HomeMy WebLinkAboutSept 9, 2009, work sessionCi~~ ~~ CoL~n~~i~ N~~~~~~
59Q 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (763} 706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692
Visit Our Website at.~ www.ci.columbia-{zeights.mn.us
ADM/NlSTRATION
Meeting of:
Date of Meeting:
Time of Meeting:
Location of Meeting:
Purpose of Meeting:
NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
~*~~~:~*~~~:~~
to be held in the
CITY OF COL UMBIA HEIGHTS
as fallows:
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2009
7:00 P.M.
CONFERENCE ROOM 1
WORK SESSION
AGENDA
Consent Items
1. Excel Energy Lighting Retrofit (to reduce energy consumption)
A. Library
B. Main MSC Shop Floor
Discussion Items
Mavor
Gcary Peterson
Councflmembers
Bruce Nawrocki
Rabert A. Williams
Tammera Ericson
Bruce Kelzenberg
Citv Manaper
Walt Fehst
Resolution Adopting Proposed Budget for 2010, Setting the Proposed City Levy,
Approving the HRA Levy, and Establishing a Budget Hearing Date for Property Taxes
Payable in 2010
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 Colwnbia 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
706-3611, to make arrangernents. (TDD/~06-3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only)
THE CI7Y pF COLUMBIA NEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BA515 OF DISA0ILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS - CiTY COUNCIL LETTER
Meeting of September 14, 2009
AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S
NO: Library APPROVAL
ITEM: Xcel Energy Efficiency Project at BY: M. Rebecca Loader BY:
Library DATE: 8-26-09 DATE:
NO:
Background: Staff is exploring ways to save energy costs at the Library. Before ordering replacement
fluorescent bulbs, Voss Electric was contacted in regards to lower wattage bulbs. The representative,
who had recently worked with the Minneapolis Public Library to re-lamp their downtown facility,
referred staff to the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE), which works with Xcel Energy to
provide audits and access to rebate programs. CEE performed a lighting system analysis and made a
recommendation based on the findings.
Analysis/Conclusion: The analysis recommended that the existing T8 32W 4' bulbs be replaced with
T8 25W 4' bulbs, which are more energy efficient and provide the same amount of light. Four of the
recommended bulbs were given to staff to use in fixtures to compare the amount of light produced. No
difference could be observed.
l. All lamps would be replaced.
2. Nine exit signs, which are original to the various construction times of the building, wouid be
replaced with LED fixtures.
3. Three incandescent fixtures in the magazine storage area would be replaced with energy efficient
fluorescent fixtures.
4. A11 prices are "turn-key."
5. Total cost of the project is $5,456.66 before rebates. Rebates of $2,084.30 would put the final cost
at $3,372.36.
6. The payback would be 2.9 years, with an annual estimated savings of $1,171.22.
Due to the low cost, energy savings, and payback of under three years, staff is requesting approval of
the Xcel Energy project as outlined by the Center for Energy and Environment to replace all existing
lamps, nine exit signs, and three fluorescent fixtures. The Columbia Heights Public Library Board of
Trustees has reviewed the proposal and recommends that the cost of the project be financed from 411
(General Government Buildings).
Recommended Motion: Move to approve the replacement of all lamps, nine exit signs, and three
incandescent fixtures at the Library under the Xcel Energy project as outlined by the Center for Energy
and ~nvironment, and tor tinancin~ to come trom iund 4ll (General Government Buildin
COUNCIL ACTION:
CONSERVATIONWISE fron,
~ XCeI Energy One-Stop Efficiency Shop
Building Energy Efficiency Progra~n
Lighting System Analysis
Cost Saving Recommendations
Customer Report
August 16, 2009
Property Address:
Columbia HTS - Library .
820 40th Ave NE
Columbia Heights, MN 55421
Prepared for:
Loader, Rebecca
Columbia HTS - Library
820 40th Ave NE
Columbia Heights, MN 55421
Ph: (763) 706-3690 Fax: (763) 706-3691
Prepared by Lighting Specialist:
ce~cer tor Erik Ennen
E~tr~>y and Center for Energy and Environment
E°v"~°°me°t 212 3rd Avenue North, Suite 560
rv-vrv.mncee.org Minneapolis, MN 55401
Program Coordinatar:
Cell: (612)819-7245
Phone:
Fax: (612) 335-5888
E-mail: eennen@ri~ncee.org
-Audits Kristen Funk Phone: 612-335-3487
- Financing Center for Energy and Environment Fax: 612-335-5888
- Contractors 212 3rd Avenue North, Suite 560 E-mail. kfunlc@rrulcee.arg
- Rebates Mimleapolis, Minnesota 55401
Page 1 Customer Report (08/16/2009 l 0:16) Program ID# 31997
~ CONSERVATIONWISE from
~, Xce/ Energy~,
One-Stop Efficiency Shop
Summary of Recommended Lighting Upgrades
~ighting Upgrades Estimated Estimated
Costs Annual Savings Payback
Total Installed Cost Befor~ r~bate $5,456.66
1 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ • • ~ , • $2 084.30
Your Final Cost AfrerYebate $3,372.36 $1,171.22~a~ 2.9 years
b Rebate equals 38% of installed cost. (Inc/uding special orders)
*This offer is only nalid for a period of 45 days. The project costs are based on current equipme~zt pricing,
utility rebate levels and custonier eligibility requirernents. After this offer's expiration date of'09/30/2009 yoac
must request pre-approval and an updated rebate offer,fro~n the One-Stnp program before startirzg the job.
Xcel Energy Financing Option
Estimated monthly savings $97.60~~~
Monthly loan payments at 3.9% for 39 month term $98.42~b~ 3.3 years
(b) Estimate based on a loan amotuit of $3,572.36, including a$200 loan processing fee. The loan term pncluding xcel ~oan
has a maximum of 5 years, with monthly payments not less than the estimated monthly savings. Final terms Financing Charges)
and conditions set by bank upon loan approval.
~
Utility COSt Attalysis Demand (kW} Energy (kWh) Annual Cost C02 (Ibs) *
Existing Lights 15.1'98 40,411 $4,OSb.53 ' 68, 700
New Lights 10.810 28,744 $2,885.31 48,864
EStimatedSavings 4.388 11,668' $1,17L22~a~t i9,835*
` How do C02 emissions affect me and my business? ¶ Rising concentrations of greenhouse gasses (GHG) produce an increase in the
average surface temperature of the Earth over time. Rising temperatures produce changes in precipitation patterns, storm severity, and sea
level commoniy referred to as "climate change." ¶ Carbon dioxide (C02), methane, nitrous oxide and four groups of fluorinated gases (sulfur
hexafluoride, HFCs, PFCs and CFCs) are the major GHG. In the U.S., GHG emissions come primarily from the combustion of fossil fuels in
energy use. C02 emissions from coal-fired electricity generation comprise neariy 80 percent of the total C02 emissions produced by the
generation of electricity in the U.S. ¶ Installing energy-efficient lighting and implementing other conservation measures that reduce eiectric
energy use significantly reduces GHG emmissions and mitigates global climate change. Read more at: www.eia.doe.gov or www.epa.gov
(a) Savings estimates are based on standard engineering calculations and are NOT guaranteed. Your actual savings may be I~igher or ]ower
depending on various factors, including how you operate your lights and other electric equipment in your building.
Electric Utility Rates =$0.0585/kWh and $9.28/kW. (07 00,00 [0] 00,00 00)
Page 2 Customer Report (08/16/2009 10;16)
Columbia HTS - Library
Program ID# Xcel Acct# 820 40th Ave NE
31997 303014293 Columbia Heights, MN 55421
GONSERVATIONWISE from
~, Xce/ Energy~
One-Stop Efficiency Shop
Recommended Lighting Projects
Schedule Name~ Instalted Estimated ~ i
Recommended Lighting System Upgrades & Hours/year Cost Annual Setected r
of Operarion (witnout Renate) i Savin s '
Area A: Office Relamp
Project: #1 i 51 HrsiWk $3,536.90 $916.58 0 i
I 2,659 hrs/yr Inci Special Order I
; Qty Watts EXISTING Luminaire Qty Watts NEW Luminaire
'~,' 133 58 T8 4' 32 E2-2L-Exist' I 133 43 T8 4' 25W ELG2 2L 4' Relamp
ii 47 110 T8 4' 32 E4-4L-Exist' 47 85 T8 4' 25W ELC4 4L 4' Relamp (
12 85 T8 4' 32 E3-3L-Exist 12 63 T8 4' 25W E~C3 3L 4' Relamp ~
Area B: Office Retrofit ~
Project: #2 51 Hrs/Wk $1,244.70 $91.29 ~
2,659 hrs/yr Incl Special Order I
_Qty Watts EXISTING Luminaire ~ ~ Qty Watts NEW Luminaire
9 40 Exit 20W, 2L _
~ 9 2 Exit-LED 002W 1 L-NewFix
Project: #3 51 HrsJWk $321.34 ' ` $68.33 ~
2,659 hrsJyr ]nc] Special Order
Qty Watts EXISTING Luminaire
I Qty Watts NEW Luminaire -~I
,
2 145 T12 SLIM 8' 75W, EEM-2, 2L
( 2 77 T8 4' 25W ELC4 LBF 4~
~~~~! 2 97 T12 4' 40W, STD-2, 2L I 2 37 T8 4' 25W ELC2 LBF 2L ~
~
Area C: New Fixtures
Project: #4 ' 51 HrslWk $353.72 $95.02 ~ j
2,659 hrs/yr
' Qty Watts EXISTWG Luminaire Qty Watts NEW Luminaire
; 3 100 INC 100W-A, 1L 3 19 T8 4' 25W ELC1 LBF 1L-NewFix
~ 1 150 INC 150W-R, 1L ~
1 37 T8 4' 25E2 LBF 2L-NewFix
~Z'O~alS (Including special or~ders)
I $5,456.66 -
$1,171.22
Page 3 Customer Report (08/16/2009 10:16)
Columbia HTS - Library .
Program ID# Xcel Acct# 820 40th Ave NE
31997 303014293 Columbia Heights, MN 55421
CONSERVAiIONWISE F.om One-Stop Efficiency Shop
~ Xcel Energy~
Customer Participation Agreement
I, the undersigned, agree that to the best of my knowledge the lighting schediile below accurately describes l~ow the lighes are
operated at the facility listed in this document. I understand that the energy or cost savings reflected in this analysis are estimates,
and that Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) and Xcel Energy do not guarantee that a specific level of energy or cost savings
will result from the implementation of energy conservation measures or the use of products fiuided under Yhis prograin. I also give
CEE pennission to submit, on my behalf, all Xcel Energy rebate and financing fornls required for the One-Stop Efficiency Shop
program.
I understand tl~at all electrical code violations that are found during the lighting system inspection or during installation must be
brought up to code at the customer's expense. Costs for correcting code violations are NOT included in the installatiou costs
quoted in this document.
I understaild that my lightiilg coiltractor must eontact the auditor in order to participate in the One-Stop Progranl, and that I WILL
NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE REBATE LTNLESS MY CONTRACTOR CONTACTS THE AUDITOR (One-Stop Auditor:
Erik Ennen, Cell Ph. (612) 819-7245)
Select One
^ Financed
^ Cash
Lighting Schedules
Signature l.oader, Rebecca Date
Customer Cost: $3,372.36 (Including special orders)
Your lighting savings are based on the following average hours of operation ',
Lighting Schedule Name ; Mon
--------------
- -
Tues
---
Wed
Thur
Fri
Sat ( Sun
---- ---~
-
51 Hrs/Wk 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 9:00 AM I 1:00 AM 9:00 AM ] 0:00 AM
to to to to to to
2,659 hrs/yr 8:30 PM
- _ __ 6:00 PM 8:30 PM 7:00 PM 5:00 PM
i 2:00 PM
Columbia HTS - Library .~
Program ID# Xcel Acct# 820 40th Ave NE
Page 4 Customer Report (08/16/2009 10:16) ~ 31997 303014293 ~ Columbia Heights, MN 55421 ~
~STOMER QUALIFICATIONS
• One-Stop Efficiency Shop Lighting Efficiency Program rebates apply only to lighting retrofits for Xcel Energy electric business
customers in Minnesota.
• This program applies only to lighting systems (equipment) operat~ing during normal business hows or peak demand periods.
TE PROGRAM GUIDELINES
• Xcel Energy offers cash rebates to eustomers who purchase and install qualifyang energy-efficient lighCing produets in existing
buildings. The rebate check will be sent to the eontractar listed on the retrofit invoice. Maximum rebaCe amount is 60% of rnstallation
and equipment costs. The rebates are based on calculated elecMc demand (K~ savings.
• Energy-efficient equipinent must result in load reduction.
• O»e-Stop Efficiency Shop recommends Illuminating Engii~eering Sa;iety (IES) ]ight levels.
C&I Lighting incentives cover:
• Fl~iorescent T12s to T8 or TS witl~ electronic ballasts
• Mercury vapor to metal halide or high pressure sodium
• Incandescent to fluorescent, T8, T5, MH, HPS or CFL
• Ineandescent exit signs to LED exit signs
• Metal halide or T12 strips to industrial multi-CFL
fixture
• Metal halide or high-pressure sodium to pulse-stazt
metal halide (must result in lamp wattage reduction)
• HID sources to fluorescent
C&I Lighting incentines do not cover
• Incandescent to tungsten halogen
• Conversions to energy saving T12 fluorescent products
• Incandescent exit signs to compact fluorescent exit signs
• Compact fluareseent exit si~is to LED exit signs
• 9ee your One-Stop Effieiency Shop representative to determi»e qualif cation of custom or specialty lighting projeets.
• Energy-efficient electronic and cathode-disconnect ballasts must meet the following minimum performance criteria:
• Power factor greater than 90% • Class `A' sound rating
• Current Crest Factor (CCF) less than 1.7 • Three-year warranty
• U.L. -approved Class `P' • Ballast factor greater tl~an 0.7
• Total Aarmonic Distortion (THD) less than 20%
• Reflectors must be installed permanently in the fixture, have a minimwn 4-year manufachirer's product warranty, be U.L.-approved and
result in the permanent removal of fluorescent lamps from the existing fixture and permanent reposit~ioning of remaining lamps, when
required for optimum lighting performance.
• Compact fluorescent lamps must meet the following rninirnum criteria:
• Yower facfor > 90%
= Total Harmonic Bistortioi~ (THD} < 35%
ARI2ANTY INFORMATION
Warrantees are between customer and equipment manufacturer(s) and ligl~ting retrofit vendors. Xcel Energy and tl~e Center for Ener~y
and Environn~e»t (CEE) make no warranties, expressed or implied, witl~ respect to equipn~ent operation, material, workmanship or
manufacfuring. Xcel Energy and CEE do not guarantee that a specific level of energy or cost saviilgs will resulf from the implementation
of energy conservation measures or the use of products funded under this program. In no event shall Xcel Energy or CEE be liable for
any incidental or consequential damages. Xcel Energy and CEE are not responsible for the disposal of lamps andJor ballasts replaced as
a result of this program, when required for optimum lighting performance.
IMPORTANT REBATE PROGRAM RULES
• Installation must be complete before submitting rebate.
• Xcei Energy will issue rebates in the form of checks, not utilify bill credits. Rebate and financing cl~ecks will be sent directly to the
lighting contractor that submits an invoice. The minimum rebate is $5.
• Customers and vendors musY submit ifemized equipment invoices along with rebaYe applications. To ensure that the equipment installed
nleets One-Stop Eificiency Shop's performance standards, these invoices must itemize labor charges, quantity and price of tl~e equipment
installed, aud information regarding the manufacturer and model numbers for all lamps, ballasts and fixtures inchided in the rebaYe.
• Xcel Energy and CEE reserve the right to conduct random inspections of installations. Retain one sample of each type of old lamp or
ballast for aY least 90 days.
I~ • Customers must apply for rebates within one year of the purchase date shown on the equipment invoiee.
One-Stop ~fficiency Shop's conservation rebate programs are subject to 60 days' notice of cancellation. The customer is responsible for
cl~ecking with a One-Stop Efficiency Shop representative to ask whether or not the program is still in effect and to verify program parameters.
' :~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ '~ ~' ~:
Page 5 Customer Report 08/16/2009 10:17 Program ID# 31997
CITY COUNCIL LETTER
Meeting o£ 9/14/2009
AGENDA SECTION: WORKSESSION
ITEM: Xcel Energy Efficiency Project at Public
Works: Main Floor Lighting
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: ~ CITY MANAGER
PUBLIC WORKS
BY: K. Hansen BY:
DATE: 9/03/2009 DATE:
Sackground:
Staff continues to explore ways to save energy costs at Public Works. 33 Metal Halide (MH) high bay ligllts at
400 watts each currently light the main shop floor. Staff contacted the Center for Energy and Environment
(CEE), which works with Xcel Energy to provide audits and access to rebate programs. CEE perforlned a
lighting system analysis and made a recommendation based on the findings - report attached.
The analysis recommended that the existing 400-watt MH fixtures be replaced with T8 36W 4-foot fluorescent
bulbs, which are more energy efficient and provide the same amount of light. A sample fixture has been in place
for the past several inonths and staff's response to the amount and type of light has been favorable. The existing
MH have diminished over time and produce a slightly yellow hue light, while the fluorescent are a inore wliite
light, providing truer colors. MH lighting also decays over time, decreasing the light intensity. The bulb cost for
replacement is also approximately 50% less with fluorescent, per fixture.
L Total cost of the project is $8,727 before rebates. Rebates of $3,667 would put the final cost at $5,059.
2. The payback would be 2.5 years, with an annual estimated savings of $2,037.
Public Works 11as $6,500 budgeted in the 2009 Central Garage budget for overhead lighting replacement.
Recommended Motion: Move to approve the replacement af 33 400watt Metal Halide light fixtures with
33 high intensity fluorescent lights, with funding provided through the Public Works Central Garage budget,
701-49950-4000, under the Xcel Energy project as outlined by the Center for Energy and Environment.
Attachments: CEE report for Public Works
KH:kh
COUNCIL ACTION:
CONSERVATIONWISE fro~r
~ Xcel Energy~ One-Stop Efficiency Shop
Builditzg Ener~~ Efficiencl~ Pragra~n
Lighting System Analysis
Cost Saving Reconunendations
Customer Report
Augiist 5, 2009
Property Address:
Colurnlbia lEI'I'S - ]Public ~mrks
637 38th Ave NE
Cahunbi~ Heigllts, MN SS421
Preplred for:
Prepared by Li~hting Specialist:
centz~~to~~ JamieFitzlce Ceii: 612-G70-2100
Ener~y and Ceuter far Energy and Enviroiunent Phone: 612-335-5825
Enviranmeut ? 12 3rd Aveuue Nortb, Suite 560 Fax: 612-335-5888
~v-vi~:»rnree.org Minneapalis, MN SS401 E-mail: jtitzke~~nuicee.org
Prograuz Coordinator:
-Aurl;ls I~risten Funlc Phone: 612-~3~-3487
- F7)1UJ1CIf1~,+ Center for Eiiergy and Enviroiunent F~a~ G12-~35-5888
- Cottn•a~tors 212 3rd Avenue North, Suite 5G0 E-mail: kiunk@nuicee.org
- Rebates Minneapolis, Muulesota 55401
Page 1 Customer Report (08105/2009 U8:25) Progranl ID# 30403
CONSERVATIONW(SE From
~ Xce~Energy„ One-Stop Efficiency Shop
Summary of Recammended Lighting Upgrades
Lighting Upgrades Estimatetl Estimated
Costs Annual Savin s Payback
Total Installed Cost B~fore rebute ~g,72~.pp
~ ' • ~ • ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ $3,667.95
Your Final Cost A.fi~,• rcbate $5,059.05 $2,037.60~a~ 2.5 years
b Rebnte egtu7ls 42% of iristalled cost.
"Thrs offer is ortly vrclirl for ct periotl of 4~ claJ~,s. The project cosis rire br~serl c~n current eqzrrpment pricitzg,
rttilil~~ YLJIlItC I8V81s an~l rusfonter elr~ibility ~~c~~rriren:enls. After ilris offer's expi~'[l~7012 fIQtL' of 09/19/2~09 t~ou
~rn~st requestpre-appravaJ rtnd an rcprCated rebafe offer.fi•ona the One-Stop progrr~nr before siartrng tlze job.
Xcel Energy Financing Option
Estinlated monthly savings ~~ 6c) g~~a>
Monthly loaiz payinents at 3.9% for 32 mollth tenn $174.64~t'} 2.7 years
(U) Estiniate Uased on a loan nmaunt of $5,259.05, including a$200 loa~i pracessin~ fee. The loan term (Including Xcei l.oan
l~as a ma~imum of 5 years. ~vith mondlly payments not ]ess tl~azl tlie estim~ted n~untlily sflvings, Finni tanns Fnancing Charges)
and conditions ~et by banlc upon loan approval.
Ut~~~tY COSt ~411aIVSiS Demand (k~ Energy (1cWh) Annual Cost C02 (lbs)'~
Existing Liglits 14.982 39,058 $3,953.29 6G,399
NewLights 7.260 18,927 $1,915.69 32,176
Estiinated Savillgs '7.722 20,131 $2,037.60~`~~~ 34,223 ~
' How do C02 emissions affect me and my business? ¶ Rising concentrations of greenhouse gasses {GHG} produce an increase in the
average surface temperature of the Earth over time. Rising temperatures produce changes in precipitation patterns
storm severit
d
,
y, an
sea
level commoniy referred to as "climate change." ¶ Carbon dioxide (C02), methane, nitrous oxide and four groups of fluorinated gases (sulfur
hexafluoride, HFCs, PFCs and CFCs) are the major GHG. In the U.S., GHG emissions come primarily from the combustion of fossil fuels i
n
energy use. C02 emissions from coai-fired electricity generation comprise neariy 80 percent of the total C02 emissions produced by the
generation of electricity in the U.S. ¶ Installing energy-e~cient lighting and implementing other conservati
on measures that reduce elecfric
energy use significantly reduces GHG emmissions and mitigates global climate change. Read more at: www,eia.doe.gov or wv~w.epa.gov
(a) Sa~~inas estimates are based on standard engineering calculations aiid are NOT guaranteed. Your actual savinas niay be l~iglier or lower
de~ending on various faetors, including how yrni operate your ligl~ts and otl~er eleetric equipment in your building.
Electric Utility R1tes =$0.0585/kV~~i~ ~nd $9.28/kR~. (0~ -88,27 [0] 00.00 00)
Columbia HTS - Public Works
Program ID# Xcel Acct# 637 38th Ave NE
Page 2 Customer Report (OS/Q~/2009 08:25) 30403 30241G793 Columbia Heights, MN 55421
CONSERNATIONWISE from
~, Xcel Energy„
One-Stop Ef~ciency Shop
Recommended Lighting Projects
Recommended Lighting System Upgrades Schedule Name
& Hours/year
of Operation Installed
Cost
(tiVithout Rebate) Estirnated
Annual
S~vings
Selected
Area A; Building
Project: #1 Operating Hours
2,607 hrs/yr $~,727:00
$2,037.6~
~ '
Qty Watts EXISTtNG Luminaire Qty Watts NEW ~uminaire
33 454 MH MOG 400W, STD-1, 1L 33 220 5T84' 36W 6ELC3 IS (HiPer) 6L-NewFix
Totals ~8,727.00 ~2,037.60
Page 3 Custouier Report (08/OS/2009 08:2~)
Calumbia HTS - Public Works
Progrnm ID#. kcel Accf# 637 38th Ave NE
304U3 362416793 Columbia Heights, MN 55421
CONSERVATIONWISE fram
'~ aCce/Energy., Une-StoP Ef~ciency Shop
Customer Participation Agreement
I, the undersigued, agree that to the best of my Icnowledge the ligl~tiug scl~edule below accurately describes how lhe lights are
operated ai the facility listed in this document. I understand that the energy ar cost saviiigs reflected in this analysis are estiuiates,
and that Center for Energy and Euvirotunent (CEE) and Xcel Energy do not ~~lrautee that a specific leve( of energy or cost savings
will result froin the iu~plementation of energy conservation measures or the use of products funded under this progra~ I also give
CEE pennission to subinit, on my behalf, all Xcel Energy rebate and financing forn~s requued for the One-Stop Efficiency Shap
prograLn.
I understand that all electrical code violations that are fowld during the ligllting systeui inspection or dnring installation tm~st be
Urou~ht up to code at the customer's expense. Costs for coirecting code vioIations are NOT included in the installation costs
quoted in this document.
I understand tliZt rny li~liting contractor must contact the auditor in order to particip~te in tile One-Stop Program, and diat I WILL
NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE REBATE LTNLESS MY CONTRACTOR CONTACTS THE AUDITQR. (One-Stop Auditor:
Jainie Fitzlce, Cell Ph. 612-670-2100)
Select One
^ Financed
^ C15~]
Signature
Customer Cast: $5,059.05
Date
Lighting Schedules
Your lighting savings are based on the foflowing average haurs af operafion
Lighting Schedule Name Man Tues ~ ~~ed Thur Fri Sat Sun
Operating Haur;
10.0 hrs 1U.0 hrs IOA hrs 10.0 hrs IO.U hrs
2.607 his/}~'
Page 4 Customer Report (08/OS/2009 0~:25)
Columbia HTS - Public Works
Pro~~•am IB# Xcel Acct# fi37 38th Ave NE
30403 302416793 Columbia Heights, MN 55421
JSTOMER QUALIF'ICA'ITONS
e One-Stop Efficiency 5hop Lighting Efficiency Progrnm rebates aPply only tn lighting retrofits fax• Xcel Energy electric business
custoiners in Minnesota.
• This prugram applies only to ligtitin~ systems (equipment) operating during nonnal business hours or peal: demand periods.
:BAT~ PROGRAIYI GUID~LINES
• Xcel Ener~y offe~s cash rebates to customers ~vho purcl~ase and install qualifying ener~y-efficient lighting products in existing
Uuildings. The rebate check ~vill be sant to the contractrn• listed wi tlie retrofit im-oice. Nlaximum rebate amount is 60°% of installation
and equipment costs. The reUates are based on calculated electric demand (KV~~ savings.
• Energy-efiicient equipment inust resuit in load re~iuction.
• One-Stop Efficiency Sl~op recoramends Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) Ii~1at levels.
Cd~l Lightixg rnceuti»es caver:
• Fluorescent T12s to T5 or T~ ~~~ith electronic b111asts
• Mercury vapar to n~etnl halide or high pressure sodium
• Incandesceirt to fluorescent, T8, T~, MH, HPS ur CFL
• I~~candescent exit signs to LED exit si~s
• Metfll halide or T12 st~ips to industrial multi-CFL
fixh~re
• Metal halide or liigh-pressure sodiuin to pulse-start
rnetal halide (must result in lamp wattage reductinn)
• HID sources ta fluarescent
C&I Liglrting irrcentiues do not cover
• fi~candescent Co hmgsten I~alogen
• Couversions to energ,y saving T12 tluorescent products
• Incandescent exit si~s to compact fluorescent exit signs
• Compnct fluorescent exit signs to LED exit signs
• 5ee your One-Stop Efficiency Shop representative to determine qualification of custom c~r specialty ligl~tine prujects.
• Energy-efficient electronic nnd cathade-disconnect ballasts must meet the folinwing minitnum perfomiance criteria:
• Power factor greater than 90% • Class 'A' sound rating
~ Cunent Crest Faetor (CGF) less than 1.7 • Tl~ree-year ~x~arrnnty
• tJ.L. -approved Class `P' • Baltast facror greater than 0.7
• Total Harnionic Distortiou (THD) less thln 2U°io
• Reflectors must be installed permaueiitly in die tixhue, liave a minivium 4-year manufacturer's product warranty, be U.L.-approved and
result in the permanent removal of fluorescent lamps froin the exisring fi~cture and pernianent repositioning of reu~aining la~nps, wlien
required for optimum lighting perforuiance.
• Corupact fluorescent lamps must meet the following minimum ciiteria:
• Power flctor > 90%
• Toi~tl Harmonic Distortion (TE-ID) < 35%
ARItANTI' INI'OItMATI(3N
Warrlntees are Uetween customer and equipment manufacturer(s} and ]ighting retrofit vendocs. Xcel Energy and the Center for Energy
and En~7romuent (CEE) mal:e no wanavties, expressed or implied, ~vitl~ respect to equiPment operation, mateiial, ~vorkinwship or
manufaeturing. Xcel Energy and CEE do not g.tarantee diat a sPecific level ofenergy or cost savings will result fiom the implementatiun
uf energy consertrvation measures or tlie use of ptnducts fitnded under this program. bi no event shall Xcel Euergy or CEE Ue liable for
any incidental or consequential damages. Xcel Enei~Uy and CEE are not responsible for ti~e disposal ~f lamps andior ballasts replaced as
a result of this program, wlieix required for aptiinum li~htin~ perfbrm~nce.
IMPORTANT I2~B~.TE PR~GRAM RUL~S
• Installauon must he complete before submitting rebate.
• Xcel Eiiergy will issue reba[es iu the form of ciiecl:s, not utility bill a-edits. Rel~~te and financing checks ~vill be seut directly to tl~e
lighting contrnctor that submits an invoice. Tlie minimum rebate is 9~5.
• Customers and vendors must submit itemized equipment invoices along witli reUata applicntions. To ensure thnt the ec~uipment installed
meets One-Stop Efficiency Shop's perfoi7nance standlyds, tliese invoices must itemize IaUor charges, quantity and price of tl~e equipment
installed, and information regarding the mnnuf~chuer and model numbeis for alI lunps, ballasts and fixtures included in the rebate.
•~icel Energy an~l CEE reser~e the rigilt tn conJuct random inspections of installntions. Retain one sainple af eacli type of old lamp or
ballast for at least 90 days.
• Custumers invst apply for rebatas within one year of tl~e purcbase date shown on the equipment invoice.
,
One-Stog Efficiency Sh~p's conservation rebate progrflms nre suUjeci to CO days' notice ofcance111tion. The custotner is responsiUle for
checking ~~ith a One-Stop Eil7ciency Shop represeutative to aslc whether or not the program is stiit in effect 1nd to verify program parameters.
Page 5 Customer Report 08l05/2009 08:25 Program ID# 30403
CITY COUNCIL LETTER
Work Session of: Septernber 9, 2009
AGENDA SECTION: ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION
NO. ORIGINATING DEPT:
FINANCE CITY MANAGER
APPROVAL
ITEM: BEING A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A BY: WILLIAM ELRITE BY:
PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2010, SETTING
THE PROPOSED CITY LEVY, APPROVING T~IE I-IRA DATE: 09/03/2009
LEVY, AND ESTABLISHING A BUDGET HEARING
DATE FOR PROPERTY TAXES PAYABLE IN 2010
NO:
Attached are the City Manager's budget message, the four-year plan, and the resolution ta adopt tl~e
proposed 2010 levy and budget. At the work session tl~e City Manager and Finance Director
presented the budget and levy recommendations. The 2010 budget and levy recommendations are
based on the 4 year budget plan that was discussed at 2~~oi•k sessions and 1 regular City Council
1Vleeting.
The second item to discuss is the 2010 budget review process. Last year there was one work session
dedicated exclusively to the review of the budget. This year we can present the budget to the City
Council at o~ze work session ar we can expand the number af budget work sessions to 2 or 3 to allow
staff rnore time to pi•esent to the City Council how the significant cut backs ai~d reductiolzs in 2009
have effected their departments and the services we provide and the effect that the limited 2010
budget will have on departments and services. Currently 90% ta 92% of the major department's
budgets are for personnel costs. The remaining 8% to 10% of tl~e budget are for utilities, supplies
and the very basic items required to run the departments.
The following is tl~e motion that will be presented at the September 14 Gity Council Meeting for
adopting the proposed 2010 budget aild levy. The proposed levy needs to be certified to the county
on or before September 15.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution 2009-134 there being
ample copies available for the public.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2009-134 being a resolution adopting a
proposed budget, setting the General, Library and EDA proposed levy at $6,852,244 establishing a
budget hearing date for property taxes payable in 2010 for December _, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. in the
City Council Chainbers, aild approving the HRA levy of $262,556.
WE:sms
0909031COUNCIL
Attachinents: City Manager's Budget Message
Four-year Sudget Plan
Standard & Poor's Rating
Resolution 2009-134
COUNCIL AC'1~ION:
RESOLUTION 2009-134
RESOI.UTION ADOPTING A PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2010, SETTING THE PROPOSED
GITY LEVY, APPROVING TNE HRA LEVY, APPROVING A TAX RATE fNCREASE, AND ESTABLISHING
A BUDGET NEARING DATE FOR PROPERTY TAXES PAYABLE IN 2410.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED gY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS,
MINNESOTA: that the following is hereby adopted by the City of Columbia Heights.
Section A. The budget for the City of Columbia Heights for the year 2010 is hereby approved and adopted
with appropriations for each of the funds listed below.
Expense
General Fund 10,030,152
Cammunity Development Fund 263,988
Economic Development Fund 346,428
State Aid 159,116
Cable Television 119,439
Library 772,743
DARE Project 20,000
I nfrastructure 0
Capital Improvement 361,815
Capitai Equipment Replacement Funds 5,758,664
Construction Funds 1,126,055
Central Garage Fund 691,800
Liquor Operating 4,342,383
~iquor Capital/Non-dperating 704,624
Water Utility Fund 523,556
Sewer Utility Fund 4,714,275
Refuse Fund 1,521,450
Storm Sewer Fund 431,000
Data Processing 306,776
Debt Service Fund 2,383,800
Tatal Expense Including Interfund Transfers 34,578,064
Section B. The estimated gross revenue to fund the budget of the City of Columbia Heights for all funds,
including general ad valorem tax levies and use of fund balances, as hereinafter set forth for the year 2010:
Revenue
General Fund 10,030,152
Community Development Fund 263,988
Economic Development Fund 346,428
State Aid 159,116
Cable Television 119,439
Library 772,743
DARE Project 20,000
Infrastructure d
Capital Improvements 361,815
Capital Equipment Replacement Funds 5,758,664
Construction Funds 1,126,055
Central Garage Fund 691,800
Liquor Operating 4,342,383
Liquor Capital/Non-Operating 704,624
Water Utility Fund 523,556
Sewer Utility Fund 4,714,275
Refuse Fund 1,521,450
Storm Sewer Fund 431,000
Data Processing 306,776
Debt Service Fund 2,383,800
Total Revenue Including Interfund Transfers 34,578,064
RESdLUTION 2009-134
RESO~UTION ADOPTING A PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2010, SETTING THE PROPOSED
CITY LEVY, APPROVING THE HRA LEVY, APPROVING A TAX RATE INCREASE, AND ESTABLISHING
A BUDGET HEARING DATE FOR PROPERTY TAXES PAYABLE IN 2010.
Section C. The following sums of money are levied for the current year, callectable in 2d10, upon the taxable
property in said City of Columbia Heights, for the following purposes:
Estimated General Fund Levy 6,235,764
Estimated Library Levy 532,509
Estimated EDA Fund Levy 83,971
Total 6,852,244
Section D. The City Council of the City of Columbia Heights hereby approves the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority Tax Levy for the fiscal year 2010 in the amount of $262,556.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF C~LUMBIA HEIGHTS, COUNTY OF
ANOKA, MINNESOTA: That the County Auditar is authorized to fix a property tax rate for taxes payable in
the year 2010 that is higher than the tax rate calculated for the City for taxes levied in 2008, collectabfe in
2009.
The City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of
Anoka County, Minnesota.
Approved this day of , 2009
Offered By:
Seconded By:
Roll Call: Ayes:
Nays:
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
Patricia Muscovitz, CMC
City Clerk
~~°~~ F ~ ~~ 1~ ~ I ~'~
2~'~ ~ ~ ~~'~ ~~~~ ~
The budget message and document have been put together to comply with the City
Charter and state statute requirements for providii~g budget information and adopting a
proposed budget and proposed tax levy. Under state statutes the City ~f Columbia
Heights lnust adopt a proposed budget and a proposed tax levy and certify it to the County
Audit~or's office prioc to September 15. T1~e City then has until December 28 ~o adopt and
cei-~ify a final budget and levy to the County Auditor's office. The final levy can be less
than the proposed levy but it camlot be greater thail the proposed levy. Based on this, staff
traditionally i°ecommends establishing a proposed levy that is adequate to cover budgetary
needs with the ui~derstanding tl~at as the budget process is fir~alized, the City Council has
the opportunity to reduce the fmal property tax levy.
~~e~~~~ ~~r~~~
The City of Columbia lHeights budget is ~repared and distributed ii~ a forinat that llicludes
useful nai-~•ative i11fo1~nation tliat highl~ghts department activities, objectives, and budget
suininary. This forn~at is designed to provide the user of the budget wi~h a more
descriptive r~arrative explaining the highlights of the budget. Uilder this fonnat the budget
is broken down into ten functional areas and is prepaied with a narrative budget message
for each of these areas. When tl~e City Council meets with tl~e various depart~nents, a
detailed budget workbook will be distributed to the Council for each of the functional
areas. The worlcboolc is intended for utilization during the woz°lc session to provide more
detail for eac11 individual budget. At the end of tl~e City Council budget review piocess, a
suinznary of the budget will be asselnbled for distribution to the public at the City's Truth
in Taxatiolz hearing, which is generally held tlle first Moilday of December, one week
prior to the adoption of tl~e budget.
~~€~~~~ ~~~~r~~~
f~~~~~~°rr° ~~,~~ Iazf~~r°r~rrrtz!~r7
In tl~e 1970's tl~e state legislature passed legislation that created LGA to cities. With this
lebislation a fonnula was developed to dis~ribute the aid to cities based on need and otl~er
factors. Tluoughout tl~e years tl~e LGA forinula was very beneficial to the City of
Columbia Heigl~ts. By 2003, the City's certified LGA was $2,651,999 or 30% of the
City's Gei~eral Fu11d revenue. At this point, the City had become veiy reliailt on LGA to
cover the costs of basic, essential services such as police, fire and public works. In 2003
when the governoi• and state legislatuie made significant reductions to LGA, it was
devastating to cities such as Columbia Heights who were relia~nt on this aid for essential
services. The alternative cities had ~~vas to increase property tax levies to maintain the
current service level or cut essential services.
During the period of tiine from 2003 to 2008 the City's LGA dropped froin $2,651,999 to
$921,280, a reduction of $1,730,'719. During this same period of time property tax levies
~~vere increased to offset the loss in LGA. For 2009 the City's certified LGA was
$1,425,338; however, the City has been informed that the 2009 LGA will be reduced by at
least $302,379. With the state's ongoing budget deficit we are anticipating that the actual
loss in LGA will be reduced even further before we receive our final payment in
December. The City is allowed to malce up for lost LGA through special levies. There
are also special levies t11aC apply to Columbia Heights for debt service and increased
public safety personnel costs.
2~~~ ~~c~~~~ N~~~I~~~~~
Thc attached detail budget pages cover the recoininended increases and decreases to the
various budgets. In sumrnary, the department proposed 2010 budget for the General Fund,
Library Fund and the EDA levy is $10,897,205, which is under both the 2009 budget and
the goals established for the 2010 budget.
With the large State of Mimlesata deficit and the anticipation of a major loss in LGA for
2009 and 2010, the 2010 budget process was started very early. Staff inet with the City
Council at a work session on April 6 to present the basic plan of a four-year budget that
would include a reduction of expenses, a reduction of several city services, and a four-year
levy plan that would eliminate the reliance on LGA for the City's general operating
budget by the year 2013.
On the expenditure side, tlle starting point was based on the 2008 adopted blidget. It
should be noted that the 2008 adopted budget for the General Pund, the Library Fund and
the EDA levy only increased by 33% froin the adopted 2003 budget. Subsequently, the
starting point for the 2010 budget has only seen rninimal increases that are far below the
cost of living for the five-year period froin 2003-2008. This brought the starting point for
the 2010 budget to $10,233,657. We added $385,000 to this ainount to cover utilities and
maintenance expenses for the new gymnasium and new Public Safety building. The only
other addition was $341,454 to cover cost of living pay increases that had already Ueen
approved by the City CounciL This brought the cap for the 2010 budget to $10,960,111.
The actual Department/City Manager proposed budget for 2010 is $10,897,205, which is
$62,906 under the preliminary goal for 2010.
On the revenue side we looked at the priinary goal of developing a revenue stream that
would enable the City to eliininate its dependence on LGA for general operations. This
will be accoinplished with a four-year levy plan that sees significant decreases each year
in the amount of the levy illcrease for general operations. In 2010 the levy wauld increase
by 10.88%, in 2011 it would increase by 8%, and by 6.35% in 2012. Tn the year 2013 the
City would l~o longer be reliai~t on any LGA for general operations. In that year the levy
is projected to increase by 4.98%. The plan also is dependent upon using slightly under
$800,000 in fund balance for the years 2010 and 2011 and then seeing slight increases to
fiind balance in 2012 and 2013. Altl~ougl~ tllis may appear to be a large levy increase in
2010, it does accomplish the goal of becoming independent from LGA within four years.
Any LGA received that is in excess of t11e ainount in the budget plan could be utilized to
reduce the debt service levy, wllich wauld result in a direct reductior~ of ~roperty taxes.
Future LGA could also be dedicated to other uses such as creating a capital building fuild
for the future replaceinent of city facilities and infrastructure. The bottoin line is that the
budget that is being presented to the City Council is well within the parame~ers established
in the four-year plan as it was discussed with the City Council at the work sessioiis of
Apri1 6, May 4, and at the regular CiCy Council meeting on May 11, 2009.
The four-year budget plan is attached to this message, as it is a significant part of tlie
budget document. Also attached is a copy of Standard and Poor's recent bond rating for
the City of Columbia Heights. Our bond rating was upgraded two steps froin an A-1 ta an
AA rating. In the rating upgrade Standard and Poar's assessed the City's management
practices and policy and rated them "good." A strang factor in the assessment was that
the City had a four-year budget plan to deal with the loss of LGA and a long-range p1a11 to
maintain lllfrast~ucture and essential services.
CITY OF COL UMBIA HEIGHTS
DATE: MAY 7, 2009
TO: THE HONORABLE GARY PETERSON
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
TAMI DIEHM
BRUCE KELZENBERG
BRUCE NAWROCKI
BOBBY WILLIAMS
FROM: WILLIAM ELRITE
FINANCE DIRECTOR
RE: PREPARING FOR THE 2010 BUDGET (Page 1 of 2)
At the work session on May 4`h staff handed out infonnation related to the preparation of the
2010 budget. Included in this was historic inforlnatioli iegarding ~he budget, local government
aid (LGA}, levies, and past properiy tax increases. It should first be iloted that this presentation
only dealt with tl~e city property tax levy t11at appears on tl~e praperty tax statements as the city
levy. The presentation did not include the school levy, the county levy, the city HRA levy or the
county IIR~ levy for the city. The reason for concentratiilg on the city portioil of the levy is that
this is the prunary ful~ding for the General and Library funds. The HRA levies are separate
levies used primarily for redevelopment ~vithin the city. As these are separate levies far a
specific purpose t1~ey caz~ be dealt with more efficiently at another tiine.
Page 1 of the document shows the Generai and Library fund budgets for 2003 with a comparison
to 2008 and a proposed 2010 funding level. It also shows the amount of persomlel expenses
along with the percent of the budget that makes up personnel. The largest departments, such as
Police and Fire, have 91% and 90% of their budget in perso11ne1 costs. Subsequently it is very
difficult to reduce budgets without reducing personnel and services provided. The reason for
using the 2003 adopted budget as a basis is that it is our higl~est-level budget and it is the year
that the state begail to significantly reduce LGA. The next column shows the 2008 adopted
budget. As you ca11 see, t11e 2008 budget only increased by $317,635 over the 2003 budget. This
is a 3.3% increase in expenditures over a five-year period. Staff is proposing that this be used as
the basis for the 2010 budget. The next colwnn shows the 2008 budget plus City Council
approved pay increases tl~rough 2010. Using this coluinn as the starting point in the preparation
of the 2010 budget we would be freezing expenditures at the 2008 level with the exception of the
approved pay increases. The next section, lines 34-37, shows the projection of utilities for the
new gyinnasium and public safety building as an addition to t11e base budget for 2010. The
bottonl section of this form, lines 39-48, i~eflects the projected revenues for 2010 through 2013
for the start of a four-year budget plan. The ~rimary goal of this plan is to no langer be
dependent on LGA as a funding source for general operations. As you can see, in 2013 the
projected LGA for general operations is zero. Line 45 shows tl~e effect this l~udget plan has on
fund balance. Iiz 2010 we would be utilizing $689,489 of fund balance. Iiz 2011 the fund
balai~ce used is $99,090, then in 2012 and 2013 we begin a slow rebuilding of fund balailce. The
Page Twa
boYtom twa Iiiles show the percent and ainaunt of inflatrorz that is built into these budgets. The
year 2010 has zero inflation, 2011 has 1%, and 2012 and 2013 have 2% ll~flation.
Page 2 sho~~s the history of the city levy and what we have received in LGA fron12003 through
projected 2010. The top portion shows the years ai~d our certified LGA and the cuts that we
have received. As you can see, on line 16 the total lost LGA froin 2003 tl~rough projected 2010
is $12,020,989. When you go to the bottoln section of the chart it sho~~s our levy 1listory for the
same period of time. Here, again, on the bottom yau can see that the total revenue gained
through increased property tax levies is $12,806,045, wl~ich does fully offset the lost LGA. The
main point of this chart is that it shaws that our property tax levies have basically covered and
made up for the lost LGA. The last four columns on the bottom section of the chart show the
percent of increase in the levy for 2003 through 2010. As you can see, our levy increases were
lligh in 2004 and 2005 to inake up for lost LGA and then decreased significantly. Likewise, the
current faur-year budget plan has the largest levy increase in the firs~ year.
Page 3 shows the four-year levy plan. In this plan 2010 is the heaviest year as it covers the new
expenses for the gyn7nasium and public safety building as well as additional bonding to cover the
Murzyn Hall unprovements and tl~e new public safety building. In ~he years 2011 thraugh 2013
tl~e levy is illcreased only to replace lost LGA and to begin replacing fund balance used in 2010
and 2011. The two bottom sections of the chart reflect the levy increases broken dou~n far
general aperations and for debt. Lines 27 and 28 reflect the fund balance changes and tt~e total
percent of levy increase for the four years. Following this plan through to 2013 will result in
2013 having a property tax levy increase of less than 5% and an increase ta fund balance af
slightly over $100,000.
One of the key points of this budget plan is to remove the reliance on LGA for general
operations. The plan is based on receiving and using $425,338 in LGA for years 2010 thraugh
2013. However, there is a possibility that wa cauld receive mare LGA in these years. If this
holds true, any additional LGA tl~at is received can be used to reduce the city's debt levy or put
aside in a capital building replacement fund. Any portion that is used to reduce the debt levy
will result i~i a direct property tax savings to the residents. For exainple, in 2010 the plan
projects that we will reeeive $425,338 in LGA. If' tl~e city receiaes more than that, a11 or a
portion of it can be used ta reduce the debt levy, which will result in a reduction of the total city
property taxes to the residents. Additional LGA of $300,000 would reduce the levy by
approximately 4%.
Based on the discussio~ls at t11e work sessions, staff will stal~t preparation of t11e 2010 budget
based on this four-year ~lan. This budget will be presented to the council following the same
schedule that has been utilized in previous years.
W~:sms
o9oso~scouNCrL
~_ q ~ g ~ C ~ p I E ~ F ~ G
City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota
Budget Comparison & Projection 2003 - 2010
General Fund, Library and EDA
Generaf i~ Library Funcl S EDA
Levy
Fund
2003 Adopted
Bud et
2008 Adopte
Bud et 2008 Budget
Plus Pay
~ncrease
Thru 2010
2010 Personnel
Ex ense
personnel
Percent of
Bud et
1 Mayor-Council 41110 211,014 183,523 190,778 117,089 61%
2 City Manager 41320 412,706 398,026 422,202 390,209 92%
3 City Clerk 41410 8,105 49,588 52,600 48,608 92%
4 Finance 41510 643,973 656,173 694,978 626,317 90%
5 Assessing 41550 101,000 106,415 106,415 0 0%
6 ~egal Services 41610 196,572 186,500 186,500 0 0%
7 Fire 42200 916,572 1,159,768 1,227,885 1,099,415 90%
8 Police 42100 2,786,587 3,075,586 3,317,120 3,024,189 91%
9 Gen Gov Bldgs. 41940 158,546 159,212 159,212 0 0%
10 Emergency Management 42500 84,973 22,344 23,126 12,621 55%
11 Animal Control 42700 16,150 15,470 15,470 0 0%
12 Weed Control 43260 16,428 21,493 22,276 12,631 57%
13 Recognition/Special Events 45050 71,368 41,700 41,700 0 0%
14 Contingencies 49200 50,000 100,810 100,810 0 0%
15 Transfers 49300 480,000 185,000 185,000 0 0%
16 Engineering 43100 319,076 321,402 339,357 289,796 $5%
17 Streets 43121 690,319 760,897 787,880 435,505 55%
18 Street Lighting 43160 126,416 151,167 151,544 6,082 4%
19 Traffic Signs & Signals 43170 73,251 81,182 84,824 58,788 69%
20 Parks 45200 751,437 735,514 764,977 475,535 62%
21 Tree Trimming 46102 104,500 128,984 133,214 68,273 51%
22 Recreation Admin. 45000 224,417 158,608 167,790 148,190 88%
23 Youth Athletics 45001 19,702 33,293 34,845 25,044 72%
24 AdultAthletics 450Q3 25,328 29,419 30,152 11,824 39%
25 CHASE II/Youth Enrichm. 45004 22,169 60,104 62,497 38,631 62%
26 Travel Athletics/CHASEIII 45005 22,635 31,139 32,227 17,554 54%
27 Trips & Outings 45030 38,666 57,212 58,344 18,277 31%
28 Senior Citizens 45040 78,580 81,689 85,539 62,139 73%
29
30 Murzyn Hall
Library Total 45129
45500 249,022
679,700 228,230
738,346 239,136
772,743 176,023
555,169 74%
72%
31 EDA Lev 140,569 78,622 83,971 83,971 100%
32 Sub Total 9,719,781 10,037,416 10,575,111 7,801,877 74%
34 New Expenses
35 Maint & Utilities new GYM 85,000
36 Maint & Util new Pub Safety 300,000
Total Expense Projection 9,719,781 10,037,416 10,960,111
39 Revenue & Ex Pro'ections 2010 2011 2012 2013
40 Operating Levy 8,052,142 8,752,142 9,352,142 9,852,142
41 LGA 425,338 425,338 425,338 0
42 Other Revenue 1,793,142 1,793,142 1,793,142 1,793,142
43 Total Revenue 10,270,622 10,970,622 11,570,622 11,645,284
44 Expense 10,960,111 11,069,712 11,291,106 11,516,928
45 Fund Bal Used Increase 689,489 99,090 279,516 128,356
46 Exp Increase for Inflation
47 Percent 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 2.0%
48 Amount 0 109,601 221,394 225,822
_
~
LL
W
~
V
~.
Q
~ OCC NNtf d~ ~ rd~
C~4 ~ I~- I`~ tf) Lf~ d' t~ CO Cfl ~
~ ~ Q ~d'~N~ ~ 00 NN
G~(~ CO O t~ CO d~ t` CD N O
~-~ ~ ~ c- r- !- ~- N N
~ ~ .... .... .~ .r. ..i ._.. ~..- c-
~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ dOCflCOOI`-et'~ C~(^7 O
~~~, O~ N~ O L~ ~O C~ ~- O
~ W ~ ~~ t~- O 1~ CS~ ~ tS~ 00 ~- O d
-~~ ~ ~ ~ Q CONd'6>O~~ tC)~- O
~C ~ C N~ C~ ~i.f)d'Nc-NM CDtCS O
~~ ([j O ~ ~ ~ p _J C~O ~ ~ N v ~- dy' O
=~•~OOO U~ "
c~ ca Z N C~ Q
L
~.~ ¢"' ~ rn rn ch r- r- ~t o~ o a~ ~n o~ o0
~-~ C~ -a ~`_ ~n rn rn o-~ co rn~i- oo c~ cv r~ c~
-J ~~~ G d) tV N rt d~~ N c~ M M o~
O~ ~-~ J
~~ Q v- (n ~ ~~ t'7 CO ~ 00 O ~ tC~ d' tf3 tf3
C.) ~ tn O~ N~_' t1~ 6f) O t.[) N M CO N N f0 N N
O(L, j~ L.~ J~ CO O~ t0 O O N N G) ~Y Oz d_ d'
Qj ~ .~ ~N ~~~-~~~ ~- c-
.~ (~4~ ~ "'' N ~
U °~ = U
c
~ c~cn~~.nc~tiaoaocornrnrnooo
(} o000000ooooot-Tr-
000000000000000
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
~IC
_
~ O
C
~ O O
~ U U
O
(SS ~ Q "t7 Q
~ `'J `,J
Q Q w-.
C) v ~C~JZC~~Z
~ L'jJ~~J~ ~
"a ~ ~,~j 'O N N "a ~ N
~ j, ~~ U f~-'.> •~ U U
•"- ~ 4= N N `•'' ~ N
~ Q ~ .~.~~ .~.
~ ~ ~ ~ O O ~ O O
U~QU~O U~1 d
0 0 ~
~ ~ ~, d' M C4
~ ~ ~ 00 O~ c'7
N ~ ~ ~
V U ~
C C
~' d'Ol~i~c~OMO~
~ 00 CU M Ch r- t~- tS~ N
~ ~N~~t)LOC~MO
J
I~- I`~ N t~ O t.f) N(A
~ r-d'Od'Od'Od'
~ 00 d^ r- M l(~ O I~- t`~-
I- ~f' tf) Cfl CO cfl f~ I~- 00
tf~ cD Cfl
~-' ~, I~ ~f' OO
-~ ) ~ i ~ i ~~t N~
~ J N ~ rn
~ ~l' Gfl
~ O N ~ o 0 0 0 0~
a tA ~00 V'~tN~7
t~~4 ~ ~ c+")Nd'NCDcI'O
A ~ ~ ~ ~
~ J ~
T '~
~ O ~ d'~M~OCOCOO~O~
RS "'' J ~~d'd'rYi~-~O
~ ~ ~ ~MO~MCONa'~o0
C ~ •~ CDNtt~COO~N
i' CiS ~~~NNO'3
V `
~ ~ N
O Q Q
_ O
~ tS5 C>tflf~-OCONN~
N d-h-f~Ot~-OONN
~~- ~ N N O O N N O
~(n ~~ LC~ Lf~ C7 (.O I~ 00
~ ~ NLf7d'tt3~d~C'~
~ O ~CflNc-d'NO0
~ ~
U p`_
X O~I' O I~- I~- c'~ ~f3 f` N
~ ~ > ~-~N1f31.f) CO00~ d'
~
+- +_~ J ~ 1~- f~- N t~- O CD ~f' N
O CL6 ~~Od'O~~tS')
>+ N RS 0~0~d'^r-c'7~S)~NO
`p Q p tt ~' t.C) Cfl t,f> CD Cfl 1~- O~
*~ o ~-
~n
c~~r~c~~oorno
0000000~
00000000
N N N N N N N N
A
>
a~
J
~
~
r
N
N
N
ca
N
L
U
~
I A e c o _ E
City of Columbia Heights
Four year levy plan
Detail of prajected levy increases
r re area 5i4iLU Uy
Lev Year 2010 2011 2012 2013
1 Purpose for levy increase
2 Wage Increases (approved in 2007} 253,025 2013 does not
3
Utility Maintenance Expense use any LGA
in the
4 New Public Safety Building 300,000 operating
5 New Gym 85,000 budget
6 Fund Balance used in Priar years
7 Makeup lost LGA 200,000 700,000 600,000 500,000
8 Total Operating Levy Increase 838,025 700,Q00 60Q,000 500,000
9 Murzyn Hal! Improvement levy 72,640
10 Add'I Public Safety Bond (2 Million) 136,000
11 Increase in Pub Safety Bond Payment 304,500
12 TfF District Offset (304,500)
13 Total Debt Levy Increase 208,640 - - -
14 Total projected levy increase 1,046,665 700,OQ0 600,000 500,Q00
15
16 2010 2011 2012 2013
17 Prior Year City Levy 7,702,362 8,749,027 9,449,027 10,049,027
18
19 Total current Year levy 8,749,027 9,449,027 10,049,027 10,549,027
20 % Increase far General Operations 10.88% 8.00% 6.35% 4.98%
21 % Increase for Debt 2.71% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
22 % Increase for Total Levy 13.59% 8.00% 6.35% 4.98%
23
24 2010 2011 2012 2013
25 Operating Levy 8,052,142 8,752,142 9,352,142 9,852,142
26 Debt Levy 696,886 696,886 696,886 696,886
27 Fund Balance (used) increase (689,489) (99,090) 279,516 128,356
28 % Increase for Total Levy 13.59% 8.00% 6.35% 4.98%
~_ ~~~ ~, ~~9
v~vr~u.s~~a~€I~rd~~adp s.co~adr~tinc~scEirect ~
Stsrcti ad $. F~sata ~.~ ri~s t~'2~^;~1 f3~ t~irt ta ~s~tainu`tiart ~t.~iiitt,ut SuP's ~?tmassiari. Ses 7~rrs ~aT -
l.~s~t'~is:lafireta ~a,sth= I~st C~'-
~ €~ ~ <°
~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~` ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~
~'~ ~°~`-~ ~~~_~=~ ~.~ ~~
US$~.6~ sr~3 G(} put~ 3~ ~ ta~ai~~ Gfl ~ i~e~s~at ~~Is set ~"~ dtd ~37I1212t~9 dne 0710iI2t138
E ~ T2~rt ~^~~ ~ 3at~~
~~~~~~~~~
Th~ 'r'~.r'~" l~~ag-teraaz ratix~g assi~a~d c~ Cola~a~--baa ~-1eq~a~s, R~n~n.`s series 2OO9A ~~aaeral abIigation (GO) j~~~s~ic
facalitie~s ~ionds an~t seraes 2fl0~I~ aaxable G() ta~ i~c~ei~e~at ~o~nds r~f~ecrs rh~ foll+ad~'saag credic qs~aliries, in St~mdard
`~ ~aor°s ~{acirt~ S~r~~c~s' a~~inion;
+~L~~.ry c~ose },ro~ixffairy ro R~iau~eap~$is-St, p~1~1 ~a~t1~ staong ~aa~rtacip.atic~n ita th~ ~tetro~otitasi ecanouuc bas~,
inc~a~cli:~g acc~ss to am~le ecup~o~=n~ea~t opgac~rtainities;
• Inca~zie amd .~~3fth sa~dtc.arars raaig,ing fro~n ~d~quate to s~erv strong;
~~~ v _ _~~ .~ ~~,~.~a.~,~~ ~ ~ • ~._ ~ , ~~,-~-~~ ~. v~.~~- x
~«~-ie:~lth~- fi~a:aizces as demonstrare,3 ~i~ a very scaoasg £a~~d l~alance; aald ~
~•~aod ~uaa~icial aa~anagesnent pla~iia~g aia~ ,~rocedear~s, w~iach ha~~ saa~taanec~ t~ie cit~ `s gvad fiss:~s~c'xal stan~i~ag ~
~ a~ad provid~ fiart~~r stalaititp; ~s~d ~
F-,~~~. a~w--~e~ .,.~.~ ~~~,-~t~=~~~.~,~~ ..~~:~~~_~~~- .~.,~~ ~.~~~~._~~~~.~~ ~- ~~~~
The eiry-°s fu#~ GO ad valaretn plecige sec~res 6s,th seri~s of ~ands. Proceeds $ronz t3~e 2{~i79A series will finance <;
v~ri~t}- af ~roj~crs, isacl~~iu~ a~sevsr ptabiic saf~ty ce~r~r, street :~nd wate~ i~~rastrc~ctc~re iqnpro~c-e~neuts, a~zd
re~ovatio~~s ro ~ cr~s~unu~sity ~taildia~g. TI~~ 2{}C19B boncls tivi~l fuiad rhs acqaai~itaa~xa of struczaar~s ~vvs`tl~ua a tax
i~ac~s~aa~aat da'strict,
~olusa~~si~ d-Ieiglics is lo~arrd just fotar xiules outs~~i~ Ivlirabi~apo~is u~ Arao~a Cou~ntp ~r1A1~fSta~le~. t'~ fi~~y de~eloped,
i~iaaer rin~ sa~bur~; c~xe citv has snaintained a fairlv stab~e go~ailatioaa ar~r t~~ past decad~, slidiaig 2°fa sin~e 2t}~0 to
reac~i 17,9~3 cgusentl~: I~.esidents are in clase pro.tianaty* so a ti~ide var'set~ o# andustries wirl7in the metropol'stan area,
cand a~isgh-spertl c~uuz~u€er raii st~trs~ai set rsa o~e~n in the fal9 ~~ill furr~~r ~~aa~arove access. Income lel~els iu che ciry
:are adeq€a~te-t~«-~aod in our ~~i~t~, «-ith a xueclia~a househo~d a~ad }~er ~~ita ef~ecti~~e Lsuying uic~acne at 87°1Q :ac~d
93"/4 af aa~taa~ial le~-els,
B~caa~s~ r4te ciry- is aii~+stly ~~~sdt-c,iir, r.3x base gr~sv-riY ha$ occ~aased ~ra~iarily throiagh r~sidential tear-clowms a~~d
~1~-isi d~t~elopment. S~~c~i irn~roteane€tcs result~ed 'a~a sread}* ~Yet ~a~ capacicy grow-th tl~rota~ 20f~$. In ?00$, t~~e cit~-
f~lt sl~~ i~xi}pacs of av~rall softenic~g in rhe hacasuig a~aarket, aa~d aaes ta~ capaciry slip~d 1",r4 to $1~.bG'billion.
I~adi~~t~d n~ark~t va1u~, a t~ieasur~ of tr~re p~o~rry va~u~, r~sYaaixms z-erg- stro~~g o~a .a per c::agita l~asis i~t our opu~ioiz,
lg~+~'~s=er, at ~$6,i0~.
I3a~~ ~a ~~ae c$t;~-`s ~c~ad plasanang an~i manageraiea~t g~ractace~., t~e ~'in:.~~3c~s $iave l~~eai histc~rically stroY~~. At fiscal
g=ear-~a~d ~f~~}~ (I3~c. 31~, t~e ~en~r:~l ftxncf I~al:~~ce h~~d $3.9 iaai~lion an ur~es~n*~d fiauds. At 47°lo af e~:geaidit~tar~s,
w~ ~-i~~~ rhis ~~rei as ~ery scroi~g. thi:~uclited result$ for 200ffi show a~22~,i3Cl4 redazctioir iia th~s~ reseawes, s~,hacls caa~
~a~ lui~s~d c~~r~ct13~ tr, a~~~ar-ea~c~ i~asallottaa~enr o# loe~ gaL~rs~~s~~~t ~aid (L~~~ frsr~~a r~ae ssate o$ ~32$,~. In tisca~
~~:~n~as~i & i~~s's ~3~i~~s~i~~ci j,1une 8, L009 2
S~ar~fiad P Fa~r'm. ~t rs~*~; r~~r~fi, f~c ~~Sra~t €~~s:,~wunsiiffn ~r~~rilx~ 5&~'s pa~rr~ssion. 5sa T~rares ~f Usa~'Lr,a.Baztr~r ca~ ~~e lazi p~. ~ ~.: <.
S~ct~~aastrr~°: G~l~nabsa Fi'~s~6at~, A~s~ras~sc~t~; ~~a;er~t ~fiddgrr~Iorz
° 2Q(}~, c~~~ca~Ls a~e ~~~p~~a~~ ~a~~ ~ s~~e~~ l~s e+f L+G~ and ~aE~~ accard~ng~~ sh~r~l~ ca~c ~xg7~e~dieaar~s bgr ~.~4~},~(~ ~
~
~{~a~arly ~ E}~~4 a~ ~$ae ba~d~es~. T'h~ esr~ 6as r~d~c~d pae~gras~ts, l~ft pasi~ions o~~~i ~~a~~a atcr~t~as~, ~cl a~q~~est~d ~
~ ~aa~~lr,y-ezs t:~~ ~ ~~~g~a. ~s ~ re~azl~, ~~a~~esa~eaa~ ~~ga~cts :~~ ag~sat~g s~rp~tas o~, at ~ro~sx, ~ b~a~-e~eaz y~as, ~
~
~ ~de~,e~dasi~ aai t~a~ l~~-~1 ~~ ~.(~:~ ~~d~~a~~~~, `~'!~e city`s fiai~a~cial #orecast in~clud~s a ~~ ~i$ #aand bala~t~c~ iaa ~4}l(? a~id ~
~~Ol Y as r~~ ei~ r~d~e~ ~~s d~g~~c~de~c~ ora state aid. ~
--
~ Gc~$~raba~ ~-I~i~~'s xflaa~e~g~aaae~at ~g~ctie~s are coi~sid~red "gaoct" under Stand~rd &~aor's ~n~aaea~l IV1~aaa~ean~s~c ~
~~ssessaaa€a~t (~ ). s~m FI~~~ ~~~~s,d i~adic~t~s tbae pr~cr~~~s ~~isc i~ anos~ ~rea~, a~t$~oa~~ a~vc ~dl a~aa}~ b~ forma~lizea~ ~
~
ar r~ an$as4 ~s~~~~r~d ~ av~rnans~~ o~~i~aa~ls. ~ h~ ca era ~ es in ~~-r~a~s~ve laaaatis~ anye~~eii~ a lon a~rc~ ~
~ ~ ~ 3` ~ ~'Y ~ ~ P ~> ~ " ~' ~
~~ira;~aieial ~~~n t~ss~~~h 2~13 :~s ~-e~l ~s a detailed f~a e-g*eas ca~aira9 is~~se~z-en~e€~~ ~la€s. Bt~t~a doc~aa~~~~ats ~r~ t~~d~t~d ~
~:
~ an~a~ll~~ ~nd ~id im haadget ~~~~ssa~a~. ~~~ cit~,- caa~e~l as~~i~tai~as a pals~y ru keep a Y''~c~~ 45°,f~ rsf t~e }~~~ce~ialg ~
~
~s ~>e~r`s e~:gaea~dir~~a~s i~ res~a~~~. ~
Ixa oaax o~a~aioaa, ~~a~ ~i~g-°s r~Z~eral~ d~b~ 3s~ardeza is ix~cderate a~ ~2,$SO per capita ~d ~.3°fa of chs tatal zaiarket t~ala~e.
koir~rlg ~al~ o€ rl~~ e~cy's ~e4~t as ~p~artecE by s~a-esaues, sgeci~I assessr~l~mts, or rax a~r.s~ea~~uES, c~l~ie~i redt~c~s t~ae
t.a~: 4~- reqa~~renze~sts r~~a th~ a~-~sa~I ~a~ basc. The garsioxa aE o~.eraria~g escp~xadiauses d~v-oc~d to .~el,t s~a~ice cascs
zvas ls~g!' ~t 22.?`:`~ iax 2at~7, ~n oair ~%aeea; r~nac~rciz:~rion is a~>er~ge; 49°!O af th~ citp`s ~irecc t~ebt is daa~ to s~aature
withia~ 10 }'e~rs ~~d 91 °.~a withsn 2C? y~a~s. T~~ city ~aas iao ~dclitiona} plaazs ta issue de~t.
~tI~~E~t~~
Thc stal-~Ie airtloak retlecrs Sc~~n~.-i:ard ~ Paor's e~.-¢~e~ration rhat anc~xiages~.~ent ~~ill coutinu~ to ex~gage iaa extesasiv~
gl.asinnia~~ in orcl~r tc, respor~~ to potential re~-eazve d~creases rel:~te~ ta slip~i~ig 3~ez tax capcxciry assd red~ctions iu
stas~ aid. ~T~ e~-~ect t~e cisy to n~<asaata`s~ its loa~-rerm foci~s an maintau~ng at le~s€ a goad reseswe le~~e~. Tlze ciry's
clos- pr~~itni~' ter Minneag~olis amd its ~a~tici}~a~ion in the anerropolit~~n ecoz~onaic ~ase pro~ ide fc~relier sta}~a~aty to
th~ ratu~~.
~~~'1~~~ ~f: s~~iF'~~
USPF Crit~ria: '°GO I7ebc,°` C3ct. 1?, `~Ot?~
Coixgplet~ ratings iaifarnaacaon is ati~ai~a~,~e t~ Ratia~~sDirect st~bscri~ers at v,~~cvrati~i~;sdirect.coni. #111 ratia~gs
a#fected I~y this r:~tisi~ actaoai c:~sz be Foi~i2d oa~ Staiidard a'~ Poor`s public TX~eb site at ww-~v.s~andardand~.,oors.con~;
auider Ti.atiti~s ii~ r~xe 1~#t navyga~i~xi bar, s~Iecc Find a I~:~tin~.
~~:sia~d~rdaitid~~ars.~a~~fr~isagsdir~ci 3
~~~~~ ~ F~sc~'e. F9i ai~t~Y~ res :s~~d. hkn at,~sini ca ~isse~ir~t€r~~ ..r~~.~ E~f`s F~scr~s~~. S~a Ta~r~ ;af U>s:'~i~i~imer on tha last p~~. -
City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota
Proposed and Final Levy Comparison
General Fund, Library and EDA
Resolution Totals 2000 - 2009
Year Proposed
EDA, Library
& General Final
EDA, Library &
General
Amount of
Decrease
2000 3,295,956 3,295,956 0
2001 3,625,552 3,625,552 0
2002 4,851,347 4,824,130 27,217
2003 4,817,984 4,817,984 0
2004 5,447,260 5,447,260 0
2005 6,241,986 6,102,537 139,449
2006 6,347,537 6,347,537 0
2007 6,500,613 6,500,613 0
2008 6,916,895 6,916,895 0
2009 7,328,477 7,214,117 114,360
This chart only indcludes the City of Columbia
Heights Operating levy.
It does not include the Debt levies, City HRA levy,
the Anoka County HRA levy or other levies or
assessments that appear on the property tax
statements.
~- .- -{
m ~
o ~
v m ~
~ ~ ~
o ~
-~ -. o
O ~ ~
~ n •<
~ a ~~
CD CD C7
-p ,-. C
O CD ~
~ ~ N
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ro
X G
.~
~ O
m f7 C7
r,: O
cD `~ c
_ ~
to Z'I 6
Dv
m =
~ ~.
cn
~ ~
~ i
O
~ ~I
O
v ~_
C7 ~
O ~
c N
~ ~
`~ `.~ ',
D
C
0
1
C!
m
(6
m'
O
N
m
~ v
CD (D
~ N
~ O
(D O
~ o
_~ ,-'
~ o
m ~
~.
~ ~
v ~
~' X
O ~
n
~ ~
~~
D
w D
o ~ ~ ~
~P
O ~ ~ O
~ O ~_
v
"~
"D ~
N 07 ~ -+
o~~
c~
co
w '-..
0 0
D~
(D ~
N ~
N ~1 ~ ~
O D7
0 0
v
x
v
v
N N N N N N N N ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O ~
_
O
W
O CO ~ ~I d7 CSn ~ -G
(D
v
~ rn rn rn rn~~ o
O ~ C9 t7t W ~ f~ 00 ~
~
~
N ~ U~ d '
~
yV'
-• -a W C3? Cri U1 N CD {D 0
w
d O ~
N `*! ~ W y
OJN~~N~O)
'
W ~ j C.77 ~+
U1 N ~
~.
O N IV O O N N •-~'
N N 00 ~ o ~ -.1
Ut N N ~? O d C7 ~
N
v~
tD
fD
n'
3 (~
O ~P ~ N -P N W ~,
co iv .p;t~oo
O O O'er O 8 O O
~
A ~ i
N G
O ~
N ~ W
~ i
V
-'
rn~oc.~wwoo '
i~ o~ ~ ~ v, in ~
W ,J ~ O ~ N c0
-~ .P Cfl U7 N N d7
C3'1 Ul C31 C3'1 ~ ~A ~
wv,~o-.icnw r S
N N W W N O O
CJ1 O W~~ O W < v
~ -P ~ N O O
~A
_
N
~ W ~
~
0
i U7
0 U
0
O ~
W N 3 ~
NW ~ ~ ~'
^
'f~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~cnoco
moooc
o
~
r Q
,.
s
C 3
~
O U1 CTi
O N CO
G.) d7 C7 00 ~ Gn N ~
~ ~
m D <
ao~wwo-~o o ~
~ ~
~
CS1 O~ V~ N W N n
.P O Cfl "~I 00 Cn :J n (D
~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D ~
~ ~'
~
,-« ~
C
~«
r
cD
r
D
O
~_
O
x
n
Q
Q
CD
m
G
u ,
m
~ ~
CD _
v ~
~ O
C ~
~ O
Q.
C
r~
~" Of
~ v
y
~.
e-f
m~
O
D