HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003 [07] Jul 02 {Book 28}
. www.cityofstjoseph.com ityofSt. Joseph
St. Joseph City Council
July 2,2003
25 College Avenue North 7:00 PM
PO Box 668
St. Joseph, MN 56374
(320) 363-7201
Fax: (320) 363-0342 1. 7:00 PM - Call to Order
ADMINISTRATOR 2. Approve Agenda
Judy Weyrens
3. Consent Agenda
MAYOR a. Minutes - Requested Action:
Larry J. Hosch b. Bills Payable - Requested Action: Approve Check Numbers 32965 - 33008
c. Assessor Appointment - Requested Action: Appoint Ollie Lesnick as Assessor
COUNCILORS for tax year 2004.
Alan Rassier
Ross Rieke 4. 7:05 PM - Public Comments to the Agenda
Gary Utsch
Dale Wick 5. 7:07 PM - Monte Eastvold, 2003 Proposed Bond Issue
6. 7:20 PM - City Engineer Reports
a. Award Bid - Test Well
. b. Liberty Pointe - Award of Bid
c. Useful life of a road
d. Other Matters
7. 7:30_ PM - Amendment to Ordinance 71, Liquor Licensing and Hours of Operation
8. Department Head Reports
9. Mayor Reports
10. Council Reports
11. Administrator Reports
a. Fireworks Ordinance
b. Budget Meeting
12. Adjourn
.
Notes to the CounciL..................... ·
Kalkman Rental License As some of you are aware, the Interim Use Permit for 209 East
Minnesota Street will be issued based on the positive vote at the last
meeting. The Friday following the Council meeting, I discussed the
matter with Sue Dege and while she initially concurred that a vote of the
full City Council, not just those present, requires a 4 - I vote to pass.
Upon researching it further, she stated that the while she believes that
was the intent of the language in the Ordinance, it should be written that
it requires a 4/5 vote of the Council. Therefore, the vote passes and the
rental unit will be allowed.
Rental Density The Planning Commission discussed the density of rental homes in an
RI zoning district and opted to leave the Ordinance as it is currently
written and give the Interim Use Permit the change to pass. As
information I have included in your packet the research from the City of
St. Paul as information only.
Assessor Part of the consent agenda includes the appointment of the Assessor. I
have contacted Steams County and adjoining Cities to see if their was an
opportunity for collaboration. Sauk Rapids is in the process of hiring
Benton County as it will be more cost effective than hiring a staff person. ·
In checking with Steams County they indicated they would charge a
similar rate to Ollie and it would be based upon the amount of work that
is required.-
·
June 19, 2003
Draft
Page 10f9
. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session
on Thursday, June 19, 2003 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall.
City Council Members Present: Mayor Larry Hosch. Councilors Ross Rieke, Dale Wick, Gary Utsch, and
AI Rassier. City Administrator Judy Weyrens.
City Representatives Present: Fire Chief Dave Theisen, Wastewater Operator Jim Marthaler
Others Present: Roger Beuning, Barb Beuning, Jerry Hettwer, Ken Twit, Joyce Stock, Dick Stock, Karen
Kalkman, Sue Meers, Nef Pfannenstein, AI Maleska, Bob Pfannenstein, Jeannette Pfannenstein
Approve Aqenda: Utsch made a motion to approve the agenda with the following changes:
1. Removal of the approval of the May minutes.
2. Remove consent agenda item 3(d), North Central Truck Accessories Development
Agreement, as Councilor Wick stated he has a conflict of interest regarding that
matter.
The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously.
Consent Aqenda: Wick made a motion to approve consent agenda as presented; seconded by
Rieke and passed unanimously.
a. Removed.
b. Bills Payable - Approved Check Numbers 32902 - 32964
c. Liquor License Renewal- Authorized the Mayor and Administrator to execute the 2003-2004
Intoxicating Liquor Licenses.
d. Removed.
e. Development Agreement - Authorized the Mayor and Administrator to execute a Development
Agreement between the City of St. Joseph and BTL for the construction of a 16,000 square foot
. facility in the St. Joseph Business Park.
f. Public Works Facility - Change Order: Approved change Order #9 adding wainscoting to the east
and west of the facility.
g. Preliminary/Final Plat Buettner Plat 3: Approved the Preliminary and Final Plat for Buettner
Business Park 3 contingent upon the approval of the City Engineer.
h. Easement Encroachment: Authorized the Administrator to execute the permit to allow a fence
across an easement for property located at 209 - 9th A venue SE contingent upon the installation of
an eight (8) foot gate.
i. Premise Gambling License: Approved the Premise Gambling Applications for the St. Joseph
Jaycees to conduct lawful gambling at Sa/'s Bar & Grill, St. Joe Amoco Liquor and JM Speedstop.
j. Ordinance 36 Repeal and re-enact. Authorized the Mayor and Administrator to execute an
amendment repealing Ordinance 36 and reenacting the same to allow the City to receive PEG fees
and to re-establish the Cable Franchises.
Development Aqreement. North Central Truck Accessories: Rassier made a motion to authorize the
Mayor and Administrator to execute a Development Agreement between the City of 51. Joseph and
North Central Truck Accessories for the construction of a 30,000 square foot facility in the 51.
Joseph Business Park. The motion was seconded by Utsch.
Ayes: Hosch, Rassier, Utsch, Rieke
Nays: None Abstain: Wick Motion Carried: 4:0:1
Public Comments: No one wished to speak.
Residents of Ash Street. discussion on proposed Interim Use Permit: Joyce Stock of 220 Ash Street East,
approached the City Council as a representative of concerned citizens who want to keep their
neighborhood comfortable and family friendly. Stock stated that Ash Street is becoming a neighborhood
of rental units and long term residents are feeling "pushed out" of their homes. It appears that everytime
- a home in the Ash Street area is placed on the market, it is converted to rental property.
-
June 19, 2003
Draft
Page 2 of 9
Stock clarified that in her opinion property that is converted to rental units do not receive the same care .
as a home that is not rental. The recent City clean up day is a good example of the difference between a
rental home and one that is not. The pickup day was scheduled for May 29, 2003 and the rental property
had mattress, furniture and miscellaneous garbage at the curb three weeks prior to the scheduled pickup.
Stock stated that non-rental property did not follow the same practice and the City should require
landlords to keep their garbage inside a garage until the next scheduled pickup. Stock encouraged the
Council to deny the Interim Use Permit that is before the Council at this meeting and continue to work
towards saving the integrity of the neighborhoods.
Jeannette Pfannenstein of 208 Ash Street East, approached the City Council speaking in opposition of
the Interim Use Permit proposed at 209 East MN Street. The Interim Use Permit will allow an owner
occupied rental unit in a Residential Zoning District. Pfannenstein stated that she owns property directly
behind 209 Minnesota Street East. She stated that she attended the Planning Commission meeting on
June 2, 2003 and did not feel the residents were afforded the same opportunity to speak at the meeting
as the petitioner. Pfannenstein stated she had asked the Planning Commission Chair if her questions
would be responded to and his response was "if I can remember them all". However, when Mr. Kalkman
approached the Planning Commission, he was able to give his opinion and received answers. She stated
it was her understanding that a public hearing is to listen to both sides of an issue.
Pfannenstein stated that it is her understanding that John Kalkman and his daughter Kathryn are the
owners of the property in question. Pfannenstein questioned if the Council has considered what happens
in the event that one of the property owners become deceased, does the Interim Use Permit continue or
cease. She further questioned if the matter has to be reconsidered, will the Planning Commission
conduct another hearing and notify the owners?
Utsch clarified that as long as the property is owner occupied, regardless if one of the owners is
deceased, the Interim Use Permit would be valid. Utsch stated it is his opinion that the implementation of
Interim Use Permits for owner occupied rental units, provides the City a greater opportunity to control .
unacceptable behaviors. Interim Use Permits allow the City to review the license each year and establish
an expiration date for the permit. The former method of issuing a Special Use Permit allowed the
property to continue indefinitely as a rental unit.
Pfannenstein stated that at the public hearing before the Planning Commission, Commissioner Deutz
stated that Kathyrn Kalkman is a young adult trying to establish herself. Pfannenstein stated it is her
opinion that Kalkman is pursuing the Interim Use Permit to reduce living costs while attending the College
of St. Benedict. As all freshman and sophomores are required to live on campus unless the College
relieves the requirement, the City should have required a written release from the College before
conducting a public hearing.
Pfannenstein expressed frustration with the actions of the Planning Commission. The Commission was
presented with a petition signed by 41 property owners expressing opposition to the proposed Interim
Use Permit and it did not appear to be considered by the Planning Commission. Pfannenstein clarified
that the property owners signing the petition are not against student housing, rather the conversion of
residential neighborhoods into rental districts. In her opinion the issuance of the Interim Use Permit will
eventually devalue the existing housing stock. Pfannenstein encouraged the Council to protect the
downtown residential districts.
Pfannenstein questioned what happened to the recommendations of the former housing committee that
reviewed the absorption and conversion of single family homes. A moratorium was placed on rental
licenses during the study and it was her understanding that when the moratorium was lifted rental units
would not longer be allowed in a Residential Zoning District. Pfannenstein stated that she along with the
residents that signed the petition do not understand how the City Council could change the Ordinance
without notifying the residents. She further stated that since rental licensure and allowance of such is a
major concern, the City should send a mailed notice to all the residents of St. Joseph.
-
-
June 19, 2003
Draft
Page 3 of 9 .
. Hosch clarified that the members who are currently on the City Council, were not members at the time the
moratorium was rescinded. Hosch clarified that the City Council did place a moratorium on rental
licenses three years ago so that a committee could review how to preserve the older housing stock and
keep the integrity of the neighborhood. The moratorium resulted in the Ordinance being amended to only
allow owner occupied rental in R1 Zoning Districts and require a special use permit for the issuance of
such. During the moratorium the Council did grant an Interim Use Permit to allow a home on Ash Street
to be rented while the property owner was in a nursing home. The Interim Use Permit was issued for
specific tenants and ceases when they move out.
Rassier stated that he was on the City Council when the moratorium was in place and concurred the
reason was to review the process for securing a rental license and at the same time try to establish an
Ordinance that would protect the integrity of the neighborhoods. With regard to the recent Ordinance
change, Rassier stated that in his opinion the new Ordinance further protects the neighborhoods and the
residents need to give the Ordinance a chance before criticizing the provisions. Before the new
Ordinance was adopted a public hearing notice was published in the St. Joseph Newsleader and a copy
of the proposed Ordinancewas available for review in the City Offices.
Pfannenstein quoted a reading from an editorial in the St. Cloud Times, "If people think their
neighborhoods have a distinct character, they had better define it now and be ready to fight like hell to
preserve it. A home is not only a place you can choose to leave, but is also something that can be take
from you and utterly changed when you are not paying attention." Pfannenstein feels the neighborhood
she resides in are paying attention.
Roger Beuning of 120 Minnesota Sf. E., approached the City Council objecting to the proposed Interim
Use Permit. Beuning stated that if the Council approves the request before them at this meeting
precedence will be set and the Council will have no alternative but to approve each request. Beuning
further stated that it is his opinion that the Ordinance should prohibit rental units in the residential
. neighborhoods as it is beginning to deteriorate the neighborhoods. Beuning stated that he has lived in St.
Joseph since 1963 but due to the over-saturation of rental units in the residential districts he will be forced
to sell his home, moving to another City.
John Kalkman. Interim Use Permit - Rental in R-1. 209 Minnesota Street East: Weyrens reported the
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on June 2, 2003 for the issuance of an Interim Use
Permit that would allow an owner occupied rental unit at 209 Minnesota Street East. John Kalkman along
with his daughter Kathryn Kalkman are listed as the property owners, validating that the property will be
owner occupied. Weyrens stated that proof of ownership was provided at the public hearing on June 2,
2003.
The Planning Commission recommended the Council approve an Interim Use Permit to John and Kathryn
Kalkman to allow an owner occupied rental in a Residential Zoning District. The recommendation for
approval included the following contingencies:
1, The rental license will be reviewed by the Planning Commission in July of 2004 at which time any
violations will be discussed and continuance of the renta' license will be determined.
2. The annual rental license application must provide proof of ownership to verify that the rental
license is issued to a property owning living at the same premise.
3. The Interim Use Permit will expire on August 14, 2006.
Weyrens stated that since the public hearing, the College of St. Benedict has forwarded a letter
discussing the release of Kathryn from the housing requirement that all freshman and sophomores live on
campus. The release is only granted if the City Council approves the Interim Use Permit. As of this date,
Kathryn has not been released. At the public hearing the Planning Commission was presented with a
petition of 41 property owners surrounding the subject property all of whom objected to the issuance of
the Interim Use Permit.
. Hosch stated he believes that if someone were to own a home, he/she should be allowed to rent a portion
of the home, as they have a vested interest in the property and the community. Hosch stated that he has
June 19, 2003
Draft
Page 4 of 9
been a supporter of the Ordinance allowing owner occupied rental in residential zoning districts, but has ·
concerns as to how the application before the Council was submitted. He stated that proof of ownership
was not presented until June 2, 2003 and questioned why, if Kalkman was aware of the Ordinance
requirements, was the daughter not listed on the purchase agreement when the application for Interim
Use was submitted.
In addition to Kathryn not being listed on the purchase agreement, Hosch questioned the letter from the
College of St. Benedict. Hosch stated that it was his understanding that Kalkman represented at the
public hearing that Kathryn had been released from the housing requirement, when in reality she has not.
Based on the application received for the Interim Use Permit and the letter from the College of St.
Benedict, Hosch questioned if the intent of the Ordinance has been met or manipulated. Wick concurred
with Hosch and questioned the process used by Kalkman and stated it is his opinion that the intent of the
Ordinance has not been met.
John Kalkman of 209 Ash Street East, approached the City Council and clarified that Kathryn was not
involved in the original purchase of the property but has since been listed as owner by quit claim deed.
Karen Kalkman of 209 Ash Street East, approached the City Council on behalf of her daughter Kathryn.
She stated that Kathryn was unable to sign the purchase agreement as she was studying abroad when
the property was purchased. The bank recommended that the property be placed in John's name alone
or John and herself until a time when the property could be quit claim deeded to Kathryn.
Weyrens clarified that the original purchase agreement presented the City along with the application was
dated April 18, 2003 and did not bear Kathryn's name. The City Offices received several amendments,
all which were dated April 18th, with the final submittal including Kathryn's name but a signature page was
not included. It was shortly before the public hearing that Kalkman indicated that his daughter was
studying abroad and would not be available to sign the purchase agreement. Weyrens stated that he did
agree to quit claim the property to Kathryn, which has been completed. ·
Karen Kalkman stated she has not viewed the letter the City received from the College of St. Benedict
and was not aware they submitted written testimony. Sl1e further stated they had notified the College of
their intent to purchase the property and that Kathryn had attended a hearing to consider her request to
be relieved from the housing requirement. The College had informed her that she would be released and
that if something were to happen she would be provided College housing.
Rieke questioned if there was discussion that he was not aware of, as to what saturation level is there in
a neighborhood and how does the City define a neighborhood in that regard. Hosch stated the Planning
Commission will be establishing density guidelines for rentals within a neighborhood at an upcoming
meeting and will forward a recommendation to the City Council.
Rassier stated that he is of the opinion that there should not be any additional rental units in R-1 Zoning
Districts. However, with the economy as it is today, that there are people who do need to rent a portion of
their home to make it affordable.
Rassier made a motion to issue an Interim Use Permit to John and Kathryn Kalkman of 209
Minnesota Street East, allowing an owner occupied rental unit at said address. Issuance is
contingent upon the following:
1. The rental license will be reviewed by the Planning Commission in July of 2004and
each subsequent year thereafter that a rental license application is submitted, at
which time any violations will be discussed and continuance of the rental license
will be determined.
2. The annual rental license application must include proof of ownership to verify that
the rental license is issued to a property owning living at the same premise.
3. The Interim Use Permit will expire on August 14, 2006.
·
The motion was seconded by Utsch.
June 19, 2003
Draft
Page 5 of 9
- Ayes: Rassier, Utsch, Rieke
Nays: Hosch, Wick Motion Carried: 3:2:0
Discussion: Weyrens clarified that thèCity Ordinance requires a full majority of the entire Council,
not just those present. Therefore, approval would require a minimum vote of 4 ayes. Kalkman
questioned if there is an appeal process or if he can re-apply for the Interim Use Permit.· Kalkman
was instructed to contact Weyrens and she will provide the requested information.
The Council recessed at 7:35 PM, reconvening at 7:45 PM.
Linda Schyma. Special Use Permit - Allow a rental in a General Business Zoninq District: Weyrens
reported the Planning Commission initially considered a request by Linda Schyma for a Special Use
Permit and Variance to allow a rental unit in a General Business Zoning District. The variance would
have allowed parking for the rental unit to be in excess of 350 feet of the property. The Planning
Commission recommended the Council deny the request and informed Schyma that if parking could be
secured within 350 feet of the property they would reconsider her request.
Since the May 5, 2003 public hearing, Schyma has received a letter of intent whereby the St. Joseph
Parish would permit seven parking spaces in their parking lot for the rental unit. Weyrens stated that she
has discussed the proposed parking with the Parish Administrator and she stated that the Parish Council
has not considered the matter as the property owner for Papa Guiseppe has not returned a contract for
the parking. When the contract is submitted the Parish Council will review the request and make a final
determination.
Rieke made a motion to approve theSpecial Use Permit request of Linda Schyma issuing a
Special Use Permit allowing a rental unit in a General Business Zoning District for property
located at 11 College Avenue North. Issuance is contingent upon the following:
e- 1. A copy of the contract for parking must be provided to the City annually with the
license application. The contract must coincide with the rental license period and if
the parking ceases, the Special Use Permit shall become null and void.
2. The parking spaces must be designated for the exclusive use of the rental unit and
must be available 24/7.
3. The rental license must meet all applicable building and fire codes. If the codes are
not meet the license will not be issued or will be suspended at the time when a
violation occurs.
The motion was seconded by Hosch and passed unanimously.
Nancy Scott. Buildinq Official. Plat Review Fee: Building Official Nancy Scott presented the Council with
information regarding adoption of thè new Uniform Building Code. As stated at the May 15 Council
meeting, the Building Code requires that all building permits include a fee for plan review. Scott stated
that the language of the new code is confusing. The old code states, "Said plan review fee shall be 65%
of the building permit fee" and the new code makes no specific reference to plan review fees other than
stating that multiple plans shall only be charged a plan review fee of 25%.
Scott requested the Council adopt a plan review fee for residential permits equal to 25% of the building
permit fee with a flat fee for decks, roofing, windows and siding. . She further reported that the permit fee
schedule would remain the same since the new code makes no specific dollar amount recommendations
for permit fees.
Utsch and Rassier stated that is was their understanding the building permit fee in place covers all fees
and compensation, including the plan review fee. Scott stated her job as Building Official is more than
issuing the a permit. As a Building Official she must review the plan for building code compliance,
complete all the required inspections, respond to all inquires regarding permits and she has liability for
. new homes for a period of ten (10) years. Scott further stated the plan review fee is treated differently
than the inspection fees, whereas the current fee structure is to cover the costs of the actual inspections,
the new fee would verify that the building meets the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances.
June 19, 2003
Draft
Page 6 of 9
Scott expressed concern with information Councilors received regarding a cost analysis on alternative ·
Building Inspection Services. First, Scott stated that she did not receive the information until shortly
before the meeting and in reviewing the information it appears to be inaccurate. Secondly Scott stated
that in February she informed the City that based on the high volume of building activity the City will need
to consider hiring a full time Building Official. Scott stated that she would assist the City with the transition
and completing an accurate cost analysis. Scott also questioned the statement on the information that
insinuated that bids were being received.
Weyrens stated that she had been asked by the Council to provide information as to what options are
available for Building Inspection Services. Weyrens stated that she is aware of three alternatives: 1)
Contract service on an as need basis; 2) Contract service staffing the office with regular hours (similar to
the services provided for Economic Development) and 3) Hiring a staff inspector. Weyrens stated that
information included in the packet is not for action at this time and was a response to a Council inquiry.
Requests for services have not been requested at this time as additional research is needed. Hosch and
Rieke clarified that the City is not unhappy with the services of Allspec, rather question at what time it is
fiscally responsible to hire a staff person.
Hosch cautioned the Council against trying to assume what fee is too much and what fee is not enough
without knowing the intricacy of Scott's position. Hosch further stated that the International Building Code
clearly states that a plan review fee must be collected and the Council needs to implement MN Statute.
He further stated that he is in favor of a plan review fee, but wants to make sure that the City is not
burdening themselves into a fee structure that is substantially higher than our neighboring cities. Rieke
stated he knows that a plan review fee will be adopted but is uncertain at this time what that fee should
be.
Hosch made a motion to amend Appendix A of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances to include a
plan review fee for all residential building permits. The plan review fee will be equal to 25%of the ·
Building Permit fee. Within the next 30 the plan review fee should be negotiated with the Building
Official, Nancy Scott, with a final recommendation forwarded to the City Council. The motion was
seconded by Wick.
Hosch amended his motion to the following: Hosch made a motion acknowledging that
the International Building Code requires that all building permits include a plan review fee.
At this time the City is not ready to determine the amount of the plan review fee and a
recommendation will be forwarded to the Council for the July 17, 2003 City Council
Meeting. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
Fire Chief Reports: Fire Chief Dave Theisen presented the Council with the six month activity report for
the period December 1,2002 through May 31,2003. As requested by the Council, the following table
illustrates the call summary for the current period along with a comparison to the prior year. Theisen
stated that since the call cost is derived from the number of responders for each call, the six month fire
contribution will vary.
2003 2002
Emergency Calls $12,980 $9,835
Drill hours 1170 @ 5.00 5,850 7,240
Chief's Salary 800 800
Assistant Chief's Salary 425 425
Secretary's Salary 150 150
Treasurer's Salary 290 290
Total $20,495 $18,740
City of St. Joseph Calls 55 61
St. Joseph Township Calls 46 48 ·
St. Wendel Township Calls 24 12
June 19, 2003
Draft
Page 7 of 9
· Mutual Aid Calls 1 1
Total Calls 126 122
Medical Calls 95 93
Fire Calls 31 29
Rassier made a motion to accept the Fire Report for the period December 1, 2002 through May 31,
2003 and authorizing the expenditure of $20,495. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed
unanimously.
Victor Aho. Request for Annexation. MorninQside Estates (CoUntv Road 121 ): Victor Aho, owner of Aha
Homes approached the Council requesting annexation for Morningside Estates. Aho stated that he
recently appeared before St. Joseph Township requesting detachment of Morningside Estates.
Morningside Estate is located adjacent to the St. Joseph Township Hall and contains 23 acres. Aho
presented the Council with three concept plans for single family development.
Weyrens stated that utility services area available to the property and St. Joseph Township has approved
the detachment request as the three criteria (petition, services are available and the property is
contiguous) have been satisfied. Weyrens clarified that the property owner has been notified that building
permits may be limited in the event the City infrastructure cannot accommodate growth and the petition
has been made aware of the affordable housing requirements.
Rassier made a motion to adopting Resolution 2003-_ Ordering annexation of Morningside
Estates as requested by Victor Aho. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed
unanimously.
James Schweqel. discussion on the 2nd Avenue NW Truck Route Desiqnation: James Schwegel
· approached the City Council requesting justification as to why the truck route has been moved from
County Road 2 (Minnesota Street) to 2n Avenue NW. Schwegel stated in his opinion designating 2nd
Avenue NW as a truck route is a safety hazard as the intersection radius at Minnesota Street/County
Road 2 -is not designed for truck traffic. Schwegel also questioned how the property owners on 2nd
Avenue NW are going to be compensated for the repairs that will be required due to the truck traffic.
Schwegel stated that if the City designates a truck route then they should be prepared to pay for street
repair and the abutting property owners should not be assessed.
Hosch stated that the City needs to provide a route for the trucks to gain access to 1-94 and County Road
2. The alternative truck route is Minnesota Street and Hosch stated that he cannot justify directin~ trucks
14 blocks down a residential street. When the City assessed the adjoining property owners on 2n
Avenue NW the City Council recognized the truck traffic and reduced the assessment of the overlay by
10%. Hosch further stated that the only good alternative at this time is to expedite the process of
redesigning the direction of County Road 2.
Rieke stated he sympathizes with Schwegel as his neighborhood provided the detour in 2002 when 2nd
Avenue NW was being overlayed. Rieke further stated that while some streets are designed and built as
commercial streets, homeowners are not penalized for living on such. Weyrens stated the Council
adopted an assessment policy whereby street assessments are based on the tax classification. Property
classified as homestead are assessed for the construction of a residential street while non-homestead
property is assessed for a commercial street.
Hosch stated he could advocate for establishing a reasonable expectation for the life expectancy of 2nd
Avenue NW. If the road were to deteriorate at a faster rate, the property owner should not be expected to
pay the full assessment rate. Rieke concurred with Hosch and requested that the City enforce the weight
restrictions of the City streets as posted.
·
June 19, 2003
Draft
Page 8 of 9
CITY ENGINEER REPORTS .
Water Main Extension - Elm Street East to 8th Avenue NE (Vet Clinic): Weyrens reported that Bettendorf
is requesting approval to ~repare construction plans and specifications to construct a 16-inch Water Main
from Elm Street East to 8 h Avenue NE. The purpose of the project is to continue the 16-inch water main
loop from 8th Avenue NE, west to the existing 12-inch water main line located near 1st Avenue NE. The
urgency of this project has escalated due to construction of the Lake Wobegon Trail and the storm water
piping for the apartment complex being developed by Mark Lambert. It would be beneficial to get the
water main in the ground before either of the aforementioned projects are completed.
The estimated project cost, construction and engineering, is $238,228. In addition to the construction and
engineering costs, the City will be required to obtain a permit from the State Rail Bank (SRB) as the
watermain will be installed in the MNDot railbed. The initial permit fee is $1,000 for the underground
utility crossing to Cedar Street East. In addition the City must sign a 20-year lease fee paying $2 per
lineal foot of the corridor that is used. The total permit fee is estimated at $7,250.
Weyrens stated that while the Trunk Sewer Fund has sufficient funds to pay for the water line extension, it
would drain the fund to zero and the City would have to rely on growth to pay for other utility line
extension charges and to provide the annual debt service payment for outstanding bond issues.
Therefore, Weyrens recommended the Council add the cost to the 2003 Bond Issue with the revenue
being contributed from the Trunk Sewer Fund.
Rieke made a motion authorizing the Engineer to prepare the plans and s~ecifications for the
extension of the 16" watermain, to complete the water system between 8t Avenue NE and Elm
Street East. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously.
Discussion: Wick questioned if the old Burlington Northern Railway will be paved at the same .
time the City is installing the watermain. Weyrens stated that the paving of the Wobegon Trail
between Avon and Sf. Joseph is scheduled to begin in July. The City will coordinate the
construction with MNDot as they control the permits required by the City.
Hosch emphasized that even though this is the most cost effective time to complete this project, if
the completion requires a contribution from the General Fund or levy, it cannot be completed.
The City is restricted by levy limits and he wants to assure that the reserves for the City remain
healthy.
DEPARTMENT HEAD REPORTS
Generator Conversion: Wastewater operator Jim Marthaler approached the Council to request
authorization to convert two generators from 208 volts to 240 volts. Marthaler stated that before the
reconstruction of the East Baker Lift Station, the existing generators provided alternative power in the
event of a power failure. The lift station could have been converted to accommodate 208 volts but the
cost to do so exceeded $ 17,000. Therefore, it seemed more economical to convert the generator at a
cost of $ 2,300. If the City would experience a power failure, the generator would only operate the lift
station for 1 or 2 hours. Marthaler requested the Council authorize the expenditure of $ 4,600 to convert
two generators to 240 volts.
Rassier made a motion authorizing the expenditure of $ 4,600 for the conversion of two
generators to 240 volts as requested. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed
unanimously.
.
June 19, 2003
Draft
Page 9 of 9
. MAYOR REPORTS
Stearns County Meetinq: Hosch stated that participated in a meeting with City staff and the Stearns
County Engineer. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss outstanding issues and included the
following:
1. County Road 2 bypass - The current Stearns County Highway Five Year Transportation
Plan does not include the County Road 2 bypass as the County does not have funding
for such. However, the Stearns County Engineer stated that the City can work with the
County to move this project to a funding level. Hosch stated that he will be pursuing this
matter and contacting the St. Cloud Area Planning Organization.
2. Northland Drive Signal Light - Hosch reported that the St. Cloud Area Planning
Organization and Stearns County Highway Department are in the process of preparing a
traffic analysis for the intersection of Northland Drive and County Road 75. Hosch stated
that once the analysis is completed a meeting will be established to discuss what options
for signalization are available.
3. County Road 121 - Hosch stated that the County is aware of the concerns of the City
regarding the sewer line installation and they are working with the general contractor to
resolve the problem.
Ordinance Amendments: Hosch requested the Planning Commission review the temporary Sign
Ordinance as it relates to real estate and leasing signs. At the recent EDA Meeting it was discussed that
leasing signs could only be displayed for 45 days and that may not be sufficient for a new building. Utsch
stated that he would forward the concern to the Planning Commission.
EDA Update: The St. Joseph EDA met recently and discussed the marketing agreement between the
. City of St. Joseph and Leo Buettner. The marketing agreement allows the EDA staff to sell property at an
established price. As the agreement expires in September 2003, the EDA is working with Leo Buettner to
determine if the agreement will be renewed. Buettner has requested a substantial increase in lot price
and the EDA will be meeting specially to discuss the extension of the agreement.
COUNCIL REPORTS
RIEKE - No Report
RASSIER
Leaque of Minnesota Cities Conference: Reported that he attended the League of Minnesota Cities
Conference in St. Cloud and it was very informative.
WICK - No Report
UTSCH
Planninq Commission Matters: Utsch reported that the Planning Commission will be meeting on June 23,
2003 to discuss proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Topics of discussion will include:
density requirements in R1 Zoning Districts, exterior requirements in R3 Zoning Districts, setback
requirements in R1 Zoning Districts and the Sign Ordinance.
Adjourn: Utsch made a motion to adjourn at 8:45 PM; seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
- Judy Weyrens
Administrator
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in special session
· on Tuesday June 10, 2003 at 7:00 AM in the St. Joseph City Hall.
Members Present: Acting Mayor Gary Utsch. Councilors Ross Rieke, Dale Wick, AI Rassier.
Administrator Judy Weyrens.
Others Present: City Engineer Amy Schaffer.
Northland Seven, Award Bid: City Engineer Amy Schaffer reported thåt bids were opened on June 6,
2003 for the utility/street improvements for Northland Plat Seven. The following is a summary of the bids
received:
RL Larson $ 331,545.76
J.R. Ferche 335,180.30
Kuechle Underground 350,578.15
Redstone Construction 352,292.52
Larson Excavating 368,806.27
Barbarosa & Sons 372,760.10
S.J. Louis Construction 382,394.71
C & L Excavating 385,549.00
Northdale Construction 426,925.85
Engineer's Estimate $ 382,134. 1 5
Schaffer stated that the bids have been reviewed and the lowest responsible bidder is RL Larson and she
recommends the City Council award the bid as submitted.
Rieke made a motion accepting the low bid of R.L. Larson in the amount of $ 331,545.76 for the
· improvements for Northland Plat Seven. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed
unanimously.
Adiourn:- The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 7:05 AM
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
·
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH 06/27/03 10:.18 AM
Page 1
Bills Payable
.
Check # Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ
032965 AFSCME COUNCIL 65 dues, june $263.70 101
032966 BORGERT PRODUCTS, INC/SKN paving stone $1,441.11 232 45126 530
032966 BORGERT PRODUCTS, INC/SKN paving stone $1 ,436.64 232 45126 530
032966 BORGERT PRODUCTS, INC/SKN paving stone $1,435.52 232 45126 530
032966 BORGERT PRODUCTS, INC/SKN paving stone-return -$19.17 232 45126 530
032966 BORGERT PRODUCTS, INC/SKN paving stone-return -$182.12 232 45126 530
032966 BORGERT PRODUCTS, INC/SKN paving stone-return -$432.89 232 45126 530
032967 C & L EXCAVATING, INC repair leaking water service-college ave N $1,157.50 601 49430 220
032968 CELLULAR 2000 cell phone $1.41 105 42250 321
032969 EVERGREEN EQUIPMENT, INC repair window on trade-in $229.49 490 45202 580
032970 GANDER MOUNTAIN gun repair $120.99 101 42120 220
032971 HACH COMPANY fluoride reagent, spadns $161.25 601 49420 220
032972 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GRO tests $109.00 602 49480 312
032972 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GRO hydrofluosilicic acid $386.06 601 49420 210
032972 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GRO tests $29.00 601 49420 312
032973 HEARTLAND LANDSCAPING, INC install paving stones-beautification $11,850.00 232 45126 530
032974 HElM, GERALD rent, july $134.00 101 43120 410
032974 HElM, GERALD rent, july $133.00 601 49440 410
032974 HElM, GERALD rent, july $133.00 602 49490 410
032975 HOMELAND PROTECTION PROF 1 year subscription $34.95 101 42120 433
032976 HONER PUMPING install sewer pipe $170.00 602 49480 220
032977 KREBSBACH ENTERPRISES gas $8.18 101 42152 210
. LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVIC dues, june $175.00 101
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES annual conference-Larry Hosch $295.00 101 41310 331
o 9 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES annual conference-Dale Wick $295.00 101 41110 331
032979 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES annual conference-Gary Utsch $295.00 101 41110 331
032979 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES annual conference-AI Rassier $295.00 - 101 41110 331
032979 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES annual conference-Ross Rieke· $295.00 101 41110 331
032980 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEAL water connection fee $1,318.00 601 49440 444
032981 MINNESOTA ELEVATOR, INC service, june $69.62 101 41942 220
032982 OFFICE DEPOT binder, correction tape $14.67 601 49440 200
032983 SCHWEGEL'S TELEPHONE SERVICE added police extensions $426.53 490 41430 570
032984 SEH general engineering services $298.00 101 43131 303
032984 SEH engineering-liberty point $11,187.50 428 43124 530
032984 SEH reclass to 428-43124-530 -$11,187.50 101 43131 303
032984 SEH engineering-northland 7 $9,297.02 428 43123 530
032984 SEH reclass to 428-43123-530 -$9,297.02 428 43120 530
032984 SEH engineering-northland 7 $9,297.02 428 43120 530
032984 SEH engineering-maint facility $893.00 429 43120 520
032984 SEH engineering-comp plan mapping $319.80 101 41910 300
032984 SEH engineering-liberty pointe $11,187.50 101 43131 303
032984 SEH engineering-cr 121 $7,362.16 425 43122 530
032984 SEH engineering-scdp grant admin $745.31 425 43122 530
032984 SEH engineering-npdesll industrial permit $1,222.00 101 43131 303
032984 SEH engineering-npdes II permit $600.50 101 43131 303
::132984 SEH engineering-ppl submittal $1,391.00 101 43131 303
J32984 SEH engineering-SE utility $6,640.88 425 49490 530
')32984 SEH engineering-baker st lift station $825.86 501 49470 530
)32984 SEH engineering-2002 street imp $11,348.61 425 43120 530
)32984 SEH engineering-graceview $258.50 101 43131 303
)32984 SEH engineering-arcon develop $742.00 101 43131 303
)32984 SEH engineering-2002 ind pk imp $141.00 425 43121 530
)32984 SEH engineering-northland 6 $1,844.20 101 43131 303
115 ST. JOSEPH DOLLARS FOR SCHOLA Fire Department Donation $250.00 101
)3 98~ TENVOORDE MOTOR COMPMANY repair air bag $162.98 101 42152 220
AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES . police car modem $147.00 101 42151 321
)32988 BO DIDDLEY'S lake region board subs & chips $36.10 105 42240 331
)32989 BORGERT PRODUCTS, INC/SKN picnic table-millstream $833.18 101 45125 530
)32990 BRIGGS AND MORGAN agent fees, 2003 maint facility $7,590.00 329 47100 620
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH 06/27/0310:18 Aw
Page L
Bills Payable
.
Check # Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ
032991 CENTRAL MCGOWAN medical oxygen refill $34.35 105 42270 210
032992 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE state withhold 6/25 sick pay $58.34 101
032992 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE state withhold 6/25 pay $1,102.86 101
032992 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE state withhold 6/24 fire pay $10.73 101
032993 CONCRETE PLUS sidewalk-northland park $1,044.00 490 45203 533
032993 CONCRETE PLUS bench pad-northland park $144.00 490 45203 533
032993 CONCRETE PLUS basketball court-northland $6,167.10 490 45203 533
032994 EFTPS fica withhold 6/24 fire pay $3,212.34 101
032994 EFTPS federal withhold 6/25 sick pay $100.47 101
032994 EFTPS federal withhold 6/24 fire pay $4.81 101
032994 EFTPS federal withhold 6/25 pay $2,567.35 101
032994 EFTPS fica withhold 6/25 pay $2,753.64 101
032994 EFTPS fica withhold 6/25 pay $352.12 101
032995 HENRY & ASSOCIATES read meters, wire, connections $1,670.24 601 49430 210
032996 HONER PUMPING open culvert & drainage ditch-millstream $85.00 101 45202 220
032997 ING LIFE INS & ANNUITY COMPANY deferred comp 6/25 pay $50.00 101
032998 K.E.E.P.R.S.INC uniforms-joel klein $45.95 101 42120 171
032999 LlNGL, GREG & JULIE cleaning service, june $220.00 101 41942 300
033000 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INSURANCE life insurance, july $18.00 101
033001 OFFICE MAX pens, binders, paper, envelopes, printer ink $91.00 101 41430 200
033002 PERA retirement 6/25 pay $3,329.72 101
033003 REED CONSTRUCTION DATA ad for bids-liberty point $140.14 428 43124 530
033003 REED CONSTRUCTION DATA ad for bids-liberty point $140.14 428 43124 530.
033004 RUDOLPH'S INC repair trans housing-4400 tractor $2,330.50 101 45202 220
033005 SCHWAAB self ink date stamp $113.10 101 41430 200
033006 ST. JOSEPH MILLING barn lime $8.70 101 45202 210
0-33007 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS lift station-CR 121 $28.00 602 49473 381
033007 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS lift station-northland $30.00 602 49472 381
033007 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS lift station-DBL Labs $30.92 602 49471 381
033007 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS street lighting $25.00 101 43160 386
033007 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS street lighting $367.25 101 43160 386
033007 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS new service-CR 121 street lighting $325.00 425 43122 530
033008 THOMSEN'S GREENHOUSE flowers for monument $52.89 490 45203 531
033008 THOMSEN'S GREENHOUSE flowers for monument $64.19 490 45203 531
$ 112,933.89
-
c o. U NTY 0 F STEARN S
. Assessor's OfBce
Administration Center RM 37 . 705 Courthouse Square . St. Cloud, MN 56303
320-656-3680 . FAX 320-656-3977
June 11, 2002
To: Steams County Townships and Cities
From: Gary'Grossinger, Steams County Assessor /&v'~(r-
Subject: 2004 Assessment
Weare just in the process of completing the 2003 assessment cycle. Weare now making plans
for the 2004 assessment. For the 2003, your Township Board or City Council has employed your
own assessor. For budgeting and schedule purposes, we need to know your intentions for the
upcoming assessment. Therefore, please complete the attached [onn and return it to this office
. as soon as possible.
If you wish to receive a quote on the amount this office would charge for doing the assessment,
you can feel free to give me a call. If there are any further questions or problems, you may
contact me at the above number.
.
c 0 U NTY 0 F STEAR N S
Assessor's Office .
Administration Center Rm 37 . 705 Courthouse Square' St. Cloud, MN56303
612-656-3680 FAX 612-656-3977
PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE
Assessor of shall be employed by said
district for the assessment year 2004.
It is our decision to rehire our local assessor
It is our decision to hire a new local assessor
Please submit name and address
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Telephone Number:
It is our decision to have the County Assessor's Office review our district for the 2004
assessment.
, Chairperson/Mayor
, Supervisor/Council Member
, Supervisor/Council Member
, Supervisor/Council Member
, Supervisor/Council Member
, Clerk
, Local Assessor .
#875-8898 "Affirmative Action I Equal Opportunity Employer"
. £OOZ/9 ~/9
£OOZ/ZZ/9
£OOZI LZI+¡
£OOZ/Zlj;
>< £OOZ/8/£
W £OOZ/ ~ ~/Z
C £OOZI L ~I ~
Z
- ZOOZI£ZIZ ~
CJ) ZOOZ/8ZH ~
-
n:: ZOOZI£/ ~ ~
W
>- ZOOZI6/0 ~
::J ZOOZI+¡ ~/6
CC ZOOZ/OZ/8
C ZOOZ/9Z1 L
Z ZOOZI ~I L
0
. ca ZOOZ/9/9
....I ZOOZIZ ~/9
<C ZOOZI L ~/+¡
C. ZOOZI£ZI£
-
() ZOOZ/9ZIZ
-
Z ZOOZH/Z
::J
ZOOZILI~
:E
....I ~OOZI£ ~/Z~
<C ~OOZ/8 ~H ~
Z ~OOZI+¡Z/O ~
0 ~OOZI6ZI6
-
I- ~ OOZ/v/6
<C
~OOZIO ~/g
Z
~OOZ/9~/L
~OOZHZ/9
:::R #. :::R :::R #. :::R #. #. :::R
. 0 0 0 0 0
0 1.0 0 1.0 0 1.0 0 1.0 0
0 ,..... L() N 0 ,..... 1.0 N 0
<0 L() L() L() L() "¢ "¢ "¢ "¢
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota .
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1997
REFUNDING SUMMARY
Dated 07/01/2003 Delivered 07/28/2003
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Par Amount of ~nds............................................................ $815,000.00
Transfers from Prior Issue Debt Service Funds........................... 182,082.77
Accrued Interest from 07/01/2003 to 07/28/2003.................... 2,008.88
TOTAL SOURCES....... ..... ... ....................... ............................ $999,091.65
USES OF FUNDS
Deposit to Crossover Escrow Fund.......................................... 969,142.65
Total Underwriter's Discount (1.960%)................................... 15,974.00
Costs of Issuance....... ..... ............................. ................. ........ 13,975.00
TOTAL USES.................. ............................. ......................... $999,091.65
FLOW OF FUNDS DETAIL
Statê and Local Government Series (SLGS) rates for.................. 7/0212003
Date of OMP Candidates........................................................
CROSSOVER ESCROW FUND SOLUTION METHOD:................... Net Funded
Total Cost of Investments...................................................... $969,142.65
Interest Earnings @ 1.072%................................................... 11,320.73 .
Transfers from Unrestricted Money Fund.................................. 184,564.04
TOTAL DRAWS.................................................................... $982,945.42
UNRESTRICTED MONEY FUND SOLUTION METHOD................. Transfer All
Total Cost of Investments...................................................... $182,082.77
Interest Earnings @ 1.067%................................................... 2,482.04
Transfers to Crossover Escrow Fund........................................ (184,564.04)
ISSUES REFUNDED AND CALL DATES
97old.................................................................................. 12101/2004
PRESENT VALUE ANALYSIS SUMMARY (NET TO NET)
Net PV Cashflow Savings @ 3.622%(Bond yield)..................... 234,404.72
Transfers from Prior Issue Debt Service Fund............................ (182,082.77)
NET PRESENT VALUE BENEAT............................................... $52,321.95
NET PV BENEFIT 1 $945,000 REFUNDED PRINCiPAL.............. 5.537%
NET PV BENEFIT 1 $815,000 REFUNDING PRINCIPAL............ 6.420%
BOND STATISTICS
Average Ute......................................................................... 8.963 Years
Average Coupon............ ..... ....................... ........................... 3.6597970%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)........................................................... 3.8784816%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes........................................... 3.6223778%
True Interest Cost (TiC)......................................................... 3.8894501%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC).......................................................... 4.1290345% .
Northland Securities Rle = SAINT JOSEPH. SF- SINGLE PURPOSE
Public Finance 7/21200312:08 PM
Page 1
Final
. City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1997
DEBT SERVICE COMPARISON
Date Total P+I PCF Existing D/S Net New D/S Old Net D/S Savings
12/01/2003 11,160.42 (11,160.42) 72,992.50 72,992.50 (109,090.27) (182,082.77)
12/01/2004 26,785;00 (971,785.00) 1,048,870.00 103,870.00 103,870.00 -
12/01/2005 76,785.00 - - 76,785.00 101,470.00 24,685.00
12/01/2006 81,035.00 - - 81,035.00 104,020.00 22,985.00
12/01/2007 75,072.50 - - 75,072.50 101.270.00 26.197.50
12/01/2008 78,972.50 - - 78.972.50 103,465.00 24,492.50
12/01/2009 82,597.50 - - 82,597.50 105,345.00 22,747.50
12/01/2010 75,857.50 - - 75,857.50 101,900.00 26,042.50
12/01/2011 79,125.00 - - 79,125.00 103,390.00 24,265.00
12/01/2012 82,235.00 - - 82,235.00 104,575.00 22,340.00
12/01/2013 79,927.50 - - 79,927.50 105,450.00 25,522.50
12/01/2014 82,620.00 - - 82,620.00 106,010.00 23.390.00
12/01/2015 84,820.00 - - 84.820.00 106.250.00 21,430.00
12/01/2016 81,820.00 - - 81,820.00 106,165.00 24.345.00
12/01/2017 83.520.00 - - 83,520.00 105,750.00 22,230.00
Total 1,082,332.92 (982,945.42) 1.121,862.50 1,221,250.00 1.349.839.73 128,589.73
. PRESENT VALUE ANALYSIS SUMMARY.(NET TO NET)
GrQss PV Debt Service Savings............................... ...................... .............................. 234,404.72
Net PV Cashflow Savings @ 3.622%(Bond yield)......................................................... 234,404.72
Transfers from Prior Issue Debt Service Fund.... .. .......... .................. ........ ...................... (182,082.77)
NET PRESENT VALUE BENEFIT...................... ...... ... ............ .......... ........ ...................... $52,321.95
NET PV BENEFIT / $1,014,632.61 PV REFUNDED DEBT SERViCE................................... 5.157%
NET PV BENEFIT / $945,000 REFUNDED PRINCIPAL..... .......... ............................... .... 5.537%
NET PV BENEFIT / $815,000 REFUNDING PRINCIPAL... ........ ......... ....... ............. ......... 6.420%
REFUNDING BOND INFORMATION
Refunding Dated Date................................................................................................ 7/01/2003
Refunding Delivery Date. ..... ........... ................................ ......... ........... ............. ........... 7/28/2003
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH. SF- SINGLE PURPOSE
Public Finance 7/ 2/2003 12:08 PM
.
Page 2
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota .
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1997
DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I FISCAL TOTAL
7/28/2003 - - - - -
12/01/2003 · - 11,160.42 11,160.42 11,160.42
6/01/2004 - - 13,392.50 13,392.50 -
12/01/2004 · - 13,392.50 13,392.50 26,785.00
6/01/2005 - - 13,392.50 13,392.50 -
12/01/2005 50,000.00 1.500% 13,392.50 63,392.50 76,785.00
6/01/2006 - · 13,017.50 13,017.50 ·
12/01/2006 55,000.00 1.750% 13,017.50 68,017 .50 81,035.00
6/01/2007 - - 12,536.25 12,536.25 -
12/01/2007 50,000.00 2.200% 12,536.25 62,536.25 75,072.50
6/01/2008 - · 11,986.25 11,986.25 -
12/01/2008 55,000.00 2.500% 11,986.25 66,986.25 78,972.50
6/01/2009 · · 11,298.75 11,298.75 ·
12/01/2009 60,000.00 2.900% 11,298.75 71,298.75 82,597.50
6/01/2010 · - 10,428.75 10,428.75 -
12/01/2010 55,000.00 3.150% 10,428.75 65,428.75 75,857.50
6/01/2011 - - 9,562.50 9,562.50 -
12/01/2011 60,000.00 3.150% _ 9,562.50 69,562.50 79,125.00
6/01/2012 - - 8,617.50 8,617.50 -
12/01/2012 65,000.00 3.550% 8,617.50 73,617 .50 82,235.00 .
6/01/2013 · - 7,463.75 7,463.75 ·
12/01/2013 65,000.00 3.550% 7,463.75 72,463.75 79,927.50
6/01/2014 · - 6,310.00 6,310.00 ·
12/01/2014 70,000.00 4.000% 6,310.00 76,310.00 82,620.00
6/01/2015 · - 4,910.00 4,910.00 -
12/01/2015 75,000.00 4.000% 4,910.00 79,910.00 84,820.00
6/01/2016 · - 3,410.00 3,410.00 -
12/01/2016 75,000.00 4.400% 3,410.00 78,410.00 81,820.00
6/01/2017 - - 1,760.00 1,760.00 -
12/01/2017 80,000.00 4.400% 1,760.00 81,760.00 83,520.00
Total 815,000.00 - 267,332.92 1,082,332.92 -
Dated.......................................................................................................... .. 7/01/2003
Delivery Date.................................................................................................. 7/28/2003
First Coupon Date........................................................................................... 12/01/2003
Accrued Interest from 07/01/2003 to 07/28/2003............................................. 2,008.88
Bond Year Dollars........................................................................................... $7,304.58
Average Ufe............ ....................................................................................... 8.963 Years
Average Coupon............................................................................................. 3.6597970%
Net Interest Cost (NIC).................................................................................... 3.8784816%
True Interest Cost (TiC)................................................................................... 3.8894501 %
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes...................................................................., 3.6223778% .
Net Interest Cost................................................. ........................................... 3.6629470%
Weighted Average Maturity................................ .............................................. 8.888 Years
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH.SF- SINGLE PURPOSE
Public Finance 7/2/2003 12:08 PM
Page 3
Final
· City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1997
PRICING SUMMARY
Maturity Type of Bond Coupon Yield Maturity Value Price Dollar Price Call Date
12/01/2005 Serial Coupon 1.500% 1.500% 50,000.00 100.000% 50,000.00 -
12/01/2006 Serial Coupon 1.750%1.750% 55,000.00 100.000% 55,000.00 -
12/01/2007 Serial Coupon 2.200% 2.200% 50,000.00 -100.000% 50,000.00 -
12/01/2008 Serial Coupon 2.500% 2.500% 55,000.00 100.000% 55,000.00 -
12/01/2009 Serial Coupon 2.900% 2.900% 60,000.00 100.000% 60,000.00 -
12/01/2011 Term 1 Coupon 3.150% 3.150% 115,000.00 100.000% 115,000.00 -
12/01/2013 Term 2 Coupon 3.550% 3.550% 130,000.00 100.000% 130,000.00 -
12/01/2015 Term 3 Coupon 4.000% 4.000% 145,000.00 100.000% 145,000.00 -
12/01/2017 Term 4 Coupon 4.400% 4.400% 155,000.00 100.000% 155,000.00 -
Total - - - - 815,000.00 - 815,000.00 -
BID INFORMATION
Par Amount of Bonds. ............. ..................... ............ ........... ...... $815,000.00
Gross Production...... ..................... ............... ............. ............... $815,000.00
Total Underwriter's Discount (1.960%)....... ......... ....................... $(15,974.00)
· Bid (98.0400/0)......................................................................... 799,026.00
Accrued Interest from 07/01/2003 to 07/28/2003........................ 2,008.88
Total Purchase Price.................... ......................... ...... ............... $801,034.88
Bond Year Dollars..................................................................... $7,304.58
Average Life............................................................................. 8.963 Years
Average Coupon..................... .................. ............ .................... 3.65979700/0
Net Interest Cost (NIC).......... ............. ................ ....................... 3.8784816%
True Interest Cost (TIC)...... ........... ......... ....... ...... ...................... 3.8894501 %
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH.SF- SINGLE PURPOSE
Public Finance 7/2/200312:08 PM
·
Page 4
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota ·
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1997
PROOF OF BOND YIELD @ 3.6223778%
Date Cashflow PV Factor Present Value Cumulative PV
7/28/2003 . 1 .00OOOOOx . .
12/01/2003 11,160.42 0.9878092x 11,024.37 11,024.37
6/01/2004 13,392.50 0.9702364x 12,993.89 24,018.26
12/01/2004 13,392.50 0.9529762x 12,762.73 36,780.99
6/01/2005 13,392.50 0.9360230x 12,535.69 49,316.68
12/01/2005 63,392.50 0.9193715x 58,281.26 107,597.94
6/01/2006 13,017.50 0.9030162x 11,755.01 119,352.95
12/01/2006 68,017.50 0.8869518x 60,328.24 179,681.19
6/01/2007 12,536.25 0.8711732x 10,921.25 190,602.44
12/01/2007 62,536.25 0.8556753x 53,510.72 244,113.16
6/01/2008 11,986.25 0.8404531x 10,073.88 254,187.04
12/01/2008 66,986.25 0.8255017x 55,297.26 309,484.31
6/01/2009 11,298.75 0.8108163x 9,161.21 318,645.52
12/01/2009 71,298.75 0.7963921x 56,781.76 375,427.28
6/01/2010 10,428.75 0.7822246x 8,157.62 383,584.91
12/01/2010 65,428.75 0.7683090x 50,269.50 433,854.41
6/01/2011 9,562.50 0.7_546411x 7,216.26 441,070.66
12/01/2011 69,562.50 0.7412162x 51,560.85 492,631.52
6/01/2012 8,617.50 0.7280302x 6,273.80 498,905.32 ·
12/01/2012 73,617.50 0.7150788x 52,642.31 551,547.63
6/01/2013 7,463.75 0.7023578x 5,242.22 556,789.86
12/01/2013 72,463.75 0.6898631x 49,990.06 606,779.92
6/01/2014 6,310.00 0.6775906x 4,275.60 611,055.52
12/01/2014 76,310.00 0.6655365x 50,787.09 661,842.61
6/01/2015 4,910.00 0.6536968x 3,209.65 665,052.26
12/01/2015 79,910.00 0.6420678x 51,307.63 716,359.89
6/01/2016 3,410.00 0.6306456x 2,150.50 718,510.39
12/01/2016 78,410.00 0.6194266x 48,569.24 767,079.63
6/01/2017 1,760.00 0.6084072x 1,070.80 768,150.43
12/01/2017 81,760.00 0.5975838x 48,858.45 817,008.88
Total 1,082,332.92 . 817,008.88 -
DERIVATION OF TARGET AMOUNT
Par Amount of Bonds.................. ........................ ......... ................................. $815,000.00
Accrued Interest from 07/01/2003 to 07/28/2003..........................................., 2,008.88
Original Issue Proceeds.................................................................................. $817,008.88
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH.SF· SINGLE PURPOSE
Public Finance 71 2/2003 12:08 PM
·
Page 5
--'.,.
Final
. City of Sa~nt Joseph, Minnesota
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1997
DETAIL COSTS OF ISSUANCE
Dated 07/01/2003 Delivered 07/28/2003
COSTS OF ISSUANCE DETAIL
Bond Counsel....................................................................... $4,080.00
Rating Agency Fee. ....................... ........................... ............. $1,625.00
POS/Official Statement.... .......... .................. ............. ..... ..... ... $375.00
Miscellaneous...................................................................... . $375.00
Registrar / Paying Agent........................................................ $5,575.00
CPA / Verification......................; ................................... ....... $1,250.00
Escrow Agent....................................................................... $695.00
TOTAL......................... ..... ............. ................ ............. ........ $13,975.00
. Northland Securities ile = SAINT JOSEPH.SF- SINGLE PURPOSE
Public Finance 7/2/2003 12:08 PM
.
Page 6
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota ·
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1997
TOTAL PRIOR NET DEBT SERVICE
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+ I Net D/S FISCAL TOTAL
7/28/2003 - - - - - -
12/01/2003 45,000.00 4.700% 27,992.50 72,992.50 72,992.50 72,992.50
6/01/2004 - - 26,935.00 26,935.00 26,935.00 ·
12/01/2004 50,000:00 4.800% 26,935.00 76,935.00 76,935.00 103,870.00
6/01/2005 - - 25,735.00 25,735.00 25,735.00 ·
12/01/2005 50,000.00 4.900% 25,735.00 75,735.00 75,735.00 101,470.00
6/01/2006 - - 24,510.00 24,510.00 24,510.00 -
12/01/2006 55,000.00 5.000% 24,510.00 79,510.00 79,510.00 104,020.00
6/01/2007 - - 23,135.00 23,135.00 23,135.00 ·
12/01/2007 55,000.00 5.100% 23,135.00 78,135.00 78,135.00 101,270.00
6/01/2008 - - 21,732.50 21,732.50 21,732.50 -
12/01/2008 60,000.00 5.200% 21,732.50 81,732.50 81,732.50 103,465.00
6/01/2009 - - 20,172.50 20,172.50 20,172.50 -
12/01/2009 65,000.00 5.300% 20,172.50 85,172.50 85,172.50 105,345.00
6/01/2010 · - 18,450.00 18,450.00 18,450.00 -
12/01/2010 65,000.00 5.400% 18,450.00 83,450.00 83,450.00 101,900.00
6/01/2011 · · 16,695.00 16,695.00 16,695.00 -
-
12/01/2011 70,000.00 5.450% 16,695.00 86,695.00 86,695.00 103,390.00
6/01/2012 - - 14,787.50 14,787.50 14,787.50 - ·
12/01/2012 75,000.00 5.500% 14,787.50 89,787.50 89,787.50 104,575.00
6/01/2013 - - 12,725.00 12,725.00 12,725.00 ·
12/01/2013 80,000.00 5.550% 12,725.00 92,725.00 92,725.00 105,450.00
6/01/2014 - · 10,505.00 10,505.00 10,505.00 ·
12/01/2014 85,000.00 5.600% 10,505.00 95,505.00 95,505.00 106,010.00
6/01/2015 - · 8,125.00 8,125.00 8,125.00 -
12/01/2015 90,000.00 5.650% 8,125.00 98,125.00 98,125.00 106,250.00
6/01/2016 · - 5,582.50 5,582.50 5,582.50 ·
12/01/2016 95,000.00 5.700% 5,582.50 100,582.50 100,582.50 106,165.00
6/01/2017 · - 2,875.00 2,875.00 2,875.00 -
12/01/2017 100,000.00 5.750% 2,875.00 102,875.00 102,875.00 105,750.00
Total 1,040,000.00 - 491,922.50 1,531,922.50 1,531,922.50 -
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH.SF- SINGLE PURPOSE
Public Finance 7/ 2/2003 12:08 PM
·
Page 7
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota
G.O. Bonds of 1997
DEBT SERVICE TO MATURITY AND TO CALL
Date Refunded Bonds D/S To Call Principal Coupon Interest Refunded D/S FISCAL TOTAL
12/01/2003 - 25,735.00 - 4.700% 25,735.00 25,735.00 25,735.00
6/01/2004 - 25,735.00 - - 25,735.00 25,735.00 -
12/01/2004 945,000.00 970,735.00 - 4.800% 25,735.00 25,735.00 51,470.00
6/01/2005 - - - - 25,735.00 25,735.00 -
12/01/2005 - - 50,000.00 4.900% 25,735.00 75,735.00 101,470.00
6/01/2006 - - - - 24,510.00 24,510.00 -
12/01/2006 - - 55,000.00 5.000% 24,510.00 79,510.00 104,020.00
6/01/2007 - - - - 23,135.00 23,135.00 -
12/01/2007 - - 55,000.00 5.100% 23,135.00 78,135.00 101,270.00
6/01/2008 - - - - 21,732.50 21,732.50 -
12/01/2008 - - 60,000.00 5.200% 21,732.50 81,732.50 103,465.00
6/01/2009 - - - - 20,172.50 20,172.50 -
12/01/2009 - - 65,000.00 5.300% 20,172.50 85,172.50 105,345.00
6/01/2010 - - - - 18,450.00 18,450.00 -
12/01/2010 - - 65,000.00 5.400% 18,450.00 83,450.00 101,900.00
6/01/2011 - - - - 16,695.00 16,695.00 -
12/01/2011 - - 70,000.00 5.450% 16,695.00 86,695.00 103,390.00
6/01/2012 - - - - 14,787.50 14,787.50 -
12/01/2012 - - 75,000.00 5.500% 14,787.50 89,787.50 104,575.00
6/01/2013 - - - - 12,725.00 12,725.00 -
12/01/2013 - - 80,000.00 5.550% 12,725.00 92,725.00 105,450.00
6/01/2014 - - - · 10,505.00 10,505.00 -
12/01/2014 - - 85,000.00 5.600% 10,505.00 95,505.00 106,010.00
6/01/2015 - - - · 8,125.00 8,125.00 -
12/01/2015 - - 90,000.00 5.650% 8,125.00 98,125.00 106,250.00
6/01/2016 - - - · 5,582.50 5,582.50 -
12/01/2016 - - 95,000.00 5.700% 5,582.50 100,582.50 106,165.00
6/01/2017 - - - - 2,875.00 2,875.00 -
12/01/2017 - - 100,000.00 5.750% 2,875.00 102,875.00 105,750.00
Total 945,000.00 1,022,205.00 945,000.00 · 487,265.00 _ 1,432,265.00 -
YIELD STATISTICS
Average Life........................................................................ .-.......... 9.216 Years
Weighted Average Maturity (Par Basis)..... ....................... ....... ............ 9.141 Years
Average Coupon............................................................................. 5.5458686%
REFUNDING BOND INFORMATION
Refunding Dated Date.. ............. ..... ...... ...... ..... ......., ... .... ......... ......... 7/01/2003
Refunding Delivery Date... ..... ......... ...... ........... .... .... ..... .... ... ............. 7/28/2003
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH.Sf-SINGLE PURPOSE
fjUbliC Finance 7/ 2/2003 12:08 PM
Page .8
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota ·
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1997
CROSSOVER ESCROW FUND CASHFLOW
Date Principal Rate Interest + Transfers Receipts Disbursements Cash Balance
7/28/2003 . . - 0.77 1.65 - 1.65
12/01/2003 . - 2,899.21 8,260.64 11,159.85 1',160.42 1.08
6/01/2004 - - 4,210.76 9,181.06 13,391.82 13,392.50 0.40
12/01/2004 787,059.00 1.070% 4,210.76 167,122.34 958,392.10 958,392.50 -
Total 787,059.00 . 11,320.73 184,564.81982,945.42 982,945.42 -
INVESTMENT PARAMETERS
Investment Model [PV, GIC, or Securities]..................................... .......................... .......... Securities
Default investment yield target......................................................................................... Bond Yield
Cost of Investments Purchased with Fund Transfers........................................................... 182,082.77
Cash Deposit............................................................................. ..................... ............... 0.88
Cost of Investments Purchased with Bond Proceeds........................................................... 787,059.00
_ Total Cost of Investments.............................. ......... .......................... ............. ................. $969,142.65
Target Cost of Investments at bond yield.......................................................................... $761,011.38 ·
Actual positive or (negative) arbitrage............................................................................... (26,048.50)
Yield to Receipt.......... .............. ................ ................................... ................................... 1.0723135%
Yield for Arbitrage Purposes. ........... .................... ......... .................................................... 3.6223778%
State and Local Government Series (SLGS) rates for........................................................... 7/02/2003
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH.SF- SINGLE PURPOSE
Public Finance 7/2/2003 12:08 PM
·
Page 9
. NORTHLAND'SECURITIES
Honorable City Council
City of St. Joseph, Minnesota
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
We understand that you desire to issue $815,000 General Obligation Fire Hall Crossover Refunding Bonds. Accordingly, we
propose as follows:
We agree to purchase $815,000 General Obligation Fire Hall Crossover Refunding Bonds of2003, to be dated July 1, 2003, and to
mature December 1,2005-2017. We agree to pay for the Bonds $799,026 and accrued interest to the date of settlement.
The Bonds are to be payable at U.S. Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, as paying agent, registrar and escrow agent.
It is further understood that you authorize Northland Securities, Inc. to purchase Securities to fund the escrow account for the
benefit ofthe City. The bonds will bear interest as follows:
1.50% - 2005 2.20% - 2007 2.90% - 2009 3.15% - 2011 4.00% - 2015
1.75% - 2006 2.50% - 2008 3.55% - 2013 4.40% - 2017
Interest is to be payable on December 1, 2003, and semiannually thereafter. The Bonds will mature or be subject to mandatory
redemption on December 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
$ 50,000 in the year 2005, $ 55,000 in the year 2006,
$ 50,000 in the year 2007, $ 55,000 in the year 2008,
$ 60,000 in the year 2009, $ 55,000 in the year 2010,
$ 60,000 in the year 2011, $ 65,000 in the years 2012 and 2013, -
. $ 70,000 in the year 2014, $ 75,000 in the years 2015 and 2016, and
$ 80,000 in the year 2017.
All Bonds will be Book Entry and in multiples of $5,000. The average interest rate is calculated at 3.6597%. The net effective rate
is calculated at 3.8784%.
Mandatory Redemption: This issue shall have four term bonds maturing December 1, 2011 (2010 and 2011 maturities),
December 1, 2013 (2012 and 2013 maturities), December 1, 2015 (2014 and 2015 maturities) and December 1, 2017 (2016
through 2017 maturities) which will have mandatory redemptions equal to the annual principal due as stated above.
Optional Redemption: Bonds maturing in the years 2012 through 2017, inclusive, are callable at the option of the Issuer in whole
or in part on December 1,2011, or on any date thereafter at a price of par plus accrued interest.
This bid is made for prompt acceptance and subject to the approval of Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association (Bond
Counsel) of St. Paul, Minnesota, as to the legality and regularity of all proceedings taken in the issuance of the Bonds.
You agree to pay the expenses of registering the Bonds and the fee ûf Bond Counsel, recognized municipal bond attorneys, in
furnishing the necessary proceedings required to authorize the issuance of the Bonds. The Issuer shall be responsible for paying
agent fees on the Refunded Bonds when called and for the publication of the call notice.
Respectfully submitted this 2nd day of July, 2003.
NOR~URJTIEs.INC. -
By: ~
The foregoing proposal is duly accepted by the City Council of the City of8t. Joseph, Minnesota, this 2nd day of July,2003
By:
. Mayor
Attest: ¡
Administrator-Clerk
Nortlùand Securities. Inc. 45 South 7th Street. Suite 2500. Minneapolis, MN 55402 T~U Free 1-800-851-2920 Main 612-851-5900 Fax 612-851-5987
www.nortlùandsecurities.com
Member NASD and SIPC
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1992/1993/1996
REFUNDING SUMMARY
Dated 07/01/2003 Delivered 07/28/2003
1992 1993 1996 Issue Summary
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Par Amount of Bonds.............................................................. $80,000.00 $220,000.00 $450,000.00 $750,000.00
Transfers from Prior Issue Debt Service Funds........................... - 13,537.49 362,195.96 375,733.45
Accrued Interest from 07/01/2003 to 07/28/2003..................... 105.75 314.25 799.13 1,219.13
TOTAL SOURCES...................................... ............................. $80,105.75 $233,851.74 $812,995.09 $1,126,952.58
USES OF FUNDS
Deposit to Crossover Escrow Fund........................................... 75,366.97 226,084.27 797,107.09 1,098,558.33
Total Underwriter's Discount (1.960%).................................... 1,568.00 4,312.00 8,820.00 14,700.00
Costs of Issuance...... ........ ..... ........... ............................ ......... 1,256.53 3,455.47 7,068.00 11,780.00
Rounding Amount................................................................... 1,914.25 - - 1,914.25
TOTAL USES........................................................................., $80,105.75 $233,851.74 $812,995.09 $1,126,952.58
FLOW OF FUNDS DETAIL
State and Local Government Series (SLGS) rates for................... 7/02/2003 7/02/2003 7/02/2003 7/02/2003
Date of OMP Candidates.................... .................. .......... .........
PRIMARY PURPOSE FUND SOLUTION METHOD........................ Net Funded Net Funded Net Funded Net Funded
Total Cost of Investments........................................................ $75,366.97 $226,084.27 $797,107.09 $1,098,558.33
Interest Earnings @ 0.857%.................................................... 220.53 621.95 1,272.64 2,115.12
Transfers from Unrestricted Money Fund................................... - 13,576.61 363,254.85 376,831.46
TOTAL DRAWS...................................................................... $75,587.50 $226,745.83 $799,439.58 $1,101,772.91
UNRESTRICTED MONEY FUND SOLUTION METHOD.................. Transfer All Transfer All Transfer All Transfer All
Total Cost of Investments........................................................ - $13,537.49 $362,195.96 $375,733.45
Interest Earnings @ 0.857%................... ..................... ............ - 39.61 1,059.85 1,099.46
Transfers to Primary Purpose Fund........................................... - (13,576.61) (363,254.85) (376,831.46)
PRESENT VALUE ANALYSIS SUMMARY (NET TO NET)
Net PV Cashflow Savings @ 2.472%(Bond yield)..................... 3,291.67 24,858.56 430,489.66 478,649.86
Transfers from Prior Issue Debt Service Fund............................. - (13,537.49) (362,195.96) (375,733.45)
Contingency or Rounding Amount............................................ 1,914.25 . - 1,914.25
NET PRESENT VALUE BENEFIT................................................ $5,205.92 $11,321.07 $68,293.70 $104,830.66
NET PV BENEFIT / $1,095,000 REFUNDED PRINCIPAL.............. 6.941% 5.032% 8.590% 9.574%
NET PV BENEFIT / $750,000 REFUNDING PRINCiPAL............. 6.507% 5.146% 15.176% 13.977%
BOND STATISTICS
Average ute.......... ....................................................... .......... 2.917 Years 3.462 Years 5.050 Years 4.357 Years
Average Coupon..................................................................... 1.9189286% 2.0791024% 2.6740189% 2.4814204%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)............................................................ 2.5909286% 2.6452293% 3.0621377% 2.9313056%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes............................................. 2.4724513% 2.4724513% 2.4724513% 2.4724513%
True Interest Cost (TlC)........................................................... 2.6425411% 2.6906819% 3.0970552% 2.9679664%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)............................................................ 3.2362843% 3.1934672% 3.4523353% 3.3752204%
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH.SF-Issue Summary
Public Finance 7/ 2/2003 12:27 PM
Page 1
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota .
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1992/ 1993/ 1996
DEBT SERVICE COMPARISON
Date Total P+I PCF Existing D/S Net New D/S Old Net D/S Savings
12/01/2003 6,772.91 (1,101,772.91) 1,263,883.75 166,969.50 (206,849.70) (373,819.20)
12/01/2004 131,255.00 - · 131,255.00 200,790.00 69,535.00
12/01/2005 129,817.50 - - 129,817.50 203,425.00 73,607.50
12/01/2006 133,092.50 - · 133,092.50 200,332.50 67,240.00
12/01/2007 130,692.50 . - 130,692.50 196,852.50 66,160.00
12/0112008 107,932.50 - - 107,932.50 177,985.00 70,052.50
12/01/2009 60,532.50 - · 60,532.50 124,735.00 64,202.50
12/01/2010 63,937.50 - - 63,937.50 128,750.00 64,812.50
12/01/2011 67,047.50 - · 67,047.50 127,080.00 60,032.50
Total 831,080.41 (1,101,772.91) 1,263,883.75 991,277.00 1,153,100.30 161,823.30
PRESENT VALUE ANALYSIS SUMMARY (NET TO NET)
Gross PV Debt Service Savings........................................... ................... ........... ......... 478,649.86
Net PV Cashflow Savings @ 2.472%(Bond yield)........................................................ 478,649.86
Transfers from Prior Issue Debt Service Fund............................................................... (375,733.45) .
Contingency or Rounding Amount............................................................................... 1,914.25
NET PRESENT VALUE BENEFIT......... .............. ............................................... ............ $ 1 04,830.66
NET PV BENEFIT / $1,223,152.70 PV REFUNDED DEBT SERViCE.................................. 8.571%
NET PV BENEFIT / $1,095,000 REFUNDED PRINCIPAL................................................ 9.574%
NET PV BENEFIT / $750,000 REFUNDING PRINCIPAL................................................ 13.977%
REFUNDING BOND INFORMATION
Refunding Dated Date........................................................................... .................... 7/01/2003
Refunding Delivery Date......................................................... ................................... 7/28/2003
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH.SF-Issue Summary
Public Finance 7/2/2003 12:27 PM
.
Page 2
Final
. City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1992/ 1993/1996
DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I FISCAL TOTAL
7/28/2003 - - . - ·
12/01/2003 - · 6,772.91 6,772.91 6,772.91
6/01/2004 · - 8,127.50 8,127.50 -
12/01/2004 115,000.00 1.250% 8,127.50 123,127.50 131,255.00
6/01/2005 · - 7,408.75 7,408.75 -
12/01/2005 115,000.00 1.500% 7,408.75 122,408.75 129,817.50
6/01/2006 - - 6,546.25 6,546.25 ·
12/01/2006 120,000.00 2.000% 6,546.25 126,546.25 133,092.50
6/01/2007 · · 5,346.25 5,346.25 ·
12/01/2007 120,000.00 2.300% 5,346.25 125,346.25 130,692.50
6/01/2008 · - 3,966.25 3,966.25 -
12/01/2008 100,000.00 2.400% 3,966.25 103,966.25 107,932.50
6/01/2009 · · 2,766.25 2,766.25 ·
12/01/2009 55,000.00 2.900% 2,766.25 57,766.25 60,532.50
6/01/2010 · - 1,968.75 1,968.75 ·
12/01/2010 60,000.00 3.150% 1,968.75 61,968.75 63,937.50
6/01/2011 · - 1,023.75 1,023~75 ·
12/01/2011 65,000.00 3.150% 1,023.75 66,023.75 67,047.50
. Total 750,000.00 - 81,080.41 831,080.41 -
Dated......................................................................................................... . 7/01/2003
Delivery Date................................................................................................ 7/28/2003
First Coupon Date......................... ................................................. ............... 12/01/2003
Accrued Interest from 07/01/2003 to 07/28/2003............................................ 1,219.13
Bond Year Dollars........................................................................................., $3,267.50
Average Life................................................................................................. 4.357 Years
Average Coupon........................................................................................... 2.4814204%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)..................... ..................... ........................................ 2.9313056%
True Interest Cost (TIC)........ ....... ........... ........................ ............................... 2.9679664%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes. ....... .... ... .... ...... ............ .......... .... ................ 2.4724513%
Net Interest Cost.... ...................................... ...................... ...... ......... ........... 2.4869219%
Weighted Average Maturity............................................................................ 4.282 Years
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH.SF·lssue Summary
Public Finance 7/2/2003 12:27 PM
.
Page 3
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota ·
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1992/ 1993/ 1996
DETAIL COSTS OF ISSUANCE
Dated 07/01/2003 Delivered 07/28/2003
COSTS OF ISSUANCE DETAIL
Bond CounseL......................................... ............. ................ $4,080.00
Rating Agency Fee............. ........... ............... ...... ................... $1,625.00
POS/Official Statement..................................................,....... $375.00
Miscellaneous................,................,.................,.................. . $375.00
Registrar / Paying Agent........,...............................,............... $3,475.00
CPA / Verification................ ....... ............. ............................. $1,500.00
Escrow Agent. ................... .......................................... ......... $350.00
TOTAL....................... ......,............. ........ ..................... ........ $11,780.00
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH,SF·lssue Summary ·
Public Finance 7/ 2/2003 12:27 PM
·
Page 6
Final
· City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota
G.O. Bonds of 1992
DEBT SERVICE TO MATURITY AND TO CALL
Date Refunded Bonds D/S To Call Principal Coupon Interest Refunded D/S FISCAL TOTAL
12/01/2003 75,000.00 77,387.50 - 6.250% 2,387.50 2,387.50 2,387.50
6/01/2004 - - - - 2,387.50 2,387.50 -
12/01/2004 - - 15,000.00 6.300% 2,387.50 17,387.50 19,775.00
6/01/2005 - - - - 1,915.00 1,915.00 -
12/01/2005 - - 20,000.00 6.350% 1,915.00 21,915.00 23,830.00
6/01/2006 - - - - 1,280.00 1,280.00 -
12/01/2006 - - 20,000.00 6.400% 1,280.00 21,280.00 22,560.00
6/01/2007 - - - - 640.00 640.00 -
12/01/2007 - - 20,000.00 6.400% 640.00 20,640.00 21,280.00
Total 75,000.00 77,387.50 75,000.00 - 14,832.50 89,832.50 -
YIELD STATISTICS
Average Life............................................................................ 3.017 Years
Weighted Average Maturity (Par Basis)....................................... 2.942 Years
Average Coupon............ .............. ............ ........... ...................... 6.3799263%
· REFUNDING BOND INFORIV!A TION
Refunding Dated Date........... .... ............. ................................... 7/01/2003
Refunding Delivery Date............................................................ 7/28/2003
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH. SF-SINGLE PURPOSE
Public Finance 7/ 2/2003 12:27 PM
·
Page 8
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota ·
G.O. Bonds of 1993
DEBT SERVICE TO MATURITY AND TO CALL
Date Refunded Bonds D/S To Call Principal Coupon Interest Refunded D/S FISCAL TOTAL
12/01/2003 225,000.00 230,835.00 · 4.900% 5,835.00 5,835.00 5,835.00
6/01/2004 · · - - 5,835.00 5,835.00 .
12/01/2004 · · 40,000.00 5.000% 5,835.00 45,835.00 51,670.00
6/01/2005 - · · - 4,835.00 4,835.00 -
12/01/2005 · · 45,000.00 5.150% 4,835.00 49,835.00 54,670.00
6/01/2006 - · - . 3,676.25 3,676.25 .
12/01/2006 · - 45,000.00 5.200% 3,676.25 48,676.25 52,352.50
6/01/2007 · · · - 2,506.25 2,506.25 -
12/01/2007 - · 45,000.00 5.250% 2,506.25 47,506.25 50,012.50
6/01/2008 · - · - 1,325.00 1,325.00 -
12/01/2008 - · 50,000.00 5.300% 1,325.00 51,325.00 52,650.00
Total 225,000.00 230,835.00 225,000.00 - 42,190.00 267,190.00 .
YIELD STATISTICS
Average Life........... ........................ ......... .................. .... ............ 3.506 Years
Weighted Average Maturity (Par Basis).......................................... 3.431 Years
Average Coupon...... ........... ............ .................. .:........................ 5.2256735% ·
REFUNDING BOND INFORMATION
Refunding Dated Date............... ......... ......................................... 7/01/2003
Refunding Delivery Date.............................................................. 7/28/2003
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH.SF-SINGLE PURPOSE
Public Finance 7/2/2003 12:27 PM
·
Page 9
Final
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota
G.O. Bonds of 1996
DEBT SERVICE TO MATURITY AND TO CALL
Date Refunded Bonds D/S To Call Principal Coupon Interest Refunded D/S fiSCAL TOTAL
12/01/2003 795,000.00 817,172.50 - 5.100% 22,172.50 22,172.50 22,172.50
6/01/2004 · - - - 22,172.50 22,172.50 -
12/01/2004 - - 85,000.00 5.200% 22,172.50 107,172.50 129,345.00
6/01/2005 - - - · 19,962.50 19,962.50 -
12/01/2005 - - 85,000.00 5.300% 19,962.50 104,962.50 124,925.00
6/01/2006 - - - - 17,710.00 17,710.00 .
12/01/2006 · · 90,000.00 5.400% 17,710.00 107,710.00 125,420.00
6/01/2007 · · - · 15,280.00 15,280.00 .
12/01/2007 - - 95,000.00 5.500% 15,280.00 110,280.00 125,560.00
6/01/2008 - · - - 12,667.50 12,667.50 -
12/01/2008 · - 100,000.00 5.600% 12,667.50 112,667.50 125,335.00
6/01/2009 - - . · 9,867.50 9,867.50 -
12/01/2009 - - 105,000.00 5.700% 9,867.50 114,867.50 124,735.00
6/01/2010 - - - · 6,875.00 6,875.00 -
12/01/2010 - - 115,000.00 5.800% 6,875.00 121,875.00 128,750.00
6/01/2011 - - - · 3,540.00 3,540.00 -
12/01/2011 - - 120,000.00 5.900% 3,540.00 123,540.00 127,080.00
Total 795,000.00 817,172.50 795,000.00 - 238,322.50 1,033,322.50 -
YIELD STATISTICS
Average Life.......... ................... ................................................... 5.197 Years
Weighted Average Maturity (Par Basis)..... ..... ............ .......... ...... ...... 5.122 Years
Average Coupon.... ." ......... ... ......... ......... ....... ............... ......... ....... 5.6793243%
REfUNDING BOND INfORMATION
Refunding Dated Date....... ........................... ........ ......................... 7/01/2003
Refunding Delivery Date................................................................ 7/28/2003
Northland Securities file = SAINT JOSEPH. Sf-SINGLE PURPOSE
Public finance 7/ 2/2003 12:27 PM
.
Page 10
Preliminary
City of Saint Joseph, Minnesota .
G.O. Refunding Bonds of 2003
1992/ 1993/ 1996
CROSSOVER ESCROW FUND CASHFLOW
Date Principal Rate Interest + Transfers Receipts Disbursements Cash Balance
7/28/2003 . . . '.45 3.33 . 3.33
12/01/2003 722,823.00 0.850% 2,115.12 376,831.46 1,101,769.58 1,101,772.91 .
Total 722,823.00 - 2,'15.12 376,832.91 1,101,772.91 1,101,772.91 -
INVESTMENT PARAMETERS
Investment Model [PV, GlC, or Securities]............................. Securities
Default investment yield target............................................. Bond Yield
Cost of Investments Purchased with Fund Transfers............... 375,733.45
Cash Deposit........................ ....... .................... .... .............. 1.88
Cost of Investments Purchased with Bond Proceeds............... 722,823.00
Total Cost of Investments................................................... $1,098,558.33
Target Cost of Investments at bond yield.............................. $718,879.05
Actual positive or (negative) arbitrage................................... (3,945.83)
Yield to Receipt...... ................................................ ...... ...... 0.8570273% .
Yield for Arbitrage Purposes................................................. 2.4724513%
State and Local Government Series (SLGS) rates for............... 7/02/2003
Northland Securities File = SAINT JOSEPH. SF-Issue Summary
Public Finance 7/2/2003 12:27 PM
.
Page 1 1
- .- " . -~~
-
. NORTHLAND' SECURITIES
Honorable City Council
City of St. Joseph, Minnesota
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
We understand that you desire to issue $750,000 General Obligation Improvement Crossover Refunding Bonds. Accordingly, we
propose as follows:
We agree to purchase $750,000 General Obligation Improvement Crossover Refunding Bonds of 2003, to be dated July 1, 2003,
and to mature December 1, 2004-2011. We agree to pay for the Bonds $735,300 and accrued interest to the date of settlement.
The Bonds are to be payable at U.S. Bank National Association, S1. Paul, Minnesota, as paying agent, registrar and escrow agent.
It is further understood that you authorize Northland Securities, Inc. to purchase Securities to fund the escrow account for the
benefit of the City. The bonds will bear interest as follow~:
1.25% - 2004 2.00% - 2006 2.40% - 2008 3.15% - 2011
1.50% - 2005 2.30% - 2007 2.90% - 2009
Interest is to be payable on December 1, 2003, and semiannually thereafter. The Bonds will mature or be subject to mandatory
redemption on December 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
$ 115,000 in the years 2004 and 2005, $ 120,000 in the years 2006 and 2007,
$ 100,000 in the year 2008, $ 55,000 in the year 2009,
$ 60,000 in the year 2010, and $ 65,000 in the year. 2011.
. All Bonds will be Book Entry and in multiples of $5,000. The average interest rate is calculated at 2.4814%. The net effective rate
is calculated at 2.9313%.
Mandatory Redemption: This issue shall have one tenn bond maturing December 1, 2011 (2010 and 2011 maturities) and
December 1,20_ (20_ through 20_ maturities) which will have mandatory redemptions equal to the annual principal due as
stated above.
Optional Redemption: Bonds maturing in the years 2012 through 2017, inclusive, are callable at the option of the Issuer in whole
or in part on December 1, 2011, or on any date thereafter at a price of par plus accrued interest.
This bid is made for prompt acceptance and subject to the approval of Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association (Bond
Counsel) of 8t. Paul, Minnesota, as to the legality and regularity of all proceedings taken in the issuance ofthe Bonds.
You agree to pay the expenses of registering the Bonds and the fee of Bond Counsel, recognized municipal bond attorneys, in
furnishing the necessary proceedings required to authorize the issuance of the Bonds. The Issuer shall be responsible for paying
agent fees on the Refunded Bonds when called and for the publication of the call notice.
Respectfully submitted this 2nd day of July, 2003.
NOR~ECURJTIES. INC
By: ~
The foregoing proposal is duly accepted by the City Council of the City of St. Joseph, Minnesota, this 2nd day of July, 2003
By:
Mayor
Attest:
. Administrator-Clerk
Northland Securities, Inc. 45 South 7th Street, Suite 2500, Minneapolis, MN 55402 Toll Free 1-800-851-2920 Main 612-851-5900 Fax 612-851-5987
www.northlandsecurities.com
Member NASD and SIPC
Master03
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2003
Est. Total Statutory Special Est. Annual
(12-1) Interest Debt 5.00% Cap. Utility Assessment Tax Surplus! Cumulative
,'ear Principal Rate Interest Payment Coverage Interest Revenues Income Lev Deficit Balance
W03 0 0.00% 15,604 15,604 15,604 32,095 28,000 7,739 0 52,229 52,229
W04 685,0001.50% 46,813 731,813768,403 111,000 783,863 ° 126,459 178,689
~005 240,000 1.75% 36,538 276,538 290,364 112,000 284,130 0 105,766 284,454
~006 395,000 2.25% 32,338 427,338 448,704 113,000 270,848 0 -64,857 219,598
~007 400,000 2.75% 23,450 423,450 444,623 114,000 257,565 0 -73,058 146,540
~008 415,000 3.00% 12,450 427,450 448,823 115,000 244,283 0 -89,540 57,000
~009 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~010 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~011 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °
~012 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °
~013 0 0.00% 0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0
~014 0 0.00% 0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0
~015 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~016 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2,135,000 167,192 2,302,192 2,416,521 32,095 593,000 1,848,426 0 57,000
ii~PI:mºªltº!Jiil~fÉ~~~§;illiII11i'i'li'I,i',,'i,ii'i';:::::":::,::;:'~;",!:!:!~I,,,':m!';:i!,:mimlimiiiiii!mmm:ii,i: il§~'~~~I;ñ~:lìñ~~m~;iii'lmii'iiiii,mm!m!mmmmimm:i:i":m:mmmm,',mmv,"""""""""""'"
2003 Improvement Projects (A) 2,031,500 Est. Amount of Assessments: $1,615,000
. Less: City Cash Contribution 0 Percentage of Issue Assessed: 75.64%
otal Hard Costs 2,031,500 Interest Rate on Assessments: 5.75%
Add: Issuance Expenses First Installment Collection: 2004
Est. Underwriter's Discount @1.250% 26,688 Number of Annual Installments: 5
Est. Capitalized Interest (11 Months) 32,095 Start Date of Assessments: 11/30/2003
Est. Financial Advisory Fee 19,000
Est. Bond Counsel 6,500
Est. Rating Fee 3,500
Est. County Auditor Fee/O.S. Printing 750
Est. Bond Insurance Premium (65 bps) 14,965
Est. Registration (One-Time Fee) 3,225
Total 2,138,223
Less: Investment Income -1,500
Rounded For Issuance 112,135,00011
Bonds Dated: 8/1/2003
Bonds Mature: 12/1/04 Through 12/1/08
Interest Payments: 6/1/04 & Semiannually Each 12/1 & 6/1 Thereafter.
Call Option: All Bonds Are Without The Option Of Prepayment.
Registrar/Pay Agent: US Bank Trust, St. Paul, MN.
Minimum Bid: $2,108,313
Est. Average Coupon: 2.4818%
AEst. Net Effective Rate: 2.8780%
~ond Sale Date: July 31, 2003
Bond Closing Date: Approximately 21 Business Days After Sale.
Bond Counsel: Briggs & Morgan, P .A.
Monte Eastvold, V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 7/2/2003
Master03
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2003
.. '>H' H~P!"tt1la.hdA~di~o~d..."'" ". ............... ·.HU1.iþ~r;tyF()int~!}~#ì~iClI1H. .
'. ......> Assessmehtš·· ··AsseSsmerits/.·.····
Estimated Estimated
Assessment Interest Assessment Assessment Interest Assessment
Year Principal 5.75% Income Principal 5.75% Income
2003 0 2,204 2,204 0 5,534 5,534
2004 460,000.00 26,450 486,450 231,000.00 66,413 297,413
2005 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 53,130 284,130
2006 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 39,848 270,848
2007 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 26,565 257,565
2008 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 13,283 244,283
2009 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2010 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2011 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2012 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2013 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2014 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2015 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2016 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
460,000.00 28,654 488,654 1,155,000.00 204,772 1,359,772
','" ",--'--.--" -'"::, ",- :.:: :: ::-:"::::»<::-:: ',-'- :.'-- -:-.-< -. -':,::::' - :.->0::: >--':' -: :.' ':'"'::-::-::" - -. .
..20Q31mpr6verriênfProjects: .(Al .
Est. Northland 7th Construction 360,300
Est. Contingencies 16,800
Est. Engineering, PlanslSpecs 58,100
Est. Liberty Pointe Construction 855,000
Est. Contingencies 85,000
Est. Engineering, PlanslSpecs 153,000
Subtotal 1,528,200
Est. 16" Watermain Construction 265,000
Est. Test Well Constr/Protection 36,300
Est. Engineering, PlanslSpecs 27,000
Est. Stormwater Management Plan 125,000
Est. Stormwater Distribution Plan 15,000
Est. Stormwater GIS SystemlMapping 35,000
Subtotal 503,300
Total Improvement Costs: 2,031,500
.
Monte Eastvold, V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 7/2/2003
Util03-5
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION UTILITY REVENUE BONDS OF 2003
!!!:a!mm!m:,mmm:! imm:::: ; !1!!maQÜ~!:â'ª":lp~tJl~!!:1 ¡¡¡:m:J¡'¡m'¡¡i,¡¡'m:i¡,¡',i,¡i¡¡,,¡,j:,¡¡¡¡,:,:i¡¡¡;!¡:¡¡!!¡¡:¡¡I¡!¡'¡!¡:¡~
Est. Total Statutory Water & Est. Annual
(12-1) Interest Debt 5.00% Cap. Storm Sewer Other Tax Surplus/ Cumulative
fear Principal Rate Interest Payment Coverage Interest Revenues Income Levy Deficit Balance
~003 ° 0.00% 3,933 3,933 3,933 0 28,000 0 0 24,067 24,067
~004 100,000 1.50% 11,800 111,800 117,390 111,000 0 ° -6,390 17,677
~005 100,000 1.75% 10,300 110,300 115,815 112,000 0 0 -3,815 13,862
~006 105,0002.25% 8,550 113,550 119,228 113,000 0 0 -6,228 7,634
~007 105,000 2.75% 6,188 111,188 116,747 114,000 0 0 -2,747 4,887
~008 110,000 3.00% 3,300 113,300 118,965 115,000 0 0 -3,965 922
~009 ° 0.00% 0 ° 0 0 0 0 0 0
!010 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~011 0 0.00% 0 ° 0 0 0 0 0 0
~012 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 ° 0 °
~013 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~014 ° 0.00% 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0 0
~015 ° 0.00% 0 ° ° 0 0 0 0 0
~016 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
520,000 44,071 564,071 592,078 0 593,000 0 ° 922
!,~pi!mçª~tº~,IÃ~!'~yñ'a§~'mm!!'!¡!!I¡: I!II !¡,t"!!;!!!,,,!,'!!;!!!!,'!"!!';!;'!!:' !'m,:,!:'!:!!:!!!!¡ !:,mmmmm!m !~~§g~§I:gp~'!Jºq~mg~"!'!¡,'!!I!:mmmm!mm::m!,!m::::::;:i:',: """"",','"",',',........
2003 WaterlStorm Sewer Projects (A) 503,300 Est. Amount of Assessments: $0
_ Less: City Cash Contribution 0 Percentage of Issue Assessed: 0.00%
9rotal Hard Costs 503,300 Interest Rate on Assessments: 0.00%
Add: Issuance Expenses First Installment Collection: NA
Est. Underwriter's Discount @1.250% 6,500 Number of Annual Installments: 0
Est. Capitalized Interest (0 Months) ° Start Date of Assessments: NA
Est. Financial Advisory Fee 4,750
Est. Bond Counsel 1 ,625 1!~'ºº~'!Wªt~rJ,§~prm':'~'~w~~;ê'r9J~þt~;~,!(lj!!I!'mm.mmmmm!!':!!:!
Est. Rating Fee 1,000
Est. County Auditor Fee/O.S. Printing 250 Est. 16" Watermain 265,000
Est. Bond Insurance Premium (65 bps) 3,703 Est. Test Well Constr/Protection 36,300
Est. Registration (One-Time Fee) 1,000 Est. Engineering, PlanslSpecs 27,000
Total 522,128 Est. Stormwater Mngmt Plan 125,000
Less: Investment Income -1,500 Est. Stormwater Dist. Program 15,000
Est. Stormwater GISIMapping 35,000
Rounded For Issuance II 520,00011
Total Improvement Costs: 503,300
Bonds Dated: 8/1/2003
Bonds Mature: 1211/04 Through 12/1/08
Interest Payments: 611104 & Semiannually Each 12/1 & 6/1 Thereafter.
Call Option: All Bonds Are Without The Option Of Prepayment.
RegistrarlPay Agent: US Bank Trust, St. Paul, MN.
Minimum Bid: $513,500
Est. Average Coupon: 2.5064%
.ESt. Net Effective Rate: 2.8761%
Bond Sale Date: July 31, 2003
Bond Closing Date: Approximately 21 Business Days After Sale.
Bond Counsel: Briggs & Morgan, PA
Monte Eastvold, V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 7/2/2003
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE .
CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
HELD: July 2, 2003
Pursuant to due call thereof, a regular or special meeting of the City Council of the City
of St. Joseph, Stearns County, Minnesota, was duly held at the City Hall on July 2,2003, at
_ o'clock P.M. for the purpose in part of authorizing the competitive negotiated sale of the
$2,135,000 General Obligation Bonds of2003.
The following members were present:
and the following were absent:
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE COMPETITNE NEGOTIATED
SALE OF $2,135,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF 2003
A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City ofSt. Joseph, Minnesota (the "City"), .
has heretofore detennined that it is necessary and expedient to issue its $2,135,000 General
Obligation Bonds of 2003 (the "Bonds") to fmance various str~ets, sidewalks, curb, gutter, sewer
and water improvements for a residential improvement; and
B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Northland Securities, Inc., in Minneapolis,
Minnesota ("Northland"), as its independent fmancial advisor and is therefore authorized to sell
these obligations by a competitive negotiated sale in accordance with Minnesota Statutes,
Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St.
Joseph, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Authorization. The City Council hereby authorizes Northland to solicit proposals
for the competitive negotiated sale of the Bonds.
2. Meeting: Proposal Opening. This City Council shall meet at the time and place
specified in the Official Terms of Bond Sale attached hereto as Exhibit A for the purpose of
considering sealed proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. The City Administrator or
designee, shall open proposals at the time and place specified in the Official Terms of Bond Sale.
3. Official Terms of Bond Sale. The terms and conditions of the Bonds and the
negotiation thereof are fully set forth in the Official Terms of Bond Sale attached hereto as .
Exhibit A and hereby approved and made a part hereof.
1541141vl
~-------
4. Official Statement. In connection with the competitive negotiated sale, the
. Administrator and other officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate
with Northland and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds, and to
execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
.
.
2
1541l41vl
STATE OF MINNESOTA .
COUNTY OF STEARNS
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Administrator of the City of St.
Joseph, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing
extract of minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a full, true
and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the City Council, duly called and held on
the date therein indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to the City's $2,135,000 General
Obligation Bonds of2003.
WITNESS my hand on July 2,2003.
Administrator
.
.
3
1541141vl
EXIDBIT A
. OFFICIAL TERMS OF BOND SALE
$2,135,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF 2003
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, STEARNS COUNTY, MINNESOTA
(Book Entry Only)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that these bonds will be offered for sale according to the
following terms:
TIME AND PLACE: Sealed proposals will be opened by the City Administrator,
or designee, on Thursday, July 31,2003, at 11 :00 A.M.,
Central Time, at the offices of Northland Securities, Inc.
("Northland"), 45 South Seventh Street, Suite 2500,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402. Consideration of the
proposals for award of the sale will be by the City Council
at its meeting in the S1. Joseph City Hall beginning at 7 :00
P.M., on the same day.
SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS: Sealed proposals may be:
a) submitted to the office of Northland;
b) faxed to Northland at (612) 851-5917,
c) for proposals submitted prior to the sale, the final price
. and interest rates may be submitted to Northland by
telephone at (612) 851-5900; or
d) proposals may be submitted electronically.
Notice is hereby given that electronic proposals will be
received via PARITY, in the manner described below, until
11 :00 A.M., Central Time on July 31, 2003. Proposals may
be submitted electronically via PARITY pursuant to this
Official Terms of Bond Sale until 11 :00 A.M., Central
Time, but no proposal will be received after the time for
receiving proposals specified above. To the extent any
instructions or directions set forth in PARITY conflict with
this Official Terms of Bond Sale, the terms of this Official
Terms of Bond Sale shall control. For further information
about PARITY, potential bidders may contact Northland or
Dalcomp at 40 West 23rd Street, 5th floor, New York, NY
100lD, telephone (212) 404-8102.
Neither the Issuer or Northland assume any liability if there
is a malfunction ofP ARITY. All bidders are advised that
each proposal shall be deemed to constitute a contract
between the bidder and the Issuer to purchase the bonds
. regardless of the manner of the proposal submitted.
A-I
1541141vl
BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM: The bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system .
with no physical distribution of bond certificates made to
the public. The bonds will be issued in fully registered
form and one bond certificate, representing the aggregate
principal amount of the bonds maturing in each year, will
be registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee of
Depository Trust Company ("DTC"), New York, New
York, which will act as securities depository of the bonds.
Individual purchases of the bonds may be made in the
principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof of a
single maturity through book entries made on the books
and records ofDTC and its participants. Principal and
interest are payable by the Issuer through U.S. Bank
National Association, in St. Paul, Minnesota (the
"Registrar'l) to DTC or its nominee as registered ovmer of
the bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to
participants of DTC will be the responsibility of DTC;
transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial
owners by participants will be the responsibility of such
participants and other nominees of beneficial ovmers. The
successful purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the
bonds, will be required to deposit the bond certificates with
DTC. The Issuer will pay reasonable and customary .
charges for the services of the Registrar.
DATE OF ORIGINAL
- ISSUE OF BONDS: August 1, 2003.
PURPOSE: For the purpose of providing money to fmance various
streets, sidewalks, curb, gutter, sewer and water
improvements for a residential improvement.
INTEREST PAYMENTS: June 1,2004, and semiannually thereafter on December 1
and June 1 to registered owners of the bonds appearing of
record in the bond register as of the close of business on the
fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the
immediately preceding month.
MA TURlTIES: December 1 in each of the years and amounts as follows:
Year Amount Year Amount
2004 $685,000 2007 $400,000
2005 240,000 2008 415,000
2006 395,000
All dates are inclusive. .
A-2
1541141vl
- -_.---
Proposals for the bonds may contain a maturity schedule
. providing for any combination of serial bonds and term
bonds, subject to mandatory redemption, so long as the
amount of principal maturing or subject to mandatory
redemption in each year conforms to the maturity schedule
set forth above.
NO REDEMPTION: The bonds are not subject to redemption and prepayment
prior to their stated maturity dates.
CUSIP NUMBERS: If the bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such
numbers will be printed on the bonds, but neither the
failure to print such numbers on any bond nor any error
with respect thereto shall constitute cause for a failure or
refusal by the purchaser thereof to accept delivery of and
pay for the bonds in accordance with terms of the purchase
contract. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the
assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid
by the purchaser.
DELIVERY: Forty days after award subject to approving legal opinion
of Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association, of St. Paul
and Minneapolis, Minnesota. Legal opinion will be paid by
. the Issuer and delivery will be anywhere in the continental
United States without cost to the purchaser at DTC.
TYPE OF PROPOSAL: Sealed proposals of not less than $2,108,313 and accrued
interest on the principal sum of $2,135,000 from date of
original issue of the bonds to. date of delivery must be filed
with the undersigned prior to the time of sale. Proposals
must be unconditional except as to legality. A certified or
cashier's check (the "Deposit") in the amount of $42,700
payable to the order of the Administrator of the Issuer, or a
Financial Surety Bond complying with the provisions
below, must accompany each proposal, to be forfeited as
liquidated damages if the purchaser fails to comply with
accepted proposal. Proposals for the bonds should be
delivered to Northland and addressed to:
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
St. Joseph City Hall
25 College Avenue North
St. Joseph, Minnesota 56374-0668
If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an
. insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the
A-3
1541I4IvI
-.
State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the Issuer. Such .
bond must be submitted to Northland, prior to the opening
of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify
. each bidder whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial
Surety Bond. If the bonds are awarded to the bidder using
a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to
submit its Deposit to Northland in the form of a certified or
cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Northland
not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business
day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by
that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the
Issuer to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The Issuer will
deposit the check of the successful purchaser, the amount
of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will
accrue to the successful purchaser. In the event the
successful purchaser fails to comply with the accepted
proposal, said amount will be retained by the Issuer. No
proposal can be withdrawn after the time set for receiving
proposals unless the meeting of the Issuer scheduled for
award of the bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to
another date without award of the bonds having been made.
AWARD: The bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest .
interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC)
basis. The Issuer's computation of the interest rate of each
proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be
controlling. In the event of a tie, the sale of the bonds will
be awarded by lot. The Issuer will reserve the right to: (i)
waive non-substantive informalities of any proposal or of
matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the
bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii)
reject any proposal which the Issuer determines to have
failed to comply with the terms herein.
RATES: All rates must be in integral multiples of 1/20th or 1/8th of
1 %. No limitation is placed upon the number of rates
which mãy be used. All bonds of the same maturity must
bear a single uniform rate from date of issue to maturity.
INFORMATION FROM The successful purchaser will be required to provide,
PURCHASER: in a timely manner, certain information relating to the
initial offering price of the bonds necessary to compute the
yield on the bonds pursuant to the provisions of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE The Issuer will covenant in the resolution awarding the .
A-4
1541141vl
UNDERTAKING: sale of the bonds and in a Continuing Disclosure
. Undertaking to provide, or cause to be provided, annual
financial information, including audited fmancial
statements of the Issuer, and notices of certain material
events, as required by SEC Rule 15c2-12.
OFFICIAL STATEMENT: The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an
addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates,
principal amounts and interest rates of the bonds, together
with any other information required by law, shall constitute
a "Final Official Statement" of the Issuer with respect to the
bonds, as that term is defmed in SEC Rule 15c2-12. By
awarding the bonds to any underwriter or underwriting
syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the Issuer agrees
that, no more than seven business days after the date of
such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior
managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the bonds
are awarded copies of the Official Statement and the
addendum or addenda.
QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT The Issuer will designate the bonds as qualified tax
OBLIGATIONS: exempt obligations for purposes of Section 265(b )(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
. The Issuer reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, to waive informalities and to adjourn
the sale.
Dated: July 2,2003. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Judy Weyrens
City Administrator
Additional information may be obtained from:
Northland Securities, Inc.
45 South Seventh Street
Suite 2500
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Telephone No.: 612- 851-5900
.
A-5
1541141vl
--~-----
Liberty
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2003
Est. Total Statutory Special Est. Annual
(12-1) Interest Debt 5.00% Cap. Other Assessment Tax Surplus/ Cumulative
Year Principal Rate Interest Payment Coverage Interest Revenues Income Levy Deficit Balance
2003 0 0.00% 9,371 9,371 9,371 25,770 ° 5,534 0 21,933 21,933
2004 125,000 1.50% 28,113 153,113 160,768 0 297,413 ° 136,644 158,578
2005 140,000 1.75% 26,238 166,238 174,549 ° 284,130 0 109,581 268,158
2006 290,000 2.25% 23,788 313,788 329,477 0 270,848 . 0 -58,629 209,529
2007 295,000 2.75% 17,263 312,263 327,876 ° 257,565 ° -70,311 139,218
2008 305,000 3.00% 9,150 314,150 329,858 ° 244,283 ° -85,575 53,643
2009 ° 0.00% 0 0 ° ° ° 0 0 0
2010 0 0.00% 0 ° 0 ° 0 0 ° 0
2011 ° 0.00% 0 0 ° 0 ° 0 ° 0
2012 0 0.00% 0 0 ° ° 0 0 ° 0
2013 0 0.00% 0 0 ° 0 0 0 ° 0
2014 0 0.00% ° 0 ° ° 0 ° ° 0
2015 0 0.00% 0 0. ° 0 0 0 ° 0
2016 0 0.00% ° ° ° ° 0 0 ° 0
1,155,000 113,921 1,268,921 1,331,898 25,770 ° 1,359,772 0 53,643
2003 Improvement Projects (A) 1,093,000 Est. Amount of Assessments: $1,155,000
. Less: City Cash Contribution 0 Percentage of Issue Assessed: 100.00%
Total Hard Costs 1,093,000 Interest Rate on Assessments: 5.75%
Add: Issuance Expenses First Installment Collection: 2004
Est. Underwriter's Discount @1.250% 14,438 Number of Annual Installments: 5
Est. Capitalized Interest (11 Months) 25,770 Start Date of Assessments: 11/30/2003
Est. Financial Advisory Fee 10,000
Est. Bond Counsel 3,000 1~ºP~'I'lrnp~º¥ømøn~!!~rQj~'~'t$¡~~I[@]!!lmmm,mm!mm!m!:,::!w!::::m:m:m::'::
Est. Rating Fee 1,500
Est. County Auditor Fee/O.S. Printing 250 Est. Northland 7th Construction °
Est. Bond Insurance Premium (65bps) 8,248 Est. Contingencies °
Est. Registration (One-Time Fee) 1,225 Est. Engineering, Plans/Specs °
Total 1,157,430 Est. Liberty Pointe Construction 855,000
Less: Investment Income -1,000 Est. Contingencies 85,000
Est. Engineering, Plans/Specs 153,000
Rounded For Issuance 111,155,00011
Total Improvement Costs: 1,093,000
Bonds Dated: 8/1/2003
Bonds Mature: 12/1/04 Through 12/1/08
Interest Payments: 12/1/03. & Semiannually Each 6/1 & 12/1 Thereafter.
Call Option: All Bonds Are Without The Option Of Prepayment.
RegistrarlPay Agent: US Bank Trust, St. Paul, MN.
Minimum Bid: $1,140,563
Est. Average Coupon: 2.6099%
~
Est. Net Effective Rate: 2.9406%
~ Bond Sale Date: July 31,2003
Bond Closing Date: Approximately 21 Business Days After Sale.
Bond Counsel: Briggs & Morgan, P.A.
Monte Eastvold, V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 7/2/2003
Liberty
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2003 .
Estimated Estimated
Assessment Interest Assessment Assessment Interest Assessment
Year Principal 6.00% Income Principal 5.75% Income
2003 0 0 0 0 5,534 5,534
2004 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 66,413 297,413
2005 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 53,130 284,130
2006 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 39,848 270,848
2007 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 26,565 257,565
2008 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 13,283 244,283
2009 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2010 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2011 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2012 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2013 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2014 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2015 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2016 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
0.00 0 o 1,155,000.00 204,772 1,359,772
.
Annual Tax Residential Market Value
Est. Tax Capacity Capacity $75,000 $150,000 $225,000
Tax Value Incr. Rate Net Tax Capacity
Year Levy 1.00% Increase $750 $1,500 $2,250
2003 0 1,936,076
2004 0 1,955,437 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2005 0 1,974,991 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2006 0 1,994,741 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2007 0 2,014,688 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2008 0 2,034,835 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2009 0 2,055,184 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2010 0 2,075,736 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2011 0 2,096,493 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2012 0 2,117,458 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2013 0 2,138,632 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2014 0 2,160,019 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2015 0 2,181,619 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2016 0 2,203,435 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 Average Annuallncr: $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Average Monthly Incr: $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
--.
--
Monte Eastvold, V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 7/2/2003
North7
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2003
.mm ,,/:/,:mm,'::~,i':'~i¡m¡,'i'imi,i'¡Bøñ'~, fiiª'''''møn~;:¡'/:imm ¡;;¡;:;I;I¡,¡¡,¡ ";:,~::;~;,:;¡,,;,lil¡,¡¡,,,,:,:;:"I:,,1:1:;::::;'
Est. Total Statutory Special Est. Annual
(12-1) Interest Debt 5.00% Cap. Other Assessment Tax Surplusl Cumulative
Year Principal Rate Interest Payment Coverage Interest Revenues Income Levy Deficit Balance
2003 0 0.00% 2,300 2,300 2,300 6,325 0 2,204 0 6,229 6,229
2004 460,000 1.50% 6,900 466,900 490,245 0 486,450 0 -3,795 2,434
2005 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2006 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2007 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2008 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2009 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2010 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2011 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2012 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2013 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2014 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2015 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2016 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
460,000 9,200 469,200 492,545 6,325 0 488,654 0 2,434
2003 Improvement Projects (A) 435,200 Est. Amount of Assessments: $460,000
. Less: City Cash Contribution 0 Percentage of Issue Assessed: 100.00%
Total Hard Costs 435,200 Interest Rate on Assessments: 5.75%
Add: Issuance Expenses First Installment Collection: 2004
Est. Underwriter's Discount @1.250% 5,750 Number of Annual Installments: 1
Est. Capitalized Interest (11 Months) 6,325 Start Date of Assessments: 11/30/2003
Est. Financial Advisory Fee 4,250
Est. Bond Counsel 1,875 ¡~ø'p:~mWmp,~p~gm~Ô~i~røÍø~ts'¡i:{~}' Im' ::,m,'::,:::mi'i:::m::,mi:::::::"'::::'"
Est. Rating Fee 1,000
Est. County Auditor FeeIO.S. Printing 250 Est. Northland 7th Construction 360,300
Est. Bond Insurance Premium (65 bps) 3,050 Est. Contingencies 16,800
Est. Registration (One-Time Fee) 1,000 Est. Engineering, PlanslSpecs 58,100
Total 458,700 Est. Liberty Pointe Construction 0
Less: Investment Income -500 Est. Contingencies 0
Est. Engineering, PlanslSpecs 0
Rounded For Issuance II 460,00011
Total Improvement Costs: 435,200
Bonds Dated: 8/1/2003
Bonds Mature: 1211/04
Interest Payments: 12/1/03 & Semiannually Each 611 & 12/1 Thereafter.
Call Option: All Bonds Are Without The Option Of Prepayment.
Registrar/Pay Agent: US Bank Trust, St. Paul, MN.
Minimum Bid: $454,250
Est. Average Coupon: 1.5001 %
-
Est. Net Effective Rate: 2.4376%
......... Bond Sale Date: July 31,2003
Bond Closing Date: Approximately 21 Business Days After Sale.
Bond Counsel: Briggs & Morgan, PA
Monte Eastvold, V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 7/2/2003
North7
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2003 .
Estimated Estimated
Assessment Interest Assessment Assessment Interest Assessment
Year Principal 5.75% Income Principal 6.00% Income
2003 0 2,204 2,204 0 0 0
2004 460,000.00 26,450 486,450 0.00 0 0
2005 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2006 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2007 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2008 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2009 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2010 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2011 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2012 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2013 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2014 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2015 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2016 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
460,000.00 28,654 488,654 0.00 0 0
.
Annual Tax Residential Market Value
Est. Tax Capacity Capacity $75,000 $150,000 $225,000
Tax Value Incr. Rate Net Tax Capacity
Year Levy 1.00% Increase $750 $1,500 $2,250
2003 0 1,936,076
2004 0 1,955,437 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2005 0 1,974,991 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2006 0 1,994,741 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2007 0 2,014,688 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2008 0 2,034,835 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2009 0 2,055,184 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2010 0 2,075,736 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2011 0 2,096,493 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2012 0 2,117,458 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2013 0 2,138,632 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2014 0 2,160,019 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2015 0 2,181,619 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2016 0 2,203,435 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 Average Annuallncr: $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Average Monthly Incr: $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
~
-
Monte Eastvold, V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 7/2/2003
42903-5
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2003
.,'¡,m:":""","";';';':¡:::;;;;i;,;;:;: :i¡'i'i:â~ft(ii,¡â~':ro~n~$'~I'!i,m, ¡,;,¡,;,¡¡¡,¡¡,::;¡m¡¡:;",¡~¡¡¡¡¡¡ ¡,¡m'",m"m',,!""¡"!:
Est. Total Statutory Special Est. Annual
(12-1) Interest Debt 5.00% Cap. Other Assessment Tax Surplus/ Cumulative
Year Princi al Rate Interest Payment Coverage Interest Revenues Income Levy Deficit Balance
2003 0 0.00% 11,671 11,671 11,671 32,095 0 7,739 0 28,163 28,163
2004 585,000 1.50% 35,013 620,013 651,013 0 783,863 0 132,849 161,012
2005 140,000 1.75% 26,238 166,238 174,549 0 284,130 0 109,581 270,593
2006 290,000 2.25% 23,788 313,788 329,477 0 270,848 0 -58,629 211,963
2007 295,000 2.75% 17,263 312,263 327,876 0 257,565 0 -70,311 141,653
2008 305,000 3.00% 9,150 314,150 329,858 0 244,283 0 -85,575 56,078
2009 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2010 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2011 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2012 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2013 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2014 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2015 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2016 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1,615,000 123,121 1,738,121 1,824,443 32,095 0 1,848,426 0 56,078
2003 Improvement Projects (A) 1,528,200 Est. Amount of Assessments: $1,615,000
. Less: City Cash Contribution 0 Percentage of Issue Assessed: 100.00%
Total Hard Costs 1,528,200 Interest Rate on Assessments: 5.75%
Add: Issuance Expenses First Installment Collection: 2004
Est. Underwriter's Discount @1.250% 20,188 Number of Annual Installments: 5
Est. Capitalized Interest (11 Months) 32,095 Start Date of Assessments: 11/30/2003
Est. Financial Advisory Fee 14,250
Est. Bond Counsel 4,875 l~gº~i'ìmp~º¥~m~n~¡f,!rºj'~!ï~$;i,i{~Fi'¡,i':mmiimm:m;:mm¡::m¡:mm:,,;,¡¡n¡,¡¡::
Est. Rating Fee 3,500
Est. County Auditor Fee/O.S. Printing 750 Est. Northland 7th Construction 360,300
Est. Bond Insurance Premium (65 bps) 11,298 Est. Contingencies 16,800
Est. Registration (One-Time Fee) 3,225 Est. Engineering, Plans/Specs 58,100
Total 1,618,380 Est. Liberty Pointe Construction 855,000
Less: Investment Income -1,500 Est. Contingencies 85,000
Est. Engineering, PlanslSpecs 153,000
Rounded For Issuance 111,615,00011
Total Improvement Costs: 1,528,200
Bonds Dated: 8/1/2003
Bonds Mature: 1211/04 Through 12/1/08
Interest Payments: 6/1/04 & Semiannually Each 1211 & 6/1 Thereafter.
Call Option: All Bonds Are Without The Option Of Prepayment.
RegistrarlPay Agent: US Bank Trust, St. Paul, MN.
Minimum Bid: $1,594,813
Est. Average Coupon: 2.4732%
-
Est. Net Effective Rate: 2.8787%
~ Bond Sale Date: July 31,2003
Bond Closing Date: Approximately 21 Business Days After Sale.
Bond Counsel: Briggs & Morgan, P.A.
Monte Eastvold, V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 7/2/2003
42903-5
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2003 .
Estimated Estimated
Assessment Interest Assessment Assessment Interest Assessment
Year Principal 5.75% Income Principal 5.75% Income
2003 0 2,204 2,204 0 5,534 5,534
2004 460,000.00 26,450 486,450 231,000.00 66,413 297,413
2005 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 53,130 284,130
2006 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 39,848 270,848
2007 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 26,565 257,565
2008 0.00 0 0 231,000.00 13,283 244,283
2009 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2010 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2011 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2012 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2013 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2014 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2015 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
2016 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
460,000.00 28,654 488,654 1,155,000.00 204,772 1,359,772
.
Annual Tax Residential Market Value
Est. Tax Capacity Capacity $75,000 $150,000 $225,000
Tax Value Incr. Rate Net Tax Capacity
Year Levy 1.00% Increase $750 $1,500 $2,250
2003 0 1,936,076
2004 0 1,955,437 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2005 0 1,974,991 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2006 0 1,994,741 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2007 0 2,014,688 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2008 0 2,034,835 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2009 0 2,055,184 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2010 0 2,075,736 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2011 0 2,096,493 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2012 0 2,117,458 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2013 0 2,138,632 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2014 0 2,160,019 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2015 0 2,181,619 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
2016 0 2,203,435 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 Average Annuallncr: $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Average Monthly Incr: $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
.
Monte Eastvold, V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 7/2/2003
\J'/U~/\J., 13;~o .AA 3kO 229 4301
SEH
_._ _._ _.__._ _. ____ ______-_"> ST JOSEPH ~ 002/004
.
. ~SeH MEMORANDUM
1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717,51. CloUd. MN 56302-1717 320.229.4300 800.572.0617 320.229.4301 FAX
TO: Judy Weyrens
FROM: Joe Bettendorf
DATE: July 1, 2003
RE: 2003 Bond Issue
SEH No. A-STJOB 0002.00 40
Enclosed is a listing of probable improvement costs for the bond issue currently under
consideration. The comments below pertain to the specific lin.e items:
1. The Liberty Pointe costs shown are only the costs for the publicly funded. portion of the
project The private road cost is $58,190, which will be financed by the Developer.
2. The North,land 7 costs shown are the costs that will be assessed to the Developer. There is a
city over sizing cost of $11,000 that is not included in these numbers.
. 3. 1 updated the estimate to reflect 2003 bid costs and added a casing to be jacked under the
W oOOgon Trail if the paving is comp]eted before we can get out"' pipe in the ground. This is to
accommodate the 6-inch water main connection to the dead end line on Cedar Street. If we
can beat the County, we can achieve some savings here. Another option is to have tbe County
place the pipe for us. We will work this oat during design.
4. The wellhead protection plan is a maIJdatory requirement and must be completed before a
neW production well will be approved. At this point the production well will be likely tied to
the new water plant construCtion proposed for the Gateway Commons area.
5. This is the estimated cost to set up the Stormwater District program.
6_ Tþe Stormwater Management Plan wou1d covet"' the entire orderly annexation area as we
recently discl1Ssed. The cost estimate is very preliminary since we have not had a chance to
prepare a proposal for the City. The cost shown would include enough drainage modeling to
provide a. framework for growth. The regional pond locations would be determined as wen as
the location. of major tn1nk storm sewer lines. This will help considerably as development
continues.
7- The aerial mapping wiI1 provide 2·foot contours throaghout the order1y annexation area. This
will help tie down the stormwater pond and trunk sewer locations, and aid future
development. It will not be a fmal design of these facilities. We should be able to recover
some of this cost from private develope:rs as the information used. The area in question has
been flown by Steams County. The current cost is to develop the rectified CQntour maps and
aerial view backgrounds from this information. This will aid nearly every City and DeveJoper
project we do for the foreseeable future.
8. The GIS element will set up the basic system and tie it into the Stearns County database. The
cost also includes putting our existing City maps on then GIS system.
- 9. The cost for the municipal test well reflects the recent bid.
-
Sholl BfIOl\ Hendriel!son lne. . Your TIU9teI1 RIISOUICØ . EQlJaI Oppollunlly Emp!oyer
U ,U~/O" ~".~" .A.4. ",,0 .:.29 4301
;".t;ö
>:- -.---.- - -.---- - ____._ _ __.__._.~T JOSEPH 141 003/004
2003 Bond Issue
. July 1.2003
Page 2
10. This represents the work already completed prior to selecting the site fot the test well, and
also jncludes the design and construction. acbninistration services for the test wen.
11. The pilot study is preparatory work for the upcoming water plant expansion, and is proposed
for this fall. The study would ÌDvolve subjecting the water from the new test well to various
treatment alternatives. This will ten us the most effective way to treat the water.
The cost breakdown is attached. Thank you:
Enclosure
c: Monte Eastvold
..~IbcnoI,"-....œ~.<Ioo
I
I
I
. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ,
I
I
I
.:-.
-
. Ut!u1/u3 13:15 ~'AA 320 229 4301 SEH
- - ---- - - ----- - ____ - _~ ST JOSEPH 141004/004
.
2003 Bond Issue Co$t Summary
A-STJOE 0002.00
1"""1-03
, Liberty Pointe Construction $850,000
Soils $õ,OOO
Contingên~ $85,000
Engineering $153,000
Total $1,093,000 $1,093,000
2 Northland 7 Construction $323.000
Soils $5,000
Contingency $:32,300
Lift station $16.800
Engineeñnl:1 $58,100
Total $435,200 $435,200
3 Trunk Water Main - 16-inch Construction $207,600
Continaencv $20,000
Engineerina $37.400
Total $265.000 $265,000
4 Wellhead Protection Plan $20,000
5 Stormwater District pl'Ogram $' 5,000
. Stormwater Management Plan
6 with drainage modeling $125,000
Aerial Mapping for Orderly
:¡ Annexation arêB $25,000
8 GIS System set-up and m2Qping $10,000
9 Municipal Test Well Construction $16.300
Municipal Test Well Engineering,
including hydrogeologic analysis.
10 system review, and report . $15,000
11 Water Plant Pilot StudY $12,000
Grand Total $2,031,500
The above casts do not Include financIng.
Bond II Revenue I Collected c:~ \I II I
. -Issue Sources Through 12/31/02 atbol 2014 I 2015 2016 2017
is!!!... Street Improvement Assessment 135,021
!Saker Street Tax Levy 64,789
Interest 19,797
1992 Water Improvement Water Surcharge 97,423
lNater Storage Facility Hookup Fees 327,300
Water Rates
Interest 16,016
L993 Street Improvement Assessment 189,425
:ast Minnesota Street Tax Levy 176,550
Interest 69,635
Other 13,990
L996 Water Improvement Water Rates 69,538 1 70,500 70,500 70,500
lVater Filtration Plant I ntererst 112,999
Transfer-water rates 345,769
L996 Street/Utility Assessment 353,947
ast MN Street/Roske Tax Levy 298,329 1
Interest 162,800
Intergovernmental 238,132
Transfers 236,413
.997 Fire Facility City Tax Levy 179,431 1 52,527 52,646 52,604 52,399
Township Levy 257,034 1 58,783 58,916 58,869 58,639
Interest 39,578
Transfers 113,252
.998 Improvement Assessment 288,836
astern Park Street Tax Levy 14,733
I. 91st Avenue Interest 32,221
.9 street/Utility Assessment 623,376 2 93,950
oseph Street Sewer Trunk Charges 17,910 16,900
Interest 54,164
.000 City Hall Project Tax Levy 97,169 1 100,000 100,000
oseph street/Bus Pk Interest 2,997
001 Sewer DBL Labs Assessmt
ewer Capacity Tax Levy
Sewer Rates 23,400 23,400 23,400 23,400
001 Development Assessment 445,424
orthland Five Interest 39,475
001 Equipment Levy
oader/Fire Truck Interest
D02 Improvements MSA
Assessment 225,703 214,782 203,860 192,939
Tax Levy 55,500 55,500 55,500 56,000
Utility Rates 64,651 64,651 64,651 64,651
Interest
IImmary of Revenue Tax Levy 831,051 4 208,077 208,196 108,154 108,449
3urces Special Assessment 1,590,605 4 319,653 214,782 203,860 192,939
Interest 549,682 - - - -
Utility Fees 512,730 2 93,900 93,900 93,900 23,400
Hookup Fees 345,210 16,900 - . -
Other 1,304,245 2 58;783 58,916 58,869 58,639
.
UIIU¿;/UJ 1o_: u4 F4.32º 229 4301 SEH ... ST JOSEPH 141 002
. .....SeJ MEMORANDUM
1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302·1717 320.229.4300 800.572.0617 320.229.4301 FAX
TO: JudyWeyrens
FROM: Joe Bettendorf
DATE: July 2, 2003
RE: Design Life of a Road
SEH No. A-STJOE 0204.03 14
A period of 20 years is typically used as a basis for road design where bituminous pavement is
the selected surfacing material. The primary reason for this is that future traffic projections,
which form the basis of the design, cannot be predicted with much accuracy beyond 20 years.
MnlDot, all Counties, and most Cities use the 20-year design period in determining the structural
section (thickness of bituminous and base material). Structural overlays are used to extend this
life, and their use usually depends on the type of traffic using the street.
Most residential streets will easily exceed this life expectancy if they are seal coated
. occasionally, and treated with an overlay as they approach the 20-year mark. Commercial streets
will typically require an overlay somewhere between 10 and 15 years of service to restore ride
quality, the cross section, and skid resistance. The timing depends on the type of traffic using the
street. Where there is considerable truck traffic, I expect to see an overlay after 10 to 12 years of
service. For residential streets, an overlay is not usually necessary until the streets approach 20
year of service. Residential streets subject to construction traffic (new developments) often
operate like a commercial street, and need help well before the 2O-year design life.
¡:Isocv\pen_lifð .........doc
Short Eliott Hendrickson Inc. . VourTrusted Resource . Equal Opportunity Emp oye¡
06/30/03 13:40 FAX 320 229 4301 -SEH ~ ST JOSEPH 141 001 .
ArSeJ 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, S1. Cloud, MN 56302-1717 320.229.4300 320.229.4301 FAX
architecture . engineering . environmental . transportation
.
June 30, 2003 RE: St.Joseph,~esota
2003 Test Wen
SEH No. A-STJOE 0302 7
Honorable Mayor and City Council
c/o Judy Weyrens
City Administrator
City of St. Joseph
25 College Avenue North
P.O. Box 668
St. Joseph, MN 56374-0668
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:
Quotes were opened in the office of SEH at 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 26, 2003, for the above-
referenced improvement. The low quote was submitted by Mark J. Traut Wells, Inc. of Waite Park,
Minnesota. A complete tabulation of quotes is enclosed.
In my opinion, Mark J. Traut Wells, Inc. is the lowest, responsive, responsible quoter and I
recommend award to them based on their quote of $16,280.00.
. Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
~ttendorl. PE
City Engineer
djg
c: Jeff Ledin, SEH (w/enclosure)
X:\P1ùljoc\03OlOlkQrr\LråIy....mmeod-063003.doc
.
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. . Your Trusted Resource . Equal Opportunity Employer
0~/30/03 1~~41 FAX 320 229 4301 SEH 4 ST JOSEPH 141002
4SeJ 1200 2$'tH AVENUE SOUTH, P.O, sex 7717. Sf. ctOUD. MN$~·1717 j20229-4300 800ll7Z.Of 7 PQge 1
TABULATION OF QUOTES .
ROJE;cr NO.: A-STJO¡; 0302-
NAME: 2003 TEiT WE!.!.
OWNER: ST. JOI!9ÞH, MINNESOTA
BID DATE: 06l26I03 0 2:00 P.M.
1 2
~W,er'8 EStimatG MarkJ. T.-ut Willis Rollkl Werner Well Drill
rMM Qn UNrT DESCRIPTION TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UN"'
.,
t: )¡!¡i#L.." .,~
1 1.00
2 150.00 Lf DRILL AND SAMPLE SMAI.L. SO.OO $B.OO S1,2OO.00 $1,200.00 $1,500.00
DIAMET£R PILOT HO!.e
3 150.00 LF ENLAR~e f'll.OT HOLE "1"0 10- $0.00 53.00 $450.00 $1,050.00 $2,250.00
INCH DIAMETË~
4 120.00 LF S' STEEL CASING WITH ßROUT $0.00 525.00 $3,000.00 $1,800.00 $2,040.00
5 30.00 LF S· WI!L1.. SCREEN WlTH GRAVEL SO,OO $80.00 $2,400.00 52,700.00 $1,200.00
PACK
G 12.00 HR DevELOP WELL $0.00 $125.00 51.500.00 $960.00 S1,eoo.00
7 300.00 LF CONSTRUCT 2" PII;ZOMETER $0.00 $11.00 53,300.00 $3.000.00 $4.500.00
WELl. (lNe. SCREEN & CASING)
B 2.00 e.A.CH 'PROTOP' FOR PIEZOMeTER SO.OO $175.00 $350.00 $130.00 $3()o,oo
WELL
9 1.00 LS FURNISH, INSTALL. FI!MOVE $0.00 5450.00 5450.00 $275.00 $1,000.00
TeST PUMPING eQUIP
10 24.00 HA TESi PUMPING SO.OO $70.00 ¡1,saO.OO $1,440.00 $1,920,00 .
11 1.00 LS TESTING ANO LOGGING 50.00 $$00.00 S3OO,OO $3,000.00 $500.00
12 1.00 L$ ~/ I, &oF! PILOT STUDY PUMPING $0.00 $500.00 $500.00 $250.00 $1/000.00
EQUIF'Mm
13 1.00 1..$ ABANDONMeNT OF TEST WELL SO.OO $900.00 $300.00 $500.00 $1,000.00
14 2.00 LS ABANDONMeNT OF $0.00 $175.00 $350.00 $300.00 $400.00
OBSERVATlON WELL
GRAND TOTAL BJD $16,000.00 I $18,260.00 I $17,105.00 $20.910.00
X:\PT\a~'<>ò Iab.Jlo
613O!C3 e
06/30/03 13:46 FAX 320 2294301 SEH -+ ST JOSEPH ~ 001/009
"'SeH 1200 25th AVlm,lS South, P.O. Box 1717, St. CloUIl, MN 68302-1717 320.229.4300 .. 320.22$.4301 FAX
arckiuclufïl . GnKinøøring . IlnlJirOnmrnLal . Lrll7lsþorlatiot/.
. June 30, 2003
RE: St.Joseph,~esota
2003 Liberty Poinre Improvements
SBH No. A~STJOE 0306 7
Honorable Mayor and City Council
clo Judy Weyrens
City Administrator
City of St. Joseph
25 College Avenue North
P.O. Box 668
St. Joseph. MN 56374-0668
DeaT Mayor and Members of the City Council:
Bids were opened in the City Hall at 11:00 a.m. on Friday, June 27,2003, for the above-referenc:ed
improvement. The low bid was submitted by R. L. Larson Excavating, Inc. of St. Cloud, Minnesota.
A complete tabulalion of bids is enclosed.
In my opinion, R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc. is the lowest, tesponsive, responsible bidder and I
recommend award to them based on their bid of $895,020.99.
. Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
~~::4
City Engineer
djg
c: Amy Schaffer, SEH (wJenclosure)
Rick Poplinski, Signature Homes, (w/enc1osure)
X~I'1)¡UI)C\o}06OOIcunlL-<i\y rvcvmmesxI-063003JIM
-
-' Short Elliott Henllñckson Inc. . YOul Tlusted Resoun;e . Equal Qpportunlty Employer
96/30/03 13:46 FAX 320 229 4301 SEH -7 ST JOSEPH 141 002/009
,. c:> '" 0 '" ~ ~ ~ 8 0 ¡fi 8 <:> 8 8 0 c:>
C! <'t C! ID 0 Q '" ~
~ œ g .,; ~ ~ ø C C ~ ~ M ~ g ~
- N 0 M ~ '" II> ....
" ~ In. N '" Ø> '" 0'> "" a ~
.. '" ~ ~ "" ,,; ~ ~ ,.: ,..: ~ ~ ~
l1. ~ .... N ~ ... ~ <Q
c.o;> ;; <h <1> ~ v.> .... ::t
0 Ln ~ I/) .... ~ ~ ~ 0 ... In ~ g :5 ~ iiš .
Q, co "'; '" C! ... <')
.,.. ..= 8 Q; d Irl ~ ;;. '" .. i ~ '" ....: a:I ~
~ ... ¡; ~ <I> ~ '" <n ...
~
<') -
~
~ ~ ~ '" 8 0 <0 0 i ~ 0 0 ~ c:> ~ CO<
,... c:> a> ~ .. ... co '"
(i; M .., ~ ~ M uJ í g N ~ ~ ~ ¡¡¡ gj
ìñ u; g; ~ '"
N c:> III ... ~ " N .....
~ ! .þ g u; Ñ ri ..... i ;;; ,.: oh ~
... "" ;; M i$. In ~ (;)
¡; "" .., ~
0 Ln ( ) .:. '" a> ~ ¡!J ;;; '" ~ ~ <:> ¡¡; M
C! CO? '" .... (,D ,... ,... ~ ....
~ ~ g ai ;; ~ ,,; ,,; '" ,,; ¡..: ~
VI- ~ .... S? ; ~ '" <f)
.,.. ....
fi
0 I/) 8. '" 8 g g 0 0 c:> c:> g <:> 0 eo '"
c:> N CD C> 0 U) 0 Q, c:¡ ç¡ C!
d .,,; C> Ilf N g ,.; on cô § fZ ,.; 0 0 æ .....
"" '" ¡Q <0 ... '" m î8 Ln '" ¡:: ,...
N '" .,.. M ~ '" '" N - '"
u; ~ .,; ~ ..¡ N .þ ,.: ,.: ..= ! ..¡
.. '" N .,.. M lh .... ~ ~ ;; ....
~ ;,; U> ~ .... <f)
0 ø co ! g 0 0 0 0 II> Ln ~ 0 ~ €. Ii!
~ I!:! =. "! co "1 0 .... .... 0
.... ¡¡; 0 Iti tri ,.; -: g d ~ ,.: Ii> !
... :5 .. ... .... ... fn ~ M V>
!,;; .. .... '"
~ g
...,
8 0 i!3 0 ¡¡¡ 8 0 0 0 C> C> 0 8 <:> ~ 0 0
.. ~ C> C> In 0 In 0 c::¡ "< c:>
I d .,,; N ~ ~ ;!j Ñ Ò co; ,.¡ co; 8 0 ~ ¡:::
... '" C> '" ... 0 ~ ~ ¡::
N ct! '" '" '" . ... Q N C> 0>
ItÌ Q ,,; ~ ,.; "" ...¡ tD .,; ,.: ,.: ¡-;¡ .¡
U) ~ N ..... ¡¡; ... ~ ~ .... '" ¡¡; '"
~ ;; '" ... '"
"-
~ Q '" ~ '" Q § ~ U') 0 .,., on I!J '" '" U') ~
~ "! ... "! Q .,. C1 0 Ii) '"
2 ~ ~ cl Ii) ... .t .¡ 0 d N .,.: cè td
~ .... ;; c.o;> <4 ;; g '" ... <n ~ ~
r- CI> .
~ ~
(i
~ co ~ 8 16 0 8. 0 C> 8 8 8 0 c:> 0 0 8
¡j =. C> ~ 0 0 '" 0 0
'" ~ ~ ~ 0 '" \11 Ilf ItÌ o;i ~ ~ ..; d .:$ .:$
...: co '" N '" '" In ;:::: ~ r;: c;; '"
'" co q, â ~ ~ '" ..... .,..
" vi .... i t ~ ,,; 1 ~ fiS '" ri ..r ...¡
z; <4 M <? ~ ;¡; ;;; <I>
~ ;; ... <I> '"
~
I";i s => '" £ 53 53 0 53 0 8 8 8 0 !?, liS 8
0: Ln 0 <.> In
~ 8 í:i § z;> .¡ u; <:; d ,..: "'" Ñ ....: ,...; d
«'> <I> ¿; ;;; f') ..., "'7 OJ> .,. ....
co '" "" <I> V1
~ :1 ...
(¡)
'" <r>
~ .. ::.::
>- iD U
'< ~
ë: ;:¡¡; Ò ~ ê ê
~ w :> Co:
~ ~ tj 0
~ ~ ø w ø ....
I , 0; ~ ~ 0 3 - ~ ~ ~
:s ;¡:;; ~ 8 :t
I , CI J:C -' a. U "".....< ~
:> ~ '" ~fj:! !.! ¡;;: ø ~$Q; oiS oiS
0 ži1 Co: .... ~ ~ ~~ !1 ~ @i!w ~
a,~~ 0 ~ ~ <
II: ø ~ c: 's~ ö ~~w
II. ø 2z ~ :::;
:s :r cI:S ë: ¡:::! ~ ~ € ð ~ w ~' ~ ~ ~
z zQ ~ w 3
- us ø <is ~
en III :i! IS: tJ 0..... 0 ~ ~ z;:¡¡; ¡¡¡ ~ [¡¡ Q.
!2 ~ ~ ::~ ?; ... ø", nw ~~ ~ ""% Q:;=> Z
0 ~ ¡s => ;:)
~ ~ ~ w ~ I!:!~ ~~:..J ~..., V5Q U~ Y1
m õ 0 § .... ::: <C :::¡; w 5 ø5w W <ð ð '"
ø.Z'? ~ !: OU 2 a. 0 a: ø ~:¡;~020 f3 ~~
i6 ~~:;;,~ ¡;¡ U U (is !6 q ø <tU U<iSUUClU...
LL. S I" ::: ¿
0 wl&l a ~ => I- ~ ~ ~ !r: IZ CI ~ ~ z z ~ ~ ü: ti:
o~oo '" ... >-
Z Q. a. § ~ => (j z z ~ => => 2 2 :z ; ~
~ ~S~~ ::; ~ U '" ~ ~ u u ::¡
0 ocÎ:~t;~ - 3
-
I- ¡a 8 8 ¡;¡ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Q 0 c>
..~".. => Q. 0.
<t .~w
~ ~ - ,..; ~ ,..;- d 0 ....: a 0 ª ~ g tri .,¿ co ij1j
...J - r- oo Ln a> ... C"oI C"oI
@~~~ "" -0 -0 - :;: Ln '" «> 0
~ Ñ :g Ñ M 0: Ñ ..:: ...: vi ~
m o II)
~ II: eo.! '" '" U? -0 to- 00 "" ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0-
-
'-
06/30/03 13:47 FAX 320 229 4301 SEH -+ ST JOSEPH ~ 003/009
: ~ ~ g C> <:> ~ C> C> II) 0 0 C> 0 0 8 5¡
q q :;¡ C> '" <"! 0 0 0 0 0
2...1 ~ 6 ~ ~ d ~ ~ \Ii c:i IZ 6 ui ð N
... ~! en ¡ "" 0 CD ~ V ... ~ lIJ
CD CD In t\!. ~ '" "". I"¡ ... ~
.. ~ rf> cr; ... fìi ;t €S Ñ :t ~
'" ;; ... '" '"
c .,. ~ ~ '" N ¡¡; ;;; <t>
a.. Z - ~ .... <I> <I
. 1':':
a
i5 g ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 .... ID 8 ~ 8 0 8 0
... ..... ,... c:> 0
d Ñ u ci Ie ;¡; ftÏ i g æ ~ ò oti Q ~
_u ¡¡; ~ ... .. ... ì'i r- oo
D:t: .. «> "" ~ ... ,... ... ...
.... ~ ~ ~ Ii ;f.
z ,.- ~
~ &Qo
S eo .... ~ 8 8. "" ~ ;1; co 0 CD N 8 ~ '"
0 C! '" CD C> '" ( ) q
tõ"" ... ftÏ '" cõ g cQ 0' ~ ~ cd oñ ~ ;1; ~
CD In .~ ;:: ... ~ "" ¡¡; I!!
z~ "!. ct '=!. ... ..... IQ IQ N C> CD
Z9 In ... &Qo N ... ~ u\' . :t ~ fD ", <'5 In· ~
CC * .... &Qo 00 .~ .... 00 ... '"
u..... <'I> <h
:J:
...U
c
êt¡ 8 en ~ CO> N g ~ N '" ~ ~ ~ ... 0 '" c>:I
'" ~ ;;¡ <=! "" C> C> ...
ä!8 ! g to- ..J .2 ~ '" ~ ~ ! fD ~ ~ or .,¡
.... ~ .. ~ ~ :¡
IDI- ;; ¡; .... CD ~ ~
<4 ~ &Qo ~ Iñ
!5 ~ .. ~
C> 8 8 0 0 8 8 8 g '" 0 C> C> ~ 8 ~
Q, C> c:> C> <:! q C!
;l C> c; g IS IS ~. $ ~. 6 0 0 C> C> C> § ~
~ ~ ... CIl "" ... 0 ~ ¡¡¡ 8
"'!. '" en '" ... ... ...
1116 ~ g ... .. ... <I> ~ ... d' .; a> g .,; g "if, .....'
<4 ... ~ "" N ~ ~ fh
6"" ø 0 .. ....
Nil:
~
1:1- S LQ 0 C> 0 8 8 8 0 '" 8 8 8 8 8 g
"')~ OIl 0 '" c>:I c c
"- <:> ~ ui d c:i ~ ~ IIÒ 6 oJ ..; Ii g c:i ~ ~
U ... .... f/> ;; '" '" N !5
i ... ;; ... .... '" U> ~ ...
fI) ... .... <4 ~ :t
~ ž ~
=
~ 8 8 8 0 0 8 0 "" 8 0 0 0 8 8 ~ 8
0 0 0 0 C> c:> Q,
~ ...I c:i ~ g 6 6 g u; .,¡ cQ æ ò '" c::i g r::: ~
~ .... ~ '" 8 ..... .., 5 ""
~:H! "'!. co ~ CD ~ "" '" ... C') ...
~ ... g ¡¡ CI;> ;; .,.: .~ t;i .q a> m ., ¡;
we <4 .. ... ... Ii> ~ U> <h
~ 21- .... fh
0
"- _en
!;: j
~ 0 In C> 8 0 0 0 0 c C> ; * 0 ~ g 0
ifi C> IN C! ~ ~ <=! <=! 0 0 C> 0
¿ zj II> g 0 In N ..¡ uS g 8 ~- ò
~ .... ... .... r- It) ~ N ....
.i ... ;; .... .... It) - .. ~ ...
i!! ~ <4 .. ~ ;; ~ ~
~
c ~ 8 0 C> C> 8 i ~ 0 0 0 "" C> <:> C> ~
<1 \!! <=! ~ 0. II) <:! C> ~ 0 0 <;>
Ii! g 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ N Ó è è è .,..::
0.; ~~ "" i C> In ~ g ~ ...
'" a .... "" Q1. OIl 11> ,.., I't ""0
~ ,þ g ~ <I> ¡; ,.: !tJ ~ <ñ ~ i :t ;¡ *
i=~ - '" '" U> N
~ æ ... '" ~
~ V)
c;i II: co 8 S 8 c C> 2 8 8 8 0 0 8 ~
a: 19l; 0 <":¡ C> 0 S co ~
~ ze e5 (¡¡; ¡;¡¡ g 0 q 0 d Ñ ~ 't:;j g g g <t!
¡;u en (1)0 C> 'Or '" N u ...
;; 0 fI) In '" .,., "" '" (1)0 m ~ ~ -0 <t>
iiit: ~ .,. ;;;. ..,. .,¡
.. <t> <1>
~ 3
~ .., 8 ;g ;g
... 8 u co w w w w
¡; ... ""' C? '" c: 2 c: c::
~ (j ~ z z 2 2 2
~ 92 (!) 0 0 C.) 0 N
.. Z c:: ~ ¡¡s ¡¡s rn
III Z W' ~ en ~ ~ ~ ~ 5
~ 2 Co. w ~ w ~ c::
- i'i ~ 2 Z 0 0 0 ¡;; Ii;
w ~
~ 'Q -J (!) IE ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ w w w w ~
æ ~2 $ ~ ~ i:Û ~ ~ ~ ~O~O~Q<t
0: U ..... ~ ~
a.. en w t% 0 $ on en en '" Z Z....¡¡;:;NZ!tI'
:Iii IU . Q: Q :!! w w ~ ~ ~ ~ < <~ oCt~ < ~
CI ~~ § ~ ~ D- o..
en !! 1! (!) u Q; Q; ¡¡; ä: ä: ä: Ej:J:Ô"'Ô ÔO-:;;
C ~ ~ 0.. 0.. 0.. 0.. 0.. Q. ¡;;Z....Zt;Zt:;ZO
z "" ;;¡; ~.... :c 1s! 1s!
iã fz~ c Q æï (.) 0 ::æ: ~> ~> ~:: ~:: zm ~~ z~ z~ ~
... w~ :5 en 0 tt. ~ ..... ~..J ¡¡.,..... =..J Ow o~ 0... o~ <:(
i6 ..~;Ii'" ... W :ž 5 u N ~ U ~ 0 -0 Ñ U U 0 0 00 U Q:
rn
IL ¡ f;
0 wilmS t- ::!;! 0 15 0 :I: tj t¡; t¡: Ii: Ii: :I: :J: :r :t: 0
g~cf1 ~ ª z z u ~ u U ~ :>-
Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :z z ;;¡: :;¡; ¡1j oct ::0
""g..... ~ <:( 0 ;:¡ ::; ..... .... w w U
q¡ 0 ~fa;~ Q.
¡:: > g "" 8 8 8 0 "" 0 8 8 8 E! 8 a 8 ~
« düiä:w t= 0 I;! C> :;!
;¡dHl~ !Z ~ 0 Ñ .:2 ~ - ..; ~ æi M ~ ..: ;;
...J - '" ~ "" ..., CD ~
I-Z~C:i "" 00 <'> -
::::J o be 5 ...,: ..s ...,: -
m II;! ãi
~ Q :;;
It Ilol .e 0- ~ Ñ N ~ ~ ;;<;¡ ... m 0- "" :; "" '"' ...
t= - "" N "" N N <? <? <? <?
-
-'
06/30/03 13; 47 FAX 320 229 4301 SEH ~ ST JOSEPH I4i 004/009
. .
, 8 ~ lG g 8 8 8 Q Q C> 0 Ó 0 8
Z.J ~ S ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
..,~ O~< u¡ iE rn ¡:s '" .. æ g¡ ~ ~ ~ g,¡ ~ '='
p) Iþ Ñ .. ~ _ .,.; <'Ì .,; ri qj r.: rJi .. .¡:~
... 'tJI't N "'it .,. w ..,. ~ - ....,. ~~
a. ~ in 01 .. ~
vi~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E¡ ~ ~ ¡;¡ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 .
Uü z¡ CD ~ ~ NON - ED ~ ~ ~ ....., Ñ
~¡ 0 N ~ ~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ ffi ~ ~
u.. ~~ .:~*-W-
~ .,.,
=
~ ~ ¡;¡ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~
.J œ .... ~ ~ - 0 0 ~ = ~ ~ ~ N
I;: ~ ~. ~ õ ~ ~_ ~ fit ill ~ ~ ~ 81 Cl
00 ~ ~;; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ æ ~ ~ ~ ~
0" ~ U) ~
;¡:
..,~
ê~ æ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~
~8 ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ § ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
1111- ~ t'>. ~ ~ ""- Ii) ~ ~ ~
! ~ ;;
8 ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8. ~ 8 ~
= ~ ~ Ö 8 g ~ ~ ~ ~ g g ~ ~ g
~ = 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ œ ~ v ~ m
w'"'S ,þ ti .... Ñ ~ ,.; "" ..¡ CO> c;; r-; tIS ..: .,¡
=.... ~ ....<':1......... <0 N ~~*w
o ~ ~
N~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8
~ 0 ;; ~ ~ 8 8 ! ~ z;¡ ~ g ~ ¡g ~ g
~ 1:: ~ iD W ~ .t;~...."'"
~ g ....... <I)
~ 8 g g 8 8 g 8 8 8 8 g g g 8
~ ~ ~ g 8 ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ g ~ g ~
~ o;t ~ -c:. I( N. ;So .... ...., "'. &l CD "f. N. N I":.
~~ "' ~ .... _ 0 ~ ~ ~ N ..... ~ ~ '"'
~ ~ N * v ~ ~ ~ W N ~ W 0 ~
R :;c <Ii' - ""
~ 0
t, ..... 12
~ 5.Jt;o ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ 8. ~ ~ ~ q q & 8
~ ..... ~ ~ ð = ~ ~ ..... "" ~ 0 ! 8 ~
~ =0 .... "" .... >! ~ ¡,. ~ ~ ~ ~ ¡2 ... ~
<: = ~.,.: "':"" <n .
::0 2: ~ ...
çi ;:)
5 g 0 ~ 000 0 ~ 8 0 0 0 0 º
d w U) I"- 0 c .. 0. r--. 0 0 c 0 Q
. 1-... 0 to: .,; 0 S . v ~ u> g g g 0 .n
t¡ 4<1: ~ !ii! rp ~ C' ~ '" ~ ~ "" u¡, <Ø :¡¡ ~
f'.:- :! ~ Q) ,..; .",: ....: .q m rt:/ ...; ~ 0; r- rÞ ..: ~
~ ~S (h ~ * w (i;. t1'7 W IJ) ¿; 0 VJ (I) '4
~ W
g ~
~ It; ~ ~ ~ E! E! a a ¡q S E! a 8 a ~
~ _0 ..,. ~ ~ ~ R ~ ;:;¡ ..., ~ S< £ s;¡ !:! ~
CO (I> tI> fooo,. t--.. 0 <h u:. iI5 r-- :c:s ~ <t)
Z:~ ..,. ..: <I> <n </)
CQ 1IJ Z ~ <CJ>
~ =
'"
~ ~~ ~ ~ d 0:
~ (f ~~ ;¡ £2 ~ ~
~ = ri ci ci 0: Œ:-: :-: ~
.~ ~ 5 ~ ~ !!;! (þ ~ ~ u £ ~ (!) ~
w ËZ ~ æ ~ ~ ~ ~.., 5 c C ~ ~
B ire ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ x ð
II: 0 « « « « z::¡: ~ I!i % UJ UJ w ¡=
t f:3 ~ .- ~ ~ !2 ~ æ ~ ~ ~::; ::; Q ~
UI w ~ c ~ i <i ~ t¡!:I > :!: ~ ~ Co: I- :§: ~ Ü 2
C 1'-. w '" wO ~ 0 c. ~ UJ ~ !JJ I:!::! W '"
~ 01: C .~ U U :'ò':;:J;.... « 10: ~ ;( 0:; ~ < z Z 0
- ozi ð c. it it ~~~ ~ x w ~ 0 (!) CD ð~u
ii m :t~:; !1. a:,;,. ~ 8¿rn w fo ¡¡:! ~f;j~ fo ?o U2~
u.. "'a::iFO
o ~S!jj ~ t¡; tï: t; = t! t¡; t;: :I: :I: :I: :I: :I:
~ 8:::! 0 I ~ ~ 'z z z ':;i ~ ;; ~ ;¡; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ 0 !il§~'" u ;: ;:);:) w .... -' uJ -' ..... ... w w W w
<I:....III~
__, E 0': ¡jj ã: w r= ~ 8 S S 8. ~ ~ €j Eì ~ g ~ q ª 8~.
..... -F !:s:;¡ R:: '" '" C'oI on 0- '" R: ~ 0 - H
...I %<~< 2::õ :s ~ '" '" C> G) ~ ~ - ~ -
_ I-z;=C « ~ <?.,., ri
_ &1 o~ :J
D:I a II) Q
ct !!= ñ'i \l1 -0 ~ cO 0. 0 - N .., ~ 00 ,.. <0 g; ¡¡;¡
I- - !: <") ..., '"' '"' CO> "<C ... '" '<:f '<:f .... .... .... ~~, _
'-
Q6/30/03 13:48 FAX 32Ö 229 4301 SEH ~ ST JOSEPH ~ 005/009
;- Q U1 e C\I ,.
Q - I;! It;!
~ë! .,; ~ ... !Ó i
.... ~. CD ~
~ .... ~ ~ ~
Šg ui 5 <;; ~
~ CO> .~
... ...
""'~ ....
. CI
=1- g ID ~
CI:~ -c: CD
liu .,¡ .., ... .,¡
$ ... ;; II)
=1-
:2
~
N ~ .... ~ ~
~ "!
l¡-' m ,.. '" ~ cD
Q ~ ....
z~ ~ '" N
ai ;. v> ~
8ß co ~ <I> =
:c -
VoPU
c:I:
I!!; .... '" ~ C
Q ... r-:
iiio m it ~ ~
i~ * <t>
Z
:J
8 ~ co ¡ I:
oJ ~ t-: :;¡ ~ fli
CD ~ g
c ....
~g ò uS ;. uS .,;
;; ~ .... !
u
~=
~
a: I- g '" 8 ~
....8 C\I
... oñ .,; ~ g
!! u ~ <I>
I- 0
~ z
~
~ ~ 8 c 8 ~
... Q
~ ooJ ~ O':Ì rD ~
N ~
~ tiS N
N ~ re CI> ~
~ ~.. 0)
.. -12
i 51- ~ g 0 C>
-'8 "! I;!
III g !! ~
II;U '<"'
III ~ ...
.Æi l-
e; §
ã c:> C> ~ 8 ...
d !II Q, Il '<"'
~ ~... :3 0; !è 01
go N
co ::¡;~ ~ an m '<"'
!:i' m ,.; ~ ~ Ë
t: ¡::ß N "I-
..,.
ð 18 .,.:
YJ ...
II!
C' mlð 8. co co a
..: "I I;!
§ ~8 8 00 .., l&
0 ,....
;;; <I>
~ iiP=
~ §
~
<q;
~ 1/1
I-
a z iš £
IU ~
.:! ¡;¡¡ ø
~ f ~ g: ~ B
~ æ ffi ØI
U 11. ..J
a. 1ft ~ c.. ð ¡$
:;¡ 8 z
en IU :!! Q ~ ~ ~
I- ~ ~
C :z ri ~ m £ií g
õzg z
¡¡ U ¡¡:; ~ <
1:1._.. =
i6 .~;;;ï:!" i:> ~ C!J
1L. a ......
:& f\!»
0 IUw..... I- :¡: [¡; ~ 0
o!!!Cllå ž ~ z
Z ~"'D ?S ~ :::>
I;"~J§ :J 2
IQ 0 w
cicnm
~ d~ffi¡!! ~ 8 c:> 8 8
q
i ~ .... ~ S!
..J :z~z< ...
I" ~
;:) b ~g 5 ri
m ã iö
~ R: 1f u; N IB ~
!:: 10
-
~
06/30/03 13: 48 FAX 320 229 4301 SEH 4 ST JOSEPH ~ 006/009
& ~
u ~
~ -
.0
.
8 8 ~ ~ g 8 g ~ ~ 8 8 8 g g 8 g
ê ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ò ~ Q ~
~ ~ m ~ m ~ m ~ ~ ~ œ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q
~ ~ ô ~ ~ Ñ ~ Ñ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ; ~ ~ ; 0 .g " ~ ~ ~ W ~
a i 8 ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 8 ~ ~
o ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ó ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ * 0 * ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
t Ii
i õ ~ g ~ g fð 8 g 8 8 8 8 8 ~ g 8
.. ö \ño N 4 r.D'.' ð d" ~ u1
~ ~ m N ~ ~ œ ~ _ g ~ 8 Q ~ ~ N m
~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ t; œ - v.. ~ ~ ~ fl) ~
ffil=! "> 1 ~ ~..,. <.? ~ ! ~ ~ 4+ :; W ~
""!È
:;)
\I,/!ñ 0 \g 8 ~ g ~ g ~ [5 8 g 8 8 13 ~ 8
B8 g ~ g ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ i g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
W/::: ID. <4 ~ '1'7 .... tJ)
~~ f¡
o ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~
ò ' . . . . . . ø . . . . . . .
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m m ~ - 0 ~ Ñ
~ ~ ; ~ ~ ;: ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~
o ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ æ ~ ~ ~ ~ ª
2 .: Iß -"" as - .,; - Q ..f . ~ Ñ ,..: ,..: ..:
* ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ; ; ~ ~ ~ w * ~
o Q: m '" 0 8 80'" 0 0 oJ'> ~ '" 0 .
~ G q "'"": "II" C! . . ~ ~ ""! "'! ~ ~ lI'! <i1
g ~ § ~ ~ g ~ g ~ ! ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~
d ~~ ~ ô ~ ~ - ri ~ ~ ~ ¿ ~ ~ ~ d
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
8 g g ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~ .g ~ ~ S ~ ~ ~
08' ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g 2 ~ ~ ~ ~
. 0 w (t) ,¡,¡¡. .w.. ~
o <?
N <4
....
~ ..... J.!
S Z <.)
q; W <:::
is en æ d W :; C;¿ c!
~ I- ;:. > W ~ 0 ~ W
'" if¡ 5 <.Þ ~ æ ü 5 <.Þ u.. 55 ü
~ ~ 0 i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 i~~ <.Þ ø æ
> >- 0') Õ'" ~ 0 Ü Q: (,þ;:S~ c: ,¡s cIS 2:
~ ~ ~ ~ÇJ ~ g ~ ~ ~ !ij ~ 3:1!2 ~ ~ ê... ~
w ø o\!:'''' W :2 c:¡; -. ~ ~ .~oo;; :::> :::,.Jw
gg (!¡ :I: IÌi5 ~zo ~ ~ :::. "" ~ I!! ;!i 58 ~ <.)<0 u~ ~
_ z...... :;) ~ t:: "'" c: '-" "':£' ¡;( U>,.......,=....
en W:Ë z¡: tj (!¡ ~¡::o w a¡ 5 ~ ;>~Z::::!:Ž ¡¡¡;g .,;!l.
g ¡ é( ~ ê ~ ~~~ ~ B ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~fõ~~~
a3 a.Z~ ~""'!:!:I ou=> ~ ~ £ Þ:; g~~~~8:;)oo!ßo~-
ii ~ ~ ~~ C ~ (,) u 15 íã ~ ~ <.Þ ø < <.) 2: ~ ~ <.) 5 <.) <.) [;J U ~ ~
LL. oa::fo '"
o ~~~§ R ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ e z ð ~ ~ ~ ~
Z ~S~§ ~ 3 ~ D ~ 5 5 ~ Ò a ~ F- ø 5 § ~
~ Q ~~~~ 3
~ "__, !:;: 0': W ët W E! ~ ~ ~ a ~ s s a ~ a ~ ~ 8 ~ S "a
- z:<w.... ~ - ¡!3 I'-!à R :Q 0 æ ~ ;¡ g ~ ~ ~ :&
....I .a;:z< co ¡;: -0 :;:s - ~ :O;¡OS It> "'" ... 0
:;::) t;%~~ Ñ 8 Ñ o? O:..,¡ <oJ ~,...: oñ '"
ED ã o~ '"
< ~ _ ~ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ 0 _ ~ M ~ ~ ~ h
.... ~ ., , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - ~ -
0,6/30/03 13; 48 FAX 320 229 4301 SEH -+ ST JOSEPH III 007/009
..,
~ ~.
;a
.
z 8 ~ 8 ~ ~ 8 ~ $ g re 8 8 g 8 8 i
º~ ~ 0 . ~ ~ m - r Ò ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ m
~~ ~ ~ æ ~ ~ m ~ = ~ m ~ & ~ s· ~ ~
~6 - m ~ ~ ~ * Ñ ~. m ~ g ø ~ ri . N
~ iio en "9- -..,. * ~ ~ ~ en ~ g ... ø ~
co
CIIZ
C
§~ 8. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
OU ~ ~ ~ i g i ~ 5 i .~ æ ~ ~ ~ ~ !
~~ ..,."" ø G9- ow .. .". fIII:t ... _
j::;: ;;. ~ ;$
:1
~ ~ ~ 8. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & ~ S. ~ ~ ~ 8. a
~~ ~ g ~ ~ g ~ 0 ~ ~ g 0 2 8 g g ~
c~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ II> ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ ¥ m ~ ~
51:: ~ øi g fI) .... ~ r '" rti ~ IŠ .,j' rt1 oJ it .:
~~ ~ ~ * * ~ ~ ~ w ø ~ w ~
w
""i
::3
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8. & a g ~ ~ ~ ~ B. ~
:0 0 N U) 0 Q 0 0 ~ .., .,.¡ !P. 8 0 e CI ~
u~; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ # ~ ~ & g ~ ~
w_ en ~ _ _ _ Ñ ....
;!iš - '" u¡. ~
~ 8 8 g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ø ß
~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~
~4 m ~ N ~ ~ ~ m ~ _ m ~ ~ m ~ ~ 0
0= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ñ ~ m m _ ~ m Ñ
o~ w .. 'fñ.,. fI) ~ ~ tr> ~ .... g ".,. (I) i+
W
",-
~
=~ ~ ~ 8 ~ Ñ ! ð ~ ~ ~ ~ Ñ ~ ~ ~ 8
~ß ~ g M m g ¡' ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ œ "" ~ ~
~:: ;. ~ ~ fa ;; ;; fi ~ m ëi ~ ~ M
. '" - ~ '" fI) _ 0'> II>
.. CI> <h ~
:1 ~ 0 III C 8 œ .., "" ~ N Q ~ CII m ~ 0
N 0 0 ~ ~ ~ N 0 0 c ø œ .~ ~
i~ ~ Ò m ò ò Ñ Ñ ~ N . 0 ~ .: ø m Ñ
-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ re ~ ~ ~- N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~o - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ õ g ~ ~ N
~~ ~ - ~ - u _ ~ ~ ~ _ - 0 ~.
o
&nf&1
z= III ~ .... ~ CI œ - ~ 1t) S 0 ~ ~ i ~ ~
~o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m
ŒU ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ N œ m ~
< I- z¡. - UJ' ID c:g '" W. ..,. (IJ ~. f.tJ Q) Vi ""
~z - ø ~ ~ ~ .~ ~
~
~ ~ g B ~
~ ~ ~ .~ ~ w ~ w w
i!: !/) Z ZZ 2 53 ~2
~... - lI}~!!! ~ Ü ü U tJ (\
Co Œi z: ... ffi ~ tn tn ... is ::J ~ => ~
1; ifì g ~ ~ z ZC ~ ~ ~!;; ~ ~ ~ s
> ¡ (!) 0 ot!:: c.: "" Q:: w w w wt,)
i ~ ~~~ ~ æ Jf ¡¡; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~g~ij~~~
II. rn "":¡;;'" I; :::J 0( « '" en '" Vol g z;è:lz ZSCL
~ III Ci:O.... ~ ~ w w ~ ~ w w <;¡¡; <.¿i;<
o E:š Q (! ~~~ ~ ~ & ~ il: il: If ~ ~;r~~:Š~Eio-~
Q z < Z ~==J: oct ::¡ !3 !3 Il. t3 ð 13 '-Zt;Z~Z:t;ZO
- Õz8 õ o~ ~ 0 ~o c:: C! ~> 0::> a:~ C!~ :2o~ z~ z¡¡\J Zo~ ~
ØJ A... W Wc;;:) tn = '_'-'-...J~-' wo...ol ,l w<.
ii ~.. >~;; ~ w~ ~ i5 0 ::!! Ñ ~o ~tJ ~tJ e;¡u uo (,)0 u¡;.¡ C)¡;¡ ê!
"" sffiz..
o ~!I~8 t: ~ i Z ~ ~ i3 13 ti: [¡: It ~ is i3 a ð ~
z i,3;~~iCl ~ Sè ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ :5 9 § ~ s ~ ~ ~ B
~ 0..=.",'"
_ ...wc.rJ
_'I !::; ., ill if w ~ 8 ~ e. a a a a ~ ~ é! ~ 8 ~ ~ €1 s:¡
- Z02w¡'" i -ò ª N .., 8 '" ... 0. CÐ 8 .... -::;
..J ... ~ iCC ~ .., - f', "" a;> - "" ..
~--. c ~ M _ _
:) OZ C ~..: >t! ..:_
m W 0_ CJ
a It!
« II: ¡:;¡ 00 0- <:> _ N ~ ot) -ð .... oc .,., 0 _ N ..., ....
... CL. e - - (Cõ.i ('i C"If ~ N N' N N (\I c-J C') c? ~ ~
Q6/30/03 13:49 FAX 320 229 4301 SEH ~ ST JOSEPH ~ 008/009
.
'; 8
'" ~
~ <5
.
. -
:z '" 5S @ '" g '" ~ 0 0 '" 0 0 '" 0
q 0 co ID ., 0 C! C! ~ "!
2 ~ &i .,; d g M ~ ~ ;;; ai ii3 ~ ~
~~ C! ë5 m Iõ a> ~
... '" '" a:> ~ '"
=0 f:i ~ ~ Ñ t'S" ,.: ~ oð ..; ~ a:> a:> Ñ .
..,. ... ~ ... '" ... ø .... ...
~'"" '" ~
=z:
8~ '" C! ~ 0 '" ~ 0 co ¡¡¡ ~ C! '" 8 '"
a:S co C") C! co on 11) q 0 co
:II,) Ñ a; ~ 0 .,; ¡¡ 0 ...: '" '" a; ~ c;
'" C4 ON ON '" .". <; '" '" ~ '"
e ~ ... ... ... ~ æ ª <t>
:5~ .,.: ;;
<I> ..,.
:I
~ 8 8 0 co ~ co '" '" 8 0 '" 8 8 C!
'" Q, ~ Q, q '" co ~
6..1 !. ~ ô ¡g § ~ ON '" ui 0 d ~ 0 ¡;
.... ... ~ ¡::, C! 8 ....
II:~ "'. '" gj '" '"
~ ~ ~ ¿ <Ii ¡¡. ¡¡ Ñ elf ~ ..,;
~o ... <I'> ... '" ~ ~ 1.1)
a:¡- ... w
W
...C
~I- ~ ~ g g 8 0 g ¡¡; 8 0 C! 8 8 0
Wen '" '" 0, '"
s!g ... N d g <6 ..; $ ....; g co ! g t-.:
~ '" ! '" ... t; C! '"
Ide ... ... '" <n <no ... N '" <I'>
~ N .,.: ...
~~ ... t,{)
~ '" U) '" co ~ <j) '" to '" iG g
N C! 0 <' ~ '" '" co
.....1 ~ ...: ~ d ,..; ~ ... ".: .,; "" .,; .,.; ~
fï!J~ ¡:.¡ '" iJ .... ~ ~ cc ;. ~
5 .... .... Q, 11) ~ '"
~ !! '"' Lñ g .cc Lñ ON ... <Ii Ñ ~
00 ... <I> ~ ... <I'> .,. ~ w (,Q ~
I,)¡-
"'~
CI;
O¡- ~ ~ ." '" ~ .,., N '" a:> ... <to Lñ ~ 0
ï=1I) "'; co <D ON ..,. "'=
11:0 rri C\I .,; ~ .,; 0> ;; ....; i co M ~ ItÏ
OU ... ... :; .... CD 14 ... ~ ! '"'
~ -0:. <t> ... '" '" v.>
¡¡:~ ~ ;; ... .
C4
:!
~ '" 53 0 In ~ ~ '" '" .... ~ a a> '"
~..J q g "'; C! ~ "'= .., ~
0 '" ~ ¡¡; .,; ;:: re N '" Ô .; N Õ
~ cc ~ N N ;;. '" ...
I-~ .... '" a:> ;fi I;> Ø) "!. ..... 0:0
m ~ 1.1) -~ .,.: â ,..: ",' ~ i- ... .,.;
§o 1o't ~ ... <t> 00 ... (I) ~
<l-
I)
o()t
tslb e <Þ '" 8 ~ .., ¡;¡ ~ ~ g .... M i 0
'" r-- ... N Q, ~ ...
UJQ N .,; ai d ì! .,; ~ .. <Ii <IS ¡:;; M ~ ....
a:u ... ... (/) ~ .., ~ t; ... ... '"
5'= ~ <09- ~ ~ ~ <I>
;; ""
z ... <I>
:I
~ -0 cz: -'
N U §
'0( ~ ...
¡!; ~ '" ~
~ E ~
\(¡ 0< cè c:: ð x
0.. Z ~ w w 0 c..
ª W ~ ~ 0 ö ~ u 0
~ II! CD 0
Z w Z w :r V> => 0 0 z I;;
> 0 "" ~ .. ~ ¡; 0 Z :!:: ~
0 z
0 ã: !( >- >- ~ :r w , "" <: ~ Q
a: 0 '~ ~ z ~ ;! z ~ ~
a. f3 :> "" ~ ~ z < g ¡
1,2 >- :I:
¡¡ <t Z Z ~ ~
1:1 ~ E ü <: t;
en !:! ~ :;¡ ~ <: I--~ >- ~ £ en cz: ... > > ~
ci W <n 80 c: w ~ ~ w w .....
9 z 0 L1 ~ u Z:I: ~ ~ . ~ ~ :;: :2:z Ô
Õ 0 " it ~ .... ~ ~
z ð~ z rJj 8< ü
m c.i!~ 0 x ><
fg ~ ~ u:::¡ :1i = ~ . N = :0 :i =-
i5 ~r=..;::: c.. w -Q II?
U. sm~~
0 IW llij c 5:! Ii: t¡; X :I: ~ :I: t¡: t¡; r:;: ~ t3 :r % :I:
g:¡~ U ~ U U u ~
Z ~ ~ z z ;¡j ~ "" § z z "" $ ;¡j
¡";'''"'", u ::; :::1 W w :::1 ::; w W \U
~ 0 ~~t;~
-
5 ~ E! 8 ~ 0 0 ¡;:: 8 g 0 '" 8 ~ 8 <=>
ciaiiã:::w <..;¡ 0 c¡ s c
§ 13 K: N Irl g: :3 ~ ¡;; ô - ..:; M
:z~I.II!;;: N - - ~
I-~~O N -
= CI; of ,.; ri
~ Q~ :J
EO Q
;5 II: iB '" " 10 C/o ~ :;;: N .., ~ Ii) .0 t; <> "" tð
Il. !:: .., <') M M .... ... .... '<I .... ..,.
-
~
~6/30/03 13;49 FAX 320 229 4301 SEH -7 ST JOSEPH I4J 009/009
/ .
'"
I ~
~
.
.
:2 I:> ... 0 C> D
..... ... N ...
2..... ~ g N ~ .
t)c IZ> ...
"!. q, '"
='"" f? .ID ~ II) ."
t5~ ~ ... CD
.
CI) ..:
IZIZ ...
0
~~ 0 <> ~ ....
... (') IZI
=0 m :1 "" f4.
0 t\I
~t: ~ .."
...z
=>
c 8 0 <:> ~ g¡
z 0 :;¡
=>..... ~ ~ ~
~g ... <> lit
<II O!.
CD ,,; .;; ... ,,;
... ~ w g
., Iii'"' ..:
....§ ~
J~ 8 0 "" ~
WIIJ <> 0
~8 ¡g III Ié ~
... ~
~~ !1)
::>z
~=
tv ¡g !8 ... g¡
,.. <>
t¡..... d po,: as Ò -
co II> .. '" en
~6 T" ... ... ... ..
or ..; .;; rß ,.:
<I> ~ "" en
0,", :
W
"'.....
4:
c~ ~ ... .., it
~~ .... ..,
Iš<.'l 8 ~ !! FJ
zt: ~ <t>
. Z
=
.
; ~ CD <D 0
III..... tv C') ~
~ .. t.: cD
~c IÐ tv ~ Vi.
t-~ "! "t
§c .... g ;; ...: i
* .."
-.;1- ... '"
(J ...
"'~
ZÞ- IZ> ; f!:. '"'
ow '" CD
wg ¡ ã m ,.;
~... <;; .."
.....-
!5
~
q;
æ ~
~
.. z ~
~ W w
11 a ~ en
~ t- o "" ~ C
II.
i ø; ~ ~ æ æ
u ....I
11. ~ D- c... :z ct
æ 0 0 2 ~ I-
m !! :i 0 Ii; () « ~
¡z: :s ~
c .;, <tI 0
Z § ~ ::> ffi
- Õz2 en z:
In ;;¡;; :;c ct
11._ u II:
i5 ~iil!!\o* .. 3= c:I
U. S £;
0 WWIU'" ... :r Ii.: ~ C"I
O!!WD Z ~ %
Z "2...10ª ~ ~ ~
t;g:§ J ~
~ 0 w
<~!õ
¡:: ., w ä: ü.ì ~ 8 <::> 8 8
C( c;¡
~~~~ <':i .... i*! ~
-I t- '" ..,.
Z N
::» I-z""o c ri
ŒI oe =
£Q o III C
t: a: :i! N :8 ....
Do. III ¡¡;
= II) '"
-
-
. VRajkowski
11 Seventh Avenue North· ~~~~~~~~ Ltd.
P,O. Box 1433 June 26, 2003
St, Cloud, MN 56302-1433
Ms. Judy Weyrens
Clerk Administrator
320-251-1055 City of St. Joseph
Toll Free 800-445-9617 21 First Avenue Northwest
P.O. Box 668
Fax 320-251-5896 St. Joseph, MN 56374
Ro' C,tv of St JAgpph - Amp...,;.:¡.....,o....tto 01"ctin<>-n'''As L'qu""'" T '!""'neing-
..... .z"....., _ .......;.",.,.... ....,...," Á-.··..... .Jo...¡........_.:I--.L'\"¡..L..i..L~....L,,... . ........... . ...........1......."'" ..&. V..L ...i-'.l.v.....J. u -.
rajhan@rajhan.com Our File No. 22641
www.rajhan.com
Dear Judy:
Upon review of the amendments of Minn. Stat. § 340A recentlypassed by the State of
Minnesota which extend bar hours to 2 a.m. and the St. Joseph Ordinance Code,
amendment of the St. Joseph Ordinance Code will be necessary to prevent establishments
with liquor licenses ftom remaining open until 2 a.m.
. Enclosed please find the following:
1. Amendment to Drdinance 71: Licensing and Regulation of Consumption
of Intoxicating Liquor (regarding hours of operation);
2. Amendment to Ordinance 71: Licensing and Regulation of Consumption
Frank j. Rðjkowski iilQ of Intoxicating Liquor (regarding definition of 3.2 percent malt liquor);
Gordon H. Hansmeier 3. Amendment to Ordinance 72: Licensing and Regulation of the Sale and
Frederick L. Grunke Consumption of Non- Intoxicating Malt Liquor;
4. Amendment to Ordinance 72: Licensing and Regulation of the Sale and
Thomas G, Jovano'fich ~ Consumption of Non-Intoxicating Liquor; and
Paul A. Rajkowsk¡1i> 5. Amendment to Ordinance 74: An Ordinance Limiting Possession of
Certain Containers of Non- Intoxicating or Intoxicating Malt Liquor
Kevin F. Gray (Kegs);
VVil!iarn J. Cashman
The St. Joseph Ordinance Code incorporates the sÚl.tutory hours of operation. Therefore,
Richard \¡Il. Sobalvarro if the Ordinance Code is not amended, the newly enacted extended bar hours will be
Susan rift Dege adopted. The following sections of the St. Joseph Ordinance Code incorporate the
LeAnne D. Bartishofski statutory hours of operation and must be amended to limit the hours of operation of
establishments with liquor licenses to 1 a.m: (1) Section 71.9 Subd. 1; and (2) Section
Sarah L. Smith 72.8Subd.l.
froy Þ,. Paetz
-
11 M. Bromeland
-
Gregory J. Haupeít
Frank j. Rafkm/</ski ilfX{ Richard Vi 50baivarro are admitted to practice in North Dakota, Gordon N. Hansmeier in North Dakota and ~¡''¡is(onsin
Paul.4. RajkG'lvski and Sarah L. Smith in VVisconsin. and lrVilfiam 1. Cashman in South Dakota.
D Member or A.merican 8Œ-¡f(J of Tria! Advocates. tiOuai¡tieu ADR NeutraL
V
June 26, 2003 .
Page -2-
Additionally, the tenn "non-intoxicating malt liquor" has been changed to "3.2 percent malt liquor"
in Minn. Stat. § 340A.1 01. Since this tenn has been changed, there no longer is a definition of
"non-intoxicating malt liquor." The tenn "non-intoxicating malt liquor" is used in Ordinance 71,
72, and 73. Since the St. Joseph Ordinance Code adopts Minn. Stat. § 340A, these ordinances must
be amended to use the same defined tenn as the Minnesota Statutes to avoid ambiguity.
Enclosed please fmd draft resolutions for amending the liquor ordinance to limit hours of operation
and replacing the tenn "non-intoxicating malt liquor" with "3.2 percent malt liquor." If you have
any questions or corrections to the resolutions, please let me know.
SiÙcerely,
RAJKOWSKI T~ EIER LTD.
--1 .
,!A A
/ /
By V
Thomas G Jovanovich
TGJlbaw .
Enclosure
-
-
.
AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 71:
LICENSING AND REGULATION OF CONSUMPTION
OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR
The City Council for the City ofS1. Joseph hereby ordains:
That Section 71.9 Subd. 1 of Ordinance 71 of the S1. Joseph Code of Ordinances be
amended to read as follows:
"Section 71.9: tIOTJRS.QF OPEM TIQ;N.
.- .-- . -.-
Subd. I: Applicability of State Laws. No sale of intoxicating liquor shall be made at any
time when the sale of intoxicating liquor shall be prohibited by state law, except that no sale of
intoxicating liquor shall be made between 1:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. on the days of Monday
through Saturday, nor after 1 :00 a.m. on Sunday, except as provided by Section 71.9 Subdivision
2."
This Amendment to Ordinance 71 was passed the _ day of , 2003 by the City
. Council for the City of St. Joseph.
_ Mayor
Clerk! Administrator
This amendment was published on ,2003.
-
-
.
AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 71:
LICENSING AND REGULATION OF CONSUMPTION
OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR
The City Council for the City of St. Joseph hereby ordains:
That all references to "non-intoxicating malt liquor" in Ordinance 71 of the St. Joseph
Code of Ordinances be amended to "3.2 percent malt liquor".
That Section 71.11 Subd. 3 of Ordinance 71 of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances be
amended as follows:
Subd. 3: Identification. Every person shall process and show proper identification to a
licensee, employee of a licensee or police officer when requested to do so when the following
circumstances exist:
a) The person is entering or present in the premises licensed for the sale of
intoxicating liquor.
b) The person is in possession of intoxicating liquor or non intoxicating 3.2 percent .
malt liquor, either on or off licensed premises.
-
For purposes of this ordinance, proper identification shall be limited to a valid
driver's license or official state identification card.
This Amendment to Ordinance 71 was passed the _ day of , 2003 by the City
Council for the City of St. Joseph.
Mayor
Clerk! Administrator
This amendment \vas published on ,2003.
-
-
.
AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 72:
LICENSING AND REGULATION OF THE SALE AND CONSUMPTION
OF NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR
The City Council for the City of St. Joseph hereby ordains:
That Section 72.8 Subd. 1 of Ordinance 72 of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances be
amended to read as follows:
"Section 72.8: CLOSINQ !{OURS.
Subd. 1: No sale of3.2 percent malt liquor shall be made between 1 :00 a.m. and 8:00
a.m. on the days of Monday through Saturday, nor between 1 :00 a.m. and 12:00 noon on
Sunday."
This Amendment to Ordinance 72 was passed the _ day of , 2003 by the City
Council for the City of St. Joseph.
. Mayor
Clerk! Administrator
This amendment was published on ,2003. .
-
-
.
AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 72:
LICENSING AND REGULATION OF THE SALE AND CONSUMPTION
OF NON-INTOXICATING LIQUOR
The City Council for the City of St. Joseph hereby ordains:
That all references to "non-intoxicating malt liquor" and "non-intoxicating liquor" in
Ordinance 72 of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances be amended to "3.2 percent malt liquor".
TIllS ..t\mendment to Ordinance 72 was passed the _ day of , 2003 by the City
Council for the City of St. Joseph.
Mayor
Clerk! Administrator
.
This amendment was published on ,2003.
-
-
.
AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 74:
AN ORDINANCE LIMITING POSSESSION OF CERTAIN CONTAINERS OF NON
INTOXICATING OR INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR (KEGS)
The City Council for the City of St. Joseph hereby ordains:
That all references to "non-intoxicating" in Ordinance 74 ofthe St. Joseph Code of
Ordinances be amended to "3.2 percent".
This Amendment to Ordinance 74 was passed the ~_ day of __ , 2003 by the City
Council for the City of St. Joseph.
Mayor
Clerk! Administrator
. This amendment was published on ,2003.
-
-
J UN-2..:h::~ØØ3 16:39 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
P.14/19
rr"
'3 ð /VðU:zJ
t, I,· /'
MAY 2002
" .r~ . IY/H AMJ:RICAN 111
PLANNING
A$SOCIATlON
CopIng with Colleges:
How Commu..lties Acldress the Probl....s
of Students LivIng Off.Campus
By Craig Raborn
Communities With colleges and universities have long
snuggled to develop effective methods for coping with the
pressures of studcnts living in off-campus housing, parcicularly
the encroachment of student r<:ncal housing into nca.rby single-
family neighborhood!; and the negative effects of this
encroachment. These impacts indude a number of issues, such
as rising rental pricc:s and loss of affordable hou.~ing, major .shifts
in property v;Úues, increased nuisance and noise complaints,
traffic congestion, and reduced parking availability. As
communities and neigbborhoods expcrience these potl1:ntiaUy
negative ixnpactS, citizens may begin to bring pressure on eleCted
officials to take some type of corrective and preventative: action.
.anners must give careful consideration to these issues and to
c full range of immediate: and long-term solutions so that they
might effectively solve these prQblems; and create framework.~ for
pl'cvcntÏng thciX" I'coccurænce.
Effective regulatory approaches to
student housingíssues almost always
involve some level of increased Studrnrs livirlg (J.f.fcampus often rfSuÙs in sì¡;nificant conversion¡ of
single-fami/y homes. This example in Austin, Texas, 3h(Jwt ;he drivfWay
effort in code enforcement. rtplacing the front yard. a sitk stairway leading ;0 an upstair!
apartment, and a parry patio" attached to the front of the house. Also
College enrollment in the United States is projectcd to rIote the ,~emi·permltnerzt "For RCrlt" sign.
increasc 12.4 percent between 2002 and 2010 (National Center
for Education Sratistics, 2002). In mOSt cases, college enrollments . ii~~¡l{~t!;;~~;~?r*~~~~f~~~,
will signiflcandy outpace schools' ability to offer on-campus
housing. This will accelerate the pressure on nearby QUE '~~~i\O N S ':~¡.;8Í~ U T T HIS
neighborhoods to offer off-çaropus student housing, and
consequently will force these conununîtic~ to deal with the range: A R'I I C~~iì~?f. J 0 I N US
of subsequent issues. Furthermore, most college and university ~.:,7·¡::~~~¡;:~~¡/ 0 N L I N E !
campuse..~ are located within che h¢art of their host communities, 4~/j"gt:' .
where there is little: room for additional housing capacity. This Dudng tho: week of June ~~~~.~~ go ónlin~ [0 participatc in
combination of proje<::tèd enrollment growth and lack (If existing our "Ask the Author" tò~';'~ new interactive feature of
housing facilities will concentrate and increase the impacts of Zoning New.. Craig ~i>r,c;~~ill be available co amwer
...)..........
college students living off-cunpus in coming years. questions anout this atü#~\Go to the AJ?A websÍte at
There have historically been two basic approaches to addressing www.planning.org and fòUÒW~the links to che "Ask the:
the affc:as of college ~'tUdent$ that over-occupy rental dwcllIDgs in AuchQr" section. From. th~e, JUSt submit your questions
. ¡:;inglc~family ncighborhoods. Thc:$e have bt:c:n to either resist about the article using an. c-mailUnk. Th.e author will reply.
encroachment of stud.ent--oc:<::upied housing or to adjust regularions posting the: answers cumulatively on th~ wehsitt: fo( the
to accommodate growing Student housing requirements. Innovative bcmefit of ail subscribt:r5. This new featur.t: will be available
. techniques to solving off-campus student residence problems have fo!lowin~ sdcctcd issues of Zotling News ;a,c annoul1c~d
been impl!:!nenteå by some citìes, and new appr~ches are tì.m~. After eaclÍ oriline discus$ion is closed. the: answers
continually being explored. Effective reguktory approad1es to will be saved in an online archive available tl1.l'ough the
student housing issues almoSt alwI'lys involve some level of increased APA 2ÁJning News webpages.
JUN-23-2003 16:39 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES P.15/19
effort in code enrorœment. Emuring suong and dfectiv(: ÇQde Regulating Occupancy .
enforcement in neighborhoods may reduce much of th(: opposition People Living in a Dwelling ----
to student housing.
eoMparlso.. of College TOWftS
This issue of Z<;ning Nro,¡¡ examines 12 çornmunities with Unrelated
similar "town 3.nd gown" characteristiç.s tç determine and People
compare the r¡¡nge of regulatory approaches used. Examind
cities and a survey of their approa~e$ are shown in the ~ble on
page 3. The approaches range from essenrially taking no :¡,ccion
to adopting nearly all availabk solutions.
The Sl,lrvey suggests no univ=rsa.Uy accepted approaçh to
addressing off.campus student housing issues. There are, < ,.... ," " '.-...- ~ EO"", u~o
however, a combination of approaches used in a variety of ciries J¡
less R~GU/.ATTON more If
tha.t indicate one of cwo overall suatcgics: 1) restrict rn¡dem restricf¡ve restrictive ð
housing or 2) accommodate it while mitigating its impact. ;
Maoy of the communities also combined several regulatory
techniques to comprehensively address the issue. Definiriom of family have been widdy litig~md. Common
Cities that recognize the issue of off-campus student housing dd1nitions in college communities rnnge (.om no more than
and its effect on single-family ncíghbo.hoods in either their two unrelaœd persons up to five un.rela.ted persons. Some
comprc:h(:nsive plans or other planning docwnems appear more localities simply define funiIy as "one or more persons living as
likely to ha....e taken the "accommodate-mitigate" approach. a single hOU5Ckeeping unit." Las Cruces dennes the term bm
docs not us= the d~fìnidon to place limits on total occupancy in.
single-family dwellings.
AlthoU-¡,nfi using a narrow d~cion of family was uphdd by the
U.S. Supreme Coun in ße/k Terre II. BoratlS (416 U.S. 1,94 S. Cr.
1536, 1974), a number of state: courtS acro.",~ the counuy have since
rejecred. using narrow f.unily dc:fìnicions to solve problems .
associated with. over-occupancy. A 1985 New York Court of
Ap~s ca.se rejected 3. restrictive definition that no more thw lWO
wuelated. persons constituted a family by deciding:
M:ltIifesdy, rcstrictl.ag ocçupano/ of singIe-fl1m.ily housing bUM
generally on the biological or legal relationships ~~[ itS
i!lhQ.bit:U1ts bean no ~on~ble rel:woøship to the goals of
reducin~ parking ;¡nd tnfl1ç problems, c;ontrolling populwo/\
de.n.sity and preventing nois.e and dinurb:lnc:e (citations
omitted, emph;uis ;\ddeq). Their achievement dep<:nds not \.Ipon
Ù\c biological or legal relations betwc:<:n the occu.P2l\ts of a house
bur geDcr.ill)' uptln the 5i~ of thc dwdIing :uld the lot and the
Incompatibility b~tumm hOUJing often 1't!suttJ from (Ontlert/()rI. ()fJingÙ- nwnber of itS OCCUP:ults. Thus. the ddJairioa of fitn'lily cmplo)'ed
fàmi/y nâghborhorJds-inlO Jrudmr neighborhood!. H~ a two-slOry Iwe is both fatally ovcrindusive it'> prohibiting, for example, a
apartTtlmr looms over a Ûngl.t'µmêly hnuse in Aumn, T~, wil/¡ littÙ young unmuried COl.lp!e from occupying a four-bedroon'l ho~
profection affirrkd by tile prillacy ftncc. .. who do not tluc:l.ten the purposes of (he ordin:mce 2l\d
und~iadusive in [Wing ro prohibit occupancy of a two-b.:droom
home by 10 or 12 persons who are rd:lt~ in only (he most distant
Regulatory Toolkit manner and who might well be expected (0 presem serious
oý~rcrowding ~nd rr:úñc problelt15. (McMinn v. T~ of Gymr Bay.
kemi,tivefamily definition. Narrowly defining the term 66 N.Y.2d 544.498 N.Y.S.zd 128, 1985)
~farnily" ís perhaps the most ~mmon method of attempting to Rcduçin.g density may control some impaCtS of student ovcr-
deal with over~ccupatlon of rental properti~ in single-family
districrs. It is also l.!Su(Ùly the firSt regulRtory t~chnique that occupation, a$ the approach is intended to do. However, the
cities consider. At its core, this Clppro:lc:h is an attempt to limit impacts that are influcnc.cd by reducing density might not be
overall population density in residential diStricts. By limitÎng the the impacts that generat(: the most concern from neighbors and
number oF unrelated individuals that may live in single-family n:sidenrs. For example, if a primary çoncern of residentS is noise
dwdlings, college communitie~ seek to reduce the impact of from lare-night parties or th(: behavior of tenants, linking a
studenrs in residential n~ghborhood.s. Homes rented to reduction in density to II reduccion of these impacts is tenuo~
u-orelated tenants <lR: considered more likely to hav~ full and speculative. A review of research and planning literature .
occupancy (a tenant for every available room) than homes finds no indication of links between density of occupancy and a
rented to families or occupied by owners, reduction in the type of disturbances that often lead to eities
narrowing the definicion of family. In other words, this is an
approach that likely will not fix the probl=rn.
Craig Raborn i.¡ d. Senior Aslociate at Duman AMt:Íaw, a Enftrcement of cxistíng cotÚ$ and standards is critiaJl. The
c?m~lti,!!firm specializing in plan impLmznrtátion uchniques in most çornmon method for enforcing over-occupation violations
;, tt, r".<nt'",r! ro romn1::.int_, trom n"iS1hbors and other r~idents.
. JUN-23-2003 16:40 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES P .16/19
. Some cities have used historic preservation districts as a [001 NEWS BRIEFS
for managiIig the impacts of stud~ts living o£F-campus in
, single-family r~sidential disuÎC;ts. HistOric preservation districts
\
¡ provide communities with a m~thod for controlling the Nelll'Clska Supre..e Court Upholds
appearance of property, such <3.S from-yard parking, litter and CAFO Zoning'
debris resrrictions, basic property upkeep, and the like. In a unanimous decision with one jusrice not participating, the
Enforcemem is again critical to success, bur also relies on self- Nebtaska Supreme Court in March rejected a challenge to one
enforcement solutions from within the neighborhood. A county's right to insisr that a concentrated animal feeding
community also should permit existing nonconforrnances operation comply with its new wning ordinance. But the r=.'l.se,
witb.in th~ distÚcr to contìnue provided mat thc property meets decided March 15, was clearly a test of whether the legislature,
the preservation district's standard.s. in a. 1967 stature, had exempted farm buildings from all wning
Other overlay districtS related to universitÍ~ ha.ve been used. In requirements by counties.
some cases, these offer W".,!.YS for àtic:$ to better regulate uses that The case began when Premium Farms, which was planning a
might m\tura1ly oeçur near wùvc:rsiries; alumni association offices, 5,OOO-hog operation in HoIr County, in nortb.-central
housing for visiting r..u:ulry, tutoring offices, art galleries. private or Nebraska., chose to ch.allenge the county's 1997 zoning
public parking lot¡¡, faculty-affiliated research f.a.ciliries, ;ød so on. ordi:os,nce. The regulations sripulatc: that any confined livestock
Manhaaan conditionally allows these types of uses within itS operation housing more man 1,000 animal units must obtain a
University CM:rlay Distric:t. In one case:, an overlay di..~triC! is used conditional use permit. After inqu..íring about its applicability to
to resmc:t stUdent housing: Allentown, Pennsyiva:oia, has a Student the firm's projcc:t ~d being told. that it was not exempt,
Residenœs Overlay Distdcc mat dccrc:ases the number of unrelated Premium Farms, whích owns fOl,lr sires in the CO\lnry, chose to
stUdcnts permitted to 1M: in dwclling unitS in ar~s around carnpus_ begin construction in November 1998 without a permit. In J\lly
The ordinance is unique in that it specHicalIy .references student } 999, county wning administrator Charles Fo" nOtified the:
residences, and it was upheld in Pennsylvania court challengc:$_ In lÌrm that it ~s in violation of county permit requirements. The
addition to the basic question of whether this approach is good company promptly filf:d an amended petition for declaratory
policy. plannc::rs also should c;;ónsidcr the xisk of a challenge as judgmem and a temporary injunction re.maining enforcement
discriminatory against suspecr classes ìn other setting.>. . .for of the zoning rr:gu.I:11iol1s. The district court sided with
instance, if the population of a college disproportionarely reptc:sc:nts Premium Farms and granted the injunction.
. a group of people that could be discriminated against, such as The firm later 6led a moùon for summary jl,ldgment that the
minorities or membe~ of a cert,ùn faith. regulations were invalid. Nebra$1œ counties have long had the
Restrictive covenants potentially offer an effi:ctive way for power to regulate agricultural Jand uses through zoning. At
neighborhoods to prevent enc:ro:'i.Chment of rental impacts. While issue, however, was me ambiguo\,l$ wording of the 1967 statute.
cities arc not usually involved in cI\fòrcing restrictive covenants, Premium Farms clairned that me following language:: exempted
they can provide information about çOV'enants to neighborhoods, or £ann buildings:
even ac:tiV'dy support neighborhoods in the dcvdC)pment of Within the: = of jurisdiction ;lr}d powers established by ~ec:cion 23·
covenants. Houston u.$eS. and enfuTÇeS deed. restríccions and
covenants rather than zoning, and neighborhoods might be able to 114. the county b01l~d lruly . . . n:gulare, rcsukr. or prohibit dlC
fi~ct.i(¡n, c:onstr\1ction, ~nS1:ruction, alteration, or use of nonfarm
emu/.aœ some aspeCts of Houston's program. Theoretically, building~ or StTUt.'tureS ;¡od the use, or occupancy of land . . . Nonf;u'm
dura.creriscil:S of a zoning disttiet could be applied to a restrictive buitdings arc all buildin~ ext:tpt those building5 utilÏ7,ed for
covenant, making enforcement largely a -matter for neighbors to a~kl.11mral pUIpOSd 00 a Emnstead. of twt:J'lf)' = or morc which
handIe. There arc many unanswercd quc::scions about applying produc;cs One dlow:md dollars or more of £àrm products each y~
areawide restrictions to ¢j(isrlng ndghborhoods, so if this a.pproach
were to be considered, cities should seek legal advice to properly The district court sided with Premium Farms and invalidated
implemem any progr¡uns.
Gose cooperation with neighboring universÎtÎes might offer the county's zoning regulation of farm buildings. This was a major
communities a method to more effecrivdyinßuence the blow for Holt County, whose code established a single zoning
universicic:s' development of on-carnpus housing, plan for spurrs of district but required conditional use permits for confined livcmck
growth in enrollment, and control disorderly .$tIident behavior. operations, which ir defined as ''torally roo&d bl,lìldings, which may
Long-term solutions might involve rdying on transit systems be opcn-sided (for ventilation purposes only) or completcly
and incendve zoning to encourage development of remote enclosed on the sides, where:in animals or pouJtry are housed ovet
student vìl1ages away from affected nearby neighborhoods, solid concrete or dirt floors, or slatted (parciallyopen) A.oot$ over
coordinating planning with the college or univcrsity, and pit;!¡ or manure colleccion areas in pens, stalls, or cages, with or
creating "~tudel1ts.housing balance" prográmS based on the ideas wimol,lt bedding materials and mechanical vencilarlon. "
of jobs-housing balapce that have been used in many places to HQlt County apPc:;Ùed directly 'CO the Nebraska S\lpreme
ensure adequate hOl,1$ing where jobs wíU soon develop. Co\.LTt, bypassing the court of appeals, and the high COUrt
Cities facing these pressures should not shy away from granted its petition. The':: county argur:d tha.t thc district couds
. addressing them in comprehensive plans and other pl:tnning interpretation was imptactical and contrary ro the statute's
dor;u.mems. Such prc:c:mptive attention will allow these legislative history, which had me more limited aÎm of .~paring
comrounirlcs to approach the impactS of students living off· farms the burden of applying for building permits for farm
campus with a.ppropria.te and cffectiv~ planning solutions, racim buildings that arc often temporary in naturc.
than shorr-term or knee-jerk rcaction8. University growth is a "It's the way counties always interpreted and enforced it,"
fact of life for many communities-especiaUy for the next few says attorney David Peak, who reprcsented Holt County. "Large
yc:ars-and they will encounter lesnraurna am! more success if livestock says you ~'t do anything- The test case reaffirmed
they develop strategies before the pressures are felt. that the statute said what we always thought it said." Ptak notes
JUN-23-2003 16:41 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES P.17/19
inspections to ensu.r~ c:ompliance wim building ar¡d 7.oning up to th~c: unrelated persons in a single-family dwe:Jling would
codes prior to allowing rental occupancy. Some programs also therefore deline a rooming house as any dwelling occupied by r
require landlords to acquire some type oflandlord pem'1it prior four or more unrelated perSOI1$. Rooming houses are then
to c::ntering into any remal agreement. allowed by right in certain disuic:ts, usually all multi-family
Columbia, Missouri, establíshed ;¡, "Rental Unit zones or in an overlay disrricL They might also be specifically
Conservation Law" in 1978 mat requires compliance with prohibited in certain single-family districts.
nl,unerQUS dty codes before issuing a c:ertificate of Exisring nonconforming uses 3..1:<: required to register within a
compli::.ncc: required for rental u.se. A property owner wishing reasonable timc, and a minimal fee m:J.y be required at
to rent property must submit a formal appliçation, including regiStration. Nonconforming uses mat do not register wirhin the
a. description of the property, owner and agent contact allotted time and are la.ter identified rhrough inspections or
information. coment for inspection, aod cc::rtification of complaints must give up the nonconforming over-Qccupanc:y. A
heating and ventìladon systems. 'rhe ownc::r must also pay an set of criteria for moniroring these nonconforming rooming
inspecrion fee. The jnspection checks for com.pliance with houses is developed mat alsu spc:c:i6es how mose that create
Columbia's building, planning, signs, subdivision, zoning, documented problems may lose: their non-conformíng status r
and 6re prevention ordinances. Noncompliance identified and cease over-<x:cupancy. Enforcement is a critical part of
through verification inspections Or neighbor complaints can making the rooming house program. work and must be part of
lead to revocation of the rental certifìcat~. Columbia's rental any attempt to regulate this we. One advantage of this progrnm
inspection program wó\s upheld by the: Missouri Supreme is {hat enforcement ¡;hould be easier rhan code enforcement for
Court in. 1985 (Fm:h v. City of Columbia. 69.3 S.w. 2d 813; over-occupancy because: it unambiguol1$ly defines what is and is
Mo.1985). not al10wed and how nonconforming uses are regulated.
;
~.
"
;
..
f
(Lift) StufÚnt hO (Jing oftrn g~atf; compLaint) about nUlstlrIW; hffe 1Tt1!h .am and myck bim arc in the unkept front yard of a )uppQf(dlJ
SÎ71gk-jamiiy hom. in Austin, nXt:t.f. (Right) Anoth.r a.nnoyflnc~ of rrudozt housing if Ih~ proLiftratiol! ojúafing signs. Thm often rmYlin up
y~ar-round, IZI/.cwing .171: ''prt:-~t1.Sing· mlfon to 17m without inttN"Uption.
Othc:r communities ha.ve taken. different rental insp~ion DÙorderly house designation. Manhattan created a '..
approac:hes: Gainesville provides it¡; liÇ(:nscd landlord lisc on the Disorderly House Nuisanc~ Code mac a/Jows the city to
city's websitt; B¢uJder exempts renta./¡; whete me owner occ\lpi~ monitor violations of a broad range of ordinances by
the dwelling and rents to one or twO lodgers and temporary dwe11ing unit. Repeat violations as defined by the ordinance ,.
rentals such as faculty membc::rs rencing hom.es while on and failure to offer abatement can. lead to severe penalties,
sabbatical; and Mankato, Minnesota, developed an easy-to-use :lnd both tenant and property Owner can b~ held re:~ponsible. ;
websitc: describing landlord and t1:nant rights, and a.lso providing Violations that are m.onitored include c:riminal offenses on
dewis for owne~ wishing to convert properties to rental uses. the premises, alcohol-related offenses. animal and fowl
Rormzing hQ1l.$I! program. Some communities have developèd violations, and health, weed, and environmental nuisance
modified rooming house programs as a method. of accommodating violations. Manhattan's ordinance: does noc include violations
and mitigarin~ student housing ímpacts. These progr<uns esrablish of the zoning code: but such violations could be indudcd by
new definitions for rooming hollSe$, sp¢cifY wh~re they will be c:ities considering this approach. Used in connection with
allowed in the futur~, and register and monitor ~og rentRlliccnsing or rooming house programs, a disord~rly
nonconforming rooming houses. The cities that have: adoptc:.d or house nuisance code: could be an enforcement to(')1 with
are c;onsiderìng this approach beüe:YI: that ir is less costly and less tee:th. IL--j
diffiçu[t to administer man rental inspection and landlord licensing Other apprðache$- There are several o1:her approaches that
approach~ or strictly ~nforcing over-occupancy codes. r.;itic:s and planners might consider in addressing the ÎSSUI:S of
The rooming house dc::finition is typically changed to include student off-campus housing, including both modifications to
any type of exisrìng over-occupancy. A c:íty that currently allows traditional approaches and developing innovative ones.
JUN-23-2003 16:42 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
P.18/19
. Some cities have used historic prc:.~ervation districts <IS a. tool NEWS BRIEFS
for managing the imp .CtS of srodents living off·campus in
'J singlc.family residential districts. HÍ$roric preservation distcicts
./ provide communities with a method for controlling the Nelaraska SUpreftlé Court Upholds
appearartce of property, such as fronr·yard parking, litrer and CAFO ZonIng
debris restrictions, basic property upkeep, and thc li~. In a unanimous decision with one: jusriœ not participating, the
Enforcement is again critical to success, but ¡¡Iso relics on sclf- Nebraska Supreme Court in March rejected a challenge to one
enforcement solutions from within the nc:ighborhoQd. A county's right [0 insist that a concentrated animal feeding
community also should permit ~isring nonconformanccs operation comply with its m:w %.Qning ordinance. But the case,
within thc district to continue provided that the property mcets decided March 15, was clearly a rest of whether the legislarure,
the preservation distxkt's standards. in 11.1967 Starutc, had exempted farm buildings from aU zoning
Other overlay diStricrs related to universiries have been used. In requirements by çOl.lnries.
some cases. these offer ways for cities to better regulate u.~es that The case began when Premium F~rns, which was planning a
might natutally occ:ur near uoiversitic:s¡ alumni association offices, 5,OOO-hog operation in Holt County, in north-central
housing for visiting faculty. tutoring offices, art galleries, pñvate or Nebraska., chose to challenge the county's 1997 zoning
public parking JOts, faculty--affiliated research facilitie:;, and so on. ordin;tnce. The: regulation~ stipulate: mar any confined livestock
Manhattan conditionally allows th~ typC$ of uses within its operation housing more than 1.000 animal u.nits must obtain á
University Overlay District. In one case, an overlay district is used conditionall.lse permit. After inql.lÌring abol.lt: its applicability to
to restrict Student hou.~ing: Allentown, Pennsylvania, has :a Student the nrm's project and being told mar it was not exempt,
Residcnçc:s Overlay District that dec;rcases the number of unrelatcd Premium Fums, which owns four sites in the county, chose to
students permitted ro live: in dwelling units in areas atound campl.l$. begin construction in November 1998 without a permit. In July
The otdlnance is unique in thar it specifically rererencc:s Student 1999, county zoning administrator Charle.~ Fox notified the
resid~ces, and it was upheld in Pennsylvania COUrt challenges. In firm that it was in violation of county permit requir.emems. Th~
addition to thr: basic question of whether this approach is good company promptly filed an amended pc:ticion for declaratory
policy, planners also should consider me risk of a ch;illenge as judgment and a temporary injunctioo restraining enforce:ment
discriminatory against suspect dasses in other settings.. .for of the zoning regulations. The distxlet eourt sided with
instance, if the population of a college disproponion.arely represents Premium Farms and granted the inju.netion.
. a group of people that could be discrimil'1a.ted against, such à.~ The firm later filed a morion for summary judgment that the
minorit¡c:.~ or members of a certain faith. regulations were invalid. Nebraská counties have long had the
Restrictive covenants poœncially offer an dfecrivc way for power to regulate agriculruralland uses through zoning. At
'. neighborhood~ to preve:nt encroachment of rental impacts. While issue, however, was the ambiguous wording of the: 1967 statutr:.
....) dries arc not usually involved in enforcing resmccive covenanrs, Premium F~ms claimed that me following language exemptcd
they can provide information about covenants to neighborhoods, or farm buildings: -
even actively support neighborhoods in me dcvdopment of Within me area ofjl1l'isdktion ~nd. power:; cSf~blished by section 23-
covenants. Houston uses and enforces deed re¡,'tricrions and
covenants rather than zoning, and neighborhoods might be able to J 14. the COUI1[}' board may. . . rcguíate, rcsuict, or prohibit the
erection, constru~tion, rccon$tt\:Iction, 3ltcmrion, or we: of ßon&nn
emulate some: aspects of Houston's program. Theoretically, buildings or StnIctUrC:S anó rh~ we, or OCCl.1pancy ofland . . . Nonf.'\!'m
characreristia: of a zçnlng district could be applied to a restrictive buildings arc: all buildings cxcept those: buildings udliz.cd for
covenant, nuking enrorcement largely a matter for neighbors to :¡gricultural pwpos~ on a farmstead of twenty aacs or more which
handle. There arc many unanswered ql.lesrions abOUt applying produces one: thousand doUars or more of farm product!; c<\ch year.
areawide: restrictions to cxi.sting neighborhoods, so if this approach
were to be considered, dties should s~ legal advice to properly The c;listl.'ict court sided with Premium Farms and invalidated
implement any programs.
Close c:ooperacion with neighboring universicies might offc:r mc county's zoning regulation of farm bu.ildings. Thi~ was a majQr
communities a method to more effectively influence me blow for Holt County, whose code established a single zoning
universities' devc:lopment of on-campus housing, plan for spurts of district but required conditional use permits for confined livestock.
grovvth in enrollment, and control disorderly student behavior. 0pl:rarions, which it defined as "tOtally roofed build¡~, which may
Long-term solutions might involve: relying on transit systems be open-sided (for ventilation purposes only) or coropleœly
and incentive zoning to encourage dl:Velopment of remote enclosed on the sides, wherein animals or poultry arc housed over
srudent villages away from affectr:d nearby nc:ighborhoods, solid concrete or dirr floors, or slatte:d (parrially open) Hoors over
coordinating planning with the college or university, and pits or manu.re collection areas in pe:ns, sralls, or cages. with or
creating "students-housing b¡¡lance" programs based on the ideas without bedding materials and .rnech.anial ventilation."
of jobs.housing balance that havc been used in many places to Hole County appealed directly to the Nebraska Supreme
ensure adec uatc housing where jobs will soon dc:velop. Court, bypassing me court of appeals, and the high court
Cities facing these pressures should nor shy away from granted its petition. The county argued mat the district courts
- addressing the:m in comprehensive plans and other planning interpretacion was impraçtícal and contrary to the sratutC::'$
documents. S1.Ich prcemptive attention will allow these legislative !úStory, w!úch had the more limited aim of sparing
- communiti~ to approach the impactS of students living off- farms the burden of applying for building permits for farm
} campus with apptopriat~ and effective planning solutions, rather buildings that are often tempor.uy in nature:.
man shOtNerm or knee-jerk reactions. Univer$Ìry growth is a "It's the way countie$ always interpreted and enforced it."
fact of life for many communities-especially for the next: few $Ø.ys arromc:y David Peak, who represented Holt County. "Large
years--and they will encounter lc:s.~ trauma and more success if livestock says you can't do anyd1ing. The te.c:t case reaffirmed
they develop matcgir:¡¡ before the pressures are felt. mat the sta[Ute:;aid what we always thought it said." Ptak notes
J UN-¿"':s-¿Ij~I.j 16:43 LERGUE OF MN CITIES P.19/19
that the law, which he concedes hM "¡;trange language,» w~ similar effect, pushin.g big boxes oue of their jurisdiction and
passed "long berore megafarms we:re: on the horizon" and that imo the dtie:s,
"livestock inte.testS were trying to use that section as a sword In May 2001, the Charloa:e-Mecklenburg Planning """
rather than a shield. .. Commission in Norm Carolina rdeased a report on the ;.
The: high courr's decision, which overturn~ the findings of challenge of big-box ....a.cancies and potential solutions for the
the lower court, borrowed Hberally from the arguments in Ptak's problem. Although no "silver bulletn was discovered, the report
bÚe:fin support of Holt County's positiol1. The court notro that provides insight imo the complexities of the pJ:oblem, and may
statUtory interpretacion should not produce a nonsensical result. help further a growing national dialogue for addressing the
Peak's brief cited numerous examples of the practical problem.
impossibility of regulating agricultural land uses while de:nying PAS and Zoning News are searching for examples of
counnes any zoning authority over the buildings themsdvc:$, intergovernmental agreements that mitigate big-box
offering the offsite impacrs of underground manure storage as vacancies without encouraging the stOres to move to a
just one exa.m.ple. The court cited committee hearing testimony neighboring jurisdiction. Se:nd rdevant information to Nate
from U.S. Rep_ Doug Bereutet, then a Nebraska senator; Hutcheson, American Planning Associatioll, 122 Sourh
I would like to c::rn.phasiu: again that we are noe \1ndcr this bill Michigan Avenue:, Suite 1600, Chicago, 1160603, or e-mail
nhutcheson@plannjng.org. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg
authodzing zoning by counties. The counties already have chat report is available to Zoning News subscribers. Send inquiries
power. They have the power to regulate agriculture land use, . . . . to the above address. Nate Hutcheson
The feeling presented here is that f¡¡rm bullding3, farming ,itself Lq
such 3. changing occup:lcion and that many times b\lildings arc built
very ra1)jdly and tom down juSt as rapidly and rhere are restrictions
placed upon. the location of these such as they may must be set back '"" -
so n}any yard.q from the highway, These still hold but. . . in Most ZOIYIHGReJ2orts
c:lSes, these things Pore exempt from building permits.
Until just a few years ago, most counties in Nebraska had nor
enacted zoning ordinances or even created planning Workbook for Successful aedevelopment:
commissions, despite their long-standing authority to regulate: An Idea anel Resource Guicl. 10. Building
agricultural land uses through zoning, now reaffirmed by the In Estallli.h.d Neighllol'hoods
state: high COUrt. The rapid expansion of large-scale confined Community First 11'l(;., RD. Box 580, NapmJille, IL 60567- -')
livatock operations, howevc:r, has altered the political situation January 2002.30 pp. www.communityftrstinc.org.
signiñcantly, spurring numerous counri~ to establish planning The workbook is intended to be an educational tool th~t
commissions and to draft zoning regulations. Today, says Ptak, provides ideas and resources for new homes ànd remodels in
"only three: or fou.t counties" are left in the state that are "not in escablished neighborhoods. It offers respectful considerations for
some stage of ~dopring zoning. " blending projects with the: defined characteristics of the
Thus, the decision in Premium Fa77'1'Ji v_ County of Holt was neighborhood, the block, the adjacent bomes, and the site while
one in which every rural county in Nebraska. had a stake. "We: also allowing individual homeowners the maximum flexibility
were playing f01' all the marbles," says Ptak. Jim Schwab to build, expand, or re:modd to meet their own needs and
objectives. It is intended that the ~ of these ideas and
Vacant Big Boxes: A Follow-up Survey rcsoun:es wiU result· in chI! valuable elements of predictability
In Juiy 2001, Zoning News published "Dark Stores Cast and mutual respl!c:t to both you and the existing neighborhood.
Shadows," by APA research associarc Shannon Ann.mong, The imention is not to mimic existing homes, but to allow for
about mitigating the impacts of vac."I,nt big-box retailers. Since diversity through a balanced and thoughtful approach_
then, ml! Planning Advisory SCn'ice: (PAS) has logged more than The workbook is presented in a two-step format: Step one
40 requestS for furrher information on this topic-a high asks a series of questions ábout the neighborhood, the block,
number of requests for one issue. the adjacent homes, ¡md the site to help identify the challenges
In an artempt [0 gather more: solutions by local jurisdictions, that may arise when building Or remodeling a home in an
and reacting in part to K-matt's announcement to dose: 350 established ne:ighborbood¡ Stl!p tWO presents ideas and resourccs
srores, a follow-up survey was done with those same 40 to assist in addressing those chillenges found in step one.
communities. Although several communities have drafte:d
ordinances com:erning design standards and maximum square
footage: for big-box reta..ílers, none have addressed the problem Z~$ N<Wl i; ~ monthly n.w.!.".... publish.d by th. AmrnQ» PI...ning ^",<>còa!io~.
of vacancy mitigation. $U¡"criptiOM ate ~",il~¡'le (0, $1$0 (U.S.) And $82 (foreign). W. I'.ul Form<r,I\JCI'. :£.x_'I;'ç
Gwinneu. County, Georgia., grappled with a.nd then Di,eaor: WUJiam It Klein, Ala, Ditcc<or of R.c.=h.
dismissed the possibility of using a. version of a solution 7,4,,¡": N""I i. p,oduced ., AJ?A. Jim .sch_b, NC1', ...d Mich"..I D;vidson. E<fito", B~1'1'Y
Boin, AIC!'. Ht;\th"" C;¡mpb<U. F,\y Dol~;clc, N~'ç fI~'c:h..<)o. S,onj.y J.... ....CP. M.~ Lewis,
enacted by Peachtree City, Gc:orgia, one of Armstrong's ~$e ~Ic;.', MAryA Morris, .'CP. Lynn 1«>... R.ponClS' Sherri. M."hew>, AJ¡,i>Gult Edi!o/¡ Lii'\
srudy communities. The: Peachtrl!e City ordinance requires à &non, DaÍ¡;n .~d P,odu.'tÎo...
Copy";¡;!>! Q2002 by Am..iconl'!£nning Anodaóon. 122 S. Michigan Avc., Suitt 1600.
rental agreement betwe:en te:nant and owner with provisíc>ns ChiCôl¡¡o. 11- 60603. '/'h. Amcri..n I'lono,ng ^",ociOC¡on ~.o h.. "ffi_ .. 177G )
geared roward linding new and appropriate tenants for the: M..mí:huttllS "w:.. N.W.. WAlhing,on. DC 200~: www.pl>nnin¡¡.org
vacant space. However, the ordinance may also push big-box. AJI rjgh!$ r,,"rved. No p= of ùW pubJic.otioo moy be t<J'roduccd ur ut;I¡.~ in Anr fom> or
by .ny mC'\n.. ç1«~",,"iç 1>' ,ncehsni..l. indudint I''''',ocopying. ",c",¿jng. 0' by any
retailers beyond jurisdjctional boundaries and beyond a city's int"rmOIion ....0"8. ""d n:tricv;¡ 5)'....m, "..¡thouc pcnni.siOIl in "";t;/I& (rom ,h. Amorlan
capacity to contro) developmenr. Gwinnet County planners 1'I;u1I1U1Ç Nso~rion,
P,;n,ed. on n:cycled pop"', indudíng 50·70% n:cyd<d libc. *
and attorneys bdieve a county ordinance would have a. ,nd 10% puttCOO~l,"'¢f ~..
TOTRL P.19
JUN-25-2003 13:39 PED 6512283261 P. 02/11
STUDENT HOUSING ZONING STUDY .
PED Staff Draft 3/23/03
City Council Request
The City Council has requested that the Planning Commission study and provide a reçommendation on a
proposed ordinance to define and regulate dwe1Iings occupied by college and university students (see
attached resolution). The proposed ordinance would create a Zoning Code definition of a student
dwel1ing, and establish parking requirements and a 350 ft. distance requirement between student
dwellings.
Authority for Study
Amendments to the Zoning Code follow the procedures in Section 64.400 of the Code and Minnesota
Statutes Section 462.357. Either the City Council or the Planning Commission can irùtiate citywide
amcndmehts. Public hearings with required notice are held at both the Planning Commission and the
City Counoil. The City Council must hold readings on four successive weeks before adopting
amendments to ordinances, inclùding the Zoning Code.
Problem DefiDition
CounC¡lmembcr Jay Benanav initiated the City Council resolution on the proposed ordinance in response
to complaints he has'received trom constituents related to single-family and duplex houses rented to
students. Benanav's ward includes the Vniversity of St Thomas, HaInline University, and Luther .
Northwestern Seminary campuses, and is close to the campuses for the College of St. Catherine,
Macalester College, Concordia University, and the St. Paul campùS of the University of Minnesota.
These are a11 the residential colle¡es and universi~es in St Paul.
While the presence ot so many ool1eges and universities in St Paul r'prt;Sa1ts a tremendous cultural and
economic asset for the city, it also presents challenges for the largely residential neighborhoods the:
schools are located in. Síngle-faririly and duplex housihg rented to students is concentrated around the
city's colleges and universities, particularly the residential campuses. A map of single-family and
duplex student rentals around the University of St. Thoma.e (attached) demonstrates this cOncentration,
with many blocks olosest to campus in both the Merriam Park and Macalester Groveland neighborhoods
containing three, four, or five student rentals.
Complaints related to student rentals can usually be placed into one of two general categories: 1)
negative student behavior; and 2) poor property maintenance. Student lifestyles sometimes conflict with
those of longer-tenn residents. Problems such as late night hours, loud parties that attract large numbers
of people and traffic, too many cars, trash, and a general lack of courtesy can create an unpleasant "
environment for neighboring residents. There are also complaints that many student rentals are not as
well-maintained as other renter or owner-occupied housing. Students tend to be re1atively short-term
"renters, and place fewer demands on landlords to maintain quaHty housing. Some property "inwstors
have used the opportunity presented by student housing demand in the neighborhoodS around the
campuses to purchase large homes, collect high rents nom Wldemanding students who are splitting the
costs, and do little to maintain or invest in the houses. In larger house$, landlords occasionally rent to
Page 1 of 6
.
JUN-25-2003 13:40 PED 6512283261 P.03/11
. more than the maXimum of four unrelated individuals pennitted by city ordinance, exacerbating the
problems.
Longer-tenn residents see an overconcentration of student rentals as having a negative impact on
neighborhood quaIity ófIife, and a potential threat to property values. They are concerned that if the
balance is tipped toward too many student rentals, it wi111ead to disinvestment and instability resulting
from the exodus of family households and other residents with a. longer-term stake in the neighborhood.
Concern is ñeight¢t'led in the MelTÍam Park neighborhood. where 51 % of housing units are rental,
according to the 2000 Census.
In 2002, the City Council sponsored "chronic problem propaty forums" around the oity. Citizens were
invited to identify properties causing problems in their neighborhoods. The fOlUm held for Wards 3 & 4,
which include five of~e six residential colleges and universities in the oity, generated a list of 47
proble~ properties. Approximately 40 percent of these prop.erties are known student rentals.
Experiences of Other Cities Across thè CQunty
Problems related to student rental housing and the impact on neighborhoods are not unique to St. Paul.
Cities around the country have tried a variety of ordinances and enforcement teohniques to address
problem student housing. The St. Paul City Council's proposed student housing ordinance is based on a
similar ordinance that was passed in 1997 in State College, PA, the bome of Penn State University. The
State College ordinance oreates a 225 ft. distance requirement· between student rentals in an attempt to
prevent overcóncentratÍon. The Philadelphia subtn"b of West Chesterf home of West Chester University.
prohibits new student housing within 400 ft. of existing student housing. In Tuscaloosa, Alabama, the
City Council recently passed several laws bamùng the outdoor use of indoor fiuniture and reducing the
. hours of all~night bars~ and is considering a ban on parking in front yards. In Boston, police called to
complaints about loud parnes are accompanied by housing inspectors who check for code violations.
Several cities limit the number of students who can live together in off-campus housing.
Student Bousine: Trends in St. Paul
An analysis of student enroUment and the percentage of students living on- and off-campus at St. Paul's
residential colleges and universities :£rom 1992 - 2002 shows both mcreases'and decreases in the number
of students living off..campus. Of the five major residential campuses, St. Thomas, Hamline, and
Macalester have experienced declines in the percet1tage oftheÌr full.time students who live off-campus.
All three ha.ve added additional on-campus housing for srudents in ~he past ten years. Conversely, St.
Kate's and Conoordia have shown inCreMeS in the percentage of their full-time students who live off-
campus (see attached table). Unfortunate1y, data is not readily ~vaìlable' to detennine how many of the
off-oampus students live in the nei¡hborhoods aroµnd the campuses. Certa,inly, some of these students
commute from areas outside the immedìate neighborhoods around the campuses. In general, this analysis
shows that there have been both increases and decreases in the number of fù11-time students living off-
c:ampus. However, &om this limited ~t:a. it is difficult to determine whether this has led to specific
increases or decreases in the demand for off-campus student housing in the neighborhoods around the
campuses.
An analysìsof census data for persons living in non-fanrily households (exoluding singles) from 1990,
and 2000 was completed for the block groups around the five major residential campuses plu$ the
neighborhood west of the University of Minnesota St. Pa.ul oampus. Four of the five block groups aroW1d
Page 2 of' 6
.
,
JUN-25-2003 13:40 PED 6512283261 P.04/11
the University of St. Thomas showed increases of over 100 persons in the ten year period. The three .
other block groups showing increases of over 100 were: 1) west of the üniversity of Minnesota St. Paul
campus; 2) the block group between the Macalester College and Concordia University campuses; and 3)
the block group southwest oftbe Hamline campus. Although ìt ìs difficult to say whether all of these
increases are attributable to students. it seems to indicate some increase in student housing in these areas.
Proposed OrrlinSlnce
The ordinance proposed in the City Council resolution would create a definition of a student dwelling in
the Zoning Code. In summary, a student dwelling would be defmed as a ¡roup of unrelated individuals
(limited to four under current city codes) living together in a single-family or duplex structure who are
students attending a college, university. community college, or technical school. Multiple-family
dwellings of 3 units or more, fraternities and sororities, lawfully established rooming houses, and owner-
occupied houses with a subordinate room or apartment for rent would be exempted. A distance
requirement of 350 ft. would be established for any new student dwel1in¡ from existing student
dwellings, The ordinance would also require a minium of two parking spaces per student dwelling. The
regular Zoning Code requirement for a housing writ is 1.5 spaces. Student rentals under this defmition
would be registered and regulated through the City's existing rental registration program for single-
family and two-family structures, as established in Chapter 51 of the Legislative Code.
There are currently distance requirements in the Zoning Code for a variety of uses, including human
service-licensed community residential facilities, transitional housing facilities, paW1'lshops, and adult
uses, These are al1legal uses that provide services to the oommwúty. However, these uses can have
nega.tive impacts On a neighborhood. especially if they concentrated. The same could be said for single-
family. and two-family structures rented to students. These rentals meet a need for student hO\.lSjng, but if
ooncentrated, can result in an unacceptable level ofneganve impacts on SUJTounding residential uses. .
The 350 ft. distance requirement proposed for student rentals would allow about one student rental per
block.
Imoact on Existine Student Rentals .,
The attaçhed map ofhoU$ÍI1g rented to students in the neighborhoods arotmd St. Thomas demonstrate
that there are many blocks with more than one student rental. With the establishment of a 350 ft.
distanc~ requ.irement, existing student rentals would become legal1y non-conforming. Non~onforming
uses for purposes of zoning code regulations can continue indefmitely, regard1ess of changes in
ownership. However~ if a non-conforming use is discontinued for 365 days, the use ofllie structure must
change to a conforming use. If questions arise about whether a non-conforming student rental was
established prior.to t1).e enactment of the ordinance, the City's Dept. of License, Inspections, and
Environmental Protection would make this determination. There are also procedures established in the
Zoning Code for re..estab1ishin¡ a non-oonforming'use if it has been discpntinued for more than 365 days
or obtaining a variance from the distance requirement. The f1I'st action requires a Planning Commission
public hearing and petition signed by surrounding property owners; the second action requires a public
hearing before the Board of Zoning App¢als. In summary~ the exìstin¡ supp1y of student rentals Mli
generally not be diminished by the establishment of a. distance requirement, unless the owner of a student
rental discontinues that use for more than a year. Suoh s. situation would include sale of a former student
rental to an owner-ocoupant. The proposed ordim.nce would prevent the estab.1ishment of new student
rentals where there a1ready are concentrations.
Page 3 of 6
.
JUN-<::'':>-¿lðlð.5 1.5:41 PED 6512283261 P.05/11
The status oflegal-nonconformance for existítlg student rentals should partially address the concerns
. e~ressed by both St. Paul >s oolleges and universities and property owners who have made a fmancial
investment in rental property. Main.tenmce of the existing supply of student housing is a ooncern for the
schools. who want to insure that their 'students have housing choice¡¡:, including the opportunity to live
near campus if on-campus student housing is either unavailable or not the living situation the student
desires. Property ~wners who have already made an investment in rental property will be able to
maintain the status of that housing as long as the property is registered as a. student rental.
Implementation Issues
The proposed ordinance raises a number of issues related to implementation. These include:
· How many of the maximum of four unrelated individuals in a rental unit need to be students for
the unit to be considered a student dwelling?
· How will landlords or city inspeotors detennine if a tenant in a unit is a student?
· How wiU an initial dàtabase of studént rentals be established?
· ' he houses purchased by the parents of students regulated as student rentals?
· Wauld licensing be a better way to regulate student rentals than simply a Zoning Code
requirement?
· Does the cwrent fee for registering single-family and two-family structures under the City's
rental registration program generate enough revenue to cover the additional staff costs for
administering this proposed requirement?
Number of Students. It is not clear in the proposed ordinance whether all or some of the individuals in
a housing unit need to be students for the unit to be considered a student dwelling. Problems associated
with student rentals seem to' occur more frequently when three or more tenants are students. Defming a
student rental as including 3 or 4 tenants who are students eliminates situations where a single indiv.idual
. in a house with non-student rootn1n~des or a couple who are attending school and renting a house are
classified as student dwellings.
Detennining Student Status. Landlorðs will be asked to register their units as student dwellings as part
of the City's ourrent rental registration program. Landlords normally require prospective terumtB to fi.11
out an application form when applying to rent a unit. Landlords Will need to ask tenants whether they are
students as part of the 'application process. As with any other application information. providing
misinfonnation to a landlord on an application can be grounds for terminating a lease. lfthe property is
not and cannot be registered as a student rental. the landlord would not be allowed to rent to tenants
where three or more arc st1.ldents. If there are complaints to City inspectors about the status of tenants in
a house that is not registered as a student rental. City inspectors will need to contaot the schools (starting
with the closest sohool) to inquire whether an individual is·a registered student at that school. The
ordinance should make olear that schools will be required to provide tbi~ information to the CitY upon
request;
Database of Student Rentals. The City's rental registration prCI¡râm (Chapter 51 of the City's
Legislative Code) requires that landlords register their properties annually. Iftbis proposed ordinance is
implemented, the Division ofÞroperty Code Enforcement, whic:h is responsible for· administering the
rental registration program, will need to reVise its registration fonn to collect information on student
rentals and oreate a database of existing student rentals.
Houses :Purchased by Student Parents. Currently, a property purohased by a paœnt for use of a ohil4
Page 4 of 6
.
JUN-25-2003 13:42 PED 6512283261 P. 06/11
who is a student is not considered a rental pr~perty for purposes of the rental registntion program. This .
is because such properties are granted homestead status for property tax purposes 1mder state law. Since
these properties are not required to be registered currently as rental properties, they would not be
considered student rentals for purposes of this ordinance, even if the ohild rents rooms to three other
students.
Licensing V8. ZoniDg Code Requirements. There has been a suggestion that creating a 1iCet'lS¢ for
student rentals would be a better way to regUlate this use. St Paul primarily issues licenies for business
uses, although rooming houses and bed and breakfasts. are examples ofresidenrial uses that are licensed.
Licensing student rentals would create a very large new category oflicenses that may be: difficult to
handle given existing staff levels. It would create another whole level of regulation that could perhaps be
more efficiently handled through Zoning Code and rental registration requirements. It could also
threaten the legal non-confoIYIÚng status of existing rentals, which would be a concern for both the
schools and rental property o'rVi1ers.
Fees for Rental Registration. Currently, the City charges an initial registration fee of $30.00 for a
single-family dwelling and $50.00 for a two-family dwelling. The annual renewal fees are $20.00 and
$40.00 respectively. Staff from the ùivision of Property Code Enforcement as well as the Dept. of
License. Inspections. and Environmental Protection would be involved in administration if this ordinance
is approved. Property Code Enforcement staff will need to handle the registrations and investigation of
complaints about compliance. LIEP staff would need to check compliance with zoning code
requi1'ements for new student rental registrations, make determinations oflega1 non-conforming status,
handle variance requests and appeal, and inform property owners about the process to reestablish a
nonconforming student house. Staf'ffrom both I)ffíces should attempt to quantify anticipated additional
staff work that would be generated by this requirement and recommend establishment of an increased fee
to cover staff costs if appropriate.
Recommendations .
1. The City Council should enact the proposed ordinance, with some minor ¢hanges and
clarifications, to prevent additional overcouceDtlation of student rentals in neighborhoods
surrounding college campuses. Recommended revisions to the ordinance language are attached
(still to be completed). Clarify that th~ numb~ of students in a dwelling must be three or four to
qualify as a. student rental. Change the language so that the distance requirement applies to
student rentals in any residential zoning districts, includin¡ R-l through RM-3, not just within an
individual ~ing district. Clarify that the 350 ft. distance is measured lot line to lot line. .
Discussion: Student 1'e11tals sometimes create problems for SU1T~ding neighbors related to·
both student behavior and maintenance of property. The Zoning Code has distance requirements
for other legal uses that can create problems for SUITOWlding properties if the QSes are
concentrated. Existing student rentals that do not meet the distance requirement would become
legal non-conforming uses and be allowed to continue as long as the use is not discontinued for
more than one year.
2. Improve enforcement of existiJ1g ordinances to address problelD.$ with current student
rentals that would not be affected by the Dew ordinance.
. Discuuion: Some existing student rentals cun-ently cause problems for neighboring residents.
The creation of a database of existing student rentals wiU allow staff from multiple City
departments and offices, including Police, Property Code Enforcement, and Licènse. Inspections,
Page 5 of 6 .
JUN-25-2003 13:42 PED 6512283261 P.07/11
. and Environmental Protection, to more easily share infonnation and work together better to
enforce existing ordinances related to property maintenance, overcrowding, and disruptive
student behaVior.
3. Quantify inercased suff costs resuJtiDg from administration and enforcement of the
student rental registration requirements and adjust rental registration fees a~cordingly.
Discussion; In this era of increasingly limited City financial resources, the added staff costs
resulting from new regulations need to be quantified and a revenùe source found to pay for those
costs.
4. St JÞall.'s coUeges and universities shouJd b.e encouraged to be as re8pOnSiVé as possible to
complaints about student behavior in the neighborhoods around their campuses.
Discussion: The University of St. Thoxnasbas taken an increasingly proactive àpproach to
monitoring and addressing problem student behavior in the neighborhoods around oampus. 81.
. Thomas' neighborhood liaison staff person tracks the location of student rentals and works with
both students and landlords to encOurage student renters to be good neighbors. It is an effective
model that can be emulated by other schools.
Attachments
City Council resolution.
Map of student rentals around St. Thomas.
Table of student enrollment and housing status at St. Paul schools.
.
. Page 6 of 6
JUN-25-2003 13:43 ÆD 6512283261 P.08/11
Council File # 03 - 3~
Green Sheet # :1 00"\ S \
RESOLUTION .
CITY OF SAINT P AUL, MIN1'.~SOTA \\
Presented By ftra ~,^r-- Committee: Date
Referred To
.
RESOLUTION REFERRING TO THE CITY'S PLANNrnG COMMISSION FOR STUDY,
REPORT, AND 'RECOMMENDATION AN ORDINANCE TO DEFINE AND
REGULATE DWELLINGS OCCUPIED BY STUDENTS.
1
2 WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Saint Paul desires to initiate certain amendments
3 to the City's zoning code which would define and regtùate residential dwellings occupied by
4 students; and
5
6 WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 462.357. Subd. 4, the Council of the City of Saint
7 Paul desires to refer to the City's planing commission for study, report and recommendation the
8 following proposed amendment8 to the zoning code:
9
10 1. To Legislative Code § 60.204.D, adding the following definition: I
11 .
12 Dwelling, student housing. A living arrangement within a 1wfamily or 2·family dwelling by
13 persons unrelated by blood, ma:rriage, domestic partnership-or legal adoption, who are attending a
14 technical, community college, undergradUate or graduate programs offered by technical schools,
15 colleges or universities, or any com.bination of such persons. The residents of a student dwelHng
16 share living expenses and may live and cook as a single housekeeping unit. Fraternity and
11 sorority houses operated in association with a college, university or other institution ófhighèr
18 learning, lawfully established and operated rooming houses, multiple dwellings and any
19 subordinate apartments or rooms offered for let in l·family dwellings when the dwelling is
20 oocupied by a family that is the recorded owner of record.of title are exempted from this
21 defirùtion.
22
23 2. To Legìslative Code § 60.412, pertaining to prinCipal uses permitted inRLL through R.4
24 zoning districts, by adding the following section:
25
26 (18) Student dwellings, as defined in section 60.204.D, are permitted only when all of the
27 following standards are met:
28
29 a. Occupancy in a one· family or two-family dwelling used as a student dwelling
30 shall ~ot exceed four u.nre1ated persons as proscribed in Chapt~ 60.206 (f) of the
31 Legislative Code.
32
33 b. N~ student dwelling shall be located within 350 feet of another lot used for a
34 student dwelling in the zorùng district in which.the student dweUing is located. .
35
36 c. ,No more than one building on a lot may be used as a student dwelling.
JUN-25-2003 13:43 PED 6512283261 P. 09/11
1 d. A minimum oftwô parking spaces shaH be provided per dwelling unit in 63 ".3,
2 driveways or off-street parking areas. All parking spaces shan be established and
3 . maintained in complianoe with the site plan and paving requirements set forth in
. seotion 34.08 oftms code.
6 e. Notwithstanding any Jawor ordinance to the contrary and for the purpose of
7 promoting the health, safety and general welfare of the public by regulating
8 student dwellings in RLL. RM} through R~4 and RT-l and RT -2 zoning districts,
9 no property shall be occupied or used as a student dwelling until the property is
10 registered as a student dwelling under the program administered by the director of
11 the offioe of citizen services according to section 51.03 of this code. m addition
12 to the requirements of the zoning code, the owner of a student dwelling shall also
13 comply with sections 51.08 and 51.09 ofthis code.
14
15 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, pursuant to·Minn. Stat. § 462.357. Subd. 4,
16 the Coutlcil of the City of Saint Pall}. hereby refers to the City' 5 planing commission for study,
17 report and recommendation the above stated proposed amendments to the zoning code.
I
.
..
~
IIOU a.YII AIJJeDI
I~~V .J" Requesteå by pepa~mènt of:
1~"iI&lIY -
l.IIosr;rOlll ---
I (OO.LemaD ~.
¡.liarr~s ..,.,- sy,
¡LaDt%']" ."..
IJl8~ter V'" Form Approveã by City Attorney
Adopted by Counoil: Date~....... ~ ~ ~òa sy:
Adoption Certified by Counc:.i. sea:retary ·
Approved by Mayor for SUbmie.aiOTl to Council
,
.
JUN-25-2003 13: 43 PED 6512283261 P .10/11
I
, \.... 'I-- f'
~ ... VOl
I-f- ..~ ~ I'.
VI OIJA II) 1\
f--.,..-.. \
~ LTON
I \
_/ ~
! 1/ / } __ -
~ JQ~ TdN / // I 1
~ V
s - /~
o /_F
~ ~ \ k;:::; -1
. :>- 1 ¡'¡"G ~ E-i
- ~ ~
~ ¡¡; ~\I ~ I d
o Iå ~ ~ \ Ar
~! U> '\. UN! ~ 1 - ~
~:2 i \1 l VI >.
~ i,6J iaEl T ~ \", ~ I. .;:
.- 1/ ~
c ~ ~
::> II II H~ ~
.! I /' .8
-
.5 AS!! JR' '0 ..
~ '" Lu~ ~ Y ¡¡j ~ $I oW <¡; IS z ~
~ ~
1: ~ _ þŠ4!, ~! w ~;;1
Ci) ~ FR ~ ' \!! U.oAJ. STeA ' ¡¡¡ ~ ~ ~ Jj.
a: >- I / a.; ~
1: AlO1rf 3j ..... ~ ~ A
-8 i I j ~'\"- ~
.: Î \I) I \WHEEl.iR WI";EJ. R
fJ) ~ j, I ">
= III 1" ~V ~ I ~ RV ~ .
ë. ~ '-. //;1-1 j ~ ÍIw!'Yª t¡j !í1
~ HT~ / J ~ - ~ ' f J -- £ He NE1J ~ ~ -; - ~ ~ ~-
.c / r \!. I '" ~ "OM 2 ~ ~
:. --. / fj!; -¡
Ê ~ ~ I 1:1 MU~ 1-1- Ki Ni~
If ~ / ""- -'fill I I~. D
i/ß M~~ 5
~ ~ i ,FINN II i I'1 N ' ¡
èñ -Þí ¡1J1 ~ ~!! š ~
f /~ J ~ _i< I~ ~\ ~ MOJNiC~
fli lì I¿ ~ ~~f \ \ i:J --~....~--~
, / ,//Ar ----\ - '-' ., '- -:::
I-- 'VI L .-____
/ ~ .--~
=-- t--V
-".\
.~ ~z.
n'd It::llOl
-
. ~. 2i ~ :;' ~~~(") ~~~¡¡;: J8:~: ~;;r~tn '~~~S2
1-_,... I. == g ,~ = = f!l 1 ~_; 1_ f'" 1__-
Õ=~::r ß~/I.).g ~"'NSI.I ,;5-- ß~~f g:;:~;t
f\)(Qt;)CD I\)....~.-
COCl- CD 5'
o~2~ oJSßa ºJS~! CO CI
gfSßCD ~JSß~ c'>JSco
i 0 ::r _ ::r NeI
gf " AI II) III I» I» I
~- ª :::s ~ tS ::I ::J
f.Q ~ <ä: ~
(Ð ~ Q) III
CD
æ-
3
~ tn
-
- I:
eo a.
CD
m ::I
::I lit
a III
-
§' ::I
":i:-..¡m .... ..... .... ...... ,..~~ I.)(,J 'Õ3fJ~ CI.
/1.)0(..) AãJ~ COOJUI ell :z:
cø(DCIQ ~w...... ....0).... m~(Q UlO»O ::I
U) W A CI1(þ NNo Wen CO A. co I.)....CO - 0
- ...... .- Iiõ
æ fI)
3'
~ CQ
ÑO).þ. .... ..... .... NI\) .... ...... \,) m~2 Sfl
....."'0 l.)CJ)Ø) ~2~ f\)wg 3'
wwo ~~:8 l'I>~ë1I ~.... III
OJOJo (0 0) en "'...... CDO(þ CD 2'
-
"a (II
I» I»
:¡ ....
~WN en
-.... -4 r'"
...... ...... ..../1.) -.... A. Å ~ I.)(þ .þ.COA. 3'
~~~ (þ/l.) I.) g0A. enwco o~~ ....(þQ; 'l
\)Q)O . CD en A.cøc..) ~....o
- - CD .E.
'TI ,,;
-f
.. ~ i
3" is:
CQ CD
0 ::I
-
::I i
Ò
II (")
.... ........ .....N 3 2-
Nç,.I (,J.þ. 0- l.)o)âI =~fB <.nO'!...... ~ eo
......CDO ,þ,,""-JN 0) co en fg·~m COUl'" I: cc
.þ..CIQ \) Ulmo "'O)(D CO,""Q) wòw CII fþ
fI)
on I»
-f =
r- c.
.~ i
5"
CO l
~ ã1
IE
(') m'
III
.... ... .... I.) NN 3
...... "
l,,)W ......(10) ~g¡~ ....(.0).. .....c.oo _(ØCÞ
UI.þ.CD .W""-J ~~m Co,)""-Jc wNco =
Oalal ""¡NCC 0'""'"" 010 en ÅCO) UI
- ...... -
~
'TI
-t
,..
:c-
o..
::J
c.a
0
:¡a;
w~~ ( (j) ww 0)17) 0).... C»CTt il
CD...... 'Ñ N~ ~~J'-) ....(.0)"'" - ( -..¡ 3
O' . W' . W' . :'Iw~
. -..¡ ( . ...,¡ CD . ..,¡ <0 . CD .(0) . 11.)...... "CJ
~"#.?P. ......'#,'#, -S?f.'#. Srft.'#. "'rft"i/. $"#.'#. i
.
H/n'd 1:92:£82:2:1:£9 G3d ÞÞ:£1: £00ë::-£ë::-Nnr
· www.cityofstjoseph.eom ity of St. Joseph
DATE: June 25, 2003
MEMO TO: Mayor Hosch, City Council Members, City Administrator Weyrens
25 College Avenue N;prROM: ~ 0.JJ-
Joan oust & Cynthia Smith-Strack, Municipal Development Group
po Box 668
St. Joseph, MN 5637'RE: Economic Development Activity Report -June, 2003
;320) 363-7201
Fax: (320) 363-0342
Municipal Development Group has been interacting with a number of prospects throughout the past
ADMINISTRATOR month. Following is a summary of activities that have transpired. If you have any questions on any
Judy Weyrens of these or other projects, please do not hesitate to contact us at 952-758-7399.
MAYOR Business Prospects have been identified by a project number to protect the confidentiality of the
~arry J. Hosch businesses.
::OUNCILORS Project 01-A:
<\lan Rassier The City has received the $42,000 from DTED for the revolving loan fund distributed it to St. Joe
loss Rieke Development LLC on June 18, 2003. Payments to the city's revolving loan fund will begin in one
Jary Utsch month.
Jale WiCk Project 01-8:
.. This manufacturing company initially contacted the city regarding an expansion in 2001. MDG and
EDA representatives worked with company contacts in 2001 and 2002. In June, 2002 the company
· indicated they were rio longer planning to expand, but may be in a year. MDG followed-up via e-mail
on June 11, 2003 regarding status of expansion plans. The contact n9ted they are still in a "holding
pattern" .
Project 01-F:
This project involves the locating of a fast food restaurant in the City of St. Jose~h. The company is
still reviewing various commercial sites in the city. MDG's followed up on June 11 h and 25th.
Project 01 ~I:
This company has been considering the purchase of a lot in Buettner Business Park since the fall of
2001. MDGsent the business a copy of the proposed re-plàt of the Business Park on June 11,2003.
Project 01-J:
This developer owns a commercial subdivision in St. Joseph and is constructing a commercial
building. MDG has been working with the developer and has forwarded potential business leads
including 03-1 who is looking for 5,000 sq. ft. The developer currently has 2,400 s~. feet leased and
7,360 sq. feet available. The last contacts with the developer were made on June 11 h and 25th.
Project 01-N:
This commercial business is considering the construction of a 3,000 square foot office facility in St.
Joseph. The company is looking at other commercial lot options in the city and other communities.
MDG followed up most recently on June 18, 2003.
Project 02-C:
This business contacted the city in January, 2002 regarding an industrial expansion in the area.
MDG has been working with the company to locate a site. The business is finalizing financing. The
last contact was made on June 11,2003.
· Project 02-H:
EDA Monthly Report -June, 2003 Municipal Development Group - Pag e 1
This highway commercial building was annexed into the city in 2002. The developer has been .
working with potential tenants. MDG followed up with the business and the property owner on May
28, 2003.
Project 02-L:
This company plans to construct a 16,000 square foot multi-tenant building in St. Joseph business
park, with plans for an additional 16,000 square feet. The EDA reviewed/approved the building and
site plan at their March 19th meeting. The Planning Commission conditionally approved the site plan
on June 2, 2003 (contingent on storm water approval by City Engineer). The City Council reviewed
plans on June 19, 2003.
Project 02-P:
This business expressed a need to expand in May, 2003. MDG has been working with the company
over the past year and has provided information on available commercial sites. The company has
some immediate space needs and long-term (2 Y2 year) plans for a larger space. They are also
looking at the City of Avon. The most recent follow-up occurred on June 11, 2003. The contact
indicated they plan to retain their business in St. Joseph for the next 2 years, but found additional
lease space in Avon.
Project 02-R:
This business has been working with MDG since June, 2002 to identify sites for a 7,000 square foot
building. The company has been finalizing their business plan and financing. MDG followed up on
June 2nd and 18th. The company is currently in a 5-year lease but is interested in a 3.343 acre parcel
in Buettner Business Park. MDG contacted the realtor for the park on June 25, 2003.
Project 02-Y:
This prospect contacted MDG on October 7, 2002 regarding new construction in the Buettner
Business Park. MDG has had numerous follow-up conversations with the company and supplied .
information requested on other sites. MDG's most recent follow-up occurred on June 25, 2003.
Project 02-AA
This prospect closed on a lot in the business park in early February, 2003. MDG last followed up on
June 18,2003. Spring 2004 construction is anticipated.
Project 02-CC
This prospect contacted MDG on November 22, 2002 regarding available acreage within the Buettner
Business Park for a 9,200 square fOQt facility. MDG followed-up most recently on June 11, 2003. The
business owner noted they are not ready to proceed with their expansion plans at this time and
requested a follow-up call in a month.
Project 03-EE
This developer is planning to construct a restaurant this summer with opening anticipated this fall.
Project 02-FF
This developer contacted the City on December 26, 2002 regarding a specific parcel in the Buettner
Business Park. EDA staff has followed up with this contact on several occasions including a letter
most recently on June 25, 2003. The business is still interested in an industrial lot in Buettner
Business Park.
Project 03-A
These developers are interested in a large highway commercial development in an area not yet
annexed into the City. MDG has been working with them over the past several months. Follow-up
correspondence most recently occurred on June 1 S\ June 4th and June 1 ih. The developers are still
finalizing a land transaction and will proceed once that is complete.
.
EDA Monthly Report -June, 2003 Municipal Development Group - Page 2
· Project 03·D
St. Cloud Area economic development partnership forwarded this lead to cities in the area on January
10, 2003. MDG has had several follow-up conversations and meetings with the company and
provided information on land, buildings and financing programs. On June 11th the company contact
reported that they decided to locate in St. Cloud. He noted both cities were great to work with and
offered similar financial programs. The decision was based on investor's desire to be located in a
larger city. The business is currently in Salt Lake City, UT.
Project 03-E
This prospect met with MDG on February 19, 2003. They inquired about land in Buettner Business
Park. MDG provided the prospect with site information, assessment and covenants. MDG followed
up on June 1 t, 2003. The business owner indicated that the covenants for Buettner Business Park
relating to outdoor storage and landscaping are too restrictive for their needs. If other industrial
parcels without these restrictions become available he is interested in additional information.
Project 03-G
This company requested information on Buettner Business Park lots, prices and covenants in
February 2003. MDG has followed up with the company on a number of occasions since. On June
25, 2003 the company indicated that they recently purchased land in Industries West Business Park
in St. Cloud.
Project 03-H
This company planning to close on 4.0 acres of industrial land in Buettner Business Park on Friday,
June 27, 2003. The Planning Commission reviewed and approved the site plan on June 2nd. The
Council reviewed the plans on June 19; 2003. MDG spoke to the new business owner on June 25,
2003. He noted the process has gone well and he is pleased to be locating in St. Joseph
· Project 03-1
This company is interested in 5,000 square feet of existing retail space - to lease. They initially
contacted the City on April 21st, 2003. MDG has forwarded the company information on three
potential buildings. Follow-up occurred on June 11th. The company representative noted that rent
prices are too high for required lease terms, and that it would be too risky at this time. They
requested a follow-up in a few months.
Project 03-J
This company inquired about the former Vicwest Building. MDG attended a meeting with a company
representative and a realtor for the building on April 30th. Follow-up by MDG occurred most recently
with the realtor for the building on June 11, 2003 and business on June 18, 2003. A decision is
anticipated by July 1,2003.
Project 03-K
This contact requested information from MDG on starting a business and zoning regulations in the
Central Business District, on May 2nd. MDG sent the contact a book from DTED "A Guide to starting
a business in MN" along with an excerpt from the zoning ordinance. MDG followed up most recently
on June, 11, 2003 and June 25, 2003.
Project 03-M
MDG met with two business people interested in leasing the former Tom Thumb building for a
recreational use, on May 14th. Zoning Ordinance excerpts relating to the highway commercial district
and application forms for a special use permit were provided. MDG followed up most recently on
June 25, 2003. The company is finalizing financing, and revièwing various site options. They may
proceed with a request for a special use permit in July, if they determine this is an appropriate site.
Project 03-N
· A contractor contacted MDG on May 15, 2003 regarding the availability of industrial sites in Buettner
Business Park for a 10,000 square foot building. Follow-up correspondence occurred on June 2nd, 6th,
EDA Monthly Report -June, 2003 Municipal Development Group - Page 3
11 th and 25th. The company is focusing on operations at this time and is waiting to proceed with land .
selection.
Other:
The EDA hosted a meeting with business owners north of County Road 75 regarding the installation
of high-speed data lines in the industrial portions of the City on June 25, 2003. Three representatives
from Astound and nine business representatives attended. More information on the feasibility is
anticipated mid-July.
.
.
EDA Monthly Report -June, 2003 Municipal Development Group - Page 4
. . Overtime and Callouts
June 6, 2003 through June 19, 2003
111111_
6/14/03 3.00 hrs Weekend Work 5/29/03 6.00 hrs Safe & Sober
6/15/03 3.00 hrs Weekend Work
6/18/03 1.00 hrs Maint. Facility Meeting
6/19/03 1.00 hrs Council Meeting
III__E..-._
6/7/03 3.00 hrs Weekend Work
6/8/03 3.00 hrs Weekend Work
I_~-
6/15/03 1.00 hrs Call Out-Hole in E MN St
6/16/03 2.00 hrs Arcon Roadway Mtg
6/18/03 1.00 hrs Maint. Facility Meeting
.
.