Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2018/06/18 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular
AGENDA JUNE 18, 2018 (Mayor Spano out) 6:00 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Community room Discussion items 1. 6:00 p.m. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for year ended December 31, 2017 –auditors discussion and review 2. 6:30 p.m. 2019 budget Written reports 3. France Avenue sidewalk project update – project 4018-2000 7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council chambers 1.Call to order 1a. Pledge of allegiance 1b. Roll call 2. Presentations 2a. Comprehensive annual financial report for the year ended December 31, 2017 2b. Jacqueline Larson – MAGC Communicator of the Year Award 2c. Recognition of donations 3.Approval of minutes 3a. Study session minutes of April 30, 2018 3b. City council meeting minutes of May 7, 2018 3c. Study session minutes of May 14, 2018 3d. Special study session minutes of May 21, 2018 3e. City council meeting minutes of May 21, 2018 4.Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar NOTE: The consent calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. The items for the consent calendar are listed on the last page of the agenda. Recommended action: Motion to approve the agenda as presented and items listed on the consent calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, or move items from consent calendar to regular agenda for discussion.) 5.Boards and commissions 5a. Approve appointment of youth representative to planning commission Recommended action: Motion to appoint Alanna Franklin to the planning commission for the current term ending August 31, 2018. Meeting of June 18, 2018 City council agenda 6. Public hearings -- None 7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – None 8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items 8a. Comprehensive plan – approve releasing draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan for adjacent community review Recommended action: Motion to approve sending out the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the required 6-month adjacent community review. 9. Communications – None Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the administration department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. Meeting of June 18, 2018 City council agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 4a. Designate Kraemer North America, LLC the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $2,100,071.16 for modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 - Project No. 4019-9007. 4b. Authorize execution of a professional services contract with Bolton & Menk, in the amount of $248,126 for the preliminary design of the Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project. 4c. Adopt Resolution authorizing participation in the reporting requirements for the local performance measurement program. 4d. Approve plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for the partial roof rehabilitation and exterior building rehabilitation at the rec center. 4e. Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line at 6216 West 35th Street, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 16-117-21-32-0006. 4f. Adopt Resolution authorizing installation of all-way stop controls on W. 28th Street at Utica Avenue. 4g. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of fishing poles and supplies from Cabela’s to be used by the police department for the Fishin’ with a Cop program. 4h. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 18, 2018. 4i. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 2, 2018. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular city council meetings are carried live on civic TV cable channel 17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at www.parktv.org, and saved for video on demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of city hall and on the text display on civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday on the city’s website. Meeting: Special study session Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Discussion item: 1 Executive summary Title: Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Recommended action: No action required. The information in this report will assist with the study session discussion. Policy consideration: Will the information contained in the Communication with Those Charged with Governance, Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and Independent Auditor’s Reports, and Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the year ended December 31, 2017 allow for effective decision making? Summary: The city is required to have an annual independent audit of its financial statements in which the audit firm issues an opinion on the financial statements. The city received a “clean” audit opinion, or unmodified opinion, which means that Redpath and Company believe the financial statements, as presented by city staff, present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the city as of December 31, 2017. David J. Mol – Partner from Redpath and Company, will present the information and key financial points with the city council. For 2017, the city was required to complete a single audit as a result of the amount of federal expenditures. Once the city council reviews the CAFR for 2017, it will be submitted to the Office of the State Auditor as required and also submitted to the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) to be considered for the Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting certificate program for which the City of St. Louis Park has been recognized for 34 consecutive years. Financial or budget considerations: This report shows the City of St. Louis Park continues to remain in strong financial condition. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: 1) 2017-Communication with Those Charged with Governance 2) 2017-Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and Independent Auditor’s Reports 3)2017-Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Prepared by: Mark Ebensteiner, Finance Manager Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager 4810 White Bear Parkway, St. Paul, MN, 55110 651.426.7000 www.redpathcpas.com COMMUNICATION WITH THOSE CHARGED WITH GOVERNANCE To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota for the year ended December 31, 2017. Professional standards require that we provide you with information about our responsibilities under generally accepted auditing standards and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, as well as certain information related to the planning scope and timing of our audit. We have communicated such information in our letter to you dated December 18, 2017. Professional standards also require that we communicate to you the following information related to our audit. Significant Audit Results Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by the City are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. No new accounting policies were adopted and the application of existing policies was not changed during 2017. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period. Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the City’s financial statements were management’s estimates of the net OPEB obligation, net pension liability, pension related deferred inflows and outflows of resources, pension expense and value of land held for resale. Management’s estimates relating to the net OPEB obligation, net pension liability, pension related deferred outflows and inflows of resources and pension expense are based on actuarial studies. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 2 City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota Communication With Those Charged With Governance Page 2 Certain financial statement disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. Determining sensitivity is subjective, however, we believe the disclosure most likely to be considered sensitive is Note 7 – Defined Benefit Pension Plans. The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear. Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit. Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. There were no uncorrected misstatements that have an effect on our opinion on the financial statements. There were no misstatements identified and corrected during the audit. Disagreements with Management For purposes of this letter, a disagreement with management is a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit. Management Representations We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated June 8, 2018. Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the City’s financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor’s opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants. Other Audit Findings or Issues We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City’s auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention. Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 3 City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota Communication With Those Charged With Governance Page 3 Other Matters We applied certain limited procedures to the management discussion and analysis, budgetary comparison information, OPEB Schedule of Funding Progress, the Schedules of Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability, the Schedules of Pension Contributions, and the Notes to Required Supplementary Information, which are required supplementary information (RSI) that supplements the basic financial statements. Our procedures consisted of inquiries of management regarding the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We did not audit the RSI and do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the RSI. We were engaged to report on the combining fund financial statements and schedules, which accompany the financial statements but are not RSI. With respect to this supplementary information, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated the form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the supplementary information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves. We are not engaged to report on the introductory and statistical sections, which accompany the financial statements but are not RSI. We did not audit or perform other procedures on this other information and we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on it. Restriction on Use This information is intended solely for the information and use of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s City Council and management, and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties. REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD. St. Paul, Minnesota June 8, 2018 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 4 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS AND INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORTS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 5 - This page intentionally left blank - Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 6 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards 1 Independent Auditor’s Report on Compliance for Each Major Program and on Internal Control over Compliance and Report on Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Required by the Uniform Guidance 3 Minnesota Legal Compliance Report 7 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 8 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs 9 Summary Schedule of Prior Year Audit Findings 11 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 7 - This page intentionally left blank - Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 8 4810 White Bear Parkway, St. Paul, MN, 55110 651.426.7000 www.redpathcpas.com INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota We have audited, in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated June 8, 2018. Internal Control over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control over financial reporting (internal control) to determine the audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, material weaknesses may exist that have not been identified. 1 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 9 Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Page 2 Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s financial statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. Purpose of This Report The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control and compliance. Accordingly, this communication is not suitable for any other purpose. REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD. St. Paul, Minnesota June 8, 2018 2 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 10 4810 White Bear Parkway, St. Paul, MN, 55110 651.426.7000 www.redpathcpas.com INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE FOR EACH MAJOR PROGRAM AND ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE AND REPORT ON SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS REQUIRED BY THE UNIFORM GUIDANCE To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota Report on Compliance for Each Major Federal Program We have audited City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s compliance with the types of compliance requirements described in the OMB Compliance Supplement that could have a direct and material effect on each of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s major federal programs for the year ended December 31, 2017. City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s major federal programs are identified in the summary of auditor’s results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. Management’s Responsibility Management is responsible for compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of its federal awards applicable to its federal programs. Auditor’s Responsibility Our responsibility is to express an opinion on compliance for each of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s major federal programs based on our audit of the types of compliance requirements referred to above. We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and the audit requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Those standards and the Uniform Guidance require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. 3 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 11 Report on Compliance for each Major Program and on Internal Control over Compliance and Report on Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Required by the Uniform Guidance Page 2 We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion on compliance for each major federal program. However, our audit does not provide a legal determination of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s compliance. Opinion on Each Major Federal Program In our opinion, City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota complied, in all material respects, with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on each of its major federal programs for the year ended December 31, 2017. Report on Internal Control over Compliance Management of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above. In planning and performing our audit of compliance, we considered City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control over compliance with the types of requirements that could have a direct and material effect on each major federal program to determine the auditing procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing an opinion on compliance for each major federal program and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with the Uniform Guidance, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over compliance. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control over compliance. A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program that is less severe than a material weakness in internal control over compliance, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over compliance that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance that 4 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 12 Report on Compliance for each Major Program and on Internal Control over Compliance and Report on Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Required by the Uniform Guidance Page 3 we consider to be material weaknesses. However, material weaknesses may exist that have not been identified. Report on Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Required by the Uniform Guidance We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s basic financial statements. We have issued our report thereon dated June 8, 2018, which contained unmodified opinions on those financial statements. Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the basic financial statements. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by the Uniform Guidance and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. The information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the schedule of expenditures of federal awards is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole. Purpose of This Report The purpose of this report on internal control over compliance is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over compliance and the results of that testing based on the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Accordingly, this report is not suitable for any other purpose. REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD. St. Paul, Minnesota June 8, 2018 5 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 13 - This page intentionally left blank - 6 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 14 4810 White Bear Parkway, St. Paul, MN, 55110 651.426.7000 www.redpathcpas.com MINNESOTA LEGAL COMPLIANCE REPORT To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated June 8, 2018. The Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Cities, promulgated by the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 6.65, contains seven categories of compliance to be tested: contracting and bidding, deposits and investments, conflicts of interest, public indebtedness, claims and disbursements, miscellaneous provisions, and tax increment financings. Our audit considered all of the listed categories. In connection with our audit, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota failed to comply with the provisions of the Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Cities. However, our audit was not directed primarily toward obtaining knowledge of such noncompliance. Accordingly, had we performed additional procedures, other matters may have come to our attention regarding the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s noncompliance with the above referenced provisions. This report is intended solely for the information and use of those charged with governance and management of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota and the State Auditor and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD. St. Paul, Minnesota June 8, 2018 7 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 15 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Federal Grantor/Federal Pass-Through Total Pass-Through Grantor/CFDA Entity ID Federal Program Title Number Number Expenditures Subrecipients U.S. Department of Transportation: Passed through the Minnesota Department of Transportation: Highway Planning and Construction - Highway Planning and Construction Cluster 20.205 2717089 1,438,400$ -$ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Passed through Hennepin County, Minnesota: Community Development Block Grant - CDBG Entitlement Grants Cluster 14.218 A177273 56,961 56,961 U.S. Department of Justice: Public Safety Partnership and Community Policing Grants 16.710 n/a - Direct 48,680 - U.S. Department of Homeland Security: Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER)97.083 n/a - Direct 171,314 - Total Expenditures of Federal Awards 1,715,355$ 56,961$ Notes to the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Note 1. Basis of Presentation The Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (the Schedule) presents the activity of federal award programs expended by the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota under programs of the federal government for the year ended December 31, 2017. The information in this Schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Because the Schedule presents only a selected portion of the operations of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, it is not intended to and does not present the financial positions, or change in financial position of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Note 2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the modified accrual basics of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Note 3. Indirect Cost Rate The City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has elected not to use the 10% de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. 8 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 16 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 SECTION I - SUMMARY OF AUDIT RESULTS Financial Statements A.Type of auditors’ report issued:Unmodified B.Internal control over financial reporting: Material weakness(es) identified?Yes X No Significant deficiency(ies) identified?Yes X No C.Noncompliance material to financial statements noted? Yes X No Federal Awards D.Internal control over major programs: Material weakness(es) identified?Yes X No Significant deficiency(ies) identified?Yes X No E.Type of auditors’ report issued on compliance for major programs: Unmodified F.Any audit findings disclosed that are required to be reported in accordance with 2 CFR section 200.516(a)? Yes X No G.Identification of major programs: Name of Federal Program CFDA Number Highway Planning and Construction – Highway Planning and Construction Cluster 20.205 H.Dollar threshold used to distinguish between Type A and Type B programs: $750,000 I.Auditee qualified as a low-risk auditee Yes X No 9 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 17 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 SECTION II – FINANCIAL STATEMENT FINDINGS There were no financial statement findings for 2017. SECTION III – FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS There were no federal award findings for 2017. 10 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 18 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA SUMMARY SCHEDULE OF PRIOR YEAR AUDIT FINDINGS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 FOLLOW-UP ON PRIOR YEAR FINDINGS FINANCIAL STATEMENT FINDINGS None. FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS Not applicable – a federal single audit was not required in the prior year. 11 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 19 - This page intentionally left blank - 12 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 20 Proposals are due 4:00 p.m. April 24, 2017 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For the year ended December 31, 2017 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 21 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2017 Thomas Harmening – City Manager Prepared by: Finance Division Member of the Government Finance Officers’ Association Of the United States and Canada Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 22 - This page intentionally left blank - Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 23 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Reference No. I. INTRODUCTORY SECTION Letter of Transmittal 3 Certificate of Achievement 9 Services Chart 11 Officials of the City of St. Louis Park 13 II. FINANCIAL SECTION Independent Auditor's Report 17 Management's Discussion and Analysis 21 Basic Financial Statements: Government-Wide Financial Statements: Statement of Net Position Statement 1 39 Statement of Activities Statement 2 40 Fund Financial Statements: Balance Sheet - Governmental Funds Statement 3 42 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Governmental Funds Statement 4 44 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities Statement 5 47 Statement of Net Position - Proprietary Funds Statement 6 48 Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Position - Proprietary Funds Statement 7 50 Statement of Cash Flows - Proprietary Funds Statement 8 52 Notes to Financial Statements 57 Required Supplementary Information: Budgetary Comparison Schedule - General Fund Statement 9 98 Schedule of Funding Progress - Post Employment Benefit Plan Statement 10 102 Schedule of Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability - General Employees Retirement Fund Statement 11 103 Schedule of Pension Contributions - General Employees Retirement Fund Statement 12 104 Schedule of Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability - Public Employees Police and Fire Fund Statement 13 105 Schedule of Pension Contributions - Public Employees Police and Fire Fund Statement 14 106 Notes to RSI 107 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 24 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Reference No. Combining Fund Statements and Schedules: Combining Balance Sheet - Nonmajor Governmental Funds Statement 15 116 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Nonmajor Governmental Funds Statement 16 117 Special Revenue Funds: Combining Balance Sheet - Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds Statement 17 120 Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds Statement 18 121 Capital Projects Funds: Combining Balance Sheet - Nonmajor Capital Projects Funds Statement 19 124 Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Nonmajor Capital Projects Funds Statement 20 125 Debt Service Funds: Combining Balance Sheet - Major Debt Service Funds Statement 21 128 Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Major Debt Service Funds Statement 22 131 Redevelopment District Funds: Combining Balance Sheet - Major Redevelopment District Funds Statement 23 136 Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Major Redevelopment District Funds Statement 24 140 Internal Service Funds: Combining Statement of Net Position Statement 25 146 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Position Statement 26 147 Combining Statement of Cash Flows Statement 27 148 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 25 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Reference No. III. STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) Financial Trends: Net Position by Component Table 1 152 Changes in Net Position Table 2 154 Governmental Activities Tax Revenues by Source Table 3 159 Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Table 4 160 Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Table 5 162 Revenue Capacity: Assessed Value/Tax Capacity Value and Estimated Market Value of all Taxable Property Table 6 164 Property Tax Rates - Direct and Overlapping Governments Table 7 166 Principal Property Taxpayers Table 8 168 Property Tax Levies and Collections Table 9 169 Debt Capacity: Ratios of Outstanding Debt By Type Table 10 170 Ratios of General Bonded Debt Outstanding Table 11 171 Direct and Overlapping Governmental Activities Debt Table 12 173 Legal Debt Margin Information Table 13 174 Pledged Revenue Bond Coverage Table 14 176 Demographic and Economic Information: Demographic Statistics Table 15 177 Principal Employers Table 16 179 Operating Information: Full-Time Equivalent Employees by Function Table 17 180 Operating Indicators by Function Table 18 182 Capital Asset Statistics by Function Table 19 183 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 26 - This page intentionally left blank - Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 27 I. INTRODUCTORY SECTION 1 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 28 - This page intentionally left blank - 2 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 29 St. Louis Park City Hall • 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416 www.stlouispark.org • Phone: 952.924.2500 • TTY: 952.924.2518 June 8, 2018 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota Minnesota statutes require all cities to issue an annual report on its financial position and activity prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), and audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards by a firm of licensed certified public accountants, or the Office of the State Auditor. Pursuant to that requirement, we hereby issue the comprehensive annual financial report of the City of St. Louis Park for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017. This report consists of management’s representations concerning the finances of the City of St. Louis Park. Consequently, management assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of all of the information presented in this report. To provide a reasonable basis for making these representations, management of the City of St. Louis Park established a comprehensive internal control framework that is designed both to protect the government’s assets from loss, theft, or misuse and to compile sufficient reliable information for the preparation of the City of St. Louis Park’s financial statements in conformity with GAAP. Because the cost of internal controls should not outweigh their benefits, the City of St. Louis Park’s comprehensive framework of internal controls has been designed to provide reasonable rather than absolute assurance that the financial statements will be free from material misstatement. As management, we assert that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, this financial report is complete and reliable in all material respects. The City of St. Louis Park’s financial statements have been audited by Redpath and Company Ltd., a firm of licensed certified public accountants. The goal of the independent audit was to provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements of the City of St. Louis Park for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, are free of any material misstatement. The independent audit involved examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management; and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. The independent auditor concluded, based upon the audit, that there was a reasonable basis for rendering an unmodified opinion that the City of St. Louis Park’s financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, are fairly presented in conformity with GAAP. The independent auditor’s report is presented as the first component of the financial section of this report. 3 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 30 St. Louis Park City Hall • 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416 www.stlouispark.org • Phone: 952.924.2500 • TTY: 952.924.2518 Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) immediately follows the independent auditor’s report and provides a narrative introduction, overview, and analysis of the basic financial statements. This letter of transmittal is designed to complement the MD&A and should be read in conjunction with it. Profile of the Government The City of St. Louis Park, established in 1886, is a first ring community located immediately west of Minneapolis. Thanks to its convenient location, St. Louis Park combines all the cultural amenities of a large metropolitan area with small town friendliness. The City of St. Louis Park currently occupies a land area of 10.8 square miles and serves a population of 48,747. The City of St. Louis Park is empowered to levy a property tax on both real and personal properties located within its boundaries. While it also is empowered by state statutes to extend its corporate limits by annexation, St. Louis Park is a completely developed community and is bordered on all sides by other incorporated communities. St. Louis Park operates under the council/manager form of government. Policy-making and legislative authority are vested in a City Council consisting of a mayor, two at-large council members, and four ward council members. The City Council is responsible, among other things, for passing ordinances, adopting the budget, appointing committees, and hiring the City Manager. The City Manager is responsible for carrying out the policies and ordinances of the council, for overseeing the day-to-day operations of the City government, and for appointing the heads of the various departments. The council is elected on a non-partisan basis. Council members serve four- year staggered terms. The City of St. Louis Park provides a full range of services, including police and fire protection; redevelopment, the construction and maintenance of highways, streets, and other infrastructure; water, sewer, storm water, and refuse services, as well as recreational activities and cultural events. The annual budget serves as the foundation for the City of St. Louis Park’s financial planning and control. All departments and agencies of the City of St. Louis Park submit requests for appropriation to the City Manager in June of each year. The City Manager uses these requests as the starting point for developing a proposed budget. The City Manager then presents this proposed budget to the council for review prior to adoption of a preliminary tax levy by September 30. The council is required to hold a public hearing on the proposed budget and to adopt a final budget no later than December 28. The appropriated budget is prepared by fund, (e.g. General), function (e.g., public safety), and department (e.g., police). Department directors may make transfers of appropriation within a department, but not between personnel and non-personnel categories. Transfers of appropriations between funds, however, require the approval of the City Council. Budget to actual comparisons are provided in this report for the general fund for which an appropriated annual budget has been adopted. These comparisons are presented starting on page 98. 4 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 31 St. Louis Park City Hall • 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416 www.stlouispark.org • Phone: 952.924.2500 • TTY: 952.924.2518 Factors Affecting Financial Condition The information presented in the financial statements is perhaps best understood when it is considered from the broader perspective of the specific environment within which the City of St. Louis Park operates. Local economy The City of St. Louis Park currently enjoys a durable economic environment and local indicators point to continued stability versus other communities in the Twin City Metro Area. The City of St. Louis Park has a well-diversified tax base, with a sizeable full valuation that includes retail, manufacturing, and health care components, as well as diverse housing stock. Redevelopment and Development efforts remain very strong in St Louis Park. Redevelopment/Development The City of St. Louis Park is committed to evaluating, preserving, and improving the housing stock available within the community. It is important that a wide variety of housing alternatives be available within the community. Redevelopment projects over the past ten years have provided a mix of apartment, co-op, condominium, town-home, and single family units. Many of these housing developments contain a commercial component including both retail and services to support the new housing and create more livable neighborhoods. The City has used its tax increment financing authority in many of these projects in order to meet specific community and economic development objectives. Some of the larger projects include: Central Park West Apartments (Phase I): Construction was completed on a six-story, multi- family building near The West End. The 199-unit luxury apartment building is adjacent to a large public gathering space for both active and passive recreation. A second six-story apartment building with 164 units (Phase II) is planned for construction in the coming year. The Shoreham: Bader Development has completed the redevelopment of a 2.23-acre block at the southwest corner of County Highway 25 and France Avenue. The Shoreham is a mixed-use five-story building with 148 apartments. The building hosts Bader Development’s headquarters and a new medical clinic, creating more than 50 new jobs. AC Hotel by Marriott at Central Park West: TPI Hospitality has constructed a six-story, 126 room AC Hotel by Marriott which will opened in the spring of 2018. 10 West End: The city has approved this 11-story, 335,710 square feet office building, to be located on the south side of the Central Park West civic space. 5 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 32 St. Louis Park City Hall • 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416 www.stlouispark.org • Phone: 952.924.2500 • TTY: 952.924.2518 The Elmwood: 36th Street LLC is scheduled to begin construction of a five-story, 70 unit mixed- use development. The apartments will be restricted to ages 55-plus and include 17 affordable units. The development also includes 4,400 square feet of commercial space; on-street, surface and underground parking; and outdoor amenity spaces. Redevelopment interest continues to remain strong in St. Louis Park and other proposals and inquiries are being considered for multi-family and mixed use projects. The City also sponsors a comprehensive rehabilitation loan program available to single family and multi-family homeowners. The first programs were started in the mid 1970’s and have evolved into a comprehensive set of programs to ensure the preservation and enhancement of the City’s housing stock. Finally, the City has a Convention and Visitors Bureau, which markets the desirability of St. Louis Park for both business and recreational opportunities. This continues to be a very strong partner with the City of St. Louis Park which has brought increased business and activities to the City. Long-term Financial Planning The City maintains a 10 year Long Range Financial Management Plan that incorporates anticipated revenues, expenditures, capital outlay, and tax impacts for all relevant funds. The plan anticipates opportunities or challenges, allows for changes to then be made, with the goal of achieving long- term sustainability. The plan is used in conjunction with the annual budget process and Capital Improvement Plan, which then allows the City Council to evaluate various budget decisions prior to adoption. This plan has proven its value by playing a significant role in maintaining the City’s AAA bond rating from Standard & Poor’s, which assists in keeping the costs of borrowing for the City of St. Louis Park at a low rate. Awards The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City of St. Louis Park for its comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016. This was the thirty-fourth consecutive year that the government received this prestigious award. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, a government must publish an easily readable and efficiently organized comprehensive annual financial report. The report must satisfy both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements. A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only. We believe that our current comprehensive annual financial report continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement Program’s requirements and we are submitting it to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate. 6 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 33 St. Louis Park City Hall • 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416 www.stlouispark.org • Phone: 952.924.2500 • TTY: 952.924.2518 Acknowledgements The preparation of this report would not have been possible without the efficient and dedicated services of the entire staff of the Finance Division and other key City of St. Louis Park personnel. We would like to express our appreciation to all members of the organization who assisted and contributed to the preparation of the report. Credit also must be given to the Mayor and the City Council for their unfailing support for maintaining the highest standards of professionalism in the management of the City of St. Louis Park’s finances. Respectfully submitted, Thomas Harmening Timothy Simon City Manager Chief Financial Officer 7 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 34 - This page intentionally left blank - 8 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 35 9Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and reviewPage 36 - This page intentionally left blank - 10 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 37 SERVICES CHART Citizens City Council City Manager Boards & Commissions Board of Zoning Appeals Human Rights Planning Police Advisory Fire Civil Service Parks & Recreation Telecommunications Advisory Environment & Sustainability ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Records General Admin Human Resources Payroll Org Development Elections City Clerk Finance Assessing COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning/Zoning Economic Development Housing INFORMATION RESOURCES Cable Television Technology Services Support Services WEB Communications & Marketing INSPECTIONS Code Enforcement Building Housing Environmental Health Facility Maintenance Licensing OPERATIONS & RECREATION Rec Ctr & Programs Nature Center Environmental Parks Fleet Utility Operations Streets/Traffic Refuse/Recycling Public Art POLICE Patrol Support Services Crime Prevention 911 Dispatch Animal Control Community Outreach & Neighborhoods ENGINEERING Engineering Projects Water Resources FIRE Fire Prevention Fire Suppression EMS/Rescue Emergency Preparedness Auditors Legal Charter Commission Economic Development Authority Housing Authority 11 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 38 - This page intentionally left blank - 12 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 39 OFFICIALS OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Council Jake Spano Mayor EDA Commissioner Term Expires 1/2020 Steve Hallfin At-Large A Councilmember EDA Vice President Term Expires 1/2020 Thom Miller At-Large B Councilmember EDA Commissioner Term Expires 1/2020 Susan Sanger Ward 1 Councilmember EDA Commissioner Term Expires 1/2018 Anne Mavity Ward 2 Councilmember EDA President Term Expires 1/2018 Gregg Lindberg Ward 3 Councilmember EDA Treasurer Term Expires 1/2018 Tim Brausen Ward 4 Councilmember EDA Commissioner Term Expires 1/2018 Executive Staff Thomas Harmening, City Manager Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director Mike Harcey, Police Chief Steve Koering, Fire Chief Karen Barton, Community Development Director Brian Hoffman, Inspections Director Timothy Simon, Chief Financial Officer Debra Heiser, Engineering Director Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer Cindy Walsh, Operations & Recreation Director 13 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 40 - This page intentionally left blank - 14 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 41 II. FINANCIAL SECTION 15 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 42 - This page intentionally left blank - 16 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 43 4810 White Bear Parkway, St. Paul, MN, 55110 651.426.7000 www.redpathcpas.com INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota Report on the Financial Statements We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business- type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. Auditor’s Responsibility Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. 17 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 44 We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions. Opinions In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as of December 31, 2017, and the respective changes in financial position, and, where applicable, cash flows thereof for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Report on Summarized Comparative Information We have previously audited the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s 2016 financial statements, and we expressed an unmodified audit opinion on the respective financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information in our report dated June 7, 2017. In our opinion, the summarized comparative information presented herein as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016 is consistent, in all material respects, with the audited financial statements from which it has been derived. Other Matters Required Supplementary Information Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management’s discussion and analysis, the budgetary comparison, the OPEB Schedule of Funding Progress, the Schedules of Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability, the Schedules of Pension Contributions, and the Notes to the Required Supplementary Information, as listed in the table of contents, be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Other Information Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s basic financial statements. The introductory section, combining fund financial statements and schedules, and statistical section, are 18 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 45 presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. The combining fund financial statements are the responsibility of management and were derived from and relate directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the combining fund financial statements and schedules, are fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole. The introductory and statistical sections have not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on them. Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated June 8, 2018, on our consideration of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance. REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD. St. Paul, Minnesota June 8, 2018 19 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 46 - This page intentionally left blank - 20 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 47 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis As management of the City of St. Louis Park, we offer readers of the City’s financial statements this narrative overview and analysis of the financial activities of the City for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017. We encourage readers to consider the information presented here in conjunction with additional information that we have furnished in our letter of transmittal, which starts on page 3 of this report. Financial Highlights The assets and deferred outflows of resources of the City exceeded its liabilities and deferred inflows of resources at the close of the most recent fiscal year by $172,304,561 (net position). Of this amount, $31,867,745 (unrestricted net position) may be used to meet the government’s ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors. The City’s total net position increased by $4,555,155 as a result of revenues in excess of expenses. $1,816,105 was a result of an increase of net position within business-type activities, and $2,739,050 from an increase of net position within governmental activities. As of the close of the current fiscal year, the City’s governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $61,199,384 a decrease of $3,103,887 in comparison with the prior year. A large portion of the decrease was related to the contract for deed payoff in the Development EDA fund ($2,025,297). Approximately 20 percent of this total amount, $12,416,915 is either nonspendable or restricted for specific purposes. The remaining fund balance was committed by City Council, assigned or unassigned. At the end of the current fiscal year, unassigned fund balance for the General fund was $17,054,520 (45 percent) of the total subsequent year budgeted General fund expenditures. The City’s total bonded debt increased $5,360,000 during 2017. New debt issued and principal paid during the year was $9,900,000 and $4,540,000 respectively. Overview of the Financial Statements This discussion and analysis is intended to serve as an introduction to the City’s basic financial statements. The City’s basic financial statements comprise three components: 1) government-wide financial statements, 2) fund financial statements, and 3) notes to the financial statements. This report also contains other supplemental information in addition to the basic financial statements themselves. The following chart on page 22 shows how the various parts of this annual report are arranged and related to one another. The financial statements also include notes that explain some of the information in the financial statements and provide more detailed data. The statements are followed by a section of combining fund financial statements and schedules that further explains and supports the information in the financial statements. Figure 1 shows how the required parts of this annual report are arranged and relate to one another. In addition to these required elements, we have included a section with combining fund financial statements and schedules that provide details about nonmajor governmental funds, which are added together and presented in single columns in the basic financial statements. Internal service funds statements are also included, reflecting balances prior to their elimination from the government-wide financial statements, to 21 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 48 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis avoid “doubling-up” effect within the governmental and business-type activities columns of said statements. 22 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 49 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis Figure 2 summarizes the major features of the City’s financial statements, including the portion of the City government they cover and the types of information they contain. The remainder of this overview section of management’s discussion and analysis explains the structure and contents of each of the statements. Government-wide Statements Governmental Funds Proprietary Funds Scope Entire City government and the City’s component units The activities of the City that are not proprietary, such as police, fire and parks Activities the City operates similar to private businesses, such as the water and sewer system Required financial statements • Statement of Net Position • Statement of Activities • Balance Sheet • Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances • Statement of Net Position • Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position • Statement of Cash Flows Accounting basis and measurement focus Accrual accounting and economic resources focus Modified accrual accounting and current financial resources focus Accrual accounting and economic resources focus Type of asset/liability information All assets and liabilities, both financial and capital, and short-term and long-term Only assets expected to be used up and liabilities that come due during the year or soon thereafter; no capital assets included All assets and liabilities, both financial and capital, and short-term and long-term Type of deferred outflows/inflows of resources information All deferred outflows/inflows of resources, regardless of when cash is received or paid Only deferred outflows of resources expected to be used up and deferred inflows of resources that come due during the year or soon thereafter; no capital assets included All deferred outflows/inflows of resources, regardless of when cash is received or paid Type of inflow/outflow information All revenues and expenses during the year, regardless of when cash is received or paid Revenues for which cash is received during or soon after the end of the year; expenditures when goods or services have been received and payment is due during the year or soon thereafter All revenues and expenses during the year, regardless of when cash is received or paid Fund Financial Statements Figure 2 Major features of the Government-wide and Fund Financial Statements 23 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 50 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis Government-wide financial statements – The government-wide financial statements are designed to provide readers with a broad overview of the City’s finances in a manner similar to a private-sector business. The statement of net position presents information on all of the City’s assets and deferred outflows of resources and liabilities and deferred inflows of resources, with the difference between the two reported as net position. Over time, increases or decreases in net position may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the City is improving or deteriorating. The statement of activities presents information showing how the government’s net position changed during the most recent fiscal year. All changes in net position are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in the statement for some items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., uncollected taxes and earned but unused vacation leave). Both of the government-wide financial statements distinguish functions of the City that are principally supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenue (governmental activities) from other functions that are intended to recover all or a significant portion of their costs through user fees and charges (business-type activities). The governmental activities of the City include general government, public safety, public information, operations and recreation, engineering, housing and rehabilitation, housing maintenance, social and economic development, and interest on long-term debt. The business-type activities of the City include water, sewer, solid waste, and storm water operations. The government-wide financial statements include not only the City itself (known as the primary government), but also a legally separate Economic Development Authority (EDA) for which the City is financially accountable. Financial information for this component unit is not reported separately from the financial information presented for the primary government itself. The government-wide financial statements start on page 39 of this report. Fund financial statements – A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City, like other state and local governments, uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements. All of the funds of the City can be divided into two categories: governmental funds and proprietary funds. Governmental funds – Governmental funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported as governmental activities in the government-wide financial statements. However, unlike the government-wide financial statements, governmental fund financial statements focus on near- term inflows and outflows of spendable resources, as well as on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal year. Such information may be useful in evaluating a government’s near-term financing requirements. Because the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government-wide financial statements, it is useful to compare the information presented for governmental funds with similar 24 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 51 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis information presented for governmental activities in the government-wide financial statements. By doing so, readers may better understand the long-term impact of the government’s near-term financing decisions. Both the governmental fund balance sheet and the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balances provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental funds and governmental activities. The City maintains nine individual major governmental funds. Information is presented separately in the governmental fund balance sheet and the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balances for the General Fund, Housing Rehabilitation, Debt Service, Permanent Improvement Revolving, Streets Capital Projects, Development EDA, Sidewalks and Trails, Park Improvement, and Redevelopment District, all of which are considered to be major funds. Data from the other five governmental funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation. Individual fund data for each of these non-major governmental funds is provided in the form of combining statements elsewhere in this report. The City adopts annual appropriated budgets for the General Fund. Budgetary comparison statements are provided for the General Fund to demonstrate compliance with this budget. The basic governmental fund financial statements start on page 42 of this report. Proprietary funds – The City maintains two different types of proprietary funds. Enterprise funds are used to report the same functions presented as business-type activities in the government-wide financial statements. The City uses enterprise funds to account for its water, sewer, solid waste, and storm water operations. Proprietary funds provide the same type of information as the government-wide financial statements, only in more detail. The proprietary fund financial statements provide separate information for the water, sewer, solid waste and storm water operations, all of which are considered to be major funds of the City. Internal service funds are an accounting device used to accumulate and allocate costs internally among the City’s various functions. The City uses internal service funds to account for maintaining its fleet of vehicles, management information systems, replacement of City equipment, employee administration, compensated absences, pension benefit and uninsured losses. Because all of these services predominately benefit governmental rather than business- type functions, they have been included within governmental activities in the governmental-wide financial statements. All internal service funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation in the proprietary fund financial statements. Individual fund data for the internal service funds is provided in the form of combining statements elsewhere in this report. The basic proprietary fund financial statements starts on page 48 of this report. Notes to the financial statements – The notes provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the government-wide and fund financial statements. The notes to the financial statements start on page 57 of this report. Other Supplementary Information - In addition to the basic financial statements and accompanying notes, Required Supplementary Information, presents a detailed budgetary 25 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 52 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis comparison schedule for the General Fund to demonstrate compliance with the budget. In accordance with the requirements of GASB Statement No. 45, it also includes other post- employment benefit plan schedule of funding progress. In accordance with the requirements of GASB Statement No. 68, also included is defined benefit pension plan information: a) schedules of the City’s contributions and b) schedules of the City’s proportionate share of net pension liability. These schedules can be found in the Required Supplementary Information section of this report. The combining statements and schedules referred to earlier in connection with nonmajor governmental funds and internal service funds are presented immediately following the required supplementary information starting on page 116 of this report. Government-wide Financial Analysis As noted earlier, net position may serve over time as a useful indicator of a government’s financial position. In the case of the City, assets and deferred outflows of resources exceeded liabilities and deferred inflows of resources by $172,304,561 at the close of the most recent fiscal year. A portion of the City’s net position (75 percent) reflects its investment in capital assets (e.g., land, buildings, machinery, and equipment); less any related debt used to acquire those assets that is still outstanding. The City uses these capital assets to provide services to citizens; consequently, these assets are not available for future spending. Although the City’s investment in its capital assets is reported net of related debt, it should be noted that the resources needed to repay this debt must be provided from other sources, since the capital assets themselves cannot be used to liquidate these liabilities. 26 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 53 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis City of St. Louis Park’s Net Position Increase Increase 2017 2016 (Decrease)2017 2016 (Decrease) Assets Current and other assets 85,023,101$ 87,490,376$ (2,467,275)$ 8,681,376$ 7,629,388$ 1,051,988$ Capital assets 135,655,580 127,342,721 8,312,859 38,632,979 33,636,822 4,996,157 Total assets 220,678,681 214,833,097 5,845,584 47,314,355 41,266,210 6,048,145 Total deferred outflows of resources 17,018,923 28,302,033 (11,283,110) - - - Liabilities Other liabilities 8,772,608 7,801,517 971,091 1,818,815 1,401,159 417,656 Noncurrent liabilities 68,598,169 91,246,133 (22,647,964) 14,799,501 10,985,117 3,814,384 Total liabilities 77,370,777 99,047,650 (21,676,873) 16,618,316 12,386,276 4,232,040 Total deferred inflows of resources 18,718,305 5,218,008 13,500,297 - - - Net position Net investment in capital assets 103,279,857 96,458,787 6,821,070 25,716,982 23,030,284 2,686,698 Restricted 11,439,977 10,658,889 781,088 - - - Unrestricted 26,888,688 31,751,796 (4,863,108) 4,979,057 5,849,650 (870,593) Total net position 141,608,522$ 138,869,472$ 2,739,050$ 30,696,039$ 28,879,934$ 1,816,105$ Governmental Activities Business-type Activities An additional portion of the City’s net position ($11,439,977) represents resources that are subject to external restrictions on how they may be used. The remaining balance of unrestricted net position ($31,867,745) may be used to meet the City’s ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors. At the end of the current fiscal year, the City is able to report positive balances in all three categories of net position, both for the City as a whole, as well as for its separate governmental and business-type activities. 27 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 54 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis Analysis of the City’s Operations – The following table provides a summary of the City’s operations for the year ended December 31, 2017. Overall, both the governmental and business- type activities revenue and expenses remained stable. Governmental activities increased the City’s net position by $2,739,050. Business-type activities increased the City’s net position by $1,816,105. City of St. Louis Park’s Changes in Net Position Increase Increase 2017 2016 (Decrease) 2017 2016 (Decrease) Revenues Program revenues Charges for services 7,807,878$ 8,026,850$ (218,972)$ 19,404,164$ 17,886,729$ 1,517,435$ Operating grants and contributions 3,670,054 2,512,011 1,158,043 159,376 181,525 (22,149) Capital grants and contributions 5,205,879 3,960,739 1,245,140 279,801 799,894 (520,093) General revenues Property taxes and TIF 40,544,785 37,919,392 2,625,393 - - - Franchise fees 3,763,394 3,079,399 683,995 - - - Grants and contributions not restricted to specific programs 590,978 584,639 6,339 - - - Unrestricted investment earnings 408,945 388,647 20,298 65,900 65,391 509 Gain on disposal of capital assets 106,204 142,713 (36,509) - - - Miscellaneous 2,091,334 3,201,122 (1,109,788) - - - Total revenues 64,189,451 59,815,512 4,373,939 19,909,241 18,933,539 975,702 Expenses General government 10,648,181 11,182,348 (534,167) - - - Public safety 17,870,131 20,091,787 (2,221,656) - - - Public information 647,316 549,940 97,376 - - - Operations and recreation 13,448,470 13,352,637 95,833 - - - Engineering 7,859,907 5,091,818 2,768,089 - - - Housing and rehabilitation 480,911 528,467 (47,556) - - - Housing maintenance 72,244 144,204 (71,960) - - - Social and economic development 10,987,654 8,826,281 2,161,373 - - - Interest on long-term debt 1,511,329 1,620,489 (109,160) - - - Water - - - 4,786,816 4,773,624 13,192 Sewer - - - 6,227,919 6,002,088 225,831 Solid waste - - - 3,390,874 3,256,804 134,070 Storm water - - - 1,611,785 1,514,761 97,024 Total expenses 63,526,143 61,387,971 2,138,172 16,017,394 15,547,277 470,117 Increase (decrease) in net position before transfers 663,308 (1,572,459) 2,235,767 3,891,847 3,386,262 505,585 Transfers 2,075,742 1,879,956 195,786 (2,075,742) (1,879,956) (195,786) Change in net position 2,739,050 307,497 2,431,553 1,816,105 1,506,306 309,799 Net position, January 1 138,869,472 138,561,975 307,497 28,879,934 27,373,628 1,506,306 Net position, December 31 141,608,522$ 138,869,472$ 2,739,050$ 30,696,039$ 28,879,934$ 1,816,105$ Governmental Activities Business-type Activities 28 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 55 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis Governmental Activities Governmental activities increased the City’s net position by $2,739,050. Overall the governmental activities in 2017 were stable, with a slight increase in both revenues and expenses. Revenues increased by $4.4 million, primarily related to property tax and TIF general revenues while expenses increased by $2.1 million, with the largest increases in engineering ($2.7 million) and social and economic development ($2.2 million) relating to project costs. Public safety expenses came in $2.2 million under budget related to the police and fire net pension. Business-type Activities Business-type activities increased the City’s net position by $1,816,105. Revenues increased by $1 million, expenses increased $0.5 million and net transfers decreased by $0.2 million. The increase in revenues was the result of increased utility rates and the increase in expenses was a result of increased operating expenses to provide services. Governmental Activities Revenues - The following chart illustrates the City’s revenue by source for its governmental activities: Revenues by Source - Governmental Activities 29 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 56 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis Expenses - The following chart illustrates the City’s expenses and program revenues for its governmental activities: Expenses and Program Revenues - Governmental Activities Business-type Activities Revenues - The following chart illustrates the City’s revenue by source for its business-type activities: Revenue Sources - Business-type Activities 30 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 57 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis Expenses - The following chart illustrates the City’s expenses and program revenues for its business-type activities: Expense and Program Revenues - Business-type Activities Financial Analysis of the Government’s Funds As noted earlier, the City uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements. In particular, unassigned fund balance may serve as a useful measure of a government’s net resources available for spending at the end of the year. 31 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 58 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis Governmental funds – As of the end of the current fiscal year, the City’s governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $61,199,384, a decrease of $3,103,887 in comparison with the prior year. Approximately 21.9 percent of this total amount, $13,426,273, constitutes unassigned fund balance, which is available for spending at the City’s discretion. The remainder of fund balance ($47,773,111 is not available for new spending because it is either 1) nonspendable ($299,321), 2) restricted ($12,117,594), 3) committed ($696,235) or 4) assigned ($34,659,961) for specific purposes. Increase 2016 2017 (Decrease) General 17,874,696$ 18,789,914$ 915,218$ Housing Rehabilitation 3,448,469$ 4,335,903$ 887,434$ Debt Service 2,048,975$ 2,285,277$ 236,302$ Permanent Improvement Revolving 2,577,727$ 2,865,788$ 288,061$ Streets Capital Projects 1,193,411$ (46,617)$ (1,240,028)$ Development EDA 26,111,150$ 23,821,044$ (2,290,106)$ Sidewalks and Trails 1,011,967$ 1,255,566$ 243,599$ Park Improvement 5,030,197$ 1,413,614$ (3,616,583)$ Redevelopment District (1,289,720)$ 1,224,227$ 2,513,947$ Fund Balances December 31, Major Funds The City’s General Fund balance increased $915,218 during the current fiscal year. A portion of this increase pertains to higher than anticipated license and permit revenue of $239,781. This is primarily related to increased license and permit revenues from more robust construction within the City. Also, intergovernmental revenue was $267,337 over budget which pertains to higher than anticipated highway user tax, and police and fire revenues. Operating expenditures were also approximately $1.1 million under budget for fiscal year 2017. The increase in fund balance is attributable to the issuance of bonds . In 2017 the fund recorded $2.1 million of capital outlay. The Park Improvement fund experienced a decrease in fund balance of $3,616,583. The decrease is a result of spending prior year bond proceeds. The Redevelopment District fund is comprised of all tax increment districts in the City. The increase in fund balance of $2,513,947 is due to collection of property taxes and tax increments in excess of expenditures and transfers out. The Housing Rehabilitation fund balance increased $887,434 as a result of special assessment and miscellaneous revenues exceeding expenditures by $1,068,713 prior to net transfers out of $181,000. The fund balance of the Debt Service fund increased $236,302 due to collection of property taxes and transfers in exceeding scheduled bond principal and interest payments. The Permanent Improvement Revolving fund balance increased slightly from prior year. Special assessments of $163,000 were received with minimal expenditures. The Streets Capital Projects fund balance decreased by $1,240,028 as a result of capital outlay in the current year of $7.1 million, revenue of $4.5 million, and net transfers in of $1.35 million. The Development EDA fund balance decreased $2,290,106 as a result of paying off the contract for deed ($2,025,297). Although the fund has $26 million in fund balance, approximately $12.7 million is made up of loans receivable and land 32 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 59 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis Proprietary funds – The City’s proprietary funds provide the same type of information found in the government-wide financial statements, but in more detail. At the end of the year, unrestricted net position of the Water, Sewer, Solid Waste, and Storm Water funds amounted to $7,960,886. Total net position increased by $2,250,134. This increase was primarily a result of a planned increase in fees to cover infrastructure replacement. General Fund Budgetary Highlights Actual revenues were $688,416 over budget and expenditures were $1,126,292 under budget; along with transfers and other financing sources, the end result was an increase in fund balance of $915,218. Favorable revenue and expenditure variances accounted for the increase in fund balance. The largest favorable revenue variances included licenses and permits ($239,781) as well as charges for intergovernmental ($267,337). The largest expenditure variance was in the operation and recreation function, which was $494,794 under budget. Capital Asset and Debt Administration The City’s investment in capital assets for its governmental and business type activities as of December 31, 2017 was $174,288,559 (net of accumulated depreciation). This investment in capital assets includes land, buildings and system improvements, machinery and equipment, park facilities, roads, highways, and bridges. The total increase in the City’s investment in capital assets for the current fiscal year was 8 percent. Major capital asset events during the current fiscal year included the following: Substantial completion of 37th Street at Minnehaha Creek bridge replacement Substantial completion of Carpenter Park storm water improvement project and skate park Street Rehab projects Connect the park trail, sidewalk and bike improvements Completion of indoor/outdoor recreation center projects $3.1 million of capital asset acquisition within the capital replacement fund. For the year ending December 31, 2017, the City has elected to use the modified approach as defined in GASB Statement No. 34 for infrastructure reporting for its Pavement Management Program, which includes streets. Under GASB Statement No. 34, eligible infrastructure capital assets are not required to be depreciated under the following requirements: 1)The City manages the eligible infrastructure capital assets using an asset management system with characteristics of (a) an up to-date inventory; (b) perform condition assessments and summarize the results using a measurement scale; and (c) estimate annual amount to maintain and preserve at the established condition assessment level. 2)The City documents that the eligible infrastructure capital assets are being preserved approximately at or above the established and disclosed condition assessment level. 33 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 60 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis The City’s policy is to achieve an average rating of good (70) for all streets. Over the course of 2014, 2015 and 2016, all areas were assessed, providing a new overall condition rating. Going forward, four areas will be assessed every other year. The City increased the number of areas assessed each year in an effort to get more comparative data and more thoroughly analyze the street infrastructure system. As of the last complete assessment, the City’s street system was rated at an Overall Condition Index (OCI) of 67, which is slightly below the City’s policy level. City staff is working with the City Council to develop a plan to increase this number back to the policy level. This plan includes the planned improvements to commercial and industrial roads that were not a part of the plan in the past. The City’s streets are constantly deteriorating resulting from the following factors: (1) traffic using the system; (2) the sun’s ultra-violet rays drying out and breaking down the top layer of pavement; (3) utility company/private development trenching operations; (4) water damage from natural precipitation; and (5) frost heave. The City is continuously taking actions to prolong the life of the system through short-term maintenance activities such as pothole patching, crack sealing, seal coating and overlaying. The City expended $4,494,315 on street maintenance for the year ending December 31, 2017. The physical condition assessment completed in 2012 was the first assessment that reported on the entire system. The City has estimated that the amount of annual expenditures required maintaining the City’s street system at the average OCI rating of good is approximately $4,255,000. The annual expenditures will vary from year to year, depending on the area of the City being targeted that year. The estimate for the year ending December 31, 2017 was $3,999,000, which is lower than the actual expenditures for the year. This was a result of the planning to increase the annual improvements to get condition back to policy level. City of St. Louis Park’s Capital Assets (net of accumulated depreciation) Increase Increase 2017 2016 (Decrease) 2017 2016 (Decrease) Land 16,991,835$ 16,991,835$ -$ 515,083$ 515,083$ -$ Permanent easments 1,429,976 1,429,976 - -- - Buildings and structures 41,151,267 33,543,044 7,608,223 677,842 805,616 (127,774) Improvements other than buildings 20,479,878 13,666,061 6,813,817 3,634,513 3,908,104 (273,591) Machinery and equipment 4,028,846 4,045,211 (16,365) 5,555,882 6,054,509 (498,627) Fleet 5,962,679 4,848,540 1,114,139 - - - Infrastructure - Streets 26,011,544 26,011,544 - - - - Infrastructure - Other 13,773,828 14,709,476 (935,648) 21,762,197 22,102,350 (340,153) Construction in progress 5,825,727 12,097,034 (6,271,307) 6,487,462 251,160 6,236,302 Total 135,655,580$ 127,342,721$ 8,312,859$ 38,632,979$ 33,636,822$ 4,996,157$ Governmental Activities Business-type Activities Additional information on the City’s capital assets can be found in Note 5 on pages 72 - 73 of this report. 34 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 61 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis Debt administration At the end of the current fiscal year, the City had total bonded debt outstanding of $50,910,000. Of this amount, $33,430,000 comprises debt issued for improvement and capital projects and will be repaid by ad valorem tax levies. In addition, $3,410,000 is general obligation tax increment debt which financed redevelopment projects and will be repaid from the tax increments resulting from increased tax capacity of the redevelopment properties. The remaining $14,070,000 of the City’s bonded debt represents general obligation revenue bonds to be repaid by the Water, Sewer, and Storm Water fund user charges. Furthermore, the City has long-term debt of $165,931 for capital leases payable, $4,040,577 for compensated absences, $3,458,414 for other post- employment benefits payable and $23,949,480 for the net pension liability. City of St. Louis Park’s Outstanding Debt General Obligation Bonds, Revenue Bonds, and other Debt Increase Increase 2017 2016 (Decrease) 2017 2016 (Decrease) G.O. Revenue Bonds -$ -$ -$ 14,070,000$ 10,515,000$ 3,555,000$ G.O. Tax Increment 3,410,000 3,805,000 (395,000) - - - G.O. Improvement 33,430,000 31,230,000 2,200,000 - - - Notes payable - 2,025,297 (2,025,297) - - - Capital leases 165,931 215,619 (49,688) - - - Compensated absences 3,895,292 3,837,736 57,556 145,285 188,635 (43,350) Other postemployment benefits 3,250,130 2,997,138 252,992 208,284 189,944 18,340 Net pension liability 23,949,480 46,787,244 (22,837,764) - - - Total 68,100,833$ 90,898,034$ (22,797,201)$14,423,569$ 10,893,579$ 3,529,990$ Governmental Activities Business-type Activities Principal payments during 2017 totaled $4,540,000. The City maintains an “AAA” rating from Standard & Poor’s for general obligation debt. State statutes limit the amount of general obligation debt a governmental entity may issue to 3 percent of its total assessed valuation. The current debt limitation for the City is $159,807,639 which is significantly more than the City’s outstanding general obligation debt. Additional information on the City’s long-term debt can be found in Note 6 on pages 74 - 79 of this report. Economic Factors, Subsequent Year Budgets, Rates and Changes in Structure The City estimates that the demand for City services will continue to grow as the economy improves. The property tax levy is set annually and is adjusted as necessary to fund the cost of providing services to our citizens and customers. Charges for services are evaluated each year and adjusted to support operations and capital outlay. All of these factors were considered in preparing the City’s budget for the 2018 fiscal year. 35 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 62 City of St. Louis Park Management’s Discussion and Analysis Requests for Information This financial report is designed to provide our citizens, customers, and creditors with a general overview of the City of St. Louis Park’s finances and to show the City’s accountability for the resources it is entrusted. Questions concerning any of the information provided in the report, or requests for additional financial information, can be directed to the City of St. Louis Park Finance Department at 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota, 55416, 952-924-2500, or Tim Simon – Chief Financial Officer at tsimon@stlouispark.org. 36 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 63 BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 37 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 64 - This page intentionally left blank - 38 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 65 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATEMENT OF NET POSITION Statement 1 December 31, 2017 Governmental Business-Type Activities Activities Totals Assets Cash and investments 55,798,056$ 6,442,600$ 62,240,656$ Accrued interest receivable 141,365 16,609 157,974 Due from other governments 2,368,236 - 2,368,236 Accounts receivable 1,445,009 3,801,899 5,246,908 Taxes receivable 736,425 - 736,425 Prepaid items 166,791 379,808 546,599 Inventories 234,227 61,222 295,449 Deposits receivable 31,000 700 31,700 Internal balances 2,981,829 (2,981,829) - Special assessments receivable 6,736,201 960,367 7,696,568 Loans receivable 6,920,101 - 6,920,101 Pledges receivable 1,350,000 - 1,350,000 Land held for resale 6,113,861 - 6,113,861 Capital assets Nondepreciable assets 50,259,082 7,002,543 57,261,625 Depreciable assets (net of accumulated depreciation)85,396,498 31,630,436 117,026,934 Total assets 220,678,681 47,314,355 267,993,036 Deferred outflows of resources - pension related 17,018,923 - 17,018,923 Liabilities Accounts payable 1,801,911 654,507 2,456,418 Salaries payable 1,732,359 138,074 1,870,433 Due to other governments 1,175,028 69,983 1,245,011 Contracts payable 1,401,684 312,738 1,714,422 Accrued interest payable 533,411 140,909 674,320 Deposits payable 1,362,898 94,290 1,457,188 Unearned revenue 765,317 408,314 1,173,631 Noncurrent liabilities Due within one year 4,460,327 1,463,259 5,923,586 Due in more than one year 64,137,842 13,336,242 77,474,084 Total liabilities 77,370,777 16,618,316 93,989,093 Deferred inflows of resources - pension related 18,718,305 - 18,718,305 Net position Net investment in capital assets 103,279,857 25,716,982 128,996,839 Restricted for Economic development 5,034,822 - 5,034,822 E-911 purposes 392,004 - 392,004 Community development 421,575 - 421,575 Debt service 3,325,205 - 3,325,205 Cable TV equipment 458,878 - 458,878 Police and fire purposes 1,807,493 - 1,807,493 Unrestricted 26,888,688 4,979,057 31,867,745 Total net position 141,608,522$ 30,696,039$ 172,304,561$ The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 39 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 66 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Operating Capital Charges For Grants and Grants and Functions/Programs Expenses Services Contributions Contributions Governmental activities General government 10,648,181$ 1,143,220$ 11,815$ -$ Public safety 17,870,131 3,962,306 1,188,499 - Public information 647,316 - - - Operations and recreation 13,448,470 2,308,221 101,284 115,000 Engineering 7,859,907 134,508 680,835 4,597,792 Housing and rehabilitation 480,911 4,514 - 309,805 Housing maintenance 72,244 - 56,961 - Social and economic development 10,987,654 255,109 1,470,446 183,282 Interest on long-term debt 1,511,329 - 160,214 - Total governmental activities 63,526,143 7,807,878 3,670,054 5,205,879 Business-Type activities Water 4,786,816 6,089,295 - 279,801 Sewer 6,227,919 7,261,014 3,359 - Solid waste 3,390,874 3,237,506 156,017 - Storm water 1,611,785 2,816,349 - - Total business-type activities 16,017,394 19,404,164 159,376 279,801 Total 79,543,537$ 27,212,042$ 3,829,430$ 5,485,680$ General revenues Taxes Property taxes Tax increment Franchise taxes Grants and contributions not restricted to specific programs Unrestricted investment earnings Gain on sale of capital assets Miscellaneous Transfers Total general revenues and transfers Change in net position Net position - January 1 Net position - December 31 Program Revenues The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 40 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 67 Statement 2 Governmental Business-Type Activities Activities Total (9,493,146)$ -$ (9,493,146)$ (12,719,326) - (12,719,326) (647,316) - (647,316) (10,923,965) - (10,923,965) (2,446,772) - (2,446,772) (166,592) - (166,592) (15,283) - (15,283) (9,078,817) - (9,078,817) (1,351,115) - (1,351,115) (46,842,332) - (46,842,332) - 1,582,280 1,582,280 - 1,036,454 1,036,454 - 2,649 2,649 - 1,204,564 1,204,564 - 3,825,947 3,825,947 (46,842,332) 3,825,947 (43,016,385) 31,582,993 - 31,582,993 8,961,792 - 8,961,792 3,763,394 - 3,763,394 590,978 - 590,978 408,945 65,900 474,845 106,204 - 106,204 2,091,334 - 2,091,334 2,075,742 (2,075,742) - 49,581,382 (2,009,842) 47,571,540 2,739,050 1,816,105 4,555,155 138,869,472 28,879,934 167,749,406 141,608,522$ 30,696,039$ 172,304,561$ Net (Expense) Revenue and Changes in Net Position The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 41 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 68 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA BALANCE SHEET GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS December 31, 2017 Special Revenue Fund General Housing Rehabilitation Debt Service Assets Cash and investments 21,645,958$ 1,175,269$ 2,450,082$ Accrued interest receivable 46,737 4,346 3,676 Due from other governments 388,420 - 80,033 Accounts receivable 446,350 3,769 13,543 Taxes receivable - unremitted 56,716 - - Taxes receivable - delinquent 627,627 - - Prepaid items 58,594 - - Inventories 234,227 - - Special assessments receivable - delinquent - 30,299 - Special assessments receivable - deferred 34,790 5,795,085 - Due from other funds - - - Interfund loan receivable - - - Loans receivable - current - - 40,000 Loans receivable - noncurrent - 3,230,023 1,520,000 Pledges receivable - current - -- Pledges receivable - noncurrent - -- Land held for resale - -- Total assets 23,539,419$ 10,238,791$ 4,107,334$ Liabilities Accounts payable 491,652$ 63,862$ 4,450$ Salaries payable 1,672,414 5,239 - Due to other governments 107,204 - - Contracts payable - 16,002 - Due to other funds - -- Interfund loan payable - -- Deposits payable 1,098,630 - 244,268 Unearned revenue 751,978 - 13,339 Total liabilities 4,121,878 85,103 262,057 Deferred inflows of resources Unavailable revenue 627,627 5,817,785 1,560,000 Fund balances Nonspendable 292,821 - - Restricted 392,004 - 2,285,277 Committed - 116,942 - Assigned 1,050,569 4,218,961 - Unassigned 17,054,520 - - Total fund balances 18,789,914 4,335,903 2,285,277 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 23,539,419$ 10,238,791$ 4,107,334$ The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 42 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 69 Statement 3 Permanent Improvement Revolving Streets Capital Projects Development EDA Sidewalks and Trails Park Improvement Redevelopment District Other Governmental Funds Total Governmental Funds 2,427,899$ -$ 12,187,073$ 1,252,919$ 1,877,539$ 6,217,960$ 3,922,805$ 53,157,504$ 7,692 - 29,024 2,647 5,175 10,590 22,953 132,840 - 1,634,497 260,686 - - - 4,600 2,368,236 - 4,722 3,660 - 1,704 - 959,918 1,433,666 - -- - - 29,743 - 86,459 - -- - - 22,339 - 649,966 - -- - - -6,500 65,094 - -- - - -- 234,227 15,318 - - - - - 1,462 47,079 680,820 - - - - - 178,427 6,689,122 422,021 - - - - - -422,021 - - 5,638,921 - - - -5,638,921 - - 243,603 - - - -283,603 - - 712,816 - - 731,360 442,299 6,636,498 - - - - 100,000 - - 100,000 - - - - 1,250,000 - - 1,250,000 - - 6,113,861 - - - - 6,113,861 3,553,750$ 1,639,219$ 25,189,644$ 1,255,566$ 3,234,418$ 7,011,992$ 5,538,964$ 85,309,097$ -$ 283,587$ 340,718$ -$ 66,560$ 12,222$ 44,814$ 1,307,865$ - - 13,488 - - - 22,045 1,713,186 - - 994,394 - 2,500 25,929 - 1,130,027 - 981,451 - - 401,744 - - 1,399,197 - 420,798 - - - - 1,223 422,021 - -- - - 5,638,921 - 5,638,921 - -20,000 - - - - 1,362,898 - -- - - - - 765,317 - 1,685,836 1,368,600 - 470,804 5,677,072 68,082 13,739,432 687,962 - - - 1,350,000 110,693 216,214 10,370,281 - - - - - - 6,500 299,321 - - 914,014 1,032,496 - 4,805,857 2,687,946 12,117,594 - - - - - -579,293 696,235 2,865,788 - 22,907,030 223,070 1,413,614 - 1,980,929 34,659,961 - (46,617) - - - (3,581,630) - 13,426,273 2,865,788 (46,617) 23,821,044 1,255,566 1,413,614 1,224,227 5,254,668 61,199,384 3,553,750$ 1,639,219$ 25,189,644$ 1,255,566$ 3,234,418$ 7,011,992$ 5,538,964$ 85,309,097$ Total Fund balances reported above 61,199,384$ Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net position are different because: Capital assets used in governmental activities are not financial resources, and therefore, are not reported in the funds 115,977,653 Other long-term assets are not available to pay for current-period expenditures and, therefore, are reported as unavailable revenue in the funds: Receivables not available soon enough to pay for the current period's expenditures 10,370,281 Long-term liabilities, including bonds payable, are not due and payable in the current period and therefore are not reported in the funds: Bonds payable and unamortized bond premium (37,337,336) Accrued interest payable (533,411) Internal service funds are used by management to charge the cost of certain services to individual funds. The assets and liabilities are included in the governmental statement of net position (8,068,049) Net position of governmental activities 141,608,522$ Capital Projects Funds The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 43 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 70 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Special Revenue Fund General Housing Rehabilitation Debt Service Revenues Property taxes 24,809,554$ 100,000$ 2,139,937$ Tax increments - - - Franchise taxes - - - License and permits 3,985,517 - - Intergovernmental 1,899,006 - 160,215 Charges for services 3,260,177 4,514 - Fines and forfeits 293,236 - - Special assessments - 827,505 - Interest income 125,985 9,521 7,871 Miscellaneous 167,484 612,697 128,611 Total revenues 34,540,959 1,554,237 2,436,634 Expenditures Current General government 8,142,675 - - Public safety 15,746,079 - - Public information - - - Operations and recreation 10,315,799 - - Engineering 339,876 - - Housing and rehabilitation - 453,940 - Housing maintenance - - - Social and economic development - - 630,472 Capital outlay General government 140,290 - - Public safety - - - Public information - - - Operations and recreation - - - Engineering - - - Social and economic development - - - Debt service Principal - - 1,625,000 Interest and other - 31,584 1,220,981 Bond issuance costs - -- Total expenditures 34,684,719 485,524 3,476,453 Revenues over (under) expenditures (143,760)1,068,713 (1,039,819) Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in 1,951,218 160,000 1,520,829 Transfers out (892,240) (341,279) (244,708) Bonds issued - - - Premium on bonds issued - - - Total other financing sources (uses)1,058,978 (181,279)1,276,121 Net change in fund balances 915,218 887,434 236,302 Fund balances - January 1 17,874,696 3,448,469 2,048,975 Fund balances - December 31 18,789,914$ 4,335,903$2,285,277$ The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 44 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 71 Statement 4 Permanent Improvement Revolving Streets Capital Projects Development EDA Sidewalks and Trails Park Improvement Redevelopment District Other Governmental Funds Total Governmental Funds -$ -$ 26,054$ -$ 810,000$ 1,056,101$ -$ 28,941,646$ - - - - - 8,961,792 - 8,961,792 - - - - - - 3,763,394 3,763,394 - - - ---- 3,985,517 - 4,481,828 1,470,446 - 159,702 - 56,961 8,228,158 - -230,340 - 9,000 - 25,094 3,529,125 - -- - - - - 293,236 162,612 - - - - - 179,742 1,169,859 22,555 - 92,895 10,532 25,438 20,987 53,419 369,203 966 82,218 1,064,372 - 158,370 - 3,994 2,218,712 186,133 4,564,046 2,884,107 10,532 1,162,510 10,038,880 4,082,604 61,460,642 - - - - - - - 8,142,675 63,623 - - - - - 14,875 15,824,577 - - - - - - 495,256 495,256 - - - - 349,530 - - 10,665,329 - - - 189,606 - - 3,444,091 3,973,573 - - - - - - - 453,940 - - - - - - 57,370 57,370 - - 3,654,599 - - 5,949,457 212,274 10,446,802 - - - - - - - 140,290 - - - - - - 25,088 25,088 - - - - - - 106,049 106,049 - - - - 4,429,563 - - 4,429,563 - 7,162,262 - 2,077,255 - - - 9,239,517 - -410,843 - - - - 410,843 - - 2,025,297 - - - - 3,650,297 - - 13,474 - - 227,741 - 1,493,780 - - 10,959 29,460 - - - 40,419 63,623 7,162,262 6,115,172 2,296,321 4,779,093 6,177,198 4,355,003 69,595,368 122,510 (2,598,216) (3,231,065) (2,285,789) (3,616,583) 3,861,682 (272,399) (8,134,726) 185,000 1,358,188 - - - - 411,253 5,586,488 (19,449) - - (156,617) - (1,347,735) (1,180,585) (4,182,613) - - 930,000 2,500,000 - -- 3,430,000 - - 10,959 186,005 - -- 196,964 165,551 1,358,188 940,959 2,529,388 - (1,347,735) (769,332) 5,030,839 288,061 (1,240,028) (2,290,106) 243,599 (3,616,583) 2,513,947 (1,041,731) (3,103,887) 2,577,727 1,193,411 26,111,150 1,011,967 5,030,197 (1,289,720) 6,296,399 64,303,271 2,865,788$ (46,617)$ 23,821,044$ 1,255,566$ 1,413,614$ 1,224,227$ 5,254,668$ 61,199,384$ Capital Projects Funds The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 45 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 72 - This page intentionally left blank - 46 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 73 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA RECONCILIATION OF THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, Statement 5 EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS TO THE STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities (Statement 2) are different because: Net changes in fund balances - total governmental funds (Statement 4)(3,103,887)$ Governmental funds report capital outlays as expenditures. However, in the statement of activities the cost of those assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives and reported as depreciation expense. This is the amount by which capital outlays exceeded depreciation in the current period. Capital outlay 14,351,350 Capital outlay not capitalized (4,516,907) Depreciation expense (3,064,510) The net effect of various transactions involving capital assets (i.e., sales, trade-ins and donations) is to increase (decrease) net position (66,500) The issuance of long-term debt provides current financial resources to governmental funds, while the repayment of principal of long-term debt consumes the current financial resources of governmental funds. Neither transaction, however, has any effect on net position. Also, governmental funds report the effect of issuance costs, premiums, discounts and similar items when debt is first issued, whereas these amounts are deferred and amortized in the statement of activities. Proceeds from long term debt (3,430,000) Principal repayments on long term debt 3,650,297 Interest on long-term debt in the statement of activities differs from the amount reported in the governmental fund because interest is recognized as an expenditure in the funds when it is due, and thus requires the use of current financial resources. In the statement of activities, however, interest expense is recognized as the interest accrues, regardless of when it is due.(16,710) Governmental funds report debt issuance premiums and discounts as an other financing source or use at the time of issuance. Premiums and discounts are reported as an unamortized asset or liability in the City-wide financial statements.(149,237) Certain revenues are recognized as soon as they are earned. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting certain revenues cannot be recognized until they are available to liquidate liabilities of the current period. Special assessments (560,807) Property taxes 373,647 Pledges (100,000) Loans (22,000) Internal service funds are used by management to charge the costs for equipment, information system, equipment replacement, employee benefits and major losses incurred by individual funds. The net revenue of certain activities of internal service funds is reported with governmental activities.(605,686) Change in net position of governmental activities (Statement 2)2,739,050$ The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 47 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 74 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATEMENT OF NET POSITION PROPRIETARY FUNDS December 31, 2017 With Comparative Amounts For Enterprise Funds For December 31, 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 Assets Current assets Cash and investments 1,274,890$ 15,523$ 837,894$ 272,392$ Accrued interest receivable - - - 3,596 Due from other governments - - - 66 Accounts receivable 1,340,211 1,270,238 1,310,502 1,098,156 Prepaid items 19,040 - 360,768 355,301 Deposits receivable 700 700 - - Due from other funds - - - - Inventories 61,222 86,086 - - Special assessments receivable - delinquent 93,513 102,432 325 1,289 Special assessments receivable - deferred 704,840 737,768 161,689 176,764 Total current assets 3,494,416 2,212,747 2,671,178 1,907,564 Noncurrent assets Capital assets, at cost Land 114,844 114,844 60,000 60,000 Buildings and structures 4,761,612 4,761,612 6,111 6,111 Improvements other than buildings 951,045 951,045 22,278 22,278 Infrastructure 15,466,976 15,466,976 20,446,343 20,116,999 Machinery, furniture and equipment 8,677,710 8,677,710 262,039 262,039 Fleet - - - - Construction in progress 3,373,516 - 363,282 - Total capital assets, at cost 33,345,703 29,972,187 21,160,053 20,467,427 Less: accumulated depreciation (15,383,228) (14,495,903) (16,192,010) (16,079,626) Total noncurrent assets 17,962,475 15,476,284 4,968,043 4,387,801 Total assets 21,456,891 17,689,031 7,639,221 6,295,365 Deferred outflows of resources - pension related - - - - Liabilities Current liabilities Accounts payable 206,031 95,132 36,903 111,233 Salaries payable 59,043 61,264 37,262 34,063 Accrued flex spending - - - - Due to other governments 20,318 9,948 2,899 4,643 Contracts payable 220,277 301,204 - - Due to other funds - 500,000 - - Deposits payable 20,500 18,157 - - Accrued interest payable 118,675 73,330 14,646 2,178 Compensated absences payable - current 37,669 72,040 37,509 31,149 Capital lease payable - current - - - - Bonds payable - current 1,194,700 1,179,800 16,500 17,000 Unearned revenue 408,314 322,550 - - Total current liabilities 2,285,527 2,633,425 145,719 200,266 Noncurrent liabilities Compensated absences payable 23,298 48,477 25,006 20,766 Capital lease payable - - - - Bonds payable 11,210,612 8,214,899 1,146,611 155,706 Other postemployment benefits payable 135,807 127,850 35,887 31,600 Net pension liability - - - - Total noncurrent liabilities 11,369,717 8,391,226 1,207,504 208,072 Total liabilities 13,655,244 11,024,651 1,353,223 408,338 Deferred inflows of resources - pension related - - - - Net position Net investment in capital assets 6,742,101 6,081,585 4,149,928 4,215,095 Unrestricted 1,059,546 582,795 2,136,070 1,671,932 Total net position 7,801,647$ 6,664,380$ 6,285,998$ 5,887,027$ Business-Type Activities Enterprise Funds Water Sewer The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 48 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 75 Statement 6 Governmental Activities Internal 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 Service Funds 2,155,321$ 1,708,616$ 2,174,495$ 3,245,258$ 6,442,600$ 5,241,789$ 2,640,552$ 6,096 6,416 10,513 9,852 16,609 19,864 8,525 - - - - - 66 - 696,362 677,548 454,824 409,187 3,801,899 3,455,129 11,343 - - - - 379,808 355,301 101,697 - - - - 700 700 31,000 - 500,000 - - - 500,000 - - - - - 61,222 86,086 - - - - - 93,838 103,721 - - - - - 866,529 914,532 - 2,857,779 2,892,580 2,639,832 3,664,297 11,663,205 10,677,188 2,793,117 - - 340,239 340,239 515,083 515,083 818,094 - - - - 4,767,723 4,767,723 9,274,550 - - 6,182,215 6,182,215 7,155,538 7,155,538 1,657,545 - - 15,865,727 15,865,727 51,779,046 51,449,702 1,313,801 - - 89,099 89,099 9,028,848 9,028,848 7,635,904 - - - - - - 10,482,284 - - 2,750,662 251,160 6,487,460 251,160 - - - 25,227,942 22,728,440 79,733,698 73,168,054 31,182,178 - - (9,525,481) (8,955,703) (41,100,719) (39,531,232) (11,504,251) - - 15,702,461 13,772,737 38,632,979 33,636,822 19,677,927 2,857,779 2,892,580 18,342,293 17,437,034 50,296,184 44,314,010 22,471,044 - - - - - - 17,018,923 406,428 249,736 5,145 7,255 654,507 463,356 494,046 18,819 17,329 22,950 24,758 138,074 137,414 - - - - - - - 19,173 40,968 50,739 5,798 9,277 69,983 74,607 45,001 - - 92,461 - 312,738 301,204 2,487 - - - - - 500,000 - - - 73,790 - 94,290 18,157 - - - 7,588 8,363 140,909 83,871 - 4,180 2,341 8,901 7,381 88,259 112,911 2,353,715 - - - - - - 51,612 - - 163,800 163,200 1,375,000 1,360,000 - - - - - 408,314 322,550 - 470,395 320,145 380,433 220,234 3,282,074 3,374,070 2,966,034 2,787 1,561 5,935 4,920 57,026 75,724 1,541,577 - - - - - - 114,319 - - 713,708 875,933 13,070,931 9,246,538 - 9,494 6,557 27,097 23,937 208,285 189,944 3,250,130 - - - - - - 23,949,480 12,281 8,118 746,740 904,790 13,336,242 9,512,206 28,855,506 482,676 328,263 1,127,173 1,125,024 16,618,316 12,886,276 31,821,540 - - - - - - 18,718,305 - - 14,824,953 12,733,604 25,716,982 23,030,284 19,511,996 2,375,103 2,564,317 2,390,167 3,578,406 7,960,886 8,397,450 (30,561,874) 2,375,103$ 2,564,317$ 17,215,120$ 16,312,010$ 33,677,868 31,427,734$ (11,049,878)$ Adjustment to reflect consolidation of Internal Service fund activities (2,981,829) Net position of business-type activities 30,696,039$ TotalsSolid Waste Storm Water Business-Type Activities Enterprise Funds The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 49 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 76 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND NET POSITION PROPRIETARY FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 With Comparative Totals For Enterprise Funds For The Year Ended December 31, 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 Operating revenues Charges for services 5,643,016$ 5,268,597$ 7,235,499$ 6,616,115$ Other 49,444 50,607 25,515 47,590 Rent 396,835 340,086 - - Total operating revenues 6,089,295 5,659,290 7,261,014 6,663,705 Operating expenses Personal services 1,321,273 1,372,830 868,578 778,069 Supplies 265,700 202,193 35,004 36,410 Professional services 482,035 374,665 41,647 89,674 Insurance 25,027 21,429 65,982 66,044 Utilities 379,715 377,267 47,927 41,129 Repairs and maintenance 481,797 1,126,710 302,970 187,484 Depreciation 887,322 707,093 112,386 114,295 Disposal charges 46,594 48,737 4,265,237 4,177,255 Other 470,676 420,359 216,896 205,837 Total operating expenses 4,360,139 4,651,283 5,956,627 5,696,197 Operating income (loss)1,729,156 1,008,007 1,304,387 967,508 Nonoperating revenues (expenses) Interest income 13,460 17,650 3,167 8,144 Property taxes - - - - Intergovernmental revenue - 7,365 3,359 - Miscellaneous expense (39,830) (12,781) (10,390) (5,668) Amortization of bond premiums 20,404 14,949 2,046 26 Gain on disposal of capital assets - - - - Interest expense (217,563) (231,389) (17,715) (5,274) Bond issuance costs (59,272) - (13,122) - Total nonoperating revenues (expenses)(282,801) (204,206) (32,655) (2,772) Income (loss) before contributions and transfers 1,446,355 803,801 1,271,732 964,736 Capital contributions Connection fees and special assessments 279,801 465,203 - - Capital assets - - - - Transfers in - 926,986 - 75,254 Transfers out (588,889) (678,127) (872,761) (1,680,684) Change in net position 1,137,267 1,517,863 398,971 (640,694) Net position - January 1 6,664,380 5,146,517 5,887,027 6,527,721 Net position - December 31 7,801,647$ 6,664,380$ 6,285,998$ 5,887,027$ Business-Type Activities Enterprise Funds Water Sewer The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 50 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 77 Statement 7 Governmental Activities Internal 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 Service Funds 3,116,087$ 3,180,075$ 2,816,349$ 2,642,383$ 18,810,951$ 17,707,170$ 3,655,740$ 121,419 60,515 - - 196,378 158,712 438,983 - - - - 396,835 340,086 - 3,237,506 3,240,590 2,816,349 2,642,383 19,404,164 18,205,968 4,094,723 536,021 482,774 542,301 542,193 3,268,173 3,175,866 4,974,247 203,064 180,422 4,617 3,783 508,385 422,808 591,937 29,142 11,783 155,776 49,711 708,600 525,833 296,694 3,916 3,810 8,463 14,923 103,388 106,206 421,871 - - 33,834 43,275 461,476 461,671 - - 30,884 2,454 25,728 787,221 1,370,806 - - - 569,779 565,262 1,569,487 1,386,650 1,722,763 2,507,800 2,450,485 - - 6,819,631 6,676,477 - 92,767 81,989 122,494 122,855 902,833 831,040 895,115 3,372,710 3,242,147 1,439,718 1,367,730 15,129,194 14,957,357 8,902,627 (135,204) (1,557) 1,376,631 1,274,653 4,274,970 3,248,611 (4,807,904) 17,202 14,478 32,071 25,119 65,900 65,391 34,364 - - - - - - 2,267,700 156,017 174,160 - - 159,376 181,525 629,701 - - (98,709) (55,262) (148,929) (73,711) - - - 3,248 477 25,698 15,452 - - - -- - - 106,204 - - (19,418) (21,190) (254,696) (257,853) (8,147) - - (3,850) - (76,244) - - 173,219 188,638 (86,658) (50,856) (228,895) (69,196) 3,029,822 38,015 187,081 1,289,973 1,223,797 4,046,075 3,179,415 (1,778,082) - - - - 279,801 465,203 - - - - 334,691 - 334,691 66,500 - - - - - 1,002,240 671,867 (227,229) (220,611) (386,863) (314,269) (2,075,742) (2,893,691) - (189,214) (33,530) 903,110 1,244,219 2,250,134 2,087,858 (1,039,715) 2,564,317 2,597,847 16,312,010 15,067,791 31,427,734 29,339,876 (10,010,163) 2,375,103$ 2,564,317$ 17,215,120$ 16,312,010$ 33,677,868$ 31,427,734$ (11,049,878)$ Adjustment to reflect consolidation of Internal Service fund activities (434,029) Change in net position of business-type activities 1,816,105$ TotalsSolid Waste Storm Water Business-Type Activities Enterprise Funds The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 51 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 78 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS PROPRIETARY FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 With Comparative Totals For Enterprise Funds For The Year Ended December 31, 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 Cash flows from operating activities Receipts from customers and users 6,099,832$ 5,268,004$ 7,039,258$ 6,468,203$ Receipts from interfund services provided - - - - Other operating cash receipts 49,444 50,607 25,515 47,590 Payments to suppliers (2,105,378) (2,866,512) (5,057,204) (4,703,978) Payments to employees (1,375,087) (1,342,114) (850,492) (730,276) Miscellaneous expense (39,830) (12,781) (10,390) (5,668) Net cash flows provided (used) by operating activities 2,628,981 1,097,204 1,146,687 1,075,871 Cash flows from noncapital financing activities Transfers in - - - - Transfers out (552,651) (536,555) (767,848) (745,483) Increase (decrease) in due to other funds (500,000) 500,000 -- (Increase) decrease in due from other funds ---- Property taxes ---- Intergovernmental receipts - 7,365 3,359 - Net cash flows provided (used) by noncapital financing activities (1,052,651) (29,190) (764,489) (745,483) Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Transfers in - 926,986 - 75,254 Transfers out (36,238) (141,572) (104,913) (935,201) Connection fees/special assessements received 279,801 465,203 - - Acquisition of capital assets (3,373,513) (2,180,026) (692,628) (438,695) Proceeds from sale of capital assets - - - - Proceeds from issuance of bonds, net 5,208,945 - 1,151,829 - Transfer of bond proceeds (to)/from escrow account - 1,865,855 - - Principal paid Bonds (2,237,200) (2,619,500) (172,500) (16,500) Capital lease - - - - Interest paid Bonds (172,218) (271,341) (5,247) (5,429) Capital lease - - - - Net cash flows provided (used) by capital and related financing activities (330,423) (1,954,395) 176,541 (1,320,571) Cash flows from investing activities Interest received 13,460 21,203 6,763 8,633 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 1,259,367 (865,178) 565,502 (981,550) Cash and cash equivalents - January 1 15,523 880,701 272,392 1,253,942 Cash and cash equivalents - December 31 1,274,890$ 15,523$ 837,894$ 272,392$ Business-Type Activities Enterprise Funds Water Sewer The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 52 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 79 Statement 8 Page 1 of 2 Governmental Activities Internal 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 Service Funds 3,097,273$ 3,174,016$ 2,844,502$ 2,599,435$ 19,080,865$ 17,509,658$ -$ - - - - - - 3,652,167 121,419 60,515 - - 196,378 158,712 451,104 (2,689,768) (2,689,385) (240,766) (231,823) (10,093,116) (10,491,698) (2,043,689) (528,529) (464,384) (538,414) (516,421) (3,292,522) (3,053,195) (2,713,570) - - (98,709) (55,262) (148,929) (73,711) - 395 80,762 1,966,613 1,795,929 5,742,676 4,049,766 (653,988) - - - - - - 100,000 (195,429) (189,737) (281,308) (273,115) (1,797,236) (1,744,890) - - - - - (500,000) 500,000 - 500,000 (500,000) - - 500,000 (500,000) - - - - --- 2,267,700 156,017 174,160 - - 159,376 181,525 629,701 460,588 (515,577) (281,308) (273,115) (1,637,860) (1,563,365) 2,997,401 - - - - - 1,002,240 571,867 (31,800) (30,874) (105,555) (41,154) (278,506) (1,148,801) - - - - - 279,801 465,203 - - - (2,499,503) (533,463) (6,565,644) (3,152,184) (3,071,897) - - - - - - 179,353 - 343,073 - 6,703,847 - - - - - 9,097 - 1,874,952 - - - (505,300) (359,000) (2,915,000) (2,995,000) - - - -- - - (49,688) - - (20,193) (24,281) (197,658) (301,051) - - - - - - - (8,147) (31,800) (30,874) (2,787,478) (948,801) (2,973,160) (4,254,641) (2,378,512) 17,522 13,010 31,410 22,239 69,155 65,085 34,612 446,705 (452,679) (1,070,763) 596,252 1,200,811 (1,703,155) (487) 1,708,616 2,161,295 3,245,258 2,649,006 5,241,789 6,944,944 2,641,039 2,155,321$ 1,708,616$ 2,174,495$ 3,245,258$ 6,442,600$ 5,241,789$ 2,640,552$ Business-Type Activities Enterprise Funds Storm Water TotalsSolid Waste The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 53 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 80 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS PROPRIETARY FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 With Comparative Totals For Enterprise Funds For The Year Ended December 31, 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 Reconciliation of operating income (loss) to net cash provided (used) by operating activities Operating income (loss)1,729,156$ 1,008,007$ 1,304,387$ 967,508$ Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash flows from operating activities Miscellaneous expense (39,830) (12,781) (10,390) (5,668) Depreciation 887,322 707,093 112,386 114,295 (Increase) decrease in assets/deferred outflows Accounts receivable (69,973) (296,901) (212,280) (149,998) Special assessments 41,847 (5,259) 16,039 2,086 Prepaid items (19,040) 13,667 (5,467) 6,463 Inventories 24,864 (71,205) - - Deferred outflows of resources - - - - Increase (decrease) in liabilities/deferred inflows Accounts payable 121,269 (8,483) (76,074) 93,392 Due to other governments - - - - Contracts payable (80,927) (229,131) - - Deposits payable 2,343 (16,610) - - Accrued salaries payable (2,221) 3,600 3,199 17,415 Unearned revenue 85,764 (21,909) - - Accrued flex spending - - - - Compensated absences payable (59,550) 11,142 10,600 22,391 Other postemployment benefits 7,957 15,974 4,287 7,987 Net pension liability - - - - Deferred inflows of resources - - - - Net cash provided (used) by operating activities 2,628,981$ 1,097,204$ 1,146,687$ 1,075,871$ Noncash capital and related financing activities Amortization of bond premiums 20,404$ 14,949$ 2,046$ 26$ Disposal of capital assets - - - - Capital contributions from government - - - - Water Sewer Business-Type Activities Enterprise Funds The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 54 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 81 Statement 8 Page 2 of 2 Governmental Activities Internal 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 Service Funds (135,204)$ (1,557)$ 1,376,631$ 1,274,653$ 4,274,970$ 3,248,611$ (4,807,904)$ - - (98,709) (55,262) (148,929) (73,711) - - - 569,779 565,262 1,569,487 1,386,650 1,722,763 (18,814) (6,059) (45,637) (42,948) (346,704) (495,906) 8,548 - - - - 57,886 (3,173) - - - - 18,433 (24,507) 38,563 73,291 - - - - 24,864 (71,205) - - - - - - - 11,283,110 146,921 69,988 (5,589) 10,019 186,527 164,916 113,811 - - - - - - (25,174) - - 92,461 - 11,534 (229,131) - - - 73,790 - 76,133 (16,610) - 1,490 9,696 (1,808) 15,999 660 46,710 - - - - - 85,764 (21,909) - - - - - - - 4,486 3,065 3,902 2,535 4,981 (43,350) 42,416 57,556 2,937 4,792 3,160 4,792 18,341 33,545 252,992 - - - - - - (22,837,764) - - - - - - 13,500,297 395$ 80,762$ 1,966,613$ 1,795,929$ 5,742,676$ 4,049,766$ (653,988)$ -$ -$ 3,248$ 477$ 25,698$ 15,452$ -$ - - - - - - 734,929 - - - - - - 66,500 Solid Waste Storm Water Totals Business-Type Activities Enterprise Funds The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 55 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 82 - This page intentionally left blank - 56 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 83 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Note 1 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES The City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the City) was incorporated in 1886 and operates a council-manager form of government under the “Home Rule Charter” concept according to applicable Minnesota laws and statutes. The governing body consists of a seven member City Council elected by the voters of the City. The financial statements of the City have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America as applied to governmental units by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The following is a summary of the significant accounting policies. A.FINANCIAL REPORTING ENTITY As required by generally accepted accounting principles, the financial statements of the reporting entity include those of the City (the primary government) and its component units, entities for which the City is considered to be financially accountable. Blended component units, although legally separate entities, are in substance, part of the City’s operations and so data from these units are combined with data of the City. BLENDED COMPONENT UNITS The Economic Development Authority (EDA) is an entity legally separate from the City. However, for financial reporting purposes, the EDA is reported as if it were part of the City’s operations because the members of the City Council serve as EDA Board Members and the City has the ability to access EDA resources. Separate financial statements are not prepared for the EDA. The following funds are maintained by the EDA: Debt Service Funds –2008B General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, and Hoigaard’s 2010A & B TIF Notes; Capital Project Funds – Development EDA and Redevelopment District. RELATED ORGANIZATION The Housing Authority (HA) is an entity legally separate from the City. The HA is governed by a Board of Commissioners appointed by the City Council. However, the City’s accountability for the HA does not extend beyond making the appointments. B.GOVERNMENT-WIDE AND FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The government-wide financial statements (i.e., the statement of net position and the statement of activities) report information on all of the activities of the primary government and its component units. For the most part, the effect of interfund activity has been removed from these statements. Governmental activities, which normally are supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues, are reported separately from business-type activities, which rely to a significant extent on fees and charges for support. The statement of activities demonstrates the degree to which the direct expenses of a given function or business- type activity is offset by program revenues. Direct expenses are those that are clearly identifiable with a specific function or business-type activity. Program revenues include: 1) charges to customers or applicants who purchase, use, or directly benefit from goods, services, or privileges provided by a given function or business-type activity and 2) grants and contributions that are restricted to meeting the operational or capital requirements of a particular function or business-type activity. Taxes and other items not included among program revenues are reported instead as general revenues. 57 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 84 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Separate financial statements are provided for governmental funds and proprietary funds. Major individual governmental funds and major individual enterprise funds are reported as separate columns in the fund financial statements. C.MEASUREMENT FOCUS, BASIS OF ACCOUNTING, AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT PRESENTATION The government-wide financial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting, as are the proprietary fund financial statements. Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Property taxes are recognized as revenues in the year for which they are levied. Grants and similar items are recognized as revenue as soon as all eligibility requirements imposed by the provider have been met. Governmental fund financial statements are reported using the current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available. Revenues are considered to be available when they are collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to pay liabilities of the current period. For this purpose, the City considers all revenues, except reimbursement grants, to be available if they are collected within 60 days of the end of the current fiscal period. Reimbursement grants are considered available if they are collected within one year of the end of the current fiscal period. Expenditures generally are recorded when a liability is incurred, as under accrual accounting. However, debt service expenditures, as well as expenditures related to compensated absences and claims and judgments, are recorded only when payment is due. Property taxes, special assessments, intergovernmental revenue, franchise taxes, licenses, and interest associated with the current fiscal period are all considered to be susceptible to accrual and so have been recognized as revenues of the current fiscal period. Only the portion of special assessments receivable due within the current fiscal period is considered to be susceptible to accrual as revenue of the current period. All other revenue items are considered to be measurable and available only when cash is received by the City. The City reports the following major governmental funds: The General Fund is the City’s primary operating fund. It accounts for all financial resources of the general government, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. The Housing Rehabilitation Fund is used to account for revenues from revenue bond fees and expenditures related to preventing deterioration of multi-unit housing. Debt Service Funds account for the resources accumulated and payments made for principal and interest on long-term general obligation debt of the government. The Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund accounts for the resources and expenditures required for the acquisition and construction of capital improvements which will provide a direct or significant indirect benefit to individual property owners. Financing of these projects is provided by shared costs with other organizations, land sales, state allotment from highway user tax collections and assessment proceeds. The Streets Capital Projects Fund accounts for street construction projects. Revenues are provided by the General Fund or by the issuance of General Obligation bonds. The Development EDA Fund accounts for transactions related to redevelopment efforts in the City; financing is provided by investment income, grants, and developer reimbursements. 58 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 85 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 The Sidewalks and Trails Fund accounts for the City’s 10 year plan to add additional sidewalks, trails, bike lane and bikeway throughout the community. Financing for this plan will occur by issuing general obligation bonds over several stages throughout the life of the plan. The Park Improvement Fund accounts for the financing of land acquisition and development for park purposes. Revenues are provided by St. Louis Park School District contributions, interest earnings, rent, sale of property and a property tax levy. The Redevelopment District Fund accounts for transactions relative to acquisition and development in the City’s tax increment redevelopment districts; financing is provided by the sale of general obligation tax increment bonds along with tax increment property tax payments. The City reports the following major enterprise funds: The Water Fund accounts for the provisions of water services to residents of the City. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, billing and collection. The Sewer Fund accounts for the provisions of sewer services to residents of the City. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, billing and collection. The Solid Waste Fund accounts for the revenue and expense related to collection, disposal, and recycling of residential solid waste. Financing is provided by charging each property owner a predetermined service fee. The Storm Water Fund accounts for the revenue and expenses related to providing storm water to the residents of the City. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, construction, maintenance, billing and collection. Additionally, the government reports the following fund types: Internal Service Funds account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the City, or to other governments on a cost reimbursement basis. The City’s internal service funds account for employee flex spending, uninsured loss, capital replacement, and pensions. As a general rule the effect of interfund activity has been eliminated from the government-wide financial statements. Exceptions to this general rule are transactions that would be treated as revenues, expenditures or expenses if they involved external organizations, such as buying goods and services or payments in lieu of taxes, are similarly treated when they involve other funds of the City. Elimination of these charges would distort the direct costs and program revenues reported for the various functions concerned. Amounts reported as program revenues include 1) charges to customers or applicants for goods, services, or privileges provided, 2) operating grants and contributions, and 3) capital grants and contributions, including special assessments. Internally dedicated resources are reported as general revenues rather than as program revenues. Likewise, general revenues include all taxes. Proprietary funds distinguish operating revenues and expenses from nonoperating items. Operating revenues and expenses generally result from providing services and producing and delivering goods in connection with a proprietary fund’s principal ongoing operations. The principal operating revenues of the water, sewer, solid waste and storm water enterprise funds are charges to customers for sales and services. Operating expenses for enterprise funds include the cost of sales and services, administrative expenses, and depreciation on capital assets. All revenues and expenses not meeting this definition are reported as nonoperating revenues and expenses. 59 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 86 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 D.BUDGETARY INFORMATION Budgets are legally adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. Annual appropriated budgets are legally adopted for the General Fund. A budget is not presented for the Housing Rehabilitation Fund since the City does not legally require to adopt a budget for the fund. Budgeted amounts are reported as originally adopted, or as amended by the City Council. Budgeted expenditure appropriations lapse at year end. Encumbrance accounting, under which purchase orders, contracts, and other commitments for the expenditure of monies are recorded in order to reserve that portion of the appropriation, is not employed by the City because it is as present not considered necessary to assure effective budgetary control or to facilitate effective cash management. E.LEGAL COMPLIANCE - BUDGETS The City follows these procedures in establishing the budgetary data reflected in the financial statements: 1.The City Manager submits to the City Council a proposed operating budget for the fiscal year commencing the following January 1. The operating budget includes proposed expenditures and the means of financing them. 2.The City Council reviews the proposed budget and makes appropriate changes. 3.Public hearings are conducted to obtain taxpayer comments. 4.The budget is legally enacted through passage of a resolution on a departmental/divisional basis and can be expended by each department based upon detailed budget estimates for individual expenditure accounts in accordance with the provisions of Section 6.05 of the City Charter. 5.After the budget resolution is approved, the City Council can increase the budget only by resolution if actual receipts exceed the estimated, or from accumulated fund balance in the amount of unexpended appropriations from the previous fiscal year. During the year 2017, the budget was not amended. 6.Formal budgetary integration is employed as a management control device during the year for the General Fund. 7.Legal debt obligation indentures determine the appropriation level and debt service tax levies for the Debt Service Funds. Supplementary budgets are adopted for the Proprietary Funds to determine and calculate user charges. These debt service and budget amounts represent general obligation bond indenture provisions and net income for operation and capital maintenance and are not reflected in the financial statements. 8.A capital improvement program is reviewed annually by the City Council for the Capital Project Funds. However, appropriations for major projects are not adopted until the actual bid award of the improvement. The appropriations are not reflected in the financial statements. 9.The legal level of budgetary control is at the fund level. Expenditures may not legally exceed budgeted appropriations at the total fund level. The City Council must approve all expenditures at fund level either by resolution or through the disbursement process. 10.Monitoring of budgets is maintained at the expenditure category level (i.e., personal services, supplies, and other services and charges, and capital outlay) within each program. Management can exceed 60 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 87 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 appropriations at the department level without City Council approval. Approval must be received for exceeding budgeted appropriations at the fund level. 11.The City Council may authorize transfer of budgeted amounts between City funds. F.CASH AND INVESTMENTS Cash and investment balances from all funds are pooled and invested to the extent available in authorized investments. Investment income is allocated to individual funds on the basis of average monthly cash balances. The City’s investment policy dictates that the General fund is to receive the first three percent of all interest earnings as an administrative fee. The administrative fee does not apply to the Economic Development Authority. Investments are stated at fair value, based upon quoted market prices, except for investments in 2a7-like external investment pools, which are stated at amortized cost. Investment income is accrued at the balance sheet date. For purposes of the statement of cash flows, the Proprietary Funds consider all highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents. All of the cash and investments allocated to the Proprietary Fund types have original maturities of 90 days or less. Therefore the entire balance in such fund types is considered cash equivalents. It is the City’s policy to invest in a manner that seeks to ensure preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. Safety of principal is the foremost objective, but liquidity and yield are also important considerations. The objective will be to mitigate credit risk by purchasing only highly rated securities with adequate collateral and interest rate risk by matching maturities to cash flow needs and holding securities to maturity. G.ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE Property taxes and special assessment receivables have been reported net of estimated uncollectible accounts (See Note 1 I and J). The City annually certifies delinquent water and sewer accounts to the County for collection in the following year. Because utility bills are considered liens on property, no estimated uncollectible amounts are established. Uncollectible amounts are not material for other receivables and have not been reported. H.INTERFUND RECEIVABLES AND PAYABLES Activity between funds that are representative of lending/borrowing arrangements outstanding at the end of the fiscal year are referred to as either “due to/from other funds” (i.e., the current portion of interfund loans) or “interfund loan receivable/payable” (i.e., the noncurrent portion of interfund loans). Any residual balances outstanding between the governmental activities and business-type activities are reported in the government-wide financial statements as “internal balances.” I.PROPERTY TAX REVENUE RECOGNITION The City Council annually adopts a tax levy and certifies it to the County in December (levy/assessment date) of each year for collection in the following year. The County is responsible for billing and collecting all property taxes for itself, the City, the local School District and other taxing authorities. Such taxes become a lien on January 1 and are recorded as receivables by the City at that date. Real property taxes are payable (by property owners) on May 15 and October 15 of each calendar year. Personal property taxes are payable by taxpayers on February 28 and June 30 of each year. These taxes are collected by the County and remitted to the City on or before July 7 and December 2 of the same year. Delinquent collections for November and December are received the following 61 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 88 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 January. The City has no ability to enforce payment of property taxes by property owners. The County possesses this authority. The City recognizes property tax revenue when it becomes both measurable and available to finance expenditures of the current period. In practice, current and delinquent taxes and State credits received by the City in July, December and January are recognized as revenue for the current year. Taxes collected by the County by December 31 (remitted to the City the following January) and taxes and credits not received at year end are classified as delinquent and due from County taxes receivable. The portion of delinquent taxes not collected by the City in January is fully offset by deferred inflow of resources because they are not available to finance current expenditures. GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The City recognizes property tax revenue in the period for which the taxes were levied. Uncollectible property taxes are not material and have not been reported. GOVERNMENTAL FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The City’s property tax revenue includes payment from the Metropolitan Revenue Distribution (Fiscal Disparities Formula) per Minnesota Statute 473F. This statute provides a means of spreading a portion of the taxable valuation of commercial/industrial real property to various taxing authorities within the defined metropolitan area. The valuation “shared” is a portion of commercial/industrial property valuation growth since 1971. Property taxes paid to the City through this formula for 2017 totaled $2,116,656. Receipt of property taxes from this “fiscal disparities pool” does not increase or decrease total tax revenue. J.SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REVENUE RECOGNITION Special assessments are levied against benefited properties for the cost or a portion of the cost of special assessment improvement projects in accordance with State Statutes. These assessments are collectible by the City over a term of years usually consistent with the term of the related bond issue. Collection of annual installments (including interest) is handled by the County Auditor in the same manner as property taxes. Property owners are allowed to (and often do) prepay future installments without interest or prepayment penalties. Once a special assessment roll is adopted, the amount attributed to each parcel is a lien upon that property until full payment is made or the amount is determined to be excessive by the City Council or court action. If special assessments are allowed to go delinquent, the property is subject to tax forfeit sale and the first proceeds of that sale (after costs, penalties and expenses of sale) are remitted to the City in payment of delinquent special assessments. Pursuant to State Statutes, a property shall be subject to a tax forfeit sale after three years unless it is homesteaded, agricultural or seasonal recreational land in which event the property is subject to such sale after five years. GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The City recognizes special assessment revenue in the period that the assessment roll was adopted by the City Council. Uncollectible special assessments are not material and have not been reported. GOVERNMENTAL FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Revenue from special assessments is recognized by the City when it becomes measurable and available to finance expenditures of the current fiscal period. In practice, current and delinquent special assessments received by the City are recognized as revenue for the current year. Special assessments that are collected by the County by December 31 (remitted to the City the following January) and are also recognized as revenue for the current year. All remaining delinquent, deferred and special deferred assessments receivable in governmental funding are completely offset by deferred inflow of resources. 62 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 89 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 K.INVENTORIES Inventory is valued at cost using the first-in, first out (FIFO) method. Inventory consists mainly of expendable supplies held for consumption. Inventories of the governmental funds are recorded as expenditures when consumed rather than when purchased. L.PREPAID ITEMS Certain payments to vendors reflect costs applicable to future accounting periods and are recorded as prepaid items in both government-wide and fund financial statements. Prepaid items are reported using the consumption method and recorded as expenditures/expenses at the time of consumption. M.CAPITAL ASSETS Capital assets, which include property, plant, equipment, infrastructure assets (e.g., roads, bridges, sidewalks, and similar items), and intangible assets such as easements and computer software, are reported in the applicable governmental or business-type activities columns in the government-wide financial statements. Capital assets are defined by the City as assets with an estimated useful life in excess of three years and an initial individual cost of more than the following: Land $1 Land improvements 5,000 Buildings and building improvements 5,000 Machinery and equipment 10,000 Office equipment 25,000 Vehicle or fleet 10,000 Infrastructure 250,000 Capitalization Threshold Such assets are recorded at historical cost or estimated historical cost if purchased or constructed. Donated capital assets, donated works of art and similar items, and capital assets received in a service concession arrangement are recorded at estimated acquisition value at the date of donation. The City uses the modified approach for reporting street and trail system capital assets. The costs of normal maintenance and repairs that do not add to the value of the asset or materially extend assets lives are not capitalized. Major outlays for capital assets and improvements are capitalized as projects are constructed. Interest incurred during the construction phase of capital assets of business-type activities is included as part of the capitalized value of the assets constructed. For the year ended December 31, 2017, no interest was capitalized in connection with construction in progress. 63 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 90 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Property, plant and equipment of the primary government, as well as the component units, is depreciated using the straight line method over the following estimated useful lives: Buildings and structures 5 – 30 years Improvements other than buildings 5 – 30 years Infrastructure 5 – 100 years Machinery, furniture and equipment (including software) 3 – 30 years Fleet 3 – 25 years Temporary easements 3 – 5 years Capital assets of the water utility and sewer utility operations include the water distribution system and sewer collection system. These systems have been wholly (or substantially) financed by non-operating funds (special assessments, general taxes, federal and state grants, and other sources) and contribution to the Water and Sewer operating funds. City policy is to finance these assets by the sources indicated rather than by user charges. Accordingly, the water and sewer user rates are not established at levels sufficient to cover depreciation on these assets. The City implemented GASB 51, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Intangible Assets effective January 1, 2010, which required the City to capitalize and amortize intangible assets. Pursuant to GASB Statement No. 51, the retroactive reporting of permanent easements is not required and therefore, the City has elected not to report permanent easements acquired in years prior to 2010. The City had already accounted for computer software at historical cost and therefore retroactive reporting was not necessary. The City elects to use the modified approach as defined by GASB Statement No. 34 for infrastructure reporting of its streets. The City conducted a physical assessment in the summer of 2015 of the condition of the streets. This condition assessment will be performed every 2 years. Each segment of City owned street was assigned a physical condition based on potential defects. An Overall Condition Index (OCI) was assigned to each segment. The index is expressed in a continuous scale from 0 to 100, where 0 is assigned to the least acceptable physical condition and 100 is assigned to those segments that have the characteristic of a new street. The following conditions were defined: Range Description 86 - 100 Excellent 71 - 85 Very good 56 - 70 Good 41 - 55 Fair 26 - 40 Poor 11 - 25 Very poor 0 - 10 Failed The City’s policy relative to maintaining the street and trail assets is to achieve an average rating of “Good” for all segments. This acceptable rating allows minor cracking and patching of the pavement along with minor roughness that could be noticeable to the users of the system. N.COMPENSATED ABSENCES It is the City's policy to permit employees to accumulate earned but unused vacation, sick pay and flex leave benefits. No liability is recorded for unpaid accumulated sick leave, except for that portion that is payable as severance. All liabilities for vacation leave, flex leave and severance, both current and long-term, are recorded in the Employee Benefits Fund, an Internal Service Fund for governmental funds, and in the individual enterprise 64 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 91 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 funds when incurred. The personnel ordinance limits the annual accumulation of benefits that can be accumulated from year-to-year. A liability for these amounts is reported in governmental funds only if they have matured, for example, as a result of employee resignations and retirements. O.LONG-TERM OBLIGATIONS In the government-wide financial statements and proprietary fund types in the fund financial statements, long-term debt and other long-term obligations are reported as liabilities in the applicable governmental activities, business- type activities, or proprietary fund type statement of net position. Bond premiums and discounts are deferred and amortized over the life of the bonds using the effective interest method. In the fund financial statements, governmental fund types recognize bond premiums and discounts during the current period. The face amount of debt issued is reported as other financing sources. Premiums received on debt issuances are reported as other financing sources while discounts on debt issuances are reported as other financing uses. P.FUND BALANCE CLASSIFICATIONS In the fund financial statements, governmental funds report fund balance in classifications that disclose constraints for which amounts in those funds can be spent. These classifications are as follows: Nonspendable - consists of amounts that are not in spendable form, such as prepaid items. Restricted - consists of amounts related to externally imposed constraints established by creditors, grantors or contributors; or constraints imposed by state statutory provisions. Committed - consists of amounts that are constrained for specific purposes that are internally imposed by formal action (resolution) of the City Council. Those committed amounts cannot be used for any other purpose unless City Council removes or changes the specified use by taking the same type of action it employed to previously commit those amounts. Assigned - consists of internally imposed constraints. These constraints reflect the specific purpose for which it is the City’s intended use. These constraints are established by the City Council and/or management. Pursuant to City Council Resolution, the City’s Chief Financial Officer and/or City Manager is authorized to establish assignments of fund balance. Unassigned - is the residual classification for the general fund and also reflects negative residual amounts in other funds. When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the City’s policy to first use restricted resources, then use unrestricted resources as they are needed. When committed, assigned or unassigned resources are available for use, it is the City’s policy to use resources in the following order; 1) committed 2) assigned and 3) unassigned. Q.INTERFUND TRANSACTIONS Interfund services provided and used are accounted for as revenues, expenditures or expenses. Transactions that constitute reimbursements to a fund for expenditures/expenses initially made from it that are properly applicable to another fund, are recorded as expenditures/expenses in the reimbursing fund and as reductions of expenditures/expenses in the fund that is reimbursed. Interfund loans are reported as an interfund loan receivable or 65 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 92 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 payable which offsets the movement of cash between funds. All other interfund transactions are reported as transfers. R.COMPARATIVE TOTALS The basic financial statements and required supplementary information, include certain prior-year summarized comparative information in total but not at the level of detail required for a presentation in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Accordingly, such information should be read in conjunction with the government’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2016, from which the summarized information was derived. S.NET POSITION Net position represents the difference between assets/deferred outflows and liabilities/deferred inflows. Net position is displayed in three components. a)Net investment in capital assets – consists of capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation reduced by any outstanding debt attributable to acquire capital assets. b)Restricted net position – consist of net position restricted when there are limitations imposed on their use through external restrictions imposed by creditors, grantors, laws or regulations of other governments. c)Unrestricted net position – all other net position that do not meet the definition of “restricted” or “net investment in capital assets”. T.USE OF ESTIMATES The preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) requires management to make estimates that affect amounts reported in the financial statements during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from such estimates. U. DEFERRED OUTFLOWS/INFLOWS OF RESOURCES In addition to assets, the statement of financial position will sometimes report a separate section for deferred outflows of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred outflows of resources, represents a consumption of net position that applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an outflow of resources (expense/expenditure) until then. The government has one item that qualifies for reporting in this category. It is the pension related deferred outflows of resources reported in the government-wide statement of net position and the proprietary funds statement of net position. In addition to liabilities, the statement of financial position will sometimes report a separate section for deferred inflows of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred inflows of resources, represents an acquisition of net position that applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an inflow of resources (revenue) until that time. The government has pension related deferred inflows of resources reported in the government-wide statement of net position and the proprietary funds statement of net position. The government also has a type of item, which arises only under a modified accrual basis of accounting, that qualifies for reporting in this category. Accordingly, the item, unavailable revenue, is reported only in the governmental fund balance sheet. The governmental funds report unavailable revenues from the following sources: property taxes, special assessments, bond reimbursement payments not yet due and other miscellaneaous unavailable revenue. 66 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 93 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 V. PENSION PLANS COST SHARING MULTIPLE – EMPLOYER PLANS Pensions. For purposes of measuring the net pension liability, deferred outflows/inflows of resources, and pension expense, information about the fiduciary net position of the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) and additions to/deductions from PERA’s fiduciary net position have been determined on the same basis as they are reported by PERA except that PERA’s fiscal year end is June 30. For this purpose, plan contributions are recognized as of employer payroll paid dates and benefit payments and refunds are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Investments are reported at fair value. Note 2 DEPOSITS AND INVESTMENTS A.DEPOSITS In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, the City maintains deposits at those depository banks authorized by the City Council, all of which are members of the Federal Reserve System. Minnesota Statutes require that securities pledged as collateral be held in safekeeping by the City Treasurer or in a financial institution other than that furnishing the collateral. Authorized collateral includes the following: 1.United States government treasury bills, treasury notes, treasury bonds; 2.Issues of United States government agencies and instrumentalities as quoted by a recognized industry quotation service available to the government entity; 3.General obligation securities of any state or local government with taxing powers which is rated “A” or better by a national bond rating service, or revenue obligation securities of any state or local government with taxing powers which is rated “AA” or better by a national bond rating service; 4.General obligation securities of a local government with taxing powers may be pledged as collateral against funds deposited by that same local government entity; 5.Irrevocable standby letters of credit issued by Federal Home Loan Banks to a municipality accompanied by written evidence that the bank’s public debt is rated “AA” or better by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. or Standard & Poor’s Corporation; and 6.Time deposits that are fully insured by any federal agency. Custodial Credit Risk - deposits – Custodial credit risk is the risk that in the event of a bank failure, the City’s deposits may not be returned to it. Minnesota Statutes require that insurance, surety bonds or collateral protect all City deposits. The market value of collateral pledged must equal 110% of deposits not covered by insurance or bonds. The City has no additional deposit policies addressing custodial credit risk. As of December 31, 2017, the bank balance of the City’s deposits was $4,028,524 all of which was covered by federal depository insurance or by collateral pledged and held in the City’s name. 67 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 94 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 B. INVESTMENTS The City is authorized by Minnesota Statute Chapter 118A, and the City’s investment policy, to invest in the following: 1.Direct obligations or obligations guaranteed by the United States or its agencies, its instrumentalities, or organizations created by an act of congress, excluding mortgage-backed securities defined as high risk. 2.Shares of investment companies registered under the Federal Investment Company Act of 1940 and whose only investments are in securities described in (a) above, general obligation tax-exempt securities, or repurchase or reverse repurchase agreements, and is rated one of the two highest rating categories for money market funds by at least one nationally recognized rating organization. 3.State and local securities as follows: a)any security which is a general obligation of any state or local government with taxing powers which is rated “A” or better by a national bond rating service; b)any security which is a revenue obligation of any state or local government with taxing powers which is rated “AA” or better by a national bond rating service; and c)a general obligation of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency which is a moral obligation of the State of Minnesota and is rated “A” or better by a national bond rating agency. 4.Bankers acceptance of United States banks. 5.Commercial paper, with a maturity of 270 days or less, issued by United States corporations or their Canadian subsidiaries, of the highest quality, and maturing in 270 days or less. At December 31, 2017, the City had the following investments and maturities: Fair Less Investment Type Rating Value Than 1 1-5 6-10 11-15 4M Fund NR 19,059,445$ 19,059,445$ -$-$ -$ Money market funds NR 1,739,310 1,739,310 -- - Commercial paper NR 2,887,102 2,887,102 -- - Brokered Certificates of Deposit NR 3,565,799 480,022 3,085,777 - - Municipal Bonds A - AAA 4,972,040 - 4,972,040 - - US Treasury AAA 14,913,534 199,204 14,714,330 - - Federal National Mortgage Association N/A 4,013,210 199,954 3,813,256 - - Federal Home Loan Bank Notes N/A 8,818,260 4,104,474 4,713,786 - - Total 59,968,700$ 28,669,511$ 31,299,189$ -$ -$ Total investments 59,968,700$ Deposits 2,267,025 Petty cash 4,931 Total cash and investments 62,240,656$ Investment Maturities (in Years) The City categorizes its fair value measurements within the fair value hierarchy established by generally accepted accounting principles. The hierarchy is based on the valuation inputs used to measure the fair value of the asset. The hierarchy has three levels. Level 1 investments are valued using inputs that are based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets. Level 2 investments are valued using inputs that are based on quoted prices for similar assets or inputs that are observable, either directly or indirectly. Level 3 investments are valued using inputs that are unobservable. 68 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 95 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 The City has the following recurring fair value measurements as of December 31, 2017: Investment Type 12/31/2017 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Investments at fair value: Commercial paper 2,887,102$ -$ 2,887,102$ -$ Brokered Certificates of Deposit 3,565,799 - 3,565,799 - Municipal Bonds 4,972,040 - 4,972,040 - US Treasury 14,913,534 - 14,913,534 - Federal National Mortgage Association 4,013,210 - 4,013,210 - Federal Home Loan Bank Notes 8,818,260 - 8,818,260 - Total/Subtotal 39,169,945 -$ 39,169,945$ -$ Investments not categorized: External investment pool - 4M Fund 19,059,445 Money market funds 1,739,310 Total 59,968,700$ Fair Value Measurement Using The City’s external investment pool investment is with the 4M Fund which is regulated by Minnesota Statutes and the Board of Directors of the League of Minnesota Cities. The 4M Fund is an unrated pool and the fair value of the position in the pool is the same as the value of pool shares. The pool is managed to maintain a portfolio weighted average maturity of no greater than 60 days and seeks to maintain a constant net asset value (NAV) per share of $1. The pool measures their investments in accordance with Government Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 79, at amortized cost. The 4M Liquid Asset Fund has no redemption requirements. The 4M Plus Fund requires funds to be deposited for a minimum of 14 calendar days. Withdrawals prior to the 14-day restriction period are subject to a penalty equal to 7 days interest on the amount withdrawn. C. INVESTMENT RISKS Custodial credit risk – investments – For investments in securities, custodial credit risk is the risk that in the event of failure of the counterparty to a transaction, the City will not be able to recover the value of its investment securities that are in the possession of an outside party. Investments in investment pools and money markets are not evidenced by securities that exist in physical or book entry form, and therefore are not subject to custodial credit risk disclosures. The City’s investment policy requires the City’s security broker/dealers to provide its audited financial statements, proof of NASD certification, proof of state registration, and certification of having read, understood and agreed to comply with the City’s investment policy. Investments in securities are held by the City’s broker-dealer of which $500,000 is insured through SIPC. Each broker-dealer has provided additional protection by providing additional insurance. This insurance is subject to aggregate limits applied to all of the broker-dealers accounts. 69 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 96 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Interest rate risk – Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in interest rates of debt investments could adversely affect the fair value of an investment. The City’s investment policy states the investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet all operating and capital requirements that might be reasonably anticipated. The maximum maturity of investments shall not extend beyond five years, unless related to specific cash flow needs. Credit Risk – Credit risk is the risk that an issuer or other counterparty to an investment will be unable to fulfill its obligation to the holder of the investment. State law limits investments to commercial paper to those rated in the highest quality category by at least two nationally recognized rating agencies; in any security of the State of Minnesota or any of its municipalities which is rated “A” or better by a national bond rating service for general obligation and rated “AA” or better for a revenue obligation; a general obligation of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency to those rated “A” or better by a national bond rating agency; mutual funds or money market funds whose investments are restricted to securities described in MS 118A.04. The City’s investment policy does not place further restrictions on investment options. Concentration of credit risk – Concentration of credit risk is the risk of loss that may be attributed to the magnitude of a government’s investment in a single issuer. The City’s investment policy states no more than 50% of its investment portfolio can be invested in municipal bonds or MHFA securities. Investments in a single issuer exceeding 5% of the City’s overall cash and investment portfolio are in various holdings as follows: Federal National Mortgage Assn.6.69% Federal Home Loan Bank 14.70% US Treasury 24.87% Note 3 RECEIVABLES A.LOANS RECEIVABLE The City has made loans to local businesses and individuals that qualify for various loan programs. The businesses and individuals pay varying installments on the loans. Depending on the loan program, some of the loans are secured by an interest in the property. Also, some of the loans are forgivable after 30 years if certain criteria are met. As of December 31, 2017, any forgiveness of loans would not occur for another 20 – 30 years. At this time, information is not available to develop an estimate for any loans which may be forgiven. Therefore, no allowance has been recorded. As loan maturity dates approach, the City will evaluate whether an allowance for forgivable loans should be recorded in the financial statements. As of December 31, 2017, the loans receivable balance was $6,920,101. 70 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 97 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Significant receivable balances not expected to be collected within one year of December 31, 2017 are as follows: Special Interfund Loans Assessments Property Loans Pledges Receivable Receivable Taxes Receivable Receivable Total Major Funds: General Fund -$ -$ 627,627$ -$ -$ 627,627$ Housing Rehabilitation Fund 3,230,023 21,721 23,339 - - 3,275,083 Debt Service Funds 1,520,000 - - - - 1,520,000 Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund - 6,485 - - - 6,485 Development EDA Fund 712,816 - - - - 712,816 Redevelopment District Fund 731,360 - - 4,638,921 - 5,370,281 Park Improvement Fund - - - - 1,250,000 1,250,000 Water Fund - 51,421 - - - 51,421 Sewer Fund - 501 - - - 501 Nonmajor Governmental Funds 442,299 2,774 - - - 445,073 Total 6,636,498$ 82,902$ 650,966$ 4,638,921$ 1,250,000$ 13,259,287$ Note 4 UNAVAILABLE REVENUE Governmental funds report deferred inflows of resources in connection with receivables for revenues that are not considered to be available to liquidate liabilities of the current period. At the end of the current fiscal year, the various components of unavailable revenue reported in the governmental funds were as follows: Unavailable Delinquent property taxes receivable (General Fund) 627,627$ Delinquent property taxes receivable (Redevelopment District) 22,339 Special assessments not yet due (Permanent Improvement Revolving)687,962 Special assessments not yet due (Housing Rehabilitation)5,817,785 Special assessments not yet due (Nonmajor Funds)178,568 Bond reimbursement payments not yet due (Debt Service Funds)1,560,000 Other miscellaneous (Redevelopment District)88,354 Other miscellaneous (Park Improvement Fund)1,350,000 Other miscellaneous (Nonmajor Funds)37,646 Total unavailable revenue for governmental funds 10,370,281$ 71 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 98 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Note 5 CAPITAL ASSETS The City has elected to use the modified approach as defined by GASB Statement No. 34 for reporting of street infrastructure. As a result, no accumulated depreciation or depreciation expense has been recorded for street infrastructure. Additional information of the modified approach is presented in the Notes to Required Supplementary Information section of this report. All other capital assets including other infrastructure systems were reported using the basic approach whereby accumulated depreciation and depreciation expense have been recorded. Modified approach adjustments represent the changes due to implementation of the modified approach for infrastructure reporting. Capital asset activity for the year ended December 31, 2017 is as follows: Beginning Ending Balance Increases Decreases Transfers Balance Governmental activities: Capital assets, not being depreciated: Land 16,991,835$ -$ -$ -$ 16,991,835$ Infrastructure - streets 26,011,544 - - - 26,011,544 Permanent easements 1,429,976 - - - 1,429,976 Construction in progress 12,097,034 8,969,243 15,174,050 (66,500) 5,825,727 Total capital assets, not being depreciated 56,530,389 8,969,243 15,174,050 (66,500) 50,259,082 Capital assets, being depreciated: Buildings and structures 47,589,376 8,705,169 - - 56,294,545 Improvements other than buildings 27,001,220 7,945,651 - - 34,946,871 Infrastructure 31,912,725 - - - 31,912,725 Machinery, furniture and equipment 9,777,050 738,370 - 66,500 10,581,920 Fleet 9,274,577 2,140,754 734,929 - 10,680,402 Total capital assets, being depreciated 125,554,948 19,529,944 734,929 66,500 144,416,463 Less accumulated depreciation for: Buildings and structures 14,046,332 1,096,947 - - 15,143,279 Improvements other than buildings 13,335,159 1,131,829 - - 14,466,988 Infrastructure 17,203,249 1,445,575 509,927 - 18,138,897 Machinery, furniture and equipment 5,731,839 821,236 - - 6,553,075 Fleet 4,426,037 291,686 - - 4,717,723 Total accumulated depreciation 54,742,616 4,787,273 509,927 - 59,019,962 Total capital assets being depreciated - net 70,812,332 14,742,671 225,002 66,500 85,396,501 Governmental activities capital assets - net 127,342,721$ 23,711,914$ 15,399,052$ -$ 135,655,583$ 72 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 99 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Beginning Ending Balance Increases Decreases Transfers Balance Business-type activities: Capital assets, not being depreciated: Land 515,083$ -$ -$ -$ 515,083$ Construction in progress 251,160 6,236,300 - - 6,487,460 Total capital assets, not being depreciated 766,243 6,236,300 - - 7,002,543 Capital assets, being depreciated: Buildings and structures 4,767,723 - - - 4,767,723 Improvements other than buildings 7,155,538 - - - 7,155,538 Infrastructure 51,449,702 329,344 - - 51,779,046 Machinery, furniture and equipment 9,028,848 - - - 9,028,848 Total capital assets, being depreciated 72,401,811 329,344 - - 72,731,155 Less accumulated depreciation for: Buildings and structures 3,962,107 127,778 - - 4,089,885 Improvements other than buildings 3,247,434 273,595 - - 3,521,029 Infrastructure 29,347,352 669,493 - - 30,016,845 Machinery, furniture and equipment 2,974,339 498,621 - - 3,472,960 Total accumulated depreciation 39,531,232 1,569,487 - - 41,100,719 Total capital assets being depreciated - net 32,870,579 (1,240,143) - - 31,630,436 Business-type activities capital assets - net 33,636,822$ 4,996,157$ -$ -$ 38,632,979$ Depreciation expense was charged to functions/programs of the primary government as follows: Governmental activities: General government 74,984$ Public safety 466,342 Engineering 8,393 Operations and recreation 2,328,908 Public information 55,874 Social and economic development 130,009 Internal service 1,722,763 Total depreciation expense - governmental activities 4,787,273$ Business-type activities: Water 887,322$ Sewer 112,386 Storm water 569,779 Total depreciation expense - business-type activities 1,569,487$ 73 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 100 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Note 6 CITY INDEBTEDNESS The City issues general obligation bonds, to provide funds for the acquisition and construction of major capital facilities. The reporting entity’s long-term debt is segregated between the amounts to be repaid from governmental activities and amounts to be repaid from business-type activities. General obligation bonds are direct obligations and pledge the full faith and credit of the City. As of December 31, 2017, long-term debt of the City consisted of the following: Final Authorized Issue Maturity Interest And Outstanding Date Date Rates Issued 12/31/17 Governmental Activities: General Long-Term Debt: General Improvement Bonds: G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2010A 5/7/2010 2/1/2031 1.25-5.7%3,105,000$ 2,415,000$ G.O. Improvement Refunding Bonds Series 2010C 12/29/2010 2/1/2040 3.0-5.65%1,770,000 1,560,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2010D (BABS)12/29/2010 2/1/2032 1.25-5.15% 13,025,000 10,340,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2012A HIA 10/17/2012 2/1/2033 0.75 - 3.90% 1,290,000 1,080,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2014A 12/18/2014 2/1/2026 2.00%5,070,000 4,605,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2016A 7/14/2016 2/1/2027 1.375 - 2.375% 10,000,000 10,000,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2017A 7/13/2017 2/1/2028 2.125 - 3%3,430,000 3,430,000 Total General Improvement Bonds 37,690,000 33,430,000 Tax Increment Bonds: Tax Increment Refunding Bonds Series 2008B 12/11/2008 2/1/2024 3.25-4.63%5,490,000 3,410,000 Issuance premiums (discounts)N/A N/A N/A N/A 497,336 Total - bonded indebtedness 43,180,000 37,337,336 Capital lease payable - copier 2/14/2014 1/14/2019 0.00%40,500 8,775 Capital lease payable - vehicles 5/1/2016 5/1/2021 4.53%222,149 157,156 Compensated absences payable N/A N/A N/A N/A 3,895,292 Total governmental activities 43,442,649 41,398,559 Business-Type Activities: General Obligation Revenue Bonds: Utility Crossover Refunding Bonds Series 2013A 7/1/2013 8/1/2023 1.0-1.9%4,170,000 3,120,000 Utility Revenue Bonds Series 2014A 12/18/2014 2/1/2026 2.00%4,930,000 4,480,000 Utility G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2017A 7/13/2017 2/1/2033 2.125 - 3%4,985,000 4,985,000 Utility Refunding Revenue Bonds Series 2017A 7/13/2017 2/1/2025 2.125 - 3%1,485,000 1,485,000 Total General Obligation Revenue Bonds 15,570,000 14,070,000 Issuance premiums (discounts)N/A N/A N/A N/A 375,931 Total - bonded indebtedness 15,570,000 14,445,931 Compensated absences payable N/A N/A N/A N/A 145,285 Total business-type activities 15,570,000 14,591,216 Total City 59,012,649$ 55,989,775$ 74 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 101 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES Annual debt service requirements to maturity for the governmental activities long-term debt are as follows: Year Ending December 31 Principal Interest Principal Interest 2018 1,640,000$ 1,102,101$ 415,000$ 141,613$ 2019 2,555,000 1,039,838 435,000 124,613 2020 2,625,000 966,956 460,000 105,563 2021 2,695,000 890,188 485,000 84,300 2022 2,755,000 810,304 510,000 61,913 2023 2,825,000 727,121 535,000 38,400 2024 2,905,000 638,277 570,000 13,181 2025 2,990,000 549,433 - - 2026 3,065,000 462,481 - - 2027 2,580,000 378,216 - - 2028 1,460,000 306,895 - - 2029 1,120,000 246,608 - - 2030 1,165,000 187,819 - - 2031 1,210,000 126,481 - - 2032 1,015,000 69,578 - - 2033 160,000 40,290 - - 2034 80,000 34,505 - - 2035 85,000 30,070 - - 2036 90,000 25,323 - - 2037 95,000 20,258 - - 2038 100,000 14,870 - - 2039 105,000 9,155 - - 2040 110,000 3,108 - - Total 33,430,000$ 8,679,871$ 3,410,000$ 569,581$ Governmental Activities G.O. Improvement Bonds G.O. Tax Increment Bonds Governmental Activities It is not practicable to determine the specific year for payment of long-term accrued compensated absences. 75 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 102 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVITIES Annual debt service requirements to maturity for the business-type long-term debt are as follows: Year Ending December 31 Principal Interest 2018 1,375,000$ 319,656$ 2019 1,675,000 284,463 2020 1,710,000 251,963 2021 1,220,000 217,275 2022 1,255,000 188,980 2023 1,295,000 159,165 2024 1,030,000 128,250 2025 1,060,000 102,125 2026 875,000 78,450 2027 340,000 64,413 2028 350,000 56,863 2029 360,000 48,425 2030 365,000 39,363 2031 375,000 29,175 2032 390,000 17,700 2033 395,000 5,925 Total 14,070,000$ 1,992,191$ G.O. Revenue Bonds Business-type Activities It is not practicable to determine the specific year for payment of long-term accrued compensated absences. 76 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 103 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 CHANGE IN LONG-TERM LIABILITIES Long-term liability activity for the year ended December 31, 2017 was as follows: Beginning Ending Due Within Balance Additions Reductions Balance One Year Governmental activities: Bonds payable: G.O. improvement bonds 31,230,000$ 3,430,000$ 1,230,000$ 33,430,000$ 1,640,000$ G.O. tax increment bonds 3,805,000 -395,000 3,410,000 415,000 Add: Premiums on bonds 459,545 196,964 55,119 601,390 - Discounts on bonds (111,446) -(7,391) (104,055) - Total bonds payable 35,383,099 3,626,964 1,672,728 37,337,335 2,055,000 Note Payable 2,025,297 -2,025,297 - - Capital lease payable 215,619 -49,688 165,931 51,612 Compensated absences 3,837,736 2,406,125 2,348,569 3,895,292 2,353,715 Total government activity long-term debt 41,461,751$ 6,033,089$ 6,096,282$ 41,398,558$ 4,460,327$ Business-type activities: Bonds payable: G.O. revenue bonds 10,515,000$ 6,470,000$ 2,915,000$ 14,070,000$ 1,375,000$ Add: Premiums on bonds 91,538 310,091 25,699 375,930 - Total bonds payable 10,606,538 6,780,091 2,940,699 14,445,930 1,375,000 Compensated absences 188,635 178,768 222,118 145,285 88,259 Total business-type activity long-term debt 10,795,173$ 6,958,859$ 3,162,817$ 14,591,215$ 1,463,259$ For governmental activities, compensated absences are paid out of the Employee Administrative internal service fund. $9,900,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2017A On July 13, 2017, the City issued the $9,900,000 General Obligation, Series 2017A with an average interest rate of 2.78% to provide $3,430,000 of funding for sidewalks, trails and the Southwest Light Rail Transit project, $4,985,000 for utility system improvements, $1,485,000 for a current refunding of the 2010B Utility Bonds. The City will use a portion of the net proceeds to redeem the 2018 through 2025 maturities of the Series 2010B Bonds aggregating $3,040,000 principal amount of the City’s $5,935,000 General Obligation Series 2010B Bonds with an average interest rate of 2.73% dated May 7, 2010. Net proceeds of $1,556,867 were used to retire all outstanding principal of the refunded bonds on August 1, 2017. The City Refunded the Bonds to reduce its total debt service payments over eight years by $92,830 and obtain an economic gain (difference between the present value of the debt service payments on the old and new debt) of $85,718. 77 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 104 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 CAPITAL LEASE PAYABLE A.COPY MACHINE In 2014, the City entered into a lease purchase agreement for a copier. The agreement calls for monthly payments of $675 maturing on January 14, 2019. Depreciation in the amount of $8,100 has been recorded as depreciation expense during 2017. The net book value of assets under the capital lease at December 31, 2017 is as follows: Equipment 40,500$ Accumulated depreciation (31,000) Net book value 9,500$ The following is a schedule of future minimum lease payments under the capital lease: Year Ending December 31, Payment 2018 8,100$ 2019 675 Total minimum lease payments 8,775$ B.VEHICLES In 2016, the City entered into a lease agreement for ten vehicles. The agreement calls for total monthly payments of $4,145 maturing on May 1, 2021, with an interest rate of 4.53 percent. Depreciation in the amount of $74,257 has been recorded as depreciation expense during 2017. The net book value of assets under the capital lease at December 31, 2017 is as follows: Equipment 222,149$ Accumulated depreciation (74,257) Net book value 147,892$ 78 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 105 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 The following is a schedule of future minimum lease payments under the capital lease: Year Ending December 31, Payment 2018 49,735$ 2019 49,735 2020 49,735 2021 20,707 Total minimum lease payments 169,912 Less: amount representing interest (12,756) Present value of minimum lease payments 157,156$ REVENUE PLEDGED Future revenue pledged for the payment of long-term debt is as follows: Percent of Debt service Remaining Principal Pledged Use of total as a % of Pledged Principal and Interest Revenue Bond Issue Proceeds Type debt service net revenues Through and Interest paid received G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2012A HIA Housing Improvement Area Fee 100.0% 55.0% 2033 1,397,831 88,039 160,793 G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2010A Housing Improvement Area Fee 100.0% 95.1% 2031 3,419,090 244,155 256,766 Tax Increment Refunding Bonds Series 2008B Street Improvements TIF 100.0% 100.0% 2024 3,979,581 552,813 552,813 G.O. Improvement Refunding Bonds Series 2010C Louisiana Court Project Operating revenues of Louisiana Court 100.0% 93.2% 2040 2,717,985 119,905 128,611 Utility Refunding Revenue Bonds Series 2010B Utility Infrastructure Projects Utility charges/Special Assessments 100.0% 100.0% 2025 1,765,083 220,155 220,155 Utility Crossover Refunding Bonds Series 2013A Utility Infrastructure Projects Utility charges 100.0% 100.0% 2023 3,255,183 790,413 790,413 Utility Revenue Bonds Series 2014A Utility Infrastructure Projects Utility charges 100.0% 100.0% 2026 4,895,000 544,100 544,100 G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2017A Utility Infrastructure Projects Utility charges 100.0% n/a 2033 6,239,754 - - Revenue Pledged Current Year 79 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 106 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Note 7 DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS A.PLAN DESCRIPTION The City participates in the following cost-sharing multiple-employer defined benefit pension plans administered by the Public Employees Retirement Association of Minnesota (PERA). PERA’s defined benefit pension plans are established and administered in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 353 and 356. PERA’s defined benefit pension plans are tax qualified plans under Section 401 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code. 1. General Employees Retirement Fund (GERF) All full-time (with the exception of employees covered by PEPFF) and certain part-time employees of the City are covered by the General Employees Retirement Fund (GERF). GERF members belong to either the Coordinated Plan or the Basic Plan. Coordinated Plan members are covered by Social Security and Basic Plan members are not. The Basic Plan was closed to new members in 1967. All new members must participate in the Coordinated Plan. 2. Public Employees Police and Fire Fund (PEPFF) The PEPFF, originally established for police officers and firefighters not covered by a local relief association, now covers all police officers and firefighters hired since 1980. Effective July 1, 1999, the PEPFF also covers police officers and firefighters belonging to a local relief association that elected to merge with and transfer assets and administration to PERA. B.BENEFITS PROVIDED PERA provides retirement, disability, and death benefits. Benefit provisions are established by state statute and can only be modified by the state legislature. Benefit increases are provided to benefit recipients each January. Increases are related to the funding ratio of the plan. Members in plans that are at least 90 percent funded for two consecutive years are given 2.5% increases. Members in plans that have not exceeded 90% funded, or have fallen below 80%, are given 1% increases. The benefit provisions stated in the following paragraphs of this section are current provisions and apply to active plan participants. Vested, terminated employees who are entitled to benefits but are not receiving them yet are bound by the provisions in effect at the time they last terminated their public service. 1.GERF Benefits Benefits are based on a member’s highest average salary for any five successive years of allowable service, age, and years of credit at termination of service. Two methods are used to compute benefits for PERA's Coordinated and Basic Plan members. The retiring member receives the higher of a step-rate benefit accrual formula (Method 1) or a level accrual formula (Method 2). Under Method 1, the annuity accrual rate for a Basic Plan member is 2.2% of average salary for each of the first ten years of service and 2.7% for each remaining year. The annuity accrual rate for a Coordinated Plan member is 1.2 percent of average salary for each of the first ten years and 1.7% for each remaining year. Under Method 2, the annuity accrual rate is 2.7% of average salary for Basic Plan members and 1.7% for Coordinated Plan members for each year of service. For members hired prior to July 1, 1989, a full annuity is available when age plus years of service equal 90 and normal retirement age is 65. For members hired on or after July 1, 1989, normal retirement age is the age for unreduced Social Security benefits capped at 66. 80 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 107 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 2.PEPFF Benefits Benefits for the PEPFF members first hired after June 30, 2010, but before July 1, 2014, vest on a prorated basis from 50% after five years up to 100% after ten years of credited service. Benefits for PEPFF members first hired after June 30, 2014, vest on a prorated basis from 50% after ten years up to 100% after twenty years of credited service. The annuity accrual rate is 3% of average salary for each year of service. For PEPFF members who were first hired prior to July 1, 1989, a full annuity is available when age plus years of service equal at least 90. C.CONTRIBUTIONS Minnesota Statutes Chapter 353 sets the rates for employer and employee contributions. Contribution rates can only be modified by the state legislature. 1.GERF Contributions Basic Plan members and Coordinated Plan members were required to contribute 9.1% and 6.50%, respectively, of their annual covered salary in calendar year 2017. The City was required to contribute 11.78% of pay for Basic Plan members and 7.50% for Coordinated Plan members in calendar year 2017. The City’s contributions to the GERF for the year ended December 31, 2017, were $1,122,359. The City’s contributions were equal to the required contributions as set by state statute. 2.PEPFF Contributions Plan members were required to contribute 10.8% of their annual covered salary in calendar year 2017. The City was required to contribute 16.20% of pay for PEPFF members in calendar year 2017. The City’s contributions to the PEPFF for the year ended December 31, 2017, were $1,210,648. The City’s contributions were equal to the required contributions as set by state statute. D.PENSION COSTS 1.GERF Pension Costs At December 31, 2017, the City reported a liability of $14,485,146 for its proportionate share of the GERF’s net pension liability. The City’s net pension liability reflected a recution due to the State of Minnesota’s contribution of $6 million to the fund in 2017. The State of Minnesota is considered a non-employer contributing entity and the state’s contribution meets the definition of a special funding situation. The State of Minnesota’s proportionate share of the net pension liability associated with the City totaled $182,131. The net pension liability was measured as of June 30, 2017, and the total pension liability used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of that date. The City’s proportion of the net pension liability was based on the City’s contributions received by PERA during the measurement period for employer payroll paid dates from July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017, relative to the total employer contributions received from all of PERA’s participating employers. At June 30, 2017, the City’s proportion was .2269% which was an increase of .0011% from its proportion measured as of June 30, 2016. For the year ended December 31, 2017, the City recognized pension expense of $2,004,710 for its proportionate share of the GERF’s pension expense. In addition, the City recognized an additional $5,260 as pension expense (and grant revenue) for its proportionate share of the State of Minnesota’s contribution of $6 million to the General Employees Fund. 81 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 108 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 At December 31, 2017, the City reported its proportionate share of the GERF’s deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions from the following sources: Deferred Outflows Deferred Inflows of Resources of Resources Differences between expected and actual economic experience 477,386$ 932,344$ Changes in actuarial assumptions 2,404,847 1,452,137 Difference between projected and actual investment earnings 94,453 - Changes in proportion 48,196 199,617 Contributions paid to PERA subsequent to the measurement date 566,138 - Total 3,591,020$ 2,584,098$ $566,138 reported as deferred outflows of resources related to pensions resulting from City contributions subsequent to the measurement date will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in the year ended December 31, 2018. Other amounts reported as deferred outflows and inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized in pension expense as follows: Pension Year Ended Expense December 31,Amount 2018 465,123$ 2019 848,769 2020 (258,242) 2021 (614,866) Thereafter - 2. PEPFF Pension Costs At December 31, 2017, the City reported a liability of $9,464,334 for its proportionate share of the PEPFF’s net pension liability. The net pension liability was measured as of June 30, 2017, and the total pension liability used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of that date. The City’s proportion of the net pension liability was based on the City’s contributions received by PERA during the measurement period for employer payroll paid dates from July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017, relative to the total employer contributions received from all of PERA’s participating employers. At June 30, 2017, the City’s proportion was .7010% which was a decrease of .0080% from its proportion measured as of June 30, 2016. The City also recognized $63,090 for the year ended December 31, 2017, as revenue (and an offsetting reduction of net pension liability) for its proportionate share of the State of Minnesota’s on-behalf contributions to the PEPFF. Legislation passed in 2013 required the State of Minnesota to begin contributing $9 million to the PEPFF each year, starting in fiscal year 2014. For the year ended December 31, 2017, the City recognized pension expense of $2,337,030 for its proportionate share of the PEPFF’s pension expense. 82 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 109 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 At December 31, 2017, the City reported its proportionate share of the PEPFF’s deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions from the following sources: Deferred Outflows Deferred Inflows of Resources of Resources Differences between expected and actual economic experience 217,850$ 2,527,973$ Changes in actuarial assumptions 12,385,969 13,437,006 Difference between projected and actual investment earnings 127,347 - Changes in proportion 86,403 169,228 Contributions paid to PERA subsequent to the measurement date 610,334 - Total 13,427,903$ 16,134,207$ $610,334 reported as deferred outflows of resources related to pensions resulting from City contributions subsequent to the measurement date will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in the year ended December 31, 2018. Other amounts reported as deferred outflows and inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized in pension expense as follows: Pension Year Ended Expense December 31, Amount 2018 156,195$ 2019 156,198 2020 (189,426) 2021 (773,727) 2022 (2,665,878) Thereafter - E.ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS The total pension liability in the June 30, 2017, actuarial valuation was determined using the following actuarial assumptions: Inflation 2.50% per year Active Member Payroll Growth 3.25% per year Investment Rate of Return 7.50% Salary increases were based on a service-related table. Mortality rates for active members, retirees, survivors and disabilitants were based on RP-2014 tables for the GERF and the PEPFF for males or females, as appropriate, with slight adjustments to fit PERA’s experience. Cost of living benefit increases for retirees are assumed to be 1% per year for the GERF through 2044 and PEPFF through 2064 and then 2.5% thereafter. Actuarial assumptions used in the June 30, 2017 valuation were based on the results of actuarial experience studies. The most recent four-year experience study in the General Employees Plan was completed in 2015. The most recent fire year experience study for the Police and Fire Plan was completed in 2016. 83 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 110 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 The following changes in actuarial assumptions occurred in 2017: General Employees Fund The Combined Service Annuity (CSA) loads were changed from 0.8% for active members and 60% for vested and non-vested deferred members. The revised CSA loads are now 0.0% for active member liability, 15.0% for vested deferred member liability and 3.0% for non-vested deferred member liability. The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.0% per year for all years to 1.0% per year through 2044 and 2.5% per year thereafter. Police and Fire Fund The single discount rate was changed from 5.6% to 7.5%. Assumed salary increases were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2016 experience study. The net effect is proposed rates that average 0.34% lower than the previous rates. Assumed rates of retirement were changed, resulting in fewer retirements. The Combined Service Annuity (CSA) load was 30% for vested and non-vested deferred members. The CSA has been changed to 33% for vested members and 2% for non-vested members. The base mortality table for healthy annuitants was changed from the RP-2000 fully generational table to the RP-2014 fully generational table (with a base year of 2006), with male rates adjusted by a factor of 0.96. The mortality improvement scale was changed from Scale AA to Scale MP-2016. The base mortality table for disabled annuitants was changed from the RP-2000 disabled mortality table to the mortality tables assumed for healthy retirees. Assumed termination rates were decreased to 3.0% for the first three years of service. Rates beyond the select period of three years were adjusted, resulting in more expected terminations overall. Assumed percentage of married female members was decreased from 65% to 60%. Assumed age difference was changed from separate assumptions for male members (wives assumed to be three years younger) and female members (husbands assumed to be four years older) to the assumption that males are two years older than females. The assumed percentage of female members electing Joint and Survivor annuities was increased. The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.00% for all years to 1.00% per year through 2064 and 2.50% thereafter. The long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments is 7.5%. The State Board of Investment, which manages the investments of PERA, prepares an analysis of the reasonableness on a regular basis of the long-term expected rate of return using a building-block method in which best-estimate ranges of expected future rates of return are developed for each major asset class. These ranges are combined to produce an expected long-term rate of return by weighting the expected future rates of return by the target asset allocation percentages. The target allocation and best estimates of geometric real rates of return for each major asset class are summarized in the following table: Target Long-Term Expected Asset Class Allocation Real Rate of Return Domestic Stocks 39% 5.10% International Stocks 19% 5.30% Bonds 20% 0.75% Alternative Assets 20% 5.90% Cash 2% 0.00% Total 100% 84 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 111 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 F.DISCOUNT RATE The discount rate used to measure the total pension liability in 2017 was 7.50%. The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that contributions from plan members and employers will be made at rates set in Minnesota Statutes. Based on these assumptions, the fiduciary net positions of the General Employees Fund was projected to be available to make all projected future benefit payments of current plan members. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the total pension liability. At June 30, 2016, the Police and Fire Fund projected benefit payments to exceed the funds projected fiduciary net position after June 30, 2056 and therefore used a single discount rate of 5.6%, which as stated above, increased to 7.5% at June 30, 2017. G.PENSION LIABILITY SENSITIVITY The following presents the City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability for all plans it participates in, calculated using the discount rate disclosed in the preceding paragraph, as well as what the City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate 1 percentage point lower or 1 percentage point higher than the current discount rate: 1% Decrease in 1% Increase in Discount Rate (6.5%) Discount Rate (7.5%) Discount Rate (8.5%) City's proportionate share of the GERF net pension liability 22,467,538$ 14,485,146$ 7,950,109$ City's proportionate share of the PEPFF net pension liability 17,824,103$ 9,464,334$ 2,562,884$ H.PENSION PLAN FIDUCIARY NET POSITION Detailed information about each pension plan’s fiduciary net position is available in a separately-issued PERA financial report that includes financial statements and required supplementary information. That report may be obtained on the Internet at www.mnpera.org. I.PENSION EXPENSE Pension expense recognized by the City for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 is as follows: GERF 2,009,970$ PEPFF 2,337,030 Total 4,347,000$ Note 8 DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN Four council members of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota are covered by the Public Employees Defined Contribution Plan (PEDCP), a multiple-employer deferred compensation plan administered by PERA. The PEDCP is a tax qualified plan under Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code and all contributions by or on behalf of employees are tax deferred until time of withdrawal. 85 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 112 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Plan benefits depend solely on amounts contributed to the plan plus investment earnings, less administrative expenses. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 353D.03, specifies plan provisions, including the employee and employer contribution rates for those qualified personnel who elect to participate. An eligible elected official who decides to participate contributes 5% of salary which is matched by the elected official’s employer. For ambulance service personnel, employer contributions are determined by the employer, and for salaried employees must be a fixed percentage of salary. Employer contributions for volunteer personnel may be a unit value for each call or period of alert duty. Employees who are paid for their services may elect to make member contributions in an amount not to exceed the employer share. Employer and employee contributions are combined and used to purchase shares in one or more of the seven accounts of the Minnesota Supplemental Investment Fund. For administering the plan, PERA receives 2% of employer contributions and twenty-five hundredths of 1% (.0025) of the assets in each member’s account annually. Total contributions made by the City during fiscal year 2017 were: Required Employer Employee (Pension Expense) Employee Employer Rate 2,294$ 2,294$ 5% 5% 5% Contribution Amount Percentage of Covered Payroll Note 9 OTHER POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS A. PLAN DESCRIPTION In addition to providing the pension benefits described in Note 7, the City provides post-employment health care benefits (as defined in paragraph B) for retired employees through a single-employer defined benefit plan. The City’s OPEB plan is administered by the City. The authority to provide these benefits is established in Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.61 Subd. 2a, and 299A.465. The benefits, benefit levels, employee contributions and employer contributions are governed by the City and can be amended by the City through its personnel manual and collective bargaining agreements with employee groups. The Plan is not accounted for as a trust fund, as an irrevocable trust has not been established to account for the Plan. The Plan does not issue a separate report. B. BENEFITS PROVIDED Retirees The City is required by State Statute to allow retirees to continue participation in the City’s group health insurance plan if the individual terminates service with the City through service retirement or disability retirement. Police officers, firefighters, sergeants, and dispatchers age 50 and over with 3 years of service, or age 65 with 1 year of service may continue medical and dental coverage at their own expense. Non-union and 49ers union employees age 55 with 3 years of service, age 65 with 1 year of service, any age with 30 years of service, or those whose age plus service is at least 90 may continue medical and dental coverage at their own expense. Employees may obtain dependent coverage at retirement only if the employee was receiving dependent coverage immediately prior to retirement. The surviving spouse of an active employee may continue coverage in the group health insurance plan after the employee’s death. All health care coverage is provided through the City’s group health insurance plans. The retiree is required to pay 100% of their premium cost for the City-sponsored group health insurance plan in which they participate. The premium is a blended rate determined on the entire active and retiree population. Since the projected claims costs for retirees exceed the blended premium paid by retirees, the retirees are receiving an implicit rate subsidy (benefit). The coverage levels are the same as those afforded to active employees. Upon a retiree reaching age 65, Medicare becomes the primary insurer and the City’s plan becomes secondary. 86 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 113 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 C. PARTICIPANTS As of the actuarial valuation dated January 1, 2017, participants consisted of: Retirees and beneficiaries currently purchasing health insurance through the City 45 Active employees 262 Total 307 Participating employers 1 D. FUNDING POLICY The additional cost of using a blended rate for actives and retirees is currently funded on a pay-as-you-go basis. Contribution requirements are negotiated between the City and union representatives and established by Council for nonunion groups. E. ANNUAL OPEB COSTS AND NET OPEB OBLIGATION The City’s annual other post employment benefit (OPEB) cost is calculated based on the annual required contribution (ARC) of the employer, an amount actuarially determined in accordance with the parameters of GASB Statement No. 45. The ARC represents a level of funding that, if paid on an ongoing basis, is projected to cover normal cost each year and amortize any unfunded actuarial liabilities (or funding excess) over a period not to exceed 30 years. The net OPEB obligation as of December 31, 2017, was calculated as follows: Annual required contribution (ARC)500,957$ Interest on net OPEB obligation 111,548 Adjustment to ARC (173,286) Annual OPEB cost 439,219 Contributions made during the year (167,886) Increase (decrease) in net OPEB obligation 271,333 Net OPEB obligation - beginning of year 3,187,082 Net OPEB obligation - end of year 3,458,415$ For governmental activities, the net OPEB obligation has been and is anticipated to be liquidated by the Employee Administrative internal service fund. 87 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 114 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 The City’s annual OPEB cost, the percentage of annual OPEB cost contributed to the plan and the net OPEB obligation for the previous three years was as follows: Percentage of Fiscal Year Annual OPEB Employer Annual OPEB Cost Net OPEB Ended Cost Contributions Contributed Obligation December 31, 2015 675,521$ 197,287$ 29.2%2,752,601$ December 31, 2016 691,347 256,866 37.2%3,187,082 December 31, 2017 439,219 167,886 38.2%3,458,415 F. FUNDED STATUS AND FUNDING PROGRESS The City currently has no assets that have been irrevocably deposited in a trust for future health benefits, therefore, the actuarial value of assets is zero. The funded status of the plan was as follows: Unfunded Actuarial Actuarial UAAL as a Actuarial Actuarial Accrued Accrued Funded Covered Percentage of Valuation Value of Assets Liability (AAL)* Liability (UAAL) Ratio Payroll Covered Payroll Date (a)(b)(b-a)(a/b)(c) ( (b-a) / c) January 1, 2017 -$ 3,918,390$ 3,918,390$ 0.0%23,588,815$ 16.6% *Using the Projected Unit Credit cost method. G. ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS Actuarial valuations of an ongoing plan involve estimates of the value of reported amounts and assumptions about the probability of occurrence of events far into the future. Examples include assumptions about future employment, mortality and the health care cost trend. Amounts determined regarding the funded status of the plan and the annual required contributions (ARC) of the employer are subject to continual revision as actual results are compared with past expectations and new estimates are made about the future. The schedule of funding progress, presented as required supplementary information following the notes to financial statements, presents multi-year trend information that shows whether the actuarial value of plan assets is increasing or decreasing over time relative to the actuarial accrued liabilities for benefits. Projections of benefits for financial reporting purposes are based on the substantive plan (the plan as understood by the employer and plan members) and include the types of benefits provided at the time of each valuation and the historical pattern of sharing of benefit costs between the employer and plan members to that point. The actuarial methods and assumptions used include techniques that are designed to reduce the effect of short-term volatility in actuarial accrued liabilities and the actuarial value of assets, consistent with the long-term perspective of the calculations. In the January 1, 2017 actuarial valuation, the Projected Unit Credit cost method was used. The actuarial assumptions included a 3.5% investment rate of return (net of administrative expenses) and an initial annual health care cost trend rate of 6.8% reduced by .3% each year to arrive at an ultimate health care cost trend rate of 4.4%, which includes a 2.75% inflation assumption. The actuarial value of assets was $0. The plan’s unfunded actuarial accrued liability is being amortized using the level dollar over 30 years on an open basis. The remaining amortization period at December 31, 2017 was 30 years. 88 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 115 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Note 10 INTERFUND RECEIVABLES, PAYABLES AND TRANSFERS The City has established interfund loans to finance infrastructure improvements, project reimbursements, housing rehabilitation loans and to provide initial financing for TIF districts. A summary at December 31, 2017 is as follows: Interfund Interfund Loan Loan Receivable Payable Major Funds: Development EDA 5,638,921$ -$ Redevelopment District - 5,638,921 Total 5,638,921$ 5,638,921$ The City provides temporary advances to funds that have insufficient cash balances by means of an advance from another fund shown as due from other funds in the advancing fund, and a due to other fund in the fund with the deficit, until adequate resources are received. A summary at December 31, 2017 is as follows: Due From Due To Other Funds Other Funds Major Funds: Permanent Improvement Revolving 422,021$ -$ Streets Capital Projects - 420,798 Other: Special Service Districts - 1,223 Total 422,021$ 422,021$ 89 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 116 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Interfund Transfers Interfund transfers at December 31, 2017 are as follows: Housing Permanent General Rehabilitation Debt Service Imp. Revolving Transfers out General -$ -$ -$ 185,000$ Housing Rehabilitation 8,185 - 333,094 - Debt Service - - - - Permanent Improvement Revolving 19,449 - - - Streets Capital Projects - - - - Redevelopment District - 160,000 1,187,735 - Nonmajor Governmental 126,348 - - - Water 552,651 - - - Sewer 767,848 - - - Solid Waste 195,429 - - - Storm Water 281,308 - - - Total transfers in 1,951,218$ 160,000$ 1,520,829$ 185,000$ Streets Capital Nonmajor Internal Projects Governmental Service Funds Total Transfers out General -$ 407,240$ 300,000$ 892,240$ Housing Rehabilitation - - - 341,279 Debt Service - - 244,708 244,708 Permanent Improvement Revolving - - - 19,449 Streets Capital Projects 156,617 - - 156,617 Redevelopment District - - - 1,347,735 Nonmajor Governmental 1,050,224 4,013 - 1,180,585 Water 4,438 - 31,800 588,889 Sewer 73,113 - 31,800 872,761 Solid Waste - - 31,800 227,229 Storm Water 73,796 - 31,759 386,863 Total transfers in 1,358,188$ 411,253$ 671,867$ 6,258,355$ Fund Transfers in Transfers in Fund Generally, transfers are used to (1) move revenues from the fund that collects them to the fund that the budget requires to expend them, (2) move receipts restricted to debt service from the funds collecting the receipts to a debt service fund in accordance with bond documents, (3) move funds in accordance with the City’s adopted capital improvement plan to support project costs, and (4) use unrestricted revenues collected in the General Fund to finance various programs accounted for in other funds in accordance with City policy. 90 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 117 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Note 11 FUND BALANCE A.CLASSIFICATIONS At December 31, 2017, a summary of the governmental fund balance classifications are as follows: Nonspendable Restricted Committed Assigned General Fund Prepaid items 58,594$ -$ -$ -$ Inventories 234,227 - - - E-911 purposes - 392,004 - - Inspections - - - 550,000 DWI enforcement - - - 172,187 Fire expenditures - - - 19,000 Tax court petitions - - - 309,382 Housing Rehabilitation - - 116,942 4,218,961 Debt service - 2,285,277 - - Permanent improvement revolving Capital improvements - - - 2,680,788 Light pole replacement - - - 185,000 Development EDA Economic development - 228,965 - - Capital improvements 685,049 Redevelopment efforts - - - 22,907,030 Sidewalks and Trails - 1,032,496 - 223,070 Park Improvement Development of parks - - - 1,413,614 Redevelopment districts - 4,805,857 - - Other governmental funds Prepaid items 6,500 - - - Community development - 421,575 - - Cable TV equipment purchases - 458,878 579,293 621,267 Police and fire purposes - 1,807,493 - - Special service districts - -- 186,008 Street rehabilitation - -- 1,173,654 Total 299,321$ 12,117,594$ 696,235$ 34,659,961$ Unless separately displayed, contraints are not more specific than the purpose of the fund. Fund/Description 91 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 118 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 B.MINIMUM FUND BALANCE POLICY The City Council has formally adopted a fund balance policy for the General Fund. The policy establishes a year-end target of unassigned fund balance amount for cash flow timing needs in the range of 40-50% of the subsequent years budget expenditures. At December 31, 2017, the unassigned fund balance for the General Fund was 45% of the subsequent year’s budgeted expenditures. Note 12 DEFICIT FUND BALANCE/NET POSITION At December 31, 2017, individual funds with deficit fund balance/net position are as follows: Amount Future Financing Source Redevelopment District: HRA Levy (2,103,103)$ General property tax levy Edgewood TIF District (878) Future tax increment Elmwood Village (1,365,648) Future tax increment Hard Coat TIF District (72,788) Future tax increment Shoreham TIF District (19,989) Future tax increment Excelsior Blvd TIF District (19,224) Future tax increment Internal Service Funds: Employee Administrative (31,778,099) Future pension contributions and investment earnings Total (35,359,729)$ Note 13 COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES A.RISK MANAGEMENT The City is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts; theft of, damage to, and destruction of assets; errors and omissions; injuries to employees; and natural disasters. The City continues to carry commercial insurance for risks of loss, including workers compensation, property and general liability and employee health and accident insurance. There were no significant reductions in insurance from the previous year or settlements in excess of insurance coverage for any of the past three fiscal years. PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE Property and casualty insurance coverage is provided through the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT), a public entity risk pool currently operating as a common risk management and insurance program for Minnesota cities: general liability, excess liability property, automobile, marine, crime, employee dishonesty, boiler and open meeting law. The City pays an annual premium to the LMCIT for its insurance coverage. The LMCIT is self-sustaining through member premiums and reinsures through commercial companies for claims in excess of various amounts. The City retains risk for the deductible portions of the insurance policies. The deductible amounts are $50,000 for each occurrence and a $150,000 annual aggregate. 92 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 119 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Current State Statute (Minnesota Statute subd. 466.04) provides limits of liability for the City. These limits are that the combination of defense expense and indemnification expense shall not exceed $500,000 in the case of one claimant or $1,500,000 for any number of claims arising out of a single occurrence. B. LITIGATION The City attorney has indicated that existing and pending lawsuits, claims and other actions in which the City is a defendant are either covered by insurance; of an immaterial amount; or, in the judgment of the City attorney, remotely recoverable by plaintiffs. C. FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDS The City receives financial assistance from federal and state governmental agencies in the form of grants. The disbursement of funds received under these programs generally requires compliance with the terms and conditions specified in the grant agreements and is subject to audit by the grantor agencies. Any disallowed claims resulting from such audits could become a liability of the applicable fund. However, in the opinion of management, any such disallowed claims will not have a material effect on any of the financial statements of the individual fund types included herein or on the overall financial position of the City at December 31, 2017. D. TAX ABATEMENTS – PAY-AS-YOU-GO TAX INCREMENT The City EDA provides tax abatements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.174 to 469.1794 (Tax Increment Financing) through a pay-as-you-go note program. Tax increment financing (TIF) can be used to encourage private development, redevelopment, renovation and renewal, growth in low-to-moderate-income housing, and economic development within the City. TIF captures the increase in tax capacity and property taxes from development or redevelopment to provide funding for the related project. 93 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 120 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 The City has several tax increment pay-as-you-go agreements. The agreements are not a general obligation of the City and are payable solely from available tax increment. Accordingly, these agreements are not reflected in the financial statements of the City. The pay-as-you-go note provides for payment to the developer a percentage of all tax increment received in the prior six months. The payment reimburses the developer for public improvements. Principal and interest shall be paid on February 1 and August 1. Payments are payable solely from available tax increment derived from the developed/redeveloped property and paid to the City. The City shall have no obligation to pay any unpaid balance of principal or accrued interest that may remain after the final payment Details of the pay-as-you-go notes are as follows: Issue Principal Interest First Final % TIF 2017 12/31/2017 District Name / Note Description Date Amount Rate Note Pymt Note Pymt Available Payments Balance Zarthan/16th Ave TIF District Rottlund ‐ Town Homes/Condos 11/06/2000 1,395,547 8.00% 08/01/2003 02/01/2021 89.75% 216,547 696,261 CSM ‐ Town Place Suites 10/25/2000 1,101,362 8.00% 08/01/2003 02/01/2022 89.75% 89,502 1,218,476 CSM ‐ Spring Hill Suites 10/25/2000 1,448,088 8.00% 08/01/2003 02/01/2022 89.75% 108,658 1,750,836 414,707 Mill City TIF District MSP SLP Apartments 11/20/2000 3,431,137 8.75% 08/1/2002 02/01/2023 94.75% 469,792 3,748,461 Park Commons TIF District Excelsior & Grand Phase I 07/01/2003 3,500,000 8.50% 08/05/2005 02/01/2023 97.00% 881,761 3,792,973 Excelsior & Grand Phase NE 06/05/2006 4,668,633 8.50% 08/01/2006 02/01/2028 97.00% 442,129 4,748,150 Excelsior & Grand Phase NW 06/05/2006 4,079,105 8.50% 08/01/2007 02/01/2028 97.00% 475,217 4,608,745 Excelsior & Grand Phase E 06/05/2006 3,300,715 8.50% 08/01/2006 02/01/2028 97.00% 278,355 3,990,718 2,077,462 Edgewood TIF District Real Estate Recycling / Edgewood Investors 02/01/2004 600,000 1.70% 08/01/2006 08/01/2019 95.00% 63,082 103,155 Wolfe Lake TIF District Belt Line Industrial Park 01/20/2006 996,000 7.50% 08/01/2006 02/01/2020 95.00% 124,392 255,277 Aquila Commons TIF District Stonebridge Development 05/26/2006 1,050,000 5.75% 08/01/2008 08/01/2018 95.00% 165,416 119,725 Elmwood Village TIF District Webster LLC / Adagio 07/29/2013 820,000 4.00% 08/01/2014 08/01/2019 95.00% 211,650 387,400 Medley Row 07/29/2013 200,000 4.00% 08/01/2014 02/01/2020 95.00% 45,927 115,246 Grecco / Towerlight 08/01/2013 490,000 6.50% 02/01/2015 02/01/2017 95.00% 21,042 ‐ Hoigaard Village 2010A TIF Revenue Bonds 10/21/2010 3,495,000 1.5‐5% 02/01/2011 02/01/2023 95.00% 356,763 1,895,000 Hoigaard Village 2010B TIF Revenue Note 10/21/2010 935,000 3.99% 02/01/2011 02/01/2018 95.00% 272,709 80,635 908,091 Highway 7 Corporate Center TIF District Highway 7 Business Center Note A 07/24/2008 2,100,000 1.00% 08/01/2008 08/01/2026 95.00% 114,330 1,049,782 Highway 7 Business Center Note B 07/24/2008 360,000 1.00% 08/01/2008 08/01/2026 95.00% 19,599 179,963 Highway 7 Business Center Note C 07/24/2008 72,000 1.00%08/01/2027 95.00%78,776 Highway 7 Business Center Note D 07/24/2008 23,000 1.00%08/01/2027 95.00%25,165 133,929 West End TIF District Duke Realty Limited Partnership 11/01/2010 21,100,000 6.75% 02/01/2012 08/01/2031 95.00% 1,078,322 20,909,528 Ellipse on Excelsior TIF District Ellipse on Excelsior Note A 08/01/2011 1,230,000 6.00% 02/01/2012 02/01/2019 95.00% 279,016 345,611 Ellipse on Excelsior Note B 08/01/2011 220,000 6.00% 02/01/2012 08/01/2019 95.00% 45,421 84,494 E2 08/01/2015 686,195 5.60% 08/01/2015 02/01/2021 95.00% 138,468 429,669 462,906 Eliot Park TIF District Cedar Lake Road Apartments LLC 05/18/2016 1,100,000 5.50% 08/01/2016 02/01/2021 95.00% 195,168 946,483 94 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 121 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 E. LOUISIANA COURT PROJECT The City of St. Louis Park has entered into an agreement with Project for Pride in Living Louisiana Court Limited Partnership to issue $4,505,000 in General Obligation Bonds – Series 2000A for the purpose of acquiring and renovating certain rental housing facilities within the City of St. Louis Park intended primarily for low and moderate income persons and their families. During 2010, the 2000A bonds were refunded by the $1,770,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2010C. The City of St. Louis Park will receive monthly principal and interest payments from Project for Pride in Living Louisiana Court Limited Partnership to cover all debt service obligations of the City of St. Louis Park on a semi-annual basis. In the event that the City of St. Louis Park does not receive payment from Project for Pride in Living, the City of St. Louis Park is still under obligation to make all debt service payments. At such time, the City of St. Louis Park would pursue collection of above referenced principal and interest payments per the agreement dated May 1, 2000. As of December 31, 2017, the outstanding principal on the bonds is $1,560,000. F. CONSTRUCTION COMMITMENTS The City has active construction projects as of December 31, 2017. The projects include street construction in areas with newly developed housing, widening and construction of existing streets and bridges, and the construction of additional storm sewer and utility improvements. At year end the City’s commitments with contractors are as follows: Remaining Project Commitment Hwy 7 at Louisiana 128,025$ ROC - glue laminated construction 73,539 Aquatic park filter replacement 250,470 2017 pavement mgmt and watermain 117,827 W. 37th Street bridge replacement 623,945 Alley reconstruction 29,169 Connect the Park sidewalk 25,497 Water treatment plant #4 rehab 2,907,801 2017 MSA - Texas Ave 136,070 Carpenter Park - stormwater improvement 82,866 Bass Lake Preserve Outlet 126,367 Total commitments 4,501,576$ Note 14 CONDUIT DEBT OBLIGATIONS From time to time, the City has issued industrial, hospital or housing revenue bonds to provide financial assistance to private- sector entities for the acquisition and construction of industrial, commercial or housing facilities deemed to be in the public interest. The bonds are secured by the property financed and are payable solely from payments received on the underlying mortgage loans. Upon repayment of the bonds, ownership of the acquired facilities transfers to the private-sector entity served by the bond issuance. Neither the City, the State, nor any political subdivision thereof is obligated in any manner for repayment of the bonds. Accordingly, the bonds are not reported as liabilities in the accompanying financial statements. As of December 31, 2017, there were 15 revenue bonds issued. The aggregate principal amount payable as of December 31, 2017 is $139,755,926. 95 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 122 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 2017 Note 15 RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING STANDARDS The Governmental Accounting Standards Boards (GASB) recently approved the following statements which were not implemented for these financial statements: Statement No. 75 Accounting and Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefits Other Than Pensions. The provisions in Statement 75 are effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2017. Statement No. 83 Certain Asset Retirement Obligations. The provisions of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2018. Statement No. 84 Fiduciary Activities. The provisions of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Statement No. 85 Omnibus 2017. The provisions of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2017. Statement No. 86 Certain Debt Extinguishment Issues. The provisions of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2017. Statement No. 87 Leases. The provisions of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Statement No. 88 Certain Disclosures Related to Debt, including Direct Borrowings and Direct Placements. The provisions of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2018. The effect these standards may have on future financial statements is not determinable at this time, but it is expected that Statements No. 75 and No. 87 may have a material impact. 96 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 123 REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 97 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 124 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Statement 9 BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE - GENERAL FUND Page 1 of 4 For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Budgeted Amounts Original Final Revenues Property taxes 24,748,436$ 24,748,436$ 24,809,554$ 61,118$ Licenses and permits Business regulatory licenses 631,110 631,110 720,282 89,172 Non-business licenses and permits 3,114,626 3,114,626 3,265,235 150,609 Total licenses and permits 3,745,736 3,745,736 3,985,517 239,781 Intergovernmental Federal 151,500 151,500 198,746 47,246 State shared taxes Highway user tax 600,000 600,000 680,835 80,835 Insurance premium tax 637,427 637,427 693,200 55,773 State of Minnesota Other 115,637 115,637 158,287 42,650 PERA 45,205 45,205 45,205 - Police training reimbursement 20,000 20,000 15,896 (4,104) School district 58,700 58,700 57,746 (954) Other local governments 3,200 3,200 49,091 45,891 Total intergovernmental 1,631,669 1,631,669 1,899,006 267,337 Charges for services General government 801,867 801,867 707,619 (94,248) Public safety 98,250 98,250 132,282 34,032 Public works - signals/lighting 17,250 17,250 17,000 (250) Culture and rec 1,110,770 1,110,770 1,196,819 86,049 Rent of City property 1,160,265 1,160,265 1,206,457 46,192 Total charges for services 3,188,402 3,188,402 3,260,177 71,775 Fines and forfeits Municipal court 225,000 225,000 237,357 12,357 Liquor violations 12,000 12,000 15,750 3,750 Property forfeits 15,000 15,000 37,479 22,479 Miscellaneous violations 2,200 2,200 2,650 450 Total fines and forfeits 254,200 254,200 293,236 39,036 Interest income 140,000 140,000 125,985 (14,015) Miscellaneous 144,100 144,100 167,484 23,384 Total revenues 33,852,543 33,852,543 34,540,959 688,416 Actual Amounts Variance with Final Budget 98 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 125 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Statement 9 BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE - GENERAL FUND Page 2 of 4 For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Budgeted Amounts Expenditures Original Final General government Administration Current Personal services 595,738$ 595,738$ 601,349$ (5,611)$ Supplies 3,500 3,500 1,600 1,900 Other services and charges 481,794 481,794 514,967 (33,173) Capital outlay - - 140,290 (140,290) Total administration 1,081,032 1,081,032 1,258,206 (177,174) General services Supplies 15,000 15,000 31,448 (16,448) Other services and charges 489,806 489,806 88,328 401,478 Total general services 504,806 504,806 119,776 385,030 Human resources Current Personal services 582,599 582,599 577,229 5,370 Supplies 2,000 2,000 2,547 (547) Other services and charges 170,100 170,100 150,956 19,144 Total human resources 754,699 754,699 730,732 23,967 Communications, marketing and community outreach Current Personal services 350,610 350,610 322,113 28,497 Materials and supplies 27,600 27,600 18,031 9,569 Other services and charges 295,184 295,184 406,459 (111,275) Total communications, etc.673,394 673,394 746,603 (73,209) Technology and support services Current Personal services 900,312 900,312 778,525 121,787 Materials and supplies 7,500 7,500 20,834 (13,334) Other services and charges 662,900 662,900 622,256 40,644 Total technology and support services 1,570,712 1,570,712 1,421,615 149,097 Accounting Current Personal services 568,460 568,460 540,891 27,569 Materials and supplies 3,000 3,000 4,324 (1,324) Other services and charges 335,890 335,890 327,739 8,151 Total accounting 907,350 907,350 872,954 34,396 Assessing Current Personal services 691,114 691,114 642,425 48,689 Materials and supplies 1,500 1,500 544 956 Other services and charges 14,525 14,525 8,295 6,230 Total assessing 707,139 707,139 651,264 55,875 Actual Amounts Variance with Final Budget 99 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 126 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Statement 9 BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE - GENERAL FUND Page 3 of 4 For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Budgeted Amounts Expenditures (continued)Original Final General government (continued) Facilities maintenance Current Personal services 444,244$ 444,244$ 461,977$ (17,733)$ Materials and supplies 89,000 89,000 94,733 (5,733) Other services and charges 599,530 599,530 571,630 27,900 Total facilities maintenance 1,132,774 1,132,774 1,128,340 4,434 Community development Current Personal services 1,351,355 1,351,355 1,342,231 9,124 Materials and supplies 1,100 1,100 1,450 (350) Other services and charges 13,600 13,600 9,794 3,806 Total community development 1,366,055 1,366,055 1,353,475 12,580 Total general government 8,697,961 8,697,961 8,282,965 414,996 Public safety Police Current Personal services 8,363,703 8,363,703 8,380,899 (17,196) Materials and supplies 142,055 142,055 203,058 (61,003) Other services and charges 593,369 593,369 574,867 18,502 Total police 9,099,127 9,099,127 9,158,824 (59,697) Fire protection Current Personal services 3,967,816 3,967,816 3,859,683 108,133 Materials and supplies 122,250 122,250 123,723 (1,473) Other services and charges 310,810 310,810 330,236 (19,426) Total fire protection 4,400,876 4,400,876 4,313,642 87,234 Inspection services Current Personal services 2,304,363 2,304,363 2,082,056 222,307 Materials and supplies 12,000 12,000 12,474 (474) Other services and charges 109,490 109,490 179,083 (69,593) Total inspection services 2,425,853 2,425,853 2,273,613 152,240 Total public safety 15,925,856 15,925,856 15,746,079 179,777 Actual Amounts Variance with Final Budget 100 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 127 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Statement 9 BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE - GENERAL FUND Page 4 of 4 For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Budgeted Amounts Expenditures (continued)Original Final Operations and recreation Public works administration Current Personal services 241,199$ 241,199$ 205,756$ 35,443$ Materials and supplies 6,000 6,000 2,664 3,336 Other services and charges 18,400 18,400 36,485 (18,085) Total public works administration 265,599 265,599 244,905 20,694 Public works operations Current Personal services 1,480,975 1,480,975 1,454,444 26,531 Materials and supplies 532,500 532,500 430,277 102,223 Other services and charges 1,005,542 1,005,542 917,763 87,779 Total public works operations 3,019,017 3,019,017 2,802,484 216,533 Culture and recreation Current Personal services 4,373,340 4,373,340 4,463,134 (89,794) Materials and supplies 1,014,978 1,014,978 804,629 210,349 Other services and charges 2,137,659 2,137,659 2,000,647 137,012 Total culture and recreation 7,525,977 7,525,977 7,268,410 257,567 Total operations and recreation 10,810,593 10,810,593 10,315,799 494,794 Engineering Current Personal services 210,319 210,319 202,470 7,849 Materials and supplies 10,450 10,450 3,495 6,955 Other services and charges 155,832 155,832 133,911 21,921 Total engineering 376,601 376,601 339,876 36,725 Total expenditures 35,811,011 35,811,011 34,684,719 1,126,292 Revenues over (under) expenditures (1,958,468) (1,958,468) (143,760) 1,814,708 Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in 1,899,927 1,899,927 1,951,218 51,291 Transfers out - - (892,240) (892,240) Total other financing sources (uses)1,899,927 1,899,927 1,058,978 (840,949) Net change in fund balances (58,541)$ (58,541)$ 915,218 973,759$ Fund balances - January 1 17,874,696 Fund balances - December 31 18,789,914$ Actual Amounts Variance with Final Budget 101 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 128 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Statement 10 SCHEDULE OF FUNDING PROGRESS - POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFIT PLAN For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Unfunded Actuarial Actuarial Actuarial UAAL as a Actuarial Value of Accrued Accrued Funded Covered Percentage of Valuation Assets Liability (AAL)* Liability (UAAL) Ratio Payroll Covered Payroll Date (a)(b)(b-a)(a/b)(c)( (b-a) / c) January 1, 2013 -$ 5,140,716$ 5,140,716$ 0.0% 17,338,372$ 29.6% January 1, 2015 -$ 5,257,905$ 5,257,905$ 0.0% 21,324,812$ 24.7% January 1, 2017 -$ 3,918,390$ 3,918,390$ 0.0% 23,588,815$ 16.6% *Using the projected unit credit actuarial pay cost method. 102 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 129 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Statement 11 SCHEDULE OF PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF NET PENSION LIABILITY - GENERAL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT FUND For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 City's Proportionate State's Share of the City's Proportionate Net Pension Proportionate Plan City's City's Share (Amount) Liability and the Share of the Fiduciary Proportionate Proportionate of the Net State's Proportionate Net Pension Net Position Share Share (Amount) Pension Share of the Net Liability as a as a Measurement Fiscal Year (Percentage) of of the Net Liability Pension Liability Percentage of its Percentage Date Ending the Net Pension Pension Associated with Associated with Covered Covered of the Total June 30 December 31 Liability Liability (a) City (b) City (a+b) Payroll (c) Payroll ((a+b)/c) Pension Liability 2015 2015 0.2263% 11,728,040$ -$ 11,728,040$ 13,317,871$ 88.1%78.2% 2016 2016 0.2258% 18,333,840 239,395 18,573,235 14,027,206 132.4%68.9% 2017 2017 0.2269% 14,485,146 182,131 14,667,277 14,714,583 99.7%75.9% The schedule is provided prospectively beginning with the City's fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 and is intended to show a ten year trend. Additional years will be reported as they become available. 103 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 130 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Statement 12 SCHEDULE OF PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS - GENERAL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT FUND For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Statutorily Contributions in Contribution Contributions as a Required Relation to the Deficiency Covered Percentage of Fiscal Year Contribution Statutorily Required (Excess)Payroll Covered Ending (a) Contribution (b)(a-b)(c)Payroll (b/c) December 31, 2015 1,026,806$ 1,026,806$ -$ 13,690,747$ 7.5% December 31, 2016 1,076,319 1,076,319 - 14,350,435 7.5% December 31, 2017 1,122,359 1,122,359 - 14,965,469 7.5% The schedule is provided prospectively beginning with the City's fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 and is intended to show a ten year trend. Additional years will be reported as they become available. 104 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 131 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Statement 13 SCHEDULE OF PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF NET PENSION LIABILITY - PUBLIC EMPLOYEES POLICE AND FIRE FUND For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Proportionate Share Proportionate of the Net Pension Plan Fiduciary Proportion Share (Amount)Liability as a Net Position as Measurement Fiscal Year (Percentage) of of the Net Percentage of its a Percentage Date Ending the Net Pension Pension Covered Covered of the Total June 30 December 31 Liability Liability (a) Payroll (b) Payroll (a/b) Pension Liability 2015 2015 0.7170%8,146,798$ 6,568,763$ 124.0%86.6% 2016 2016 0.7090%28,453,404 6,826,711 416.8%63.9% 2017 2017 0.7010%9,464,334 7,214,850 131.2%85.4% The schedule is provided prospectively beginning with the City's fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 and is intended to show a ten year trend. Additional years will be reported as they become available. 105 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 132 Statement 14CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION SCHEDULE OF PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS - PUBLIC EMPLOYEES POLICE AND FIRE FUND For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Statutorily Contributions in Contribution Contributions as a Required Relation to the Deficiency Covered Percentage of Fiscal Year Contribution Statutorily Required (Excess)Payroll Covered Ending (a) Contribution (b)(a-b)(c)Payroll (b/c) December 31, 2015 1,087,225$ 1,087,225$ -$ 6,711,265$ 16.2% December 31, 2016 1,127,487 1,127,487 - 6,959,796 16.2% December 31, 2017 1,210,648 1,210,648 - 7,473,136 16.2% The schedule is provided prospectively beginning with the City's fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 and is intended to show a ten year trend. Additional years will be reported as they become available. 106 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 133 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION NOTES TO RSI December 31, 2017 Note A LEGAL COMPLIANCE – BUDGETS The General Fund budget is legally adopted on a basis consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The legal level of budgetary control is at the department level for the major funds. Note B MODIFIED APPROACH FOR CITY STREETS AND TRAILS INFRASTRUCTURE CAPITAL ASSETS In accordance with GASB Statement No. 34, the City is required to account for and report infrastructure capital assets. The City defines infrastructure as the basic physical assets including the street and trail system; water treatment and distribution system; wastewater collection system; park and recreation lands and improvement system; storm water conveyance system; and building combined with site amenities such as parking and landscape areas used by the City in the conduct of its business. Each major infrastructure can be divided into subsystems. For example, the street and trail system can be divided into pavement widths, curb type and sidewalk. City owned streets could further be classified as collector or local. Subsystem detail is not presented in these basic financial statements; however, the City maintains detailed information on these subsystems. The City elects to use the modified approach as defined in GASB Statement No. 34 for infrastructure reporting for its Pavement Management Program. Under GASB Statement No. 34, eligible infrastructure capital assets are not required to be depreciated under the following requirements: 1) The City manages the eligible infrastructure capital assets using an asset management system with characteristics of (1) an up to-date inventory; (2) perform condition assessments and summarize the results using a measurement scale; and (3) estimate annual amount to maintain and preserve at the established condition assessment level. 2) The City documents that the eligible infrastructure capital assets are being preserved approximately at or above the established and disclosed condition assessment level. The City’s policy relative to maintaining the street and trail assets is to achieve an average rating of “Good” for all segments. This acceptable rating allows minor cracking and patching of the pavement along with minor roughness that could be noticeable to the users of the system. 107 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 134 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION NOTES TO RSI December 31, 2017 In 2017, the City conducted a physical condition assessment of four of eight areas of the City. This assessment will be performed every two years. Each street segment was assigned a physical condition based on potential defects. An Overall Condition Index (OCI) was assigned to each street and expressed in a continuous scale from 0 to 100, where 0 is assigned to the least acceptable physical condition and 100 is assigned the physical characteristics of a new street. The following conditions were defined: Range Description 86 - 100 Excellent 71 - 85 Very good 56 - 70 Good 41 - 55 Fair 26 - 40 Poor 11 - 25 Very poor 0 - 10 Failed As of December 31, 2017, the City’s street and trail system was rated at an OCI index of 67 on the average with detail condition as follows: The City’s streets are constantly deteriorating resulting from the following factors: (1) traffic using the system; (2) the sun’s ultra-violet rays drying out and breaking down the top layer of pavement; (3) utility company/private development trenching operations; (4) water damage from natural precipitation; and (5) frost heave. The City is continuously taking actions to prolong the life of the system through short-term maintenance activities such as pothole patching, crack sealing, seal coating and overlaying. The City expended $4,494,315 on street maintenance for the year ending December 31, 2017. These expenditures delayed deterioration; however, the overall condition of the system was not improved through these maintenance expenditures. The City has estimated that the amount of annual expenditures through 2027 required to maintain the City’s street system at the average OCI rating of “good” is approximately $4,255,000. Year Maintenance Estimate Actual Expenditures OCI Rating 2015 2,622,000 2,050,904 65% 2016 3,999,000 2,731,582 64% 2017 4,255,000 4,494,315 67% Condition % of Streets and Trails Excellent to Good 64.0% Fair 14.2% Poor to Substandard 21.8% 108 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 135 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION NOTES TO RSI December 31, 2017 Note C PENSION INFORMATION PERA – General Employees Retirement Fund 2017 Changes Changes in Actuarial Assumptions: -The Combined Service Annuity (CSA) loads were changed from 0.8 percent for active members and 60 percent for vested and non-vested deferred members. The revised CSA loads are now 0.0 percent for active member liability, 15.0 percent for vested deferred member liability and 3.0 percent for non- vested deferred member liability. -The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.0 percent per year for all years to 1.0 percent per year through 2044 and 2.5 percent per year thereafter. 2016 Changes Changes in Actuarial Assumptions: -The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.0% per year through 2035 and 2.5% per year thereafter to 1.0% per year for all future years. -The assumed investment return was changed from 7.9% to 7.5%. The single discount rate was changed from 7.9% to 7.5%. -Other assumptions were changed pursuant to the experience study dated June 30, 2015. The assumed future salary increases, payroll growth, and inflation were decreased by 0.25% to 3.25% for payroll growth and 2.50% for inflation. PERA – Public Employees Police and Fire Fund 2017 Changes Changes in Actuarial Assumptions: -The single discount rate was changed from 5.6% to 7.5%. -Assumed salary increases were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2016 experience study. The net effect is proposed rates that average 0.34 percent lower than the previous rates. -Assumed rates of retirement were changed, resulting in fewer retirements. -The Combined Service Annuity (CSA) load was 30 percent for vested and non-vested deferred members. The CSA has been changed to 33 percent for vested members and 2 percent for non-vested members. -The base mortality table for healthy annuitants was changed from the RP-2000 fully generational table to the RP-2014 fully generational table (with a base year of 2006), with male rates adjusted by a factor of 0.96. The mortality improvement scale was changed from Scale AA to Scale MP-2016. The base mortality table for disabled annuitants was changed from the RP-2000 disabled mortality table to the mortality tables assumed for healthy retirees. -Assumed termination rates were decreased to 3.0 percent for the first three years of service. Rates beyond the select period of three years were adjusted, resulting in more expected terminations overall. -Assumed percentage of married female members was decreased from 65 percent to 60 percent. 109 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 136 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION NOTES TO RSI December 31, 2017 -Assumed age difference was changed from separate assumptions for male members (wives assumed to be three years younger) and female members (husbands assumed to be four years older) to the assumption that males are two years older than females. -The assumed percentage of female members electing Joint and Survivor annuities was increased. -The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.00 percent for all years to 1.00 percent per year through 2064 and 2.50 percent thereafter. 2016 Changes Changes in Actuarial Assumptions: -The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.0% per year through 2037 and 2.5% thereafter to 1.0% per year for all future years. -The assumed investment return was changed from 7.9% to 7.5%. The single discount rate changed from 7.9% to 5.6%. -The assumed future salary increases, payroll growth, and inflation were decreased by 0.25% to 3.25% for payroll growth and 2.50% for inflation. 110 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 137 COMBINING FUND STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES 111 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 138 - This page intentionally left blank - 112 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 139 NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS 113 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 140 - This page intentionally left blank - 114 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 141 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS The Special Revenue Funds are used to account for and report the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are restricted or committed to expenditure for specified purposes other than debt service or capital projects. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS The Capital Projects Funds account for financial resources that are restricted, committed, or assigned to expenditure for capital outlays including the acquisition or construction of capital facilities and other capital assets. 115 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 142 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET Statement 15 NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS December 31, 2017 Special Capital Revenue Projects Total Assets Cash and investments 1,749,829$ 2,172,976$ 3,922,805$ Accrued interest receivable 4,915 18,038 22,953 Due from other governments 4,600 - 4,600 Accounts receivable 168,706 791,212 959,918 Prepaid items - 6,500 6,500 Special assessments receivable - delinquent 1,462 - 1,462 Special assessments receivable - deferred 178,427 - 178,427 Loans receivable - noncurrent 442,299 - 442,299 Total assets 2,550,238$ 2,988,726$ 5,538,964$ Liabilities Accounts payable 43,735$ 1,079$ 44,814$ Salaries payable 22,045 - 22,045 Due to other funds 1,223 - 1,223 Total liabilities 67,003 1,079 68,082 Deferred inflows of resources Unavailable revenue 216,214 - 216,214 Fund balances Nonspendable - 6,500 6,500 Restricted 880,453 1,807,493 2,687,946 Committed 579,293 - 579,293 Assigned 807,275 1,173,654 1,980,929 Total fund balances 2,267,021 2,987,647 5,254,668 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 2,550,238$ 2,988,726$ 5,538,964$ 116 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 143 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND Statement 16 CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Special Capital Revenue Projects Total Revenues Taxes Franchise taxes 684,128$ 3,079,266$ 3,763,394$ Intergovernmental 56,961 - 56,961 Charges for services 25,094 - 25,094 Special assessments 179,742 - 179,742 Interest income 14,393 39,026 53,419 Miscellaneous 3,994 - 3,994 Total revenues 964,312 3,118,292 4,082,604 Expenditures Current Public safety - 14,875 14,875 Public information 495,256 - 495,256 Engineering - 3,444,091 3,444,091 Housing maintenance 57,370 - 57,370 Social and economic development 212,274 - 212,274 Capital outlay Public safety - 25,088 25,088 Public information 106,049 - 106,049 Total expenditures 870,949 3,484,054 4,355,003 Revenues over (under) expenditures 93,363 (365,762) (272,399) Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in 11,253 400,000 411,253 Transfers out (130,361) (1,050,224) (1,180,585) Total other financing sources (uses)(119,108) (650,224) (769,332) Net change in fund balances (25,745) (1,015,986) (1,041,731) Fund balances - January 1 2,292,766 4,003,633 6,296,399 Fund balances - December 31 2,267,021$ 2,987,647$ 5,254,668$ 117 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 144 - This page intentionally left blank - 118 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 145 NONMAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Cable Television Fund – used to account for revenues received from franchise fees and expenditures related to regulation of the privately owned cable television company. Community Development Fund – used to account for funds received under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. Special Service Districts Fund – used to account for the operations of Special Service Districts. Revenues are received from each district’s property owners and are used to provide additional services, primarily snow removal, within each District. 119 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 146 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET Statement 17 NONMAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS December 31, 2017 Assets Cash and investments 1,549,464$ 12,322$ 188,043$ 1,749,829$ Accrued interest receivable 4,383 - 532 4,915 Due from other governments - 4,600 - 4,600 Accounts receivable 168,706 - - 168,706 Special assessments receivable - delinquent - - 1,462 1,462 Special assessments receivable - deferred - - 178,427 178,427 Loans receivable - noncurrent - 442,299 - 442,299 Total assets 1,722,553$ 459,221$ 368,464$ 2,550,238$ Liabilities Accounts payable 41,070$ -$ 2,665$ 43,735$ Salaries payable 22,045 - - 22,045 Due to other funds - - 1,223 1,223 Total liabilities 63,115 - 3,888 67,003 Deferred inflows of resources Unavailable revenue - 37,646 178,568 216,214 Fund balances Restricted 458,878 421,575 - 880,453 Committed 579,293 - - 579,293 Assigned 621,267 - 186,008 807,275 Total fund balances 1,659,438 421,575 186,008 2,267,021 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 1,722,553$ 459,221$ 368,464$ 2,550,238$ Cable Television Community Development Special Service Districts Total 120 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 147 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, Statement 18 EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES NONMAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Revenues Taxes Franchise taxes 684,128$ -$ -$ 684,128$ Intergovernmental - 56,961 - 56,961 Charges for services - -25,094 25,094 Special assessments - -179,742 179,742 Interest income 12,579 - 1,814 14,393 Miscellaneous 862 - 3,132 3,994 Total revenues 697,569 56,961 209,782 964,312 Expenditures Current Public information Personal services 416,238 - - 416,238 Supplies 15,199 - - 15,199 Other services and charges 63,819 - - 63,819 Housing maintenance Personal services - 6,897 - 6,897 Other services and charges - 50,473 - 50,473 Social and economic development Supplies - - 23,856 23,856 Other services and charges - - 188,418 188,418 Capital outlay Public information 106,049 - - 106,049 Total expenditures 601,305 57,370 212,274 870,949 Revenues over (under) expenditures 96,264 (409) (2,492) 93,363 Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in - - 11,253 11,253 Transfers out (84,506) - (45,855) (130,361) Total other financing sources (uses)(84,506) - (34,602) (119,108) Net change in fund balances 11,758 (409) (37,094) (25,745) Fund balances - January 1 1,647,680 421,984 223,102 2,292,766 Fund balances - December 31 1,659,438$ 421,575$ 186,008$ 2,267,021$ Cable Television Community Development Special Service Districts Total 121 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 148 - This page intentionally left blank - 122 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 149 NONMAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Pavement Management Fund – used to account for the financing of street rehabilitation. Revenues are provided by a franchise fee and transfers from the Sanitary Sewer Utility and Water Utility Funds. Police and Fire Pensions Fund – used to account for the funds received by the Police and Fire department for pension refunds. These funds must be used for specific police and fire purposes. 123 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 150 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET Statement 19 NONMAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS December 31, 2017 Pavement Management Police and Fire Pensions Total Assets Cash and investments 369,524$ 1,803,452$ 2,172,976$ Accrued interest receivable 12,918 5,120 18,038 Accounts receivable 791,212 - 791,212 Prepaid items 6,500 - 6,500 Total assets 1,180,154$ 1,808,572$ 2,988,726$ Liabilities Accounts payable -$ 1,079$ 1,079$ Fund balances Nonspendable 6,500 - 6,500 Restricted - 1,807,493 1,807,493 Assigned 1,173,654 - 1,173,654 Total fund balances 1,180,154 1,807,493 2,987,647 Total liabilities and fund balances 1,180,154$ 1,808,572$ 2,988,726$ 124 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 151 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, Statement 20 EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES NONMAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Pavement Management Police and Fire Pensions Total Revenues Taxes Franchise taxes 3,079,266$ -$ 3,079,266$ Interest income 23,818 15,208 39,026 Total revenues 3,103,084 15,208 3,118,292 Expenditures Current Public safety - 14,875 14,875 Engineering 3,444,091 - 3,444,091 Capital outlay Public safety - 25,088 25,088 Total expenditures 3,444,091 39,963 3,484,054 Revenues over (under) expenditures (341,007) (24,755) (365,762) Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in 400,000 - 400,000 Transfers out (1,050,224) - (1,050,224) Total other financing sources (uses)(650,224) - (650,224) Net change in fund balances (991,231) (24,755) (1,015,986) Fund balances - January 1 2,171,385 1,832,248 4,003,633 Fund balances - December 31 1,180,154$ 1,807,493$ 2,987,647$ 125 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 152 - This page intentionally left blank - 126 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 153 MAJOR DEBT SERVICE FUNDS 2010A General Obligation Bond 2012A General Obligation HIA Bonds 2010D General Obligation Fire Station Bond 2014A General Obligation Bonds 2016A General Obligation Bonds 2000 General Obligaiton Bond Reserve 2010C General Obligation Bond 2010C General Obligation Bond Reserve Fund 2005A General Obligation Bond Hoigaard’s 2010 A & B TIF Notes 2008B General Obligation Tax Increment Bond 127 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 154 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET MAJOR DEBT SERVICE FUNDS December 31, 2017 2010D General Obligation Fire Station Bond 2014A General Obligation Bonds 2016A General Obligation Bonds 2000 General Obligation Bond Reserve Assets Cash and investments 926,306$ 572,539$ 511,630$ 121,105$ Accrued interest receivable 1,747 1,060 869 - Due from other governments 80,033 - - - Accounts receivable - - - - Loans receivable - current - - - - Loans receivable - noncurrent - - - - Total assets 1,008,086$ 573,599$ 512,499$ 121,105$ Liabilities Accounts payable -$ -$ -$ -$ Deposits payable - - - - Unearned revenue 13,339 - - - Total liabilities 13,339 - - - Deferred inflows of resources Unavailable revenue - - - - Fund balances Restricted 994,747 573,599 512,499 121,105 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 1,008,086$ 573,599$ 512,499$ 121,105$ 128 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 155 Statement 21 2010C General Obligation Bond 2010C General Obligation Bond Reserve Hoigaard's 2010 A & B TIF Notes 2008B General Obligation Tax Increment Bond Total 71,018$ 243,034$ 450$ 4,000$ 2,450,082$ - - - - 3,676 - - - - 80,033 9,877 3,666 - - 13,543 40,000 - - - 40,000 1,520,000 - - - 1,520,000 1,640,895$ 246,700$ 450$ 4,000$ 4,107,334$ -$ -$ 450$ 4,000$ 4,450$ - 244,268 - - 244,268 - -- - 13,339 - 244,268 450 4,000 262,057 1,560,000 - - - 1,560,000 80,895 2,432 - - 2,285,277 1,640,895$ 246,700$ 450$ 4,000$ 4,107,334$ 129 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 156 - This page intentionally left blank - 130 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 157 Statement 22 Page 1 of 2 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES MAJOR DEBT SERVICE FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 2010A General Obligation Bond 2012A General Obligation HIA Bonds 2014A General Obligation Bonds 2010D General Obligation Fire Station Bond Revenues Taxes Property taxes -$ -$ 595,455$ 927,436$ Intergovernmental - - - 160,215 Interest income - - 1,204 2,842 Miscellaneous - - - - Total revenues - - 596,659 1,090,493 Expenditures Social and economic development Developer assistance - - - - Debt service Principal 120,000 55,000 465,000 550,000 Interest and other 124,605 33,489 100,899 500,523 Total expenditures 244,605 88,489 565,899 1,050,523 Revenues over (under) expenditures (244,605) (88,489) 30,760 39,970 Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in 244,605 88,489 - - Transfers out - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)244,605 88,489 - - Net change in fund balances - - 30,760 39,970 Fund balances - January 1 - - 542,839 954,777 Fund balances - December 31 -$ -$ 573,599$ 994,747$ 131 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 158 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES MAJOR DEBT SERVICE FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 2016A General Obligation Bonds 2000 General Obligation Bond Reserve 2010C General Obligation Bond Revenues Taxes Property taxes 617,046$ -$ -$ Intergovernmental - - - Interest income 1,049 857 333 Miscellaneous - - 128,611 Total revenues 618,095 857 128,944 Expenditures Social and economic development Developer assistance - - - Debt service Principal - - 40,000 Interest and other 219,497 - 79,705 Total expenditures 219,497 - 119,705 Revenues over (under) expenditures 398,598 857 9,239 Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in - - 857 Transfers out - (857) - Total other financing sources (uses)- (857) 857 Net change in fund balances 398,598 - 10,096 Fund balances - January 1 113,901 121,105 70,799 Fund balances - December 31 512,499$ 121,105$ 80,895$ 132 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 159 Statement 22 Page 2 of 2 2010C General Obligation Bond Reserve 2005A General Obligation Bond Hoigaard's 2010 A & B TIF Notes 2008B General Obligation Tax Increment Bond Interfund Eliminations Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,139,937$ - - - - - 160,215 1,586 - - - - 7,871 - - - - - 128,611 1,586 - - - - 2,436,634 - - 630,472 - - 630,472 - - - 395,000 - 1,625,000 - - - 162,263 - 1,220,981 - - 630,472 557,263 - 3,476,453 1,586 - (630,472) (557,263) - (1,039,819) - - 630,472 557,263 (857) 1,520,829 - (244,708) - - 857 (244,708) - (244,708) 630,472 557,263 - 1,276,121 1,586 (244,708) - - - 236,302 846 244,708 - - - 2,048,975 2,432$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,285,277$ 133 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 160 - This page intentionally left blank - 134 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 161 MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FUNDS Duke West End TIF Eliot Park TIF Ellipse TIF District HRA Levy Victoria Ponds Park Center Housing CSM TIF District Mill City TIF District Park Commons TIF District Edgewood TIF District Elmwood Village Wolfe Lake TIF District Aquila Commons Highway 7 Business Center Hard Coat TIF District Shoreham TIF District Excelsior Blvd TIF District 135 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 162 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FUNDS December 31, 2017 Duke West End TIF Eliot Park TIF Ellipse TIF District HRA Levy Assets Cash and investments 1,262,057$ 167,133$ 335,817$ 57,020$ Accrued interest receivable 1,813 156 416 146 Taxes receivable - unremitted - - - 1,844 Taxes receivable - delinquent - - - 22,339 Interfund loan receivable - - - - Loans receivable - noncurrent - - - - Total assets 1,263,870$ 167,289$ 336,233$ 81,349$ Liabilities Accounts payable 1,504$ 270$ 1,857$ -$ Due to other governments 3,351 982 1,280 - Interfund loan payable 459,284 20,366 170,014 2,162,113 Total liabilities 464,139 21,618 173,151 2,162,113 Deferred inflows of resources Unavailable revenue - - - 22,339 Fund balances Restricted 799,731 145,671 163,082 - Unassigned - - - (2,103,103) Total fund balances 799,731 145,671 163,082 (2,103,103) Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 1,263,870$ 167,289$ 336,233$ 81,349$ 136 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 163 Statement 23 Page 1 of 2 Victoria Ponds Park Center Housing CSM TIF District Mill City TIF District Park Commons TIF District 266,107$ 202,044$ 648,313$ 386,847$ 1,190,919$ 761 719 1,409 602 1,114 - - 188 - 23,271 - - - - - 99,800 - - - - - 731,360 - - - 366,668$ 934,123$ 649,910$ 387,449$ 1,215,304$ -$ -$ 2,327$ 270$ 3,936$ - 743 1,430 1,218 6,517 - -- - - - 743 3,757 1,488 10,453 - 88,354 - - - 366,668 845,026 646,153 385,961 1,204,851 - - - - - 366,668 845,026 646,153 385,961 1,204,851 366,668$ 934,123$ 649,910$ 387,449$ 1,215,304$ 137 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 164 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FUNDS December 31, 2017 Edgewood TIF District Elmwood Village Wolfe Lake TIF District Aquila Commons Assets Cash and investments -$ 1,420,721$ 87,115$ 111,750$ Accrued interest receivable - 3,038 132 150 Taxes receivable - unremitted - 4,440 - - Taxes receivable - delinquent - -- - Interfund loan receivable - -- - Loans receivable - noncurrent - -- - Total assets -$ 1,428,199$ 87,247$ 111,900$ Liabilities Accounts payable 270$ 930$ 270$ 270$ Due to other governments 608 4,986 697 1,775 Interfund loan payable - 2,787,931 - - Total liabilities 878 2,793,847 967 2,045 Deferred inflows of resources Unavailable revenue - - - - Fund balances Restricted - - 86,280 109,855 Unassigned (878) (1,365,648) - - Total fund balances (878) (1,365,648) 86,280 109,855 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances -$ 1,428,199$ 87,247$ 111,900$ 138 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 165 Statement 23 Page 2 of 2 Highway 7 Business Center Hard Coat TIF District Shoreham TIF District Excelsior Blvd TIF District Interfund Eliminations Total 53,493$ 27,569$ 526$ 529$ -$ 6,217,960$ 87 47 - - - 10,590 - - - - - 29,743 - - - - - 22,339 - - - - (99,800) - - - - - - 731,360 53,580$ 27,616$ 526$ 529$ (99,800)$ 7,011,992$ 270$ 48$ -$ -$ -$ 12,222$ 731 556 526 529 - 25,929 - 99,800 19,989 19,224 (99,800) 5,638,921 1,001 100,404 20,515 19,753 (99,800) 5,677,072 - - - - - 110,693 52,579 - - - - 4,805,857 - (72,788) (19,989) (19,224) - (3,581,630) 52,579 (72,788) (19,989) (19,224) - 1,224,227 53,580$ 27,616$ 526$ 529$ (99,800)$ 7,011,992$ 139 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 166 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Duke West End TIF Eliot Park TIF Ellipse TIF District HRA Levy Revenues Taxes Property taxes -$ -$ -$ 1,056,101$ Tax increments 2,076,586 343,232 575,356 - Interest income 2,839 58 178 24 Total revenues 2,079,425 343,290 575,534 1,056,125 Expenditures Current Social and economic development 1,125,301 200,863 471,612 15,154 Debt service Interest and other 19,086 734 8,096 86,686 Total expenditures 1,144,387 201,597 479,708 101,840 Revenues over (under) expenditures 935,038 141,693 95,826 954,285 Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in - - - - Transfers out (557,263) - - - Total other financing sources (uses)(557,263) - - - Net change in fund balances 377,775 141,693 95,826 954,285 Fund balances - January 1 421,956 3,978 67,256 (3,057,388) Fund balances - December 31 799,731$ 145,671$ 163,082$ (2,103,103)$ 140 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 167 Statement 24 Page 1 of 2 Victoria Ponds Park Center Housing CSM TIF District Mill City TIF District Park Commons TIF District Edgewood TIF District -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - 166,342 467,997 527,512 2,652,451 52,422 6,202 1,906 3,592 914 114 - 6,202 168,248 471,589 528,426 2,652,565 52,422 1,427 4,581 462,949 476,037 2,374,281 64,776 - - - - - - 1,427 4,581 462,949 476,037 2,374,281 64,776 4,775 163,667 8,640 52,389 278,284 (12,354) - - - - - - (25,133) (160,000) - - - - (25,133) (160,000) - - - - (20,358) 3,667 8,640 52,389 278,284 (12,354) 387,026 841,359 637,513 333,572 926,567 11,476 366,668$ 845,026$ 646,153$ 385,961$ 1,204,851$ (878)$ 141 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 168 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Elmwood Village Wolfe Lake TIF District Aquila Commons Revenues Taxes Property taxes -$ -$ -$ Tax increments 1,653,982 128,465 181,535 Interest income 4,661 186 145 Total revenues 1,658,643 128,651 181,680 Expenditures Current Social and economic development 303,880 132,210 172,319 Debt service Interest and other 107,228 - - Total expenditures 411,108 132,210 172,319 Revenues over (under) expenditures 1,247,535 (3,559) 9,361 Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in - - - Transfers out (630,472) - - Total other financing sources (uses)(630,472) - - Net change in fund balances 617,063 (3,559) 9,361 Fund balances - January 1 (1,982,711) 89,839 100,494 Fund balances - December 31 (1,365,648)$ 86,280$ 109,855$ 142 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 169 Statement 24 Page 2 of 2 Highway 7 Business Center Hard Coat TIF District Shoreham TIF District Excelsior Blvd TIF District Interfund Eliminations Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,056,101$ 115,413 20,499 - - - 8,961,792 114 54 - - - 20,987 115,527 20,553 - - - 10,038,880 139,531 564 1,041 2,931 - 5,949,457 - 4,600 706 605 - 227,741 139,531 5,164 1,747 3,536 - 6,177,198 (24,004) 15,389 (1,747) (3,536) - 3,861,682 - 25,133 - - (25,133) - - - - - 25,133 (1,347,735) - 25,133 - - - (1,347,735) (24,004) 40,522 (1,747) (3,536) - 2,513,947 76,583 (113,310) (18,242) (15,688) - (1,289,720) 52,579$ (72,788)$ (19,989)$ (19,224)$ -$ 1,224,227$ 143 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 170 - This page intentionally left blank - 144 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 171 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS The City has three Internal Service Funds to account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the City, or to other governments on a cost reimbursement basis. The City’s internal service funds account for employee flex spending, uninsured loss, and capital replacement. 145 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 172 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING STATEMENT OF NET POSITION Statement 25 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS December 31, 2017 Employee Administrative Uninsured Loss Capital Replacement Total Assets Current assets Cash and investments 1,101,596$ 589,614$ 949,342$ 2,640,552$ Accrued interest receivable 5,069 1,306 2,150 8,525 Accounts receivable - 9,150 2,193 11,343 Prepaid items - 72,431 29,266 101,697 Deposits receivable 31,000 - - 31,000 Total current assets 1,137,665 672,501 982,951 2,793,117 Noncurrent assets Capital assets, at cost Land - - 818,094 818,094 Building and structures - - 9,274,550 9,274,550 Improvements other than buildings - - 1,657,545 1,657,545 Infrastructure - - 1,313,801 1,313,801 Machinery, furniture and equipment - - 7,635,904 7,635,904 Fleet - - 10,482,284 10,482,284 Total capital assets, at cost - - 31,182,178 31,182,178 Less: accumulated depreciation - - (11,504,251) (11,504,251) Total noncurrent assets - - 19,677,927 19,677,927 Total assets 1,137,665 672,501 20,660,878 22,471,044 Deferred outflows of resources - pension related 17,018,923 - - 17,018,923 Liabilities Current liabilities Accounts payable 102,307 11,425 380,314 494,046 Accrued flex spending 19,173 - - 19,173 Due to other governments - - 45,001 45,001 Contracts payable - - 2,487 2,487 Compensated absences payable - current 2,353,715 - - 2,353,715 Capital lease payable - current - - 51,612 51,612 Total current liabilities 2,475,195 11,425 479,414 2,966,034 Noncurrent liabilities Compensated absences payable 1,541,577 - - 1,541,577 Capital lease payable - - 114,319 114,319 Other postemployment benefits payable 3,250,130 - - 3,250,130 Net pension liability 23,949,480 - - 23,949,480 Total noncurrent liabilities 28,741,187 - 114,319 28,855,506 Total liabilities 31,216,382 11,425 593,733 31,821,540 Deferred inflows of resources - pension related 18,718,305 - - 18,718,305 Net position Net investment in capital assets - - 19,511,996 19,511,996 Unrestricted (31,778,099) 661,076 555,149 (30,561,874) Total net position (31,778,099)$ 661,076$ 20,067,145$ (11,049,878)$ 146 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 173 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND Statement 26 CHANGES IN FUND NET POSITION INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Employee Administrative Uninsured Loss Capital Replacement Total Operating revenues Charges for services 2,333,007$ -$ 1,322,733$ 3,655,740$ Other 172,779 266,204 - 438,983 Total operating revenues 2,505,786 266,204 1,322,733 4,094,723 Operating expenses Personal services 4,943,791 30,456 - 4,974,247 Supplies - - 591,937 591,937 Professional services 26,240 - 270,454 296,694 Insurance - 421,871 - 421,871 Depreciation - - 1,722,763 1,722,763 Other 90,968 587 803,560 895,115 Total operating expenses 5,060,999 452,914 3,388,714 8,902,627 Operating income (loss)(2,555,213) (186,710) (2,065,981) (4,807,904) Nonoperating revenues (expenses) Interest income 19,045 4,975 10,344 34,364 Property taxes 200,000 - 2,067,700 2,267,700 Intergovernmental revenue 84,231 - 545,470 629,701 Gain on disposal of capital assets - - 106,204 106,204 Interest expense - - (8,147) (8,147) Total nonoperating revenues (expenses)303,276 4,975 2,721,571 3,029,822 Income (loss) before transfers (2,251,937) (181,735) 655,590 (1,778,082) Capital contributions - capital assets - - 66,500 66,500 Transfers in - 100,000 571,867 671,867 Change in net position (2,251,937) (81,735) 1,293,957 (1,039,715) Net position - January 1 (29,526,162) 742,811 18,773,188 (10,010,163) Net position - December 31 (31,778,099)$ 661,076$ 20,067,145$ (11,049,878)$ 147 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 174 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS Statement 27 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Page 1 of 2 For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Employee Administrative Uninsured Loss Capital Replacement Total Cash flows from operating activities Receipts from interfund services provided 2,333,007$ -$ 1,319,160$ 3,652,167$ Other operating cash receipts 172,779 278,325 - 451,104 Payments to suppliers 24,019 (441,020) (1,626,688) (2,043,689) Payments to employees (2,683,114) (30,456) - (2,713,570) Net cash flows provided (used) by operating activities (153,309) (193,151) (307,528) (653,988) Cash flows from noncapital financing activities Transfers in - 100,000 - 100,000 Property taxes 200,000 - 2,067,700 2,267,700 Intergovernmental receipts 84,231 - 545,470 629,701 Net cash flows provided (used) by noncapital financing activities 284,231 100,000 2,613,170 2,997,401 Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Transfers in - - 571,867 571,867 Acquisition of capital assets - - (3,071,897) (3,071,897) Proceeds from sale of capital assets - - 179,353 179,353 Principal paid on capital lease - - (49,688) (49,688) Interest paid on capital lease - - (8,147) (8,147) Net cash flows provided (used) by and related financing activities - - (2,378,512) (2,378,512) Cash flows from investing activities Interest received 18,205 5,297 11,110 34,612 Net increase in cash and cash equivalents 149,127 (87,854) (61,760) (487) Cash and cash equivalents - January 1 952,469 677,468 1,011,102 2,641,039 Cash and cash equivalents - December 31 1,101,596$ 589,614$ 949,342$ 2,640,552$ 148 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 175 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA COMBINING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS Statement 27 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Page 2 of 2 For The Year Ended December 31, 2017 Employee Administrative Uninsured Loss Capital Replacement Total Reconciliation of operating income (loss) to net cash provided (used) by operating activities Operating income (loss)(2,555,213)$ (186,710)$ (2,065,981)$ (4,807,904)$ Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash flows from operating activities Depreciation - - 1,722,763 1,722,763 (Increase) decrease in assets/deferred outflows Accounts receivable - 12,121 (3,573) 8,548 Prepaid items 79,207 2,383 (8,299) 73,291 Deferred outflows of resources 11,283,110 - - 11,283,110 Increase (decrease) in liabilities/deferred inflows Accounts payable 74,397 (20,945) 60,359 113,811 Accrued flex spending 4,486 - - 4,486 Due to other governments (12,377) - (12,797) (25,174) Compensated absences payable 57,556 - -57,556 Other postemployment benefits 252,992 - - 252,992 Net pension liability (22,837,764) - - (22,837,764) Deferred inflows of resources 13,500,297 - - 13,500,297 Net cash provided (used) by operating activities (153,309)$ (193,151)$ (307,528)$ (653,988)$ Noncash capital and related financing activities Disposal of capital assets -$ -$ 734,929$ 734,929$ Capital contributions from government - - 66,500 66,500 149 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 176 - This page intentionally left blank - 150 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 177 III. STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) 151 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 178 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) NET POSITION BY COMPONENT LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS 2008 2009 2010 2011 Governmental activities Net investment in capital assets 76,600,774$ 89,252,994$ 94,326,512$ 99,835,484$ Restricted - 20,075,976 21,692,426 17,695,996 Unrestricted 65,908,328 40,508,755 40,581,189 43,929,086 Total governmental activities net position 142,509,102$ 149,837,725$ 156,600,127$ 161,460,566$ Business-type activities Net investment in capital assets 27,559,942$ 23,977,469$ 21,717,923$ 22,347,266$ Unrestricted 6,414,768 6,903,776 8,433,915 8,524,086 Total business-type activities net position 33,974,710$ 30,881,245$ 30,151,838$ 30,871,352$ Total primary government Net investment in capital assets 104,160,716$ 113,230,463$ 116,044,435$ 122,182,750$ Restricted - 20,075,976 21,692,426 17,695,996 Unrestricted 72,323,096 47,412,531 49,015,104 52,453,172 Total primary government 176,483,812$ 180,718,970$ 186,751,965$ 192,331,918$ Note: GASB 65 was implemented in 2013. Net position was restated for 2012 to reflect the expenses of bond issuance costs in the year of issuance. Net position for years prior to 2012 was not restated. GASB 68 was implemented in 2015. Net position was restated for 2014 to reflect the reporting of net pension liability and pension related deferred outflows of resources. Net position for years prior to 2014 was not restated. Fiscal Year 152 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 179 Table 1 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 95,020,700$ 96,480,493$ 94,891,625$ 96,286,131$ 96,458,787$ 103,279,857$ 18,941,172 13,560,965 10,971,995 10,608,709 10,658,889 11,439,977 46,413,200 45,688,600 49,971,778 31,667,135 31,751,796 26,888,688 160,375,072$ 155,730,058$ 155,835,398$ 138,561,975$ 138,869,472$ 141,608,522$ 22,906,086$ 19,127,309$ 22,818,382$ 22,753,326$ 23,030,284$ 25,716,982$ 9,829,024 11,540,303 4,783,696 4,620,302 5,849,650 4,979,057 32,735,110$ 30,667,612$ 27,602,078$ 27,373,628$ 28,879,934$ 30,696,039$ 117,926,786$ 115,607,802$ 117,710,007$ 119,039,457$ 119,489,071$ 128,996,839$ 18,941,172 13,560,965 10,971,995 10,608,709 10,658,889 11,439,977 56,242,224 57,228,903 54,755,474 36,287,437 37,601,446 31,867,745 193,110,182$ 186,397,670$ 183,437,476$ 165,935,603$ 167,749,406$ 172,304,561$ Fiscal Year 153 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 180 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) CHANGES IN NET POSITION LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS (accrual basis of accounting) 2008 2009 2010 2011 Expenses Governmental activities General government 8,216,816$ 8,167,355$ 7,192,652$ 7,247,716$ Public safety 11,867,403 12,138,185 12,256,272 12,535,793 Public works 6,904,217 6,915,541 19,446,758 7,513,833 Public information 425,829 457,872 435,050 803,885 Culture and recreation 7,352,406 7,456,215 7,792,614 7,882,789 Operations and recreation - - - - Engineering - - - - Housing and rehabilitation 1,615,010 1,544,175 4,150,595 794,935 Housing maintenance 199,757 128,099 241,345 79,786 Social and economic development 5,494,634 6,321,623 4,861,518 6,171,527 General services 2,653 7,662 - - Interest on long-term debt 1,329,767 1,543,879 1,453,555 1,695,758 Total governmental activities expenses 43,408,492 44,680,606 57,830,359 44,726,022 Business-type activities Water 3,391,992 4,089,837 3,904,801 3,839,592 Sewer 4,485,386 4,228,680 4,193,191 4,572,869 Solid Waste - - 2,116,949 2,319,099 Refuse 2,135,677 2,125,540 - - Storm Water 1,172,199 1,287,202 1,325,803 1,373,546 Wireless 315,664 151,708 - - Total business-type activities expenses 11,500,918 11,882,967 11,540,744 12,105,106 Total expenses 54,909,410$ 56,563,573$ 69,371,103$ 56,831,128$ Program revenues Governmental activities Charges for services General government 955,811$ 888,246$ 1,065,209$ 1,059,527$ Public safety 4,282,699 2,958,383 2,898,634 2,917,525 Public works 380,452 2,292,287 601,890 315,163 Public information - - - 200,000 Culture and recreation 2,121,505 2,083,015 1,959,556 2,111,348 Operations and recreation - - - - Engineering - - - - Housing and rehabilitation 507,163 562,930 8,833 62,191 Housing maintenance - - - - Social and economic development 173,960 184,236 588,757 316,935 Interest on long-term debt - 318,134 - - Operating grants and contributions 3,581,092 2,664,563 1,735,926 2,065,312 Capital grants and contributions 2,822,683 2,131,755 14,908,522 1,878,697 Total governmental activities program revenue 14,825,365 14,083,549 23,767,327 10,926,698 Business-type activities Charges for services Water 3,584,384 4,294,962 4,148,394 4,475,068 Sewer 4,506,339 5,153,171 5,277,473 5,768,266 Solid Waste - - 2,719,376 2,894,726 Refuse 2,348,133 2,458,555 - - Storm Water 1,529,180 1,699,557 1,829,792 1,904,587 Wireless 51,322 16,140 - - Operating grants and contributions 966,053 167,604 103,342 103,166 Capital grants and contributions 1,040,384 - 2,890 - Total business-type activities program revenue 14,025,795 13,789,989 14,081,267 15,145,813 Total program revenues 28,851,160$ 27,873,538$ 37,848,594$ 26,072,511$ Fiscal Year 154 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 181 Table 2 Page 1 of 2 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 7,387,354$ 10,085,905$ 9,161,922$ 10,712,749$ 11,182,348$ 10,648,181$ 13,264,220 13,365,297 13,954,604 15,336,854 20,091,787 17,870,131 ------ 524,012 466,043 507,928 3,057,509 549,940 647,316 ------ 15,209,548 13,487,238 13,318,552 9,996,885 13,352,637 13,448,470 5,253,969 16,046,665 21,045,392 10,185,956 5,091,818 7,859,907 3,914,261 1,774,657 909,051 707,661 528,467 480,911 116,949 141,250 130,534 84,505 144,204 72,244 7,810,635 9,040,280 8,058,914 8,872,479 8,826,281 10,987,654 ------ 1,245,294 1,295,298 1,185,975 1,233,107 1,620,489 1,511,329 54,726,242 65,702,633 68,272,872 60,187,705 61,387,971 63,526,143 3,890,860 5,747,116 4,609,579 4,684,190 4,773,624 4,786,816 4,593,166 5,272,646 4,885,748 5,333,887 6,002,088 6,227,919 2,562,985 3,614,118 2,813,587 2,917,214 3,256,804 3,390,874 ------ 1,485,390 1,390,235 1,422,645 1,400,975 1,514,761 1,611,785 ------ 12,532,401 16,024,115 13,731,559 14,336,266 15,547,277 16,017,394 67,258,643$ 81,726,748$ 82,004,431$ 74,523,971$ 76,935,248$ 79,543,537$ 1,060,679$ 1,024,253$ 1,142,294$ 1,185,881$ 1,184,122$ 1,143,220$ 3,344,449 3,109,813 3,477,244 4,237,819 4,354,793 3,962,306 ------ ---10,000 -- 2,438,841 ----- -2,035,715 2,089,052 2,344,863 2,122,730 2,308,221 -1,032 318,873 144,151 97,688 134,508 8,162 8,606 7,537 6,315 7,607 4,514 --241 --- 281,002 250,015 224,252 256,557 259,910 255,109 ------ 2,360,465 2,709,644 2,024,171 3,586,440 2,512,011 3,670,054 6,290,076 11,881,109 12,066,132 3,178,294 3,960,739 5,205,879 15,783,674 21,020,187 21,349,796 14,950,320 14,499,600 16,683,811 5,109,446 5,037,067 5,188,065 5,766,601 5,674,239 6,089,295 5,959,931 5,822,085 5,841,377 6,112,024 6,663,731 7,261,014 2,858,930 2,912,415 3,179,732 3,189,566 2,905,899 3,237,506 ------ 1,977,663 2,054,915 2,246,201 2,472,134 2,642,860 2,816,349 ------ 105,976 135,642 127,742 128,610 181,525 159,376 ----799,894 279,801 16,011,946 15,962,124 16,583,117 17,668,935 18,868,148 19,843,341 31,795,620$ 36,982,311$ 37,932,913$ 32,619,255$ 33,367,748$ 36,527,152$ Fiscal Year 155 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 182 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) CHANGES IN NET POSITION LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS (accrual basis of accounting) 2008 2009 2010 2011 Net (expenses) revenues Governmental activities (28,583,127)$ (30,597,057)$ (34,063,032)$ (33,799,324)$ Business-type activities 2,524,877 1,907,022 2,540,523 3,040,707 Total primary government (26,058,250)$ (28,690,035)$ (31,522,509)$ (30,758,617)$ General Revenues and Other Changes in Net Position Governmental activities Taxes Property taxes 28,523,119$ 29,512,631$ 29,642,090$ 23,527,322$ Tax increment - - - 7,222,976 Franchise taxes 1,507,994 1,503,075 1,497,178 1,894,714 Grants and contributions not restricted to specific programs 519,850 153,108 151,624 156,325 Unrestricted investment earnings 2,133,858 1,452,176 629,094 1,048,395 Gain on sale of capital assets 1,842,601 91,149 34,453 51,686 Miscellaneous 470,230 11,229 950,231 2,300,478 Transfers 1,956,727 5,202,312 3,358,921 2,457,867 Total governmental activities expenses 36,954,379 37,925,680 36,263,591 38,659,763 Business-type activities Unrestricted investment earnings 243,724 201,825 88,991 136,674 Miscellaneous 18,473 - - - Transfers (1,956,727) (5,202,312) (3,358,921) (2,457,867) Total business-type activities expenses (1,694,530) (5,000,487) (3,269,930) (2,321,193) Total primary government 35,259,849$ 32,925,193$ 32,993,661$ 36,338,570$ Change in net position Governmental activities 8,371,252$ 7,328,623$ 2,200,559$ 4,860,439$ Business-type activities 830,347 (3,093,465) (729,407) 719,514 Total primary government 9,201,599$ 4,235,158$ 1,471,152$ 5,579,953$ Note: GASB 65 was implemented in 2013. Governmental and business-type activities expenses were restated for 2012 to reflect the expensing of bond issuance costs in the year of issuance. Expenses for years prior to 2012 were not restated. GASB 68 was implemented in 2015. Pension expense for years prior to 2015 was not restated. Fiscal Year 156 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 183 Table 2 Page 2 of 2 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 (38,942,568)$ (44,682,446)$ (46,923,076)$ (45,237,385)$ (46,888,371)$ (46,842,332)$ 3,479,545 (61,991) 2,851,558 3,332,669 3,320,871 3,825,947 (35,463,023)$ (44,744,437)$ (44,071,518)$ (41,904,716)$ (43,567,500)$ (43,016,385)$ 24,625,789$ 26,963,176$ 27,398,157$ 28,209,567$ 30,185,703$ 31,582,993$ 6,446,389 6,647,729 7,380,995 6,763,951 7,733,689 8,961,792 1,954,557 2,211,569 2,268,213 2,915,732 3,079,399 3,763,394 46,422 45,266 504,035 557,671 584,639 590,978 663,978 138,899 407,753 221,408 388,647 408,945 60,416 69,237 464,629 577,248 142,713 106,204 2,183,685 2,199,629 2,609,539 2,985,997 3,201,122 2,091,334 1,660,035 1,761,927 5,995,095 3,620,449 1,879,956 2,075,742 37,641,271 40,037,432 47,028,416 45,852,023 47,195,868 49,581,382 113,260 (3,348) 78,003 59,330 65,391 65,900 ------ (1,660,035)(1,761,927)(5,995,095)(3,620,449)(1,879,956)(2,075,742) (1,546,775)(1,765,275)(5,917,092)(3,561,119)(1,814,565)(2,009,842) 36,094,496$ 38,272,157$ 41,111,324$ 42,290,904$ 45,381,303$ 47,571,540$ (1,301,297)$ (4,645,014)$ 105,340$ 614,638$ 307,497$ 2,739,050$ 1,932,770 (1,827,266)(3,065,534)(228,450)1,506,306 1,816,105 631,473$ (6,472,280)$ (2,960,194)$ 386,188$ 1,813,803$ 4,555,155$ Fiscal Year 157 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 184 - This page intentionally left blank - 158 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 185 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED)Table 3 GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES TAX REVENUES BY SOURCE LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Fiscal Property Franchise Year Tax Tax Total 2008 28,523,119$ 1,507,993$ 30,031,112$ 2009 28,523,119 1,503,075 30,026,194 2010 29,316,753 1,497,178 30,813,931 2011 30,853,927 1,894,714 32,748,641 2012 31,220,365 1,954,557 33,174,922 2013 33,610,905 2,211,569 35,822,474 2014 34,779,152 2,268,213 37,047,365 2015 34,973,518 2,915,732 37,889,250 2016 37,919,392 3,079,399 40,998,791 2017 40,544,785 3,763,394 44,308,179 159 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 186 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) FUND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS (modified accrual basis of accounting) 2008 2009 2010 2011 General fund Reserved 29,368$ 572,206$ -$ -$ Unreserved 11,697,232 7,326,638 - - Nonspendable - - 80,664 71,192 Restricted - - 425,967 427,718 Assigned - - 124,503 139,483 Unassigned - - 10,399,401 10,799,829 Total General fund 11,726,600$ 7,898,844$ 11,030,535$ 11,438,222$ All other governmental funds Reserved 10,610,175$ 7,540,696$ -$ -$ Unreserved, reported in Special revenue funds 7,134,284 7,568,944 - - Capital projects funds 43,134,211 40,680,331 - - Nonspendable - - 250,008 306,058 Restricted - - 35,515,318 21,476,374 Committed - - 466,792 511,610 Assigned - - 33,253,313 34,425,344 Unassigned - - (7,872,234) (5,042,828) Total all other governmental funds 60,878,670$ 55,789,971$ 61,613,197$ 51,676,558$ Note: The City implemented GASB Statement No. 54 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, resulting in significant reclassification of the components of fund balance. Fiscal Year 160 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 187 Table 4 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - 70,450 256,251 397,873 566,574 330,483 292,821 458,448 498,922 492,223 464,469 413,787 392,004 690,242 691,171 696,293 758,084 936,663 1,050,569 10,757,776 14,342,422 14,576,348 15,242,009 16,193,763 17,054,520 11,976,916$ 15,788,766$ 16,162,737$ 17,031,136$ 17,874,696$ 18,789,914$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - 426,736 - - - 23,563 6,500 20,464,874 15,102,011 12,663,957 12,457,701 10,057,843 11,725,590 459,160 467,682 483,590 481,009 466,287 696,235 35,947,479 33,481,454 38,701,128 39,567,878 41,068,221 33,609,392 (7,567,117) (7,020,483) (8,819,377) (6,551,326) (5,187,339) (3,628,247) 49,731,132$ 42,030,664$ 43,029,298$ 45,955,262$ 46,428,575$ 42,409,470$ Fiscal Year 161 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 188 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS (modified accrual basis of accounting) 2008 2009 2010 2011 Revenues Taxes 21,563,302$ 21,700,329$ 22,667,190$ 23,336,537$ Tax increments 8,371,424 7,846,204 6,649,563 7,222,976 Franchise taxes - 1,503,075 1,497,178 1,894,714 Licenses and permits 4,072,753 2,786,032 2,359,716 2,797,700 Intergovernmental 2,424,119 3,867,795 11,879,601 3,105,500 Charges for services 324,512 4,228,179 4,051,971 3,897,710 Fines and forfeits 3,894,839 332,694 401,610 281,047 Special assessments 703,484 800,054 1,550,110 985,912 Investment earnings 1,990,854 1,358,170 612,098 949,510 Miscellaneous 3,591,212 2,615,062 3,050,231 2,285,608 Total revenues 46,936,499 47,037,594 54,719,268 46,757,214 Expenditures General government 6,642,295 6,472,022 6,219,751 6,415,318 Public safety 11,744,656 11,949,612 11,771,246 11,885,577 Public works 4,671,631 4,637,289 15,624,494 4,437,939 Operations and recreation - - - - Engineering - - - - Public information 415,609 445,146 387,459 383,586 Culture and recreation 6,213,945 6,027,059 6,234,938 6,546,054 Housing and rehabilitation 1,621,099 1,550,264 4,144,378 790,918 Housing maintenance 199,757 128,099 241,170 79,786 Social and economic development 5,162,698 6,241,123 4,720,638 6,426,013 General services 2,653 7,662 - - Debt service Principal 4,485,000 4,709,000 2,170,000 5,420,000 Interest 1,365,484 1,322,477 1,170,286 1,170,549 Other charges - - 453,288 1,040 Bond issuance costs - - - - Capital outlay 9,998,748 10,314,002 6,306,083 14,295,009 Total expenditures 52,523,575 53,803,755 59,443,731 57,851,789 Revenues over (under) expenditures (5,587,076) (6,766,161) (4,724,463) (11,094,575) Other financing sources (uses) Transfers in 11,129,934 9,939,299 11,809,353 7,086,529 Transfers out (9,233,136) (10,579,081) (14,974,391) (5,520,906) Refunding bonds issued - - 3,615,000 - Bonds issued 5,490,000 2,000,000 20,560,000 - Proceeds from long term debt - - - - Premium on bonds issued - 10,202 2,792 - Redemption of refunded bonds - - (1,825,000)- Payments to refunded bond escrow agent - (6,244,425) (4,164,000)- Costs paid to refunded bond escrow agent - -- - Proceeds from sale of capital assets 2,123,277 - 27,412 - Total other financing sources (uses)9,510,075 (4,874,005) 15,051,166 1,565,623 Net change in fund balances 3,922,999$ (11,640,166)$ 10,326,703$ (9,528,952)$ Debt service as a percentage of noncapital expenditures 13.76%13.87%6.29% 15.13% Fiscal Year 162 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 189 Table 5 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 24,259,861$ 25,658,762$ 24,361,524$ 26,598,373$ 27,734,546$ 28,941,646$ 6,446,389 6,647,729 7,380,995 6,763,951 7,733,689 8,961,792 1,954,557 2,211,569 2,268,213 2,915,732 3,079,399 3,763,394 3,241,813 3,069,090 3,413,683 4,312,702 4,320,078 3,985,517 2,983,191 13,887,247 13,216,055 6,017,025 4,345,482 8,228,158 3,547,900 3,052,789 3,476,264 3,608,933 3,406,964 3,529,125 341,356 311,882 369,546 263,951 299,808 293,236 2,233,715 1,505,568 1,268,539 1,238,873 1,192,628 1,169,859 622,450 123,306 386,263 199,747 362,196 369,203 2,188,262 2,216,820 2,577,300 3,051,946 3,230,390 2,218,712 47,819,494 58,684,762 58,718,382 54,971,233 55,705,180 61,460,642 6,503,965 7,162,588 7,376,380 7,813,046 8,188,193 8,142,675 12,571,356 12,435,341 13,239,729 14,025,463 14,669,251 15,824,577 - - - - - - 13,955,142 10,083,541 10,450,789 9,710,604 9,688,872 10,665,329 939,416 15,998,842 21,013,383 10,068,447 480,162 7,754,421 470,280 408,683 462,341 561,252 477,721 495,256 - - - - - - 3,881,500 1,715,540 875,225 538,411 482,313 453,940 116,949 141,250 130,534 84,505 144,204 57,370 7,681,176 8,910,821 7,928,905 8,872,479 8,673,638 10,857,645 - - - - - - 1,285,000 3,275,000 1,970,000 1,612,827 1,681,876 3,650,297 1,235,118 1,298,016 1,138,100 1,210,971 1,446,371 1,493,780 46,435 3,895 54,433 2,640 2,717 - - - - - 111,922 40,419 3,930,528 2,089,798 2,271,988 3,486,864 19,894,828 10,159,659 52,616,865 63,523,315 66,911,807 57,987,509 65,942,068 69,595,368 (4,797,371)(4,838,553)(8,193,425)(3,016,276)(10,236,888)(8,134,726) 6,395,355 10,472,534 19,317,129 13,296,241 8,148,651 5,586,488 (5,580,044)(9,531,189)(15,241,005)(9,462,850)(6,994,545)(4,182,613) 1,290,000 - - - - - - - 5,070,000 - 10,000,000 3,430,000 - - - 2,200,000 - - - - 98,040 - 396,655 196,964 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 885,328 8,590 321,866 777,248 3,000 - 2,990,639 949,935 9,566,030 6,810,639 11,553,761 5,030,839 (1,806,732)$ (3,888,618)$ 1,372,605$ 3,794,363$ 1,316,873$ (3,103,887)$ 5.18%7.44%4.81%5.18%6.79%8.65% Fiscal Year 163 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 190 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) ASSESSED VALUE/TAX CAPACITY VALUE AND ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE OF ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS 2008 2009 2010 2011 Population 47,198 47,221 45,250 44,665 Real Property Total assessed/tax capacity value 68,006,453$ 69,704,858$ 68,386,268$ 65,611,006$ Less tax increment districts -(7,639,464) (8,276,993) (6,976,791) (6,379,980) Area-wide allocation (net)(1,498,263) (1,635,724) (1,231,482) (2,775,483) Net assessed/tax capacity value 58,868,726$ 59,792,141$ 60,177,995$ 56,455,543$ Estimated market value 5,552,520,000$ 5,633,028,200$ 5,550,563,700$ 5,302,557,500$ Personal Property Assessed/tax capacity value 458,627$ 434,825$ 428,760$ 478,864$ Estimated market value 23,263,700$ 22,006,100$ 21,712,100$ 24,363,800$ Total Real and Personal Property Assessed/tax capacity value 59,327,353$ 60,226,966$ 60,606,755$ 56,934,407$ Estimated market value 5,575,783,700$ 5,655,034,300$ 5,572,275,800$ 5,326,921,300$ Tax Capacity Rate 34.8% 36.7% 37.1% 41.5% Fiscal Year 164 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 191 Table 6 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 45,505 46,362 47,411 47,502 48,354 48,747 62,602,680$ 61,348,576$ 62,068,742$ 65,599,841$ 71,118,692$ 77,324,247$ (5,426,995) (5,587,609) (6,130,653) (5,894,025) (6,798,025) (8,211,886) (3,220,881) (2,940,678) (3,670,487) (3,879,478) (3,168,815) (4,255,021) 53,954,804$ 52,820,289$ 52,267,602$ 55,826,338$ 61,151,852$ 64,857,340$ 5,226,900,300$ 5,103,186,900$ 5,123,316,900$ 5,435,136,500$ 5,841,548,800$ 6,306,324,900$ 490,122$ 559,718$ 576,427$ 607,025$ 614,793$ 650,504$ 24,962,100$ 28,487,900$ 29,320,000$ 30,852,400$ 31,212,200$ 33,056,300$ 54,444,926$ 53,380,007$ 52,844,029$ 56,433,363$ 61,766,645$ 65,507,844$ 5,251,862,400$ 5,131,674,800$ 5,152,636,900$ 5,465,988,900$ 5,872,761,000$ 6,339,381,200$ 43.9% 46.6% 48.6% 47.8% 46.2% 46.2% Fiscal Year 165 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 192 STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) 2008 2009 2010 2011 Operating Rate 32.504 34.402 34.869 39.689 Debt Service Rate 2.255 2.265 2.247 1.770 Total City Direct Rates 34.759 36.667 37.116 41.459 County Operating Rate 38.571 40.413 42.640 45.840 School District Operating Rate 8.691 9.080 9.295 12.917 Debt Service Rate 10.889 11.257 11.803 13.539 Other Taxing Districts St. Louis Park HRA Levy 1.344 1.759 1.718 1.817 Metro Mosquito Control 0.486 0.489 0.461 0.525 Metro Council 0.812 0.817 0.793 0.885 Metro Transit Debt 1.264 1.273 1.366 1.539 Hennepin County HRA - - 0.241 0.397 Hennepin Parks 3.137 3.334 3.499 3.765 Park Museum 0.719 0.771 0.778 0.815 HC Regional Railroad Authority 0.979 0.470 1.000 1.246 Referendum Market Value Based Rate - - 0.152 0.148 Watershed 1.404 1.489 1.511 1.606 Total Overlapping Rates 68.296 71.152 75.257 85.039 Total Direct and Overlapping Rates 103.055 107.819 112.373 126.498 City of St. Louis Park Overlapping Rates CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA PROPERTY TAX RATES - DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GOVERNMENTS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Year 166 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 193 Table 7 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 40.303 42.902 45.868 45.234 43.744 42.933 3.563 3.650 2.702 2.520 2.451 3.267 43.866 46.552 48.570 47.754 46.195 46.200 48.231 49.461 49.959 46.398 45.356 44.087 13.324 13.976 16.741 15.642 14.887 12.364 15.946 15.754 15.617 14.698 13.627 13.247 1.806 1.676 1.808 1.679 1.634 1.661 0.537 0.556 0.563 0.507 0.483 0.475 0.940 0.997 1.069 0.976 0.925 0.883 1.607 1.689 1.703 1.523 1.491 1.463 0.403 0.478 0.514 0.471 0.439 0.497 3.943 4.054 4.169 3.789 3.601 3.365 0.799 0.754 0.766 0.702 0.712 0.711 1.294 1.561 1.777 1.817 1.879 1.925 - - - - - - 1.705 1.769 1.806 1.738 1.724 1.738 90.535 92.725 96.492 89.940 86.758 82.416 134.401 139.277 145.062 137.694 132.953 128.616 Year 167 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 194 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED)Table 8 PRINCIPAL PROPERTY TAXPAYERS CURRENT YEAR AND NINE YEARS AGO Percentage Percentage of Total of Total Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Assessed Assessed Assessed Assessed Value Rank Value Value Rank Value ARC WEMPSMN001, LLC 106,623,000$ 1 1.68 % 99,450,000$ 1 1.78 % Interchange Investors 96,800,000 2 1.53 83,000,000 2 1.49 Gateway Knollwood, LLC 80,243,000 3 1.27 G & I VII 1600 & Moneygram LLC 80,000,000 4 1.26 Excelsior & Grand LLC 87,593,200 5 1.38 39,643,700 6 0.71 Middleton Park Place Investors, LLC 58,821,000 6 0.93 West End Office MN, LLC 54,758,000 7 0.86 PNMC Holdings 49,988,100 8 0.79 Ellipse On Excelsior LLC 45,507,000 9 0.72 WTC No 459 Corp 44,950,000 10 0.71 26,390,000 8 0.47 Park Nicollet 60,602,100 3 1.09 Parkdale Property LLC 53,000,000 4 0.95 Park Place OPCO LLC 49,420,000 5 0.89 Park Shore Senior Campus, LLC 23,805,000 9 0.43 Target 27,458,500 7 0.49 General Growth/Knollwood Co.21,556,600 10 0.39 Total 705,283,300$ 11.13 % 484,325,900$ 8.69 % Total taxable assessed value 6,339,381,200$ 5,575,783,700$ Source: Hennepin County Assessor's Office Taxpayer 2017 2008 168 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 195 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED)Table 9 PROPERTY TAX LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Fiscal Year Total Tax Ended Levy for Percentage Percentage December 31 Fiscal Year Amount of Levy Amount of Levy 2008 21,100,651$ 20,693,403$ 98.07 % 21,100,651$ 100.00 % 2009 22,204,522 21,796,296 98.16 22,204,522 100.00 2010 22,841,195 22,465,478 98.36 22,841,195 100.00 2011 23,724,816 23,368,028 98.50 23,724,816 100.00 2012 24,746,325 24,435,571 98.74 24,690,024 99.77 2013 25,613,874 25,379,070 99.08 25,603,646 99.96 2014 26,527,267 26,129,048 98.50 26,508,347 99.93 2015 27,938,615 27,590,682 98.75 27,892,392 99.83 2016 29,615,682 29,462,804 99.48 29,353,171 99.11 2017 31,350,534 30,559,213 97.48 30,559,213 97.48 Collected Within the Fiscal Year of the Levy Total Collections to Date 169 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 196 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED)Table 10 RATIOS OF OUTSTANDING DEBT BY TYPE LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Business Type Activities General Net Unamortized Total Percentage Fiscal Obligation Tax Increment Capital Notes Revenue Premiums/ Primary of Personal Per Year Bonds Bonds Leases Payable Bonds (Discounts) Government Income (1) Capita (1) 2008 10,715,000$ 15,995,000$ -$ -$ 9,570,000$ (76,234)$ 36,203,766$ 2.24 % 767.06 2009 9,590,000 8,405,000 - - 9,185,000 43,692 27,223,692 1.54 576.52 2010 26,335,000 7,410,000 - - 11,334,924 41,847 45,121,771 2.71 997.17 2011 21,420,000 6,905,000 26,220 - 10,555,000 (136,030) 38,770,190 2.32 868.02 2012 21,730,000 6,600,000 - - 9,600,000 (141,310) 37,788,690 2.17 830.43 2013 20,185,000 4,870,000 - - 12,785,000 (93,362) 37,746,638 2.07 814.17 2014 23,609,091 4,520,700 33,075 - 16,826,503 101,294 45,090,663 2.39 951.06 2015 22,445,000 4,175,000 24,975 2,122,173 13,510,000 78,070 42,355,218 2.25 891.65 2016 31,230,000 3,805,000 215,619 2,025,297 10,515,000 439,637 48,230,553 2.44 997.45 2017 33,430,000 3,410,000 165,931 - 14,070,000 873,267 51,949,198 2.53 1,065.69 Note: Details regarding the City's outstanding debt can be found in the notes to the financial statements. (1) See the Schedule of Demographic Statistics on page 177 for personal income and population data. Governmental Activities 170 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 197 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED)Table 11 RATIOS OF GENERAL BONDED DEBT OUTSTANDING LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Percentage of Less: Amounts Estimated General Restricted Net Unamortized Actual Taxable Fiscal Obligation for Debt Premiums/Value of Per Year Bonds Service Funds (Discounts)Total Property (1) Capita (2) 2008 10,715,000$ (5,436,328)$ 511$ 5,279,183$ 0.09 %111.85 2009 9,590,000 (2,198,070) 12,514 7,404,444 0.13 156.80 2010 26,335,000 (2,765,611) (114,863) 23,454,526 0.42 518.33 2011 21,420,000 (2,792,922) (111,310) 18,515,768 0.35 414.55 2012 21,730,000 (3,862,611) (123,684) 17,743,705 0.34 389.93 2013 20,185,000 (3,703,071) (119,339) 16,362,590 0.32 352.93 2014 23,609,091 (3,152,137) (16,954) 20,440,000 0.40 431.12 2015 22,445,000 (3,092,198) (20,758) 19,332,044 0.35 406.97 2016 31,230,000 (3,146,018) 355,124 28,439,106 0.48 588.14 2017 33,430,000 (3,325,205) 503,370 30,608,165 0.48 627.90 (1) See the Schedule of Assessed Value/Tax Capacity Value and Estimated Market Value on page 164 for property value data. (2) Population data can be found in the Schedule of Demographic Statistics on page 177. 171 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 198 - This page intentionally left blank - 172 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 199 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED)Table 12 DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES DEBT AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2017 Share of Debt Percentage Overlapping Outstanding (1)Applicable (2) Debt Overlapping Debt Hennepin County 911,083,511$ 3.76 % 34,256,740$ St. Louis Park Independent School District 33,819,742 99.47 33,640,497 Hopkins Independent School District 140,286,562 3.12 4,376,941 Edina Independent School District 181,497,226 0.06 108,898 Hennepin County Suburban Park District 45,784,829 5.25 2,403,704 Hennepin Regional RR Authority 26,942,546 5.25 1,414,484 Metropolitan Council 12,606,580 1.92 242,046 Subtotal of Overlapping Debt 1,352,020,996 76,443,310 Direct Debt City of St. Louis Park 30,425,154 100 30,425,154 Total of Direct and Overlapping Debt 1,382,446,150$ 106,868,464$ Source: Hennepin County, Minnesota Note: Overlapping governments are those that coincide, at least in part, with the geographic boundaries of the City of St. Louis Park. This schedule estimates the portion of the outstanding debt of those overlapping governments that is borne by the residents and businesses of the City of St. Louis Park. This process recognizes that, when considering the City's ability to issue and repay long-term debt, the entire burden borne by the residents and businesses should be taken into account. However, this does not imply that every taxpayer is a resident, and therefore responsible for repaying the debt of each overlapping government. (1) Net debt which excludes revenue and special assessment bonds. (2) The percentage applicable to the City of St. Louis Park was determined by dividing the portion of tax capacity within the City by the total tax capacity of the of the taxing jurisdiction. Governmental Unit 173 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 200 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) LEGAL DEBT MARGIN INFORMATION LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS 2008 2009 2010 2011 Debt Limit 167,273,511$ 169,651,029$ 167,168,274$ 159,807,639$ Total Net Debt Applicable to Limit 2,747,414 2,880,000 15,535,000 15,150,000 Legal Debt Margin 164,526,097$ 166,771,029$ 151,633,274$ 144,657,639$ Total Net Debt Applicable to the Limit as a percentage of Debt Limit 1.64%1.70%9.29%9.48% Legal Debt Margin Calculation for Fiscal Year Estimated Taxable Market Value 5,575,783,700$ 5,655,034,300$ 5,572,275,800$ 5,326,921,300$ Debt Limit (3% of taxable market value)167,273,511$ 169,651,029$ 167,168,274$ 159,807,639$ Debt applicable to limit Total Bonded Debt 36,280,000$ 27,180,000$ 45,079,924$ 38,880,000$ Less: Amount Set Aside for Repayment of G.O. (487,586)- - - G.O. Revenue Bonds (9,570,000) (9,185,000) (11,334,924) (10,555,000) G.O. Improvement Bonds (7,480,000) (6,710,000) (10,800,000) (6,270,000) G.O. Tax Increment Bonds (15,995,000) (8,405,000) (7,410,000) (6,905,000) Notes payable - - - - Total Net Debt Applicable to Limit:2,747,414 2,880,000 15,535,000 15,150,000 Legal Debt Margin:164,526,097$ 166,771,029$ 151,633,274$ 144,657,639$ Note: Under State of Minnesota law, the City of St. Louis Park's outstanding general obligation debt should not exceed 3 percent of the market value of the taxable property. By law, the general obligation debt subject to the limitation may be offset by amounts set aside for the extinguishment of those obligations. Fiscal Year 174 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 201 Table 13 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 157,555,872$ 153,950,244$ 154,579,107$ 163,979,667$ 176,182,830$ 190,181,436$ 14,755,000 13,820,000 17,952,166 16,984,975 23,934,703 28,375,000 142,800,872$ 140,130,244$ 136,626,941$ 146,994,692$ 152,248,127$ 161,806,436$ 9.36% 8.98% 11.61% 10.36% 13.59% 14.92% 5,251,862,400$ 5,131,674,800$ 5,152,636,900$ 5,465,988,900$ 5,872,761,000$ 6,339,381,200$ 157,555,872$ 153,950,244$ 154,579,107$ 163,979,667$ 176,182,830$ 190,181,436$ 37,930,000$ 37,840,000$ 44,989,369$ 42,277,148$ 45,550,000$ 50,910,000$ - - - - - - (9,600,000) (12,785,000) (16,826,503) (13,510,000) (10,515,000) (14,070,000) (6,975,000) (6,365,000) (5,690,000) (5,485,000) (5,270,000) (5,055,000) (6,600,000) (4,870,000) (4,520,700) (4,175,000) (3,805,000) (3,410,000) - - - (2,122,173) (2,025,297) - 14,755,000 13,820,000 17,952,166 16,984,975 23,934,703 28,375,000 142,800,872$ 140,130,244$ 136,626,941$ 146,994,692$ 152,248,127$ 161,806,436$ Fiscal Year 175 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 202 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED)Table 14 PLEDGED REVENUE BOND COVERAGE LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Less:Net Fiscal Gross Operating Revenue Year Revenue 2 Expenses 3 Available Principal Interest Coverage 2008 5,200,332 (4,300,290) 900,042 340,000 264,902 1.49 2009 5,985,714 (4,982,093) 1,003,621 385,000 374,208 1.32 2010 5,981,074 (3,851,018) 2,130,056 400,000 327,325 2.93 2011 12,186,180 (8,269,813) 3,916,367 525,000 363,435 4.41 2012 13,079,123 (8,387,329) 4,691,794 1,405,000 375,218 2.64 2013 12,659,936 (10,417,099) 2,242,837 985,000 324,393 1.71 2014 13,277,524 (10,514,981) 2,762,543 1,015,000 352,614 2.02 2015 14,379,975 (9,041,931) 5,338,044 1,045,000 4 381,359 3.74 2016 15,481,494 (10,328,560) 5,152,934 1,155,000 5 301,051 3.54 2017 16,495,157 (10,186,997) 6,308,160 1,360,000 6 197,658 4.05 Note: Details regarding the government's outstanding debt can be found in the notes to the financial statements. 1 Includes Water Utility, Sewer Utility and Storm Water Utility revenue bonds. 2 Gross revenue includes investment income and excludes intergovermental and miscellaneous revenues. 3 Expenses exclude depreciation, interest on bonds and miscellaneous expenses. 4 Excludes $2,145,000 refunded principal paid through cash with fiscal agent. 5 Excludes $1,840,000 refunded principal paid through cash with fiscal agent. 6 Excludes $1,555,000 refunded principal paid through issuance of 2017A bonds. Debt Service Revenue Bonds1 176 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 203 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Personal Income (amounts expressed Per Capita Median School Unemployment Year Population (1) in thousands) Income (1) Age (1) Enrollment (2) Rate (3) 2008 47,198 1,613,039 34,176 35.8 4,258 5.6 2009 47,221 1,761,674 37,307 35.7 4,447 5.9 2010 45,250 1,660,539 36,697 35.5 4,347 3.9 2011 44,665 1,680,297 37,620 35.4 4,365 4.4 2012 45,505 1,744,525 38,337 35.4 4,472 4.6 2013 46,362 1,828,193 39,433 35.4 4,545 4.4 2014 47,411 1,884,398 39,746 35.4 4,590 2.6 2015 47,502 1,876,424 39,502 35.5 4,590 2.3 2016 48,354 1,962,641 40,589 35.2 4,627 2.9 2017 48,747 2,053,370 42,123 35.7 4,571 2.1 Source: (1) Federal Census Bureau data (2) St. Louis Park School District (3)Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development Table 15 177 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 204 - This page intentionally left blank - 178 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 205 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED)Table 16 PRINCIPAL EMPLOYERS CURRENT YEAR AND NINE YEARS AGO Employees (1) Rank Employees (1)Rank Park Nicollet Health Services and Methodist Hospital 6,286 1 15.2 % 6,144 1 15.3 % Wells Fargo Mortgage 1,450 2 3.5 St. Louis Park Public Schools (I.S.D. No. 283)950 3 2.3 682 3 1.7 Japs-Olson Company 659 4 1.6 650 4 1.6 MoneyGram International 409 5 1.0 523 8 1.3 HealthPartners 400 6 1.0 Center for Diagnostic Imaging 387 7 0.9 Northland Aluminum Products (NordicWare)350 8 0.8 St. Louis Park, City of 277 9 0.7 AAA Minneapolis 205 10 0.5 Sholom Home West 851 2 2.1 Knollwood Mall 650 5 1.6 Target 580 6 1.4 Allied Interstate 565 7 1.4 Byerly's 400 9 1.0 Miracle Mile Shopping Center 350 10 0.9 Total 11,373 27.50 % 11,395 28.30 % Total City employment (2)41,438 40,212 Source: (1) St. Louis Park Community Development Department (2) Metropolitan Council Community Profiles Data of Total City of Total City Employer Employment Employment Percentage Percentage 2017 2008 Fiscal Year Fiscal Year 179 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 206 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT EMPLOYEES BY FUNCTION LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS 2008 2009 2010 2011 Function General government 122.5 114.5 105.5 95.4 Public safety Police Officers 51.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 Civilians 18.5 17.0 20.0 23.0 Fire Firefighters and officers 25.0 25.0 25.0 24.0 Operations and recreation and Engineering 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Water 11.4 11.4 9.9 11.2 Sewer 2.7 2.7 3.6 4.9 Solid Waste 1.8 1.8 1.8 3.3 Storm Water 2.6 2.6 3.3 4.9 Total Employees 267.5 258.0 252.0 249.7 Source: St. Louis Park Human Resources Department Fiscal Year 180 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 207 Table 17 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 90.3 88.8 88.4 89.4 91.6 97.9 52.0 52.0 53.0 55.0 55.0 57.0 30.0 34.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 25.0 26.0 28.0 33.0 35.0 34.0 35.0 35.0 28.1 11.2 10.9 11.2 11.5 11.4 12.5 4.9 4.9 5.5 6.0 6.0 6.4 3.3 3.3 4.7 5.8 5.8 5.3 4.8 4.8 6.2 6.7 6.7 7.1 253.5 257.7 262.0 269.4 272.5 277.3 Fiscal Year 181 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 208 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED)Table 18 OPERATING INDICATORS BY FUNCTION LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Police Medical calls 3,153 3,110 3,188 3,101 3,152 3,296 2,391 3,756 3,623 3,705 Traffic stops 2,724 2,462 4,236 5,362 7,146 6,674 6,907 6,692 6,939 7,401 Other 24,412 22,562 21,355 21,742 24,354 25,014 27,752 29,299 31,462 31,052 Fire Inspections/Medical/All other calls 4,357 4,429 3,893 3,078 3,117 3,360 4,747 5,118 6,130 5,513 Fire calls - residential/structural 61 96 107 153 142 66 116 135 53 202 Fire calls - other 46 68 37 53 64 48 91 115 41 85 Cable TV Hours of new programming 294 250 456 535 - 549.5 311 400 400 368 Inspections Permits 13,687 8,895 8,397 9,220 9,091 10,254 11,111 9,684 10,099 11,246 Inspections 24,022 27,332 20,204 22,818 23,667 26,902 32,543 23,031 23,372 28,484 Culture and recreation Aquatic park attendance 76,218 67,617 69,825 67,422 70,270 52,557 51,894 68,355 72,439 65,665 Hours of ice time 6,787 6,354 6,493 4,687 5,444 4,701 4,773 4,626 4,125 6,000 Water Gallons of water production (billions)2.4 2.4 2.1 2.1 2.4 2.2 2.09 2.01 1.78 1.79 Average watermain breaks per year 30 30 30 30 30 27 40 41 20 11 Public Works Snowplowing hours 1,672 2,454 3,216 2,543 1,173 6,449 3,752 2,284 3,781 2,859 Source: St. Louis Park Departments Fiscal Year 182 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 209 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED)Table 19 CAPITAL ASSET STATISTICS BY FUNCTION LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Function Public safety Police Stations 111111111 1 Patrol units 26 26 26 26 28 26 25 28 28 29 Fire Stations 222222222 2 Vehicles 13 13 13 13 14 13 13 10 14 15 Fire hydrants 1,699 1,699 1,699 1,699 1,699 1,699 1,699 1,699 1,772 1,773 Culture and recreation Parks 53 53 53 57 57 57 57 52 53 53 Trails 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 22 22 Streets Lane miles of streets 290 310 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 Miles of streets 117 155 156 155 155 155 155 155 155 155 Water Wells 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 10 10 10 Water treatment plants 666666666 6 Miles of watermain 148 148 149 160 160 160 160 160 175 175 Sanitary Sewer Lift stations 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 Miles of sewermain 138 138 139 147 147 147 147 147 143 143 Storm Sewer Lift stations 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 Ponds and lakes 26 26 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 Catch basins 2,943 3,154 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,885 3,885 Source: St. Louis Park Departments Fiscal Year 183 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 210 - This page intentionally left blank - 184 Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 1) Title: CAFR for year ended December 31, 2017 – auditors discussion and review Page 211 Meeting: Special study session Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Discussion item: 2 Executive summary Title: 2019 budget Recommended action: No formal action required. This report is to assist with the study session discussion regarding the preparation of the 2019 budget. Policy consideration: •Is the council willing to consider setting the preliminary property tax levy above the 10 year average levy increase of 4.42% due to various factors anticipated to impact the city’s budget in 2019? (These factors relate to staffing costs associated with program support items noted in the report, growth in the demand for services, and debt service, among other items) •Does the 2019 budget process and timeline and direction meet council expectations? •Is there other information that council would like to review during the upcoming process including any other service delivery change considerations? Summary: Staff has started working on preparing budget recommendations for 2019. As listed above, staff would like direction on levy considerations and any major changes, programs, or policy considerations that should be deliberated as part of preparing the 2019 budget. Financial or budget considerations: Details regarding financials are provided in this report. Strategic priority consideration: All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget. Supporting documents: Discussion Prepared by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Title: 2019 budget Discussion Background: The purpose of the discussion is to make sure staff is in line with council expectations in preparing the 2019 budget. Staff is planning to continue to use the newly adopted strategic priorities as well as vision and council goals, and the key organizational cultural behaviors of collaboration, quality and responsiveness. This study session discussion is intended to be at the higher level and, based on the direction provided, will allow staff to then prepare more detailed budgetary information for council which will assist in setting property tax levies, fees and utility rates for 2019. 2019 budget preparation: In upcoming sessions, the city council will be provided with more detail on budget recommendations, with time allowed for review of materials and questions. Directors or their designees will also be present for questions or sharing information as needed or requested. All budgets, capital improvement plan (CIP), long range financial management plan (LRFMP), debt model, fee schedules, utility rates and relevant information will be included in future materials. Budget webpage and e-mail: As council is aware, to continue providing a more transparent budget process, staff has created a webpage on the city’s website and an e-mail address for any questions that arise. The link is: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/finance/city-budget and the e-mail address is: budget@stlouispark.org. Following tonight’s budget kickoff meeting, staff will start updating the webpage and activate the e-mail address again. We are also planning to do a Facebook live budget presentation in the fall for the second year. Legislative directives: •There are no levy limits in place for 2019 at this time. •Local Government Aid has not been certified yet, but early Minnesota House Research department estimates show St. Louis Park will receive $264,129 in 2019, which is $302,462 less than the $566,591 certified for 2018. These dollars go into the Capital Replacement Fund and not the General Fund budget. Staff is in the process of trying to gain more details as to why our projected LGA funding for 2019 is projected to be reduced. Staffing costs wages: Being an organization that delivers services, programs and projects etc., funds for staffing are the largest expenditure of the City’s operating budget. In building the 2019 budget recommendations, a wage adjustment of 3% is being used as an assumption. Contracts for patrol, fire and dispatch are settled through December 31, 2019 (3% basic adjustment for 2018-19) and we continue in active negotiations with sergeants for 2018- 19. Local 49 maintenance is settled through 2018 and will be open for 2019 negotiations. PERA coordinated plan: Employee contribution of 6.50% of salary and employer contribution of 7.50% of salary in 2018 will remain the same at this point in 2019. PERA police and fire: Employee contribution of 10.8% and employer contribution of 16.2% in 2018 will increase to 11.3% employee contribution and 16.95% employer contribution in 2019. Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 2) Page 3 Title: 2019 budget Benefits: For 2019, formal bidding for health insurance will be conducted as required every 5 years. We have very active claims experience and are estimating a 12% increase in health insurance premiums. We expect a modest increase in dental insurance premiums as well. Staff continues to work with the city’s benefits consultant and internal benefits committee on cost containment on claims. The wellness benefit since 2014 has been set at $40 per employee per month and is recommended to remain the same in 2019. These estimates are incorporated into the 2019 budget. Operational costs: Staff is being asked to look at how operational costs have been changing and take into consideration market conditions, as well as planning ahead for operational needs. The focus areas relate to the strategic priorities and include, but are not limited to: environment, climate action plan work, rank choice voting, race equity and inclusion, trails and sidewalks, housing and business programs, transportation, ongoing redevelopment. Support and outreach activities continue in public safety, fire prevention, neighborhoods and housing. Energy costs will continue to be monitored closely given the potential for volatility in this sector of the economy and also monitoring use as we continue to incorporate improvements in energy saving in our operations. Program support: • SWLRT: Staff resources have been reallocated to meet increased demand for work and planning related to SWLRT. Community development along with engineering are closely working with other agencies and will incorporate changes as needed. Increases in consultant costs from SWLRT have been and will continue to be paid from the Development Fund when appropriate. • Vision/comprehensive plan update/strategic priorities: Work continues with the required update of our comprehensive plan by December 2018. Staff and consultants are connecting with departments on various pieces of this plan. Work to support strategic priorities are part of the budget analysis and planning and is being conducted by departments for 2019 funding recommendations and future budgets. • Race equity and inclusion: As discussed in a June study session, staff is looking at developing baseline data and measures as we continue in support of race equity and inclusion. Expansion in the area of outreach will be happening with connections within departments, and will include request for additional staff for grass roots outreach in our community. Continued planning and working with other agencies will happen as well as further work on action plans with staff and council to make this part of the fabric of what we do in our city. • Rank choice voting: We anticipate 2019 will continue to be very busy with development of technical pieces of RCV, ordinance adoption, education, outreach and overall communication as well as working with Hennepin County. Additional staff support is needed to make sure RCV roll out is a success and will work for our local election. Once the technical pieces are done, we are required to test for the new RCV systems to ensure successful use. • Environment/climate action plan (CAP): Staff continues to support environment and sustainability initiatives and commission with the focus on implementation of the recently approved CAP. Items in the climate action plan will be reviewed and included in 2019 and future budget and capital programs. The larger piece of CAP is development of the strategy for short term and longer term plans and programs to guide us through Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 2) Page 4 Title: 2019 budget implementation to reach targets over the years. The largest impact in meeting goals in the CAP is with our business community. Staff is currently contacting consultants to help with support and guidance to set up thoughtful methods and possible programs prior to meeting with our businesses. A communication and education plan is being developed for information sharing. There will be requests for staffing to help with program development, data collection and outreach and other opportunities to support CAP. Utility funds: All utility funds will be presented during the budget process as in previous years with a review of rates in accordance with the city’s long range financial management plan (LRFMP). As in previous years, all utility rates are analyzed, adjusted as needed to meet operational and capital needs, while also working to meet appropriate cash position guidelines. During this budget process, staff from various departments and our financial consultants will gather to review the utility funds, review rate structures in conjunction with short term and longer term program needs including conservation strategies. • Water: For 2019, the city will be in the ninth year of the ten year plan for increasing the fixed rate charges to reduce volatility in the fund due to seasonal usage fluctuations. Usage rates will also be analyzed to meet more aggressive demands for infrastructure replacement within the city’s aging system. Significant expenses for this fund are capital, staffing, and the Reilly superfund site and debt service. Staff will further study water conservation, irrigation and rates in 2018 to prepare for future recommendations. • Sewer: Rates are also expected to increase due to the city’s more aggressive infrastructure replacement plan. Sewer costs mainly support the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) charge, staffing and capital costs. • Solid Waste: Rates for this fund are expected to continue to support more of a pay as you throw type rate structure. Rates may also vary depending on any enhanced or new initiatives the council would like to pursue/offer. The new hauler contract will be included in our long range analysis. The major expenses for this fund are the contract charges, supplies and staffing. • Storm Water: With the interest council and the community has in surface water, staff will continue to develop, modify, connect and communicate programs to both the city council and the community. Based on council direction to place more emphasis on storm water management, along with increasing regulations, rates will need to continue to be adjusted over the next few years. These increases will help meet the increased capital needs. Significant expenses for this fund currently are capital and staffing. Franchise fees: In the past, council has directed staff to consider franchise fee adjustments every odd numbered year. For the 2019 Budget, there will be an adjustment proposed which will be discussed as part of the budget process. Once the new 10 year capital improvement plan projects for pavement management are analyzed we will determine if the proposed $0.75 adjustment for electric and gas is still an appropriate increase or if it needs to be adjusted. The current monthly amount is $4.00 per utility (Gas and Electric). Fees, charges and other revenues: Staff will continue to review current fee data based on cost analyses and other communities before making recommendations for the 2019 fee schedules. Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 2) Page 5 Title: 2019 budget LRFMP (long range financial management plan): This document will be presented at future meetings with council to assist in setting property tax levies, debt management, fees, utility rates and budgets. CIP (capital improvement plan): Staff has completed the first round work on the CIP (2019- 2028). This information has been programmed into the LRFMP and finance is analyzing the results in an effort to create long-term sustainability in funds and also looking at where changes in funding or expenditures/expenses need to occur for the city council and city manager to consider. The council will see a draft of the plan in August and again in the fall. Trends in valuations and possible property tax implications: For the 2018 assessment, St. Louis Park’s taxable market value increased by 8.8% with all of the dominant property types increasing in value. Composition of the change is summarized as +7.7% for single-family homes, +9.1% for condos, +8.5% for townhomes, +13.6% for apartments, and the commercial-industrial sectors at +8.4%. As can be surmised by the above figures, there will be a slight shift of the property tax burden to commercial, condos, and apartment properties for the payable 2019 tax period. This shift will be mitigated somewhat when considering all taxing jurisdictions that make up the typical property tax bill (in the aggregate, other county jurisdictions increased at higher rates for single-family homes but at lower rates for apartments and commercial properties). City property tax levy: As a point of reference, the city’s 10 year average property tax levy increase is 4.42%. As the year progresses, and more firm information becomes available, staff will bring property tax levy recommendations and the potential impact on property owners for council to consider. Before this occurs though, and in preparation to bring budget and property tax levy recommendations to the council, staff would like to have council consider the following question: 1) What is the council’s propensity to consider setting the preliminary property tax levy above the 10 year average levy increase of 4.42% due to various factors impacting the city’s budget in 2019? (These factors relate to staffing costs associated with program support items noted earlier, growth in the demand for services, and debt service, among other items). HRA property tax levy: Based on current and future infrastructure needs, the HRA levy is recommended to be set at the maximum allowed of 0.0185% of estimated market value, which is consistent with previous years. This levy is committed to pay back a loan from the development fund that helped cash flow the city’s obligation for Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue and is expected to be paid off in 2020 or earlier depending on market value changes. City and HRA tax levies: The council and EDA will meet to adopt preliminary 2019 levies on September 17. After adoption of the preliminary property tax levies, the levies may be reduced, but not increased. The preliminary property tax levies that are adopted will then be used to determine the preliminary property taxes on the statements that Hennepin County mails out in November to all property owners. Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 2) Page 6 Title: 2019 budget Next steps: The following preliminary timeline has been developed for council: July 23 (If necessary) Review and discussion of 2019 budget August 13 Review and discussion of 2019 budget and draft 2019-2028 CIP. Department Directors or their designees will also be in attendance. September 4 (Tues) High level 2019 Budget, CIP, fees, utility rates discussion. This meeting will be more of a proposed preliminary levy discussion with direction provided to staff to prepare information for the September 17th meeting adopting preliminary levies. September 17 Council establishes 2018 preliminary property tax levy and HRA levy. (Levies can be reduced, but not increased for final property tax levies.) October 8 Review and discussion of 2019 budget, CIP, utility rates and LRFMP. Directors or their designees in attendance as needed. October 15 Public Hearing - 1st Reading of Fees, and adoption of 2019 Utility Rates November 5 (If necessary) Budget and CIP discussion prior to Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and budget presentation. 2nd Reading of Fee on Consent. November Live Facebook chat on 2019 budget and CIP. December 3 Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and budget presentation December 10 (If necessary) Continuation of Public Hearing and any budget discussion. December 17 Council adopts 2018 Revised Budget, 2019 Budgets, final tax levies (City and HRA), and 2019 - 2028 CIP. Meeting: Special study session Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Written report: 3 Executive summary Title: France Avenue sidewalk project update – project 4018-2000 Recommended action: None at this time, staff is providing an update to the schedule related to the construction of this sidewalk. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to continue to implement the Connect the Park plan? Summary: On January 2, 2018, the city council approved a Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Edina for the construction of a sidewalk along the west side of France Avenue between W. 39th Street and W. 42nd Street. This agreement designated the City of Edina as the lead agency for the design and construction of the sidewalk. This sidewalk segment is the only missing segment on the west side of France from Excelsior Boulevard in St. Louis Park to the Minnesota River in Bloomington. The City of Edina opened bids on May 24, 2018 for this project. Five bids were submitted for the project. The low bidder was G.L. Contracting for a project total of $209,069.30. In accordance with our joint powers agreement, the project will be led by the City of Edina. St. Louis Park will reimburse Edina for the actual cost of construction. The city’s cost, $44,338.92, is under $100,000 and within administrative approval authority. A schedule of the upcoming construction can be found on the second page of this report. Financial or budget considerations: This project is included in the city’s CIP for 2018. The project will be paid for using General Obligation Bonds and Hennepin County grant funds. Additional funding details are included in the discussion section. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Discussion Location Map Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, Sr. Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3) Page 2 Title: France Avenue sidewalk project update – project 4018-2000 Discussion Background: Connect the Park is the city’s 10-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to add sidewalks, trails, and bikeways throughout the community. The sidewalk segment on the west side of France Avenue from 39th Street to the city border was identified to be constructed in 2018. This sidewalk connects to a segment of sidewalk being constructed by Edina from 42nd Street to the city boundary. The two cities entered in to a Joint Powers Agreement in January of 2018 allowing the City of Edina to lead the project and completed the final plan design. Each city is responsible for the costs of the project within its corporate boundary. The City of Edina applied for a cost participation solicitation with Hennepin County. Hennepin County agreed to contribute a lump sum of $75,600 for the new sidewalk. The money will be distributed proportionally to the St. Louis Park and Edina based on the amount of sidewalk constructed in their respective corporate boundaries. This amounts to approximately one third (1/3) of the money going to St. Louis Park and two thirds (2/3) to Edina. Funding The low bidder was G.L. Contracting for a project total of $209,069.30. The cost for the sidewalk segment within St. Louis Park is $69,338.92. Funding Source Low Bid General Obligation Bonds $44,338.92 Hennepin County Grant $25,000.00 Total $69,338.92 Communications There are only four property owners within St. Louis Park. Staff has been communicating with these property owners via letter and has had a few face to face meetings to discuss the project. We will continue to use the same format for keeping the residents informed as the project progresses. Schedule The proposed construction schedule is shown below. The contractor anticipates starting at 39th Street and working south to 42nd Street. Tree clearing Late June to early July 2018 Relocation of overhead utilities July 2018 Start of construction First week of July 2018 Completion of construction End of August 2018 EDINA MINNEAPOLIS ST. LOUIS PARK 42nd Street Drew AvenueEwing AvenueBeard AvenueChowen Avenue41st Street 40th Street 39th Street France AvenueInglewood AvenueAlden DriveScott Terrace39TH ST W FRANCE AVE SINGLEWOOD AVE SGLENHURST AVE S3940 3901 3916 390540014021392140153835 3847 3924 3944 3912 3906 3918 40093836 3842 3837 3843 3930 3920 3910 3903 3834 3840 3936 3940 3840 3835 3841 3834 3844 3900 3845 3844 38313830 3838 3834 3828 3920 3931 3844 3845 0 500 1,000250 Feet ´ France Avenue Sidewalk Proj. No. 4018-2000 - Location Map Legend Proposed St. Louis Park Sidewalk Proposed Edina Sidewalk Municipality Boundaries St. Louis Park Property Lines Special study session meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3) Title: France Avenue sidewalk project update – project 4018-2000 Page 3 Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Presentation: 2a Executive Summary Title: Comprehensive annual financial report for the year ended December 31, 2017 Recommended action: No action required. David J. Mol, Partner from Redpath and Company, will make a presentation on the opinion issued and other required forms of communication to the city council. Policy consideration: Does the city council feel the information contained in the Communication with Those Charged with Governance, Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and Independent Auditor’s Reports, and Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the year ended December 31, 2017 will allow for effective decision making? Summary: The city is required to have an annual independent audit of its financial statements in which the audit firm issues an opinion on the financial statements. The city received a “clean” audit opinion, or unmodified opinion, which means that Redpath and Company believe the financial statements, as presented by city staff, present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the City as of December 31, 2017. After the city council reviews the CAFR for 2017, it will be submitted to the office of the state auditor as required and also submitted to the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) to be considered for the Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting certificate program for which the City of St. Louis Park has been recognized for 34 consecutive years. Financial or budget considerations: This report shows the City of St. Louis Park continues to remain in strong financial condition. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: 1) 2017-Communication with Those Charged with Governance* 2) 2017-Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and Independent Auditor’s Reports* 3) 2017-Comprehensive Annual Financial Report* (*See Special Study Session Report for Attachments) Prepared by: Mark Ebensteiner, Finance Manager Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Presentation: 2b Executive summary Title: Jacqueline Larson – MAGC Communicator of the Year Award Recommended action: The city council is respectfully requested to recognize Jacqueline Larson for this prestigious award in her professional field. Carolyn Marinan, Chief Public Relations Officer with Hennepin County, will be in attendance to present this award with the mayor. Policy consideration: None at this time. Summary: Jacqueline Larson was named Communicator of the Year by the Minnesota Association of Government Communicators (MAGC) at the organization’s Northern Lights Awards ceremony on May 17. In addition to being the communications and marketing manager for the City of St. Louis Park, she is also an officer on the Minnesota Association of Community Telecommunications Administrators (MACTA) board. Jacque’s communications career spans 25 years with 14 of those years in local government. A strategic thinker who provides sound advice both City Council and staff, Jacque is highly skilled in media and public relations, marketing and branding, and crisis communications. Jacque was recognized for her commitment and dedication to excellence in communications throughout 2017. A few highlights of her work include collaborating with the St. Louis Park Emergency Program and all city departments on the Canadian Pacific Railroad Holiday Train visit; coordinating marketing on human trafficking training for rental properties around the Super Bowl and participating in two years of Advancing Racial Equity Training with GARE. Those who nominated her for the award described Jacque as highly motivated and creative, and an outstanding leader. They noted how she is greatly respected and admired by her peers, her staff and the city leaders and elected officials she serves with. Jacque is professionally active, continually learning and contributing to the development of staff, college and high school interns, and others interested in the communications field. She gives her time to work with MAGC, MACTA, and Hubbard School of Journalism and Mass Communications Alumni Association Board (University of Minnesota-Twin Cities). In 2017, Jacque completed the accreditation in public relations certification program. This rigorous certification is completed successfully by a small minority of communications professionals. It reflects Jacque's drive to excel in her service to her organization and profession. Financial or budget considerations: None. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: None. Prepared by: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Presentation: 2c Executive Summary Title: Recognition of donations Recommended action: Mayor to announce and express thanks and appreciation for the following donations being accepted at the meeting and listed on the consent agenda: From Donation For Cabela’s Forty fishing poles and fishing supplies The police department’s Fishin’ with a Cop summer program Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: None Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Minutes: 3a Unofficial minutes City council study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota April 30, 2018 The meeting convened at 7:20 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller, and Margaret Rog. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening) joined the meeting at 8 p.m., Deputy City Manager/HR Director (Ms. Deno), Fire Chief Koering, Deputy Fire Chief Wolff, Community Outreach Coordinator (Ms. Schmelzle), Management Assistant (Ms. Carrillo-Perez), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guest: None 1. Environment & Sustainability Commission membership requirements Ms. Deno explained over the past several years, the city has had difficulty recruiting and filling business and residential tenant member positions on the Environment & Sustainability Commission. During the most recent annual appointment process, the city received no applications for the business or residential member positions. Multiple councilmembers requested a discussion regarding the membership requirements for these member positions. Councilmember Mavity cautioned the council to be careful with what they want to accomplish, and first define what business and residential tenant membership means. Councilmember Miller pointed out the Climate Action Plan is the most important issue at hand, and community businesses will need to be brought on board. He stressed it does not matter if a resident owns or works at a community business, the main thing is they would represent businesses. Councilmember Brausen added he is fine if someone who does not live in St. Louis Park, but works here, is on the commission, and he would be willing to consider this as criteria. Mayor Spano stated he has no preference on whether a business owner works or lives in St. Louis Park, but he would like a person on the commission who can effect change in their organization and get the business community excited about the Climate Action Plan. Councilmember Mavity pointed out it’s not this person’s job to get other businesses excited about the Climate Action Plan. They should help the council understand the business perspective, and how it will impact the bottom line in a business operation. The city’s role will be to get the word out to businesses through marketing and communication. Councilmember Harris asked how other commissions bring in the business aspect. Ms. Deno said the Environmental & Sustainability Commission is the only one with a business component. Page 2 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3a) Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2018 Councilmember Rog noted there are multiple people interested in these roles, and the council should find ways to help these folks serve. Councilmember Hallfin wondered if the council should state that it is the goal to have a business representative on the commission vs. having hard and fast criteria. Councilmember Mavity agreed. It was the consensus of the council to no longer have a requirement that there be a business member and residential tenant on the commission, but that instead they will “strive for the goal of having a business member and residential tenant.” Ms. Deno said this change will be forwarded to the Environmental & Sustainability Commission prior to the final reading. 2. Policy prohibiting family members of council from serving on Boards and Commissions Ms. Deno stated staff was asked to look into implementing a rule that would prohibit a councilmember’s immediate family, registered domestic partner, or members of the same household from serving on any city advisory board or commission. Mayor Spano stated he does not feel any of the councilmember’s family member should be on commissions, noting that reasonable expectations must be set for applicants to commissions, and one should be that nepotism is not tolerated. Councilmember Mavity stated defining who family is, within a household, will need to be addressed. Councilmember Brausen stated he is opposed to this rule and does not see why family members should be prohibited from serving on commissions. Councilmember Hallfin explained the issue is how it is perceived by others. Councilmember Mavity agreed. Councilmember Rog concurred with the issue of appearances; however, added it is too broad to say a councilmember’s family member that lives in the same household cannot be appointed to a commission. It was the consensus of the council to implement a policy prohibiting family members of council members from serving on city advisory boards and commissions. 3. Fire department strategic plan Fire Chief Koering noted a five-year strategic plan will be presented which outlines 10 initiatives across all areas of fire department operations. He noted the bulk of the conversation will be on Page 3 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3a) Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2018 community health management, with comments from Deputy Chief Wolff and Community Outreach Coordinator Schmelzle. Chief Koering discussed initiatives of the department, opportunities for leadership development, race equity plans and training, revenue enhancements, technology, emergency preparedness, and response. Councilmember Mavity asked about the status of 911 dispatch. Chief Koering stated there have been no substantive changes; however, the City of Minnetonka is no longer St. Louis Park’s back up city. The city’s new partner is now the City of Edina. Chief Koering stated that having our own 911 Dispatch is a critical component of how we address EMS. Councilmember Harris asked about the hospital release program, and if this model is helping with cost sharing and revenue enhancement. Chief Koering stated this will be discussed later in the presentation. Councilmember Rog asked if the fire department has a program similar to the Pathways to Policing program, and if there is an effort for community outreach and hiring a more diverse staff within the fire department. Chief Koering stated yes, they have partnered with Minneapolis the past 2 years on a similar program, and have had four (4) graduates from St. Louis Park, who have all taken jobs in EMS. He also noted an intern recently hired by the department was involved in the Pathways program. Councilmember Mavity asked about goals related to race equity and community engagement programs within neighborhoods, pointing out that most active neighborhoods in the city tend to be white and affluent. She noted this does not seem to be the right place for the department to work on community engagement. Chief Koering stated they focus on areas where the greatest needs are first, especially in multi- family housing complexes and neighborhoods. Councilmember Mavity suggested this be stated more directly in the strategic plan, in order to reach diverse communities. Councilmember Rog asked about the Safer Grant program. Chief Koering stated the department has applied for and received this grant, and is in the second year of the grant. The costs for hiring two (2) additional positions will be covered by the city after the grant is completed. Chief Koering stated the future of EMS is in community health management programs, adding this program is rapidly expanding across the country, but is in very few fire departments in Minnesota. He noted that St. Louis Park is leading this initiative at this time. He stated the mission is to create equity in healthcare, and requires intentional intervention so folks can be safer and healthier in their homes. Chief Koering stated the fire department’s role is to identify the need, connect folks with care integration resources, and then follow up and document needs or improvements. After that, measuring outcomes becomes important, along with customer satisfaction. He added, by Page 4 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3a) Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2018 putting the fire department in the process and connecting people to the right resources, 911 calls can be reduced. Ms. Schmelzle stated the department visits discharged patients from Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital to be sure they are getting correct medications, food, and support. The department also partners with Sholom programs and Life Spark, to help coordinate home discharge care for city residents. Mr. Wolff estimated that $60,000 in revenue was created through these programs, which help avoid crisis for individuals and prevent multiple 911 calls, and hospital re-admittance. Chief Koering pointed out that more data on residents would be helpful, in order to identify populations with greater risk in the community. Councilmember Hallfin pointed out that residents in need of food can be connected with STEP, and care packages can be set up post discharge. Chief Koering stated there is a food shelf component involved post discharge from Park Nicollet. Councilmember Harris stated as she speaks with folks in the city, people are looking for affordable housing and access to healthcare, adding there is a growing and ongoing need as things have changed in the national landscape. She stated she is excited about this program and the potential it has for the future in addressing these ongoing needs. Councilmember Rog asked the Chief how they connect with the police. Chief Koering stated they connect as it relates to the dispatch center, and partner with the police on medical calls, especially with behavioral health calls. Councilmember Rog asked if the department plans to seek additional grants and partnerships. Chief Koering stated yes, especially state and federal grants. Councilmember Mavity stated this is great work and it feels like the city and the fire department are doing the right thing. Mayor Spano and Councilmembers Miller and Brausen agreed. The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 4. Yeshiva boys high school expansion 5. Off-sale intoxicating liquor ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Minutes: 3b Unofficial minutes City council meeting St. Louis Park, Minnesota May 7, 2018 1. Call to Order Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller, and Margaret Rog. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno) Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), Director of Community Development (Ms. Barton), Associate Planner (Ms. Kramer), Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Mr. Walther), Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Sullivan), Management Assistant (Ms. Carrillo Perez), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guests: St. Louis Park Residents 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations 2a. Bike Month Proclamation Mayor Spano read the proclamation, declaring the month of May as Bike Month in St. Louis Park. Throughout the entire month, businesses, community groups, and individuals are encouraged to host and participate in events and activities focusing on encouraging newer riders to try biking. 2b. Recognition of Donations Mayor Spano thanked Becky Finnigan for her donation of $1,000 for maintenance of the area around the John Finnigan memorial bench and other areas at Westwood Hills Nature Center as needed. 3. Approval of Minutes - None 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar 4a. Accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the period of March 24, through April 30, 2018. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 2 Title: City council meeting minutes of May 7, 2018 4b. Moved to 8f. 4c. Designate G.L. Contracting, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $639,433.40 for the 2018 Alley Reconstruction Project No. 4018-1500. 4d. Designate Northdale Construction Company, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize a contract with the firm in the amount of $646,142.23 for the 2018 MSA Aquila Avenue Rehabilitation Project (4018-1100). 4e. Designate S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize the City of Hopkins to execute a contract with the firm in the amount of $5,197,547.47 for the Texas Avenue S. and Division Street Improvement Project (4018-1101). 4f. Adopt Resolution No. 18-067 calling for a public hearing relative to the establishment of the Bridgewater Bank Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a redevelopment district). 4g. Adopt Resolution No. 18-068 to recognize Parks Field Supervisor Don Drennen for 41 years of service. 4h. Adopt Resolution No. 18-069 rescinding Resolution No. 17-076 and approving the attached revised list of snow removal exempt parking areas. 4i. Adopt Resolution No. 18-070 approving acceptance of a monetary donation from Becky Finnigan in the amount of $1,000 to be used at Westwood Hills Nature Center to maintain the area around the John Finnigan memorial bench and other areas in Westwood Hills Nature Center as needed. 4j. Adopt Resolution No. 18-071 amending Resolution Nos. 17-196 and 18-026 limiting the number of off-sale intoxicating liquor licenses issued in St. Louis Park. 4k. Adopt Resolution No. 18-072 recognizing staff in Operations, Police and Facilities Maintenance for their excellent work in removing the snow for the 2017 – 2018 season. 4l. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 7, 2018. 4m. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 21, 2018 Councilmember Brausen requested that Consent Calendar item 4b be removed and placed on the Regular Agenda as item 8F. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to approve the agenda and items listed on the consent calendar as amended to move consent calendar item 4b to the regular agenda as item 8f and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Boards and Commissions - None 6. Public Hearings- None 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 3 Title: City council meeting minutes of May 7, 2018 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. Second Reading of Ordinance Amending Home Rule Charter by Adding Sec. 12.08 Related to Voting Method. Ordinance No. 2535-18. Ms. Deno explained the amendment would authorize a change in the voting method for municipal elections to elect the Mayor and City Council by single transferable voting, also known as “ranked-choice voting”. She stated the first reading of the ordinance was approved unanimously, and tonight’s second reading must also be approved unanimously by all 7 councilmembers for approval. Councilmember Rog recognized her predecessor former Councilmember Sanger for all her work on this ordinance. It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to adopt Ordinance No. 2535-18, amending the St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter by adding Sec. 12.08, Voting Method, to allow for the use of ranked-choice voting in municipal elections. (A unanimous vote of all 7 councilmembers is required for approval.) The motion passed 7-0. 8b. 2018-2019 Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS) Local #206 Police Officers and Local #220 Public Safety Dispatchers Labor Agreements. Resolution No. 18- 073 and Resolution No. 18-074. Ms. Deno explained the two-year agreement and active negotiations noting the new agreement would provide for a 3% wage increase, for both police officer and public safety dispatchers. She stated this was completed in order to be more competitive with other city police departments and to meet market targets in 2019. She added all were pleased with this outcome. Mayor Spano pointed out the police and city staff are exceptional employees who deliver high quality services and it has become clear to the council that we need to compensate them for this great work, and to bring their compensation in line with other cities. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to adopt Resolution No. 18-073 and Resolution No. 18-074, approving labor agreements between the city and two bargaining groups (police officers and dispatchers) establishing terms and conditions of employment for two years, from 1/1/18 – 12/31/19. The motion passed 7-0. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 4 Title: City council meeting minutes of May 7, 2018 8c. Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ms. Kramer stated that Tower Place LLC applied for a major amendment to the Park Village PUD to renovate the former Mann Theater building at 5400 Excelsior Blvd for new uses. The application proposes medical office use on the entire first floor of the existing Mann Theater building and proposes to keep the second floor vacant in the near term. The application requests that future renovations to the second story for permitted uses in the district, including a medical office, be allowed to be approved administratively. Ms. Kramer continued a major amendment to the PUD is necessary because the original PUD ordinance included a specific mix of uses that were allowed for the site. The major amendment process includes rezoning the property from C-2 General Commercial to PUD and a zoning code text amendment. As part of this application, the previous PUD amendments would be rescinded. Councilmember Mavity stated this seems to be a perfectly reasonable use of this space, and is a good fit and appropriate use of space and she will support it. Councilmember Miller agreed, although noted he will be sad to lose the community theater, but understands this will be a higher and better use of the space. Councilmember Brausen added this reflects the current realities that less people go to movie theaters these days, and he appreciates the reusing and recycling of this building – noting it is a great reuse of the building Councilmember Harris agreed, noting she is pleased there is another significant use for this large building, and thanked Park Nicollet for their commitment and great use of the space. Mayor Spano added the theater building provides a great open canvas for public art, and he would like to see it used in this way if possible. It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to rescind resolutions Nos. 93-183, 94-180, 02-084, 06-025, 06-042, 11-033, and 11-132, subject to adoption, and effective upon the effective date, of the Park Village PUD ordinance, and to approve the first reading of an ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 12 to the zoning code and amending the zoning map from C-2 General Commercial to PUD 12 for the land located at the following legal description: Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, Tower Place, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and setting the second reading for May 21, 2018. The motion passed 7-0. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 5 Title: City council meeting minutes of May 7, 2018 8d. Modifications of Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 – Project No. 4019-9007 Resolution No. 18-075. Mr. Sullivan noted the modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7, stating the improvements will be made to consider safety at the very compact interchange. These phase 1 changes include restructuring sightlines by reducing retaining walls, and creating dedicated pedestrian and bike lanes. Mr. Sullivan stated phase 2 changes will consider the SWLRT in 2018 – 2022, and will include the installation of traffic signals at the top of both ramps, restriping, and changing the bridge deck to 4 lanes with a left turn lane onto ramps. He added the Cedar Lake Regional Trail underpass will be included during phase 2, at Wooddale Avenue. Mr. Sullivan stated the $2.4 million project will be paid for by the Elmwood TIF district and G.O. Bonds, and bids open June 6, with a contract scheduled to be awarded on June 18, 2018. Councilmember Mavity stated this project has been considered for a long time and she is glad to be moving forward on this. She stated the bridge has been challenging for pedestrians and bicyclists in particular, adding she is in favor of the plan. Councilmember Mavity added, in comments from neighbors, there is concern about the amount of concrete in this intersection, and she asked staff about landscaping improvements at the location. Mr. Sullivan stated there will be a reduction in hard surface, and a move toward the city’s living streets policy. He added staff is working with the city forester on low plantings and trees for the bridge, which should help improve the area. He stated the landscaping will also play off the design features of PLACE, which is in close proximity to the bridge. Councilmember Harris added this project has long been desired by folks in the neighborhood, along with the added sense of safety. She gave kudos to staff for this design and plans for long term uses, especially taking into account PLACE and the SWLRT. She noted she is looking forward to the finished project, stating the face of the concrete wall could be used for public art, and to enhance the neighborhood with creativity and vitality. Mayor Spano asked if there was still time to do more public art here, and still remain on the timeline to complete the project. Mr. Sullivan stated that might be challenging as there are some stipulations, however opportunities could be reviewed within the area of the corridor, and still keep the project on schedule. Councilmember Rog asked about the impacts to the Sorenson residents and people passing on the bridge during the project. Mr. Sullivan stated the goal is to keep traffic moving and during construction there will be temporary enhancements that recognize the Sorenson and Elmwood neighborhoods usage of the bridge. He also noted during construction, one sidewalk will be kept open. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 6 Title: City council meeting minutes of May 7, 2018 Councilmember Miller stated he is in favor of moving forward on this plan adding he is proud the city is moving forward on this and correcting this situation. He also appreciated that traffic signals will be added soon and is glad staff is looking at this, but understands the constraints to getting the traffic lights installed sooner. Mayor Spano noted these improvements are much needed, and the project is a good opportunity to acknowledge the fact that not every design works, and sometimes staff needs to come back and correct it. He added this is a huge step in the right direction, and asked Mr. Sullivan to consider looking at a scramble configuration at the intersection near the high school and McDonalds, during the next cycle of street improvements. It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to adopt Resolution No. 18-075, approving final plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for the modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 – Project No. 4019-9007. The motion passed 7-0. 8e. Traffic Study No. 694 – 2018 Pavement Management Project (4018-1000) Traffic Control Resolutions. Resolution No. 18-076, Resolution No. 18-077, Resolution No. 18-078 and Resolution No. 18-079. Ms. Heiser noted the four resolutions establish new traffic controls for the 2018 Pavement Management Project, adding the background on each resolution is included in the staff report. She stated this year’s pavement management project is located in the Elmwood, Brooklawns, and Brookside neighborhoods. Councilmember Miller stated the parking restriction on Zarthan is too restrictive and prevents neighbors from parking in front of their homes, and he will oppose all four resolutions. Councilmember Rog asked if these changes can be revisited at a later date and re- negotiated. Mr. Harmening stated the council can pass these resolutions now, and then and always request to revisit them after a certain time and see how they are working. He stated by adopting the resolution, nothing precludes council from coming back to reevaluate the area, adding the council always has that option. It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to adopt Resolution No. 18-076 authorizing the installation of parking restrictions on W. 36th Street and Brunswick Avenue, Resolution No. 18-077 authorizing installation of parking restrictions on Zarthan Avenue and W. 39th Street, Resolution No. 18-078 authorizing the removal of stop signs and installation of neighborhood traffic circles with yield signs on Oxford Street and Goodrich Avenue at Brunswick Avenue, and Resolution No. 18-079, authorizing the conversion of Oxford Street from Wooddale Avenue to Zarthan Avenue to two-way traffic and installation of stop signs at Oxford Street and Zarthan Avenue. The motion passed 6-1 (Councilmember Miller opposed.) City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 7 Title: City council meeting minutes of May 7, 2018 8f. Approve the 2018/2019 Neighborhood Grants. Councilmember Brausen stated this is a $50,000 award of grants, which is a small budget, but it’s one of the biggest things the city does, in that we award grants to neighborhood groups for various programs, environmental projects, and initiatives. He added that 21 of the 35 neighborhoods applied for and received funds, noting the council would like to see this be 35 out of 35 neighborhoods. He encouraged every resident, especially those living in neighborhoods that are not organized, to come forward with ideas to build community in those neighborhoods and to bring those ideas to the council and city staff, specifically to Breanna Freedman, our community liaison with the police department. He explained assistance will be available to all residents with these endeavors. He also thanked those residents and neighborhood groups that are already participating. Councilmember Brausen added these efforts are appreciated by the city and neighbors, and the council is happy to spend this money on the programs folks feel will benefit their neighborhoods. Mayor Spano stated he was a neighborhood leader and sees this as a tremendous opportunity, noting these grants are incentives to get neighborhoods organized. He encouraged anyone who is not part of an organized neighborhood group to contact Breanna Freedman and get organized. He also noted the best part about being a neighborhood leader is that each leader can head up the organization any way they choose, adding it’s a very flexible system. He again encouraged neighborhood groups to apply for the grant money the city provides. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to approve the 2018/2019 grants. The motion passed 7-0. 9. Communications Councilmember Rog noted there is a meeting on Thursday, May 10, with an opportunity to provide input on the historic Walker Lake area. The meeting is at city hall from 5:30 – 7 p.m. in council chambers. Councilmember Harris noted an event on Tuesday, May 8, from 6:30 – 9 p.m. at the Lennox Community Center, which the Police Advisory Commission is co-hosting. This is an informational equity inclusive event. Councilmember Brausen noted an upcoming discussion in May on Westwood Nature Center, and he encouraged all residents to attend and weigh-in on their thoughts. Councilmember Hallfin stated not only is Sunday, May 13 Mother’s Day, but it is the Children First Ice Cream Social from 2-5 p.m. at the Rec Center and The ROC, and all are invited to attend. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 8 Title: City council meeting minutes of May 7, 2018 Mayor Spano noted an upcoming tree planting event on May 12 at Shelard Park from 9 a.m. – 12 noon. He also recognized all Mother’s on the upcoming Mother’s Day holiday. Mayor Spano also noted that last week the council met with Congressman Ellison to communicate city priorities. Mayor Spano shared some information from Representative Ellison’s thank you letter to the city, where he recognized St. Louis Park’s work on affordable housing, inclusivity, and initiatives that are on the cutting edge, along with critical leadership and work with families. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Minutes: 3c Unofficial minutes City council study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota May 14, 2018 The meeting convened at 6:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, and Margaret Rog. Councilmembers absent: Thom Miller. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Housing Supervisor (Ms. Schnitker), Director of Community Development (Ms. Barton), Director of Inspections (Mr. Hoffman), Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Police Chief Harcey, Police Lt. Garland, Fire Chief Koering, Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), Sr. Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Sullivan), Planner (Ms. Monson), Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Mr. Walther), ESC Coordinator (Ms. Pinc), Natural Resources Coordinator (Mr. Vaughan), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Public Works Superintendent (Mr. Hanson), Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Elkin), Management Assistant (Ms. Carrillo Perez), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guest: Rabbi Avi Olitzky, Beth El Synagogue; Staff members from Benilde-St. Margaret and St. Louis Park Residents 1. Future study session agenda planning – May 21 and May 29, 2018 Councilmember Brausen asked for a discussion on mandatory minimum wage. Councilmember Mavity supported this. Councilmember Rog asked for a discussion on the senior advisory commission, during the conversation about the youth advisory commission. Mr. Harmening stated both topics will be discussed at the same meeting. Councilmember Hallfin acknowledged this is a very active council, but asked the councilmembers and staff to think about the pace of the work the council is trying to do, and raised concerns about missing the important items, while discussing everything. Mayor Spano stated the council has much work to do, adding it is all good work, but also noting he wants to be sure they can accomplish it all and give the work the attention it deserves. 2. Common Sound Music Festival update Ms. Carrillo Perez gave a quick overview stating that Beth El Synagogue and Benilde-St. Margaret’s School have partnered to host an inaugural outdoor summer concert called Common Sound Music Festival, on Sunday, June 17, 2018. She stated she has served as the main point person on the event for the city and noted that issues related to police, fire, and public safety have been addressed. Ms. Carrillo Perez noted an application for a temporary liquor license will come before the council at next week’s meeting. She added tonight’s meeting will be for the council to raise questions, concerns and make comments. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3c) Page 2 Title: City council study session minutes from May 14, 2018 Rabbi Avi Olitzky stated the event was created to be about folks coming together in a positive light, with a goal to be good neighbors, during a time of divisiveness. He added this is going to create a fun, exciting event for St. Louis Park. He added that neighbors within 2000 feet of the event were notified. Rabbi Olitzky introduced Mr. Lannazzo with the event staff, who discussed event logistics, safety, vendors, entertainment, and traffic issues with the council. Mr. Lannazzo stated no streets will be closed off for the event, and it is taking place in the Beth El parking lot. He added there will be parking in the Benilde lots, and Uber/taxi drop-offs and pick-ups on Toledo Avenue. Councilmember Mavity asked if the city has established parking requirements, and if the event will meet those requirements. Mr. Harmening stated there are no requirements for parking for an outside event, within the city. Mr. Lannazzo stated the event organizers will be monitoring ticket sales to the event, and if sales exceed 1,500 tickets, they will add off-site parking at the West End, and shuttle folks to the event. Mayor Spano asked how many folks the area can hold for a concert. Ms. Carrillo Perez stated there is no known equation. Rabbi Olitzky added the ticket sales will be capped at 2,000, including staff and volunteers, for this first year. Mayor Spano noted he has concerns about folks coming from Minneapolis through neighborhoods to get to the event location, adding that there will be a need for directional signage and traffic routing. Mayor Spano asked if the food trucks will have internal or external generators, noting that external generators are very loud, and can be disruptive to neighbors. Mayor Spano asked if the crossings between Beth El and Benilde will be staffed by police. Mr. Lannazzo stated yes, on Barry Street. He added that traffic will be stopped there to let folks cross the street. Mayor Spano asked about serving liquor and if folks will be ID’d. Mr. Lannazzo stated folks will receive a wrist band as they enter the event, and ID’s checked for serving liquor. Mr. Lannazzo added that a medical tent will be at the event location as well. Councilmember Harris asked if there will be recycling areas both inside and outside of the event. Mr. Lannazzo stated they will be located around the perimeter of the event. With regard to composting, he added they would need additional volunteers to help with that, and they are not available at this point. Councilmember Brausen stated the city does pride itself on our zero waste events, so it would be great if that could be done. He added the event coordinators may want to check with Steel Toe and encourage them to create a special brand for the event. Rabbi Olitzky stated they are looking at this for next year. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3c) Page 3 Title: City council study session minutes from May 14, 2018 Councilmember Brausen encouraged all to purchase their tickets soon. Councilmember Rog commended the planning team, adding she trusts they are addressing every detail and that they have a lot of support from everyone in the city for this event. Mayor Spano agreed and congratulated all on the planning and message of the event. 3. Crime free rental ordinance, affordable housing trust funds and NOAH preservation strategies Ms. Schnitker updated the council on the status of housing-related strategies and tools, including the city’s Crime Free Rental Ordinance, Affordable Housing Trust Funds and Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) Preservation Strategies. Ms. Schnitker stated the ordinance provides structure for landlords and property owners to ensure responsive management and quality of life. Additionally, it provides for crime free training, application screening and fair-housing considerations, including diversity and anti- harassment, crime prevention through environmental design, and education related to drug issues. Councilmember Mavity expressed concerns about what happens to families when their lease is not renewed by a landlord due to a violation that may have occurred when a relative/guest is visiting a tenant. Councilmember Mavity stated she appreciated this topic of discussion and the information provided, adding that more data would be helpful, some comparison data to pre-2007, and comparison to other communities that do not have this ordinance. She stated she is concerned about the philosophy of the crime-free ordinance, adding the city’s community policing approach is well done, but this ordinance can have impacts on families of color and disabilities. She noted some landlords won’t rent to these folks because of possible problems and will not renew leases if there has been one violation. Councilmember Mavity stated the city needs to be cognizant of this. Councilmember Mavity added she appreciated the domestic violence waiver in the ordinance, but asked how an incident of disorderly conduct would be handled, due to disability or mental health issues, again adding she has concerns with this ordinance. Councilmember Rog thanked Police Chief Harcey and Lt. Garland for their work, but added data would be helpful. She noted an eviction study for Homeline, that the city might be able to participate in, to help learn more about this issue and eviction issues in general. She noted there are 40 evictions in St. Louis Park per year, adding race equity is important here. Councilmember Harris thanked staff for the report and recent history shared. She added she would like to see some cases prior to the ordinance being enacted, to help determine the effectiveness of the ordinance. She asked if it would be possible to break down the number of calls per apartment by rental value, to understand the conversation related to equity. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3c) Page 4 Title: City council study session minutes from May 14, 2018 Councilmember Brausen also appreciated the conversation, noting that landlords use this ordinance as a tool and can call police if needed. He added unless there is discriminatory information discovered, related to the ordinance, he is in favor of keeping it. Councilmember Hallfin stated he attended the city’s landlord classes and he agreed with Councilmember Brausen that unless discriminatory information was discovered, he is in favor of keeping the ordinance, along with tightening it up related to mental health issues. Councilmember Mavity added she does not want criminal activity taking place on properties, but again she has concerns about guests visiting, and causing a problem, which can have disparate impacts on low income families and families of color. Police Chief Harcey stated the city’s community policing program partners with the community, including tenants, and the ordinance allows for the ability to deal with quality of life issues. He added if the police cannot partner with landlords and tenants regarding this, there will be a problem. Councilmember Mavity stated when a criminal action is committed on a property, the police have authority to address it. However, Mr. Harmening pointed out there is no authority to evict with a criminal act, so the ordinance provides a tool to deal with this. Mayor Spano stated the question is, does the crime free ordinance create a safe community. He added it is dangerous to talk about race equity work in the sense of it being monolithic, stating folks who may be of color want to have quality of life and be safe as well, or they will move away. He stated he is uneasy with the eviction study, and is not comfortable speaking for families, without even having a conversation with them, to find out their views. Mayor Spano stated he would like more information on the ordinance. Councilmember Brausen agreed adding, any type of ordinance can be useful, and a policy needs to be in place to direct police to work with landlords and to provide necessary social services to assist families, while maintaining them in their households. Ms. Schnitker commented on the local housing trust fund, which the Minnesota legislature passed in 2017, to support preservation of affordable housing. She stated it is a dedicated funding source and a policy is created indicating what the funding can be used for. She noted the sources of donations can be grants, loans, appropriations, and housing levies. Ms. Schnitker added the city currently has a fund similar to a housing trust fund, the Housing Rehab Fund. The fund has dedicated funding and a policy indicating how the funds may be used. The policy can be updated, noting the council can decide what they want to dedicate funds to be used for. Ms. Schnitker noted that an advantage in establishing a Housing Trust Fund would be the city’s ability to accept donations. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3c) Page 5 Title: City council study session minutes from May 14, 2018 Councilmember Rog stated she would like to look at having a robust discussion on this, and how the city can be more proactive around housing solutions, while leveraging public and private contributions. She noted that Minneapolis has an RFP process, and this may be a solution for St. Louis Park as well. She would rather the council be more proactive than reactive as developers come to present projects and added, while the city has generated about 50 affordable units, there is only one three-bedroom unit, and there needs to be more. She noted the current Housing Rehabilitation fund is not the best repository of the city’s housing funds and the value in a housing trust fund is the capacity to accept donations from businesses. Councilmember Mavity appreciated Councilmember Rog bringing up this topic. She stated the council will want to be sure the city’s fund aligns with the state funds, and with the requirements of the state. She said the trust fund will open conversations as to how the city is using its land and there is more that can be done. She added she supports this entirely and pointed to Minneapolis Mayor Frey’s task force which will target $50 million for Minneapolis affordable housing, noting there will also be discussions on regional funding and strategy with the Metropolitan Council. Councilmember Harris stated she is in favor of looking further into this, noting she worked in community land trust in the past, and it would be a wonderful avenue to support affordable housing in the future. She asked about doing something similar to park dedication fees but making them housing dedication fees. Councilmember Brausen stated he is also supportive of a housing trust fund and asked to see the overall picture of how much affordable housing stock currently exists in St. Louis Park – both rental and owned – in order to understand the balance we want to create in our community, and tailor our programs along the way. Mayor Spano agreed that inclusionary affordable housing is great and the city is definitely creating more than existed in the past. He noted there needs to be discussion about the term “workforce housing” vs. affordable housing, noting the working poor deserve good, safe housing. Councilmember Harris stated she is in favor of the 4D Tax Classification, noting it is a wonderful opportunity to ensure NOAH properties are preserved. Councilmember Hallfin pointed out that with the 4D Tax Classification, taxes are redistributed, with St. Louis Park citizens paying for NOAH property levies. Councilmember Rog stated she is pleased with the city’s tenant protections and would like to look at further protection ordinances. She added she’d like to discuss community land use partnerships and create permanent affordable housing for folks to have an opportunity to own homes and create wealth. She stated this is a racial equity issue and the government has a role in correcting this. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3c) Page 6 Title: City council study session minutes from May 14, 2018 4. 2040 Comprehensive Plan update Ms. McMonigal, along with city staff members, gave an overview of the goals and strategies for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. She and staff discussed the new and/or revised goals and strategies and answered questions relating to existing goals and strategies. Ms. McMonigal noted an online survey of proposed goals and strategies will begin on May 14th. She added staff will present the entire draft of the Comp Plan at the study session on May 29th for review and discussion. The Planning Commission will also be provided the draft plan on May 30th and will take action on June 6th to recommend council approve sending the draft plan out for review. On June 18th the council will be asked to take action to begin the formal 6-month review process with adjacent jurisdictions. Areas reviewed and discussed at this evenings study session included: • Why We Are A Livable Community – land use, economic redevelopment, housing • Mobility: Getting Around in Our Community – pedestrians, bicycles, transit, highways and streets • Where We Gather – Parks and open space, schools, public art • Environment and Sustainability – Climate and energy, solid waste, water resources • How We Govern – city government, public health and safety, race and equity, communication The council stated that since they are the two most important areas of the 2040 plan, both the Race and Equity section and the Climate Action Plan portions must be moved to the beginning of the document. Ms. McMonigal agreed, and noted that the topics will also be sprinkled throughout the full plan document. Mr. Harmening noted the entire draft of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan will be presented and discussed again at the May 29th study session. Communications/meeting check-in (verbal) The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 5. Special assessment policy – sewer and water availability charges 6. Dockless bicycles update 7. 2019 pavement management CIP update 8. Westwood Hills Nature Center project update ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Minutes: 3d Unofficial minutes City council special study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota May 21, 2018 The meeting convened at 6:45 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller. Councilmembers absent: Margaret Rog Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Management Assistant (Ms. Carrillo Perez), Communications Manager (Ms. Larson), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guest: Gabriel Kaplan, Anna Long, Ruby Stillman, Isaac Wahl, Ellen Poulter, St. Louis Park High School Students 1. Firearm sales Mayor Spano stated he requested that this topic to be on the agenda. He noted a group of St. Louis Park High School students recently approached him at the March for Life walk and asked what he and the council can do about gun laws, especially since the Mayor is a leader in the community. Ms. Stillman and the group of students from St. Louis Park High School stated they understand there is only so much the city can do about this issue, but they stressed the city should be listening to the students, who are their constituents. Ms. Poulter stated she and other students have struggles about the gun issue, adding many students have agreed there is a feeling of un-safeness every day, adding that students feel very vulnerable. Mr. Wahl added every time he walks into a classroom at school, he looks around and says to himself, “if there was a person in the room with a gun, where would I hide.” He stated this seems like an irrational fear, but is sure others feel the same way he does. Ms. Stillman added when she babysits for a new family, her mom comes with and asks if there are any guns in the house. She said at first she did not understand why her mom did this, but sadly today she understands. Ms. Stillman added that finding a place to hide at school should not be happening, and school should be a place where students can be completely focused on learning, and not be scared that something could happen. She added she doesn’t know who protects students at school, adding there is only one resource officer at the school, who cannot protect all 1,400 students. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 2 Title: Special study session minutes from May 21, 2018 Ms. Stillman thanked city leaders for meeting with students and being willing to listen to students on gun safety. Councilmember Miller asked if the students had spoken with others in the community, about what would make them feel more safe, and if other ideas have been discussed. Ms. Stillman noted that Hopkins High School just opened a mental health clinic at their school, and yet St. Louis Park High School does not have this, adding that counselor support could be better. She added the student to counselor ratio is not good, and the school district needs to do something about this. The students indicated to feel safer in school, they are interested in more physical barriers, and also approve of locking school doors during the school day; as well as having another officer in the building during the day, and more mental health support with additional counselors. Mayor Spano asked the students if they feel their teachers should have guns. All of the students said no, they were not comfortable with teachers having guns in the schools, also noting they would be concerned about biases against students of color or students who have behavior issues. Mayor Spano agreed, noting his wife is an elementary school teacher and she could never use a gun on a student. He added that teachers with guns in school is a horrible idea. Mr. Wahl added the teacher’s job is to teach, not protect the students. Councilmember Brausen stated this is one of the saddest days of his time on the council, having this discussion, yet it is also one of the best days of his time on the council, being able to talk about this topic. He asked the students if they have talked about this topic with the school board yet. Ms. Stillman stated they have not and if the council could help them with this, they would appreciate it. Councilmember Brausen suggested students reach out to the school superintendent. City Attorney Mattick stated the state has their own laws about firearms, and cited state statute 471.633, which states the legislature pre-empts all authority of home rule charter or statutory city to regulate firearms and ammunition with two exceptions: 1. the city can regulate discharge of arms, 2. the city can regulate zoning and where the sale of firearms can be located within the city Councilmember Mavity asked if the city’s zoning code is silent on this, what the violation is, and if it is considered a misdemeanor. City Attorney Mattick stated this is a misdemeanor, and the city does have one location within the zoning code, which is the Frontiersman. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 3 Title: Special study session minutes from May 21, 2018 Mayor Spano stated the city can zone specific parcels of land for gun stores, and the Frontiersman would be grandfathered in. Councilmember Harris stated related to zoning, the city has limited city liquor stores, so possibly this could be done similarly with gun stores. City Attorney Mattick stated the difference here is the city has control with licenses with liquor stores, and the city can limit the number of licenses, so this is not done via zoning. Councilmember Mavity stated she would be interested in exploring the front edge of reasonableness and creating some kind of draft language about what is reasonable and what is not, around zoning. She added this could be reviewed as a public safety issue, with a conclusion that there is some type of restriction on gun sales. Councilmember Miller added he would like to explore banning assault weapons and how that might change attitudes or perceptions within our city. He added he would also like to talk about the protection around the perimeter of the school, and what could be done by the city related to this. Councilmember Brausen added he would like to pursue the statute which was adopted in 1985 and adopted at the push of the NRA to pre-empt cities from doing anything. He stated because cities don’t have much wiggle room within this statute, it is urgent for residents to contact their state senators. He added he would like to see the council pursue this issue. Mayor Spano stated Representative Latz is very involved in gun safety and gun legislation, noting that elections have consequences. Mr. Harmening stated he has also spoken with Police Chief Harcey about how firearms are sold in the city and confirmed with the city attorney that as a St. Louis Park resident, a person can apply for a firearm, and if they pass the requirements, they can get a license and buy and sell firearms. He added there are 9 individuals in St. Louis Park who have this FFL license and can buy and sell firearms over the internet. He noted while the local police need to be informed of this, it is a fairly commonplace occurrence. Councilmember Hallfin stated he thought this conversation was going to be a waste of time because of the state statute, but because of the student’s stories, he has changed his mind. He added he did not recall being scared or concerned about where to hide in school and applauded the students for bringing this issue to the forefront and opening up the council’s eyes. He stated the council is all on board with the students concerns, adding they have changed the thought process. He thanked the students for their concerns. Mayor Spano stated more kids died in 2018 than soldiers died in combat. He stated he would go with the students to talk to legislators about this issue, adding the council supports them. Mayor Spano stated he agrees with the students’ mental health concerns, noting Minnesota is at or near the bottom of having mental health counselors in schools. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 4 Title: Special study session minutes from May 21, 2018 Mayor Spano stated he appreciated the students being here, adding this is just the beginning, and the students will need to start building a culture of people behind them. He also noted this will be a long battle. The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Written reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 2. 2019 municipal elections: ranked-choice voting planning and implementation ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Minutes: 3e Unofficial minutes City council meeting St. Louis Park, Minnesota May 21, 2018 1. Call to order Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, and Thom Miller. Councilmembers absent: Margaret Rog Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Operations and Recreation Director (Ms. Walsh), Community Development Direction (Ms. Barton), Inspections Director (Mr. Hoffman), Communications Manager (Ms. Larson), Chief Financial Officer (Mr. Simon), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Planner (Ms. Monson), Management Assistant (Ms. Carrillo Perez) and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guests: Dean Dovolis, DJR architects; Glenn Waguespack, Nancy Blankford, HGA. Mayor Spano introduced Ms. Alex Hogue, who served as Mayor for the Day. In her time Ms. Hogue performed a housing inspection, spent time with the city’s recycling staff, attended the council study session, and the regular council meeting. 1a. Pledge of allegiance 1b. Roll call 2. Presentations – proclamation declaring the first Friday in June National Gun Violence Awareness Day Mayor Spano read the proclamation. He noted the council had just completed a discussion regarding this topic, during which students shared their concerns. He encouraged everyone to get out and show their support on Friday, June 1st. 3. Approval of minutes 3a. LBAE meeting minutes of April 9, 2018 It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to approve the April 9, 2018 LBAE meeting minutes as presented. The motion passed 6-0. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 2 Title: City council meeting minutes from May 21, 2018 3b. Study session minutes April 9, 2018 Councilmember Brausen stated on page 5, it should read in the last paragraph: “…that we need to look at broadening access to the facilities and increasing opportunities and connections for all our diverse community members to be able to utilize enjoy the nature center, and he supports committing necessary resources to do so.” Councilmember Miller noted on page 2 it should read: “Councilmember Miller thanked Ms. Niz for her comments and for bringing these comments forward. He stated he thinks of Highway 7 as a freeway that goes through our community without any of the safety measures of a freeway.” It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to approve the April 9, 2018 study session meeting minutes as revised. The motion passed 6-0. 3c. Joint city council & school board meeting minutes April 10, 2018 Councilmember Brausen pointed out he was present at the meeting, although he may have joined late. It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to approve the April 10, 2018 joint city council and school board meeting minutes as revised. The motion passed 6-0. 3d. City council minutes April 16, 2018 It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to approve the April 16, 2018 city council meeting minutes as presented. The motion passed 6-0. 3e. Special study session minutes April 16, 2018 It was moved by Councilmember Harris, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to approve the April 16, 2018 special study session meeting minutes as presented. The motion passed 6-0. 4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar 4a. Approve second reading and Adopt Ordinance 2536-18 adding section 36-268-PUD 12 to the zoning code and amending the zoning map from C-2 general commercial to PUD 12 for the land legally described as: Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, Tower Place, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and approve the summary ordinance for publication. 4b. Moved to 8e. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 3 Title: City council meeting minutes from May 21, 2018 4c. Adopt Resolution No. 18-080 amending and restating Resolution No. 16-027 approving rules and procedures for boards and commissions 4d. Authorize execution of an amendment to a professional services contract with Short Elliott Hendrickson in the amount of $140,073 for Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 - Project No. 4019-9007. 4e. Approve a temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license for Beth El Synagogue. Event to take place on June 17, 2018 at Beth El Synagogue located at 5225 Barry Street West. 4f. Approve for filing planning commission meeting minutes of April 4, 2018. Councilmember Miller requested that consent calendar item 4b be removed and placed on the regular agenda as item 8e. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to approve the agenda and items listed on the consent calendar as amended to move consent calendar item 4b to the regular agenda as item 8e; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 6-0. 5. Boards and commissions 5a. Appointment of citizen representatives to boards and commissions Mayor Spano thanked all who volunteered for the boards and commission positions. Councilmember Mavity stated for those folks who have applied for positions, but not been selected, there is always room to volunteer in other areas of the city, including neighborhood associations. Councilmember Harris added there are a few commissions that have work groups, and she encouraged those who are interested in participating in one, to contact staff and get involved. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to approve the appointment of citizen representatives to boards and commissions as proposed. The motion passed 6-0. 6. Public hearings - none 7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – none 8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion Items 8a. General obligation bonds, series 2018A. Resolution No. 18-081. Mr. Simon presented the staff report. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 4 Title: City council meeting minutes from May 21, 2018 Mr. Aarsvold, Ehlers, noted the city’s maintaining the AAA rating reflects well on staff and the city. The lowest true interest cost was awarded to Piper Jaffrey at 2.8085%. Councilmember Brausen asked if rates seem to be going upward. Mr. Aarsvold answered yes, this is the general trend. Councilmember Mavity referenced the rating summary from Standard and Poor’s for St. Louis Park, and stated this is an extraordinary bond rating and points to the city’s strong management, strong budget, strong liquidity, and strong institutional framework scores. She added she hopes residents understand the city is trying hard to be good stewards and this shows in the results of this bond sale. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to adopt Resolution No. 18-081, awarding the sale of general obligation bonds, series 2018A, to Piper Jaffrey. The motion passed 6-0. 8b. Bridgewater Bank corporate center preliminary & final plat and preliminary & final PUD. Resolution No. 18-082. Ms. Monson presented the staff report. She stated Bridgewater Bank requests preliminary and final plat and preliminary and final planned unit development (PUD) approval for the redevelopment of 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Blvd., and 3743 Monterey Drive. Bridgewater Bank proposes to demolish an existing 1-story commercial building and construct a 4-story, 84,000 square foot office building with a 7,152 square foot commercial bank branch, 7,530 square feet of retail and service space, including a 4,000 square foot restaurant and three levels of structured parking. The first floor will include the bank’s customer branch, restaurant, and retail space. The second and third floors will be the bank’s executive offices and fourth floor will be a co-working entrepreneurial hub, servicing new business start-ups. The proposal also includes a public plaza at the corner of Excelsior and Monterey, with outdoor seating, space for artwork, and landscaping. Ms. Monson stated a traffic study was completed, and the building will follow the green building policy, as it relates to the city’s climate action plan. Councilmember Mavity recused herself from the vote and the conversation, noting she is very much involved in and looks forward to more conversation with residents in the area, especially regarding the multimodal design of Monterey Drive. Councilmember Miller asked with the PUD, if there is a guarantee from the developer that they would retain retail and restaurant space as it is. Ms. Monson stated the PUD requires commercial on the ground floor, and the developer would like to see a restaurant there; however, it is not required. Councilmember Miller encouraged Bridgewater to follow through on the restaurant as it is important to the neighborhood. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 5 Title: City council meeting minutes from May 21, 2018 Councilmember Hallfin stated this property has been on the council’s radar for many years, and when the previous development did not work out, the council started over to find the best project for this area. He stated he wanted to reiterate how deliberate the council has been on this project. Councilmember Hallfin added the property to the north had a concern about the retaining wall on the property line, with no setback. He noted with a PUD, the developer will be allowed to include this retaining wall. He added staff sent him examples of retaining walls which are similar to the one proposed and after seeing that, he feels better about the neighbor’s concerns. He appreciated the work done by staff on this and stated he will be voting to approve the PUD. Councilmember Miller stated he spoke with residents at Liv Apartments and while this has been a long road, which started before he was on the council, he feels this project is much more appealing than the previous one that was presented. He stated this is the best project to put in this area at this time, bringing tremendous value to St. Louis Park, and he will support the project. Councilmember Harris stated she is impressed with the evolution of this project, appreciative of staff’s collaboration with the developer, and work on the traffic and public space. She thanked the developers for incorporating the climate action plan into the development, noting she likes the idea of the restaurant on ground level. She stated she is enthused with the co-working hub, and entrepreneurial area as a place where people can have a destination, as it will be an asset to the community for collaboration. Councilmember Harris stated she will also support the project, which is a great use of space. Mayor Spano stated change brings more activity and people, and this project will bring a strong economy to the community, while balancing the needs from the city’s existing businesses. He noted he also spoke with the Liv Apartment residents and gave kudos to Bridgewater on working with the Liv Apartment residents to make the back area of the development look better. He stated this project will bring 200 jobs into the area and be an area where retail and residential balance each other. It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to adopt Resolution No. 18-082, approving the preliminary and final plat subject to conditions. The motion passed 5-0-1 (Councilmember Mavity abstained). It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to approve the first reading of an ordinance adding section 36-268-PUD 13 to the zoning code and amending the zoning map from C-2 general commercial and R-4 multiple family residential to PUD 13 for the property located at 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Blvd. and 3743 Monterey Drive, and set the second reading for June 4, 2018. The motion passed 5-0-1 (Councilmember Mavity abstained). City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 6 Title: City council meeting minutes from May 21, 2018 8c. Westwood Hills Nature Center project. Glenn Waguespack pointed out the updates and changes made to the design since the last discussion with council. He noted the outdoor patio, which replaces an outdoor deck in the earlier version, stating the patio will be much less maintenance, and will be an important buffer. Mr. Waguespack noted the classrooms, offices and restrooms, raptor cages and the flat roof, which will be more efficient and economical, and will utilize solar panels. He also pointed out a change in the use of less vertical elements and obstructions on the outside of the building. Councilmember Mavity stated the new design is an improvement and she appreciated it very much. She noted this will be a good investment for the city over the long-term, she hopes this will be a long-term building, and she will approve the design tonight. Councilmember Miller stated he is opposed to the current plan, but not opposed to investing in the nature center. However, he is concerned about the design at $12.5 million, and about cost and liquidity for other projects that come forward in the city. He added there has not yet been enough spent on affordable housing for families, parks for kids, or affordable housing for seniors. He stated he will oppose the design, adding the council will need to consider what projects the city spends money on – needs vs. wants. Councilmember Brausen stated he supports the design as it supports the needs of the community. He stated this is a reinvestment in St. Louis Park and in talking with residents about the project, the majority of the feedback is that it is a good investment. He added this is the city’s chance to lead and be the first to create a zero-waste building. He stated he supports this project and encouraged folks to continue to weigh in on it with the council and share their concerns. Councilmember Harris stated as someone who grew up in St. Louis Park and had her first job at the nature center, it is an honor to be a part of the project. She stated she has spoken to folks about the project and found they care about the city’s natural resources and want their children, parents, and grandparents to continue to enjoy the nature center over the years. She stated when information about the climate action plan is shared, people understand the high costs, but do appreciate the design, adding she will support this. Councilmember Hallfin stated he supports the project and the overall spending and takes a different view than Councilmember Miller. He stated he looks at each project the city considers as mutually exclusive, he looks at the merits of the project itself, and this is how he has looked at this project. He also will support the project design. Mayor Spano stated he will also support the design, adding when recently visiting the nature center, he noticed he is drawn to the water there. He asked the architects about featuring the water more in future plans for the nature center. Mayor Spano also asked about the removed columns and how they were changed or minimized, noting the center needs more space. Mr. Waguespack stated 11 columns were removed, which were not structurally needed for the design. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 7 Title: City council meeting minutes from May 21, 2018 It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to approve the results of the design development phase and authorize staff and consultants to move to the next phase of preparing construction documents for the Westwood Hills Nature Center project. The motion passed 5-1 (Councilmember Miller opposed). 8d. First reading of ordinance related to memberships terms of environment & sustainability commission. Ms. Carrillo Perez explained during the most recent annual appointment process, the city received no applications for either the business or residential tenant member positions on the Environmental and Sustainability Commission (ESC). On April 30, 2018 the council discussed possible changes to the membership terms that would allow for the currently vacant positions to be filled and for the commission to have a full membership. Ms. Carrillo Perez stated that ESC members did not express any concerns with the change to term expiration dates, which will take effect June 28, 2018. The positions will be filled at the sole discretion of the council. Councilmember Brausen stated in 2012 and 2013 he was on the ESC task force that the council appointed and was part of drafting the design of the commission. He stated at that time, it was to have business members, but by making it a requirement, it left the commission a bit understaffed at times. He stated he is fully supportive of this change. Councilmember Mavity stated she also supports these changes, especially in light of adopting the climate action plan. She pointed out the most difficult piece will be working with the business community, and a new strategy may be needed to reach businesses in order to meet the climate action plan goals. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to approve the first reading of an ordinance amending Sec. 2-332 of the St. Louis Park City Code related to the membership terms of the Environment and Sustainability Commission and to schedule the second reading of the ordinance for June 4, 2018. The motion passed 6-0. 8e. Approval of the strategic priorities and council norms as developed at the January council workshop and May follow up session. Councilmember Brausen stated the five strategic priorities should be read into the record, as they will be the points that guide the council’s work. It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to refer discussion on council norms to the next study session for further clarifications. The motion passed 6-0. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 8 Title: City council meeting minutes from May 21, 2018 9. Communications Councilmember Brausen commented on how much fun the ice cream social was. He stated his appreciation for the Children First group and the community for putting this event on. Mayor Spano stated every ten years the city works on the comprehensive plan, and noted a survey is now on the city website. He recommended folks contact city staff or the council about any questions. Mayor Spano stated next Monday is Memorial Day and the city offices will be closed. He also noted Oak Hills Splash Pad opens on May 26. Mayor Spano stated the Common Sound Concert, a joint event with Beth El and Benilde – St. Margaret will be held on June 16. Additionally, the Lenox Community Center will host the IFTAR dinner (breaking the Ramadan fast) on June 7 from 8-10 p.m. Councilmember Harris noted there is a Police meet and greet for Ward 3, on May 22 from 7-9 p.m. at Ainsworth Park. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:06 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Consent agenda item: 4a Executive summary Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for modifications to Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 – Project 4019-9007 Recommended action: Motion to designate Kraemer North America, LLC the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $2,100,071.16 for modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 - Project No. 4019-9007. Policy consideration: Are there sufficient funds to undertake this project? Is Kraemer North America the lowest responsible bidder? Summary: A total of two bids were received for this project. A summary of the bid results is shown below: CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT Kraemer North America, LLC $2,100,071.16 Zenith Tech, Inc. $2,414,693.45 Engineer’s Estimate $2,030,000.00 A review of the bids indicates Kraemer North America, LLC. submitted the lowest responsible bid. Kraemer North America, LLC has completed this type and size of work successfully in other cities. Staff recommends that a contract be awarded to Kraemer North America, LLC in the amount of $2,100,071.16. Financial or budget considerations: This project is included in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2018. Funding will be provided using tax increment funds from the Elmwood TIF District and General Obligation Bonds. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Discussion Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, Sr. Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 2 Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for modifications to Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 – Project 4019-9007 Discussion Background: The modifications to the Wooddale Bridge are broken down in to two phases. •Phase 1 is work led by the city to widen each side of the bridge deck to enhance the pedestrian and bicycle facilities and sight lines across the bridge. •Phase 2 is work led by SWLRT to add traffic signals at the top of both ramps on the Wooddale Bridge and to restripe the bridge deck from two lanes to four lanes. Additional work adjacent to the interchange will be to build the Cedar Lake Regional Trail underpass at Wooddale Avenue to separate pedestrians and bicyclists from Wooddale Avenue. Phase 1 The first phase of the project will include widening of the bridge deck by about 7 feet on each side. This widening will allow additional space for more comfortable pedestrian and bicycle facilities across the bridge. The new sidewalks will be 12 foot wide and the bike lanes will be 6 foot wide. In addition, it pulls the concrete walls back to provide better sight lines for drivers as they approach Wooddale Avenue from the Highway 7 ramps. The project will also add landscaping at strategic locations that will soften the feel of the corridor and compliment the SWLRT Wooddale Station and PLACE development. The installation of the various underground components necessary to build the traffic signals that are proposed in Phase 2 are included in this plan set. This will provide minimum disruption to the newly installed roadway when Phase 2 begins and is expected to reduce the construction duration. Phase 2 Phase 2 is not part of this project scope. The intent of this section is to inform the community about the potential upcoming work and schedule of the SWLRT. Phase 2 is work led by and paid for by SWLRT to add traffic signals at the top both ramps on the Wooddale Bridge and to restripe the bridge deck from two lanes to four lanes. This work is expected to be completed sometime between 2019 and 2022. More information on this schedule will be available after the award of the SWLRT project in late 2018. Communications Since this bridge is used by many in the community, staff is planning on communicating with the adjacent neighborhoods and the community using the neighborhood contacts, Nextdoor and the other city social media platforms. There will be weekly updates and details related to upcoming traffic impacts and contractor progress. Funding details Staff has reviewed the bids and determined that Kraemer North America, LLC is the lowest responsible contractor. The bid came in slightly higher than expected. We have reviewed these costs with the chief financial officer, and there is adequate funds to cover the project. Based on the low bid received, cost and funding details are as follows: City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 3 Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for modifications to Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 – Project 4019-9007 Engineer's Estimate Low Bid Construction Cost $2,030,000.00 $2,100,071.16 Engineering & Administration (10-20%) $411,250.00 $420,014.23 Total $2,441,250.00 $2,520,085.39 Funding Sources Fiber (GO Bonds) $86,250.00 $15,273.50 Elmwood TIF District $2,355,000.00 $2,504,811.89 Total $2,441,250.00 $2,520,085.39 Due to the nature of our construction projects, unexpected costs do come up. To address this, past practice has been to show a contingency for all aspects of the project. What follows is a table that shows this 10% contingency and how this would affect the project costs. Engineering has reviewed these contingency costs with the Chief Financial Officer. If overruns occur there is adequate funds to cover these costs. Low Bid Contingency (10%) Engineering Total Fiber (GO Bonds) $13,885.00 $1,388.50 $1,388.50 $16,662.00 Elmwood TIF District $2,086,186.16 $208,618.62 $417,237.23 $2,712,042.01 Total $2,100,071.16 $210,007.12 $418,625.73 $2,728,704.01 Schedule The schedule has been updated from the communication from May 21. The contractor expects to start around the first week of July. The contractor has proposed an aggressive schedule to complete the work by the end of the 2018 construction season. Open Bids June 12, 2018 Award Construction Contract June 18, 2018 Construction of Phase 1 July to November 2018 Construction of Phase 2 (By SWLRT) Anticipated to begin in late 2018 thru 2022 Next steps An additional contract will be presented at the July 9, 2018 Council meeting for construction administration and inspection services. Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Consent agenda item: 4b Executive summary Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Recommended action: Motion to authorize execution of a professional services contract with Bolton & Menk, in the amount of $248,126 for the preliminary design of the Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to continue to implement our pavement management program? Summary: In 2019, Cedar Lake Road between Kentucky Avenue and Quentin Avenue is proposed to be rehabilitated. This street is an important east/west route and is designated as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) road. This designation makes it eligible for state funding (gas tax dollars). Given work load and technical demands, consultant assistance is needed for the preliminary design of this project. A request for proposal (RFP) for was sent to two consulting firms who are qualified to complete this project. If the project is approved to proceed to final design, we will enter into an additional contract for final design and construction administration. One proposal was received for this project. A summary is shown below: CONSULTANT AMOUNT Bolton and Menk, Inc. $248,126 Due to existing work load, the second consultant (AECOM) chose not to submit a bid. They were unable to meet the project deadlines since they already have work under contract. The proposal provided by Bolton and Menk was very thorough and showed they had a clear understanding of the project. Bolton and Menk completed the bike facility feasibility study for Cedar Lake Road in 2016 and has completed other Connect the Park construction projects. Staff has reviewed the cost provided by Bolton and Menk and believes it is consistent with prior proposals. Financial or budget considerations: This project is included in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2019. The project will be paid for using a combination of Municipal State Aid, Utility funds, and General Obligation Bonds (Connect the Park sidewalk and bikeway). Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Discussion 2016 bikeway study Location map Prepared by: Joseph Shamla, Senior Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Debra M. Heiser, Engineering Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 2 Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Discussion Background: In 2015, the city hired Bolton and Menk, to complete a feasibility study to add a bike facility on Cedar Lake Road from Highway 169 to Quentin Avenue. Cedar Lake Road is designated as a bikeway in the Connect the Park Plan and the Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan. Hennepin County contributed 50% of the cost of the feasibility study. A public open house was held on July 19, 2016 to allow residents and business owners to view the preliminary layout for the Cedar Lake Road Bikeway and to provide feedback to city staff. The attendees were notified that additional public involvement will occur in 2018 as part of the proposed rehabilitation of Cedar Lake Road scheduled for construction in 2019. Present consideration: A request for proposal (RFP) was sent to Bolton and Menk and AECOM. Both firms are experienced with the design of roads and bicycle facilities and are qualified to complete this type of project. AECOM and Bolton and Menk were both interested in the project, but AECOM chose not to submit a proposal. AECOM stated that they are unable to meet the project schedule and as such chose not to submit a proposal. Staff reviewed the proposal submitted by Bolton and Menk. Their proposal was very thorough and showed that they had a clear understanding of the project. Bolton and Menk has designed other bike facilities in St. Louis Park with their most recent on Texas Avenue S. of Highway 7. Also, since Bolton and Menk completed the feasibility report for the bike facility on Cedar Lake Road, they will be able to continue the process where they left off in 2016 which will be more efficient than any other consultant. This consultant contract covers all preliminary aspects of the project up to final plans. Another contract will be needed to complete the final plans and construction administration. The final design scope will be defined upon approval of the preliminary layout which will allow the consultant to provide a cost for the final design and construction administration. The table below summarizes the cost of this contract. Staff has reviewed the cost provided by Bolton and Menk and believes it is consistent with prior proposals and it is reasonable given the work required. CONSULTANT BID AMOUNT Bolton and Menk $248,126 Cedar Lake Road Improvements: In 2019, Cedar Lake Road between Kentucky Avenue and Quentin Avenue is scheduled for rehabilitation. This segment of road is in poor condition. Cedar Lake Road has a traffic volume of 12,500 ADT and serves many residents and businesses. This is a Municipal State Aid road which is eligible for state gas tax dollars. In order to qualify for funding, the road must be constructed to state aid standards. A corridor study is included with this contract and will help guide the city to the final design of Cedar Lake Road. The intersections of Zarthan Avenue, Park Place Boulevard, and Quentin Avenue will all be reviewed to determine the appropriate traffic control for the intersection. Using the existing traffic data, forecasting future volumes and using input from residents, the consultant will recommend a typical street section for approval by the city council. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 3 Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 The Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project will consist of the following items. •Rehabilitation of the pavement from Kentucky Avenue to Quentin Avenue. •Replacement of 4500 linear feet of 12 inch watermain. •Construction of a bike facility from Kentucky Avenue to Quentin Avenue. •Review of sidewalk gaps along the corridor. •Replace the trail on the south side of Cedar Lake Road. •Construction of upgrades at the railroad crossing near the intersection of Colorado Avenue and Cedar Lake Road. This work will be completed to make a safer crossing and to prepare for a future whistle quiet zone. Proposed Schedule: The following is the proposed project schedule: Corridor study / concept plans August 2018 Preliminary plans September 2018 ROW or easement identified September 2018 Final plans complete January 2019 ROW / easement acquisition February 2019 Private utility relocation April 2019 Construction May 2019 to November 2019 Next steps: Engineering will host a public meeting this summer to communicate with residents and business owners of the proposed project and to gather feedback. Another public meeting will be scheduled this fall to provide the public with information about the proposed design. Also this fall, the city council will hold a public hearing where they will be asked to approve the preliminary project layout. At the public hearing, engineering staff will present the recommended design along with public input received from neighborhood meetings. ĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŬĞǁĂLJ^ƚƵĚLJĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŬĞǁĂLJ^ƚƵĚLJĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŬĞǁĂLJ^ƚƵĚLJĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŬĞǁĂLJ^ƚƵĚLJ KdK ZϮϬϭϲ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 4 Ϯ dĂďůĞŽĨŽŶƚĞŶƚƐ /͘ džĞĐƵƚŝǀĞ^ƵŵŵĂƌLJĂŶĚŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶƐ ͘ džĞĐƵƚŝǀĞ^ƵŵŵĂƌLJ ͘ ŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶ //͘ ĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ ͘ WƌŽũĞĐƚ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ͘ ŽƌƌŝĚŽƌƚƚƌŝďƵƚĞƐ ͘ ŽƵŶƚLJ͛ƐŝŬĞǁĂLJĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚWĂƌƚŝĐŝƉĂƚŝŽŶWƌŽŐƌĂŵ ͘ ŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŚĞWĂƌŬ ///͘ ^ƚƵĚLJWƌŽĐĞƐƐ ͘ ĂƚĂŽůůĞĐƚŝŽŶ ͘ ƐƚĂďůŝƐŚŝŶŐ^ƚƵĚLJ'ŽĂůƐ ͘ ZĞǀŝĞǁŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂŶĚďĞƐƚƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐ ͘ ĞƐŝŐŶƌŝƚĞƌŝĂͬ^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐhƐĞĚ ͘ WƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐŶĂůLJƐŝƐ &͘ ĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ '͘ WƵďůŝĐ/ŶǀŽůǀĞŵĞŶƚ /s͘ ^ƵŵŵĂƌLJŽĨ&ŝŶĚŝŶŐƐ ͘ /ŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶKƉƚŝŽŶƐ ͘ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚŽƐƚƐ ͘ &ƵŶĚŝŶŐ^ŽƵƌĐĞƐͬ&ŝŶĂŶĐŝŶŐ ͘ ŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶ s͘ &ŝŐƵƌĞƐͬƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐ ͘ ƵƌƌĞŶƚdWϭϬzĞĂƌ^ŝĚĞǁĂůŬ͕dƌĂŝů͕ĂŶĚŝŬĞǁĂLJWƌŽũĞĐƚ&ŝŐƵƌĞ ͘ ĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŬĞǁĂLJ^ƚƵĚLJ>ĂLJŽƵƚƐ;ϰ>ĂLJŽƵƚƐͿ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 5 ϯ /͘ džĞĐƵƚŝǀĞ^ƵŵŵĂƌLJĂŶĚŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶƐ ͘ džĞĐƵƚŝǀĞ^ƵŵŵĂƌLJ dŚĞŝƚLJŽĨ^ƚ͘>ŽƵŝƐWĂƌŬŝƐĞdžĂŵŝŶŝŶŐƚŚĞĨĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJƚŽŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂďŝŬĞǁĂLJĂůŽŶŐ ĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚ͘dŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŽƵůĚƌƵŶĨƌŽŵdƌƵŶŬ,ŝŐŚǁĂLJϭϲϵƚŽƚŚĞEŽƌƚŚĞĚĂƌ >ĂŬĞZĞŐŝŽŶĂůdƌĂŝůĐŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŽŶĞĂƐƚŽĨEĂƚĐŚĞnjǀĞŶƵĞ͘/ŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶŐŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚďŝŬĞ ĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐŝƐƚŚĞƉƌŝŵĂƌLJĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĨŽƌƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJ͘dŚŝƐƌĞƉŽƌƚŽǀĞƌǀŝĞǁƐƚŚĞƐĐŽƉĞŽĨ ƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͕ƌĞǀŝĞǁƐƚŚĞĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐĂůŽŶŐĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚ͕ĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐ ŐƵŝĚĂŶĐĞƚŽŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘/ƚĂůƐŽŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞƐůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĂůŽŶŐ ĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚǁŚĞƌĞŐĞŽŵĞƚƌŝĐĐŚĂŶŐĞƐĂƌĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͘ĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŚĂƐďĞĞŶ ŶŽƚĞĚĂƐĂŚŝŐŚͲƉƌŝŽƌŝƚLJĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌĨŽƌĂĚĚŝŶŐďŝŬĞĂŶĚƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐŝŶĐŽŶũƵŶĐƚŝŽŶ ǁŝƚŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƌŽĂĚǁĂLJŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘ĚĚŝŶŐďŝŬĞůĂŶĞƐǁŝůůƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĐƌŝƚŝĐĂůůŝŶŬĂŐĞ ƚŽŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐ͕ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJĐĞŶƚĞƌƐ͕ĂŶĚƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚƐ͘dŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚĂůŝŐŶƐǁŝƚŚ ƚŚĞĐŝƚLJ͛ƐŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŚĞWĂƌŬƉůĂŶ͘ ͘ ŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶ &ƌŽŵĂŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐƐƚĂŶĚƉŽŝŶƚ͕ƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐŽƵƚůŝŶĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐ ƌĞƉŽƌƚĂƌĞĨĞĂƐŝďůĞ͘ //͘ ĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ ͘ WƌŽũĞĐƚ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ dŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚĂůŽŶŐĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚĨƌŽŵdƌƵŶŬ,ŝŐŚǁĂLJϭϲϵƚŽ ƚŚĞEŽƌƚŚĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZĞŐŝŽŶĂůdƌĂŝů͘dŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŽƵůĚďĞŽŶĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚĂŶĚ ǁŽƵůĚƵƚŝůŝnjĞŶĞǁŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚďŝŬĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐŽƌĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐƚƌĂŝůƐ͘WƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJĐŽŶĐĞƉƚůĂLJŽƵƚƐ ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚďŝŬĞǁĂLJĂƌĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞĂƉƉĞŶĚŝdžŽĨƚŚŝƐƌĞƉŽƌƚ͘ ͘ ŽƌƌŝĚŽƌƚƚƌŝďƵƚĞƐ ĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝƐĂŵĂũŽƌĞĂƐƚͲǁĞƐƚĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌƚƌĂǀĞƌƐŝŶŐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚ^ƚ͘>ŽƵŝƐWĂƌŬ͘dŚĞ ƌŽĂĚǁĂƐŽƌŝŐŝŶĂůůLJĂĐŽƵŶƚLJƌŽĂĚĂŶĚŚĂƐƐŝŶĐĞďĞĞŶƚƵƌŶĞĚďĂĐŬƚŽƚŚĞĐŝƚLJ͘dŚĞƌŽĂĚ ƌƵŶƐƉĂƌĂůůĞůƚŽƚŚĞE^&ƌĂŝůƌŽĂĚŽŶŝƚƐŶŽƌƚŚƐŝĚĞ͘dŚĞƌŽĂĚǁĂLJƉƌŝŵĂƌŝůLJĐŽŶƐŝƐƚƐŽĨ ƚǁŽͲůĂŶĞƚƌĂĨĨŝĐǁŝƚŚƐŵĂůůƉŽƌƚŝŽŶƐŚĂǀŝŶŐĨŽƵƌͲůĂŶĞƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŶĞĂƌƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƐŽĨ >ŽƵŝƐŝĂŶĂǀĞŶƵĞĂŶĚWĂƌŬWůĂĐĞŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ͘dŚĞƌĞĂƌĞĂůƐŽƚƵƌŶůĂŶĞƐĂƚǀĂƌŝŽƵƐ ŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƐĂůŽŶŐĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚ͘ džŝƐƚŝŶŐůĂŶĚƵƐĞĂůŽŶŐĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝƐĂ ĐŽŵďŝŶĂƚŝŽŶŽĨůŽǁĂŶĚŵŝĚͲĚĞŶƐŝƚLJƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĂŶĚĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƵƐĞƐ͘ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 6 ϰ ĚĚŝŶŐďŝŬĞŝŶĨƌĂƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞĂůŽŶŐĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚǁŝůůŚĂǀĞĂŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨďĞŶĞĨŝƚƐ͘dŚĞ ƉƌŽdžŝŵŝƚLJŽĨƚŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŝůůĂůůŽǁĨŽƌďŝĐLJĐůŝƐƚƐƚŽĂĐĐĞƐƐŚŝŐŚǀŽůƵŵĞĚĞƐƚŝŶĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶ ^ƚ͘>ŽƵŝƐWĂƌŬ͘ĞƐƚŝŶĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶĐůƵĚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŚƵďƐ͕ƚƌĂŶƐŝƚĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐ͕ƐĐŚŽŽůƐ͕ĐŚƵƌĐŚĞƐ͕ ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůŶŽƚĞƐ͕ĞŵƉůŽLJŵĞŶƚĐĞŶƚĞƌƐ͕ƉƵďůŝĐƐĞƌǀŝĐĞĐĞŶƚĞƌƐ͕ ĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐ͕ƉĂƌŬƐ͕ĂŶĚƐŝŶŐůĞĨĂŵŝůLJŚŽŵĞƐ͘dŚĞƉƌŽdžŝŵŝƚLJƚŽƚŚĞEŽƌƚŚĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞ ZĞŐŝŽŶĂůdƌĂŝůǁŝůůĂůůŽǁĨŽƌƐĂĨĞƌĂŶĚŵŽƌĞĐŽŵĨŽƌƚĂďůĞďŝŬĞĂĐĐĞƐƐƚŽƚŚĞƐĞ ĚĞƐƚŝŶĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘ dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŝůůĂůƐŽƚŝĞŝŶƚŽĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐďŝŬĞǁĂLJĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐĂŶĚĨƵƚƵƌĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ƚŚĂƚĂƌĞďĞŝŶŐƉůĂŶŶĞĚŽƌĂƌĞŝŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ ͘ ,ĞŶŶĞƉŝŶŽƵŶƚLJ͛ƐŝŬĞǁĂLJĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚWĂƌƚŝĐŝƉĂƚŝŽŶWƌŽŐƌĂŵ dŚĞŝƚLJŽĨ^ƚ͘>ŽƵŝƐWĂƌŬƐƵďŵŝƚƚĞĚĂŶĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƚŽ,ĞŶŶĞƉŝŶŽƵŶƚLJĂƐƉĂƌƚŽĨ ,ĞŶŶĞƉŝŶŽƵŶƚLJ͛ƐŝŬĞǁĂLJĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚWĂƌƚŝĐŝƉĂƚŝŽŶWƌŽŐƌĂŵĂŶĚǁĂƐƐĞůĞĐƚĞĚďLJ ƚŚĞĐŽƵŶƚLJƚŽƉƵƌƐƵĞĞĨĨŽƌƚƐŽĨĂďŝŬĞǁĂLJƐƚƵĚLJ͘dŚĞĐŝƚLJĞŶƚĞƌĞĚŝŶƚŽĂĐŽƐƚͲƐŚĂƌŝŶŐ ĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŽƵŶƚLJŝŶϮϬϭϯ͕ǁŝƚŚĂƌĞƉŽƌƚĨŝŶĚŝŶŐƐĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞĐŽƵŶƚLJŝŶϮϬϭϲ͘ ͘ ŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŚĞWĂƌŬ ŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŚĞWĂƌŬŝƐƚŚĞĐŝƚLJΖƐϭϬLJĞĂƌƉůĂŶƚŽĂĚĚĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐ͕ƚƌĂŝůƐ͕ďŝŬĞůĂŶĞƐ ĂŶĚďŝŬĞǁĂLJƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƚƚŚĞĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘dŚĞŝƚLJŽƵŶĐŝůĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚƚŚĞŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŚĞ WĂƌŬWĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶĂŶĚŝĐLJĐůĞ^LJƐƚĞŵ/ŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶWůĂŶŽŶ:ƵŶĞϭϳ͕ϮϬϭϯ͘ƐƉĂƌƚŽĨ sŝƐŝŽŶ^ƚ͘>ŽƵŝƐWĂƌŬŝŶϮϬϬϳ͕ƚŚĞĐŝƚLJǁŽƌŬĞĚǁŝƚŚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŵĞŵďĞƌƐƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞƚŚĞ ĐƚŝǀĞ>ŝǀŝŶŐ͗^ŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐĂŶĚdƌĂŝůƐWůĂŶ͘dŚĞĐŝƚLJŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚŝŶŐŝƚƐƚŚŝƌĚLJĞĂƌŽĨƚŚĞϭϬ LJĞĂƌƉůĂŶ͘dŚĞĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚĐŽƐƚĨŽƌƚŚĞĨƵůůϭϬLJĞĂƌƉůĂŶǁĂƐΨϮϰŵŝůůŝŽŶ͘^ŽŵĞŽĨƚŚĞ ŐĞŶĞƌĂůŐŽĂůƐŽĨŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŚĞWĂƌŬŝŶĐůƵĚĞ͗ • ĞǀĞůŽƉĂŶŝŶƚĞƌĐŽŶŶĞĐƚĞĚŶĞƚǁŽƌŬŽĨƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶĂŶĚďŝĐLJĐůĞƌŽƵƚĞƐ ƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƚƚŚĞĐŝƚLJƚŚĂƚǁŝůůůŝŶŬƚŽƚƌĂŶƐŝƚƐLJƐƚĞŵƐ͕ƉƌŽǀŝĚŝŶŐŽƉƚŝŽŶƐƚŽ ĂƵƚŽŵŽďŝůĞĚĞƉĞŶĚĞŶĐĞ͘ ¾ ƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĂĐŝƚLJǁŝĚĞŐƌŝĚͲƐLJƐƚĞŵŽĨƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJĞǀĞƌLJЬͲŵŝůĞ͘ ¾ ƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĂĐŝƚLJǁŝĚĞŐƌŝĚͲƐLJƐƚĞŵŽĨďŝĐLJĐůĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJĞǀĞƌLJЪͲ ŵŝůĞ͘ ¾ ůŽƐĞŐĂƉƐŝŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐ͛ĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬŶĞƚǁŽƌŬƐ͘ • WƌŽǀŝĚĞƐĂĨĞĂŶĚĞĂƐŝůLJĂĐĐĞƐƐŝďůĞƌŽƵƚĞƐĨŽƌƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐĂŶĚǁŽƌŬĞƌƐŝŶƚŚĞ ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĐŚŝůĚƌĞŶ͕ƐĞŶŝŽƌƐĂŶĚƚŚĞĚŝƐĂďůĞĚ͘ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 7 ϱ • ĞǀĞůŽƉĂĂƉŝƚĂů/ŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚWůĂŶďĂƐĞĚŽŶƉƌŝŽƌŝƚŝĞƐ͕ŶĞĞĚƐĂŶĚĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ ƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐ͘ dŚĞĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŬĞǁĂLJƐƚƵĚLJĐŽƌƌĞůĂƚĞƐǁŝƚŚŵĂŶLJŽĨƚŚĞŐŽĂůƐĂŶĚƉƌŝŽƌŝƚŝĞƐ ŽƵƚůŝŶĞĚŝŶƚŚĞŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŚĞWĂƌŬWůĂŶ͘/ŶĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶ͕ƚŚĞĐƚŝǀĞ>ŝǀŝŶŐ͗^ŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐĂŶĚdƌĂŝůƐ WůĂŶŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚĂƐĂƉƌŝŽƌŝƚLJϮƌŽƵƚĞ͘ ///͘ ^ƚƵĚLJWƌŽĐĞƐƐ ͘ ĂƚĂŽůůĞĐƚŝŽŶ sĂƌŝŽƵƐĚĂƚĂŵĞƚƌŝĐƐǁĞƌĞĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJ͘ džŝƐƚŝŶŐůĂŶĞǁŝĚƚŚƐ͕ƐŚŽƵůĚĞƌǁŝĚƚŚƐ͕ ďƵƐƐƚŽƉƐ͕ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐnjŽŶĞƐ͕ƐŝŐŶĂůůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶĐƌŽƐƐŝŶŐůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ ǀŽůƵŵĞƐ͕ĂŶĚƐƉĞĞĚůŝŵŝƚƐǁĞƌĞĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚƚŽŚĞůƉĚĞǀĞůŽƉĚĞƐŝŐŶƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘ ͘ ƐƚĂďůŝƐŚŝŶŐ^ƚƵĚLJ'ŽĂůƐ dŚĞƉƌŝŵĂƌLJŽďũĞĐƚŝǀĞŽĨƚŚĞĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŬĞǁĂLJ^ƚƵĚLJŝƐƚŽĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞƚŚĞĨĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ ŽĨĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚŝŶŐĂĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŽƵƐďŝŬĞǁĂLJĂůŽŶŐĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚ͘dŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐŐŽĂůƐǁĞƌĞ ĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJ͗ • ƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĂƉƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJĚĞƐŝŐŶŽŶĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚǁŚŝĐŚǁŽƵůĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂƐĂĨĞ͕ ĐŽŵĨŽƌƚĂďůĞ͕ŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚďŝŬĞǁĂLJĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƚƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌ͘ • /ĚĞŶƚŝĨLJĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐŽĨĨͲƐƚƌĞĞƚƚƌĂŝůƐŝŶƚŚĞĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌ͕ĂŶĚĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞƚŚĞŝƌƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůƵƐĞ ĂƐĂĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚďŝŬĞǁĂLJĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJ͘ • ĞƐŝŐŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚĂŶĚƵŶŝĨŽƌŵĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐǁŝƚŚŵŝŶŝŵĂůǀĂƌŝĂƚŝŽŶƐƚŽĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĂ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƚƚŚĞĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌ͘ • ƐƐĞƐƐƐĂĨĞƚLJĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌďŝĐLJĐůŝƐƚƐ͕ŵŽƚŽƌŝƐƚƐ͕ĂŶĚƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶƐ͘ • DŝŶŝŵŝnjĞŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚŽĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐĐƵƌďůŝŶĞƐǁŚĞƌĞƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͘ ͘ ƵƌƌĞŶƚĞƐŝŐŶ^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂŶĚĞƐƚWƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐ ĞƐƚƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐĨŽƌďŝŬĞǁĂLJĚĞƐŝŐŶŚĂǀĞƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚůLJĞǀŽůǀĞĚŝŶƚŚĞƉĂƐƚƚĞŶLJĞĂƌƐ͘ƐĂ ƌĞƐƵůƚ͕ĂĐŽŵďŝŶĂƚŝŽŶŽĨŝŶĚƵƐƚƌLJĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐǁĞƌĞƵƐĞĚƚŽŐƵŝĚĞĐŽŶĐĞƉƚĚĞƐŝŐŶ ƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘ĞƐŝŐŶŵĂŶƵĂůƐĂŶĚďĞƐƚƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐƵƐĞĚĂƐƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƐƚƵĚLJ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞ͗ • DŶKdŝŬĞǁĂLJ&ĂĐŝůŝƚLJĞƐŝŐŶDĂŶƵĂů͕DĂƌĐŚϮϬϬϳ • DŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ͛ƐĞƐƚWƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐĨŽƌWĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶͬŝĐLJĐůĞ^ĂĨĞƚLJ͕ZĞƉŽƌƚϮϬϭϯͲϮϮ • DŶKd^ƚĂƚĞŝĚĨŽƌ>ŽĐĂůdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ'ƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐ • EdKhƌďĂŶŝŬĞǁĂLJĞƐŝŐŶ'ƵŝĚĞ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 8 ϲ hƉĐŽŵŝŶŐĐŚĂŶŐĞƐƚŽďŝŬĞǁĂLJĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂƌĞĂŶƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞĚďĞĨŽƌĞďŝŬĞ ŝŶĨƌĂƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞŽŶĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝƐŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĞĚ͘/ƚŝƐĂŶƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞĚƚŚĂƚĨƵƚƵƌĞĚĞƐŝŐŶ ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐǁŝůůŝŶĐůƵĚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝǀĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕ĂƐŶĞǁ ďŝŬĞǁĂLJƌĞƐĞĂƌĐŚƐŚŽǁƐƚŚĂƚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝǀĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕ƐƵĐŚĂƐƐƚƌŝƉĞĚďƵĨĨĞƌƐ͕ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƐĂĨĞƚLJ͘ĞƐŝŐŶƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŝůůƵƐĞ ƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂŶĚŝŶĚƵƐƚƌLJďĞƐƚƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐǁŚĞŶĨŝŶĂůĚĞƐŝŐŶĐŽŵŵĞŶĐĞƐ͘ ͘ ĞƐŝŐŶƌŝƚĞƌŝĂͬ^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐhƐĞĚ dŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂƵƐĞĚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƐƚƵĚLJŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐĂĐŽŵďŝŶĂƚŝŽŶŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚĚĞƐŝŐŶ ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂŶĚĂŶƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞĚĨƵƚƵƌĞĐŚĂŶŐĞƐƚŽƚŚŽƐĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐďĂƐĞĚŽŶƉƵďůŝƐŚĞĚ ƌĞƐĞĂƌĐŚĂŶĚŽďƐĞƌǀĞĚŝŶĚƵƐƚƌLJďĞƐƚƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐ͘dŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐŵŝŶŝŵƵŵĂŶĚĚĞƐŝƌĞĚ ĚƌŝǀĞůĂŶĞƐ͕ďŝŬĞůĂŶĞƐ͕ĂŶĚďƵĨĨĞƌǁŝĚƚŚƐǁĞƌĞĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚ;^ĞĞdĂďůĞϭďĞůŽǁͿ͗ DŝŶŝŵƵŵ ĞƐŝƌĞĚ ƌŝǀĞ>ĂŶĞƐ ϭϬ͛ ϭϭ͛ ŝŬĞ>ĂŶĞƐ ϱ͛ ϱ͛ ƵĨĨĞƌtŝĚƚŚƐ Ϭ͛ ϯ͛ dĂďůĞϭ͗DŝŶŝŵƵŵĂŶĚĞƐŝƌĞĚtŝĚƚŚƐ ͘ WƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJĂůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐ ^ŽŵĞŽĨƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚƐĞŐŵĞŶƚƐŽĨƚŚĞĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŬĞǁĂLJŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂŶ ĂůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƉůĂŶĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘ • ůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞŝŬĞ>ĂŶĞŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐ sŝƌŐŝŶŝĂǀĞŶƵĞ^ŽƵƚŚʹdĞdžĂƐǀĞŶƵĞ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 9 ϳ dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉůĂŶƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƚŚĞǁŝĚƚŚŽĨƚŚĞƌŽĂĚďĞǁŝĚĞŶĞĚƚŽĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƚĞ ƚǁŽŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚďŝŬĞůĂŶĞƐ͘dŚĞĂůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞŝƐƚŽǁŝĚĞŶƚŚĞĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐǁĞƐƚďŽƵŶĚ ƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬĂŶĚĐŽŶǀĞƌƚŝƚŝŶƚŽĂŶŽĨĨͲƐƚƌĞĞƚƐŚĂƌĞĚͲƵƐĞƉĂƚŚ͘dŚŝƐǁŽƵůĚĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞ ƚŚĞŶĞĞĚƚŽǁŝĚĞŶƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚǁŝĚƚŚ͕ďƵƚǁŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞƐŽŵĞĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŝŵƉĂĐƚƐ ďĞƚǁĞĞŶƚŚĞĐƵƌďĂŶĚƌŝŐŚƚͲŽĨͲǁĂLJ͘ EĞǀĂĚĂǀĞŶƵĞʹ>ŽƵŝƐŝĂŶĂǀĞŶƵĞ dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉůĂŶƐĞdžƉůŽƌĞĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚůĂŶĞĐŽŶĨŝŐƵƌĂƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌĞĂƐƚďŽƵŶĚĂŶĚ ǁĞƐƚďŽƵŶĚƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĞĂƐƚŽĨEĞǀĂĚĂǀĞŶƵĞ͘ĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐǁŝůůďĞ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞŝĨĂĚĞĚŝĐĂƚĞĚǁĞƐƚďŽƵŶĚƌŝŐŚƚƚƵƌŶůĂŶĞĂƚEĞǀĂĚĂ ǀĞŶƵĞŝƐǁĂƌƌĂŶƚĞĚ͘ YƵĞŶƚŝŶǀĞŶƵĞʹEĂƚĐŚĞnjǀĞŶƵĞ dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉůĂŶƐĐĂůůĨŽƌƵƐŝŶŐƚŚĞĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐŽĨĨͲƐƚƌĞĞƚƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬͬƚƌĂŝůŽŶƚŚĞ ŶŽƌƚŚƐŝĚĞŽĨĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚĂƐƚŚĞďŝŬĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJĨŽƌďŽƚŚĞĂƐƚďŽƵŶĚĂŶĚ ǁĞƐƚďŽƵŶĚďŝĐLJĐůŝƐƚƐ͘dŚĞĂůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƉůĂŶƐǁŽƵůĚĂĚĚĂƐƚƌŝƉĞĚǁĞƐƚďŽƵŶĚ ďŝŬĞǁĂLJŽŶƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚƚŽĐŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁĞƐƚŽĨ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 10 ϴ YƵĞŶƚŝŶǀĞŶƵĞ͘KƚŚĞƌŽƉƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌĂĚĚŝŶŐŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚĂŶĚŽĨĨͲƐƚƌĞĞƚďŝŬĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ǁŝůůďĞĞdžĂŵŝŶĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƉƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJΘĨŝŶĂůĚĞƐŝŐŶ͘ • /ŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶŽŶĨŝŐƵƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ >ŽƵŝƐŝĂŶĂǀĞŶƵĞ/ŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ;EĞǀĂĚĂǀĞŶƵĞʹ<ĞŶƚƵĐŬLJǀĞŶƵĞͿ dŚĞƌĞĂƌĞĂŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶƉůĂĐĞĨŽƌƚŚĞƐĞŐŵĞŶƚŽĨĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞ ZŽĂĚďĞƚǁĞĞŶEĞǀĂĚĂǀĞŶƵĞĂŶĚ<ĞŶƚƵĐŬLJǀĞŶƵĞ͘ϮϬϭϲͬϮϬϭϳdƌĂĨĨŝĐ^ƚƵĚLJ ŽĨƚŚĞ>ŽƵŝƐŝĂŶĂǀĞŶƵĞ/ŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶǁŝůůĂůůŽǁĨŽƌƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞƉƌĞĨĞƌƌĞĚůĂŶĞ ĐŽŶĨŝŐƵƌĂƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌƚŚŝƐĂƌĞĂ͘dŚĞŽŶŶĞĐƚdŚĞWĂƌŬƉůĂŶĂůƐŽŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞƐ>ŽƵŝƐŝĂŶĂ ǀĞŶƵĞĂƐĂĨƵƚƵƌĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJ͕ƐůĂƚĞĚĨŽƌŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶŝŶϮϬϭϴ͘ WĂƌŬWůĂĐĞŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚͬWĂƌŬĚĂůĞƌŝǀĞͬĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚ/ŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ ĚĞůŝŶĞĂƚĞĚͬƐƚƌŝƉĞĚĐŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŽŶŝƐƉůĂŶŶĞĚĨŽƌǁĞƐƚďŽƵŶĚďŝĐLJĐůŝƐƚƐƚŽƐĂĨĞůLJ ŶĂǀŝŐĂƚĞůĞĨƚŚĂŶĚƚƵƌŶƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ͘/ŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝŽŶ ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂƌĞĐŚĂŶŐŝŶŐƌĂƉŝĚůLJ͕ƐŽƚŚĞĨŝŶĂůŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƚƌĞĂƚŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌƚŚĞ ǁĞƐƚďŽƵŶĚůĂŶĞǁŝůůďĞďƌŽƵŐŚƚƵƉƚŽĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĚƵƌŝŶŐĨŝŶĂůĚĞƐŝŐŶ͘ ĂƐƚďŽƵŶĚďŝĐLJĐůŝƐƚƐǁŝůůƌĞŵĂŝŶŽŶƚŚĞĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐŽĨĨͲƐƚƌĞĞƚƚƌĂŝů͘ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 11 ϵ &͘ ĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ • &ƵƚƵƌĞŝŬĞǁĂLJƐ dĞdžĂƐǀĞŶƵĞ;ĨƌŽŵĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚƚŽtĂLJnjĂƚĂŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚͿĂŶĚ&ƌĂŶĐĞǀĞŶƵĞ ;&ƌŽŵĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚƚŽĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞǀĞŶƵĞͿŚĂǀĞƌĞĐĞŶƚůLJŝŶƐƚĂůůĞĚŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚ ďŝŬĞůĂŶĞƐ͘KƚŚĞƌŶŽŶͲŵŽƚŽƌŝnjĞĚĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĨŽƌŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶŝŶ ŽŶŶĞĐƚdŚĞWĂƌŬƚŚĂƚǁŽƵůĚĐŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŽĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŶĐůƵĚĞ͗ ¾ sŝƌŐŝŶŝĂǀĞŶƵĞ^ŽƵƚŚ;ŽŶŶĞĐƚƐƚŽƚŚĞĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZĞŐŝŽŶĂůdƌĂŝů͕ƚŚĞϮϴƚŚ ^ƚƌĞĞƚďŝŬĞǁĂLJ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞdĞdžĂƐǀĞŶƵĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJƐŽƵƚŚŽĨϮϴƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚͿ ¾ >ŽƵŝƐŝĂŶĂǀĞŶƵĞ;/ŶĐůƵĚĞƐŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƌĞĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝŶϮϬϭϴͿ ¾ ĂŬŽƚĂǀĞŶƵĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJĂŶĚƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶďƌŝĚŐĞ;&ƵƚƵƌĞŶŽƌƚŚͲƐŽƵƚŚ ĐŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŽŶƚŽ ĚŐĞǁŽŽĚǀĞŶƵĞͿ ¾ ĂƌƚŚĂŶǀĞŶƵĞ;ŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŽŶƚŽtĂLJnjĂƚĂŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚͿ ¾ WĂƌŬWůĂĐĞŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ ¾ ,ŝŐŚǁĂLJϭϬϬƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶďƌŝĚŐĞƐ;EŽƌƚŚͲƐŽƵƚŚĐŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŽŶƐŽǀĞƌƚŚĞE^& ƌĂŝůůŝŶĞŽŶďŽƚŚƐŝĚĞƐŽĨ,ŝŐŚǁĂLJϭϬϬĂƌĞƵŶĚĞƌƌĞǀŝĞǁͿ ¾ YƵĞŶƚŝŶǀĞŶƵĞ;tĂLJnjĂƚĂŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚŝŬĞ^ƚƵĚLJŝŶƉƌŽŐƌĞƐƐͿ ¾ ĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚ;EŽƌƚŚĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZĞŐŝŽŶĂůdƌĂŝůƚŽ&ƌĂŶĐĞǀĞŶƵĞͿ • ĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůdƌĂĨĨŝĐ^ƚƵĚŝĞƐ ϮϬϭϯƚƌĂĨĨŝĐƐƚƵĚLJĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞĚƚŚĞŶĞĞĚƚŽĂĚĚĂĐĞŶƚĞƌƚƵƌŶůĂŶĞŶĞĂƌ ,ĂŵƉƐŚŝƌĞǀĞŶƵĞĨŽƌĂŶĞǁŵƵůƚŝĨĂŵŝůLJƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘dƌĂĨĨŝĐ ĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐǁŝůůďĞĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞĚĂƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJĨŝŶĂůĚĞƐŝŐŶ͘ • WĂƌŬŝŶŐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ ĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŚĂƐĂŵŝdžƚƵƌĞŽĨƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĂŶĚŶŽͲƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐĞŐŵĞŶƚƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƚ ƚŚĞĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌ͘dŚĞĨŽƵƌͲůĂŶĞƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƐƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐǁŚŝůĞƐŽŵĞƚǁŽͲůĂŶĞ ƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƐĂůůŽǁƉĂƌŬŝŶŐŽŶŽŶĞŽƌďŽƚŚƐŝĚĞƐ͘dŽĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƚĞƚŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJĂŶĚĂ ƐĂĨĞďƵĨĨĞƌůĂŶĞ͕ƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐĂůŽŶŐĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚǁŽƵůĚ ƌĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĂůŽŶŐƚŚĞĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌ͕ǁŝƚŚĂĨĞǁĞdžĐĞƉƚŝŽŶƐŶŽƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞƐŝŐŶ͘dŚĞďĂůĂŶĐĞŽĨŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶŝŶŐƐŽŵĞŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐďLJ ƌĞĚƵĐŝŶŐŽƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚŝŶŐƚŚĞďƵĨĨĞƌůĂŶĞƐǁŝůůďĞĂŶĂůLJnjĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐĨŝŶĂůĚĞƐŝŐŶ͘ '͘ WƵďůŝĐ/ŶǀŽůǀĞŵĞŶƚ ƉƵďůŝĐŽƉĞŶŚŽƵƐĞǁĂƐŚĞůĚŽŶ:ƵůLJϭϵ͕ϮϬϭϲƚŽĂůůŽǁƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐƚŽŚĞĂƌĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͕ǀŝĞǁƉƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJůĂLJŽƵƚƐĨŽƌƚŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĨĞĞĚďĂĐŬƚŽĐŝƚLJ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 12 ϭϬ ƐƚĂĨĨ͘ůůĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŽƉĞŶŚŽƵƐĞŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞĚ͘dŚŝƐ ĨĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJƐƚƵĚLJŝƐĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚĂƉƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĨŽƌƚŚĞĐŝƚLJĂŶĚŶŽĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĂƚƚŚŝƐƚŝŵĞ͘ĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƉƵďůŝĐŝŶǀŽůǀĞŵĞŶƚǁŝůůŽĐĐƵƌŝŶϮϬϭϴĂƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƌĞŚĂďŝůŝƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐŽŶĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚĨŽƌϮϬϭϵĂŶĚ ϮϬϮϭ͘dŚĞĨŝŶĂůĚĞƐŝŐŶƉŚĂƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŬĞǁĂLJƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁŝůůŚĂǀĞŝƚƐŽǁŶ ƉƵďůŝĐŝŶǀŽůǀĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ͘ /s͘ ^ƵŵŵĂƌLJŽĨ&ŝŶĚŝŶŐƐ ͘ /ŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶKƉƚŝŽŶƐ dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉůĂŶƐĂŶĚĂůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƉůĂŶƐǁŝůůďĞĂŶĂůLJnjĞĚĨŽƌĨŝŶĂůĚĞƐŝŐŶ͘dŚĞŵŽƐƚ ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂŶĚŝŶĚƵƐƚƌLJďĞƐƚƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐǁŝůůďĞƵƐĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝŶĂůĚĞƐŝŐŶ͘ dŚĞƌĞĂƌĞĂŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨƉůĂŶŶĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐƐĞƚƚŽŽĐĐƵƌŽŶŽƌŶĞĂƌƚŚĞĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚ ĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌ͘dŚĞƐĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞ͗ • ŶƵƉĐŽŵŝŶŐƌŽĂĚǁĂLJŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝƐƉůĂŶŶĞĚƚŽŽĐĐƵƌŽŶĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞ ZŽĂĚŝŶϮϬϭϵĂŶĚϮϬϮϭ͘ • >ŽƵŝƐŝĂŶĂǀĞŶƵĞŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕ƉůĂŶŶĞĚĨŽƌϮϬϭϴ͘ • ĞŶƚĞƌWŽŝŶƚ ŶĞƌŐLJŚĂƐƉůĂŶƐƚŽƌĞƉůĂĐĞĂŐĂƐŵĂŝŶŝŶϮϬϮϬŽŶsŝƌŐŝŶŝĂǀĞŶƵĞ ĂŶĚŽŶĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚďĞƚǁĞĞŶsŝƌŐŝŶŝĂǀĞŶƵĞĂŶĚdĞdžĂƐǀĞŶƵĞ͘ ĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůůLJ͕ƚŚĞ,ĞŶŶĞƉŝŶŽƵŶƚLJϮϬϰϬŝĐLJĐůĞdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶWůĂŶŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞƐsŝƌŐŝŶŝĂ ǀĞŶƵĞƚŽEŽƌƚŚĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZĞŐŝŽŶĂůdƌĂŝůĂƐĂƉůĂŶŶĞĚďŝŬĞǁĂLJƌŽƵƚĞ͘ ͘ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚŽƐƚƐ /ŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶĐŽƐƚƐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚďŝŬĞǁĂLJĚĞƉĞŶĚŽŶĐŽŽƌĚŝŶĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚ ĨƵƚƵƌĞƌŽĂĚƌĞƐƵƌĨĂĐŝŶŐĞĨĨŽƌƚƐ͘dŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŽƵůĚďĞƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚůLJ ŵŽƌĞĐŽƐƚͲĞĨĨĞĐƚŝǀĞŝĨĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚŽƚŚĞƌƉůĂŶŶĞĚƌŽĂĚǁĂLJƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐ͘ dĂďůĞϮďĞůŽǁŽƵƚůŝŶĞƐƚŚĞƚŽƚĂůĐŽƐƚƚŽƐƚƌŝƉĞƚŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƉůĂŶŶĞĚƌŽĂĚǁĂLJ ŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐĂůŽŶŐĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚ͕ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚĨŽƌϮϬϭϵĂŶĚϮϬϮϭ͘ dŽƚĂůƐƚƌŝƉŝŶŐĐŽƐƚĨŽƌƉůĂŶŶĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ;ǁŝƚŚŽƵƚďŝŬĞǁĂLJƐͿΨϭϭϭ͕ϬϬϬ dŽƚĂůƐƚƌŝƉŝŶŐĐŽƐƚĨŽƌƉůĂŶŶĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ;ǁŝƚŚďŝŬĞǁĂLJƐͿΨϭϵϴ͕ϬϬϬ dŽƚĂůĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůĐŽƐƚƐƚŽƐƚƌŝƉĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŝƚŚƉůĂŶŶĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ Ψϴϳ͕ϬϬϬ dĂďůĞϮ͗dŽƚĂůĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŽƐƚƚŽ^ƚƌŝƉĞŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŝƚŚWůĂŶŶĞĚWƌŽũĞĐƚ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 13 ϭϭ dĂďůĞϯďĞůŽǁĐŽŵƉĂƌĞƐƚŚĞƚŽƚĂůĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůĐŽƐƚƚŽƐƚŝƉĞƚŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƉůĂŶŶĞĚ ƌŽĂĚǁĂLJŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚǀĞƌƐĞƐƚŚĞĐŽƐƚƚŽŝŶƐƚĂůůĂďŝŬĞǁĂLJĂůŽŶŐĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞ ZŽĂĚĂƐĂƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞƐƚƌŝƉŝŶŐƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝŶƚŚĞĨƵƚƵƌĞ͘ dŽƚĂůĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůĐŽƐƚƚŽƐƚƌŝƉĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŝƚŚƉůĂŶŶĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ;dĂďůĞϮͿΨϴϳ͕ϬϬϬ dŽƚĂůĐŽƐƚƚŽƐƚƌŝƉĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJĂƐĂƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚΨϮϰϱ͕ϬϬϬ dŽƚĂůĐŽƐƚƐĂǀŝŶŐƐƚŽƐƚƌŝƉĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŝƚŚƉůĂŶŶĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ Ψϭϱϴ͕ϬϬϬ dĂďůĞϯ͗dŽƚĂůŽƐƚ^ĂǀŝŶŐƐƚŽ^ƚƌŝƉĞŝŬĞǁĂLJǁŝƚŚWůĂŶŶĞĚWƌŽũĞĐƚ /ŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶŐƚŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJĂƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƉůĂŶŶĞĚƌŽĂĚǁĂLJŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁŝůů ƐĂǀĞĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJΨϭϱϴ͕ϬϬϬŽǀĞƌŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶŐƚŚĞďŝŬĞǁĂLJĂƐĂƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞƐƚƌŝƉŝŶŐ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝŶƚŚĞĨƵƚƵƌĞ͘ ͘ &ƵŶĚŝŶŐ^ŽƵƌĐĞƐͬ&ŝŶĂŶĐŝŶŐ ůůŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŚĞWĂƌŬƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐĂƌĞĨƵŶĚĞĚƚŚƌŽƵŐŚ'ĞŶĞƌĂůKďůŝŐĂƚŝŽŶ;'͘K͘ͿďŽŶĚƐ͘dŚĞƌĞ ǁŽƵůĚďĞŶŽƐƉĞĐŝĂůĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚƐƚŽŶĞĂƌďLJƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŽǁŶĞƌƐ͘ ͘ ŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶ ĚĚŝŶŐďŝŬĞŝŶĨƌĂƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞĂůŽŶŐĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚǁŝůůďĞďĞŶĞĨŝĐŝĂůƚŽ^ƚ͘>ŽƵŝƐWĂƌŬ͕ ,ĞŶŶĞƉŝŶŽƵŶƚLJ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚŝĞƐ͘dŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚďŝŬĞǁĂLJ ŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐƚŽĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚĂƌĞĨĞĂƐŝďůĞĨƌŽŵĂŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐƉĞƌƐƉĞĐƚŝǀĞ͘dŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚďŝŬĞǁĂLJŝƐĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨ^ƚ͘>ŽƵŝƐWĂƌŬ͛ƐǀŝƐŝŽŶƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞĂŵŽƌĞ ĐŽŶŶĞĐƚĞĚ͕ŚĞĂůƚŚLJ͕ĂŶĚĞŶŐĂŐĞĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ͘ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 14 ϭϮ s͘ &ŝŐƵƌĞƐͬƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐ ͘ ƵƌƌĞŶƚŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŚĞWĂƌŬ͊ϭϬzĞĂƌ^ŝĚĞǁĂůŬ͕dƌĂŝů͕ĂŶĚŝŬĞǁĂLJWƌŽũĞĐƚƐ&ŝŐƵƌĞ ͘ ĞĚĂƌ>ĂŬĞZŽĂĚŝŬĞǁĂLJ^ƚƵĚLJ>ĂLJŽƵƚƐ;ϰ>ĂLJŽƵƚƐͿ City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 15 !! !!!!!!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!! !!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! !!! !!!!!!!! ! ! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! !!!!!!!!! ! !!!! ! ! !!!!!!!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!! !!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!! !!!!!!! !!! ! !!!!!!! !!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! ! !! ! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!! !!! !!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!f !f !f !f &< &< &< &< ")20 ")17 ")5 ")25 ")3 §¨¦394 £¤169 ¬«100 ¬«7 Dakota Park Wolfe Park Carpenter Park Bass Lake Park Browndale Park Minikahda Vista Park Cedarhurst Park Twin Lakes Park Shelard Park Jersey Park Cedar Manor Park Texa-Tonka Park Rainbow Park Willow Park Ainsworth Park Nelson Park Sunshine Park Roxbury Park Center Park Freedom Park Parkview Park Aquila Park Sunset Park Elie Park Jorvig Park Webster Park Blackstone Park Bass Lake Preserve Northside Park Fern Hill Park Lamplighter Park Otten PondHampshire Park Westwood Hills Nature Center Louisiana Oaks Isaac Walton League/Creekside Town Green Park Ford Park Oregon Park Edgebrook Park Lilac Park Carroll Hurd Park Meadowbrook Manor Park OAK HILL PARK LYNNAVESTEXASAVESMORNINGSIDE RD 36TH ST W MON T E R E Y D R QUENTINAVESVERNONAVES25TH ST W BELTLINEBLVDC E D A R L A K E R D W A YZATA BLVD SERVICE DR HI G H W A Y 7 WAYZATA BLVD 28TH ST W WO L F EPK W YCAMBRIDGE ST QUENTINAVESMONTEREYAVESZARTHANAVES41 S T S T WZARTHANAVESWEBSTERAVESCED A R L A K E R D 29TH ST W FORESTRD VIRGINIAAVESJOPPAAVESLAKE ST W INGLEWOODAVESWALKER STGEORGIAAVES TOLEDOAVES2 2 N D ST W 26TH ST W 43 1/2 ST W CLUB RD GOODRICH AVE 14TH ST W DAKOTAAVESLOUISIANAAVESGLENHURSTAVESVIRGINIA CIR N XENWOODAVESPARKLAND S RD26TH ST W RHODEISLANDAVES28TH ST W 27TH ST W 36TH ST WFLAGAVES JOPPAAVESCED A R WO OD R D BRUNSWICKAVESFRANKLINAVE W 35TH ST WBOONEAVES 27TH ST W UTICAAVESBURDPL S U NSET BLVD 33RD ST W 394 HOV LN VALLAC H E R A V E 32ND ST W 33RD ST W 16TH ST W NATCHEZAVESBARRY STHAMILTON ST DIVISION ST 24TH ST W 34TH ST W 25 1/2 ST W 37TH ST W 36 1/2 ST W EDGEB R O O K D R 31ST ST W29THSTW DAKOTAAVESALABAMAAVESOXFORD STCOLORADOAVESUTAHAVES341/2 ST W INGLEWOODAVESKIPLINGAVESSUMTERAVES18TH S T W AQUILALNS2 3 R D S T W LYNN AVE S B R O W N L O W A V E WESTMOR E L ANDLNOR EGONCT31ST ST W QUEBECAVESZINRANAVESOREGONAVESMARYLANDAVESNEVADAAVESOREGONAVESIDAHOAVESNEVADAAVESEDGEWOODAVESHAMPSHIREAVESFLORIDAAVESPENNSYLVANIAAVESIDAHOAVESMARYLANDAVESDAKOTAAVESSALEMAVESYOSEMITEAVESRALEIGHAVESALABAMAAVESNORT H S T WEBSTERAVES3 5 T H S T WDUKE DR40TH L N W S TA NLEN R DX Y L ONAVESP A R K G L E N R D 28TH S T W LOUI SIANAAVES PARK PLACE BLVDPARKCENTERBLVDKIPLINGAVESFRANCEAVESTEXASAVESUTICAAVESPENNSYLVANIAAVESSHELARD PKWY FRANCEAVES2ND ST NWYOSEMITEAVESCOLORADOAVESOTTAWAAVES25T H S T W BROOKSI DE AVE SUTAHDRFLAGAVESR IDGE DRXENWOODAVESS E R V IC E D R H IG H W A Y 7 PRIVATER D W A Y Z A TA BLVD HI LLSBOROAVESE L IO T V IE W R DPARKERRD JORDANAVESF O R D R D BRUNSWICKAVESHUNTINGTON AVE SKENTUCKYAVESALLEYA QUILAAVESVERNONAVESVIRGINIA CIR S JERSEYAVESBLACKSTONEAVESHUNTINGTONAVESTOLEDOAVESSALEMAVESMELROSEAVESPO W ELL RD 2 3 R D STW PR I V ATERDConnect the Park! Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway Projects 10 Year Proposed Projects CTP! Sidewalks 2016 - 0.1 mile 2017 - 1.1 miles 2018 - 1.1 miles 2019 - 1.2 miles 2020 - 0.4 miles 2021 - 1.3 miles 2022 - 0.5 miles 2023 - 0.4 miles Study - 0.3 miles Completed - 5.3 miles CTP! Trails 2017 - 0.4 miles 2018 - 0.2 miles 2019 - 0.4 miles 2020 - 0.2 miles Study - 0.1 miles Other - 0.02 miles Completed - 1.6 miles CTP! Trail Bridges !f 2019 !f Other !f Completed CTP! Bikeways 2017 - 3.8 miles 2018 - 7.0 miles 2019 - 4.5 miles 2020 - 3.1 miles 2021 - 4.3 miles 2022 - 1.9 miles Study - 0.3 miles Other - 1.7 miles Completed - 6.0 miles Sidewalk Gaps &<2016 Pedestrian Activated Crossings Current Sidewalks !! !!Current Trails Lakes Parks Railroad City Limits 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Miles Ë Date: 5/19/2016 City Council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 16 © Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2015, All Rights ReservedH:\STLP\C12109212\CAD\C3D\BIKEWAY-CEDAR LAKE ROAD 1.DWG 07/18/2016 3:34 PMCITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKCEDAR LAKE ROADBIKEWAY STUDYWZK: dZ CEDAR LAKE ROAD (W 28TH ST TO TEXAS AVE) [1 OF 4]LEGENDON-ROAD BIKE LANEPROPOSED LANE LINESBUFFER ZONESHARED-USE-PATH (OFF STREET)EXISTING NO PARKINGPROPOSED NO PARKINGBUS STOPSIGNAL SYSTEMCEDAR LAKE ROAD (W 28TH ST TO TEXAS AVE) [1 OF 4]EXISTING LANE USE PROPOSED BIKE LANEMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUTMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUT Z>< Z;tϮϴd,^dͲd y^s Ϳ y/^d/E'KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-BUS ROUTE-CENTER STRIPE Z>< Z;tϮϴd,^dͲd y^s ͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTERLINE & BIKEWAY STRIPING6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11'-12' TURN LANE Z>< Z;tϮϴd,^dͲd y^s ͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTERLINE, BIKEWAY AND TURN LANE STRIPING-WIDENING NEEDED FOR TWO ON-STREET BIKE LANES48' F - F48' F - F48' F - F46' F - F42' F - F42' F - F42' F - F42' F - F42' F - F42' F - F42' F - F47' F - F 39' F - F38' F - F48'48'48'46'42'42'42'42'42'42'42'46'46'6.5' BIKE LANE1' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER1' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFERTAPER FROM 1' TO 3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3' BUFFER1' BUFFER6' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANE Z>< Z;tϮϴd,^dͲd y^s Ϳ>d ZEd /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTERLINE, BIKEWAY AND TURN LANE STRIPING-ALTERNATE: TURN WESTBOUND SIDEWALK INTO SHARED-USE PATH, NO STREET WIDENING REQUIRED38'OFF STREET OPTION1:15STRIPED PEDCROSSINGUNDER REVIEWSTRIPED PEDCROSSINGUNDER REVIEW1:151:15NO BUFFERNO BUFFERSTRIPED PEDCROSSINGUNDER REVIEWSTRIPED PEDCROSSINGUNDER REVIEW ALTERNATIVETAPER FROM 0' TO 3.5' BUFFERTAPER FROM 3.5' TO 0' BUFFERDEDICATED TURNLANES VS CENTER TURNLANES UNDER REVIEW38'-39' EXISTING43' (MIN.) NEEDED FOR 5' BIKE LANES46' NEEDED FOR 6.5' BIKE LANESMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUT39'5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANEDEDICATED TURN LANESVS. CENTER TURN LANESUNDER VIEWTRANSITION FROM 6' BIKE LANE TO5' BIKE LANE AS ROAD NARROWSSTRIPE TRANSITION FROMBIKE LANE TO TRAILCity council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100Page 17 © Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2015, All Rights ReservedH:\STLP\C12109212\CAD\C3D\BIKEWAY-CEDAR LAKE ROAD 2.DWG 07/18/2016 1:12 PMWZK: dZ CEDAR LAKE ROAD (TEXAS AVE TO FLORIDA AVE) [2 OF 4]EXISTING LANE USEPROPOSED BIKE LANEMATCHLINEEXISTING LANE USEPROPOSED BIKE LANEMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUTMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUTMATCHLINEMATCHLINEMATCHLINEMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUTMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUTCEDAR LAKE ROAD (TEXAS AVE TO FLORIDA AVE) [2 OF 4] Z>< Z;d y^s Ͳ< Edh<zs Ϳ y/^d/E'KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-BUS ROUTE-CENTER STRIPE Z>< Z;d y^s Ͳ< Edh<zs ͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTERLINE & BIKEWAY STRIPING Z>< Z;< Edh<zs Ͳ&>KZ/s Ϳ y/^d/E'KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-BUS ROUTE-CENTER STRIPE Z>< Z;< Edh<zs Ͳ&>KZ/s ͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTERLINE, BUFFER LANE & BIKEWAY STRIPINGFUTURE BIKELANES ONLOUISIANA AVEUNDERCONSIDERATION6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6' BIKE LANE6' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6' BIKE LANE6' BIKE LANE14' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANE12' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE12' TURN LANE6' BIKE LANE6' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANEBIKBIKBIKE BIKIKE LAELAIKE LKE LIKE LAIKE LA39' F -F42' F -F 42' F -F 42' F -F 42' F -F 42' F -F42' F -F42' F -F51' F -F71' F -F71' F -F 42' F -F 42' F -F42' F -F42' F -F 42' F -F42'42'42'42'42'71'71'42'42'42' 42' 42' 42' 42'LEGENDON-ROAD BIKE LANEPROPOSED LANE LINESBUFFER ZONEEXISTING NO PARKINGPROPOSED NO PARKINGBUS STOPSIGNAL SYSTEM3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFERTURN BLVD INTOSHARED USE PATH73' F -FFUTURE BIKELANES ONLOUISIANA AVEUNDERCONSIDERATION5' BIKE LANE14' TURN/BIKE LANE Z>< Z;d y^s Ͳ< Edh<zs Ϳ>d ZEd /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING-WIDENING FOR BUS STOPS-CENTERLINE & BIKEWAY STRIPINGOFF STREET OPTIONOFF STREET OPTIONMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUT6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE39'3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFERSTRIPED PEDCROSSINGUNDER REVIEW NO BUFFER NO BUFFERSTRIPED PEDCROSSINGUNDER REVIEW1:15TAPER FROM 3.5' TO 2.0' BUFFERCITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKCEDAR LAKE ROADBIKEWAY STUDYALTERNATIVEALTERNATIVEPOSSIBLE FUTURE LEFTTURN LANE AT HAMPSHIREAVENUE UNDER REVIEW6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE 4' MEDIANSTRIPECONNECTIONSTRIPECONNECTIONMULTIPLE LANEOPTIONS UNDERREVIEWWIDENING OFEASTBOUNDLANE UNDERREVIEW FOR BUSSTOPLANE CONFIGURATIONTO BE REVIEWED IN2016/2017 TRAFFICSTUDY OF LOUISIANAAVENUE INTERSECTIONSTRIPECONNECTIONSTRIPECONNECTIONEXISTING TEXASAVENUE BIKE LANESEXISTING TEXASAVENUE BIKE LANESEXISTING TEXASAVENUE BIKE LANES2' BUFFER2' BUFFER39'2' BUFFER0' BUFFER0' BUFFER4' STRIPED MEDIAN1:151:151:151:15TAPER FROM 0' TO 2' BUFFERTAPER FROM 0' TO 2' BUFFERTAPER FROM 2.0'TO 3.5' BUFFER1:1548' F -F11' THRU LANE6' BIKE LANE17'6' BIKE LANE6' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE12' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE12' TURN LANE71'11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANECity council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100Page 18 © Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2015, All Rights ReservedH:\STLP\C12109212\CAD\C3D\BIKEWAY-CEDAR LAKE ROAD 3.DWG 07/18/2016 1:36 PMWZK: dZ CEDAR LAKE ROAD (FLORIDA AVE TO MN 100) [3 OF 4]EXISTING LANE USEPROPOSED BIKE LANECEDAR LAKE ROAD (FLORIDA AVE TO MN 100) [3 OF 4]EXISTING LANE USEPROPOSED BIKE LANEMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUTMATCHLINEMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUTMATCHLINEMATCHLINEMATCHLINEMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUTMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUT Z>< Z;&>KZ/s ͲZd,Es Ϳ y/^d/E'KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-BUS ROUTE-CENTER STRIPE Z>< Z;&>KZ/s ͲZd,Es ͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTERLINE & BIKEWAY STRIPING Z>< Z;Zd,Es ͲWZ<W>>sͿ y/^d/E'KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING-BUS ROUTE-CENTER STRIPE Z>< Z;Zd,Es ͲWZ<W>>sͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTERLINE & BIKEWAY STRIPING BOTH DIRECTIONSFUTURE BIKELANES ON PARKBLVD UNDERCONSIDERATION 6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE14' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE12' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE18' THRU LANE18' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' TURN LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6' BIKE LANE6' BIKE LANE11' TURNLANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANE11' TURN LANE20' TURN LANE15' THRU LANE15' THRU LANE12' THRU LANE12' THRU LANE6' BIKE LANE12' TURN LANE Z>< Z;Zd,Es ͲWZ<W>>sͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTERLINE STRIPING-ON STREET BIKEWAY FOR WESTBOUND-BIKEWAY OFF ROAD EASTBOUND (EXISTING)43' F-F50' F-F48' F-F47' F-F42' F-F 42' F-F 42' F-F56' F-F62' F-F62' F-F 60' F-F72' F-F 75' F-F46' F-F 46'74'72'60'62'62'54'42'42'42'47'48'43'LEGENDON-ROAD BIKE LANEPROPOSED LANE LINESBUFFER ZONESHARED-USE-PATH (OFF STREET)EXISTING TRAILEXISTING NO PARKINGPROPOSED NO PARKINGBUS STOPSIGNAL SYSTEM2' BUFFER3.5' BUFFERTAPER FROM 0.75' TO 3' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER2.5' BUFFER2.5' BUFFER1.5' BUFFER20'8'8'8'8'8'6'6'5'TAPER FROM 0.75' TO 2.0' BUFFER1:150.75' BUFFER1:153' BUFFER3' BUFFER3' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE3.5' BUFFER1:15TAPER FROM 3.5' TO 0' BUFFER0.75' BUFFERCITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKCEDAR LAKE ROADBIKEWAY STUDY54' F-F52' F-F57' F-F 28' F-F 31' F-F 2019 PED BRIDGE56'TAPER FROM 0'TO 3.5' BUFFER1:156.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE12'11'11'1:10FUTURE SIDEWALKUNDER REVIEW6.5' BIKE LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANE11' TURN LANETAPER FROM 2.5' TO 1.5' BUFFER ON CURVETAPER FROM 1.5' TO 2.5' BUFFER ON CURVE1.5' BUFFER1.5' BUFFERFUTURE SIDEWALKUNDER REVIEWSTRIPE CONNECTIONFROM BIKE LANE TO TRAIL6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE1.5' BUFFER52'6' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE1.5' BUFFERSTRIPECONNECTIONSTRIPECONNECTIONFUTURE WALKEXTENSIONS BYDEVELOPERSSTRIPECONNECTIONSTRIPECONNECTIONCity council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100Page 19 © Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2015, All Rights ReservedH:\STLP\C12109212\CAD\C3D\BIKEWAY-CEDAR LAKE ROAD 4.DWG 07/18/2016 3:10 PMCITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKCEDAR LAKE ROADBIKEWAY STUDYWZK: dZ CEDAR LAKE ROAD (MN 100 TO NORTH CEDAR TRAIL) [4 OF 4]LEGENDON-ROAD BIKE LANESHARE THE ROAD LANEPROPOSED LANE LINESEXISTING SIDEWALK/TRAILFUTURE OFF-ROAD FACILITY (UNDER REVIEW)EXISTING TRAILBUFFER ZONEEXISTING NO PARKINGPROPOSED NO PARKINGON ROAD BIKE FACILITIESBUS STOPSIGNAL SYSTEMEXISTING LANE USEPROPOSED BIKE LANECEDAR LAKE ROAD (MN 100 TO NORTH CEDAR TRAIL) [4 OF 4]MATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUTMATCHLINEEXISTING LANE USEPROPOSED BIKE LANEMATCHLINESEE NEXTLAYOUTMATCHLINEMATCHLINEMATCHLINE Z>< Z;Yh Ed/Es ͲEd, s Ϳ y/^d/E'KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-BUS ROUTE-CENTER STRIPE Z>< Z;Yh Ed/Es ͲEd, s ͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES Z>< Z;WZ<> ZͲYh Ed/Es Ϳ y/^d/E'KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-BUS ROUTE-CENTER STRIPE Z>< Z;WZ<> ZͲYh Ed/Es ͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTERLINE & BIKEWAY STRIPING BOTH DIRECTIONS-BUMP OUT EAST-BOUND CURB LINE WEST OF HWY 100 TO QUENTIN AVE S.8' PARKING LANE12' THRU LANE12' THRU LANE6' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE11' TURN LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE39' F-F32' F-F 32' F-F 32' F-F 32' F-F32'32' 32' 32' 49'36'36' F-F30' F-F10' 9'8'8'7'11' 9'10'OFF STREET OPTION8' PARKING LANE12' THRU LANE12' THRU LANE8' PARKING LANE12' THRU LANE12' THRU LANE11'ALTERNATIVEMATCHLINE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE Z>< Z;WZ<> ZͲYh Ed/Es ͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTER & WESTBOUND BIKEWAY STRIPING-EASTBOUND BIKEWAY OFF ROAD (EXISTING)32' 10' 9'OFF STREET OPTIONALTERNATIVEMATCHLINE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE6.5' BIKE LANE11' THRU LANE11' THRU LANE Z>< Z;Yh Ed/Es ͲEd, s ͿWZKWK^ /< >E KE/d/KE^-2-WAY STREET CONFIGURATION-NO PARKING EXCEPT BUSES-CENTER & EASTBOUND BIKEWAY STRIPING-EASTBOUND BIKEWAY OFF ROAD (EXISTING)-WESTBOUND BIKE LANE32' 32'32'11' 9'10'OFF STREET OPTION11'OFF STREET OPTIONUNDER REVIEWOFF STREET OPTIONUNDER REVIEWFUTURE PED BRIDGECONNECTION UNDERREVIEW IN THIS AREATAPER FROM 1.5' TO 3.0' BUFFER1.5' BUFFER3.0' BUFFER0' BUFFER0' BUFFERBIKERS COULD CROSSHERE OR RIDE ONUNMARKED ROADSTRIPECONNECTIONCOORDINATE BIKEFACILITIES WITHWAYZATA BLVD STUDYPOTENTIALON-ROAD FACILITYUNDER REVIEW3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER3.5' BUFFER6.5' BIKE LANE13' THRU LANE13' THRU LANE3.0' BUFFERCity council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100Page 20 ¬«100 16TH ST W HAMPSHIREAVESC E D A R LA K E R D FRANKLIN AVE W PARKPLACEBLVD394HOVLNGAMBLE DR 22ND ST W QUENTINAVES18TH ST W CEDAR L A K E R DZARTHANAVES WEBSTERAVESCEDAR LAKE R D 16TH ST W PARKDALE D R 14TH ST W BARRY ST 16TH ST W 26TH ST W VERNONAVESIDAHOAVESKENTUCKYAVES14TH ST W IDAHOAVESKENTUCKY L NJERSEYAVES16TH ST WDAKOTAAVES COLORADOAVESXENWOODAVES26TH ST W 24TH ST W 25 1/2 ST WEDGEWOODAVES 25 1/2 ST W ELIOT VI E W R D WESTSIDE DR WAYZATA BLVD 18TH STW 2 3 R D S T W UTICAAVES2 3 R D ST W ALABAMAAVESDAKOTAAVESHAMPSHIREAVESALABAMAAVESBRUNSWICKAVESBLACKSTONEAVESDUKE DRPARKWOODSRDEDGEWOODAVES2 3 R D S T WRIDGE DR¯0 250 500 750 1,000Feet Legend 2019 MSA Street Rehabilitation City Council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: Approve consultant contract for Cedar Lake Road improvements – project no. 4019-1100 Page 21 Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Consent agenda item: 4c Executive Summary Title: Authorizing participation in the local performance measurement program Recommended action: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing participation in the reporting requirements for the local performance measurement program. Policy consideration: How will participation in this program benefit the city? Summary: In 2010, the Legislature created the Council on Local Results and Innovation (CLRI) and charged the group with developing a voluntary performance measurement reporting program for Minnesota cities and counties. An incentive for cities to participate in this program is that they would be exempt from certain levy limits for taxes payable in the following calendar year if levy limits are or were put into effect. While levy limits are currently not in effect, staff feels it is in the city’s best interest to participate given next year’s legislative session being devoted to developing a budget for the next biennium. In order to participate in the program, each city or county must pass a resolution that confirms participation and implementation of a minimum of ten performance measures developed by the CLRI. All participants are required to file a report with the Office of the State Auditor by July 1, 2018. The report must include a resolution declaring participation in the program and a report with a minimum of ten performance measures. Staff have developed the tools necessary to participate in the program for 2018. If the city’s participation is approved by the council, staff will submit the attached data for 2017 and the signed resolution to the Office of the State Auditor by July 1, 2018. In order to comply with the posting requirements, the data will be available to residents on the city’s website. Financial or budget considerations: A city or county that chooses to participate in the program is eligible for a reimbursement of $0.14 cents per capita from the State Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Resolution Report on performance measures for 2017 Prepared by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Maria Carrillo Perez, Management Assistant Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Page 2 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4c) Title: Authorizing participation in the local performance measurement program Resolution No. 18-___ Authorizing reporting requirements for the local performance measurement program Whereas, in 2010, the Minnesota Legislature created the Council on Local Results and Innovation; and Whereas, the Council on Local Results and Innovation developed a standard set of performance measures that will aid residents, taxpayers, and state and local elected officials in determining the efficacy of counties in providing services and measure residents’ opinion of those services; and Whereas, benefits to the City of St. Louis Park are outlined in MS 6.91 and include eligibility for a reimbursement as set by State statute; and Whereas, any city/county participating in the comprehensive performance measurement program is also exempt from levy limits for taxes, if levy limits are in effect; and Whereas, the City Council of St. Louis Park has adopted and implemented at least 10 of the performance measures, as developed by the Council on Local Results and Innovation, and a system to use this information to help plan, budget, manage and evaluate programs and processes for optimal future outcomes; and Now therefore let it be resolved that, the City Council of St. Louis Park will report the results of the performance measures to its citizenry by the end of the year through publication, direct mailing, posting on the city’s/county’s website, or through a public hearing at which the budget and levy will be discussed and public input allowed. Be it further resolved, the City Council of St. Louis Park will submit to the Office of the State Auditor the actual results of the performance measures adopted by the city. Wherefore, I set my hand and cause the Great Seal of the City of St. Louis Park to be affixed this 18th day of June, 2018. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council June 18, 2018 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk St. Louis Park • 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416 www.stlouispark.org • Phone: 952.924.2575 • Fax: 952.928.2662 • TTY: 952.924.2518 Report on Performance Measures for 2017 City of St. Louis Park Category # Performance Measure Data General 1. Percent change in the taxable property market value 8.48% 2. Number of nuisance code enforcement cases per 1,000 population 13 3. Bond Rating AAA Police Service 4. Part I and II Crime Rates Part I: 1,440 Part II: 1,510 Fire & EMS Service 5. Insurance industry rating of fire services ISO 3 6. EMS calls per 1,000 population 76.73 Streets 7. Average city street pavement condition rating 64 8. Expenditures for road rehabilitation per paved lane mile rehabilitated (jurisdiction only roads) $545,833.33 9. Percentage of all jurisdiction lane miles rehabilitated in the year 2.8% Water 10. Operating costs per 1,000,000 gallons of water pumped/produced $2,432 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4c) Title: Authorizing participation in the local performance measurement program Page 3 Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Consent agenda item: 4d Executive summary Title: Approve plans and specs, and authorize ad for bids for rehab of rec center roof and exterior of building Recommended action: Motion to approve plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for the partial roof rehabilitation and exterior building rehabilitation at the rec center. Policy consideration: Does the city council want to proceed with this project by authorizing staff to go out for bids? Summary: On January 12, 2018, staff entered into a contract with ZMD Engineered Solutions, LLC to prepare plans and specifications for a project that would replace a portion of the rec center roof, specifically the East arena and front office/concession area and make improvements to the exterior of the building, including control joint repair on walls, flashing replacement and painting of decorative glulam’s. The roof and exterior are all original, installed in 1997. As a part of these improvements we will prepare the roof of the east arena for potential solar panel installation in the future. Next Steps and timelines: If the city council approves the plans and specifications and authorizes bids, bids will be received on July 10. Council will be asked to approve the lowest responsible bidder and authorize the project on July 16. Construction would begin around August 27 and be completed by November 2, 2018. Financial or budget considerations: The estimate for the partial roof replacement is $500,000 (includes cost of contract with ZMD Engineered Solutions, LLC) and the cost for the exterior rehabilitation is $175,000. The 2018 Park Improvement Fund includes $500,000 and $175,000 budgeted for this project. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Resolution Prepared by: Jason Eisold, Rec Center Manager Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4d) Page 2 Title: Approve plans and specs, and authorize ad for bids for rehab of rec center roof and exterior of building Resolution No. 18-___ Resolution accepting the project report, establishing the improvement project, approving plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids for partial roof and exterior building rehabilitation at the rec center Whereas, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report related to the partial roof and exterior building rehabilitation. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that: 1.The Project Report regarding Project Nos. 24185018 and 24185024 are hereby accepted. 2.Such improvements as proposed is necessary, cost effective and feasible as detailed in the Project Report. 3.The proposed project, designated as Project Nos. 24185018 and 24185024 are hereby established and ordered. 4.The plans and specifications for the partial replacement of the rec center roof, as prepared under the direction of the rec center manager, or designee, are approved. 5.The city clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least two weeks in the official newspaper and in relevant industry publications, an advertisement for bids for the making of said improvement under said-approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall appear not less than ten (10) days prior to the date and time of receipt of bids, and specify the work to be done, state the date and time bids will be received by the city clerk, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the city clerk and accompanied by a bid bond payable to the city for five (5) percent of the amount of the bid. 6.The rec center manager, or designee, shall report the receipt of bids to the city council shortly after the letting date. The report shall include a tabulation of the bid results and a recommendation to the city council. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council June 18, 2018 Thomas Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Consent agenda item: 4e Executive summary Title: Special assessment – sewer service line repair at 6216 West 35th Street Recommended action: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line at 6216 West 35th Street, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 16-117-21-32-0006. Policy consideration: The proposed action is consistent with policy previously established by the city council. Summary: Justin and Anna Magnuson, owners of the single family residence at 6216 West 35th Street, have requested the city to authorize the repair of the sewer service line for their home and assess the cost against the property in accordance with the city’s special assessment policy. The city requires the repair of service lines to promote the general public health, safety and welfare within the community. The special assessment policy for the repair or replacement of water or sewer service lines for existing homes was adopted by the city council in 1996. This program was put into place because sometimes property owners face financial hardships when emergency repairs like this are unexpectedly required. Plans and permits for this service line repair work were completed, submitted, and approved by city staff. The property owners hired a contractor and repaired the sewer service line in compliance with current codes and regulations. Based on the completed work, this repair qualifies for the city’s special assessment program. The property owners have petitioned the city to authorize the sewer service line repair and special assess the cost of the repair. The total eligible cost of the repair has been determined to be $8,000. Financial or budget considerations: The city has funds in place to finance the cost of this special assessment. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Resolution Prepared by: Jay Hall, Utility Superintendent Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent Beth Simonsen, Accountant Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4e) Page 2 Title: Special assessment – sewer service line repair at 6216 West 35th Street Resolution No. 18-___ Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line at 6216 West 35th Street, St. Louis Park, MN P.I.D. 16-117-21-32-0006 Whereas, the property owners have petitioned the City of St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line for the single family residence located at 6216 West 35th Street; and Whereas, the property owners have agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, right of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and Whereas, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the Utility Superintendent related to the repair of the sewer service line. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that: 1.The petition from the property owners requesting the approval and special assessment for the sewer service line repair is hereby accepted. 2.The sewer service line repair that was done in conformance with the plans and specifications approved by the public works department and department of inspections is hereby accepted. 3.The total cost for the repair of the sewer service line is accepted at $8,000. 4.The property owners have agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, notice and appeal from the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or by other statutes, or by ordinance, city charter, the constitution, or common law. 5.The property owners have agreed to pay the city for the total cost of the above improvements through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at the interest rate of 4.00%. 6.The property owners have executed an agreement with the city and all other documents necessary to implement the repair of the sewer service line and the special assessment of all costs associated therewith. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council June 18, 2018 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Consent agenda item: 4f Executive summary Title: Traffic study no. 695: authorize all-way stop controls at W. 28th Street and Utica Avenue Recommended action: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing installation of all-way stop controls on W. 28th Street at Utica Avenue. Policy consideration: Installing traffic controls is allowed per the city’s established regulatory authority. Summary: Staff received a request in August 2017 to add additional stop signs to the intersection of W. 28th Street and Utica Avenue. This intersection currently has a stop sign on the west leg, stopping eastbound 28th Street. The City’s Traffic Control Policy and the MN Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD) guide the installation of stop signs. The policy sets out warrant criteria which an intersection should meet in order to have stop signs installed. The stop sign warrants for traffic volume, crash history and sightlines were not met for this intersection. The Traffic Committee discussed the study at the October 2017 meeting and did not recommend to support the request because the intersection did not meet warrants. When the Traffic Committee does not recommend the installation of a traffic control device, residents have an opportunity to petition the City Council to consider the Committee’s recommendation. In late May 2018, staff received a petition that meets the requirements. Past practice by the Council has been to approve stop sign requests when a petition is received that meets the requirements of the Traffic Control Policy. A letter was sent to the surrounding property owners soliciting feedback on the petition. Staff did not received additional feedback on the petition. Financial or budget considerations: The cost to install these traffic controls is minimal and will come out of the general operating budget. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Discussion Traffic study 695 Resolution Petition Location map Prepared by: Ben Manibog, Transportation Engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Page 2 Title: Traffic study no. 695: authorize all-way stop controls at W. 28th Street and Utica Avenue Discussion Background: Staff received a request for additional stop signs to the intersection of W. 28th Street & Utica Avenue in August 2017. The intersection of W. 28th Street and Utica Avenue is a T-intersection (approaches to the north, west, and south) and currently has one stop sign on the west leg of the intersection. The south approach ends in a dead-end without an outlet. The City’s Traffic Control Policy and the MN Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD) guide the installation of stop signs. The policy sets out warrant criteria which an intersection should meet in order to have stop signs installed. The stop sign criteria for traffic volume, crash history and sightlines were not met for this intersection. Stop signs are installed to control conflicting traffic movements at intersections and assign who has the right-of-way. Multiple studies have found that stop signs do not slow down traffic except in the immediate vicinity of the intersection. Also, stop sign compliance is low when drivers believe the signs are not justified, creating an enforcement problem. Finally, they create traffic noise and higher CO2 emissions due to vehicles slowing down, idling, and starting back up again. Past experience has demonstrated that placing stop signs in locations where they do not meet these conditions can potentially cause an intersection to be less safe due to low compliance. The Traffic Committee discussed the study at the October 2017 meeting and did not recommend to support the request because the intersection did not meet the thresholds for stop sign installation. When the Traffic Committee does not recommend the installation of a traffic control device, residents have an opportunity to petition the City Council to consider the Committee’s recommendation. Per City policy, non-qualifying devices and traffic calming methods may be considered if both the following are satisfied. •70% of residents within a 600 foot radius from the location sign a petition or a neighborhood association supports a neighborhood study and calming strategy. •Special studies and installation of traffic calming controls (except signs) would be at residents or neighborhood cost (specially assessed to benefited residents or areas) The City has received the attached petition that meets the requirements listed above. Past practice by the Council has been to approve stop sign requests when a petition is received that meets the requirements of the Traffic Control Policy. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Page 3 Title: Traffic study no. 695: authorize all-way stop controls at W. 28th Street and Utica Avenue Traffic study no. 695: installation of all-way stop signs on Utica Avenue at W. 28th Street The Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MnMUTCD) guides the installation of stop signs. The decision to install a multi-way stop control should be based on an engineering study. The following information was collected and reviewed for this multi-way stop sign installation request: 1.Accidents Were there five or more reported crashes in a three year period that are susceptible to correction by a multi-way stop installation? Such crashes include right-turn and left-turn collisions as well as right-angle collisions. •Crash history showed there was zero reported and correctable accidents. The crash history did not meet this warrant for a multi-way stop sign. 2.Vehicle Volumes Do the combined vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian volumes entering the intersection from all approaches average more than 5000 units a day? •The traffic volumes at this intersection were collected using traffic counters. There were 533 vehicles a day entering the intersection. The traffic volumes did not meet this warrant for a multi-way stop sign. 3.Sight Lines Is there an obstruction on an approach that blocks the view of a road user in a way that they cannot see conflicting traffic which would prevent them from stopping or yielding in compliance with the normal right-of-way rule of stopping or yielding? •The west leg of the intersection has shrubs within the sight triangle looking to the north. However, they are short enough to not block sight lines of a vehicle approaching the intersection. The sight lines did not meet this warrant for a multi-way stop sign. Traffic Committee Recommendation Due to none of the multi-way stop sign warrant criteria being met, the Traffic Committee does not recommend that additional stop signs be installed at the intersection of W. 28th Street and Utica Avenue. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Page 4 Title: Traffic study no. 695: authorize all-way stop controls at W. 28th Street and Utica Avenue Resolution No. 18-___ Authorize installation of all-way stop controls at the intersection of W. 28th Street and Utica Avenue Traffic Study No. 695 Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota received a request for additional stop signs at the intersection of W. 28th Street & Utica Avenue; and Whereas, the Traffic Committee has reviewed the request and did not recommend installation of additional stop signs for the intersection for W. 28th Street & Utica Avenue; and Whereas, non-qualifying devices may be considered if seventy (70) percent of residents within a six hundred (600) foot radius from the intersection by petition; and Whereas, City staff received a completed and valid petition requesting the installation of additional stop signs at the intersection of W. 28th Street & Utica Avenue. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the Engineering Director is hereby authorized to: 1.Install stop signs on the all approaches (north, west, and south) of the intersection of W. 28th Street & Utica Avenue. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council June 18, 2018 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Title: Traffic study no. 695: authorize all-way stop controls at W. 28th Street and Utica AvenuePage 5 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Title: Traffic study no. 695: authorize all-way stop controls at W. 28th Street and Utica AvenuePage 6 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Title: Traffic study no. 695: authorize all-way stop controls at W. 28th Street and Utica AvenuePage 7 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Title: Traffic study no. 695: authorize all-way stop controls at W. 28th Street and Utica AvenuePage 8 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Title: Traffic study no. 695: authorize all-way stop controls at W. 28th Street and Utica AvenuePage 9 !"$ ^ ^UTICA AVE S28TH ST W 0 25 5012.5 Feet ´ Proposed Stop Sign Installation - TS 695 Legend ^Proposed Stop Signs !"$Existing Stop Sign City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Title: Traffic study no. 695: authorize all-way stop controls at W. 28th Street and Utica Avenue Page 10 Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Consent agenda item: 4g Executive summary Title: Accept Donation from Cabela’s Recommended action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of fishing poles and supplies from Cabela’s to be used by the police department for the Fishin’ with a Cop program. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept the gift with restrictions on its use? Summary: State statute requires city council acceptance of donations. This requirement is necessary in order to make sure the city council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the use of each donation prior to it being expended. Cabela’s has graciously offered to donate forty fishing poles and supplies to assist with the police departments Fishin’ with a Cop program this summer. The City Attorney has reviewed this matter. His opinion is that state law permits the payment of such expenses by this organization, regardless of whether the funds come from primary or secondary sources. It is treated as a gift to the city and there needs to be a resolution adopted by the city council determining that attendance at this event serves a public purpose and accepting the gift. The resolution needs to be adopted before attendance. Financial or budget considerations: None Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Resolution Prepared by: Mike Harcey, Police Chief Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Page 2 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4g) Title: Accept Donation from Cabela’s Resolution No. 18-___ Resolution accepting donation from Cabela’s for Fishin’ with a Cop program Whereas, The City of St. Louis Park is required by state statute to authorize acceptance of any donations; and Whereas, the city council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the donor; and Now therefore be it resolved, Cabela’s has graciously donated forty fishing poles and supplies to assist with the police departments Fishin’ with a Cop program this summer. It is further resolved, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to Cabela’s for their generosity and support of the police department’s Fishin’ with a Cop program to engage with youth in the community. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council June 18, 2018 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Minutes: 4h OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 18, 2018 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Jacquelyn Kramer, Meg McMonigal, Jay Hall, Mark Hanson, Phillip Elkin OTHERS PRESENT: Nancy Zeigler, AE2S 1.Call to Order – Roll Call 2.Approval of Minutes of March 7, 2018 and March 21, 2018 Commissioner Carper made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner Person seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Commissioner Johnston-Madison arrived at 6:05 p.m. 3.Public Hearings A.Park Village Amendment to Planned Unit Development Location: 5400 Excelsior Blvd. Applicant: Tower Place LLC Case No.: 18-09-PUD Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She explained the amendment is requested to renovate the Mann Theater building. The proposal is for medical office use on the entire first floor of the building. The second floor will be kept vacant in the near term, with possible medical office use in the future. Ms. Kramer provided background on the Planned Unit Development. She reviewed zoning compliance, parking, traffic and signage for the application. She noted that a neighborhood meeting was held on April 3. No residents attended the meeting. Commissioner Peilen asked if the Mann Theater was closing regardless of the application. The applicant Ross Hedlund, Frauenshuh Companies, said Mann Theater is closing May 20, 2018, regardless of the proposal. Commissioner Peilen said she understood Chipotle is moving to the Granite City site, McDonald’s stays where it is and Bruegger’s Bagels is closing and may be looking for a new location. Page 2 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4h) Title: Planning commission meeting minutes of April 18, 2018 Mr. Hedlund said Bruegger’s Bagels was closing and he did not think it would be relocated. He added that Caribou Coffee and Boston Market will remain in the same location. Chipotle will move to the western half of the Granite City building. Health Partners Delta will be going to the eastern 2/3rds of the former Granite City building. Commissioner Peilen asked about the condition of the current parking lot. Mr. Hedlund responded that the asphalt is pretty worn and they do plan to refresh it. He said the lot is 25 years old. Commissioner Tatalovich asked about parking that would be required for the second floor development. Ms. Kramer stated that parking for the second floor does not need to be provided with the current application. She said proof of parking was asked for to make sure it could be added to the site when needed. Chair Robertson asked if there is a potential use for the second floor that would intensify the parking requirement. Ms. Kramer responded that the most likely use would be medical office. She explained how the second floor is a hard space to renovate. Mr. Hedlund said he believes the second floor would be for medical office. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked what kind of a clinic would be located at the first floor site. Mr. Hedlund said it would be a specialty clinic for urology and a specialty clinic for plastic surgery. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Peilen made a motion recommending rescinding Resolution 11-132 and recommending approval of a major amendment to the Planned Unit Development subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. 4.Other Business:None 5.Communications Ms. McMonigal, Principal Planner, said that May 30 is being held as an additional date for a Planning Commission study session on Comprehensive Plan if needed. Page 3 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4h) Title: Planning commission meeting minutes of April 18, 2018 Ms. McMonigal noted the upcoming Climate Action Plan Launch Party on April 22. Commissioner Carper stated that the Lenox Foundation, which supports the St. Louis Park senior program, is having a fund raiser on April 24 to be held at Parkway Pizza. 6.Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m. STUDY SESSION The study session began at 6:30 p.m. 1.Comprehensive Plan – Water Resources Discussion Ms. McMonigal said the intent of the presentation is to give a general familiarity with the systems. No policy or procedure changes are being suggested but perhaps refinement and advancement of what is being done. She introduced Nancy Zeigler of AE2S, Water Supply Plan consultant. Jay Hall, Utilities Superintendent; Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent; and Phillip Elkin, Sr. Engineering Project Manager; introduced themselves. Ms. Zeigler spoke about her background as a water engineer working with municipalities. Ms. Zeigler provided an overview of St. Louis Park’s water system planning. She also noted the DNR’s water supply plan in the Appendix of the comprehensive plan which is a detailed template the city completes. Chair Robertson asked about the bigger and larger commercial/industrial users. Ms. Zeigler said there is a list of the top 10 users in the Appendix document. She said Methodist Hospital is the biggest user. Commissioner Peilen asked about the source of the drinking water. Ms. Zeigler responded that it comes from deep wells, approximately 450 – 600 feet deep. Commissioner Person asked what the trend is cost per unit to the user. Mr. Hall said it is $1.73 per unit/Tier One. There are three tiers. Mr. Hall said the cost has been going up slightly. The cost structure is currently being evaluated. He said the city recently instituted an aggressive watermain replacement program which follows a national trend on replacing aging infrastructure. Page 4 City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4h) Title: Planning commission meeting minutes of April 18, 2018 Commissioner Peilen asked what happens to the well capacity at 2040. Ms. Zeigler responded there would still be capacity at 2040 and all systems can be expanded. Commissioner Johnston Madison asked the age of existing wells. Mr. Hanson responded they were installed 50 – 75 years ago. He explained that the operating equipment and lining of the wells is rehabbed every seven years. In response to a question about aquifers, Mr. Hanson said aquifers are managed by the DNR from an entire metro area perspective. There was a discussion about timed sprinkling restrictions in place which have helped conserve water. There was a discussion about recent meter replacement and upgraded household appliances which have also helped water conservation. Ms. Zeigler discussed the sanitary sewer plan. Ms. McMonigal explained that the major regional sewer system is operated and maintained by the Met Council. Ms. Zeigler discussed the city-wide sanitary sewer network. Mr. Hall and Mr. Hanson discussed Inflow and Infiltration (I & I) and corrective actions the city takes to meet goals established by the Met Council. Phillip Elkin, Sr. Engineering Project Manager, provided an overview of the Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). Commissioners asked about water quality in St. Louis Park lakes. Mr. Elkin responded that depends on the location of the lake. He provided historical background on the city wetlands. Mr. Elkin said the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and perhaps the Met Council do a health report on each of the lakes. He commented that they aren’t swimmable and are mostly stormwater treatment. He provided background on Bass Lake and Twin Lakes. Mr. Elkin spoke about floodplain maps and revisions. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Minutes: 4i OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA MAY 2, 2018 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther; Jennifer Monson, Meg McMonigal, Jack Sullivan, Mike Harcey, Steve Koering, Brian Hoffman 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of April 4, 2018 Commissioner Carper made a motion to recommend approval of the April 4, 2018 minutes. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. 3. Public Hearings A. Bridgewater Bank Corporate Headquarters Preliminary and Final PUD; Preliminary and Final Plat Location: 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Blvd., 3743 Monterey Drive Applicant: Bridgewater Bank Case Nos.: 18-07-S, 18-08-PUD Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report. She discussed the request, site information and background. She reviewed proposed access points. Ms. Monson gave an analysis of the preliminary and final plat request. Ms. Monson provided analysis of the PUD request. She spoke about zoning compliance, uses, architectural design, height, lighting, parking and access. She also discussed the traffic study, Travel Demand Management Plan, landscaping, Climate Action Plan components, Designed Outdoor Recreation Area and public input. Ms. Monson noted that staff has received input from a representative of LIV Apartments, the apartment complex directly to the north. Concerns include landscaping, location and height of the access C driveway and retaining wall, and stormwater. Commissioner Peilen asked if the outdoor plaza area was a public space. Ms. Monson responded that it is a publicly accessible space. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 2 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes of May 2, 2018 Commissioner Peilen asked about traffic patterns at Monterey and Park Commons Drive. Matt Pacyna, SRF traffic consultant, discussed current conditions. Commissioner Peilen and Jack Sullivan, Engineering Project Manager, spoke about the proposed roundabout design at Monterey and the Rec Center. Commissioner Peilen asked about the location of the proposed U turn. Mr. Sullivan showed and spoke about the location of U turn at Monterey and Excelsior Blvd. Commissioner Kanne asked if there would be physical barriers preventing left turns at the right in/right out access point driveway. Mr. Sullivan said physical barriers are proposed. Commissioner Carper asked about restaurant location and walkway to the patio. Dean Dovolis, DJR Architecture, indicated the location of the wrap around patio design and the plaza. Commissioner Carper thanked the developer for including infrastructure for charging stations. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about need for additional parking with outdoor seating. She stated there are existing Excelsior Blvd. restaurants whose patrons park in neighborhoods. Ms. Monson responded that the parking study indicated there is adequate parking to serve a 4,000 sq. ft. restaurant. She said the parking study shows even at peak time there is still additional capacity for restaurant parking. Sean Walther, Parking and Zoning Supervisor, explained the formula used in zoning code for parking and outdoor seating. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she loves the building but everything depends upon the traffic impact. She commented that the new plan has more daily trips than the previous proposal. She said the City Council voted down the previous proposal. Mr. Pacyna explained from a total site trips perspective it is less than what was previously proposed. He stated that the primary difference is the fact that when the data was collected previously the former uses were still active so there was a credit applied for those current uses. With the latest traffic count update those businesses were no longer active and the credit was not applied, which results in the reported net new system trips. He referenced where that information could be found in the traffic study. Mr. Dovolis, architect, gave a presentation on the development. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 3 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes of May 2, 2018 Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about Access B and the amount of traffic exiting from ramp. Mr. Pacyna said there would be approximately 10-15 peak hour vehicles making a right turn to go north on Excelsior Blvd. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the proposed U turn would double the amount of traffic on that stretch of Monterey. Mr. Pacyna said that U-turns had been accounted for in the traffic analysis. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. Paul Jennings, 3925 Joppa Ave. S., spoke about the choke point at Excelsior and Monterey. He said the only way he can get out of his neighborhood is at Wooddale or Excelsior/Monterey. He spoke about parking at Trader Joe’s complicating the choke point problem. He said it doesn’t make sense to him to grade traffic. He said it is up to the applicant to design the access points. Mr. Jennings said traffic questions need to be addressed with anything that is built on that corner. Patti Carlson, 3801 Inglewood Ave. S., said the building has a lot of great ideas but she is concerned about traffic. Monterey is her family’s single primary route to multiple destinations. She spoke about her concern of the change to a single lane being the primary route for emergency vehicles. She spoke about bike lanes and bus stops in addition to one lane. She said she is able to walk for many of her errands and she is concerned about roundabout design and pedestrian safety. She said she thought the proposed changes to Monterey road design are dangerous, elaborate and expensive. Janet Grimes, 4530 Park Commons Dr. #309, said she lives above Trader Joe’s parking lot. She spoke about accidents she has seen at Monterey and Park Commons Dr. She said to create more driveways on to Monterey is insane. She commented that if she does not leave her parking lot by 3 p.m. she is not able to leave the lot. She spoke about the number of pedestrians going to the bank, stores, post office and apartment buildings currently encountering heavy traffic. Ms. Grimes said she likes the proposed building design but doesn’t feel a roundabout is the solution to Park Commons Dr. and Monterey. Jonathan Saliterman, representing LIV Apartments, 4505 W. 36th ½ St., provided background on LIV Apartments. He said the Bridgewater design is good but it is a strange site with incongruent pieces which neglect the existence of the LIV complex. Access C is currently on city-owned property. The land is being contributed to the development so it can be a driveway with a one foot setback and built on a substantial graded wall. He said it isn’t a normal driveway. He said he is concerned about water retainage with the new development. LIV doesn’t have any drainage naturally. Mr. Saliterman said as neighbors LIV should have been incorporated into the design of Access C. He said traffic concerns of neighbors are legitimate. Yvette LaCroix, building manager, LIV Apartments, 4505 W. 36 1/2 St., stated that LIV Apartments has been in the neighborhood since 1968. Additional traffic, Access C, City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 4 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes of May 2, 2018 landscaping, and setback are concerns. She added there is no consideration for neighbors to enjoy their right to quiet. Ms. LaCroix said there is also concern about construction hours and measures to protect residents. Alberto Bertomeu, property owner of several properties on Excelsior Blvd., said the traffic issues are a reality in urban areas. He said signage can be improved and there should be greater enforcement of traffic rules. He stated that the development is being wrongly mixed up with traffic further west on Excelsior Blvd. Mr. Bertomeu stated the community is missing the opportunity to discuss the project and bring employment to St. Louis Park. He commented that weekend traffic will be lighter than work week traffic which is a plus for neighborhoods. No one is mentioning weekend traffic. Mr. Bertomeu said the traffic flow needs to be enforced as well as enforcing respectful driving in the neighborhoods. As no one else was present wishing to speak and the Chair closed the public hearing. Chair Robertson asked staff to address setback concerns from LIV Apartments. Ms. Monson said the site is zoned C-2 and the zoning ordinance allows a driveway to be built there. It is not an accessory structure. It is an engineered retaining wall with a driveway on top. She spoke about wall requirements and noted the PUD creates the height and setback regulations for the site. Mr. Walther added Access C was designed in that location to locate the driveway farther north away from Excelsior/Monterey and Access B. Commissioner Tatalovich asked about LIV Apts. and water retainage. Ms. Monson said the Water Resource Manager has explained to LIV Apartments how the stormwater works in that area. Currently where LIV property abuts the EDA property is at one of the low points of the site so the surface water is coming from LIV Apts and the EDA property and there is likely pooling currently in that area. There are no existing stormwater mitigations on the EDA site. She stated that the Bridgewater development has multiple areas for capturing and managing stormwater, including the plaza and Access A, which would improve the stormwater conditions in the area. Commissioner Peilen said the comments were excellent. She said the building is beautiful. She said there are pedestrian and traffic issues everywhere in the metro area. She stated she is concerned about the proposed U turn. She spoke about congestion with bike lanes. Overall she said she feels the project is lovely and worthy of the commission’s consideration. Commissioner Carper said the roundabout concerns stand apart from the Bridgewater development. Chair Robertson said the project is well designed and thoughtful. He commented that it’s been a long time since an office use has come to the city which is very exciting. Traffic issues are real but separate from the project. He said he felt the future road improvements will improve traffic flow. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 5 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes of May 2, 2018 Commissioner Kanne said she agreed with traffic concerns. She stated she encounters traffic issues everywhere in the metro area. She said the development is ultimately an improvement, good for livability and property values. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she likes the building but is concerned about traffic issues on Excelsior Blvd. She stated she is concerned about the number of driveways on Monterey. She said this part of St. Louis Park is different from other communities in that it doesn’t have a grid road design. Commissioner Peilen made a motion recommending approval of the preliminary and final plat, and preliminary and final Planned Unit Development subject to staff recommendations. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-1 (Johnston-Madison no). 4. Other Business 5. Communications 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 p.m. A study session followed. STUDY SESSION The study session began at 7:40 p.m. 1. Comprehensive Plan – Public Health and Safety a. Police Services b. Fire Services c. Public Health Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner, introduced the study topic. She said City Organization, Inspections Services and Plan-by-Neighborhood sections of the plan would also be discussed; as well as an update on the Housing Goals and Strategies section. Mike Harcey, Police Chief, and Steve Koering, Fire Chief, gave presentations regarding their department services, policies and strategies. A question and answer session followed. Ms. McMonigal spoke about city-wide department connections with both departments. Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections, discussed the department philosophy, services, policies and strategies. Ms. McMonigal distributed copies of the Housing Goals and Strategies section which has been refined. She spoke about clarifications made to density provisions on the land use page. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 6 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes of May 2, 2018 Ms. McMonigal discussed plans for additional Comp Plan community outreach through a survey that will be available soon. She said the survey will include questions on accessory dwelling units and 2-family dwelling units in low density residential areas. Commissioner Robertson asked about preserving and creating affordable commercial space. Mr. Walther and Ms. McMonigal spoke about how that will be addressed in the economic development section of the Comp Plan. Ms. McMonigal spoke about other survey questions being considered related to land use. Mr. Walther said a map element will be part of the survey design. The survey will start around May 15 and run 4-5 weeks. Commissioner Robertson asked about including a survey question on relaxation of setbacks. Commissioner Peilen noted that the Fire Dept. strategy on Revenue Enhancement should state this is related to health and safety programs. Ms. McMonigal presented a mock-up of the Plan by Neighborhood section. Ms. McMonigal reviewed the upcoming City Council and Planning Commission schedule regarding Comp Plan. There was a conversation about senior services in the city. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Action agenda item: 5a Executive summary Title: Approve appointment of youth representative to planning commission Recommended action: Motion to appoint Alanna Franklin to the planning commission for the current term ending August 31, 2018. Policy consideration: Not applicable. Summary: The city received an application from Alanna Franklin to serve as a youth member on the Planning Commission. Ms. Franklin has interests in architecture, city planning, design and environmental sciences. Youth members are appointed to one-year terms, beginning August 31 of each year. There is currently one vacancy on the planning commission. If appointed, Ms. Franklin will fill the vacant position and serve the rest of the current term which ends August 31, 2018. Following appointment by council, Ms. Franklin will go through an orientation program with the staff liaison prior to the start of her service. Financial or budget considerations: None Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: None Prepared by: Maria Carrillo Perez, Management Assistant Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City council Meeting date: June 18, 2018 Action agenda item: 8a Executive summary Title: Comprehensive plan – approve releasing draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan for adjacent community review Recommended action: Motion to approve sending out the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the required 6-month adjacent community review. Policy consideration: Is the draft St. Louis Park 2040 Comprehensive Plan in a form sufficient for adjacent community review? Summary: Please find St. Louis Park Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan at: https://www.stlouispark.org/home/showdocument?id=10239 The St. Louis Park Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan is an update to the city’s current 2030 Plan. Several sections are revised and updated, and some sections are new. The plan is intended to meet State Law requirements for metro area cities, and in addition St. Louis Park has added areas to the plan to show additional future directions. The attached outline summarizes each section, and shows which sections are required. Please note this iteration is a draft; photos, quotes and icons will be added and additional editing will take place over the coming months. State law requires communities to submit the draft plan to surrounding communities and jurisdictions for a 6-month review period. The intent is to have this review completed by the end of the year and the 6-month period will begin around July 1st. Following the six months, the city will submit the plan to the Metropolitan Council for review and determination of compliance with metro-wide systems. Community survey: A community on-line survey of some proposed items in the Comprehensive Plan began on May 14th and will continue until June 20th. It is located at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2040-comp-plan-survey Next steps: Analysis of the input from the community survey may result in additional discussion by the planning commission and city council over the coming months on any policy level items. In September, the Plan will be presented to the Metropolitan Council for an informal review, with final action on the plan by the planning commission and city council toward the end of 2018. Financial or budget considerations: The funding for the plan has been allocated in the 2017 and 2018 community development budgets. Strategic priority consideration: All of the Strategic Priorities are considered in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Supporting documents: 2040 Comprehensive Plan outline with descriptions Prepared by: Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy Comm. Dev. Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 2 Title: Comprehensive plan – approve releasing draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan for adjacent community review St. Louis Park 2040 Comprehensive Plan Outline CHAPTER Req’d DESCRIPTION Comprehensive Planning Explains basis for plan Vision 3.0 St. Louis Park Strategic Directions and Key Themes Vision provides guidance for the city’s specific plans. The strategic priorities and key themes have been developed from vision and all of the important directions the city is working on. Community Background A.Planning Context B.Demographics X Historical background of planning and development of the community. City’s demographic projections from Met Council and other pieces of data important to the plan. Racial Equity Description of the city’s past, current and future efforts related to race and equity. Environmental Stewardship A.Climate and Energy Solar only The Climate Action Plan is summarized and in this section, as well as numerous other programs and plans the city is working on. A section on solar resources is required. B.Parks, Open Space and Natural Resources X Shows the city’s park system and facilities, programs, and natural resources. Addresses park design standards, improvements and maintenance and planning for the future. C.Water Resources 1.Water System X A summary of the Water Supply Plan being completed is included. It shows detailed information on volume and capacities and plans for future improvements. Metropolitan Council and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources set out specific requirements for these plans. 2.Sanitary Sewer X Met Council owns and operates the sewer systems in the Twin Cities Metro Area and the city owns and operates the local system that feeds into it. Growth projections are shown for sanitary sewer needs. Attention to preventing and reducing excessive inflow to the systems is also required. 3.Surface Water X A summary of the Surface Water Management Plan is included. The detailed plan will meet rules by various watershed and state agencies. The final plan will be completed in fall of 2018, as required by these agencies. D.Solid Waste X The city has made important improvements and strides in solid waste programs and is continuing its efforts into the future. These are described. Other utilities X This chapter notes various utility providers in the city and discusses the extension of fiber in the city. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 3 Title: Comprehensive plan – approve releasing draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan for adjacent community review A Livable Community A. Land Use Plan X Sets out land use plan for the future by showing existing and future land use categories descriptions and maps. Land uses on map show the types of uses allowed and density ranges. B. Economic and Redevelopment X Provides guidance for future economic development and redevelopment in city. Includes employment, economic development assistance and redevelopment objectives. C. Housing Plan X Provides a description of housing in the community, including a variety of statistics. Describes housing programs by City and Housing Authority. Sets out future housing goals and direction for the city. D. Historic Resources X Describes historic preservation in the community and the St. Louis Park Historical Society and its work. E. Plan By Neighborhood X Looks at each neighborhood individually, showing statistics and reflecting the desires of the local residents from the Neighborhood Planning Workshops Mobility X Pedestrians and Bicycles X Analyzes pedestrian and bike networks and recommends improvements. Transit X Describes bus and light rail transit systems and city’s work with Metro Transit on services. Highways and Streets X Describes the roadway system, predicts future traffic volumes and areas of future congestion, and recommends roadway improvements. Freight X Describes freight rail routes in city and issues related to rail routes. Aviation X Describes MSP airport impacts on the city, and required Federal Aviation requirements for building and noise mitigation. Community Health and Safety A. Community Health Public health has become more important to the city and is being addressed on a number of fronts. B. Schools and Youth Summarizes St. Louis Park schools and how the city and other organizations support youth in the community. C. Police Services The Police Department employs Community Policing, along with goals and strategies for the future. D. Fire Services Fire services are described, along with looking at ways to improve health services in the community. E. Inspection Services The Inspections Department covers many areas of public safety. They are described here. City council meeting of June 18, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 4 Title: Comprehensive plan – approve releasing draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan for adjacent community review Implementation of the Plan X Specific steps for implementing the Comprehensive Plan will be listed and described. APPENDICES: Water Supply Plan, Surface Water Management Plan, I & I Study, Climate Action Plan These plans will be referred to and available with the Comprehensive Plan.