HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.a. Adoption of Preliminary 2011 Budget, Tax Levy and Public Hearing DateCITY COUNCIL
City Council Regular Meeting September 7, 2010
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM: - Adoption of preliminary 2011 budget, tax
AGENDA SECTION
levy and public hearing date
RW -aus, n-e55
PREPARED BY: Dwight Johnson, City Administrator
AGENDA NO. vl Q
a •
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution, Budget summary, County
APPROVED BY:
Budget forms
1.30 0/6)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the attached resolution setting the
preliminary 2011 General Fund Operating Budget, the Preliminary 2011 C.I.P. Budgets, the
Preliminary 2011 Insurance Budget, the Preliminary 2011 Port Authority Operating Levy
and the Preliminary 2010 Levy and Budget Hearing Date Required by the City of
Rosemount.
INTRODUCTION
Each year, the City Council must approve a preliminary budget and tax levy by September 15th. We are
also required to set a date and time for a public hearing at this tune. The City Council has held four
meetings on the budget so far this year. State law says that the tax levy adopted in September may be
reduced when the final budget is approved in December, but may not be increased. The following
information was first presented to the Council on June 9th, and has been updated with the latest
information and adjustments both in the budget and the calculation of the impact on the median value
home.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The recommended budget for 2011 proposes a reduction of $64 in the City taxes assessed to a median
value home. The City tax levy would decline by 1.59% and the overall reduction in City funding needs
would be 2.14 %. With the reduction of $77 in taxes for the median home in 2010, the two year property
tax decline for the median home will be $141 or 13.75 %. The median family home paid $1,025 in City
taxes in 2009 and would pay $884 in 2011 with this proposed budget. The principal reasons for this
decline are declining home values, significant reductions in City debt for the second straight year, a City
wide review and prioritization of our levels of service and ongoing improvements in efficiency. Key
characteristics of the proposed 2011 budget are shown in the following table:
Budget Facts at a Glance
Loss of property tax base from 2010
Average reduction in residential values
General fund spending change:
Total funding change — all funds
Total funding change — all tax impacted funds
Change in overall tax levy from 2010
City share of tax impact on median value home
Percentage tax reduction on median value home
Change in estimated tax rate (City share only)
-5.08%
-8.12%
+0.14%
- $364,700 (-
2.14 %)
- $167,500 (-
1.30 0/6)
- $176,868 (-
1.59 %)
-$64
-6.75%
+2.96% (from .43358 to .44640)
BUDGET PROCESS
The annual budget process really begins with the adoption of goals and work plans by the City Council
early in the year. All participating staff members keep these goals and plans in mind as the budget is
developed. One of the goals was to begin the budget process a month early, and a budget calendar was
developed to accommodate this new schedule. At the March 16th workshop meeting, staff provided
background materials for the 2011 budget including tax base information, a list of grants, and information
comparing Rosemount to a number of other similar metro cities.
Another directive from the goal setting sessions early in the year was to review our level of services. At
the workshop meeting on April 14th, staff presented a list of 30 possible service reductions that were
generated from the various City Departments. The list was divided into an A group, a B group and a C
group. After discussion, the Council reached consensus that all of the items on the A list should be
included for further consideration as well as two items on the B list. More information was requested on
several other items. These ten reduction items have been included in the draft budget presented and saved
an estimated $91,150. Also, performance measurements for each department, which were initiated last
year, have been updated.
This draft budget was initially developed by the Department Directors and the Finance Director. I met
with each Department Director and reviewed every line item with them. After discussion and a review of
historical trends, about 55 individual line items were adjusted. While a few line items were increased, the
net effect of the review was an additional net reduction of an estimated $85,360. Revenues were generally
estimated by the Finance Director with input from the Departments.
In addition, as a part of the budget review, we have looked again at our long range needs for street
improvements, equipment replacement, and also reviewed a 10 year projection for the Ice Arena.
Finally, we looked at the overall budget strategically one more time for its overall balance, consistency,
impact on taxpayers, and long term impacts on finances for 2011 and beyond. Our hope was to develop
the most conservative budget possible that:
(1) is consistent with council goals
(2) is consistent with council direction on levels of service,
(3) does not weaken the City's long range financial outlook.
(4) is balanced not only between revenues and expenditures, but also is well balanced internally
between personnel, equipment, technology, operating needs and capital expenditures.
The City continues to look for new savings and efficiencies. We were recently awarded a grant for new,
more efficient boilers for the Steeple Center. We have also conducted a major review of our City liability
insurance policies to verify that we can benefit from higher deductibles since we currently have a large
balance in the Insurance Fund.
According to state law, the preliminary budget and levy must be adopted by September 15'h and the final
budget must be adopted by December 26th after a public hearing.
OUTSIDE FACTORS AFFECTING THE BUDGET
Tax Base
For the second consecutive year, the overall tax base in the community has declined. The overall tax
capacity value within the City is estimated to be 5.08% lower in 2011 that it was in 2010. This is on top of
a 4.51% decline from 2009 to 2010. The decline in market value of the median home in Rosemount is
even more dramatic, with an average decrease of 8.12 %. The overall tax base did not decline by that much
because new growth in the community offset some of the decline in existing property values.
State Budget and Legislative Impacts
Rosemount has not received any Market Value Homestead Credit (MVHC) Funds from the State of
Minnesota since October, 2008. We have not budgeted assuming that we would receive any MVHC since
2007. The 2011 budget has been prepared assuming no MVHC funds will be received and the recent
adoption of the budget by the State Legislature confirmed this assumption. The MVHC amount for 2010
would have been $429,507 had the Legislature approved it.
Levy limits continue for 2011 under current law but would expire after 2011 if no new legislation is
approved next year. The draft budget is currently estimated to be $77,292 below the levy limit. Levy
limits are calculated based upon an index known as the implicit price deflator as well as a formula for local
household and commercial growth. Although the current levy limit laws do not require us to "use it or
lose it," there is a risk that any legislation to extend or introduce new levy limit laws next year may use our
current levy as the new base for calculations and give us no credit for reducing levies the last two years.
There have been only a few years in the last several decades where some type of levy limit was not in place.
We will levy close to our levy limit but still reduce overall taxes as proposed in the draft budget.
Building Permit Revenues
The economy is continuing to slow the growth of the City. The current 2010 budget was based upon an
estimate of 100 new homes (60 multifamily and 40 single family homes). For 2011, we are following the
revenue trends to date. Most of our permit categories should be about the same as we budgeted in 2010,
except that HVAC and plumbing permits are trending somewhat lower than our current budget assumed..
SKB Revenues
The City approved a new agreement with SKB, inc. in 2008 that will gradually increase our percentage of
revenues from SKB's operations in Rosemount over the next several years. The draft budget continues to
designate $400,000 of SKB funds to the operating budgets and $100,000 to the capital budgets which is
the same split that the Council approved for the 2010 budget.
Emerald Ash Borer threat
Recently, the Emerald Ash Borer was discovered in the St. Paul area which poses a major threat to Ash
trees throughout Minnesota. Rosemount has a number of parks, right -of -ways, and public spaces with
Ash trees that may be threatened. While no emerald ash borer insects have been verified in the immediate
Rosemount area, it is important to consider the long range threat in looking at future City finances. The
City receives $25,000 annually from SKB specifically designated for landscaping. It is staff's intention to
designated these funds principally to prepare for the Emerald Ash Borer threat during the three remaining
years we are scheduled to receive these funds (2011- 2013).
REVENUES
Property taxes fund 83.62% of the General Fund budget and 65.66% of the overall City Budget. As noted
above, our tax base is decreased by 5.08% for 2011. However, there are several other categories of
General Fund revenues that are also important to the City. The chart below compares budgeted revenue
for 2010 with estimated revenue in 2011 for several key categories of revenues.
K
As can be seen, non -tax revenues have stabilized at their relatively low 2010 levels. Licenses and permits
continue to decline mainly due to expected reductions in plumbing and HVAC permits.
Intergovernmental revenues are up mainly because of increased gravel tax revenue from Dakota County
and increased cable TV franchise taxes. Recreational revenues are down due to the elimination of the Tiny
Tot program for which there is a corresponding decrease in expenditures also.
EXPENDITURES
Salaries and Benefits
Rosemount employs 78 full time employees. One additional full time building inspector position is in
layoff status at this time. The 2011 budget provides for half of the salary of this position. Another
currently vacant full -time position in the 2010 budget (GIS Technician) is now planned to be a 30
hour /week position when it is filled. No other changes in staffing are proposed for the 2011 budget.
Contract settlements were reached with all four City bargaining units earlier this year for both 2010 and
2011. With contracts in hand, the City will not need a salary contingency as a part of the 2011 budget.
The budget includes a 1.5% salary increase as required by the contracts for 2011. Health insurance
contract renewal rates have just been received and show an increase of 18% for 2011. A 10% increase in
health insurance premiums had been assumed in earlier budget drafts. The City is seeking alternative
health insurance bids, but will not receive them before the preliminary budget and levy must be adopted.
Therefore, the budget now incorporates the 18% increase in it. State mandated increases in PERA
employer contributions are also included in the budget.
Utility and fuel cost assumptions.
Electric and natural gas bills for 2011 have been estimated based on recent consumption trends with a 5%
increase added based upon pending rate adjustment requests. Fuel costs for 2011 will not be very
predictable until December when we will sign a new fuel consortium agreement with the State. In this
draft budget, we are lowering the expected price of fuel from $2.80 per gallon to $2.65 based on current
market conditions. It should be noted that the price the City gets is not directly comparable to what
consumers pay because we can buy in bulk, make purchases through a consortium, and do not pay the
same taxes consumers do.
Steeple Center (former St. Joe's Church)
The proposed budget continues to include operating funds for the Rosemount Steeple Center (former St.
Joe's church). The center opened in July, 2010. Since a full year of expenditures and revenues were
included in the 2010 budget, there is no significant new impact on the 2011 budget. The budget shows
$87,500 in expenditures and $13,500 in revenues. Over half of the expenditures ($46,000) are for gas and
electric utility bills.
City Liability Insurance
The City currently has a low deductible liability insurance plan with the League of Minnesota Cities
Insurance Trust. The Insurance Fund has an unencumbered balance of over $500,000. As a result, staff
has researched scenarios for adopting a higher deductible liability insurance plan. A review of the past five
4
2010 Budget
2011 Estimated
Change
Licenses & Permits
$382,600
$360,100
($22,500)
Intergovernmental
$566,500
$624,700
$58,200
Charges for Services (no SKB)
$255,900
$258,400
$2,500
Fines & Forfeits
$125,000
$125,000
$ 0
Recreational Revenues
$267,300
$252,300
($15,000)
Miscellaneous Revenues
$178,200
$181,300
$3,100
SKB revenue (General Fund)
$400,000
$400,000
$ 0
As can be seen, non -tax revenues have stabilized at their relatively low 2010 levels. Licenses and permits
continue to decline mainly due to expected reductions in plumbing and HVAC permits.
Intergovernmental revenues are up mainly because of increased gravel tax revenue from Dakota County
and increased cable TV franchise taxes. Recreational revenues are down due to the elimination of the Tiny
Tot program for which there is a corresponding decrease in expenditures also.
EXPENDITURES
Salaries and Benefits
Rosemount employs 78 full time employees. One additional full time building inspector position is in
layoff status at this time. The 2011 budget provides for half of the salary of this position. Another
currently vacant full -time position in the 2010 budget (GIS Technician) is now planned to be a 30
hour /week position when it is filled. No other changes in staffing are proposed for the 2011 budget.
Contract settlements were reached with all four City bargaining units earlier this year for both 2010 and
2011. With contracts in hand, the City will not need a salary contingency as a part of the 2011 budget.
The budget includes a 1.5% salary increase as required by the contracts for 2011. Health insurance
contract renewal rates have just been received and show an increase of 18% for 2011. A 10% increase in
health insurance premiums had been assumed in earlier budget drafts. The City is seeking alternative
health insurance bids, but will not receive them before the preliminary budget and levy must be adopted.
Therefore, the budget now incorporates the 18% increase in it. State mandated increases in PERA
employer contributions are also included in the budget.
Utility and fuel cost assumptions.
Electric and natural gas bills for 2011 have been estimated based on recent consumption trends with a 5%
increase added based upon pending rate adjustment requests. Fuel costs for 2011 will not be very
predictable until December when we will sign a new fuel consortium agreement with the State. In this
draft budget, we are lowering the expected price of fuel from $2.80 per gallon to $2.65 based on current
market conditions. It should be noted that the price the City gets is not directly comparable to what
consumers pay because we can buy in bulk, make purchases through a consortium, and do not pay the
same taxes consumers do.
Steeple Center (former St. Joe's Church)
The proposed budget continues to include operating funds for the Rosemount Steeple Center (former St.
Joe's church). The center opened in July, 2010. Since a full year of expenditures and revenues were
included in the 2010 budget, there is no significant new impact on the 2011 budget. The budget shows
$87,500 in expenditures and $13,500 in revenues. Over half of the expenditures ($46,000) are for gas and
electric utility bills.
City Liability Insurance
The City currently has a low deductible liability insurance plan with the League of Minnesota Cities
Insurance Trust. The Insurance Fund has an unencumbered balance of over $500,000. As a result, staff
has researched scenarios for adopting a higher deductible liability insurance plan. A review of the past five
4
years shows that the City could have saved $50,000 per year if a high deductible plan of $100,000 per
occurrence, $200,000 aggregate had been in place after accounting for all premiums and losses. Because
we have a significant balance in the Insurance Fund to buffer the risk, staff is recommending that the
higher deductible plan be adopted for 2011. However, to be conservative, staff recommends that the levy
for the Insurance Fund be reduced by only $30,000 for 2011.
Capital Budgets
The City currently has three capital improvement program (CIP) funds: Equipment, Streets, and
Buildings. In the Equipment CIP, a long range study of vehicle needs was accomplished as a part of the
2010 budget. That study was reviewed and updated for the 2011 budget. The 2010 study showed that a
$25,000 increase in the Equipment CIP levy was indicated for 2011 because of long range weakness in the
fund, even after extending the projected life -cycle of a number of vehicles. However, further review this
year indicates that the levy can remain the same for the Equipment CIP due to payment of outdoor
warning sirens and police records management system software from 2009 surplus funds. The actual
analysis of whether any vehicles will be recommended for replacement in 2011 has not yet taken place and
will be presented at a future meeting.
The Street CIP is proposed to have a levy of $710,000 for 2010. The long range plan developed in August
2010 showed that the levy should increase 6% annually to meet future needs. The six percent was based
upon a combination of inflation and the construction of new streets that will begin to need maintenance.
However, since inflation has been very low and the construction of new streets has also been minimal due
to low growth, this levy is proposed to increase by only 1.4 %.
The Building CIP has a levy of $44,000 for 2011 which includes repayment of an internal loan for the
current Public Works facility and $20,000 for general repairs and upgrades to the Community Center
building. Water damage to the building near the south door has been evaluated recently and will probably
need repairs. Other building equipment such as the windows, restrooms, light controls and HVAC
equipment also need repairs or improvements. The SKB funds currently designated for Capital
Improvements ($100,000) are being allocated to the Building CIP fund. Recent trends show that SKB
revenues may be stronger than projected in the budget. Any additional SKB funds beyond what is
budgeted will be recommended to be placed in the Building CIP budget for future needs.
Enterprise Fund Budgets
The water, sewer, and storm sewer budgets do not show any major new projects or initiatives. As usual,
funds are budgeted in each account for any utility work that must be done in relation to our our annual
street improvement project. Water and sewer rates were changed last winter to comply with DNR
requirements for tiered water rates and also to boost revenues by 4 -5 %. No changes in rates are proposed
for 2011. The Ice Arena budget also was also reviewed using a 10 year forecast for needed improvements
and currently appears to be stable with the current amount of support from the General Fund ($115,000).
Debt Service Funds
The City ended 2009 with a General Fund surplus. The Council approved a strategy that committed about
two- thirds of the surplus to paying off existing debt, similar to what was approved a year ago with the
2008 surplus. Enough funds were available from the 2009 surplus to make all of the remaining debt
service payments on two debt issues, saving $190,000 in tax levies for 2011. Implementation of this
strategy is once again a major reason why we have been able to propose an overall reduced tax levy for
2011.
5
CONCLUSION
While it is always a challenge to draft a budget in a time of declining revenues, staff is pleased to present a
draft budget for 2011 that will reduces the City tax burden by an additional $64 for the resident in a
median value home while still maintaining our most important services. This tax reduction is in addition
to the $77 decrease adopted for 2010. We believe that the proposed budget is appropriately conservative
for the current economic situation, but also keeps us as ready as possible to accommodate economic
recovery when it occurs and allows us to continue to address the Council's goals. Accordingly, we
recommend approval of the preliminary 2011 budget and tax levy as presented and establishing a public
hearing date for the budget on December 7, 2010 at 7:30 p.m.
E
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2010 -
A RESOLUTION SETTING THE PRELIMINARY 2011 GENERAL FUND OPERATING
BUDGET, THE PRELIMINARY 2011 C.I.P. BUDGETS,
THE PRELIMINARY 2011 INSURANCE BUDGET, THE PRELIMINARY 2011 PORT
AUTHORITY OPERATING LEVY AND THE PRELIMINARY 2010 LEVY AND BUDGET
HEARING DATE REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemount has determined that budgets and
special needs for the year 2011 will be in the amount of $16,295,976 for the General
Operating Fund, the three CIP Funds, the Insurance Fund, the Port Authority Fund and the
Enterprise Funds; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that special levies for Bonded Indebtedness
(including $143,654 for the market value based referendum levy for the fire station) and the
Armory Project total $398,568; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that actual incomes, fund transfers and
anticipated aids will total $5,732,093.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the total Preliminary Levy certified to the
Dakota County Auditor shall be $10,818,797 for the normal levy and $143,654 for the
market value based referendum levy; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount will conduct a
Public Hearing for the purpose of presenting the proposed budget and levy to the general
public and to comply with Truth in Taxation laws as set by the Minnesota State Legislature,
and that the hearing shall take place on December 7, 2010, at 7:30 P.M., in the Council
Chambers at the City Hall.
ADOPTED this 7th day of September, 2010.
ATTEST:
Amy Domeier, City Clerk
RESOLUTION 2010 -
William H. Droste, Mayor
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and
adopted by the City Council of Rosemount at a duly authorized meeting thereof, held on the
7th day of September, 2010, as disclosed by the records of said City in my possession.
(SEAL)
Amy Domeier, Rosemount City Clerk
Motion by: Seconded by:
Voted in Favor:
Voted Against:
Members Absent:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS - USES
(INCLUDING FIRE STATION LEVY)
September 7, 2010
Departments
Council Budget
Administration Budget
Elections Budget
Finance Budget
General Government Budget
Community Development Budget
Police Budget
Fire Budget
Public Works Operating Budgets:
Government Buildings Budget
Fleet Maintenance Budget
Street Maintenance Budget
Parks Maintenance Budget
Park & Rec Budget - General Operating
Park & Rec Budget - Steeple Ctr. Operations
Park & Rec Budget - Special Programs
Transfers - Arena Assistance
Total Operating Budgets - General Fund
Transfers - Debt Service Levies
Total Of All Budgets - General Fund
Building CIP Requirements
Street CIP Requirements
Equipment CIP Requirements
Insurance Budget Requirements
Port Authority Operating Levy
Bonded Indebtedness
Bonded Indebtedness - Fire Station Levy
Armory Anticipatory Levy (Value 2/18/10)
'*$2,060,560,350 x.00798% _ $164,433""
Water Enterprise Fund
Sewer Enterprise Fund
Stone Water Enterprise Fund
Arena Enterprise Fund
Total Funding Requirements
2010 2011
Adopted Proposed +/-
Budget Budget Difference Percentage
$256,500 $237,100 ($19,400) -7.56%
520,300 516,700 (3,600) -0.69%
40,000 22,000 (18,000) - 45.00%
422,300 422,600 300 0.07%
387,700 385,100 (2,600) -0.67%
945,700 935,900 (9,800) -1.04%
3,030,300 3,122,200 91,900 3.03%
301,800 303,600 1,800 0.60%
490,200 491,900 1,700 0.35%
612,300 569,900 (42,400) -6.92%
1,331,300 1,358,800 27,500 2.07%
723,900 736,600 12,700 1.75%
1,077,500 1,073,400 (4,100) -0.38%
87,500 87,500 0 0.00%
123,700 102,400 (21,300) - 17.22%
115,000 115,000 0 0.00%
$10,466,000 $10,480,700 $14,700 0.14%
0 362,376 362,376 n/a
$10,466,000 $10,843,076 w $377,076 3.60%
24,000 44,000 20,000 83.33%
700,000 710,000 10,000 1.43%
439,000 439,000 0 0.00%
275,000 245,000 (30,000) - 10.91%
50,000 58,600 8,600 17.20%
729,471 168,914 (560,557) - 76.84%
142,273 143,654 1,381 0.97%
80,000 86,000 6,000 7.50%
1,353,900 1,175,700 (178,200) - 13.16%
1,671,300 1,680,800 9,500 0.57%
670,300 673,300 3,000 0.45%
458,000 426,500 (31,500) -6.88%
~
$17,059,244 $16,694,544 ($364,700) -2.14%
�a3asaexe =e= °eats® as�eeeaa =e �xs®smee
NOTE: Special Levies include (1)Bonded Indebtedness, (2)Fire Station Levy and (3)Armory Anticipatory Levies.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS -SOURCES
(INCLUDING FIRE STATION LEVY)
September 7, 2010
Levy Sources:
Special Levies
2010
2011
(553,176)
- 58.12%
General Levy
Adopted
Proposed
376,308
+/-
Types
Budget
Budget
Difference
Percentage
Internal Revenue Generated:
$412,575
$429,507
$16,932
4.10%
Licenses and Permits
382,600
360,100
(22,500)
-5.88%
Intergovernmental
566,500
624,700
58,200
10.27%
Charges for Services
655,900
658,400
2,500
0.38%
Fines & Forfeits
125,000
125,000
0
0.00%
Recreational Fees
267,300
252,300
(15,000)
-5.61%
Miscellaneous Revenues
178,200
181,300
3,100
1.74%
Transfers In
3,500
3,500
0
0.00%
Enterprise Revenues
4,153,500
3,956,300
(197,200)
- 4.75%
Total Internal Revenues
6,332,500
6,161,600
(170,900)
-2.70%
MVHC Cuts Made Later To Include in Levy
412,575
429,507
Levy Sources:
Special Levies
951,744
398,568
(553,176)
- 58.12%
General Levy
10,187,575
10,563,883
376,308
3.69%
Total Levy
$11,139,319
$10,962,451
($176,868)
-1.59%
Loss of MVHC from State Funding
$412,575
$429,507
$16,932
4.10%
Total Revenue Sources
$17,059,244 $16,694,544 ($364,700) -2.14%
NOTE: Special Levies include (1)Bonded Indebtedness, (2)Fire Station Levy and (3)Armory Anticipatory Levies.
2010 GENERAL PROPERTY TAX LEVY PAYABLE 2011
GENERALFUND
BUILDING CIP FUND
STREET CIP FUND
EQUIPMENT CIP FUND
INSURANCE FUND
PORT AUTHORITY OPERATING LEVY
TOTAL GENERAL LEVY
GENERAL LEVY
BONDEDINDEBTEDNESS
G.O. PUBLIC FACILITY BONDS 2001 C (Port Authority) (Authorized - $168,914)
G.O. COMMUNITY CENTER REFUNDING BONDS 2001E (Authorized - $91,883)
G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS 2003A (Authorized - $86,354) (City Assumed Special Assessments)
G.O. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) BONDS 2005A (Authorized - $210,764)
G.O. EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES 2006A (Authorized - $87,150)
G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS 2006B (Authorized - $268,201)
G.O. EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES 2007B (Authorized - $107,022)
PUBLIC SAFETY REVENUE BONDS 2007 (Dakota Communications Center) (Authorized - $65,258)
G.O. EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES 2008A (Authorized - $94,265)
TOTAL BONDED INDEBTEDNESS
MARKET VALUE BASED REFERENDUMS
G.O. FIRE STATION REFUNDING BONDS, 2005D (Authorized - $143,654)
$9,067,283
$44,000
$710,000
$439,000
$245,000
$58,600
$10,563,883
$168,914
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$168,914
$143,654
TOTAL FIRE STATION LEVY $143,654
PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ARMORY BONDS
ARMORY ANTICIPATORY LEVIES ($2,060,560,350 x.00798% = $164,433) (As of 2/18/10) $86,000
(Authorized - $164,433 - Only Levy Amount Due MSABC) ---
TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ARMORY BONDS $86,000
GRAND TOTAL 2010 PROPERTY TAX LEVY $10,962,451
Last Updated 8/25110
SPREAD LEVY COMPUTATIONAL WORKSHEET
(INCLUDING FIRE STATION LEVY)
(1) Actual Spread Levy Based on Numbers from Dakota County
(2) 2011 Number Provided by Dakota County as of 819110
(3) Market Value Based Levy for Fire Station - Based on $143,654 Levy Spread to Taxable Market Value on 2118110
Last Update from Dakota County 8/1/10 Shows the Levy of $143,654 / $2,056,062,750 = $.0699 per $1,000 as our Estimate
Last Updated - 8125/10
(Proposed)
2008
2009
2010
2011
Total Funding Requirements
17,855,312
17,288,034
17,059,244
16,694,544
Less: Internal Revenues
6,526,300
6,210,900
6,332,500
6,161,600
Less: Market Value Based Levy - Fire Station (See Below)
144,417
146,084
142,273
143,654 (3)
Equals: Revenues Needed
11,184,595
10,931,050
10,584,471
10,389,290
Add Back in State MVHC Cuts to Reflect Actual Levy
0
350,330
412,575
429,507
Levy Certified by City to County Auditor
11,184,595
11,281,380
10,997,046
10,818,797
County Auditor Adjustments (All Subtractions):
Fiscal Disparities Distribution Levy (Metro Area)
968,892
1,141,159
1,195,913
1,299,717 (2)
Spread Levy Used to Compute Local Tax Rate
10,215,703
(1) 10,140,221 (1)
9,801,133 (1)
9,519,080
Increase /(Decrease) from Previous Year in Spread Levy
- 0.740/6
-3.U%
- 2.88°
Market Value Based Referendum Levy - Fire Station
144,417
146,084
142,273
143,654 (3)
(1) Actual Spread Levy Based on Numbers from Dakota County
(2) 2011 Number Provided by Dakota County as of 819110
(3) Market Value Based Levy for Fire Station - Based on $143,654 Levy Spread to Taxable Market Value on 2118110
Last Update from Dakota County 8/1/10 Shows the Levy of $143,654 / $2,056,062,750 = $.0699 per $1,000 as our Estimate
Last Updated - 8125/10
C) Oyn-1 v 0FD0 -I {{ < 9 ,n Oyn1 V 0 0 1 yy < ;
x 0 d v m 0.Z m x x m m @ % 0 �7 = o x O Q a m
v ,°� oxm'O ;�oc�m m' #m w�ionmw = ° v #yv ;�o(�� 01m w�ionmm o
m c
a o n�i o OS, o'c� °m w < o 0 n p c 2� 0 n p c� y°y <
m m °cam =m �81 °c 3m m °?.7 4.4 c m °c3 ^� o °O —�Z 1 °c �m mo—,7 am. c
�A;
aw a u aw n
° 3 3 3 3
O O O II II
I I O 8 8 I I {Op pOp O O O NOy I I pO O p O p p
II pd�1 �p W >> QONQO II A Ar(Nj�N A � Ip II N I ONO 11 > I >�_fNllN N 8N
II A +AN(V uANm V N`�• II Ol 1+OONDN � � II W N>t00 i O�J�nJn �N� II V � �1�G�U W S 110
II O I V +tr♦ nN V J W � II V n V> W 11 ►. V +W> V V • � W W
II I II 11 11
s m = A l N
O� A1 pN O g
O Oi b W J OO �j N N w O m W N �g N ;; AOVD m OD 00 O
It o00
II N d r > F��gj(f 11
III I + O) N0 IW+p N01J 10 ��1pp 0 0W 0J 0VO D > �N 11 OV V m AJ ON+E V t0 0 A O m 1I1 I N N O N W W OOA `�aOo 5 W 9INN S 1I1 I IN � 1 A OW V I bV N o N 8
T
O c
G
O
v II 11 11 11 II �
v' II 11 11 11 II w
y II 11
POP
II =
11 111 �Op Op 000 0 N « �Op 0000 N m
II V 11 N (� "pN1 ¢ NO 11 A f` >00 W IJ 11 N y O yN II + m+OWD W W O
m C1 Ci Z N 71 II 11 NOl wwmOm O+O+A `SA' po�Qj II p+ +pp et O1�11 11 N > OD ++ MI
jj .m� O C II A 11 GUN W W V LOAN �N+ II M OiD +W O 11 V +V NtT OINN W �> II IWp OI fO� W A
a II II O O O 11 II O O O II y
OpNNO No ri« iii 0000 c � � ;-
<p. O _ 8 a 11 V 0 yW Ol
W N fp +np p + O N [
SOQ$ 11 Gp+ IAp tT V O1 OO1 O 8� 11 !V N Oy1 O1y O1 NpQQ$± 11 8O �gpN J N O py y
m N O w. II GD 11 O W m J A �� 11 N V V>I�p OD O O Ij N N N(T W JO1J WN II tT Jm A O
°
g m L r n u n n n o A
p m T u n 11 n n v e m 4
000 I N 11 000 II ^' N y
x o m ym m c II n u o II 5Q� II p o 9 —{
�X O Ta II N 11 W +N N II .a ANpV p � m II N N N� II N SpVp N m � �
2T
V NN II « pQ4 `�' II O ON1Nyy
a O �' w II �V�pp 11 GG.�f WW�j W GOp1 �pI 1�pI 0� II 1p W �N1 II yV N IJ Oa1 pOp1 �pp1 }� II N �ppp W Ql W N S y
u O S II OU 11 OOIm W N J AO oN II V V +I�O O II N NNtT W O V J> ���>!!!�N II V V V+ms Y O m° S 0.
m
V w 3 Q $ C O O
m Z
m A .Ay y
ro G II OO II �Op pOO OO N
S• <'. �Iwpp� QA. yX N II tmpl !
ll low O II _fp yA ' ap �p !8Qp!Nyog4! II j AO +NN N L DXy
O 2 m J L6 m Gl I V I N II I W A D mN N II N O V W+ N 00 fD W N j 11 m Ol W W W f11
S ;m S'm �u co
ro m p3Q II o 000o II 11 o00o No N
m p3appa (pC�I(QJ�IJA �ee II
ap� O mN_
n �o 6w II p r II 11 jA C
fil m . Opt 080 II OO1 t9 Sit N IJ fAp. O X I1I «N 1p 8Q8Q8Qg00SpSp0 '' J ppNNNp j pwe�
iS
s W O V II m >J>10 tO 1A0—, V O 11 NN GUm W IN1 w C
II + > W A V N> O 11 V J+ G
O N
NN `� 11 II 11
ypN �Aj+ mN
Opp II �Op pON NA 8N M 11 O8O pQpQpQO ;; 1Op pOOOO N
ion
pQQy BN yG II A A> tTN t0 J 11 W p� N I� SQp ^I 11 A A+ItGJnpA W 8
O N W +O W N ^'}FJ(� 11 > f0+ m 11 W W >N A O+AN U8p 11 01 V'pfJ �j fD
W m m W o pmmyy W
O A S ,N+ II V d10> W
a O
A ^, 4 g ii ii ii
0.00
8-1
Ol y n 11 + O00 00 N yW jj q �8V jj + 000100 N
10
O A ° D No O �� N1� mGNU 11 O «OUO W
�4yo?6 o > be X N
m m O O O O j O O O
I
o00o K II QQ5� 11' 0000 _
tsla %N4i4iJ N OWV� A 1O VV Vp O 11 p !qJ 8
m 33T W_ 2G 2� > OpDN 11 V GVU> ro M 11 m NGstDOOI NI+N oN 11 GVU JfO O
� 41 N p •
ONO 9 � v
O O O
�O v0 2 O
m ?
DAKOTA COUNTY City of Rosemount
PROPERTY TAXATION & RECORDS TAXING DISTRICT NAME
PAYABLE 2011
PROPOSED LEVY CERTIFICATION FORM
FORM B
Expendittare
Butlget
Locat
Amount needed to fund services.
Other
These aids are certified to the taxing district by the Department of Revenue. This can be used to reduce
Certffled Levy.
Category
C -Other Resources ................................................... ...............................
Requremer }f
Gumt Aid'
to other aids, interest income, prior year reserves, grants, etc.
Resources
............................... Levy certified to the County Treasurer - Auditor. ROUND TO THE NEAREST WHOLE DOLLAR. DO NOT
CERTIFY PENNIES. The Treasurer - Auditors office will deduct Fiscal Disparities from all certified levies.
TAX CAPACIT�I(BASED
•'tyY."iY isle :+•
LEVY
�� ... _'.
a
_
��
yCri
General Revenue
s
16,295,976
$ -0-
$
5,732,093
s 10,563,883
Debt - General Obligation*
254,914
254,914
Debt - Other*
Road and Bridge
Other (identify)
Total Tcap Based Levy
16,550,890
As
-0-
s
5,732,093
s 10,818,797
MAREK US�
�
TEFEREN
ED EV
�BA
�
4�
.
Debt - General Obligation*
143,654
143,654
Debt - Other*
Other
Total Mkt Referendum Levy
s
143,654
Is
$
$ .143,654
* Provide a breakdown of the certified levy by individual bond on the reverse side or attach an additional sheet.
(See Attached)
A- Budget Requirement ............................................... ...............................
Amount needed to fund services.
B -LGA (Local Government Aid) ................................. ...............................
These aids are certified to the taxing district by the Department of Revenue. This can be used to reduce
any budget item levy requirement, combination of items or be deducted proportionally from all levies.
C -Other Resources ................................................... ...............................
All other resources that will be used to finance your taxing districts budget. Including but not limited
to other aids, interest income, prior year reserves, grants, etc.
D- Certified Levy .........................................................
............................... Levy certified to the County Treasurer - Auditor. ROUND TO THE NEAREST WHOLE DOLLAR. DO NOT
CERTIFY PENNIES. The Treasurer - Auditors office will deduct Fiscal Disparities from all certified levies.
Before signing, please verify the following:
-MAKE SURE THAT ALL LINES ADD ACROSS AND ALL COLUMNS ADD UP TO THE TOTAL LINE
- BREAKDOWN OF DEBT SERVICE LEVY BY INDIVIDUAL BOND HAS BEEN PROVIDED
- AMOUNTS REPORTED MATCH ANY OTHER SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION INCLUDED
e.,
7,1V4 is form matches amount on your taxing district's resolution, etc.)
651 - 322 -2031
Signatur of er n completing for Phone number (including area -code)
Finance Director 9 -10 -10
Title Date
LEVY CERTIFICATION
Debt Service Schedule
PLEASE NOTE: All debt must be accounted for in your resolution whether it is a part of your levy or not. If the amount levied is less than the
required amount from the payment schedule for the bond, you must pass a resolution stating that you have sufficient funds for that bond. This
can be included in the same resolution with your levy. Dakota County will be verifying the levy requirements based on the payment schedule in
our Bond Register (see attached, if applicable). You must submit your resolution with this certification form.
** This must match the totals for Debt Service reported on the front.
2010 GENERAL PROPERTY TAX LEVY PAYABLE 2011
GENERAL LEVY
GENERAL FUND
$9,067,283
BUILDING CIP FUND
$44,000
STREET CIP FUND
$710,000
EQUIPMENT CIP FUND
$439,000
INSURANCE FUND
$245,000
PORT AUTHORITY OPERATING LEVY
$58,600
TOTAL GENERAL LEVY $10,563,883
BONDEDINDEBTEDNESS
G.O. PUBLIC FACILITY BONDS 2001 C (Port Authority) (Authorized - $168,914)
$168,914
G.O. COMMUNITY CENTER REFUNDING BONDS 2001E (Authorized - $91,883)
$0
G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS 2003A (Authorized - $86,354) (City Assumed Special Assessments)
$0
G.O. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) BONDS 2005A (Authorized - $210,764)
$0
G.O. EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES 2006A (Authorized - $87,150)
$0
G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS 2006B (Authorized - $268,201)
$0
G.O. EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES 2007B (Authorized - $107,022)
$0
PUBLIC SAFETY REVENUE BONDS 2007 (Dakota Communications Center) (Authorized - $65,258)
$0
G.O. EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES 2008A (Authorized - $94,265)
$0
TOTAL BONDED INDEBTEDNESS $168,914
MARKET VALUE BASED REFERENDUMS
G.O. FIRE STATION REFUNDING BONDS, 2005D (Authorized - $143,654) $143,654
TOTAL FIRE STATION LEVY $143,654
PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ARMORY BONDS
ARMORY ANTICIPATORY LEVIES ($2,060,560,350 x.00798% = $164,433) (As of 2/18/10) $86,000
(Authorized - $164,433 - Only Levy Amount Due MSABC) ______ ------- _-----
TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ARMORY BONDS $86,000
GRAND TOTAL 2010 PROPERTY TAX LEVY $10,962,451
Last Updated 8125/10
DAKOTA COUNTY
OFFICE OF PROPERTY TAXATION & RECORDS
PAYABLE 2011 TRUTH IN TAXATION
PUBLIC BUDGET HEARING DATE CERTIFICATION
FORM A
Taxing District Name: City of Rosemount
Public Hearing Date:
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Time of meeting:
7:30 P.M.
Place of meeting:
Rosemount City Hall
(Including address)
2875 145th Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
PLEASE PROVIDE
AS YOU
CONTACT INFORMATION, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
WOULD LIKE
(Five
IT TO APPEAR ON THE TNT NOTICES.
lines only----36 characters per line including spaces. )
Name and/or Title:
Finance Director
Address:
City of Rosemount
2875 145th Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
Phone number:
( 651) 423 -4411
Website or E -mail Address: www.ci.rosemount.mn.us
No personal (home) e-mail If you would like an e-mail contact or your website listed on the notice,
addresses please. please co ete. Note: you §tre not required to provide this information.
Signature of person
completing this form:
Title: Finance Director
Phone number: ( 651) 322 -2031
Date: September 10, 2010
* ** *Please include area code when identifying phone numbers * * **