Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2.a. Public Facility Projects
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Work Session Date: September 21, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC FACILITY PROJECTS AGENDA SECTION: DISCUSSION PREPARED BY: JAMIE VERBRUGGE, CITY AGE ADMINISTRATOR # 2 A n ATTACHMENTS: None APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: This item is discussion only. ACTION: ISSUE Continued growth of the community requires the City Council to evaluate the need for construction and expansion of public buildings. BACKGROUND A second fire station is currently in the 2005 CIP. The City has already secured land for the next fire station on the east side of the urban residential portion of the community, north of Connemara Trail along the west edge of the Centex Minea development. Staff has also discussed with Council the need to expand the Public Works Facility, City Hall, or both. Based on the last discussion with Council, when Council and Staff walked through the Public Works buildings, Staff has proceeded on a conceptual expansion plan that includes the Public Works facility and does not include City Hall. SUMMARY Staff will provide an overview of the projects at the meeting, as well as discussing the process to bond for public facilities, the need for a public process to share information with the community, and preliminary financial analysis of the project costs. Al Erickson at Springsted, the City's consulting financial advisor, is preparing the preliminary financial review and information relating to the bonding process. That information was not available at the time of packet preparation. Todd Christopherson of AMCON Construction will also be present at the meeting. AMCON was the City's management contractor for the City Hall expansion and has been working with the staff on the building plans. Y 9/16/2004 Option 2 Cost per SF Cost Area (SF) 11,241 113 1,270,286 900 70 63,000 1,333,286 10% 133,329 15% 199,993 Owner supplied budget number Total Project Budget (not including land costs) $ 2,019,263 City of Rosemount Proposed Fire Station Option 1 Cost per SF Cost Area (SF) New Fire Station - Construction Cost 13,738 113 1,552,410 Outdoor Storage Building 900 70 63,000 Subtotal - Construction Cost 1,615,410 Contingency 10% 161,541 Project Development/Soft Costs A/E, SACMAC, testing, surveys, etc 15% 242,312 FFE Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment Owner supplied budget number Phones, Computers, Radio, etc. Y 9/16/2004 Option 2 Cost per SF Cost Area (SF) 11,241 113 1,270,286 900 70 63,000 1,333,286 10% 133,329 15% 199,993 Owner supplied budget number Total Project Budget (not including land costs) $ 2,019,263 ROSEMOUNT FIRE STATION 9/16/2004 STATION 1 -_ -_ RM # ROOM 101 Bays 102 Standy -By 103 Laundry 104 Emergency Shower 105 SCBA Room 106 Hose Storage 107 Hose Tower 108 Stora /Radio Eng 109 Electric Room 110 Storage Room 111 Medical 126 100 0 113 Workout Room 114 Womens Locker 115 Womens Shower _ 116 Womens Bathroom Large 0 35 100 118 Janitor's Closet 119 Mens Bathroom Large 120 Mens Locker 121 Mens Shower 122 Mail Box Area 160 175 100 124 Command Center 125 Dispatch 0 60 127 Officer Office Area 0 60 100% 129 Mens Bathroom Small 130 Closet/Meeting Room 131 lWomens Bathroom Small 132 Closet Meeting Room 133 Vending Area 134 Janitor's Closet 137 Day Room 138 Kitchen Appliance Area 139 Kitchen Table Area CURRENT AREA % 6,340 110% 306 50% 240 40% 16 100% 187 100% 110 0 230 0 99 100% 88 100% 374 60% 126 100% 126 100 0 340 100% 64 100% 40 100% 120 100% 0 35 100 35 100% 216 100% 134 0% 40 0% 70 100% 160 175 100 160 100% 175 100% 0 60 554 0 0 60 100% 130 0 60 100% 130 100% 1021 100% 491 0 585 50% 189 50% 196 0 , PTION 1 AREA % 6,974 90 153 50 96 40 16 100 187 100 0 0 99 100 88 100 224 60 126 100 0 340 64 100 40 100 120 100 0 35 100 216 100 0 0 0 0 70 100 0 160 175 100 0 0 0 60 E Im Ea EMM ow E- OPTION 2 AREA % 5,706 153 % 96 % 16 % 187 0 0 0 0 99 % 88 % 224 % 126 0 0 0 YO 64 YO 40 YO 120 0 YO 35 YO 216 YO 0 YO 0 70 0 0 0 175 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _0 0 0 0 130 0 102 0 1 ROSEMOUNT FIRE STATION 9/16/2004 STATION 1 EXISTING FIRST FLOOR OPTION 1 OPTION 2 12956 TOTAL CIRCULATION 1874 CURRENT 14.5% ** Excluding Mail Box Area ENGINEER NEWS- RECORD - Construction Building Cost Index RM # ROOM 3178 AREA % AREA % AREA 140 Meeting Room 1,045 110% 1,150 110% 1,150 0 0 142 Fire Marshall Office 208 100% 208 100% 208 143 Chief Office 208 100% 208 100% 208 0 0 TOTAL NON -CIRC AREA 13,026 11,488 9,307 CIRCULATION AT 14.5% 1,889 1`,666 1,350 TOTAL AREA 1st FLOOR 14,915 13,154 - 10,657 201 Mezzanine 987 50% 494 50% 494 202 Compressor Room 91 100% 91 100% 91 301 Hose Tower Top 200 0 0 0 0 TOTAL BLDG. AREA 16,193 1 13,738 11,241 PROJECT COST @$113 /SF * $1,408,771 $1,552,410 $1,270,286 Garage /Out Building 900 0 0 0 1 OT " Station 1 at $87 per SF per 1996 cost EXISTING FIRST FLOOR TOTAL AREA 14830 TOTAL NON- CIRCULATION AREA ** 12956 TOTAL CIRCULATION 1874 % OF NON- CIRCULATION AREA 14.5% ** Excluding Mail Box Area ENGINEER NEWS- RECORD - Construction Building Cost Index June, 1996 Cost Index 3178 June, 2004 Cost Index 3996 Cost Index Increase ( %) 126% June, 2005 Adjusted Cost 130 % Increase 3.5% above 2004 1996 Construction Cost ($ /SF) $87 Estimated 2005 Construction Cost ($ /SF) $113 :)Id Scott i �A Rosemount Public Works Proposed Expansion 9/16/2004 FFE Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment Phones, Computers, Radio, etc. Total Project Budget Owner supplied budget number $ 3,497,929 $ 4,080,604 Budget.xlsCADocuments and Settingsydv \Local Settings \Temporary Internet FIIes \0LK3 \Budget.xls Cost per SF Cost Area (SF) Low High Low High Garage & Maintenance Areas One Story 24,155 70 80 1,690,850 1,932,400 Office /Admin /lunchroom /Parts Area 2 -Story w elevator 12,000 100 120 1,200,000 1,440,000 Subtotal - Construction Cost 2,890,850 3,372,400 Contingency 10% 289,085 337,240 Project Development/Soft Costs A/E, SAC/WAC, testing, surveys, etc 11% 317,994 370,964 FFE Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment Phones, Computers, Radio, etc. Total Project Budget Owner supplied budget number $ 3,497,929 $ 4,080,604 Budget.xlsCADocuments and Settingsydv \Local Settings \Temporary Internet FIIes \0LK3 \Budget.xls Page 1 of 1 -Verbrugge,Jamie From: Todd Christopherson [tchris @amconconstruction.com] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 12:04 PM To: Strand,Alan Cc: Verbrugge,Jamie Subject: City Hall - miscellaneous projects Alan here is the draft report we discussed. I left a message on your voicemail this morning regarding this. Let's talk early next week after you have, had a chance to review this. thanks Todd Christopherson, P.E. Amcon Construction Company 1715 Yankee Doodle Road Suite 200 Eagan, MN 55121 Direct Phone 651- 379 -9013 Main 651- 379 -9090 Fax 651- 379 -9091 952- 200 -4955 Nextel 104* 17452 *23 Nextel Direct Connect www.amconconstruction.com 9/13/2004 City of Rosemount City Hall Modifications September 9, 2004 Notes on Cost Estimates Below We have done a review of the on site conditions with City Staff to review situations that need improvements or repairs. Our cost estimates are budgetary in nature and do not constitute bids or guarantees. It is assumed that if authorized, a nominal amount of professional architectural services will be needed in order to quantify, detail, and specify the work. This would allow accurate estimates and fixed price bids to be received and the work contracted. The actual costs will vary depending upon how much of the work under consideration can be packaged to individual bidders /contractors. Also, if the various projects were packaged with other more sizeable project(s) under consideration (i.e. Fire Station, Public Works expansion, etc) additional economies of scale may be realized. 1. Sound Issue at Front Lobby The area is hard surfaced on floors, ceilings, and walls and it is difficult front office staff to in the lobbv. Suggested solution — we recommend installing approximately 1,000 square feet of suspended acoustic ceiling the (ACT) system. This would be suspended from the existing vaulted gyp board ceiling system. Doing so would require installing new lighting within the new ACT system, dropping of sprinkler heads, and probably routing of some air flow registers and grills. A heavy textured tile would provide a better sound rating than a more standard, smooth, fissured tile, however, at a greater cost. If this system is employed, a gyp board bulk- head could be installed near the elevator balcony to separate the front lobby ceiling from the lower level ceiling which would remain. We estimate the cost of this new system including lighting and air flow modifications to approximately. $10 — 15,000. City of Rosemount City Nall Modifications September 9, 2004 2. Counter in side receptionist area This issue here is that there is a need for an extension of the existing counter for work space. It is desirable to have a counter that could be folded down and up as space is needed so that it is not in the way of traffic flow when not in use. We estimate the cost for such a folding counter would be in the range of $500 — 1,000. Needs modification /repair at ceiling. This is one that is properly done. This opening was completed at the time the expansion and remodeling project was completed. It is my understanding that some time after that, an alarm caused the fire door shutters to close. This one apparently caught on the metal ceiling tile trim and caused the trim to be damaged. This is a minor item to repair; however, we will need to make sure that the repair technician leaves adequate clearance for door movement. We estimate the cost of this repair work to be $400. 3. Front Lobby rolling shutter ceiling repair. [01 0101 FAIL 000 Ale;ewlxoidde eq o; ;!.alai siy ; .o;soo ay; a;ewl;se ant (;oa(o.id uo!suedxa;uaoaa ;sow ay; 6ulanp pansind ;ou seen uol ;do s!y; A qm s! 'lieoai I 's!yl) coeds ay; o;;uawanadw! Ilews a Aluo y ;!M;soo;ueo!.lu6!s a aq pinoM;noAei leuoi ;oun. ajow (AllgBils) a a ;eaio o; eaae;ey; u! s!lenn 6uijeaq tiuosew do suoipod 6uinow9N - Ala ;enbape pa;ona;sgo;ou aie jop!jjoo ay; waj seug;y6!s se pe lool eq o; speau joop ay;'aallooi s,uawoM ay; 6uisn sl uosaad quo uegm 'Aoen!jd ao. 'fi ;uajjno •leuol;3un. pue ;ueq..a aJoua eaae ley; aNew o; saoueJ;ua woa J ay; do ease ay; u! ;noAel joop pue Jop!Jaoo ay; 6ullepowaa do lel;ua;od ay; pa;e6i;s9nu! osle aM •saysiug o; sapea6dn jei!w!s and 000 Ala;ewlxoidde ;e pe ;eBpnq eq pinoys `iallews Bulaq'wooi aa)lool s,uewoM eq I '000 Ala ;ewixoadde eq o; wool aa)lool s,uew ay; w eaae aannoys ay; apea6dn o;;soo ay; a;ewl ;s9 ant 'anoge xis i9gwnu o; aeliwiS 'seaae aa5l3ol/-'ann04s 00110. ul ;slxe yslgan}aa/apea n •L •eseajoui p1noM sajn6ld asay; 'Aiesseoeu Sae suol;eoidipow 6u!gwnid ;ueog!uBis dl '4 000`6 — L$ ;e swoop ;silo; .inoj ay; 6ulop.o;soo ay; a;ew! ;s9 ant 's;noAei 6u!;sixe 6uisn 'saysluld ul s;uaw9noidwi o! ;ay ;sae Al;ueupopaid si �aoM ay; do adoos ay ; .I •a ;ew! ;se Ala ;einooe o ;;ino!..!p si we;! s!y; 'Aiessooeu s96ueyo 6uigwnld ay ; .o adoos ay; eu!waa;ap o; s;noAei paile;ap lein ;oa ;!yoae Bu!op ;sii. ;noy ;!M - Aiessaoeu eq Aew s;uawaiin69a ydy ;caw o; suo! ;eol.lpow 6uigwnld awoS •swoa 941 ;0 uo! ;e1!;uan;sneyxe o; sapea6dn se !lane pue sajn;xg pue segslu4 Mau ap!noid o; pue sawn ;x!. pue 'suoilgied ;a11o; 'saysiui. 6u!;sixe eoeldaj pue anowaJ o; sl wa;! slyl umop pue sjle ;s n swooit4 ;eq ul ;slxe yslginjoi/epea n - 9 '000'L — 000`9$ sl ;ueweoeldaj sly; 6ulop.o;soo pa;ewi;se .inO •aJeMpaey pue 'sewea. 'snoop Mau y;lM scoop do sated y;oq pue s9we4 y;oq 6uioeldaa puawwooai ant • 1301 sAeMle pop A9y; souls w9ouo3 a 6u!wooaq s! Apinoes pue elge ;snipe Alpea aa6uol ou ace Aay; 'asn o!..ei; y6!y do sJe8X ay; JOAO •uo!;ona 6uipi!nq ieu!6!ao ay; woad 6w ;s!xa ace Aay; sieedde ;I •91g eige93uu9s J!ay ;.o pus tian ay; Beau JO le We scoop wnu!wnle do shed yjog •aingl;san AJJUG ;e saooa ;uoJ} ul;slx3 •g '000'06 — 8$ Ala ;ewixojdde ;soo p1noM NioM s!yl •tiessooeu aq pinoM lioM ysiuq pue 6ui lined '6ui;adjeo Mau 'uol;!ppe ul - Al;oex9 do cull II!M seaie aajy; ay; ui s6uillao 6u!;sixe ay;;ey; A19N!Iun si 11 eou!s p!!6 ay; 6u!ilao Mau a bullle;sul pue 6UI;SIxa 6Ulnowa.l pu9wwo0aa 9M •pa;na aj eq o; peau p!noM silent u! 661JIM leoplo913 •IIeM Mau .o;aa.leouli tq do uoi ;else ;sui pue swa ;sAs IIeM pjeoq dAB pue pn;s.o ;aa.Ieauii Lg do uol ;!lowap anlonu! Il!M slyl •se9ae Z£Z 06eJo ;S PUe ££Z 931.40 na n o 6uINe; Aq wooi eouaaa.uo3 jaBjel a o ;ui pepuedx9 aq P1noM tb£Z — wooZj aouaja.uoo !!eons 6u!;s!xe eq i woob GOuaaa;u03 DURSIX3 10 UOISUBCIX3 T ti00Z '6 jagweldeS suWOMPoW 11 �!0 ;unowesoa {o Apo $6,000,000 City of Rosemount, Minnesota General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005 NET DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I CIF Net New D/S 105 % Overlevy Fiscal Total 07/0112005 - - 02/01/2006 132,329.17 132,329.17 (132,329.17) - 08/01/2006 113,425.00 113,425.00 113,425.00 119,096.25 02/01/2007 235,000.00 1.800 % 118,425.00 348,425.00 348,425.00 365,846.25 484,942.50 08/01/2007 - - 111,310.00 111,310.00 111,310.00 116,875.50 - 02/01/2008 240,000.00 2.150% 111,310.00 351,310.00 351,310.00 368,875.50 485,751.00 08/01/2008 - - 108,730.00 108,730.00 108,730.00 114,166.50 02/01/2009 245,000.00 2.500% 108,730.00 353,730.00 353,730.00 371,416.50 485,583.00 08/01/2009 - - 105,667.50 105,667.50 105,667.50 110,950.88 02/01/2010 250,000.00 2.800% 105,667.50 355,667.50 355,667.50 373,450.88 484,401.75 08/01/2010 - - 102,167.50 102,167.50 102,167.50 107,275.88 - 02/01/2011 255,000.00 3.050% 102,167.50 357,167.50 357,167.50 375,025.88 482,301.75 08/01/2011 - - 98,278.75 98,278.75 - 98,278.75. 103,192.69 02/0112012 265,000.00 3.300% 98,278.75 363,278.75 363,278.75 381,442.69 484,635.38 08/01/2012 - - 93,906.25 93,906.25 93,906.25 98,601.56 02/01/2013 275,000.00 3.450% 93,906.25 368,906.25 368,906.25 387,351.56 485,953.13 08/01/2013 - - 89,162.50 89,162.50 89,162.50 93,620.63 - 02/01/2014 280,000.00 3.600% 89,162.50 369,162.50 369,162.50 387,620.63 481,241.25 08101/2014 - - 84,122.50 84,122.50 84,122.50 88, 328.63 - 02/01/2015 290,000.00 3.750% 84,122.50 374,122.50 374,122.50 392,828.63 481,157.25 08/01/2015 - - 78,685.00 78,685.00 78,685.00 82,619.25 02/01/2016 305,000.00 3.900% 78,685.00 383,685.00 383,685.00 402,869.25 485,488.50 08/01/2016 - - 72,737.50 72,737.50 72,737.50 76,374.38 02/01/2017 315,000.00 4.000% 72,737.50 387,737.50 387,737.50 407,124.38 483,498.75 08/01/2017 - - 66,437.50 66,437.50 66,437.50 69,759.38 - 02/01/2018 330,000.00 4.100% 66,437.50 396,437.50 396,437.50 416,259.38 486,018.75 08101/2018 - - 59,672.50 59,672.50 59,672.50 62,656.13 - 02/01/2019 340,000.00 4.200% 59,672.50 399,672.50 399,672.50 419,656.13 482,312.25 08/0112019 - - 52,532.50 52,532.50 52,532.50 55,159.13 - 02/01/2020 355,000.00 4.250 %' 52,532.50 407,532.50 407,532.50 427,909.13 483,068.25 08/01/2020 - - 44,988.75 44,988.75 44,988.75 47,238.19 02/01/2021 370,000.00 4.350% 44,988.75 414,988.75 414,988.75 435,738.19 482,976.38 08/01/2021 - - 36,941.25 36,941.25 36,941.25 38,788.31 - 02/01/2022 385,000.00 4.400% 36,941.25 421,941.25 421,941.25 443,038.31 481,826.63 08/01/2022 - - 28,471.25 28,471.25 28,471.25 29,894.81 - 02/01/2023 405,000.00 4.450% 28,471.25 433,471.25 " 433,471.25 455,144.81 485,039.63 08/01/2023 - 19,460.00 19,460.00 19,460.00 20,433.00 - 02/01/2024 420,000.00 4.500% 19,460.00 439,460.00 439,460.00 461,433.00 481,866.00 08/01/2024 - - 10,010.00 10,010.00 10,010.00 10,510.50 - 02/01/2025 440,000.00 4.550% 10,010.00 450,010.00 450,010.00 472,510.50 483,021.00 Total $6,000,000.00 - $2,885,741.67 $8,885,741.67 (132,329.17) $8,753,412.50 $9,191,083.13 Series 2005 C1P Bonds I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 9/1612004 1 1:27 PM ,gSI'RINGS'TED A&k—. wowatx S.— $6,000,000 City of Rosemount, Minnesota General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005 Sources & Uses Dated 07/01/2005 1 Delivered 07/01/2005 Sources Of Funds ParAmount of Bonds ....................................................................................................................... ............................... $6,000,000.00 TotalSources ......................................................................................................... ............................... ......... $6,000,000.00 Uses Of Funds Depositto Construction Fund ........................................................................................................... ............................... 5,752,270.83 Deposit to Capitalized Interest (CIF) Fund .................. :................................................................................................... 132,329.17 Total Underwriter's Discount (1. 300%) ............................................................................................ ............................... 78,000.00 Costs issuance ............................................................................................................................ ............................... 37,400.00 TotalUses ....................................................................................................................................... ............................... $6,000,000.00 Series 2005 CIP Bonds I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 9/1612004 1 1:27 PM SPRIN t3STED : g Adll.. m dw 1l b& Sea., Series 2005 CIP Bonds I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 9/16/2004.1 1:27 PM ®SPRINGST:ED �Adr -' m the Nhh' Sx -- $6,000,000 City of Rosemount, Minnesota General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005 NET DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE SIGNIFICANT DATES DatedDate ......................................................................................................................................................... ............................... 7/01/2005 Delivery ...................................................................................................................................................... ............................... 7/01/2005 First Coupon Date ............................................................................................................................................... ............................... 2/0112006 Yield Statistics BondYear Dollars ............................................................................................................................................... ............................... $69.970.00 AverageLife ....................................................................................................................................................... ............................... 11.662 Years AverageCoupon ................................................................................................................................................. ............................... 4.1242556% Net Interest Cost ( NIC) ....................................................................................................................................... ............................... 4.2357320% TrueInterest Cost ( TIC) ...................................................................................................................................... ............................... 4.2291098% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes ...................................................................................................................... ............................... 4.0818629% All Inclusive Cost ( AIC) ....................................................................................................................................... ............................... 4.3006975% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost ................................................................................................................................................. ............................... 4.1242556% WeightedAverage Maturity ................................................................................................................................. ............................... 11.662 Years Series 2005 CIP Bonds I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 9/16/2004.1 1:27 PM ®SPRINGST:ED �Adr -' m the Nhh' Sx -- PL BUC FfNtANCL Jrst ATE I A Publication of Dorset's Public Finance Practice Group July _'003 Dorsey & Whitney LLP Suite 1500 50 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 -1498 O©RSEY Mechanics an affirmative vote of three - fifths of the the question of whether to issue the members of a five - member council. For bonds. The City Council adopts a capital cities with more than five council Chapter t 27, Article 12, Section 16 adding improvement plan that covers at least a members, a two- thirds vote is required. Minnesota Statutes, Section. 410326; effective five -year period beginning with the date Generally, bonds issued by a city to May 26, 2003. of its adoption. finance capital improvements under an • It should be noted that although this law appears The City publishes notice of its intention approved capital improvements program in Chapter 410, which applies to home rule charter to issue bonds and the date and time of are not subject to the election cities, the law defines 'city' to include both home the hearing to obtain public comment on requirements of Minnesota Statutes, rule charter and s }atuto y rides. the matter. Such notice must be Section 475.58. However, if, within 30 This Memorandum contains general advice and a published at least 14 but not more than days of the public hearing, a petition general description of the effects of this 28 days prior to the date of the hearing requesting a vote on the issuance of the legislation. It should not be relied upon as specific legal advice for any particular situation. Dorsey & in either the City's official newspaper or bonds is signed by a number of Nhait.iey would be happy to respond to your a newspaper of general circulation in the registered voters in the City equal to five specific questions. City. percent of the votes cast in the City's last general election, then the bonds At the public hearing, the City Council may be issued only after obtaining approves the issuance of the bonds by approval of a majority of voters voting on PL BUC FfNtANCL Jrst ATE I A Publication of Dorset's Public Finance Practice Group July _'003 Dorsey & Whitney LLP Suite 1500 50 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 -1498 ( ))) OORSEY � � L z- 1 The 2003 Minnesota Legislature enacted into law a program that allows home rule and statutory cities to establish a capital improvement program and issue bonds for certain capital improvements without an election. Similar authority has been in place for counties for several years. Permissible Capital improvements • the estimated costs of the capital improvements; • the need for the capital improvements; and • the sources of revenue to pay for the capital improvements. A capital improvement plan maybe amended annually by the City Council after a public hearing. Considerations Bond Characteristics & Limitations Bonds issued under this authority are subject to the provisions of Chapter 475, including the net debt limits contained in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.53. Bonds may not be issued if the maximum amount of principal and interest to become due in any year on all such bonds issued under this authority would equal or exceed 0.05367 percent of taxable market value of all property in the county. The law defines "capital improvements' to include acquisition or betterment of public lands, buildings or other improvements, with an expected useful life of at least five years or more, for the purpose of a city hall, public safety facility, and public works facility. Specifically excluded are: parks, libraries, roads, bridges, other city administrative buildings, light rail transit and related activities, and land therefor. Capital Improvement Pan Requirements Contents A capital improvement plan must cover at least a five -year period beginning with the date of its adoption and must contain: • the estimated schedule, timing, and details of specific capital improvements by year; In preparing a capital improvement plan, a City Council must consider, for each capital improvement and for the capital improvement plan overall: • the condition of the City's existing infrastructure, including the projected need for repair or replacement; • the likely demand for the capital improvement; • the estimated cost of the capital improvement; • the available public resources; • the level of overlapping debt in the City; • the relative benefits and costs of alternative uses of the funds; • operating costs of the proposed improvements; and • alternatives for providing services most efficiently through.shared facilities with other cities or local government units. This calculation is required to be made using the taxable market value for the taxes payable in the year in which the obligations are issued and sold. We believe that the reference to taxable market value in the county was a drafting error in the legislation, and that the Legislature intended to refer to taxable market value in the City. We have been advised that a correction to this language will be included in the Public Finance Bill to be considered during the 2004 legislative session. Dorsey & whtney LLP PJiiUC FSrsAMUI UPDXIT I H Publication of Dorsey's Public Finance Practice Group ,July 2003 Ibb"MIL EHLERS 6 ASSOCIATES INC Funding Community Facilities Public Participation Process The traditional approach for funding community facilities has relied upon a process that prepares options, costs and financing options. The plan is carefully prepared by staff, elected officials and sometimes representatives from the general public. This plan is then presented to the public for "buy -in ". This buy -in is generally necessary regardless of the type of funding. A number of communities have found that including the public earlier in this planning process provides a better final result and increases community support for the project. The basic elements of the process include the following steps: Sell the Problem • Communicate the implications of not addressing or solving the problem. • If possible, forecast the problem in advance of needing to address problem. • Explain impact of not solving the problem as outcome statements and impact on residents and customers. • Develop chronology of communications on important issues. • Develop methods to assess community understanding of problem and impact of problem on community. • Develop communications plan to support effort. Sell the Process • Develop a process appropriate to problem (i.e. task force, staff report, commission study, etc.). • Communicate process including specific opportunities for public involvement. • Establish clear expectations regarding community involvement. • Solicit suggestions for changes in the process. • Feedback community response to the facility problem. • Request options to be evaluated. • Reaffirm problem statement. • Maintain chronology. Sell the Options • Communicate options generated from process, including funding, building location, building cost, etc. • Develop clear evaluation criteria for options including advantages and disadvantages. • Request feedback on additional options. • Request feedback on evaluation criteria. • Request feedback on evaluation. • Reaffirm problem statement and process. • Maintain chronology. z Sell the Selected Option • Communicate selected option. • Respond specifically to suggested options and evaluation criteria. • Communicate basis for selection. • Provide balanced evaluation including disadvantages of options. • Reaffirm problem statement, process and options. • Maintain chronology • Identify next steps for implementation. Community participation is typically centered around "open houses" held at strategic times during the process. In some cases multiple open house meetings are needed to seek community feedback. It is vital to assess public acceptance prior to proceeding to the next step in the process. For example if the public is not accepting that there is a need for the facility under study, additional efforts should be undertaken to communicate the need before proceeding to the options stage. Elected officials play a key role in this process. Their assessment of community support during various phases is critical. Other key features of this process include developing a communication plan that will encourage broad based community involvement at open houses and in the process in general.