Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 26, 1994 Work Session NOTICE OF OFFICIAL MEETING Notice is hereby given that an official meeting is to be held in the City of Columbia Heights as follows: Meeting of: Date of Meeting: Time of Meeting: Location of Meeting: Purpose of Meeting: 7:00 A.M. 9:00 A.M. 9:00 A.M. 12:00 P.M. 12:30 P.M. 1:00 P.M. 2:00 P.M. 2:30 P.M. 3:30 P.M. 4:30 P.M. MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1994 7:00 A.M. TO 4:30 P.M. * 7:00 A.M. BRIEFING AT PANNOEKEN RESTAURANT, MEETING ROOM, 4920 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN * 8:45 A.M. - 4:30 P.M. MEETING RECONVENES AT COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY HALL, CONFERENCE ROOM WORK SESSION 1994 STATE LEGISLATIVE SESSION BRIEFING - SENATOR STEVEN NOVAK - REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SIMONEAU (**NOTE: BRIEFING CONDUCTED AT PANNOEKEN RESTAU- RANT, MEETING ROOM, 4920 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN) RECONVENE MEETING AT COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY HALL, CONFERENCE ROOM BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCY INTERVIEWS LUNCH BREAK ADMINISTRATIVE/ENGINEERING CHARGEg ON SEAL COAT/MID-BLOCK LIGHTING PROJECTS POLICE RELIEF PENSION CONSOLIDATION WITH PERA HOUSING MAINTENANCE CODE REVISIONS TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS FINANCIAL REPORT REFUSE RATE ADJUSTMENTS ADJOURNMENT The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its services, programs, or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all City of Columbia Heights' services, programs, and activities. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 782-2800, Extension 209, to make arrangements. (TDD/782-2806 for deaf only) TO: FROM: DATE: RE: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL PAT HENTGES, CITY MANAGER FEBRUARY 25, 1994 POLICE RELIEF ASSOCIATION CONSOLIDATION WITH PERA In my quest for further information on the potential impact of consolidating the Police Relief Association under PERA, I refer you to the following attachments: Supplemental Projection for Columbia Heights Police Relief Consolidation. Millman and Robertson provided projections on municipal contribution requirements based upon a vote of actual election of benefits by the individual members. The analysis shows that our municipal contribution will change from approximately $200,000 to $41,000 in 1994. The payments will be made on 11.41% of payroll. However, our amortization payment will go back up in 1995 to about $100,000 and then decrease to approximately $50,000 in the year 2000. Gabriel Roeder Letter. I previously submitted a letter from Gabriel Roeder to City of St. Paul. Mr. Finley indicates that the fundamental issue in consolidation essentially boiled down to a shifting of economic risk to PERA and an extension of PERA benefits to Relief Association employees. I might add that the City of St. Paul ultimately determined to consolidate with PERA. Reduction in Administrative Expense. One clear cut advantage of consolidation will be the reduction in administrative expenses that run approximately $20,000 to about $2,000 annually. Other Potential Cost Savings. The current Relief Association bylaws provide that active members stop making contributions to the plan at 25 years of service. Sgt. Jendro is under this provision and the remaining three active members are approaching 25 years of service. Effective with consolidation all four members now will begin paying into PERA and will continue until such time retirement occurs. Additionally, any service years Sgt. Jendro or the others have accumulated to date only are credited at top patrol officer rate, and Sgt. Jendro will have to make back payments into the plan if he is to get credit for the approximately three years of service he did not make contributions on. Other Cities' Experience with PERA. Attached please find a report on the experience of other cities' municipal contribution levels after consolidation with PERA. Overall, the report reveals that cities' contribution levels went down with consolidation, but there are instances that the mortality tables changed because retirees lived longer or because of early retirements, resulting in the need for additional municipal contributions to be made to the fund. This catch-up payment to either post-fund with consolidation or the local Relief Association without consolidation would occur under either circumstance, because the fund must be fully funded by the year 2010. Every two to three years, PERA will do a financial projection to determine if an additional catch up increase in the municipal contribution is necessary in order to ensure that there exists enough funding in the post-retirement account. Additional Actuarial Projections. I have requested that Millman and Robertson prepare another projection based upon the assumption that a retiree lives two years longer or deceases two years earlier than projected under PERA assumptions. Further, I have asked that a projection be made if one of the active members leaves two years earlier or stays two years longer. They indicated that it would take approximately three weeks longer to get this information because of the current work load. He did indicate that the mortality rate assumption would have minimal affect on the plan. On the other hand, he was willing to provide further projections on the active member retirement changes. In summary, I have talked with a number of cities~ PERA officials, and different actuarials. Surprisingly, all of them referred to the Gabriel Roeder St. Paul letter indicating that the actuarial assumptions and cost projections are simply that .... projections. The pension benefits must be amortized by the year 2010 under either benefit program. It appears clearly in the short term, city's cost will go down, with the qualification that the individuals electing PERA benefits will do so under the circumstances indicated with the straw poll. Mortality rates, benefit changes by PERA, early retirements, or interest earnings will have a material effect on our municipal contribution to the plan; accordingly will result in a change to the projected savings consolidation. Gerald R. Bernstein, F.S.A. Stephen D. Brink, F.S.A. Brian Z. Bro.'n, F.C~a~.S. MarkJ. CMn, A.C.A.S. Susan J. Comstock, F.S.A., F.C~at.S. Timothy D. Courtne), A.S.A. Thomas IL Custis, KS.A. Patrick J. Dunks, A.S.A. PamelaJ. E~ans, A.S.A. DanielJ. Haher~', F.C.A.S. Steven G. Hanson, A.S.A. Richard H. Hauboldt, F.S.A. Peggy L. Hauser, F.S.~.. GregoD' N. Herrle, F.S.A. William V. Hogan, F.S.A. Gar3,' R. Josephson, F.C.A.S. Frank Kopenski,Jr., A.S.A. Kenneth E. Leinbach, F.S.A. Mark E. Litow, F.S.A. Elaine Magrady, A.S.A. Sandra A. Metres, F.S.A. James C. Modaff, F.S.A. Kenneth W. Newhouse, A.S.A. David F. Ogden, F.S.A. William M. Pollock, F.S.A. Kexin B. Robbins, F.C.A.S. Robert L. Sanders, F.C.A.S. Steven J. Sherman, KS.A. John B. Snyder, F.S.A. Lee H. Straate, F.S.A. Peter G. Wick, A.C.A.S. Roger A. Yard. A.C.A.S. MII.I JMAN & ROBERTSON, INC. Actuaries and Consultants Suite 400 15700 Bluemound Road Brookfield, Wisconsin 53005-6069 Telephone: 414/784-2250 Fax: 414/784-4116 Wendell Milliman, F.S.A. (1976) Stuart A. Robertson, F.S.A. Chairman Emeritus December 22, 1993 Mr. Pat Hentges City Manager City of Columbia Heights 590 40th Avenue Northeast Columbia Heights, MN 55421 RE: Supplemental Projection of Columbia Heights Police Relief Association Under P.E.R.A. Consolidation Dear Mr. Hentges: We have completed a rough projection of future municipal contribution requirements under P.E.R.A. consolidation for the Columbia Heights Police Relief Association. This projection is based on the results of our pre-consolidation valuation with the following special assumptions which you requested that we use: (1) Consolidation would occur in the first quarter of 1994; before the Relief Association supplemental contribution is paid (so that no supplemental payment is made in calendar year 1994). (2) All retirees elect to receive future benefits through P.E.R.A. (3) All currently active participants will choose to receive P.E.R.A. benefits. (4) Jendro, Olson and Sehmidt will elect to retire at age 55; Kapala at age 52. (5) Annual salary increases (including 1993) are assumed to be 6.5 percent. Albany · Atlanta · Boston · Chicago · Cinrlnnafi * Dill]as · Dexlver * I.~o~ · Houston Indianapolis · Irvine · Los.Angeles · Milwaukee · MinneaPOlis · New York · Omaha · Philadelphia · Phoenix Portland · St. Louis · Salt Lake City * San Diego * San Francisco * Seattle · Tokyo · Washlnoo~on, D.C. Internationally X¥OODROW MII.I.IMAN Attstralia · Austria · Belgium * Bermuda · Canada · Channel Inlands * Denmark France * Gennam · Ireland · Italy · Japan · .Mcxito · Netherlands · Ne~ Zealand Philippines · Spain · Sweden * L'nited Kingdom · L'nited Stairs · 14'est Indies Mr. Pat Hentges December 22, 1993 Page Two You should recognize the rough approximation of these results. Results could vary significantly if plan investment experience deviates from 8.5 percent. The results would also be sensitive to each of the assumptions outlined above. For example, municipal contribution requirements may be accelerated if Officer Sehmidt were to retire before 2001. I l~ope this information is suitable for your purposes. Don't hesitate to call if you have further questions. Sincerely, Thomas K. Custis, F.S.A. Consulting Actuary TKC~h Enclosure CC: Larry Martin Laurie Hacking MII.!JMAN & ItOB~N, INC. COLUMBIA HEIGHTS POLICE RELIEF ASSOCIATION projected Mu~P~I Con~bution Requirements 1994 1993 184 1994 41' 1995 100'* 1996 97 1997 75 1998 72 1999 52 2000 49 2001 49 *Reflects skipping of amortization payment in year of consolidation. **Reflects significant gain from retirees electing P.E.R.A. Retirements assumed to occur on the July 1 nearest age 55 (except age 52 for Kapala). MII.!.IMAN & ROBERTSON, INC. Gerald R. Bernstein, A.S.A. Stephen D. Brink, ES.A. Brian Z. Brown, EC.A.S. MarkJ. Cain, A.C.A.S. Su~nJ. Comstock, ES.A., EC.A.S. Thomas K. Custis, ES.A. PatrickJ. Dunks, A.S.A. PamelaJ. Evans, A.S.A. DanieIj. Flahert% EC.A.S. Steven G. Hanson, A.S.A. Richard H. Hauboldt, ES.A. Peggy L. Hauser, ES.A. Gregory N. Herrle, ES.A. William V Hogan, ES.A. Gary. ILJoc, ephson, EC.A.S. Frank Kopenski,JL, A.S.A. Kenneth E. Leinbach. ES.A. Mark E. Litow, ES.A. Elaine Magrady, A.S.A. Sandra A. Merles, ES.A. James C. Modaff, ES.A. Kenneth W. Newhouse, A.S.A. David E Ogden, ES.A. William M. Pollock, ES.A. Kevin B. Robbins, EC.A.S. Robert L. Sanders, EC.A.S. StevenJ. Sherman, ES.A. John B. Snyder, ES.A. Lee H. Stxaate, ES.A. Peter G. Wick, A.C.A.S. Roger A. Yard, A.C.A.S. MII J JMAN & ROBIN, INC. Actuaries and Consultants Suite 400 15700 Bluemound Road Brooldield, Wisconsin 53005 Telephone: 414/784-2250 Fax: 414/784-4116 September 24, 1993 Wendell Milliman, ES.A. (1976} Stuart A. Robertson, ES.A. Chairman Emeritus Legislative Commission on Pensions and Retirement 55 State Office Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 RE: Columbia Heights Police Relief Association Commission Members: Pursuant to your request, we have performed actuarial calculations preliminary to consolidation for the Relief Association as of January 1, 1993. The results of our calculations are set forth in the following report as are the actuarial assumptions upon which our calculations have been made. We have relied on the basic employee data and asset figures as submitted by the Public Employees Retirement Association. On the basis of the foregoing, we hereby certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, this report is complete and accurate and has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 356.215, Minnesota statutes, and the requirements of the Standards for Actuarial Work, adopted by the Commission on September 20, 1989 and revised on July 8, 1992. Respectfully Submitted, Ttfomas K. Custis, F.S.A. Consulting Actuary Wflhm V. Hog~, F.S.~. Consulting Actu~ TKC/WVH/bh Albany · Atlanta · Boston · Chicago · Cincinnati · Dallas · Denver · Hartford · Houston Indianapolis · Irvine · Los Angeles · Milwaukee · Minneapolis · New York · Omaha · Philadelphia Phoenix · Portland · St. Louis · Salt Lake City · SanDiego · San Francisco · Seattle · WashingXon, D.C. Internationally WOODROW MILLIMAN Australia · ,Austria · Belgium · Bermuda · Canada · Channel Islands · Denmark France · Germany · Ireland · Italy ·Mextco · Nether[ands · New Zealand · Norway Philippines · Spain · United Kingdom · United States · West Indies Gerald R. Bernstein. F.S.A. Stephen D. Brink, F.S.A. Brian Z. Brown. F.C.A.S. MarkJ. Cain, A.C.A.S. SusanJ. Comstock, F.S.A., F.C.A.S. Timothy D. Courmey, A.S.A. Thomas lC Custis, F.S.A. Patrick J. Dunks, A.S.A. Pamela J. Evans, A.S.A. DaoielJ. Flahcrty, F.C.,\.S. Steven (;. Han~m, A.S,.\. Richard H. Hau'mfldt, F.S.A. Peg~' 1.. Hauser, F.S.A. GrcgoD' N. Herrle. F.S.A. William V. Hogan. F.S.A. Gray R. Josephson F.C.A.S. Frank Kopenski,Jr., A.S.A. Kenneth E. I.einbach, F.S.A. Mark E. I,itow, F.S.A. Elaine Magrady, A.S.A. Sandra A. Metres, F.S.A. James C. Modaff, F.S.A. Kenneth W. Newhouse, A.S.A. David F. Ogden, F.S.A. William M. Pollock, F.S.A. Kevin B. Robbins, F.CA.S. Robert I.. Sanders. F.C.A.S. Steven J. Sherman, F.S.A. John B. Snyder, F.S.A. Lee H. Straate, F.S.A. Peter G. Wick, A.C.A.S. Roger A. Yard, A.(2A.S. MIIJJMAN & ROBERTSON, INC. Actuaries and Consultants Suite 400 15700 Bluemound Road Brookfield, Wi~onsin 5300.5-6069 Telephone: 414/784-2250 Fax: 414/784-4116 December 22, 1993 Wendell Milliman, F.S.A. (1976) Stuart A. Robertson, F.S.A. Chairman Emeritus Mr. Pat Hentges City Manager City of Columbia Heights 590 40th Avenue Northeast Columbia Heights, MN 55421 RE: Supplemental Projection of Columbia Heights Police Relief Association Under P.E.R.A. Consolidation Dear Mr. Hentges: We have completed a rough projection of future municipal contribution requirements under P.E.R.A. consolidation for the Columbia Heights Police Relief Association. This projection is based on the results of our pre-consolidation valuation with the following special assumptions which you requested that we use: (1) Consolidation would occur in the first quarter of 1994; before the Relief Association supplemental contribution is paid (so that no supplemental payment is made in calendar year 1994). (2) All retirees elect to receive future benefits through P.E.R.A. (3) All currently active participants will choose to receive P.E.R.A. benefits. (4) Jendro, Olson and Schmidt will elect to retire at age 55; Kapala at age 52. (5) Annual salary increases (including 1993) are assumed to be 6.5 percent. Albany · Atlanta * Boston · Chicago * Cincinnati * Dallas · Denver * Hartford * Houston Indianapolis * Irvine * Los Angeles * Milwaukee * Minneapolis * New York * Omaha * Philadelphia * Phoenix Portland * St. Louis · Salt L~ke City · S~m Diego * San Francisco * Seattle * Tokyo · Washington, D.C. Internationally W()ODROW MII.[,I~&4N A~Lstralia · Austria · Belgium · Bermuda * Canada ° Channel Islands · I)enmark France ° (;ermany ° Ireland ° Italy ° Japan ° Mexico · Netherlaods · NewZealand Philippines ° Spain · Sweden · United Kingdom ° L'nitvd States · West Indies Mr. Pat Hentges December 22, 1993 Page Two You should recognize the rough approximation of these results. Results could vary significantly if plan investment experience deviates from 8.5 percent. The results would also be sensitive to each of the assumptions outlined above. For example, municipal contribution requirements may be accelerated if Officer Schmidt were to retire before 2001. I hope this information is suitable for your purposes. Don't hesitate to call if you have further questions. Sincerely, Thomas K. Custis, F.S.A. Consulting Actuary TKC&h Enclosure Larry Martin Laurie Hacking MILLIMAN & ROBERTSON, INC. REPORT PRELIMINARY TO CONSOLIDATION The purpose of this report is to determine the initial additional municipal contribution required by consolidating the Relief Association with PERA Police and Fire (P&F) as specified in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 353A. The consolidation process provides the Relief Association members and their beneficiaries an opportunity to change their retirement benefit plan coverage by electing between Relief Association and P&F benefits. In order to evaluate the financial aspects of consolidation, the costs in Table 1 have been determined under three possible outcomes - all individuals elect Relief Association benefits (column 2), all individuals elect P&F benefits (column 3) and each individual elects the benefit plan which has the greater total benefit plan actuarial value (column 4). Table 1 also compares the consolidation calculations to those found int he actuarial valuation of the Relief Association as of December 31, 1992, prepared by Gabriel, Roeder, Smith & Company. Since the Relief Association benefits are identical for columns 1 and 2, the differences in liabilities and costs are due to the use of different actuarial assumptions as required by statute. Table 2 shows a summary of the data and lists the major assumptions. Whenever a retired member or the retired member's surviving spouse elects P&F benefits, the reserve for that benefit must be transferred to the Minnesota Post-Retirement Investment Fund (MPRIF). The amount to be transferred if all benefit recipients who are eligible for MPRIF elect P&F benefits is $2,376,426, which is less than the current market value of assets. This amount includes an estimated increase of 3.5% for those who meet the MPRIF eligibility rules for a January 1, 1994 benefit adjustment. In addition, when current active members retire and elect P&F benefits, the reserve for those benefits must also be transferred to the MPRIF. Currently, there is one active member who is eligible to retire. We estimate the total required transfer if he elects P&F benefits to be MILLIMAN & ROBERTSON, INC. approximately $396,000. The total of the potential required transfer for both retired and actives eligible to retire is less than the current market value of assets. Current benefit recipients who have elected PERA benefits but are not eligible for MPRIF will be paid directly by PERA. Their benefits will be escalated by the same percentage that applies to MPRIF annuitants; however, no funds are required to be transferred to MPRIF. Although the costs shown in Table 1 represent an appropriate range of estimates available today, the costs are subject to change in future years following the consolidation. The true cost of any pension plan is not completely determined until the last benefit payment has been made to the last benefit recipient. Prior to that date, annual budgets are determined by making assumptions regarding future experience. Each year in the future following consolidation, municipal costs will be redetermined based on the elections made by members and beneficiaries and will consist of the following components: Regular Contributions (line 8): A variable cost which will depend on the compensation of members still active. Additional Contributions (line 7): A fixed cost which is an annual amount required to amortize the initial unfunded consolidation actuarial liability shown in column 4 of Table 1 by December 31 of the year 2010. In this particular case, the additional contributions are equal to $193,478. Experience Contributions (undeterminable at this time): A variable cost which will depend on actual experience. Any actuarial gains will reduce future contributions and actuarial loss will increase future contributions. -2- MILLIMAN & ROBEglWoON, INC. COLUHBZA HEZGHTS POLZCE DEPARTMENT RELZEF ASSOCZATZON ACTUARIAL CALCULATZONS TABLE 2 NUMBER IN PLAN Active Members Deferred Former Members Retired Members and Beneficiaries MEMBER CONTRIBUTION Percentage Compensation Base Contribution MUNICIPAL CONTRIBUTION Percentage Compensation Base Contribution INTEREST - Before Retirement - After Retirement SALARY INCREASE PDST-RETIREMENT BENEFIT INCREASE RETIREMENT AGE/SERVICE OTHER ASSUMPTIONS BENEFITS Prior Valuation Relief Association (1) 4 0 13 8.0% 157,344 12,588 12.0% 157,344 18,881 5.0% 5. O% 3.5% 3.5% 52/20 Per Columbia Heights Policeman's Relief Associat ion Per Columbia Heights Policeman's Relief Consolidated Calculation All Elect All Elect Relief Association PERA P&F (3) 4 4 0 0 13 13 7.6% 216,425 16,448 7.6% 216,425 16,448 11.4% 216,425 24,672 8.5% 8.5% 6.5% 6.5% 52/20 Per PERA P&F Report Per Columbia He Policeman's Rel 11.4% 216,425 24,672 8.5% 5.0% 6.5% N/A 60/3 Per PERA P&F Report Per PERA P&F Report MILI.IMAN & ROBERTSON, INC. PUBLIC EHPLOYEES POLICE AND FIRE FUND 5U~Y OF ACTUARIAL ASSlMPTIONS AND #ETHODS TABLE 12 Interest: Salary Increases: IIor tal tty: Retirement Age: Separation: DtsabtlttY: Expenses: Return of Contributions: F~tly Coeposttton: Social Security: Pre-Retiremnt: 8.S~ per annum Post-Rettremnt: 5~per annum Reported salary for prior fiscal year, with new hires annualized, Increased 6.5~ to current flscal year and 6.S% annually for each future year. Pre-Rettremnt: Male - 1971 Group Annutty Mortality Table male rates pro~ected to ]984 by Scale 0 Feeale - 197! Group Annuity Mortality Table feeale rates projected to 1984 by Scale D Post-Ret1 reaent: Male Same as above Feaale - Same as above Post-Disability: Male 1965 RRB rates Female - 1966 RRB rates Age 60, or if over age 60, one year from the valuation date. Graded rates based on plan experience as of Oune 30, 1989. Rates are shown tn rate table. Rates as shown in rate table. Prior year expenses expressed as percentage of prior year payroll. All eaployees withdrawing after becoming eligible for a deferred benefit were assumed to take the larger of their contributions accueulated with tnterest or the value of their deferred benefit. 85~ of male ~ebers and 65~ of female Members are assuaed to be ~arrted. Feeale ts four years younger than ~a]e. Assuae Meal)ers have no children. N/A - 18 - MILl]MAN & ROBERTSON, INC. PUBLIC DIPLOYEES POLICE AND FZRE FUND SUNNARY OF ACTUARIAL ASSU~FTION$ AND #ETHOD$ TABLE 12 (Continued) Benefit Increases After Retirement: Payment of earnings on retired reserves in excess of 5% accounted for by 5% post-retirement assumption. Spectal Consideration: Harrted Hembers assumed to elect subsidizecl joint and survivor fo~ of ~nnutty as follo~s: Hale - Female - 40%elect 50~J&S option 45% elect ]00~J&S option 15% elect 50~j&S optton 15% elect 100~ J&S option Astua~ial Cost Hethod: Entry Age Nome1 Actuarial Cost Hethod with nome1 costs expressed as a level percentage of earnings. Under this method, Actuarial Gains (Losses) reduce (increase) the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability. Asset Veluatton Hethod: Cost Value plus one-third Unrealized Gains or Losses. Payment on the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability: A level percentage of payroll each year to the statutory amortization date assuming payroll increases of 6.5% per annum. - 19 - MI///MAN ar IROBERTSON, INC~ OCT 12 '93 1~:~1 FROM M/R CASUALTY TO 1~1~782~801 PAGE.004/005 PUBLIC DI~OYEES POLICE AND FIRE FUHD SUNKARY OF ACTUA~IAL ASSUNPTIONS AND #ETHODS TABLE 12 (Continued) SEPARATIONS EXPRESSED AS THE limBER OF OCCURRENCES PER 10,0OO: Ape JJzlle. Female Hale F~ale 20 5 2 859 859 Il 11 0 0 21 5 2 '750 750 11 11 0 0 22 5 2 660 660 12 12 0 0 23 5 3 583 583 12 12 0 24 5 3 519 519 13 13 0 0 25 $ 3 463 463 13 13 26 6 3 416 416 ]4 14 27 6 3 374 374 14 14 28 7 3 339 339 14 ]4 29 7 4 307 307 15 15 30 7 4 280 280 16 16 31 8 4 256 256 16 16 32 8 4 234 234 17 17 33 9 5 215 215 17 17 34 10 5 198 198 lB 18 35 10 5 183 183 19 ]9 36 ll 6 169 169 20 20 37 12 6 157 157 22 22 38 13 7 146 146 23 23 39 14 7 135 135 24 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 15 8 126 126 26 26 0 0 41 i6 9 1]8 118 28 28 0 0 42 ]8 9 110 110 29 29 0 0 43 21 10 103 103 31 31 0 0 44 24 11 97 97 34 34 0 0 45 27 12 91 9! 36 36 0 0 46 30 13 86 86 41 41 0 0 47 34 14 81 81 46 46 0 0 48 39 15 69 69 52 52 0 0 49 44 ]7 59 59 60 60 0 0 M~LIMAN ~'ROBKRTSON INC.. OCT 1~ '~ 1B:~I F~OM MYR CASUALTY TO I~I~?~BOI PAGE.005/005 PUBLIC ENPLOYEES POLICE AND FIRE ~ SUI414ARY OF ACTUARIAL ASSUI4PTIONS AND #ETHODS TABLE 12 (Continued) SEPARATIONS EXPRESSED AS THE N~BER OF OCCURRDICES PER 10,0OO: Death _ Wi thdrawal. _])tlibJL~_t.Y~ Mala Fe~le ~ Flamale 50 49 18 50 50 69 69 51 54 20 39 39 80 80 53 65 23 22 22 10¢ 104 54 72 25 15 15 119 119 Retirement Male Female 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 78 27 11 11 135 135 0 0 56 85 30 7 7 152 152 O 0 57 92 33 5 5 17] 171 O 0 58 lO0 37 3 3 192 192 0 O 59 110 41 1 1 215 215 O 0 60 12] 46 0 0 0 0 61 133 52 0 0 0 0 62 146 58 0 0 0 0 63 160 65 0 0 0 0 64 176 73 0 0 0 0 I0,000 10,00o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 65 195 81 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 219 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 243 99 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 270 109 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 300 123 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 334 140 0 0 0 O 0 0 21- FEB 25 '94 BB:B~ PUBLIC EMPLOYEES TiLi lC- 1~-78~7801 PRGE.08~/"005 PUBLIC EJ4PLOYEES POLICE AND FIRE FUNO SUMI4ARY OF ACTUARIAL ASSIJNPTIONS ANO HETHOOS TABLE 12 Interest: Salary Increases: Mortality: Retirement Age: Separation: Disability: Expenses: Return of Contributions: Family Composition: Social Security: Pre-Retirement: 8.5~ per annum Post-Retirement: 5% per annum Reported salary for prior fiscal year, with new hires annualized, increased 6.5% to current fiscal year and 6.S% annually for each future year. Pre-Retirement: Male - lg71 Group Annuity Mortality Table male rates projected to 1984 by Scale D Female 1971 Group Annuity Mortality la!~!e female rates projected to 1984 by Scale J Post-Retirement: Hale Same as above )emale - Same as above Post-Oisability: Male - 1965 RRB rates Female - 1965 RRB rates Age 60, or if over age 60, one year from the valuation (late. Graded rates based on plan experience as of June 30, 1989. Rates are shown in rate table. Rates as shown in rate table. Prior year expenses expressed as percentage of prior year payroll. All employees withdrawing after becoming eligible for a deferred benefit were assumed to take the larger of their contributions accumulated with interest or the value of their deferred benefit. 85% of male Members and 65% of female Members are assumed to be married. Female is four years younger than male. Assume Members have no children. N/A MILLIMAN & ROBI!Ik~rSON, INC. CASUALTY TF! !Bi27_P, 22001 PAISE,00S/005 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES POLICE ANO FIRE FUND SUHMARY OF ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS Alto METHOOS TABLE 1~ (Continued) Benefit Increases After Retirement: Speclal Constderati.on: Payment of earnings on retired reserves in excess of 5% accounted for by 5% post-retirement assumption. Married Members assumed to elect subsidized joint and survivor form of annuity as follows: Male - Female - 40% elect 50%j&S option 45% elect 100%J&S option 15% elect 50% J&S option 15% elect I00%J&S option Actuarial Cost Method: Entry Age Normal Actuarial Cost Method with normal costs expressed as a level percentage of earnings. Under this method, Actuarial Gains (Losses) reduce (increase} the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability. Asset Valuation Method: Cost Value plus one-third Unrealized Gains or Losses. Payment on the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability: A level percentage of payroll each year to the statutory amortization date assuming payroll increases of 6.5% per annum. - lg - OCT 1~ '~3 l~:~i FI~C,M M,..'~ CASLIALTY TO i61~782~801 PAGE.E104.,'005 PUBLIC ENPLOYEES POLICE AND FIRE FUND SUGARY OF ACTUARIAL ASSUNPTIONS ANO HETHODS TABLE 12 (Continued) SEPARATIONS EXPRESSED AS THE NUICBER OF OCCURRENCES PER 10,OOO: Death _ Age ~ ~ Ni thdrawal__ ~ Female Hal e 20 5 2 859 859 II 11 21 5 2 750 750 ll 11 2Z 5 2 660 660 12 12 23 5 3 583 583 12 12 24 5 3 51g 51g 13 13 Rett~eeent Male Female 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 25 6 3 463 463 13 13 0 0 26 6 3 416 416 ]4 14 0 0 27 6 3 374 374 14 14 0 0 28 7 3 339 339 14 14 0 0 29 7 4 307 307 15 15 0 0 30 7 4 280 280 16 16 31 8 4 256 256 16 16 32 8 4 234 234 17 17 33 9 5 215 215 17 17 34 10 5 198 198 18 18 35 10 5 183 183 lg 19 36 11 6 169 169 20 20 37 12 6 157 157 22 22 38 13 7 146 146 23 23 39 14 7 135 135 24 24 40 15 8 126 126 26 Z6 41 16 9 118 118 28 28 42 18 9 110 110 29 29 43 21 10 103 103 31 31 44 ~4 11 97 97 34 34 45 27 12 gl 91 36 36 46 30 13 86 86 41 41 47 34 I4 81 81 46 46 48 39 15 69 69 52 52 49 44 ]7 59 59 60 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 20 - PUBLIC ENPLOYEES PUL]CE AND FIRE FUND ~UMMARY OF ACTUARIAL As%uMPTIONS AND METHODS TABLE 12 (Continued) SEPARATIONS EXPRESSED AS THE NUMBER OF OCCURRENCES PER 10,000: Death _Withdraw)L_ Aae 'ale Fem i Female 50 49 18 51 54 20 52 60 21 53 65 23 54 72 25 55 78 27 56 85 30 57 92 33 58 100 37 59 110 41 60 121 46 61 133 52 62 146 58 63 160 65 64 176 73 65 195 81 66 219 gO 67 243 9g 68 270 109 69 300 123 70 334 140 50 50 69 69 39 39 80 80 29 29 91 91 22 22 104 104 15 15 119 119 Il 11 135 135 7 7 152 152 5 5 171 ]71 3 3 192 192 1 1 215 215 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ret i rement Male Fpmal e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I0,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 IH/IJ,EMAN & B. OBF.,B. TSON, INC. i~i[~Si:M.'..r4 ~:-%~ -~ :::::::::::::::::::::: ~?.:~:~:~:~l::~'::-: ~:~:D~J::~:::: ...... ~ ................................ ::¢:::::~¢¢~ :::¢:::~:~c:~8~ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :~:~:E:~:~S!:!:i:iS ~: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ ~ :¢:~.:.:.:.:¢.:.:¢¢~.¢,:.:¢ ~¢¢'~'~'~'~' f:'::'::'::'~'~'~'~ ~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:i:~:~:~:~:~  !! [: ::'::':[::':'Z:~: ~:~$ ~%'..?:!:::~i~.~:'.,:..~ ::::::::::::::::::::::: ~.-'..~:~:~:~q ~::~[~::~ii~!i!::~ii .o .o .~ tl !.-.il! 'ii' :: I I 512 Crown Roller Mill (612) 341-364& 103 Fifth Avenue South FAX (612) 341-4148 Minneapolis, MN 5S401 TO: FR: February 17, 1994 Pat Hentges, City of Columbia Heights Mark Ruff RE: Tax Increment Projections Attached are three projections for the HRA tax increment districts assuming changes in the CHBC situation. Scenario 1 assumes that none of the $770,041 in unpaid tax increment from 1990 to 1993 is paid to tax increment fund, but the CHBC begins paying full taxes on the $4.8 million market value in 1994. The Scenario 2 assumes that CHBC taxes become current in 1994 at $4.8 million, and all of the unpaid tax increment is deposited into the tax increment fund. Scenario 3 assumes that the CHBC taxes become current in 1994 but at the $2.4 million value and with 50% of the unpaid tax increment deposited into the fund. Page 1 is a summary of all tax increment districts combined after existing debt service. Please note that tax increment years run from March 1 to March 1 instead of a calendar year. According to our records, the beginning balance of the tax increment fund on March 1, 1994 will be negative. The $410,762 of proceeds from the senior housing bonds deposited in the tax increment fund should result in a beginning balance of $80,891 before any back taxes are paid. We should verify these figures with the finance department. The remaining pages of each cash flow show the individual tax increment districts income and expenses. Please note that the best scenario is obviously if 100% of back taxes paid to the tax increment fund and taxes at $4.8 million in value. The second best scenario is if no back tax increment is paid to the fund but taxes continue at $4.8 million in value. An approximately break even scenario by the year 200 would be the third scenario with 50% of current taxes and 50% in back taxes. These cash flows are based upon 1992/1993 values and rates and October 1993 balances in funds. If you reach the point where we should refine these cash flows to account for 1993/1994 values, current and for various options in repayment of the senior housing bond funds after 2001, please contact me. PUblicorp Inc. 512 Crown Roller Mill 105 Fifth Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55401 (612)'341-3646 FAX (612) 341-4148 October 26, 1993 TO: Pat Hentges, City of Columbia Heights Bill Elrite. City of Columbia Heights Don Schneider, Columbia Heights lIRA IR: Mark Ruff i~: Tax ~ Projections Attached are the updated tax increment projections on · district by disa~ basis and on a combined cash flow basis. All of the projections maintain conservative assumptions; therefore, they should be viewed as worse rase scenarios rather than a prediction of the future..Specifically, the rum do not include any taxes from the Columbia l-lei?hts BmL_~__$ Ce~__er for the duration of the projec~_j_m,-_s; no tax rate or market ~'-alue increases, and no property tax class rates. As you can see page 1 relates to the A3 and C7 Pre-1979 tax increment districts. We do recommend that these two districts be shown as a single entity so that any C7 is clearly obligated to make debt service payments after the year 2000. The combimtion of the cash flows for the two districts is important given that pre-1979 districts are scheduled to begin to be decertified beginning in 2001. Pages 2 through 4 list the remaining tax increment districts. For purposes of presentation, all projeetiom nm only through the year 2009. As you are aware, the MURP extends beyond these time frames. Page 5 is a compilation of all districts including revenues and fund balances, some of which may be used on an interfund loan basis to cover shortfalls in the rash flows. Specifically, there is $439,943 in the tax increment fund and $410,762 in the proc__~,ds from the senior housing bond available for debt service. In addition, there is $300,030 in current balances in the tamp fund available on an needed" basis as is the projected $95,366 per year in ramp revenues. Based upon the expected income and identified begirming balances, it is poss~le tim · shortfall of up may occur after the 1995 tax I~acremem year (ending March 1, 1996) and ~mtinue through the year 2000. It is possible to cover the potential shortfall with other interfund loans, tax levy, or other regain a positive balance and be able to repay some of the interfund loans. Please call with questions or c, onnne~. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Columbia Heights Oomml~ione~ Patricta Jindra Richard Dustin Do~ald J. Murz~n, Jr. 590 N.E. 40th Avenue, Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Fax: (612) 782-2857- (612) 782-2854 TO: FROM: Patrick Hentges, City Manager, City of Columbia Heights Don Schneider, HRA Executive Director ~v~- ~~/~_~_~ DATE: February 24, 1994 SUBJECT: Van Buren Street Parking Ramp Special Assessments(S95,365 yearly through 2002) As per your request on February 23, 1994, enclosed is backup information on the special assessment on the Van Buren Street Parking Ramp which is located immediately to the northwest of the Columbia Park Clinic. As I understand the $95,365 yearly special assessment payment is from the Columbia Park Clinic as their share of the costs for the construction of the parking ramp. Enclosed are Bill Elrite's City Council letter of August 3, 1992, Holmes & Graven's legal opinion on use of the special assessment proceeds, a copy of a portion of the Contract for Private Redevelopment between the HRAand the Columbia Park Properties, and a copy of the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions. Please call or see me if you need anything further. Encl cc: HRA Comm Equal Opportunity Employer Equal Housing Opportunity Agency CITY COUNCIL LETI'ER AGENDA SECTION: NEW BUSINESS ORIGINATING DEPT.: C1TY MANAGER NO: 9 FINANCE APPROVAL ITEM: FuNDESTABLISHMENTTo ACCOuNTOFAFoRNEW BY: WILLIAM/.~R1TE BY~.,~. ~ PARKING RAMP ASSESSMENrI~ DATE: AUGUST 3, 1992 ~ In the process of the downtown development, the City funded construction of a parking ramp on Van Buren, behind the Columbia Park Clinic. At that time, there was an agreement with the Clinic whereby they pay approximately $95,000 each year in interest and principal assessments for the parking ramp. In 1992, Don Schneider, Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, received a legal opinion from Holmes and Graven that these assessment revenues do not have to be dedicated to debt service. The revenue can be spent on other eligible expenses. However, it cannot be used as general revenue in the General Fund. Attached herewith is a copy of the legal opinion. At the present time, the assessments on the parking ramp are needed to cover debt service payments. However, in later years, there should be a surplus in the debt service funds. At that time, the $95,000 annual assessment can be used for other purposes. It is Staff's recommendation that a separate fund be established to account for the assessment money. As funds are need to cover debt service, funds will be loaned from this fund to the debt service fund. In later years, when the debt service fund has a surplus, these loans can be repaid. This will free up additional money to be used on other projects, or as the Council desires within the scope of the legal opinion. The primary purpose in establishing a separate fund is to ensure that we have adequate documentation and segregation of the money collected from assessments on the parking ramp. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize the establishment of Fund #290 Parking Ramp Assessments and to authorize inter-fund loans from this fund to the debt service fund as needed to make debt service payments. WE:dn 9208043 Attachment COUNCIL ACTION: STEFAA~ N. Anomc~ Dilm D~I (612) 337-9212 HOLMES & GRAVEN CHARTERED C~uler, MJnnetpol~ Mbmesom SM~ Fs~b (612) ~310 April 30, 1992 Mr. Donald R. Schneider Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Columbia Heights 590 - 40th Avenue Northeast Columbia Heights, MN 55421 ca?~ ._.FACSlWWr.F- and MAIL 788-9360 RE: Columbia Park Clinic Parki~ Ramp Special Assessments Dear Don: By letter dated April 23, 1992, you have requested our written opinion with respect to certain aspects of the special assessments levied ag~in-~t Columbia Park Clinic in connection with the Columbia Park Clinic parkint~ ramp. The City receives $95,365 annually through 2002, from spec!a! assessments originally assessed for the purpose of repaying the cost of the construction of the parking ramp. The parking l~mp was constructed by the City under authority of l~innesota Statutes, Section 459.14 and, in accordance with Subdivision 2 thereof, was financed by the levlFing of speoial assessments against benefitted propert'y in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 429 of Minnesota Statutes. Because the parking r~mp is located in the Downtown CBD Development Project Area of the City, the HRA of the City was authorized under the provisions of the Tax Increment Act to apply tax increments and tax increment bond proceeds to the payment of public redevelopment costs, which include in this case the construction of a public parking l~mp. Therefore, the cost of the 'parking-r~.-np-corm~uction' was paid-primarily out-of proceeds of the. City's $2,100,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds of 1985, Series A. You have asked 'ceftin specific questioxis. You have asked us to affirm that the special assessments are not specifically pledged toward payment of the general obligation bonds. I have reviewed Authori~.ing Resolution No. 85-42 adopted by the City Council of the City of Col-mbia Heights on September 9, 1985, purs,~,t to which the Council provided for the security for the general obligation bonds. The special assessments were not pledged as security to the general obligation bonds. You have asked us to state that the special assessment proceeds may be used for general City purposes. I would modify this statement as follows: The spe-_ial assessments may be used for any purpose for which tax increment or tax increment bond proceeds may be used, since the special assessments are repaying the City for its cost of the parking l~mp improvement which was initially financed by application of tax increment bond proceeds. Since the spe~_ial assessments are therefore Mr. Donald R. Schneider April 30, 1992 Page 2 repayin~ the fund from which the original cost was paid, their application is l~n~ted to those purposes for which the fund itself malt be used. Therefore, your subsequent specific questions are addressed as follows: The spe--~A1 assessment proceeds may be placed in a development fund and used for development or development-relAted purposes provided they are development expenses of the CBD Redevelopment Project Area. The funds from the par~ni~ z~,~p assessment may be used for tax increment debt rel~ement. AdditionsJ tax increment moneys wi~ich come in after the date of such debt retirement by spe~l assessments may be used for development expenses of the CBD Redevelopment Area, same as the spe-_~A1 assessments. Your HRA/City Business Revolvin[ Loan Fund is a program with which I am not sufficiently f-r~l~-r to render an op~n~on as to use of speo_~Al assessment funds for that purpose, and I believe it exceeds the scope of the questions I mm addressin~ in th~, open,on. Perhaps the approach which I An~ su~gesling in th~s opinion, i.e., that the spe-~A1 assessments may be used for any purpose for which the tax increment or tax increment bond proceeds which they replaced r~n be used, will provide sufficient ~nform-tion for you to address th~, question on your own. If you would like me-to look into that progtmm further, please let me ~now and I will tell you what 4nform~tion I need. Please feel free ~o _0~ if I can be of any further assistance. SNG/bjm CONTRACT POR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT By and Between THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY O1~ COLUMBIA HEIGHTS And COLUMBIA PARK PROPERTIES (b) If any objection to the updated commitment is made by the Redeveloper, said objections shall be accompanied by a written election of one of the following: (i) termination of this Agreement; or (ii) authorization to proceed with transfer of the title to and possession of the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper upon the assumption by the Agency of the obligation to take any actions permitted by law to cure the objection. If the Redeveloper makes the election described in Section 3.5(bXi) of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate upon receipt of such written election by the Agency but only if any objections to the title are objections which the Redeveloper is permitted to make pursuant to Section 3.$(a) of this Agreement. If the Redeveloper makes the election described in Section 3.5(bXii) of this Agreement, the risk that the objection cannot be cured.(or that title cannot be rendered marketable) shall be entirely borne by the Redeveloper; provided, that in the event that Parcel I has already been conveyed to Redeveloper, the risk that any objection to the title to Parcel II cannot be cured shall be borne by the Agency. (c) The Agency shall voluntarily take no actions to encumber title to the Redevelopment Property between the date the Agency acquires the Redevelopment Property and the date on which the Redevelopment Property Deed is delivered to the Redeveloper, /// Section3,6. Acquisitio% Construetion~ Us% and Maintenance of the /Parkin~ Facilities. (a) It is understood by the parties that the construction of the Minimum Improvements by Redeveloper will necessitate the provision of additional public parking spaces to meet the additional demand for parking. It is further understood that it is the policy of the City to assess all or a portion of the cost of constructing and operating necessary public parking facilities against properties benefited by such parking. This Agreement shall be expressly conditioned upon the execution within thirty (30) days after the date hereof by the Redeveloper and the City of a Parking Agreement, in a form approved by the Agency, governing the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Parking Facilities. When executed, the Parking Agreement shall become a part of this Agreement. In the event that the Parking Agreement has not been executed by the City and Redeveloper within thirty (30) days after the execution of this Agreement, or by such other date which may be mutually agreed upon between the Redeveloper and the Agency, this Agreement shall automatically terminate and neither party shall have any further obligations hereunder. ~'~'--~'" (b) It is understood and agreed that the City may assess a portion of the cost of constructing the Parking Facilities against the Redevelopment Property in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. The maximum principal amount of such assessment shall be equal to fifty (50) percent of the total cost of the design, planning and construction of the Parking Facilities, payable over fifteen (15) years at an annual interest rate in such amount as may be permitted by law. with the Agency to extend the time for acquisition and conveyance of the Redevelopment Property to the dates specified in the notice by the Agency by giving written notice to the Agency within ten (10) days after notification by the Agency. Failure' to exercise this option within said ten (10) days constitutes a waiver of the right to exercise the option due to occurrence of such event. Section 10.12. Extension of Redeveloper~s Obligations. In the event that the date for conveyance of Parcel I is extended pursuant to Section 10.11, all obligations of Redeveloper to construct the Minimum Improvements and to g~arantee taxes, and the effective date of the Assessment Agreement shall be abated and extended for a period equal to the period from October 21, 1985, to a date thirty (30) days after conveyance of Parcel I to the Redeveloper. Redeveloper's tax ~uarantee pursuant to Section 6.1 shall be prorated based upon the number of months which the Redeveloper was required to delay commencement of construction of the Minimum Improvements. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Agency has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf and its seal to be hereunto duly affixed and the Redeveloper has executed the Agreement in its own behalf, on or as of the date first above written. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF C~L U MBIAj~IEIG HTS ~E~e~ius-Heinti, ~hair~ COLUMBIA PARK PROPERTIES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ANOKA ) · ~ f , The foregoing instrument was acknowledged befpre~me th'm~c~- day o ~_._ff~.~za~-~V'7-~. , 1985, by E~ebius Hein~ a~~.,~~ ·the.Chairman a~ ~c ~/~~c' of ~e Ho~ing and Redevelopment Authority ~n and for the City of Columbia Heightm J Notary Public / ' 37 DECLAHAT~ON OP COVHNANTS AND RF_~TP~CT~ONS THIS DECLARATION, is made and entered into as of this /~'fl-~ day of j~r~-. , 19~., by the CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, a municipal corporation (the "City"). W1TNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, the Oity has instituted a downtown parking program concerning the provision of municipal parking facilities to an area herein referred to as the "Parking District", which Parking District is shown on Schedule A attached hereto, and the assessment of the costs of such parking against benefitted properties within the Parking District; and WHEREAS, in connection with the establishment of the parking program the City has determined that it is in the best interest of the City that additional parking facilities provided within the Parking District and that these facilities be maintained in or for the benefit of the Parking District; and WHEREAS, in order to service the existing public parking demand within the Parking District and the additional public parking demand to be created as a result of planned development within the Parking District the City has constructed a 310- space public parking ramp (the "Parking Facility") on real property owned by the City and described in Schedule B attached hereto (the "Parking Property"); and WHEREAS, the City desires to make the Declaration set forth herein concerning its operation and maintenance of the Parking Facility for the benefit of the parking district. 1. Construction of Parking Facility. The City has constructed or caused to be constructed the Parking Facility on the Parking Property. The Parking Facility consists of a 310 space parking ramp, together with landscaping and shrubbery. 2. Operation and Maintenance. (a) The City shall maintain or cause to be maintained the Parking Facility as a municipal public parking ramp. The Parking Facility shall be available for use by tenants, licensees, customers and business invitees of the owners of business establishments located within the Parking District. The Parking Facility shall be designated for short-term parking as appropriate for the businesses served. Use of the Parking Facility for employee parking will be regulated through the use of a permit system and employee parking will be limited to the top levels of the Parking Facility. The City will use reasonable efforts to enforce all use restrictions established herein. (b) The City shall operate, maintain, repair and reconstruct, if necessary, the Parking Facility in good condition and repair for the period of time beginning with completion of the Parking Facility and ending on the earlier of: (i) January 1, 2027; or (ii) such time as the Parking District has changed in character or the parking needs of the Parking District have changed so as to no longer require the parking furnished by the Parking Facility, provided that the City shall have obtained the reasonable consent of all owners of properties including 25% or more of the commercial square footage existing on the date hereof within the Parking District prior to any abandonment of any portion of the Parking Facility. (e) The Parking Facility shall be operated as a free municipal public parking ramp unless the City determines that it is necessary or desirable to charge a parking fee and provided that before commencing to charge such fees the City obtains the reasonable consent of all owners of properties including 25% or more of the commercial square footage existing on the date hereof within the Parking District. (d) The Parking Facility shall be maintained in a first-class manner in accordance with sound engineering principles. 3. Covenant Running with the Land. The covenants contained in this Declaration shall be enforceable by an action for specific performance and damages, an action for damages, or any other remedy available at law or in equity by any owner or group of owners of 25% or more of the commercial square footage located within the Parking District calculated based upon the total commercial square footage within the Parking District as of the date hereof; and the City specifically agrees that a remedy at law is not adequate and these covenants shall be specifically enforceable in a court of equity. 4. Provision of Additional Parking. In the event that there is a change in demand for parking on the Parking Property, the City will at all times during the term of this Declaration promptly and diligently respond to such change and construct and maintain adequate parking on the Parking Property. The costs of additional parking shall not be assessed against properties in the Parking District except to the extent that a change in use of such properties, new construction on such properties, or other conditions on such properties, after the date hereof creates a need for additional parking beyond the demand for parking estimated by the City as of the date hereof to be generated by such properties. Nor shall the existing spaces within the Parking Facility be allocated to serve additional par. king demands created by any new construction or change in use of an existing business which change in use has been approved by the City. 5. Insurance~ Repair or Replacement. (a) The City agrees to keep or cause to be kept the Parking Facility insured against direct damage covering all risks of loss, including but not limited to fire, extended damage perils, vandalism and malicious mischief, and collapse, on a replacement cost basis in an amount equivalent to the full insurable value thereof. Full insurable value sb~]] include the actual replacement cost of the improvements, architectural and engineering fees, without deduction for depreciation. The policy shall be subject to a no co- insurance clause and shall contain reasonable deductibility provision. (b) If any part of the Parking Facilities is damaged or destroyed by fire or any other insured casualty, the entire proceeds of all insurance which are payable by reason of such damage or destruction will be used to restore, as promptly as possible, the Parking Facilities to as near the condition which existed immediately before such damage or destruction as is reasonably possible. (c) If the Parking Facility is to be restored pursuant to paragraph (b) above, the City will promptly proceed to repair and restore the same to 2 substantially the same condition as existed before casualty and will receive the insurance proceeds for such purpose and pay all costs incurred therefor from the insurance proceeds. Any repairs or replacements undertaken pursuant to this Section 5 will be at least equal in quality to the original and shall be done in a workmanlike manner. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has executed this Declaration as of the day and year first above written. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF~(~t'/O~g'*~7 ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /~ day of ~~~, ~9 ~, by -~~ ~ .~~' me ~~~ of the City of Columbia Heights, on beh~ of the City. Notary~Public This instrument was drafted by: HOLMES & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 S(~HEDULE A Pa~'king .Dist~'iet Beginning at a point 30' north of the northeasterly corner of Lot l, Block 61, Columbia Heights Annex, thence westerly along the centerline of platted 41st Avenue NE, a distance of 448.75' to a point on the northerly extension of the centerline of the platted alley running north and south within Block 60, Columbia Heights Annex, thence souther, ly a distance of 832' to the intersection of the centerline of the platted alley running east and west within Block 63, Columbia Heights Annex, thence easterly a distance of 136.15' to the intersection of the centerli, ne of Van Buren St NE, thence southerly .along said centerline a distance of 307' to a point on the westerly extension of Lot ll, Block 62, Columbia Heights Annex, thence easterly a distance of 282.3' to the southeast corner of Lot 11, Block 62, Columbia Heights Annex, thence northerly along the west right-of-way line of platted Central Avenue NE to the point of beginning. All in Anoka County, Minnesota. CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DATE: TO: FROM: RE: FEBRUARY 25, 1994 PAT HENTGES CITY MANAGER WILLIAM ELRITE~~ FINANCE DIRECTOR TAX INCREMENT ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE At the council meeting on February 14, 1994 there were some questions raised in relationship to the City's payment to the County of $11,384.98 for the County's expenses in administrating the tax increment districts and parcels in Columbia Heights. On February 23, I spoke with Dick Sivanich at Anoka County. Based on that conversation I have included some information listed below in relationship to the administration for the tax increment districts. The charge made by the County is $403.98 for each district and $10.28 for each parcel. City of Columbia Heights has five districts with a total of 911 parcels. This brings the total bill for Columbia Heights to $11,384.98. The County's total expense allocated to the administration of the tax increment districts is $71,750.00 the detail of which is broken down below: Employee Compensation Computer Reports and Run Time Software and Hardware Maintenance Program Development Costs - Amortized over 7 years CRT Time Costs Other Expenses TOTAL $59,021 $ 4,750 $ 3,ooo $1,50o $ 1,000 $ 2?479 $71,750 The total amount is then allocated to all of the cities in Anoka County that have tax increment districts based on the district/parcel fees. Fifty percent of the $71,750 is recovered based on the parcel assessment with the balance recovered by the district assessment. In Anoka County there are a total of 3,459 tax increment parcels and 88 districts. City of Columbia Heights has 911 of these parcels or 26 percent of the total. Because of the high number of parcels in Columbia Heights, the allocation of expenses to Columbia Heights is also relatively high. In comparison to other cities, Coon Rapids tax increment administrative fees were $12,725. Fridley's fees were $10,500. Columbia Heights has a high number of parcels in comparison to the number of districts. Part of this is due to the residential condominiums and townhouse type buildings where you have several parcels in a small area. If the City Council would like additional information on this they can either contact me or Dick Savanich at Anoka County. Dick's direct dial number is 323-5438. WJE/jlg 9402252 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40th Avenue N. E. Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (612) 782-2800 Mayor Joseph Sturdevant Councilmembers I)onald G. Jolly Bruce G. Nawrocki Gary L. Peterson Robert W. Ruettimann City Manager Patrick Hentges February 17, 1994 The Honorable Senator Novak State Capital Building, Room 322 St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Senator Novak: Please accept this letter as an invitation to attend a breakfast meeting with the Mayor, councilmembers, and City Manager of the City of Columbia Heights, on Saturday, February 26, 1994. This breakfast meeting will be held at the Pannekoeken Huis meeting room, 4920 Central Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights (571-8661) from 7 a.m. to 8 a.m. Upon receipt of this invitation, please inform my office at 782-2810 if you can attend this meeting. Thank you. Sincerely, City Manager cb 94/14 "SERVICE IS OUR BUSINESS" EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER