HomeMy WebLinkAbout5. Assessment PolicyCITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 10, 1992
AGENDA ITEM:
AGENDA SECTION:
Assessment Policy
Old Business
PREPARED BY:
AGENDfTlEM # v
Stephan Jilk, City Administrator
ATTACffiXENTS :
AP OVE BY
Assessment Policy
Attached please find a revised assessment policy. There were minor changes
(mostly typo) made since the last draft was provided.
I will provide, Monday evening, examples of how the policy would work on
145th Street and at least two previous projects if it would have been used
on those projects. This will give you a better idea of the application of
this policy.
RECOWdEN'DED ACTION:
Consensus on this policy to allow us to adopt it on March 17, 1992.
COUNCIL ACTION:
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
FINAL DRAFT
MARCH 6, 1992
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Page 1
Preface
Page 2
Introduction
Page 3
I.
Definitions
Page 4
II.
Policies and Procedures
Page 4
III.
Project Initiation &
Hearing Process
Page 7
IV.
Construction Standards
Page 9
--
Useful Service Life
Page 9
V.
New Development
Improvements
Page 12
VI.
Existing Development
Improvements
Page 14
VI. D 3.
Method of Payment
Page 14
VII.
Assessment Deferment
Policy
Exhibit
A
Pg 17, 18,
19, Five Year Street
20
Reconstruction Program
Exhibit
B
Pg 21
Structural Maintenance
Exhibit
C
-Pg 22
Street Reconstruction
Exhibit
D
Pg 23
Residential Street
Equivalent Estimate
Exhibit
E
Pg 24
Street Assessment
Examples
PREFACE
This policy is the basis for, and plays an integral part in, the
long range construction and reconstruction of streets, sanitary
sewer, water, stormwater and trail improvements in the City of
Rosemount.
In construction of such improvements it is necessary to consider
two basic issues: one is the improvement needed, and two, how
will it be paid for.
The City is entering a new era in regards to these types of
improvements. Sections of the City are still developing with new
residential, commercial and industrial developments which require
utilities and streets.
At the same time a section of the City is ageing and the
infrastructure has aged and deteriorated such that it needs major
upgrading and replacement.
In new developments the cost of making such improvements can
generally be born by the developer and development agreements
where the costs are assessed over a rather short period of time
and no additional burden is placed on the rest of the taxpayers.
In older areas which are already developed, this may not be the
case. When existing infrastructure is replaced after those
improvements have "lived their normal life" the replacement costs
may become such a burden to the property owners that those costs
may be unacceptable and to assess all of these costs may prove
difficult.
Therefore, the City is attempting to develop a "Reconstruction"
program utilizing revenue sources from several areas including:
1. Assessments
2. Minnesota State Aids for Highway Improvements
3. Sanitary Sewer Connection Charges
4. Water Utility Connection Charges
5. Stormwater utility user fees & connection charges
6. General Taxes.
This concept, wherein revenues from various sources will be
"pooled" to develop a reconstruction fund, allows assessments to
be generated on a more equitable and consistent basis and still
not create an extreme burden on the property owners. It also
allows the City as a whole to share in the responsibility to
maintain and protect the entire infrastructure for city services.
1
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
The policy which follows outlines most specifically as to how
improvements are initiated, how they are designed and finally how
they are funded.
This approach is taken so that those involved in improvement
projects will be able to comprehend the approach taken and how
they are to be charged for the benefit they receive through the
improvement process.
INTRODUCTION
This document sets forth the methods and policies relating to
local improvements and special assessments practiced in the City
of Rosemount. It is emphasized that the following summarization
is general in nature and that certain circumstances may justify
deviations from stated policy as determined by the Rosemount City
Council.
A local improvement involves one or more of the following types
of improvements:
Roadway grading and base
Bituminous surfacing
Curb and gutter
Sidewalks, trails and driveways
Water trunklines and laterals
Sanitary sewer trunklines and laterals
Service connections
Storm sewer trunks, laterals and ponds
Street Lighting
All appropriate appurtenances associated with the
above improvements
Improvements are classified as follows:
1. New Developments - The construction of improvements related
to newly developed areas, normally made in conjunction with
the plat approval process.
2. Reconstruction - see definitions (Section I.1)
3. Rehabilitation - see definitions (Section I.2)
4. Preventive Maintenance - see definitions (Section I.3)
5. Extensions - Construction of improvements generally made to
extend services to a certain area. Extensions normally
pertain to water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer trunks.
K
The special assessment is a
of Rosemount as a means to
improvements to benefitted
over a number of years.
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
financing tool employed by the
allocate the cost of specific
properties and to spread those
City
costs
Minnesota Statues Chapter 429 regulates the procedure for the
construction and financing of local improvement projects when at
least part of the cost is defrayed by special assessments.
Special assessments are collected from the property owner along
with real estate taxes. When an improvement is of benefit to
certain areas, it is the intent of the Council that special
assessments be levied against benefitted properties. A major
goal of this document is that special assessments be allocated
and levied in an equitable and consistent manner.
SECTION I
DEFINITIONS
1. RECONSTRUCTION - will be defined as a project whereby all
meaningful elements of an improvement are being removed and
replaced. This would include curb and gutter, sidewalks,
trail, bituminous or concrete pavement, granular base, water
mains, sewer mains, laterals, curb boxes and items
appurtenant to these elements.
2. REHABILITATION will be defined as a project in which one
or more of the aforementioned elements is modified or
supplemented in-place, to restore the serviceability of the
entire street, such as bituminous overlays.
3. PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE - will be defined as work that
involves a level of effort less than that involved in
reconstruction or rehabilitation, the intent of which is to
extend the life of the existing improvement. Preventative
maintenance will include but not be limited to crack
filling, patching, milling and cold planing, and seal
coating.
3
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
SECTION II
GENERAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
The following are general principles, policies and procedures
applicable to all types of improvement:
1. Project costs shall include the cost of all necessary
construction work required to accomplish the improvement,
plus engineering, legal, financing, easement acquisition and
contingency costs.
2. Assessable costs are project costs minus the City and County
share and other credits. MSA funds will not be credited as
they will be utilized to offset total reconstruction program
costs
3. Special assessments will be levied as soon as practical.
Normally this will be within one year after completion of
the project.
4. Publicly owned properties, including but not limited to
municipal building sites, schools, parks, County, State and
Federal building sites, but not including public streets and
alleys, are regarded as being assessable on the same basis
as if such property were privately owned.
5. Revenue sources for these types of improvements will be many
including, but not limited to assessments, MSA Funds, core
facility funds and general tax levies. This policy
determines an equitable assessment approach such that the
property will pay an "equivalent" amount on each project no
matter what other funding sources are available.
SECTION III
SPECIFIC POLICIES
Protect Initiation and Hearing Process
This section describes the initiation of improvement projects and
the administration required to receive final City Council action,
pursuant to the requirements of MSA 429.
A. Project Initiation
1. By Petition: Petitions for initiating improvements will be
prepared by City staff upon request. Such petitions,
4
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
circulated by the affected property owners should bear the
signatures of the property owners of 51% or more, of the
benefitted property(ies).
when projects are initiated through this process the costs
of doing engineering feasibility studies and associated
project consideration costs will be born by the property
owner so petitioning.
If the project proceeds through construction and assessment
those costs will be considered project costs under Section
II.1 above.
If the project does not proceed through construction these
costs will be billed back to the property owners petitioning
or will be recorded for future project costs consideration
at which time the project is concluded. Determination of
the method of cost recovery will be made -.by the City
Council.
2. By Council Action: If the Council determines that an
improvement is in the best interest of the City, it can,
without petition, initiate the improvement with a
four/fifths vote of the Council.
3. By 100% Signed Petition When a petition is signed by 100%
of the property owners benefitted by the improvement, and
there is no City cost participation, the Council may order
the improvement without holding an improvement hearing.
4. By Development Contract: Improvement projects for new
development will only be considered upon execution of a
developers agreement signed by 100% of the benefitted
property owners. The Council may order the project without
a public hearing.
5. Projects may be petitioned or initiated by City Council at
any time during the year, but projects which are initiated
after February 1st will not be scheduled for construction
until the construction season of the following year. The
normal time required for receiving, processing, scheduling
hearings and preparing construction documents is six months.
B. Hearing Process
1. Improvement Hearing: After a petition is filed and its
adequacy determined, or the Council initiates the project,
the City Engineer is directed to study and report as to the
feasibility of the improvement. If after reviewing the
5
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
feasibility report, the Council feels the project has merit,
a public hearing is scheduled, notice published twice, and
all persons benefitted by the project notified in writing.
When an improvement project is to be financed by the sale of
improvement bonds, there is a statutory requirement that at
least 20t of the total costs of the project be assessed
against the benefitted properties.
If after the improvement hearing, at which all persons are
heard, the Council feels that the project still has merit,
then the Council will authorize the preparation of necessary
plans and specifications, and upon receipt and acceptance of
those plans, will authorize the advertisement for bids, by
resolution, for the construction of the project.
C. Final Hearing (Assessment)
After the improvement is ordered and bids received and the
improvement is completed, an assessment roll will be
prepared and the affected property owners will be mailed a
Notice of the Assessment Hearing stating the time and date
that an assessment hearing will be held. The prepared
assessment roll will be posted at the City Hall for review
prior to the assessment hearing. All interested parties
shall have an opportunity to be heard regarding the proposed
assessment.
Necessary and proper adjustment to the assessment roll can
be made by Council at the time the hearing is being held.
If an appeal is made regarding the amount of the special
assessment, written notice must be filed with the Council
prior to or at the assessment hearing.
After the hearing, the assessment roll is adopted by the
Council. The property owners have a 30 day period in which
to pay their assessment in part or in full at the City Hall,
interest free. After this period, the assessment begins to
accumulate interest. On a date as determined by the County
of each year, the assessment roll is certified to the County
Auditors office where it is added to the tax roll for the
following year.
The assessment shall be levied over a period to be
established by the City Council, in equal annual
installments on the principal with interest due and payable
on the declining balance. The annual interest rate shall
also be established by the City Council upon the sale of the
improvement bonds.
2
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
SECTION IV
CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AND EXPECTED LIFE
Construction Standards and Expected Life Minimum Design Standards
The following are minimum design standards applied to the
design and construction of improvements in the City of
Rosemount and are for reference to this policy.
The design of construction of improvements will be completed
referencing City Construction and Engineering Guidelines and
Minnesota Department of Transportation Reference Book dated
1988 as amended.
Sanitary sewer and water mains will be designed and
constructed per the standard for "Sewage and Waterworks" as
established by the "Great Lakes Upper Mississippi Board
(GLUME) and the City Engineer's Association of Minnesota.
Design and construction of such improvements may be enhanced
as is determined by the City Engineer to serve areas being
serviced.
A. Sanitary Sewer Laterals
Minimum 8" PVC (SDR35), (SDR36), or DIP (CL52).
B. Sanitary Sewer Services
Minimum 4" PVC (SD26)
C. Water Main Lateral
Minimum 6" loop or as determined by the City Engineer
D. Water Main Services
1. Single Family Residences - Minimum 1" Type K copper.
2. Multiple Family Residences - To be determined by City
Engineer based on Minnesota State Plumbing Code.
3. Commercial/Industrial - To be determined by City Engineer
based on Minnesota State Plumbing Code.
E. Storm Sewer System
Pipe size shall be designed to handle a 10 year event and
pond shall be designed to handle a 100 year event as
determined by the City Engineer.
7
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
F. Sidewalks, Trails and Bikeways
Concrete - 5 ' wide with 6" sand base - 411 thick (6" thick
at driveways)
Bituminous - 8' wide (2341) Bit. with 6" CLS, 100 percent
crushed rock and 2" Bit.
All trails and sidewalks will be located 1' off property
line, pedestrian ramps and curb drops will be installed
according to MNDOT Standards.
G. Streets
AG, AG -P and RR Zones - minimum 24' edge to edge, 4' gravel
shoulders, rural ditch cross section and 7 ton pavement - or
- minimum 28' back of curb to back of curb, urban cross
section with concrete curb and 7 ton pavement (no street
parking). In certain cases bituminous curb will be allowed
and considered temporary.
RL, R1 & R2 Zones - minimum 32' back of curb to back of
curb, urban cross section, with concrete curb & gutter and 7
ton pavement.
R-3 & R-4 Zones - minimum 37' back of curb to back of curb,
urban cross section, with concrete curb & gutter and 9 ton
pavement.
Commercial Zones - 37' minimum, 49' maximum back of curb to
back of curb, urban cross section, with concrete curb and
gutter and 9 ton pavement as determined by the City
Engineer.
WM and Industrial Zone - 37' minimum, 49' maximum back of
curb to back of curb, urban cross section, with concrete
curb and gutter and 9 ton pavement as determined by the City
Engineer.
Public Zone - Churches, government offices and primary
schools - 37' back of curb to back of curb, urban cross
section, with concrete curb and gutter and 7 ton pavement;
secondary and post -secondary schools: 49' back of curb to
back of curb, urban cross section, with concrete curb and
gutter and 9 ton pavement.
E]
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
Useful Service Life
Public improvements are judged to have a normal useful life
expectancy. For the purpose of this policy, this life expectancy
shall be as follows:
A. Surface Improvements
Concrete Curb and Gutter 30 years
Bituminous Roadways 20 years
Pedestrian Walkways - Concrete 30 years
Pedestrian Walkways — Bituminous 20 years
B. Subsurface Improvements
Water Main 50 years
Sanitary Sewer 50 years
Storm Sewer 50 years
When any existing improvement is ordered to be reconstructed
or replaced as defined under Section I, the assessments to
be levied will be prorated from 0k at one-half life
expectancy to 100% at full life expectancy as noted above or
beyond.
SECTION V
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS
General Procedures and Policies
City Code requires execution of a development contract at the
time of land platting. The developer's agreement normally
references means and methods of providing for public improvement
construction.
As a standard, the City of Rosemount has pursued policies by
which all costs of improvement are directly attributable and
fully paid by cost allocation or assessments against the
development, developer or properties requiring and benefiting by
the improvement. The policies are established with the intent
that no developmental costs are incurred by existing lots or
parcels, by the existing residents, or by the City in general
The exception is for improvements which are determined to have an
area wide benefit which exceeds the scope of the development.
E
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
At the time of platting, the cost responsibilities for any
development for trunk improvements shall be defined. This
responsibility includes trunk sanitary sewer facilities, trunk
water facilities (including source, supply, storage and
distribution components), storm water drainage and control
facilities, arterial street, park dedication, pedestrian walkway
systems and other public improvements, existing or proposed, of
an area wide benefit. Normally the City will require a cash
payment by the developer for the development's share of
improvements for an area wide benefit. The amount to be
determined by the City Council.
At the time of platting, the development contract may provide
details on construction and timing of local or lateral
improvements of various nature for the benefit and improvement of
the individual properties as required by the Rosemount
Subdivision Ordinance.
City Improvement Financing and Construction
As a general policy, the City of Rosemount will assist developers
in the financing and construction of public improvements through
authority granted to the City by Chapter 429 of Minnesota
Statutes. Such assistance is granted by specific Council action
for each development proposal based on perception by the Council
of the project, viability, and development benefit to the City.
The City may elect to sell bonds for such improvement and assess
the costs of bond retirement against individual benefitted land
parcels for a period of repayment 3-5 years or as otherwise
determined by Council.
Typically, the total project costs for improvements benefiting
the development will be assessed on an equal basis against all
buildable lots in the development.
For such City assessed developments and improvements, the City,
through the development contract, requires a 60% down payment,
cash escrow or letter of credit to protect the City from
potential project default, and requires assessment payment
concurrent with building permit issuance or per the assessment
payment schedule whichever comes first. For such City assisted
projects, the City provides design, contract administration and
assessment roll processing, legal, fiscal and administrative
services and charges costs for those services back to the
project.
10
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
Public Improvement Work by Private Developers
No public improvements may take place before a development
contract has been executed.
A private developer may have his plans prepared by other than
City forces under the following conditions:
1. All plans, drawings, specifications and related documents
required shall be prepared by a professional engineer,
registered in the State of Minnesota and approved by the
City.
2. The developer must keep the City informed as to the time
table of development and design, the letting date of a
construction contract, and the starting date of construction
work.
3. In order to warrant the construction for the life expectancy
as previously set forth, the City will provide inspection of
all phases of construction as set forth in the contract
documents at the developer's cost.
4. The City of Rosemount may perform such engineering and
contract administration services which include, but are not
limited to, construction surveys, staking and other
engineering services when requested by the contractor or
developer. The City will also assist the contractor in
interpretation of the contract documents, ordinances, codes
and other items necessary to meet the criteria as
established by the City of Rosemount.
5. No public improvement work shall be performed by any
developer or other private party in City right of way or
easement unless a development contract has been executed and
the final construction plans have been approved by the City.
6. The City will require a surety deposit of 1001 of the
estimated project costs in the form of cash, escrow deposit,
or irrevocable letter of credit.
The City and its representatives shall at all times have access
to the work in order to complete the services as herein provided,
and the developer shall give the City timely notice of his
readiness for inspections or other work to be rendered. Permits,
licenses and easements or permanent changes in existing
facilities shall be secured and paid for by the developer.
The developer shall be charged for these services, and the value
of the services shall be determined on a percentage basis as
11
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
agreed upon by the developer and the City before the project is
started. The fee for City administration services is set
annually by resolution of the City Council.
Upon proper completion of sanitary sewers, storm sewers, water
mains, curb and gutter, roadway base, surfacing and pedestrian
walkway by the developer, the City will accept said improvements
by resolution under a two (2) year guarantee to the City.
SECTION VI
IMPROVEMENTS IN EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS
(RECONSTRUCTION/REHABILITATION)
A. Initiation
Improvements may be initiated by petition'or by City Council
as set out in Section III -1-A.
B. Reconstruction and rehabilitation work proceeding under the
terms of this policy shall provide for the standards set out
in Section IV. A -G.
C. Computation of Assessable Costs
Property Cost Assessable Allocation Assessable costs will
be allocated to properties based upon their zoning
designation at the time of the improvement. The "current"
cost for constructing the improvement in Section IV. A -G.
will be determined using actual bid prices for those units
averaged over the previous two years as constructed by the
City plus the last 12 months change in the ECI (Engineering
Construction Index).
D. Method of Assessment
1. Basic Assessment Data
a. Front Footage Assessment
Most improvements are assessed according to the cost of
the actual design standards implemented in the
improvement project, based upon the lesser of the cost
per front footage of the improvements abutting a parcel
or the corresponding cost based upon the design
criteria of the use identified in Section IV.
12
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
b. Unit Assessments
Some improvements may be assessed on a unit basis,
rather than front footage basis. The unit basis is
typically used in improvement projects affecting only
single family residential properties. It may also be
used in single use developments, i.e. commercial parks,
industrial parks, where land uses and development
densities are similar. Unit assessments are generally
determined by multiplying equivalent design costs of
the improvements by the minimum frontage requirements
of a parcel, as established in the Zoning Ordinance.
C. Adjusted Assessments
Assessments may be adjusted due to public easements
recorded on a parcel.
d. Multiple Frontage Assessment
Parcels with multiple frontage may be assessed for more
than one improvement project. Determination of the
assessments will be based upon the actual access or
connection to improvements that abut the parcel.
2. Method for Determining Assessment
a. Front Footage Assessment
To determine the front footage assessment whichever of the
following is less will be used:
1) The actual front foot costs of improvements being made
which abut the parcel; or
2) The cost per front foot for constructing the
improvement according to the design criteria as
described in Section IV.
b. Unit Assessment
1) Multiple Land Use Improvement Project assessments
will be determined by multiplying the design
criteria costs per front foot by the minimum
frontage of the parcel, as established in the
Zoning Ordinance for improvement projects
affecting mixed land uses. (RR/AG lot width is
300')
13
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
2) Single Land Use Improvement Projects
Assessments will be determined by dividing the
actual costs of the improvement project by the
maximum number of benefitted parcels abutting the
improvements, as determined by the Zoning
Ordinance. Parcels that may be divided according
to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Sub -
Division Ordinance, may receive multiple
assessments units.
3. Method of Payment (Interest on the assessment will begin
accruing from the date of the adoption of the assessment
roll.)
A schedule for the payments of special assessments will be
determined by the City for each project. The payment
schedule for projects in new developments will be set
through a development contract but in no circumstances will
those schedules be less than the following schedule(s) used
for existing developments.
The owner may pay the entire or partial amount of assessment
at City Hall within 30 days of adoption of the assessment
roll without interest. The remaining amount shall be paid
in equal principal installments plus interest as determined
by the Council (typically 2g above the net interest rate of
the bond issue). Annual payments will be remitted with the
property taxes. An owner may pay off the assessments in
full at any time, but will be charged the entire year's
interest after the assessment is certified to the County.
SECTION VII
ASSESSMENT DEFERMENT POLICY
Deferment of Special Assessments
A. Purpose - To indicate in which instances the City may
legally allow deferment of special assessments levied under
this policy.
B. Situations of Mandatory Deferment:
1. Certain agricultural/nursery/greenhouse deferments.:
Generally, real estate consisting of 10 acres or more
or a nursery or greenhouse shall be entitled to a
deferment from special local assessments provided that:
14
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
a. The property is actively and exclusively devoted
to agricultural use evidenced by:
(1) At least 33341 of the total family income of
the owner is derived from the property or the
total production income including rental from the
property is $300.00 plus $10.00 per tillable acre;
and
(2) The property is devoted to the production for
sale of agricultural products.
b. The property:
(1) Is the homestead of the owner, the owner's
surviving spouse, child or sibling of the owner or
is real estate which is farmed with the real
estate containing the homestead property; or
(2) Has been in possession of the applicant, the
applicant's spouse, parent, or sibling or a
combination of the foregoing for a period of at
least seven (7) years prior to application for the
deferment of special assessments or is real estate
which is physically near and farmed with the real
estate which qualifies under this provision; or
(3) Is the homestead of a share holder in a
family farm corporation; or
(4) Is in the possession of a nursery or
greenhouse.
When the above described property no longer qualifies
for deferment, all deferred special assessments plus
interest shall be payable in equal installments spread
over the time remaining until the last maturity date of
the bonds issued to finance the improvements for which
the assessments were levied. If such bonds have
matured, the deferred special assessments plus interest
shall be payable within 90 days.
Application for deferment of special assessments under
these provisions must be filed by May 1st of the year
prior to the year in which the assessments would be
payable. Applications granted shall continue in effect
for subsequent years until the property no longer
qualifies. Applications shall be filed with the
assessor of the taxing district in which the real
property is located.
15
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
The agricultural/nursery/greenhouse special assessments
deferment is subject to the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes §273.111.
C. Situations of Discretionary Deferment.
1. Senior citizen/low income deferment. At its discretion
the City may defer assessments against any homestead
property owned by a person 65 years of age or older and
for whom it would be a hardship to make the assessment
payments. The standards and guidelines governing what
constitutes hardship are established by City ordinance
or resolution.
Additionally, the City may grant a deferrment in
situations where its hardships standards and quidelines
have not been met if exceptional and unusaual
circumstances exist and no preference or discriminatory
treatment will occur.
This deferment is subject to the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes §435.193.
2. Unimproved property deferment. The City may also defer
the assessment of improvements with respect to property
which is not directly and immediately affected by the
improvement for which the assessment is levied. If
applicable, at such times as extensions or conections
regarding the improvement directly benefit such
unimproved property, the City may require payment of
the deferred assessments as well as those relating to
the connection or extension.
This deferment is subject to the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes §429.051.
16
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
Five Year Street Reconstruction Program
Estimated Cost of Reconstruction $5,700,000 over 5 years
Estimated Cost of Maintenance/Overlays $ 300,000 over 5 years
Sources of Revenue
1. Assessments
2. MSA Funds
3. CIP
4. General Tax Levy
Concept
Develop five year, ongoing, street reconstruction program to
reconstruct and maintain city streets. Initially this program
would cover 5 years. Each year this program would be reviewed
and upgraded to add next year.
In order to fund this general reconstruction/maintenance program
it is necessary to look at sources of funding in a broader sense
than on a project by project basis. It is necessary to consider
"pooling" of all available sources so that a "financing program"
can be generated. These sources would be:
1. Assessments - under the proposed assessment policy a
portion of all construction costs, will be assessed.
The percentage of individual project costs to be
assessed will typically be 60t, but could range from a
low of 50k to a high of loot depending on what type of
street it is and how many abutting properties have
access to the street, the type of development
occurring, etc.. Generally if the street is larger
than a residential street MSA Funds offset city costs.
(Those not collected through assessments.)
2. MSA Funds are available to the city through the State
of Minnesota from the MVET Fund. There is no
indication now that those funds are in any great
extent, in jeopardy.
On some projects the amount of dollars that the city
can receive for reconstruction of an MSA designated
street is almost loot of the cost. The city receives a
maximum amount er year from MSA Funds even if our costs
are greater. We don't lose those funds which are not
covered in a single year but we must wait for our
allocation to be great enough to cover those costs.
Exhibit A
17
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
The City's allocation for MSA is about $300,000 per
year. This amount would expand as the number of street
miles that are eligible increases.
What many cities do is to develop a 5 year
reconstruction plan and borrow against their MSA
allocation. That is, say borrow money to fund large
projects which have to be done before MSA Funds are
available and use their allocation as it comes in to
pay off the debt. This is actually quite a common and
a good approach if you have a "Street Reconstruction
Program" in place.
3.. CIP. As part of a reconstruction and maintenance
program it is appropriate to set aside, as part of a 5
year CIP Program, monies for general maintenance. This
is simply part of the General Fund but funds
specifically designated for the Street Reconstruction
Program.
In fact, the Street Reconstruction Program should be
just one part of an overall 5 year CIP Program for the
city and the "General Tax" contribution would be part
Of it.
The specific dollar amount to be designated in the CIP
would vary depending on the overall needs.
4. General Tax Levy. Funds made available through general
taxes could be provided in a couple of ways.
a. In a five year street reconstruction program as we
borrow money to pay for projects a certain portion
of that debt could be calculated as "General Fund"
debt, and, if the levy needed to pay for that debt
is greater than the assessments available, the
general tax base would support that debt.
b. Through a CIP Program, as noted in No. 3 above,
the general taxes used to help finance a program
would compete with other uses of our tax levy.
Example:
YEAR RECONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE TOTAL
1 $ 800,000 $ 60,000 $ 860,000
2 800,000 60,000 860,000
3 1,000,000 60,000 1,060,000
4 1,600,000 60,000 1,660,000
5 1,500,000 60,000 1,560,000
TOTAL COST $5,700,000 $ 300,000 $ 6,000,000
Exhibit A
18
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
Revenues
1. Assessments - Assume average of 50W of
Reconstruction cost would be assessable.
50W X $5,700,000 =$2,850,000
Typically assessments would be spread for seven
years in these issues.
2.. MSA - Based on the projects now projected for
complete reconstruciton over the next 5 years it
is calculated that $3,000,000 would be MSA
Fundable. Since our MSA allocation is only
$300,000 per year we could either use that
$300,000 per year to offset that amount of debt to
incur or borrow against this allocation up front
and utilize our allocation to pay off that debt.
3. General Tax/CIP - The shortfall created between
the total needed and those dollars available in
No. 1 and 2. above would have to be picked up
through general taxes wither through a debt levy
or general tax levy and funding the CIP.
Assume•
A. Year 1, Year 2, Year 3 $2,780,000 in cost
MSA Allocation (900.000)
$1,880,000
CIP Funding
Per Yr.
Debt Needed
$ 300,000
(100,000)
$1,580,000
Issue $1,600,000 in Bond at 8% for 7 yrs. in 1991
Annual debt payment
Assume 50t Assessments
Increase in Debt Levy
B. Year 4, Year 5
MSA Allocation
CIP Funding
Per Yr.
Debt Needed
19
$299,255
260,000
40,000 (rounded)
$3,220,000 in cost
(600,000)
$2,620,000
$ 300,000
(150.000)
$2,325,000
Exhibit A
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
Issue $2,325,000 in Bonds at 8t for seven years
in Year 4.
Annual debt payment $ 434,855
Assume 50t Assessable 301,125
Increase in Debt Levy 134,000 (rounded)
This example shows what two debt issues over a
five year period would cause as an increase in
debt services levy. The amount of $174,000 is
equal to about a 2k increase in the city's portion
of our tax levy.
TYPICAL ASSESST
Assume a 80 foot frontage residential street lot.
Assume residential equivalent front footage cost equals $40.
Percentage Assessed Assessment Amount:
100
$3,200
90%,
2,880
80%
2,560
50%*
1,600
40%
1,280
30%
960
20t
640
10%-
320
Exhibit A
20
------------------
SIUCEr
CAMBRIAN AVE
C kMARO LANE
CNAItU" AVE
C3IAIANTI AVE:
C11ILI AVE
146111 ST A4 .
146MI ST.W.
L. 147'111
147'111 sr.W.
U. 147'111 Sl'.W.
14 8711 S A4 .
U.149'111 Sr -W.
L. 150111 ST.W.
143RD S"r.W.
144711 sr.W.
CHORLEY AVE
147111 Sr.w.
14trill Sr.W.
149111 ST.W.
U.149111 S'r-W.
DALLARA AVE
DALLARA AVE
DANV I LLE AVE
DELFT AVE
U. 145111 ST.W.
U. 145'111 Sr.W.
U. 148'111
121ST :;1'. W.
BUItNLE:Y AVE
I..147111 SI'.W.
149'111 ST.W.
CIMARRON AVE
146111 ST.W.
U.148'111 ST.W.
149TH
DAMASK Cl'.
L.146111 Sr -W.
150'111 ST.W.
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE
Route
EPROM
L. 147711 ST.W.
CAMBRIAN AVE
148711 ST.W
145711 SI'-
W.L. 14711.1 ST.W.
BURNLEY AVE
CAMED AVE
CANADA AVE.
CANADA AVE
CANADA AVE
CANADA AVE
CNARLSIXA AVE.
CANFIELD CIR.
CIIII,E AVE
011111 AVE
U.10"111 ST.W.
C211PP. AVE.
CIHPP AVE
CIl I PP .AVE.
CI10RI.EY AVE.
145111 ST.W.
DOM BLVD
U.145111 ST.W.
0.145111 S'r.W.
DALLARA AVE
DANV I 11E AVE
DELFT AVE
AKRON AVE
145'r11 ST.W.
BURMA AVE
CANADA AVE
148'111 01'.W.
CHIMP. AVE.
CHORLEY AVE
0101110/ AVE
N. END
DAN1it1RY AVE
DALLARA AVE
TO
IF/1Y 3
S. END
11. 150711 ST.W.
L. 147'111 ST.W.
148141 ST.W.
I1WY 3
CHIPP.AVE
C11 11.I AVE
C11IPP. AVE
C 11ILI AVE
C11 I L I AVE
Ci{I PP. AVE
CIIARLSTON AVE
CIMMARON
CINMARON AVE
U.1417111 ST.W.
CIMARRON AVE
CIMARRON AVE
WORLEY AVE
CIMARRON AVE
DODD BLVD
15U'Li ST.W.
DODD BLVD
DODD BLVD
DAMASK AVE
DE:LF'r AVE
DIAMOND PATH
WEST' F7iD
146111 ST.W.
HWY 3
CIIARLSTON AVE
U.148'111
CI14M7UIRON AVE
C:IMARRON AVE
C11RYSLER AVE
DODD BLVD
DANVILIX AVE
W. END
21
PRIORMILES
FEW
4
0.25
1320
4
0.19
1003
4
0,13
686
4
0.14
739
4
0.18
950
4
0.1
528
4
0.38
2006
4
0.21.
1109
4
0.24
1267
4
0.21
1109
4
0.21
11.09
4
0.15
792
4
0.16
845
4
0.21
1109
4
0.24
1267
4
0.1 .
528
4
0.21
1109
4
0.21
1109
4
0.04
211
4
0.16
845
4
0.31
. 1637
4
0.16
845
4
0.38
2006
4
0.42
2218
4
0.06.
317
4
0.11.
581
8
0.09
475
10
0.64
3379
10
0.09
475
10
0.06
317
10
0.09
475
10
0.16
845
10
0.2
1056
10
0.17
898
10
0.1
528
10
0:13
686
10
0.06
33.7
10
0.18
950
TOTAL 7.13 37646
WI'AL
$13,000.00
$11,000.00
$6, 000.0Ei-
$6,000.00
$8,000.00
$6,000.00
$18,000.00
$9,000.00
$11,000.00'
$9,000.00
$9,000.00
$7,000.00'
$7,000.00
$9,000.00
$11,000.00
$4,000.00
$9,000.00
$9,000.00
$2,000.00
$7,000.00
$14,000.00
$7,000.00
$15,000.00
$17,000.00
$2,000.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$24,000.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$7,000.00
$`3, 0011.00
$7,000.00
$4,000.00
$5,000.00
2,000.00
$7,000.00
$311,000.00
Exhibit B
City of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
4: N N
40
4044
�
Z
t�
r
r
v
`rr� •
2 080
N O h N N
h tl! 0 0 0 0
o000
O
ORRR O���
00
yrs
eei a�
ao ori r ¢i Q
eh s Bei .-i vi a.
o .n • .r
%0
CO
I
h tl
! tl tl .+ •r tl
140 VI t7
Vt i!? N
eft il? N
4* 4
il! iA ilt N
ih ii? N
0 �
a
.0
H
O!
r4 r4
NO NMr
ehe v,vt
!a!
!
!r
E+
h !%D
M'WMM M
�
a
` �. .4%0�:_.%.
CO Z; CO
moi
8
�. .
0
�. C1�
Ohm Ne!!
COtA Nlh
_
.
en
..
fm 04
C4 %0 Mr..�.�NeN
N .�
F4
Cj
Mh
Niin_ IV .4
O0�
lM+ftH�
M
�
C4hiT
00000
.�00
CCN
O
O
►'�+ 00
00
E'1
O Nte9
NN en V'
N! N!%0
N!tl
N
!
W
•.
Qd
1
E+
1
L
3
-:Gy6G
G] v tzi
W
LM
LL1 >
4L',
<
aw
c
N
F
Fc. n
t f., t9
aA .. .•4Z
a "' y0
Sc Z
�=
m
1
d !N
..� 3
4
>
c stn
ontoZ
Zr
en G
GZ
�
t
y
••
<
W
>3 n
tU3 �
�>
.4
iA NO
CN<riq
Ic:A 0Eqr
v
r .r ..1
as
NNNNN
o+aaaa
f+1 e7 TTT
0%0%a�aa
�t1NN
o.a+rn
�D
o+
h
er
`'
EBhibit C
22
city of Rosemount
Assessment/Improvement Policy
RESIDENTIAL STREET EQUIVALENT ESTIMATE
The quantities listed below are for a 500' length
of residential street, 32' wide bituminous,
including lateral storm drain
and street lights
$49,350 divided by 500 LF. = $98.70 per foot of street.
$98.70 divided by 2 sides = $49.35 per assessable foot.
Equivalent residential street assessment = $49.35 per foot for all items.
Street only = $34.85 per assessable foot (items 1-6)
Storm Drain only = $11.95 per assessable foot (items 8-10)
Street fight only = $ 2.57 per assessable foot (item 7)
23 Exhibit D
Item
Quantity
its
Unit Price
Total
1.
Soll Correction
2000
C.Y.
$ 4
$ 8,000
2.
6" Class 5 Aggregate
600
Ton
5
3,000
3.
lie 2331 Bitum. Base
135
Ton
17
2,295
4.
1V 2341 Bit. Wear Course 135
Ton
19
2,565
5.
Concrete Curb & Gutter 1000
LF.
5
5,000
6.
Restoration
1
LS.
3,500
3,500
7.
Street Ught
1
Each
1,800
1,800
8.
Catch Basins
2
Each
800
1,600
9.
Manhole
1
Each
1,000
1,000
10. RC Pipe
250
LF.
23
5,750
Total Construction
$34,510
10% Contingency
3,450
Subtotal
$37,960
Plus 10% Administration
11,390
Total
$49,350
$49,350 divided by 500 LF. = $98.70 per foot of street.
$98.70 divided by 2 sides = $49.35 per assessable foot.
Equivalent residential street assessment = $49.35 per foot for all items.
Street only = $34.85 per assessable foot (items 1-6)
Storm Drain only = $11.95 per assessable foot (items 8-10)
Street fight only = $ 2.57 per assessable foot (item 7)
23 Exhibit D
MEMORANDUM
TO: STEVE JILK
FROM: MIKE MILES
DATE: MARCH 10, 1992
RE: ROSEMOUNT CONTRIBUTIONS OF LABOR OR MONEY TO-S.O.A.R.
This memo is written in response to the request at the Monday,
March 2, 1992 Rosemount City Council Meeting for the City Attorney
to research whether the City could provide funds or employee
assistance to the S.O.A.R. movement to stop relocation of the
Metropolitan Airport.
The Minnesota Attorney General's Office has faced this type of
question on several occasions and its advice to various
municipalities is instructive. In fact, there is an AG's opinion
(Op. 476-B-2) which specifically provided that the Village of Arden
Hills could not contribute funds toward a campaign in opposition
to expansion of the Anoka Airport. The Attorney General's Office
concluded that such a contribution would have been for a "private
purpose" unauthorized by law. The Attorney General's Office also
concluded that, even if the residents of Arden Hills voted to
recommend that the Village Counsel make such a contribution, this
did not empower the counsel to proceed with funding the campaign.
The reasoning behind the various rulings of the Attorney General's
Office is that, unless a municipality can show that the official
business and interests of that municipality are adversely affected
by an action, a city may not expend funds in either support of or
opposition to the action in question. Furthermore, my review of
the opinions suggests that the official interest or business to be
protected must be very tangible and not simply speculative in
nature.
Since the provision of employee time toward thwarting the
relocation- of the airport in Dakota County is, in effect, the
expenditure of city funds, the same arguments as stated above would
apply toward the provision of staff services to S.O.A.R.
os/16/91
r' [REVISOR j XX/LY 91-2964
Introduced by Kalis, Pauly, Lieder, Uphus, Orenstein H. F. No. 1709
May 18, 1991 Companion S.F. No.
Referred to Committee on TRANSPORTATION
Reproduced by PHILLIPS LEGISLATIVE SERVICE
1 A bill for an act
2 relating to transportation; authorizing municipalities
3 to create transportation utilities; proposing coding
4 for new law in MinnesotaStatutes, chapter 444.'
5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
6 Section 1. (444.30) [TRANSPORTATION UTILITY.]
7 Subdivision 1. [DEFINITIONS.] For purposes of this
8 section, the following terms have the meanings given them
9 (a) The term "municipality" means a home rule charter or
10 statutory city or a town.
11 (b) The term of governina body" means the town board with
12 respect to towns. ^�
13 (c) The term "transportation utilities" or "facilities"
14 includes grading, base construction, surfacing construction,
15 curb and gutter, striping, signing, signalization, lighting,
16 sidewalks, pedestrian pathways, landscaping, boulevard
17 restoration, and other appurtenances and related facilities.
18 Subd. 2. [AUTHORIZATION.] A municipality may build,
19 construct, reconstruct, repair, enlarge, improve, maintain, or
20 in any other manner obtain transportation utilities and
21 facilities for the collection, transport, and disbursement of
22` traffic, maintain and operate the facilities inside its
23 corporate limits, and acquire by gift,purchase, lease,
24 condemnation, or otherwise any and all land and easements
25 required for those purposes. The authority granted in'this
1
05/16/91 [REVISOR ] XX/LY 91-2964 v
l subdivision is in addition to all other powers with reference to
2 the facilities otherwise granted by the laws of this state or by
3 charter of any municipality.
4 Subd. 3. [FINANCING.] For paying the cost of building,
5 constructing, reconstructing, repairing, enlarging, improving,
6 maintaining, or in any other manner obtaining the facilities or
7 any portion of them, a municipality may issue and sell its
8 general obligations. The obligations may be made payable
9primarily from taxes or from special assessments to be levied to
10 pay the cost of the facilities or from net revenues derived from
11 transportation charges or from other nontax`revenues pledged for
12 their payment under charter or other statutory authority, or
13 from two or more of 'the sources. A municipality may issue
14 special obligations payable solely from taxes or special
15 assessments or from revenues, or from two or more of the
16 sources. Real estate tax revenues should be used only,. and then
17 on a temporary basis, to pay general or special obligations when
18 the other revenues are insufficient to meet the obligations.`
19 All obligations must be issued and sold in accordance with
20 chapter 475. When special assessments are pledged for the
21- payment of the obligations, they must be authorized and issued
22 in accordance with chapter 429 or the city's charter, if the
23 charter authorizes these obligations and the governing body
24 determines to proceed under the charter. When net revenues are
25 pledged to the payment of the obligations, together with or
I
26 apart from taxes and special assessments, the pledge must be
27 made in accordance with subdivision 4.
28 Subd. 4. [CHARGES; NET REVENUES.] To pay for the
29 construction, reconstruction, repair, enlargement, improvement;
30 or other obtainment and the maintenance, operation, And use of
31 the facilities, the governing body of a municipality may impose
32 just and equitable charges for the use and for the availability
33 of the facilities and for connections with them and make
34 contracts for the charges as provided in this section. Charges
35 must be as nearly as possible proportionate to the cost of
36 transportation systems and may be fixed on the basis of traffic
2
1
r 05/16/91 (REVISOR ] XX/LY 91-2964
1generated, by reference to a reasonable classification of the
2 types of premises to which service is furnished, by reference to
3 the quantity, type,
'and loading of the traffic generated, or on
4 any other equitable basis including, but without limitation, any
5 combination of those referred to. The governing body may make
6 thecis a charge against the owner, lessee, occupant, or all
7 of them and may provide and covenant for certifying unpaid
8 charges to the county auditor with taxes against the property
9 served for collection as other taxes are collected. In
10 determining the reasonableness of the charges to be imposed, the
11 governing body may consider all costs of the establishment,
12 operation, maintenance, depreciation, and necessary replacements
13 of the system and of improvements, enlargements; and extensions
14 necessary to serve adequately the territory of the municipality,
15 includin9 the principal and interest to become due on
_ A P
16 obligations issued or to be issued. When net revenues have been
17 appropriated to the payment of the cost of the establishment,
18 the cost of any specified replacement; improvement enlargement,
19 or extension, or the cost of the principal and interest due on
20 obligations to be issued for those purposes, no charges imposed
21 to produce net revenues adequate for the
purpose may be deemed
22 unreasonable by virtue of the fact that the project to be
23 financed has not been started or completed if (1) proceedinqS
24 for it are taken with reasonable dispatch and (2) the project,
25 when completed, may be expected to make service available to the
26 premises charged that will have a value reasonably commensurate
27 with the charges. All charges, when collected, and all money
28 received from the sale of any facilities or equipment or any
29 by-products must be placed in a separate fund and used first to
30 pay the normal, reasonable, and current costs of operating and
31 maintaininq the facilities. The net revenues received in excess
32 of the costs may be pledged by resolutions of the governing
33 body, or may be used though not so pled ed, to pay principal and
34 interest on obligations issued as provided in subdivision 3 or
35 to pay the Portion of theprincipal and interest as may be
36 directed in the resolutions. Net revenues derived from an
3
05/16/91 [REVISOR ] XX/LY 91-2964
1 facilities, whether or not financed by the issuance of the
2 obligations, may be pledged or used to pay obligations issued
3 for other facilities of the same types. In resolutions
4 authorizing the issuance of either general or special
5 obligations and pledging net revenues to them, the governing
6 body may make covenants for the protection of holders of the
7 obligations and taxpayers of the municipality as it deems
8 necessary, including, but without limitation, a covenant that
9 the municipality will impose and collect charges of the nature
10 authorized by this section at the times and in the amounts
11 required to produce, together with any taxes or special
12 assessments designated as a primary source of payment of the
13 obligations, net revenues adequate to pay all principal and
14 interest when due on the obligations and to create and maintain
15 reserves securing the payments as may be provided in the
16 resolutions. When a covenant is made, it is enforceable by
17 appropriate action on the part of any holder of the obligations
18 or any taxpayer of the municipality in a court of competent
19 jurisdiction, and the obligations are deemed tobepayable
20 wholly from the income of the system whose revenues are so
21 pledged, within the meaning of sections 475.51 and 475.58.
22 Subd. 5. [LEVY ASSESSMENTS.] The governing body of a
23 municipality may also levy assessments against property within
24 the municipal limits benefited by the transportation system
25 under the procedure authorized by law or charter with reference
26 to other assessments for benefits of local improvements, may
27 .transfer and use for the purposes of this section surplus funds
28 of the municipality not specifically dedicated to another
29 purpose, and may levy taxes on property within the municipal
30 limits for the purposes of this section.
4
Precinct Mala With Polling Locations
SCALE r = 3000' CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
of i
u
I „dw
N
3 PRECINCT 1
• PRECII
PRECINCT 2
PRECINCT 5
DAKOTA COV IY
TECHNICAL /NST TV7
146.8
49
r
&.„u -.
UNIVERSI T
Y OF ;
MINNESOTA
PRECINCT" 4
. rN•/ taw
•. w///r trt•/
• "" "'
TNM
_
"/""• `""'
/ NiYNw wW
•. rw/Nr !r/�4
•. W WK/ /trl W1{
M. MlrYt 4KW
•. N11rMt W
IL rlY{NI11 lrWl
RESEARCH
/. • i
CENTER
1�
-
i•
•. r1/ir/ NWr
• rrwri twM
V. /i{{liti H{YW
x. r«wwr r/lu/
N. r..rrt .wrr
.
N M
s
q. MrN Iirll
... rwu cw•r {
/.. Mlr /irar ilW/
N. !r1{l N/M /iNl/ tlWi
�
PRECINCT 1
SHANNON PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL / 13501
SHANNON
PARKWAY
PRECINCT 2
UNITED METHODIST CHURCH 1
14770 CANADA
AVENUE
PRECINCT 3
ST. JOHN'S LUTHERAN CHURCH
/ 3285 144TH
STREET WEST
CITY
OF
1
PRECINCT 4 LUTHERAN CHURCH OF OUR SAVIOR / 14980 DIAMOND PATH
PRECINCT 5 SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER / 2900 145TH STREET WEST
( E$ ) INDICATES POLLING LOCATIONS EX h i U i t 1 ADMIN. DEPT.
(BCB '03/92)
R,.
1 I �
. t.•h
2
I -
3 I ��
_"_V F 1 - - ---- - -- — -- —
=Az ocm r)
LJUV
6 £ �`
s m� �_ rpt.• � � ,
IRMO
owel.
4000 w 3000 w
CITY
OF R OSEMOUNT
January, 19911
ADMIN. DEPT. ( B C B 03 / 92
CURRENT PRECINCT MAP
T.'•`t�',��JIpi
'�f�a'�fi M.7.S' F?fes! _
\�,.'
r
4.
f %!
I
i
�I
i
�,-
1
ClTr
/ COATES
'111 111 111 '111 II! il� I11
ADMIN. DEPT. ( B C B 03 / 92
CURRENT PRECINCT MAP