HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-04-09 CC Packet 1 CITY OF CENTERVILLE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
r, & JOINT WORK SESSION
teryi�Ce W /COMMITTEE /COMMISSIONS AGENDA
Wednesday, April 9, 2014
6:00 p.m. or shortly thereafter
WORK SESSION 7:00 p.m. or shortly thereafter
OPEN FORUM 6:30 P.M.: An opportunity for members of the public to address the City Council on items not on
the current agenda. Items requiring Council action may be deferred to Staff or Boards and Commissions for research
and future Council Agendas if appropriate. You will be limited to two (2) minutes and we ask that you conduct
yourself in a professional, courteous manner and refrain from the use of profanity. Failure to abide by this policy
may result in the loss of your privilege to speak. Persons wishing to speak will be required to complete a sign -up
sheet and give it to the Mayor or a Staff person prior to 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. AWARDS /PRESENTATIONS /APPEARANCES
1. ABDO, EICK & Meyers — 2013 Annual Audit (Pages 1 -109)
iV. PUBLIC HEARING
1. Amending Assessments — Backage Road /Commerce Drive Project
(Sheehy Property /City of Centerville) (Pages 110 -111
V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. March 26, 2014 City Council Meeting Minutes (Pages 112 -118)
VII. CONSENT AGENDA
1. City of Centerville March 27, 2014 through April 9, 2014
Claims (Check #28573- 28535) & Voided Check #28606 (Page 119 -120)
2. Centennial Police Department Claims through March 28, 2014
(Check #9839 -9855) w /Check #9772 Voided (Pages 121 -122)
3. Centennial Fire District Claims through March 21, 2014 (Check #6305 -6317)
(Page 123)
4. Res. #14 -0XX — Establish a Local Board of Appeals & Equalization, Pursuant to
Minnesota Statute 274.014, Subd. 3(c) (Pages 124 -126)
5. P & R Recommendation to Approve Special Event Permit Application — Easter
Egg Hunt, Laurie LaMotte Park — April 19, 2014 (8:00 a.m. — 2:00 p.m.) (Pages
127 -132)
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
IX. NEW BUSINESS
1. Approval of the 2013 Annual Audit & Management Letter
2. Res. #14 -OXX — Amending Special Assessments — Backage Road /Commerce Drive
(Sheehy Property /City of Centerville) * *IN DROPBOX WHEN AVAILABLE **
X. ANNOUNMENTS/UPDATES
1. Administrator Larson
XI. ADJOURNMENT
COUNCIL JOINT WORK SESSION MEETING (Approximately 7:00 p.m.)
I. CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call
II. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION
1. Goals
III. ADJOURNMENT
*REMINDERS **
Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting — May 6, 2014, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers)
Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting — May 7, 2014, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers)
City Council Meeting — May 14, 2014, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers)
City Council Meeting — April 23, 2014, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers)
PARK USAGE RESERVATIONS
Centennial Little League, Ball field #3, #4 and possibly #5, LaMotte Park — April 1 through August 1,
2014, Monday through Fridays from 4:00 p.m. to dark
Ms. Jaci Smetana, Fitness Classes, Parking Lot, Football /Soccer Fields /Shelter, LaMotte Park — April 28
through October 31, 2014, Monday through Thursdays from 5:30 -6:30 a.m. & 6:00 -7:00 p.m.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
MANAGEMENT LETTER
FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2013
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
MANAGEMENT LETTER
FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2013
March 29, 2014
Management, Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Centerville, Minnesota
We have audited the accompanying financial statementsof thegovernmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund
and the aggregate remaining fund information of theCity ofCenterville,Minnesota (the City), forthe year ended December31,2013.
Professional standards requirethat we provide you withinformation about our responsibilities under generally accepted auditing
standards, as well as certain information related to the planned scope and timing of our audit.We have communicated such
information in our letter to you dated November 7, 2013.Professional standards also require that we communicate to you the
following information related to our audit.
Our Responsibility Under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States of America
As stated in our engagement letter, our responsibility, as described by professional standards, is to express opinions about whether the
financial statements prepared by management with your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformitywith
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States ofAmerica. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or
management of your responsibilities.
Our responsibility is to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. As part of our audit, we considered the internal control over financial reporting of the City. Such
considerations were solely for the purpose of determining our audit procedures and not to provide any assurance concerning such
internal control over financial reporting. We are responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are, in our
professional judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are not required to
design procedures specifically to identify such matters.
Significant Audit Findings
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City’s internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing
auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an
opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over financial reporting.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this
section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that might be deficiencies,
significant deficiencies or material weaknesses.
deficiency in internal control
Aexists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the
material
normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A
weakness
is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material
misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. We consider the
deficiency described in the following pages as finding 2013-001 to be a material weakness in internal control over financial reporting.
A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness,
yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control
over financial reporting that we consider to be significant deficiencies.
2013-001Material audit adjustment
Condition:
During analytical testing of expenditures, it was noted that a capital asset was recorded as an
expense.
Criteria:
Accounting principles require that capitalrelated activity be recorded as an asset and not an expense.
Cause:
The asset was not contemplated with the year-endaccounting entries.
Effect:
This omission indicates that the City’s system of internal controldid not identify a necessary
adjustment.
Recommendation:
We recommend that management maintain a list of projects in process the identified capital related
activity and then evaluates the status of the projects at year end.
Management response
:
TheCity staff has acknowledged that the capital asset activity should have been recorded and has corrected for 2013.
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free from material misstatement, we
performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with
which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on
compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of
our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance
Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit
We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously communicated to you.
Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accountingpolicies.The significant accounting policies used by
the City are described in Note 1 to the financial statements.No new accounting policies were adopted and the application of existing
policies was not changed during the year.We noted no transactionentered into by the governmental unit during the year for which
there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in
the proper period.
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management’s
knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are
particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting
them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements include depreciation
on capital assets andallocation of payroll.
Management’s estimate of depreciation is based on estimated useful lives of the assets. Depreciation is calculated using the
straight-line method.
Allocations of gross wages and payroll benefits are approved by City Council within the City’s budget and are derived from
each employee’s estimated time to be spent servicing the respective functions of the City. These allocations are also used in
allocating accrued compensated absences payable.
We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop these estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to the
financial statements taken as a whole. The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial
statement disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users.
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit.
Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that
are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. Management has corrected all such misstatements.In
addition, none of the misstatements detected as a result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either
individually or in the aggregate, to each opinion unit’s financial statements taken as a whole.
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial accounting, reporting, or
auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report.
We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit.
Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated
March 29, 2014.
Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining
a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the governmental unit’s
financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor’s opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional
standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our
knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants.
Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management
each year prior to retention as the City’s auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional
relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention.
Other Matters
With respect to the supplementary information accompanying the financial statements, we made certain inquiries of managementand
evaluated the form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and
the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the
supplementary information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements
themselves.
Financial Position and Results of Operations
Our principal observations and recommendations are summarized on the following pages.These recommendations resulted from our
observations made in connection with our audit of the City’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2013.
General Fund
The General fund is used to account for resources traditionally associated with government, which are not required legally or by
sound principal management to be accounted for in another fund.The General fund balance increased $52,776from 2012. The
fund balance of $1,258,596is59.4percent of the 2014 budgeted expenditures.The total General fund budget is $2,120,416for
2014.We recommend the fund balance be maintained at a level sufficient to fund operations until the major revenue sources are
received in June.We feel a reserve of approximately 40 to 50 percent of planned expenditures and transfers out is adequate to
meet working capital and small emergency needs.At the current level, the fund balance is above the minimum but City Council
has acknowledged the amount. The City Council adopted a fund balance resolution and the City is in compliance with this
resolution.
Statement of Position
The Office of the State Auditor (the OSA) has issued a relating to fund balance stating “a local government
should identify fund balance separately between reserved and unreserved fund balance. The local government may assign and
report some or all of the fund balance as designated and undesignated.” We recommend local governments adopt a formal policy
on the level of unreserved fund balance that should be maintained in the General and special revenue funds. This helps address
citizen concerns as to the use of fund balance and tax levels.
The purposes and benefits of an adequate fund balanceare as follows:
Expenditures are incurred somewhat evenly throughout the year. However, property tax and state aid revenues are not
received until the second half of the year. An adequate fund balance will provide the cash flow required to finance the
governmental fund expenditures.
Expenditures not anticipated at the time the annual budget was adopted may need immediate City Council action.These
would include capital outlay replacement, lawsuits and other items.An adequate fund balance will provide the financing
needed for such expenditures.
A strong fund balance will assist the City in obtaining, maintaining or improving its bond rating.The result will be better
interest rates in future bond sales.
A table summarizing the General fund balances in relation to budgeted expenditures and transfers out follows:
Percent
of Fund
TotalGeneral
Balance to
Fund BalanceBudgetFund
Budget
YearDecember 31YearBudget
2009$1,231,32620102,184,430$56 %
20101,068,41120112,054,70052
20111,142,32120121,902,80060
20121,205,82020131,914,40063
20131,258,59620142,120,41659
Fund Balances as a Percent of Next Year’s Budget
$2,500,000
$2,184,430
$2,120,416
$2,054,700
$1,902,800 $1,914,400
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
56%
59%
63%
60%
52%
$1,000,000
$500,000
$-
200920102011201220132014
Actual Fund BalanceBudget
We have compiled a peer group average derived from information we requested fromthe Office of the State Auditor for Cities of
the 4th class which have populations of 2,500-10,000. In 2011 and 2012, the average General fund balance as a percentage of
expenditures was 69 percent and 76, percent, respectively.
A summary of the 2013operations is as follows:
OriginalFinal
BudgetedBudgetedActualVariance with
AmountsAmountsAmountsFinal Budget
Revenues$2,083,300$2,083,300$2,195,682$112,382
Expenditures1,914,4001,914,4001,900,70313,697
Excess of revenues over expenditures168,900168,900294,979126,079
Other financing sources (uses)
Sale of capital assets--10,00010,000
Transfers out(168,900)(168,900)(252,203)(83,303)
Total other financing sources (uses)(168,900)(168,900)(242,203)(73,303)
Net change in fund balances--52,77652,776
Fund balances, January 11,205,8201,205,8201,205,820-
Fund balances, December 31$1,205,820$1,205,820$1,258,596$52,776
Total revenue had a positive budget variance of $112,382. All revenue categories had positive variances, except for
interest on investments, which was due to thecost exceeding themarket value of investments. The City holds its
investments to maturity and the market value decline is temporary and will not affect the overall cash received.
Total expenditures had a positive budget variance of $13,697. Total public safety, public works and economic
development expenditures were over budget by a total of $63,500. Total generalgovernmental expenditures, culture and
recreation and capital outlay expenditures were under budget by a total of $77,197.
The city also transferred $252,203 from the general fund to other funds, which was $83,303 more than budget. City
Council approved establishing anew capital equipment fund for $43,303 and $40,000 was authorized to fund future debt
payments in the 2006A Debt Service fund.
A more detailed comparison of General fundrevenues and transfers for the past three years is as follows:
Percent
of
Per
SourceTotal
201120122013Capita
Taxes $1,698,512$1,738,970$1,758,24379.6 %$458
Licenses and permits111,842129,424122,9945.632
Intergovernmental163,244222,950203,2129.253
Charges for services8,8107,4965,8890.32
Fines and forfeitures26,99044,83634,8281.69
Special assessments20,35027,54357,8212.615
Interest on investments17,48311,334---
Miscellaneous34,31289,73512,6950.63
Sale of capital assets--10,0000.53
Transfers in12,480----
Total revenues and transfers$2,094,023$2,272,288$2,205,682100.0 %$575
The sources of General fund revenues are presented graphically as follows:
Revenues and Transfers In
$2,000,000
$1,800,000
$1,600,000
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$-
201120122013
Taxes Licenses and permits IntergovernmentalOther
A summary of the past three years General fund expenditures and transfers is as follows:
Percent
Peer
of
PerGroup Per
ProgramTotal
201120122013CapitaCapita
Current
General government$521,796$475,742$440,344 %20.5$115$125
Public safety1,018,0721,009,2001,051,59148.9274218
Public works322,042408,361297,47113.877106
Culture and recreation89,93482,68473,9063.41954
Economic development7,6282,4002,0380.114
Miscellaneous5,7095,5695,9500.3212
Total current1,965,1811,983,9561,871,30086.9488519
Capital outlay22,10029,00029,4031.4834
Debt service6,7326,833 ----
Transfers out26,100189,000252,20311.766-
Total expenditures
and transfers$2,020,113$2,208,789$2,152,906 %100.0$562$553
The above chart compares the amount the City spends per capita, in comparison to a peer group. The peer group average is
th
derived from information we requested fromthe Office of the State Auditor for Cities of the 4class which have populations
between 2,500 and 10,000.
The function/program of the expenditures and transfers are presented graphically as follows:
Expenditures and Transfers Out
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$-
201120122013
General government Public safety Public worksOther
Special Revenue Funds
Special revenue funds are used to account for revenue derived from specific taxes or other earmarked revenue sources.They are
usually required by statute or local ordinance to finance particular functions or activities of government.A summary of year end
fund balances for all special revenue funds follows:
Fund Balances
December 31,
Increase
Fund
20132012(Decrease)
Nonmajor
Cable T.V.$15,061$20,126$(5,065)
Capital Projects Funds
The capital projects funds are used to account for the acquisition and construction of major capital facilities other than those
financed by enterprise funds.A summary of year end fund balances for all capital projects funds follows:
Fund Balances
December 31,
Increase
Fund
20132012(Decrease)
Major
Park$(1,086,915)$(1,070,527)$(16,388)
2013 Street Project237,170-237,170
Nonmajor
Revolving Street 350,646187,850162,796
Pedestrian Trail Ways15,622(2,763)18,385
Capital Equipment Revolving43,303-43,303
Total$(440,174)$(885,440)$445,266
The City shouldcontinue toannuallyevaluate the status of each project to determine if the fund should be closed or if additional
funding sources will be needed for deficits.Each deficit indicates a funding shortfall and all will eventually need to be eliminated
eitherby future charges or by transfers from other funds. The deficit fund balance in the Park fund of $1,086,915is due to a
transfer out of $825,000 in 2011 to the Pedestrian Trail Ways tofundthe project plan.The increase in the 2013 Street project
fund is due to bond proceeds and other activity remaining for the completion of the project. The Revolving Street fund increased
mainlydue to a transfer from the General fund. A transfer of $43,303 from the General fund was used to establish a new Capital
Equipment Revolving fund.
Debt Service Funds
Debt Service funds are a type of governmental fund to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of interest and
principal on debt (other than enterprise fund debt).
Debt Service funds may have one or a combination of the following revenue sources pledged to retire debt as follows:
Property taxes - Primarily for general City benefit projects such as parks and municipal buildings.Property taxes may
also be used to fund special assessment bonds which are not fully assessed.
Tax increments - Pledged exclusively for tax increment/economic development districts.
Capitalized interest portion of bond proceeds - After the sale of bonds, the project may not produce revenue (tax
increments or special assessments) for a period of one to two years.Bonds are issued with this timing difference
considered in the form of capitalized interest.
Special assessments - Charges to benefited properties for various improvements.
In addition to the above pledged assets, other funding sources may be received by Debt Service funds as follows:
Residual project proceeds from the related capital projects fund
Investment earnings
State or federal grants
Transfers from other funds
A comparison of the assets of each fund and theremaining bonds outstanding at year end are as follows:
Cash and
TemporaryTotalBonds
Fund
InvestmentsAssetsOutstandingMaturity
309Joint Police Station 2005A$55,044$61,712$455,0002021
348G.O. Crossover Bonds of 2009B374,315412,0311,945,0002018
349G.O. Improvement Bonds of 2011A427,360892,9352,215,0002019
351G.O. Improvement Bonds of 2009A879,6661,590,1023,450,0002025
352G.O. Improvement Bonds of 2013A60,711315,7551,485,0002029
Total$1,797,096$3,272,535$9,550,000
Water Fund
Water Utility Cash Flow
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$-
20102010 Receipts20112011 Receipts20122012 Receipts20132013 Receipts
DisbursementsDisbursementsDisbursementsDisbursements
Operating costsOther (capital, etc.)Operating receiptsOther (connection, interest, etc.)
A graphic representation of the cash flow statement of the Water fund is shown above. As you can see, operating receipts have
covered operating expenses over the past four years. The other receipt category is mostly connection fee and interestearnings.
Water Utility Cash Reserve Target
$1,400,000
$1,288,411
$1,210,365
$1,200,000
$1,074,848
$961,881
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$-
2010201120122013
UnrestrictedMinimum target balance (35% of operating costs)
Cash balance in the Water fund continues to be strong. Amounts above the target may be considered a reserve for future capital
and/or unexpected expenses. Regardless of the strong cash position relative to expenses, it is important for the City to monitor
funds to ensure they have enough cash to cover future operations and future capital needs.
Sewer Fund
Sewer Utility Cash Flow
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$-
20102010 Receipts20112011 Receipts20122012 Receipts20132013 Receipts
DisbursementsDisbursementsDisbursementsDisbursements
Operating costsOther (capital, interfund, etc.)Operating receiptsOther (connections, interfund, etc.)
A graphic representation of the cash flow statement of the Water fund is shown above. As you can see, operating receipts have
covered operating expenses, except for in 2013when they were slightly less. The other receipt category is mostly connection fee
and interfund receipts. The table below represents the amounts due from other funds.
2010201120122013
Due from other funds$2,038,474$2,050,776$23,000$23,000
Sewer Utility Cash Reserve Target
$1,000,000
$946,137
$905,212
$900,000
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$222,280
$169,273
$200,000
$100,000
$-
2010201120122013
UnrestrictedMinimum target balance (35% of operating costs)
The Sewer fund operated at a loss again in 2013 but continues to show an increase in cash flow mainly due to
the repayments onthe interfund loan.The fund currently is owed $1,191,917from other funds. A large
percentage of total expense in this fund comes from depreciation. The City needs to continue monitoring cash
flow and reviewratesannuallyto aim towards an operating incomeand future capital needs.
Storm Water Fund
Storm Water Utility Cash Flow
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$-
20102010 Receipts20112011 Receipts20122012 Receipts20132013 Receipts
DisbursementsDisbursementsDisbursementsDisbursements
Operating costsOther (capital, interfund, etc.)Operating receiptsOther (transfers, interest earnings, etc.)
A graphic representation of the cash flow statement of the Storm Water fund is shown above. As you can see, operating receipts
have covered operating expenses over the past four years. The other receipt category is mostly transfers in (in 2010)and interest
earnings.
2010201120122013
Due to other funds$110,000$110,000$65,650$43,980
Storm Water Utility CashReserve Target
$189,770
$200,000
$180,000
$160,000
$130,947
$130,644
$140,000
$120,592
$120,000
$100,000
$80,000
$60,000
$40,000
$20,000
$-
2010201120122013
UnrestrictedMinimum target balance (35% of operating costs)
The Strom Water fund has a cash balance just under the target balance. However, the fund also has an interfund
payable in the amount of $66,980.The City needs to continue monitoring cash flow and review rates annually
to aim towards an operating income and future capital needs.
Ratio Analysis
The following captures a few ratios from the City’s financial statements that give some additional information for trend and peer
group analysis.The peer group average is derived from information we requested from theOffice of the State Auditor. Different peer
th
group averages were used for Cities of the 4class (population 2,500 – 10,000).The majority of these ratios facilitate the use of
economic resources focus and accrual basisof accounting at the government-wide level.A combination of liquidity (ability to pay its
most immediate obligations), solvency (ability to pay its long-term obligations), funding (comparison of financial amounts and
economic indicators to measure changes in financial capacity over time) and common-size (comparison of financial data with other
cities regardless of size) ratios are shown below.
Ratio
CalculationSource2010201120122013
Debt to assetsTotal liabilities/total assetsGovernment-wide28%31%31%31%
37%33%33%N/A
Debt per capitaBonded debt/populationGovernment-wide$2,159$2,459$2,310$2,486
$3,125$2,826$2,626N/A
Taxes per capitaTax revenues/populationGovernment-wide$433$442$456$455
$407$500$480N/A
Current expenditures per capitaGovernmental fund currentGovernmental funds$525$528$526$507
$624$640$649N/A
expenditures/population
Capital expenditures per capitaGovernmental fund capitalGovernmental funds$370$246$33$330
$265$229$298N/A
expenditures/population
Capital assets % left to Net capital assets/Government-wide82%79%74%72%
61%64%65%N/A
depreciate - Governmentalgross capital assets
Capital assets % left to Net capital assets/Government-wide75%69%66%64%
59%65%63%N/A
depreciate - Business-typegross capital assets
Represents the City of Centerville
Represents Peer Group Average
Debt-to-Assets Leverage Ratio (Solvency Ratio)
The debt-to-assets leverage ratio is a comparison of a city’s total liabilities to its total assets or the percentage of total assets that are
provided by creditors. It indicates the degree to which the City’s assets are financed through borrowings and other long-term
obligations (i.e. a ratio of 50 percent would indicate half of the assets are financedwith outstanding debt).
Bonded Debt per Capita (Funding Ratio)
This dollar amount is arrived at by dividing the total bonded debt by the population of the city and represents the amount ofbonded
debt obligation for each citizen of the city at the end of the year.The higher the amount, the more resources are needed in the future to
retire these obligations through taxes, assessments or user fees.
Taxes per Capita (Funding Ratio)
This dollar amount is arrived at by dividing the total tax revenues by the population of the city and represents the amount of taxes for
each citizen of the city for the year.The higher this amount is, the more reliant the city is on taxes to fund its operations.
Current Expenditures per Capita (Funding Ratio)
This dollar amount is arrived at by dividing the total current governmental expenditures by the population of the
City and represents the amount of governmental expenditure for each citizen of the City during the year. Since this is
generally based on ongoing expenditures, we would expect consistent annual per capita results.
Capital Expenditures per Capita (Funding Ratio)
This dollar amount is arrived at by dividing the total governmental capital outlay expenditures by the population of the Cityand
represents the amount of capital expenditure for each citizen of the City during the year. Since projects are not always recurring, the
per capita amount will fluctuate from year to year.
Capital Assets Percentage (Common-size Ratio)
This percentage represents the percent of governmental or business-type capital assets that are left to be depreciated.The lower this
percentage, the older the city’s capital assets are and may need major repairs or replacements in the near future.A higher percentage
may indicate newer assets being constructed or purchased and may coincide with higher debt ratios or bonded debt per capita.
Future Accounting Standard Changes
The following Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statements have been issued and may have an impact on future
(1)
City financial statements:
GASB Statement No. 67The Financial Reporting for Pension Plans- an Amendment to GASB Statement No. 25
-
Summary
The objective of this Statement is to improve financial reporting by state and local governmental pension plans. This Statement
results from a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of existing standards of accounting and financial reporting for pensions
with regard to providing decision-useful information, supporting assessments of accountability and interperiod equity, and
creating additional transparency.
Financial Reportingfor Defined Benefit Pension Plans and Note
This Statement replaces the requirements of Statements No. 25,
Disclosures for Defined Contribution PlansPension Disclosures
, and No. 50,, as they relate to pension plans that are
administered through trusts or equivalent arrangements (hereafter jointly referred to as trusts) that meet certain criteria.
The requirements of Statements No. 25 and No. 50 remain applicable to pension plans that are not administered through trusts
covered by the scope of this Statement and to defined contribution plans that provide postemployment benefits other than
pensions.
This Statement is effective for financial statements for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2013. Earlier application is
encouraged.
How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Financial Reporting
The requirements of this Statement will improve financial reporting primarily through enhanced note disclosures and schedules of
required supplementary information that will be presented by the pension plans that are within its scope. The new information
will enhance the decision-usefulness of the financial reports of these pension plans, their value for assessing accountability, and
their transparency by providing information about measures of net pension liabilities and explanations of how and why those
liabilities changedfrom year to year. The net pension liability information, including ratios, will offer an up-to-date indication of
the extent to which the total pension liability is covered by the fiduciary net position of the pension plan. The comparability of the
reported information for similar types of pension plans will be improved by the changes related to the attribution method used to
determine the total pension liability. The contribution schedule will provide measures to evaluate decisions related to the
assessment of contribution rates in comparison to actuarially determined rates, when such rates are determined. In that
circumstance, it also will provide information about whether employers and nonemployer contributing entities, if applicable, are
keeping pace with actuarially determined contribution measures. In addition, new information about rates of return on pension
plan investments will inform financial report users about the effects of market conditions on the pension plan's assets over time
and provide information for users to assess the relative success of the pension plan's investment strategy and the relative
contribution that investment earnings provide to the pension plan's ability to pay benefits to plan members when they come due.
Future Accounting Standard Changes - Continued
GASB Statement No. 68The Accounting and Financial Reporting of Pensions- an Amendment of GASB Statement No. 27
-
The primary objective of this Statement is to improve accounting and financial reporting by state and local governments for
pensions. It also improves information provided by state and local governmental employers about financial support for pensions
that is provided by other entities. This Statement results from a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of existing standards of
accounting and financial reporting for pensions with regard to providing decision-useful information, supporting assessments of
accountability and interperiod equity, and creating additional transparency.
This Statement replaces the requirements ofStatement No. 27, Accounting for Pensions by State and Local Governmental
Employers, as well as the requirements ofStatement No. 50, Pension Disclosures, as they relate to pensions that are provided
through pension plans administered as trusts or equivalent arrangements (hereafter jointly referred to as trusts) that meet certain
criteria. The requirements ofStatements 27and50remain applicable for pensions that are not covered by the scope of this
Statement.
This Statement is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2014. Earlier application is encouraged.
How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Financial Reporting
The requirements of this Statement will improve the decision-usefulness of information in employer and governmental
nonemployer contributing entity financial reports and will enhance its value for assessing accountability and interperiod equity by
requiring recognition of the entire net pension liability and a more comprehensive measure of pension expense. Decision-
usefulness and accountability also will be enhanced through new note disclosures and required supplementary information.
GASB Statement No. 69 -Government Combinations and Disposals of Government Operations
Summary
This Statement establishes accounting and financial reporting standards related to government combinations and disposals of
government operations. As used in this Statement, the term government combinations include a variety of transactions referred to
as mergers, acquisitions, and transfers of operations.
The distinction between a government merger and a government acquisition is based upon whether an exchange of significant
consideration is present within the combination transaction. Government mergers include combinations of legally separate entities
without the exchange of significant consideration. This Statement requires the use of carrying values to measure the assets and
liabilities in a government merger. Conversely, government acquisitions are transactions in which a government acquires another
entity, or its operations, in exchange for significant consideration. This Statement requires measurements of assets acquired and
liabilities assumed generally to be based upon their acquisition values. This Statement also provides guidance for transfers of
operations that do not constitute entire legally separate entities and in which no significant consideration is exchanged. This
Statement defines the term operations for purposes of determining the applicability of this Statement and requires the use of
carrying values to measure the assets and liabilities in a transfer of operations.
A disposal of a government's operations results in the removal of specific activities of a government. This Statement provides
accounting and financial reporting guidance for disposals of government operations that have been transferred or sold.
This Statement requires disclosures to be made about government combinations and disposals of government operations to enable
financial statement users to evaluate the nature and financial effects of those transactions.
The requirements of this Statement are effective for government combinations and disposals of government operations occurring
in financial reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2013, and should be applied on a prospective basis. Earlier
application is encouraged.
How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Financial Reporting
Until now, governments have accounted for mergers, acquisitions, and transfers of operations by analogizing to accounting and
financial reporting guidance intended for the business environment, generally APB Opinion No. 16, Business Combinations. This
Statement provides specific accounting and financial reporting guidance for combinations in the governmental
environment. This Statement also improves the decision usefulness of financial reporting by requiring that
disclosures be made by governments about combination arrangements in which they engage and for disposals of
government operations.
Future Accounting Standard Changes - Continued
GASB Statement No. 70 - Accounting and Financial Reporting for Nonexchnage Financial Guarantees
Summary
Some governments extend financial guarantees for the obligations of another government, a not-for-profit organization, a private
entity, or individual without directly receiving equal or approximately equal value in exchange (a nonexchange transaction). Asa
part of this nonexchange financial guarantee, a government commits to indemnify the holder of the obligation if the entity or
individual that issued the obligation does not fulfill its payment requirements. Also, some governments issue obligations thatare
guaranteed by other entities in a nonexchange transaction. The objective of this Statement is to improve accounting and financial
reporting by state and local governments that extend and receive nonexchange financial guarantees.
This Statement requires a government that extends a nonexchange financial guarantee to recognize a liability when qualitative
factors and historical data, if any, indicate that it is more likely than not that the government will be required to make a payment
on the guarantee. The amount of the liability to be recognized should be the discounted present value of the best estimate of the
future outflows expected to be incurred as a result of the guarantee. When there is no best estimate but a range of the estimated
future outflowscan be established, the amount of the liability to be recognized should be the discounted present value of the
minimum amount within the range.
This Statement requires a government that has issued an obligation guaranteed in a nonexchange transaction to report the
obligation until legally released as an obligor. This Statement also requires a government that is required to repay a guarantor for
making a payment on a guaranteed obligation or legally assuming the guaranteed obligation to continue to recognize a liability
until legally released as an obligor. When a government is released as an obligor, the government should recognize revenue asa
result of being relieved of the obligation. This Statement also provides additional guidance for intra-entity nonexchange financial
guarantees involving blended component units.
This Statement specifies the information required to be disclosed by governments that extend nonexchange financial guarantees.
In addition, this Statement requires new information to be disclosed by governments that receive nonexchange financial
guarantees.
The provisions of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2013. Earlier application is
encouraged. Except for disclosures related to cumulative amounts paid or received in relation to a nonexchange financial
guarantee, the provisions of this Statement are required to be applied retroactively. Disclosures related to cumulative amounts
paid or received in relation to a nonexchange financial guarantee may be applied prospectively.
How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Financial Reporting
The requirements of this Statement will enhance comparability of financial statements among governments by requiring
consistent reporting by those governments that extend nonexchange financial guarantees and by those governments that receive
nonexchange financial guarantees. This Statement also will enhance the information disclosed about a government's obligations
and risk exposure from extending nonexchange financial guarantees. This Statement also will augment the ability of financial
statement users to assess the probability that governments will repay obligation holders by requiring disclosures about obligations
that are issued with this type of financial guarantee.
Future Accounting Standard Changes - Continued
GASB Statement No. 71Pension Transition for Contributions Made Subsequent to the Measure Date - an Amendment of
-
GASB Statement No. 68
Summary
The objective of this Statement is to address an issue regarding application of the transition provisions of Statement No. 68,
Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions. The issue relates to amounts associated with contributions, if any, made by a
state or local government employer or nonemployer contributing entity to a defined benefit pension plan after the measurement
date of the government's beginning net pension liability.
Statement No. 68 requires a state or local government employer (or nonemployer contributing entity in a special funding
situation) to recognize a net pension liability measured as of a date (the measurement date) no earlier than the end of its prior
fiscal year. If a state or local government employer or nonemployer contributing entity makes a contribution to a defined benefit
pension plan between the measurement date of the reported net pension liability and the end of the government's reporting period,
Statement No. 68 requires that the government recognize its contribution as a deferred outflow of resources. In addition,
Statement No. 68 requires recognition of deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources for changes in the net
pension liability of a state or local government employer or nonemployer contributing entity that arise from other types of events.
At transition to Statement No. 68, if it is not practical for an employer or nonemployer contributing entity to determine the
amounts of all deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions, paragraph 137 of Statement
No. 68 required that beginning balances for deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources not be reported.
Consequently, if it is not practical to determine the amounts of all deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of
resources related to pensions, contributions made after the measurement date of the beginning net pension liability could not have
been reported as deferred outflows of resources at transition. This could have resulted in a significant understatement of an
employer or nonemployer contributing entity's beginning net position and expense in the initial period of implementation.
This Statement amends paragraph 137 of Statement No. 68to require that, at transition, a government recognize a beginning
deferred outflow of resources for its pension contributions, if any, made subsequent to the measurement date of the beginningnet
pension liability. Statement No. 68, as amended, continues to require that beginning balances for other deferred outflows of
resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions be reported at transition only if it is practical to determine all such
amounts.
The provisions of this Statement are required to be applied simultaneously with the provisions of Statement No. 68.
How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Financial Reporting
The requirements of this Statement will eliminate the source of a potential significant understatement of restated beginning net
position and expense in the first year of implementation of Statement No. 68 in the accrual-basis financial statements of
employers and nonemployer contributing entities. This benefit will be achieved without the imposition of significantadditional
costs.
1
Note
. From GASB Pronouncements Summaries. Copyright 2014 by the Financial Accounting Foundation, 401 Merritt 7,
Norwalk, CT 06856, USA, and is reproduced with permission.
* * * * * *
This communication is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management and the Minnesota Office of the
State Auditor and is not intended and should not be used by anyone other than those specified parties.
Our audit would not necessarily disclose all weaknesses in the system because it was based on selected tests of the accounting records
and related data. The comments and recommendations in the report are purely constructive in nature, and should be read in this
context.
If youhave any questions or wish to discuss any of the items contained in this letter, please feel free to contact us at your convenience.
We wish to thank you for the continued opportunity to be of service and for the courtesy and cooperation extended to us byyour staff.
ABDO, EICK & MEYERS, LLP
Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 29, 2014
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2013
THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK
INTENTIONALLY
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
Page No.
INTRODUCTORY SECTION
Elected and Appointed Officials5
FINANCIAL SECTION
Independent Auditor’s Report9
Management’s Discussion and Analysis13
Basic Financial Statements
Government-wide Financial Statements
Statement of Net Position27
Statement of Activities28
Fund Financial Statements
Governmental Funds
Balance Sheet32
Reconciliation of theBalance Sheet to the Statement of Net Position35
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 36
Reconciliation of theStatement of Revenues, Expenditures and
Changes in Fund Balances tothe Statement of Activities38
General Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual39
Proprietary Funds
Statements of Net Position40
Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position44
Statements of Cash Flows46
Notes to the FinancialStatements51
Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statementsand Schedules
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
Combining Balance Sheet72
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 73
General Fund
Scheduleof Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual75
Debt Service Funds
Combining Balance Sheet80
Combining Scheduleof Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 82
Summary Financial Report
Revenues and Expenditures for General Operations - Governmental Funds84
OTHER REQUIRED REPORT
Independent Auditor’s Report on Minnesota Legal Compliance87
INTRODUCTORY SECTION
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2013
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
ELECTEDAND APPOINTED OFFICIALS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
ELECTED
NameTitleTerm Expires
Thomas WilharberMayor01/01/15
Steve KingCouncil Member01/01/15
Ben FehrenbacherCouncil Member01/01/17
Jeff PaarCouncil Member01/01/17
D. LoveCouncil Member01/01/15
APPOINTED
Dallas LarsonCity Administrator
Teresa BenderCity Clerk
Ellie PaulsethFinance Director
FINANCIAL SECTION
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2013
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Centerville, Minnesota
Report on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund,
and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Centerville, Minnesota (the City), as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2013,and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements
as listed in the table of contents.
Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Statements
Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the design, implementation, and maintenance of
internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement,
whether due to fraud or error.
Auditor’s Responsibility
Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit.The prior year comparative
information has been derived from the City’s 2012financial statements and, in our report dated March 20,2013we express
unmodifiedopinions on the respective proprietary fund financial statements. We conducted our audit in accordance with
auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the
audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.
An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The
procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial
statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the
City’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriatein the
circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, we
express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of
significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions.
Opinions
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the
governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City as of
December 31, 2013, and the respective changes in financial position and, where applicable, cash flows thereof and the respective
budgetary comparison for the General fund for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America.
Other Matters
Required Supplementary Information
Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the Management’s Discussion and Analysis
starting on page 13be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic
financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial
reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied
certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the
United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing
the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries,the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we
obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information
because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance.
Other Information
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City’sbasic
financial statements.The introductory section and combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules are presented for
purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the financial statements.
The combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules are the responsibility of management and were derived from
and relate directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such information has
been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures,
including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the
basic financial statements or to the basic financial statementsthemselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing
standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the information is fairly stated, in all material respects,
in relation to the basic financial statementsas a whole.
The introductory section hasnot been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements,and
accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on it.
ABDO, EICK & MEYERS, LLP
Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 29, 2014
Management’s Discussion and Analysis
As management of the City of Centerville, Minnesota, (the City), we offer readers of the City’s financial statements this narrative
overview and analysis of the financial activities of the City for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013.
Financial Highlights
The assets of the City exceeded its liabilitiesat the close of the most recent fiscal year by $21,686,182 (net position). Of this
amount, $4,461,946(unrestricted net position) may be used to meet the City’s ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors.
The City’s total net positionincreased$343,121.A further breakdown of net position ischronicled under Government wide
financial statement analysis.
At the end of the current fiscal year, unassignedfund balance for the General fund was $1,253,989, or 66.0percentof total
General fund expenditures.
The City’s total debt increased $262,259, during the current fiscal year.The increase was mainly due tothe issuance of the
refunding 2013A bond issue, which was offset by regularly scheduled debt payments
Overview of the Financial Statements
This discussion and analysis is intended to serve as an introduction to the City’s basic financial statements. The City’s basic financial
statements comprise three components: 1) government-wide financial statements, 2) fund financial statements, and 3) notes to the
financial statements. This analysis contains other supplemental information in addition to the basic financial statements themselves.
The financial statements also include notes that explain some of the information in the financial statements and provide more detailed
data. The statements are followed by a section of combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules that further
explains and supports the information in the financial statements. Figure 1 shows how the required parts of this annual report are
arranged and relate to one another. In addition to these required elements, we have included a section with combining and individual
fund financial statements and schedules that provide details about nonmajor governmental funds, which are added together and
presented in single columns in the basic financial statements.
Figure 1
Required Components of the
City’s Annual Financial Report
Management's
Basic Required
Discussion and
Financial Supplementary
Analysis
StatementsInformation
Government-FundNotes to the
wide Financial Financial Financial
StatementsStatementsStatements
SummaryDetail
Figure 2 summarizes the major features of the City’s financial statements, including the portion of the City government they cover and
the types of information they contain. The remainder of this overview section of management’s discussion and analysis explains the
structure and contents of each of the statements.
Figure 2
Major features of the Government-wide and Fund Financial Statements
Fund Financial Statements
Government-wide StatementsGovernmental FundsProprietaryFunds
ScopeEntire City government(except The activities of the Citythat are Activities the City operates
fiduciary funds)and the City’s not proprietary or fiduciary, such similar to private businesses,
component unitsas police, fire and parkssuch as the water and sewer
system
Required financial
Statement of Net PositionBalance SheetStatementsof Net
statements
Position
Statement of ActivitiesStatement of Revenues,
Statements of Revenues,
Expenditures, and Changes in
Fund Balances Expenses and Changes in
Net Position
Statementsof Cash Flows
Accounting Basis and Accrual accounting and Modified accrual accounting and Accrual accounting and
measurement focuseconomic resources focuscurrent financial resources focuseconomic resources focus
Type of asset/liability All assets and liabilities, both Onlyassets expected to be used All assets and liabilities, both
informationfinancial and capital, and short-up and liabilities that come due financial and capital, and
term and long-termduring the year or soon thereafter; short-term and long-term
no capital assets included
Type of deferred All deferred inflows of Only deferred inflows of All deferred inflows of
Inflows of resources resources, regardless of when resources that come due during resources, regardless of when
Informationcash is received or paidthe year or soon thereafter; no cash is received or paid
capital assets included
Type of inflow/out All revenues and expenses Revenues for which cash is All revenues and expenses
flow informationduring year, regardless of when received during or soon after the during the year, regardless of
cash is received or paidend of the year; expenditures when cash isreceived or paid
when goods or services have been
received and payment is due
during the year or soon thereafter
Government-wide financial statements.
The government-wide financial statementsare designed to provide readers with a broad
overview of the City’s finances, in a manner similar to a private-sector business.
The statement of net positionpresents information on all of the City’s assets and liabilities, with the difference between the two
reported as net position. Over time, increases or decreases in net positionmay serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial
position of the City is improving or deteriorating.
The statement of activitiespresents information showing how the City’s net positionchanged during the most recent fiscal year. All
changes in net positionare reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of
related cash flows. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement for some items that will only result in cash flows in
future fiscal periods (e.g., uncollected taxes and earned but unused vacationleave).
Both of the government-wide financial statements distinguish functions of the City that are principally supported by taxes and
intergovernmental revenue (governmental activities) from other functions that are intended to recover all or a significant portion of
their costs through user fees and charges (business-type activities). The governmental activities of the City include general
government, public safety, public works, economic development, culture and recreation, and interest on long-term debt. The business-
type activities of the City include water, sewer, and storm water.
The government-wide financial statements start on page 27of this report.
Fund financial statements.
Afundis a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been
segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City, like other State and local governments, uses fund accounting to ensure and
demonstrate compliancewith finance-related legal requirements. All of the funds of the City can be divided into two categories:
governmental funds and proprietary funds.
.
Governmental fundsGovernmental fundsare used to account for essentially the same functions reported as governmental activities
in the government-wide financial statements. However, unlike the government-wide financial statements, governmental fund
financial statements focus on near-term inflows and outflows of spendable resources, as well as on balances of spendable resources
available at the end of the fiscal year. Such information may be useful in evaluating a government’s near-term financing
requirements.
Because the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government-wide financial statements, it is useful to compare the
information presented for governmental fundswith similar information presented for governmental activitiesin the government-wide
financial statements. By doing so, readers may better understand the long-term impact by the government’s near-term financing
decisions. Both the governmental fund balance sheet and the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in
fund balances provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental fundsand governmental activities.
The City maintains 12 individual governmental funds, fiveof which are Debt Service funds. Information is presented separately in the
governmentalfund balance sheet and in the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balances for
the General, Debt Service, Park funds, and 2013 Street Project. Data from the other fournon-majorgovernmental funds are combined
into asingle, aggregated presentation. Individual fund data for each of these non-major governmental funds is provided in the form of
combining statements or scheduleselsewhere in this report.
The City adopts an annual appropriated budget for its General fund. A budgetary comparison statement has been provided for the
General fund to demonstrate compliance with this budget.
The basic governmental fund financial statements start on page 32 of this report.
Proprietary fund. The City maintains one type of proprietary fund. Enterprise fundsare used to report the same functions presented
as business-type activitiesin the government-wide financial statements. The City uses enterprise funds to account for its water, sewer
and storm water.
The proprietary fund provides the same type of information as the government-wide financial statements, only in more detail. The
proprietary fund financial statements provide separate information for each of the enterprise funds.
The basic proprietary fund financial statements start on page 40 of this report.
Notes to the financial statements.
The notes provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data
provided in the government-wide and fund financial statements. The notes to the financial statements start on page 51of this report.
Other information.
The combining statements referred to earlier in connection with non-major governmental funds are presented
following the notes to the financial statements. Combining and individual fundstatements and schedules start on page 72of this
report.
Government-wide Financial Analysis
As noted earlier, net positionmay serve over time as a useful indicator of a government’s financial position. In the case of the City,
assets exceeded liabilities by $21,686,182at the close of the most recent fiscal year.
By far, the largest portion of the City’s net position ( 63percent) reflects its investment in capital assets (e.g., land, buildings,
machinery and equipment); less any related debt used to acquire those assets that are still outstanding. The City uses thesecapital
assets to provide services to citizens; consequently, these assets are not available for future spending. Although the City’s investment
in its capital assets is reported net of related debt, it should be noted that the resources needed to repay this debt must be provided from
other sources, since the capital assets themselves cannot be used to liquidate these liabilities.
City of Centerville’s Summary of Net position
Governmental ActivitiesBusiness-type Activities
IncreaseIncrease
20132012(Decrease)20132012(Decrease)
Assets
Current and other assets$4,394,334$4,169,758$224,576$4,174,554$4,175,666$(1,112)
Capital assets16,220,21415,905,997314,2176,852,1376,872,677(20,540)
Total assets20,614,54820,075,755538,79311,026,69111,048,343(21,652)
Liabilities
Noncurrent liabilities outstanding9,586,9319,327,285259,64615,71513,1022,613
Other liabilities336,438374,124(37,686)15,97366,526(50,553)
Total liabilities9,923,3699,701,409221,96031,68879,628(47,940)
Net position
Net investment in
capital assets6,907,3847,126,016(218,632)6,852,1376,872,677(20,540)
Restricted for
Future expansion---71,63171,631-
Debt service3,140,8532,945,918194,935---
Capital projects237,170-237,170---
Cable TV15,06120,126(5,065)---
Unrestricted 390,711282,286108,4254,071,2354,024,40746,828
Total net position$ 10,691,179$ 10,374,346$316,833$ 10,995,003$ 10,968,715$26,288
An additional portion of the City’s netposition (16.0percent) represents resources that are subject to external restrictions on how they
may be used. The remaining balance of unrestricted net position ($4,461,946) may be used to meet the City’s ongoing obligations to
citizens and creditors.
At the end of the current fiscal year, the City is able to report positive balances in all three categories of net position, both for the City
as a whole, as well as for its separate governmental and business-type activities. The same situation held true for the prior year.
Governmental activities
. Governmental activities increased the City’s net positionby $316,833. Key elements of this increaseare as
follows:
City of Centerville’s Changes inNet position
Governmental ActivitiesBusiness-type Activities
IncreaseIncrease
20132012(Decrease)20132012(Decrease)
Revenues
Program revenues
Charges for services$377,142$441,643$(64,501)$813,789$785,561$28,228
Operating grants and contributions87,73776,10811,6292,625-2,625
Capital grants and contributions337,928176,630161,298635,760156,356479,404
General revenues
Taxes
Property taxes/tax increments1,742,7421,734,5468,196---
Property taxes, levied for debt service528,766528,257509---
Other taxes6,2801,1575,123---
Grants and contributions
not restricted to specific programs1,43117,673(16,242)---
Unrestricted investment earnings6,86230,478(23,616)35,09435,738(644)
Gain on sale of capital assets10,000-10,000---
Miscellaneous-420(420)---
Total revenues3,098,8883,006,91291,9761,487,268977,655509,613
Expenses
General government454,273491,268(36,995)---
Public safety1,056,2821,011,26545,017---
Public works1,188,5381,272,361(83,823)---
Culture and recreation203,827178,19225,635---
Economic development2,0382,400(362)---
Interest on long-term debt265,393310,937(45,544)---
Water---487,667349,521138,146
Sewer---481,188433,79247,396
Storm Water---103,82989,28214,547
Total expenses3,170,3513,266,423(96,072)1,072,684872,595200,089
Increase (decrease) in
net position before transfers(71,463)(259,511)188,048414,584105,060309,524
Capital contributions to other funds-(271,886)271,886-271,886(271,886)
Transfers 388,296(10,464)398,760(388,296)10,464(398,760)
Change in net position 316,833(541,861)858,69426,288387,410(361,122)
Net position, January 110,374,34610,916,207(541,861)10,968,71510,581,305387,410
Net position, December 31$ 10,691,179$ 10,374,346$316,833$ 10,995,003$ 10,968,715$26,288
Capitaland operatinggrantsand contributions increased in both governmental and business due tospecial assessments for
street projects.
The following graph depicts various governmental activities and shows the program revenues and expenses directly related to those
activities.
Expenses and Program Revenues - Governmental Activities
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$-
GeneralPublic safetyPublic worksCulture andEconomicInterest on long-
governmentrecreationdevelopmentterm debt
Program revenuesExpenses
Revenues by Source - Governmental Activities
Capital grants and
contributions
13.2%
Operating grants and
contributions
3.4%
Taxes
68.3%
Charges for services
14.7%
Unrestricted
Grants and
investment earnings
contributions not
0.3%
restricted
0.1%
Business-type activities
. Business-type activities increasedthe City’s net positionby $26,288.Key elements of this increase areas
follows:
Expenses and Program Revenues - Business-type Activities
$1,000,000
$900,000
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$-
WaterSewerStorm water
Program revenuesExpenses
Revenues by Source - Business-type Activities
Investment
earnings
2.4%
Capital grants and
contributions
42.8%
Charges for
services
54.8%
A further breakdown of expenses is shown below:
Governmental ActivitiesBusiness-type Activities
IncreaseIncrease
20132012(Decrease)20132012(Decrease)
Personnel costs$539,125$582,993$(43,868)$209,426$211,814$(2,388)
Supplies39,35841,904(2,546)126,40819,871106,537
Other charges for services1,305,7441,373,891(68,147)735,520639,26096,260
Capital outlay35,891114,019(78,128)---
Total$1,920,118$2,112,807$(192,689)$1,071,354$870,945$200,409
Financial Analysis of the Government’s Funds
As noted earlier, the City uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements.
Governmental funds. The focus of the City’s governmental fundsis to provide information on near-term inflows, outflows and
balances of spendableresources. Such information is useful in assessing the City’s financing requirements. In particular, unassigned
fund balancemay serve as a useful measure of a government’s net resources available for spending at the end of the fiscal year.
Activity in the City’s major governmental funds is discussed below:
Fund Balance December 31,
Increase
Major Funds
20132012 (Decrease)
General $1,258,596$1,205,820$52,776
The General fund balance has increased from 2012 and is strong moving
into 2013. The fund also transferred out $208,900 during the year.
Debt Service$1,832,254$1,866,410$(34,156)
The Debt Service fund increased $34,156. The City manages cash flow in
all Debt Service funds and ensures adequate resources exist to fund future
obligations.
Park$(1,086,915)$(1,070,527)$(16,388)
The Park fund balance decreased about $16,000 from the previous year.
Which is due to interest paid on the interfund loan.
2013 Street Project$237,170$-$237,170
The 2013 Street project fund balance increased $436,230 during the year.
Major activity in the fund included bond proceeds of $1,477,493 as well
as $1,030,985 of capital expenditures for the street project.
As of the end of the current fiscal year, the City’s governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $2,665,737, an
increaseof $458,821in comparison with the prior year. Approximately 6.2percent of this total amount or $164,033constitutes
unassignedfund balance, which is available for spending at the City’s discretion. The remainder of fund balance ($2,501,704) is not
available for spending because it is either: 1) nonspendable ($30,229), 2) restricted ($2,058,863,3) committed ($3,041)or assigned
($409,571) for the purposes described in the fund balance section of each balance sheet.
Proprietary funds. The City’s proprietary funds provide the same type of information found in the government-wide financial
statements, but in more detail.
Unrestricted net positionof the enterprise funds at the end of the year amounted to $4,071,235. The total increasein net positionfor
the funds was $26,288. Other factors concerning the finances of this fund have already been addressed in the discussion of the City’s
business-type activities.
General Fund Budgetary Highlights
The City’s General fund budget was not amended during the year. Revenues had a positive budget variance and expenditures had
negativebudget variance, and overall the General fund had a net positive budget variance of $95,499.
Some of the significant variances can be briefly summarized as follows:
Total revenue had a positive budget variance of $112,382.All revenue categories had positive variances, except for interest
on investments, which was due to the market value loss on investments.
Total expenditures had a positivebudget variance of $13,697.Total public safety, public worksand economic development
expenditures were over budget by a total of $63,500.Total general governmental expenditures, culture and recreation and
capital outlay expenditures were under budget by a total of $77,197. The city also transferred $252,203 from the General
fund to other funds, which was $83,303 more than anticipated.
Capital Asset and Debt Administration
Capital assets.
The City’s investment in capital assets for its governmental and business-type activities as of December31,2013,
amounts to $23,072,351(net of accumulated depreciation). This investment in capital assets includes land, structures, improvements,
machinery and equipment, park facilities, roads, highways and bridges.
Major capital asset events during the current fiscal year included the following:
The 2013 street and utility project will be completed in 2014. The City has incurred $1,455,217 of expense for this project as
of December 31, 2013.
The City made improvements to a Volleyball Court
Purchase of a generator to be used in the public safety department.
The City installed new water lines related to the Mount Trail Extension.
Additional information on the City’s capital assets can be found in Note 3B start on page 60 of this report.
City of Centerville’s Capital Assets
(
net of depreciation)
Governmental ActivitiesBusiness-type Activities
IncreaseIncrease
20132012(Decrease)20132012(Decrease)
Land$3,337,023$3,337,023$-$200,655$196,255$4,400
Construction in progress1,229,234-1,229,234225,983-225,983
Buildings897,692934,982(37,290)365,010373,290(8,280)
Infrastructure10,487,34111,329,577(842,236)5,963,3616,175,919(212,558)
Machinery and equipment268,924304,415(35,491)97,128127,213(30,085)
Total$ 16,220,214$ 15,905,997$314,217$6,852,137$6,872,677$(20,540)
Street Maintenance Program.
Beginningin 2012 the City began annually accumulating funds for a street maintenance program that
will consist of mill and overlay to each segment of street in the city, at approximately every twelve year intervals. The initial
construction program begins in 2014and is anticipated to cost around $400,000, to be paid from funds accumulated in a revolving
improvement account. A minimal special assessment of around $500 per residential lot will cover approximately 20% of the cost,
which combined with the City levy contribution each year, should sustain the program. Each year going forward, a similar project is
anticipated.
Equipment Funding.
In 2012, the City Council approved as part of the budget, a capital replacement program for equipment and
other assets that have predictable replacement cycles. All major street equipment, building roofs, carpets and similar items will be
funded through an equipment replacement fund that will be sustained by an annual levy. Likewise, the enterprise funds have identified
equipment and other assets that need periodic upgrading and replacement. Sufficient retained earnings will be protected to allow these
repairs/replacements to be completed without incurring debt.
Long-term debt
.At the end of the current fiscal year, the City had total bonded debt outstanding of $9,550,000. While all of the
City’s bonds have revenue streams, they are all backed by the full faith andcredit of the City.
City of Centerville’s Outstanding Debt
Governmental ActivitiesBusiness-type Activities
IncreaseIncrease
20132012(Decrease)20132012(Decrease)
General obligation bonds$9,550,000$9,294,981$255,019$-$-$-
Compensated absences payable36,93132,3044,62715,71513,1022,613
Total$9,586,931$9,327,285$259,646$15,715$13,102$2,613
Minnesota statutes limit the amount of net general obligation debt a City may issue to 3 percent of the market value of taxable
property within the City. Net debt is debt payable solely from ad valorem taxes. The taxable market value totals $292,948,400which
calculatesto a debt margin of $8,788,452. Debt financed partially or entirely by special assessments is not applied against the City’s
debt limit, nor is debt financed by proprietary fund revenues. Currently the City has $455,000of general obligation debt outstanding
leaving a debt margin of $8,333,452.
Additional information on the City’s long-term debt can be found in Note 3E startingon page 63 of this report.
Economic Factors and Next Year’s Budgets and Rates
The area economy is finally showing signs of improving. Property values for 2014 for payable year 2015 in the city, increased for the
first time in several years. The City General Fund Budget was increased for 2014 approximately 1.8% but the levy again remained
flat, largely due to new local government aid anticipated in 2014.
Requests for Information
This financial report is designed to provide a general overview of the City’s finances for all parties interested. Questions concerning
any of the information providedin this report or requests for additional financial information should be addressed to the City
Administrator, City of Centerville, 1880 Main Street, Centerville, Minnesota, 55038.
GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2013
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
STATEMENT OF NET POSITION
DECEMBER 31, 2013
GovernmentalBusiness-type
ActivitiesActivitiesTotal
ASSETS
Cash and temporary investments$ 3,840,485$ 2,287,146$ 6,127,631
Receivables
Accrued interest9,518-9,518
Taxes95,090-95,090
Accounts11,006232,883243,889
Special assessments1,472,371508,4911,980,862
Due from other governments60,572-60,572
Internal balances(1,124,937)1,124,937-
Inventories-4,7694,769
Prepaid items30,22916,32846,557
Capital assets
Land and construction and progress4,566,257426,6384,992,895
Depreciable assets (net of accumulated depreciation)11,653,9576,425,49918,079,456
TOTAL ASSETS20,614,54811,026,69131,641,239
LIABILITIES
Accounts and contracts payable131,5489,173140,721
Accrued salaries payable3,5941,0814,675
Due to other governments3,3075,7199,026
Accrued interest payable131,682-131,682
Deposits payable66,307-66,307
Noncurrent liabilities
Due within one year887,03612,979900,015
Due in more than one year8,699,8952,7368,702,631
TOTAL LIABILITIES9,923,36931,6889,955,057
NET POSITION
Net investment in capital assets6,907,3846,852,13713,759,521
Restricted for
Future expansion-71,63171,631
Debt service3,140,853-3,140,853
Capital projects237,170-237,170
Cable TV15,061-15,061
Unrestricted 390,7114,071,2354,461,946
TOTAL NET POSITION$10,691,179$10,995,003$21,686,182
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
Program Revenues
OperatingCapital Grants
Charges forGrants and and
Functions/ProgramsExpensesServicesContributionsContributions
Governmental activities
General government$ 454,273$ 87,481$ -$ -
Public safety1,056,282233,77669,415-
Public works1,188,53840,11318,322337,928
Culture and recreation203,82711,141--
Economic development2,0384,631--
Interest on long-term debt265,393---
Total governmental activities3,170,351377,14287,737337,928
Business-type activities
Water487,667327,9482,625580,989
Sewer481,188389,134-54,771
Storm water103,82996,707--
Total business-type activities1,072,684813,7892,625635,760
Total $ 4,243,035$ 1,190,931$ 90,362$ 973,688
General revenues
Taxes
Property taxes, levied for general purposes
Property taxes, levied for debt service
Gambling taxes
Grants and contributions not restricted to specific programs
Unrestricted investment earnings
Gain on sale of capital assets
Transfers - internal activities
Total general revenues and transfers
Change in net position
Net position, January 1
Net position, December 31
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
Net (Expenses) Revenues
and Changes in Net Position
GovernmentalBusiness-type
ActivitiesActivitiesTotal
$ (366,792)$ -$ (366,792)
(753,091)-(753,091)
(792,175)-(792,175)
(192,686)-(192,686)
2,593-2,593
(265,393)-(265,393)
(2,367,544)-(2,367,544)
-423,895423,895
-(37,283)(37,283)
-(7,122)(7,122)
-379,490379,490
(2,367,544)379,490(1,988,054)
1,742,742-1,742,742
528,766-528,766
6,280-6,280
1,431-1,431
6,86235,09441,956
10,000-10,000
388,296(388,296)-
2,684,377(353,202)2,331,175
316,83326,288343,121
10,374,34610,968,71521,343,061
$10,691,179$10,995,003$21,686,182
FUNDFINANCIAL STATEMENTS
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2013
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
BALANCE SHEET
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
101300's402
Debt
GeneralServicePark
ASSETS
Cash and temporary investments$ 1,283,695$ 1,797,096$ 38,022
Receivables
Accrued interest9,518--
Taxes86,4228,668-
Accounts11,006--
Special assessments31,2221,441,149-
Due from other governments49,931--
Prepaid items4,60725,622-
TOTAL ASSETS$ 1,476,401$ 3,272,535$ 38,022
LIABILITIES
Accounts and contracts payable$ 61,123$ -$ -
Deposits payable66,307--
Accrued salaries payable3,508--
Due to other governments3,307--
Advances from other funds--1,124,937
TOTAL LIABILITIES134,245-1,124,937
DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Unavailable revenue - property taxes52,560--
Unavailable revenue - special assessments31,0001,440,281-
TOTAL DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES83,5601,440,281-
FUND BALANCES
Nonspendable4,60725,622-
Restricted-1,806,632-
Committed3,041--
Assigned---
Unassigned1,250,948-(1,086,915)
TOTAL FUND BALANCES 1,258,5961,832,254(1,086,915)
TOTAL LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES AND FUND BALANCE$ 1,476,401$ 3,272,535$ 38,022
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
452
2013OtherTotal
StreetGovernmentalGovernmental
ProjectFundsFunds
$ 303,105$ 418,567$ 3,840,485
--9,518
--95,090
--11,006
--1,472,371
-10,64160,572
--30,229
$ 303,105$ 429,208$ 5,519,271
$ 65,935$ 4,490$ 131,548
--66,307
-863,594
--3,307
--1,124,937
65,9354,5761,329,693
--52,560
--1,471,281
--1,523,841
--30,229
237,17015,0612,058,863
--3,041
-409,571409,571
--164,033
237,170424,6322,665,737
$ 303,105$ 429,208$ 5,519,271
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
RECONCILIATION OF THE BALANCE SHEET
TO THE STATEMENT OF NET POSITION
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Total fund balances - governmental$ 2,665,737
Amounts reported for the governmental activities in the statement
of net position are different because
Governmental funds do not report an asset for equity interest in the joint venture-
Capital assets used in governmental activities are not financial
resources and therefore are not reported as assets in governmental funds.
Cost of capital assets22,609,288
Less accumulated depreciation(6,389,074)
Long-term liabilities, including bonds payable, are not due and payable in the
current period and therefore are not reported as liabilities in the funds.
Long-term liabilities at year end consist of
Bond principal payable(9,550,000)
Compensated absences payable(36,931)
Some receivables are not available soon enough to pay for the current period's expenditures,
and therefore are unavailable in the funds.
Delinquent taxes receivable1,471,281
Special assessments receivable52,560
Governmental funds do not report a liability for accrued interest until due and payable(131,682)
Total net position - governmental activities$10,691,179
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
101300's402
Debt
GeneralServicePark
REVENUES
Taxes
General property$ 1,751,963$ 528,766$ -
Gambling6,280--
Licenses and permits122,994--
Intergovernmental203,212--
Charges for services5,889--
Fines and forfeitures34,828--
Special assessments57,821508,367-
Interest on investments-5,948237
Miscellaneous12,695--
TOTAL REVENUES2,195,6821,043,081237
EXPENDITURES
Current
General government440,344--
Public safety1,051,591--
Public works297,47161,468-
Culture and recreation79,856--
Economic development2,038--
Capital outlay
General government11,248--
Public works---
Culture and recreation18,155--
Debt service
Principal-1,229,981-
Interest and other-221,59116,625
Bond issuance costs---
TOTAL EXPENDITURES1,900,7031,513,04016,625
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES
OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES294,979(469,959)(16,388)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Sale of capital assets10,000--
Transfers in-428,296-
Bonds issued-7,507-
Transfers out(252,203)--
TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)(242,203)435,803-
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES 52,776(34,156)(16,388)
FUND BALANCES, JANUARY 11,205,8201,866,410(1,070,527)
FUND BALANCES, DECEMBER 31$ 1,258,596$ 1,832,254$ (1,086,915)
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
452
2013OtherTotal
StreetGovernmentalGovernmental
ProjectFundsFunds
$ -$ -$ 2,280,729
--6,280
--122,994
--203,212
--5,889
--34,828
--566,188
-6776,862
-28,87141,566
-29,5483,268,548
--440,344
--1,051,591
--358,939
-15,84495,700
--2,038
--11,248
1,230,0456,4881,236,533
--18,155
--1,229,981
--238,216
10,278-10,278
1,240,32322,3324,693,023
(1,240,323)7,216(1,424,475)
--10,000
-212,203640,499
1,477,493-1,485,000
--(252,203)
1,477,493212,2031,883,296
237,170219,419458,821
-205,2132,206,916
$ 237,170$ 424,632$ 2,665,737
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
RECONCILIATION OF THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES TO THE STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
Net change in fund balances - governmental funds$ 458,821
Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement
of activities are different because
Capital outlays are reported in governmental funds as expenditures. However, in the statement of
activities, the cost of those assets is allocated over the estimated useful lives as depreciation expense.
Capital outlay1,256,701
Depreciation expense(942,484)
The issuance of long-term debt provides current financial resources to governmental funds, while
the repayment of principal of long-term debt consumes the current financial resources of governmental
funds. Neither transaction, however, has any effect on net position. Also, governmental funds report
the effect of issuance costs, premiums, discounts and similar items when debt is first issued,
whereas these amounts are delayed and amortized in the statement of activities.
Principal repayments1,229,981
Debt issued or incurred(1,485,000)
Interest on long-term debt in the statement of activities differs from the amount reported in the
governmental fund because interest is recognized as an expenditure in the funds when it is due,
and thus requires the use of current financial resources. In the statement of activities, however
interest expense is recognized as the interest accrues, regardless of when it is due.(16,899)
Certain revenues are recognized as soon as they are earned. Under the modified accrual basis of
accounting, certain revenues cannot be recognized until they are available to liquidate liabilities
of the current period.
Property taxes(9,221)
Special assessments(170,439)
Some expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of current
financial resources and, therefore, are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds.
Compensated absences payable(4,627)
Change in net position - governmental activities$ 316,833
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES -
BUDGET AND ACTUAL
GENERAL FUND
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
Budgeted Amounts
ActualVariance with
OriginalFinalAmountsFinal Budget
REVENUES
Taxes
General property$ 1,739,600$ 1,739,600$ 1,751,963$ 12,363
Gambling--6,2806,280
Licenses and permits104,500104,500122,99418,494
Intergovernmental155,800155,800203,21247,412
Charges for services3,4003,4005,8892,489
Fines and forfeitures33,50033,50034,8281,328
Special assessments24,00024,00057,82133,821
Interest on investments15,00015,000-(15,000)
Miscellaneous7,5007,50012,6955,195
TOTAL REVENUES2,083,3002,083,3002,195,682112,382
EXPENDITURES
Current
General government482,300482,300440,34441,956
Public safety1,020,9001,020,9001,051,591(30,691)
Public works266,700266,700297,471(30,771)
Culture and recreation90,50090,50079,85610,644
Economic development--2,038(2,038)
Capital outlay54,00054,00029,40324,597
TOTAL EXPENDITURES1,914,4001,914,4001,900,70313,697
EXCESS OF REVENUES
OVER EXPENDITURES168,900168,900294,979126,079
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Sale of capital assets--10,00010,000
Transfers out(168,900)(168,900)(252,203)(83,303)
TOTAL OTHER FINANCING
SOURCES (USES)(168,900)(168,900)(242,203)(73,303)
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES--52,77652,776
FUND BALANCES, JANUARY 11,205,8201,205,8201,205,820-
FUND BALANCES, DECEMBER 31$ 1,205,820$ 1,205,820$ 1,258,596$ 52,776
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
STATEMENTS OF NET POSITION - CONTINUED ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES
PROPRIETARY FUNDS
DECEMBER 31, 2013 AND 2012
Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds
601602
WaterSewer
2013201220132012
ASSETS
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash and temporary investments$ 1,210,365$ 1,288,411$ 946,137$ 905,212
Receivables
Accounts84,23672,549121,310109,385
Special assessments13,57110,3851,1421
Due from other funds--23,00023,000
Inventories4,7699,960--
Prepaid items38-16,29016,137
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS1,312,9791,381,3051,107,8791,053,735
NONCURRENT ASSETS
Special assessments receivable 437,98762,83955,79154,163
Advances to other funds--1,168,9171,556,520
Capital assets
Land72,25572,255124,000124,000
Construction in progress225,983---
Buildings138,000138,000276,000276,000
Infrastructure5,054,9204,966,1423,442,4833,442,483
Machinery and equipment269,367269,36796,74296,742
Less accumulated depreciation(1,977,358)(1,788,769)(1,655,901)(1,538,111)
Net capital assets3,783,1673,656,9952,283,3242,401,114
TOTAL NONCURRENT ASSETS4,221,1543,719,8343,508,0324,011,797
TOTAL ASSETS5,534,1335,101,1394,615,9115,065,532
LIABILITIES
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Accounts and contracts payable8,1734,407-647
Accrued salaries payable4222,8484222,848
Due to other funds----
Due to other governments960-4,75954,371
Compensated absences payable - current5,0385,4585,0385,458
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES14,59312,71310,21963,324
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds
603
Nonmajor
Storm WaterTotals
2013201220132012
$ 130,644$ 130,947$ 2,287,146$ 2,324,570
27,33724,807232,883206,741
--14,71310,386
--23,00023,000
--4,7699,960
--16,32816,137
157,981155,7542,578,8392,590,794
--493,778117,002
--1,168,9171,556,520
4,400-200,655196,255
--225,983-
--414,000414,000
--8,497,4038,408,625
968,992968,9921,335,1011,335,101
(187,746)(154,424)(3,821,005)(3,481,304)
785,646814,5686,852,1376,872,677
785,646814,5688,514,8328,546,199
943,627970,32211,093,67111,136,993
1,000809,1735,134
2371,3251,0817,021
23,00023,00023,00023,000
--5,71954,371
3,6192,18613,69513,102
27,85626,59152,668102,628
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
STATEMENTS OF NET POSITION - CONTINUED
PROPRIETARY FUNDS
DECEMBER 31, 2013 AND 2012
Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds
601602
WaterSewer
2013201220132012
NONCURRENT LIABILITIES
Advances from other funds$ -$ -$ -$ -
Compensated absences payable1,010-1,010-
TOTAL NONCURRENT LIABILITIES1,010-1,010-
TOTAL LIABILITIES15,60312,71311,22963,324
NET POSITION
Net investment in capital assets3,783,1673,656,9952,283,3242,401,114
Restricted for future expansion--71,63171,631
Unrestricted1,735,3631,431,4312,249,7272,529,463
TOTAL NET POSITION$ 5,518,530$ 5,088,426$ 4,604,682$ 5,002,208
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds
603
Nonmajor
Storm WaterTotals
2013201220132012
$ 43,980$ 65,650$ 43,980$ 65,650
--2,020-
43,98065,65046,00065,650
71,83692,24198,668168,278
785,646814,5686,852,1376,872,677
--71,63171,631
86,14563,5134,071,2354,024,407
$ 871,791$ 878,081$10,995,003$10,968,715
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
STATEMENTS OF REVENUES, EXPENSES
AND CHANGES IN NET POSITION
PROPRIETARY FUNDS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013 AND 2012
Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds
601602
WaterSewer
2013201220132012
OPERATING REVENUES
Charges for services$ 327,449$ 320,631$ 389,134$ 375,103
OPERATING EXPENSES
Salaries and benefits84,08188,14485,49589,475
Supplies124,56617,6061,2181,611
Other services and charges73,49740,45179,62031,746
Utilities16,93416,6833,4172,985
MCES - disposal charges--193,648189,237
Depreciation 188,589186,637117,790118,738
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES487,667349,521481,188433,792
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS)(160,218)(28,890)(92,054)(58,689)
NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES)
Interest earnings6,20915,17228,05318,843
Intergovernmental2,625---
Miscellaneous revenue499427--
Interest expense----
TOTAL NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES)9,33315,59928,05318,843
-
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE TRANSFERS
AND CONTRIBUTIONS(150,885)(13,291)(64,001)(39,846)
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS FROM OTHER FUNDS----
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS580,98962,29454,77194,062
TRANSFERS IN----
TRANSFERS OUT--(388,296)-
CHANGE IN NET POSITION430,10449,003(397,526)54,216
NET POSITION, JANUARY 15,088,4265,039,4235,002,2084,947,992
NET POSITION, DECEMBER 31$ 5,518,530$ 5,088,426$ 4,604,682$ 5,002,208
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds
603
Nonmajor
Storm WaterTotals
2013201220132012
$ 96,707$ 89,400$ 813,290$ 785,134
39,85034,195209,426211,814
624654126,40819,871
28,70319,461181,82091,658
--20,35119,668
--193,648189,237
33,32233,322339,701338,697
102,49987,6321,071,354870,945
(5,792)1,768(258,064)(85,811)
8321,72335,09435,738
--2,625-
--499427
(1,330)(1,650)(1,330)(1,650)
(498)7336,88834,515
(6,290)1,841(221,176)(51,296)
-271,886-271,886
--635,760156,356
-10,464-10,464
--(388,296)-
(6,290)284,19126,288387,410
878,081593,89010,968,71510,581,305
$ 871,791$ 878,081$10,995,003$10,968,715
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS - CONTINUED ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES
PROPRIETARY FUNDS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013 AND 2012
Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds
601602
WaterSewer
2013201220132012
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Receipts from customers and users$ 316,261$ 321,415$ 377,209$ 365,125
Payments to suppliers(205,118)(79,615)(328,315)(174,814)
Payments to employees(85,917)(88,515)(87,331)(89,846)
NET CASH PROVIDED (USED)
BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES25,226153,285(38,437)100,465
CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL
FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Increase (decrease) in advances to other funds--387,603471,256
Interest paid on advance from other funds----
Grant proceeds2,625---
Transfers to other funds--(388,296)-
Transfers from other funds----
NET CASH PROVIDED (USED) BY
NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES2,625-(693)471,256
CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL
AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Acquisition of capital assets(314,761)(25,741)--
Hook up fees and unit charges received179,44928,37032,96874,487
Special assessments received23,20642,47719,03417,882
NET CASH PROVIDED (USED) BY CAPITAL
AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES(112,106)45,10652,00292,369
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES
Interest received on investments6,20915,17228,05318,842
NET INCREASE (DECREASE)
IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS(78,046)213,56340,925682,932
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, JANUARY 11,288,4111,074,848905,212222,280
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, DECEMBER 31$ 1,210,365$ 1,288,411$ 946,137$ 905,212
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds
603
Nonmajor
Storm WaterTotals
2013201220132012
$ 94,177$ 85,484$ 787,647$ 772,024
(28,407)(29,661)(561,840)(284,090)
(39,505)(34,655)(212,753)(213,016)
26,26521,16813,054274,918
(21,670)(21,350)365,933449,906
(1,330)(1,650)(1,330)(1,650)
--2,625-
--(388,296)-
-10,464-10,464
(23,000)(12,536)(21,068)458,720
(4,400)-(319,161)(25,741)
--212,417102,857
--42,24060,359
(4,400)-(64,504)137,475
8321,72335,09435,737
(303)10,355(37,424)906,850
130,947120,5922,324,5701,417,720
$ 130,644$ 130,947$ 2,287,146$ 2,324,570
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS - CONTINUED
PROPRIETARY FUNDS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013 AND 2012
Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds
601602
WaterSewer
2013201220132012
RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING (INCOME) LOSS TO NET
CASH PROVIDED (USED) BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Operating income (loss)$ (160,218)$ (28,890)$ (92,054)$ (58,689)
Other income related to operations499427--
Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to
net cash provided (used) by operating activities
Depreciation188,589186,637117,790118,738
(Increase) decrease in assets
Accounts receivable(11,687)357(11,925)(9,978)
Inventories5,191(6,670)--
Prepaid items(38)1,301(153)472
Increase (decrease) in liabilities
Accounts payable3,7661,272(714)337
Accrued salaries payable(2,426)(33)(2,426)(33)
Compensated absences payable590(338)590(338)
Due to other governments960(778)(49,545)49,956
NET CASH PROVIDED (USED)
BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES$ 25,226$ 153,285$ (38,437)$ 100,465
NONCASH CAPITAL AND
RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Capital assets contributed by other funds$ -$ -$ -$ -
The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds
603
Nonmajor
Storm waterTotals
2013201220132012
$ (5,792)$ 1,768$ (258,064)$ (85,811)
--499427
33,32233,322339,701338,697
(2,530)(3,916)(26,142)(13,537)
--5,191(6,670)
--(191)1,773
920(9,546)3,972(7,937)
(1,088)30(5,940)(36)
1,433(490)2,613(1,166)
--(48,585)49,178
$ 26,265$ 21,168$ 13,054$ 274,918
$ -$ 271,886$ -$ 271,886
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 1:SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
A.Reporting entity
The City of Centerville, Minnesota (the City),operates under the “Optional Plan A” form of government as defined in
the State of Minnesota statutes.Under this plan, the government of the City is directed by a City Council composed of an
elected Mayor and four elected City Council Members.The City Council exercises legislative authority and determines
all matters of policy.The City Council appoints personnel responsible for the proper administration of all affairs relating
to the City.The City has considered all potential units for which it is financially accountable, and other organizations for
which the nature and significance of their relationship with the City are such that exclusion would cause the City’s
financial statements to be misleading or incomplete.The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has set
forth criteria to be considered in determining financial accountability.These criteria include appointing a voting majority
of an organization’s governing body, and (1) the ability of the primary government to impose its will on that organization
or (2)the potential for the organization to provide specific benefits to, or impose specific financial burdens on the
primary government.The City does not have anycomponent units.
B.Government-wide and fundfinancial statements
The government-wide financial statements (statement of net positionand the statement of activities) report information
on all of the nonfiduciary activities of the City.Governmental activities, which normally are supported by taxes and
intergovernmental revenues, are reported separately from business-type activities, which rely to a significant extent on
fees and charges for support.
The statement of activities demonstrates the degree to which the direct expenses of a given function or segment isoffset
by program revenues.Direct expenses are those that are clearly identifiable with a specific function or segment.
Amounts reported as program revenues include 1) charges to customers or applicants who purchase, use, or directly
benefit from goods, services, or privileges providedby a given function or segment and 2) grants and contributions that
are restricted to meeting the operational or capital requirements of a particular function or segment.Taxes and other
items not properly included among program revenues are reported instead as general revenues.
Separate financial statements are provided for governmental fundsandproprietaryfunds.Major individual governmental
funds and major individual enterprise funds are reported as separate columns in the fund financial statements.
C.Measurement focus, basis of accounting and financial statement presentation
The government-wide financial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the
accrual basis of accounting, as are the proprietary fund financial statements. Revenues are recorded when earned and
expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Property taxes are
recognized as revenues in the year for which they are levied. Grants and similar items are recognized as revenue as soon
as all eligibility requirements imposed by the provider have been met.
Governmental fund financial statements are reported using the current financial resources measurement focus and the
modified accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available.
Revenues are considered to be availablewhen they are collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to
pay liabilities of the current period. For this purpose, the City considers revenues to be available if they are collected
within 60 days of the end of the current fiscal period. Expenditures generally are recorded when a liability is incurred, as
under accrual accounting. However, debt service expenditures, as well as expenditures related to compensated absences
and claims and judgments, are recorded only when payment is due.
Property taxes, franchise taxes, licenses and interest associated with the current fiscal period are all considered to be
susceptible to accrual and so have been recognized as revenues of the current fiscal period. Only the portion of special
assessments receivable due within the current fiscal period is considered to be susceptible to accrual as revenue of the
current period. All other revenue items are considered to be measurable and available only when cash is received by the
City.
Revenue resulting from exchange transactions, in which each party gives and receives essentially equal value, is
recorded on the accrual basis when the exchange takes place. On a modified accrual basis, revenue is recorded in the
year in which the resources are measurable and become available.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 1:SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - CONTINUED
Non-exchange transactions, in which the City receives value without directly giving equal value in return, include
property taxes, grants, entitlement and donations.On an accrual basis, revenue from property taxes is recognized in the
year for which the tax is levied.Revenue from grants, entitlements and donations is recognized in the year in which all
eligibility requirements have been satisfied.Eligibility requirements include timing requirements, which specify the year
when the resources are required to be used or the year when use is first permitted, matching requirements, in which the
City must provide local resources to be used for a specified purpose, and expenditure requirements, in which the
resources are provided to the City on a reimbursement basis.On a modified accrual basis, revenue from non-exchange
transactions must also be available before it can be recognized.
Unearned revenuearises when assets are recognized before revenue recognition criteria have been satisfied.Grants and
entitlements received before eligibility requirements are met are also recorded as unearned revenue.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts and
disclosures.Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates.
The City reports the following major governmental funds:
The General fundis the City’s primary operating fund.It accounts for all financial resources of the City, except
those required to be accounted for in another fund.
The Debt Service fundaccounts for the resources accumulated and payments made for principal and interest on
long-term general obligation debt of governmental funds.
The Park fund captures all park capital items and receives all the City’s park dedication fees.
The 2013 Street Projectfund accounts for the activity related to the 2013 street improvement project.
The City reports the following major proprietary funds:
The Water fund accounts for the activities of the water distribution system the City maintains.
The Sewer fundaccounts for the activities of the City’s sewage collection operations.
As a general rule the effect of interfund activity has been eliminated from government-wide financial statements.
Proprietary funds distinguish operating revenues and expenses from nonoperatingitems.Operating revenues and
expenses generally result from providing services and producing and delivering goods in connection with a proprietary
fund’s principal ongoing operations.The principal operating revenues of the City enterprise funds are charges to
customers for sales and services.Operating expenses for enterprise funds include the cost of sales and services,
administrative expenses and depreciation on capital assets.All revenues and expenses not meeting this definition are
reported as nonoperating revenues and expenses.
When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the City’s policy to use restricted resources
first, then unrestricted resources as they are needed.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 1:SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - CONTINUED
D.Assets, liabilities, deferred inflows of resources,and net position/fund balance
Deposits and investments
The City’s cash and cash equivalents are considered to be cash on hand, demand deposits and short-term investments
with original maturities of three months or less from the date of acquisition.
Cash balances from all funds are pooled and invested, to the extent available, in certificates of deposit and other
authorized investments.Earnings from such investments are allocated on the basis of applicable participation by each of
the funds.
The City may also invest idle funds as authorized by Minnesota statutes, as follows:
1.Direct obligations or obligations guaranteed by the United States or its agencies.
2.Shares of investment companies registered under the Federal Investment Company Act of 1940 and received
the highest credit rating, rated in one of the two highest rating categories by a statistical rating agency, and have
a final maturity of thirteen months or less.
3.General obligations of a state or local government with taxing powers rated “A” or better; revenue obligations
rated “AA”or better.
4.General obligations of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency rated “A” or better.
5.Bankers’ acceptances of United States banks eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System.
6.Commercial paper issued by United States banks corporations or their Canadian subsidiaries, of highest quality
category by at least two nationally recognized rating agencies, and maturing in 270 days or less.
7.Repurchase or reverse repurchase agreements and securities lending agreements with financial institutions
qualified as a “depository” by the government entity, with banks that are members of the Federal Reserve
System with capitalization exceeding $10,000,000, a primary reporting dealer in U.S. government securities to
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, or certain Minnesota securities broker-dealers.
8.Guaranteed Investment Contracts (GIC's) issued or guaranteed by a United States commercial bank, a domestic
branch of a foreign bank, a United States insurance company, or its Canadian subsidiary, whose similar debt
obligations were rated in one of the top two rating categories by a nationally recognized rating agency.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 1:SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - CONTINUED
Accounts receivable
Accounts receivable include amounts billed for services provided before year end. Unbilled utility enterprise fund
receivables are also included for services provided in 2013. The City annually certifies delinquent water and sewer
accounts to the County for collection in the following year. Therefore, there has been no allowance for doubtful accounts
established.
Interfund receivables and payables
Activity between funds that are representative of lending/borrowing arrangements outstanding at the end of the fiscal
year are referred to as either “due to/from other funds” (i.e., the current portion of interfund loans) or “advances to/from
other funds” (i.e., the non-current portion of interfund loans). All other outstanding balances between funds are reported
as “due to/from other funds.” Any residual balances outstanding between the governmental activities and business-type
activities are reported in the government-wide financial statements as “internal balances.”
Property taxes
TheCityCouncil annually adopts a tax levy in December and certifies it to the County for collection in the following
year.The County is responsible for collecting all property taxes for the City.These taxes attach an enforceable lien on
taxable property within the City on January 1 and are payable by the property owners in two installments.The taxes are
collected by the County Auditor and tax settlements are made to the City during January, July and December each year.
Delinquent taxes receivable include the past six years’ uncollected taxes.Delinquent taxes have been offset by a deferred
inflow of resources liability fordelinquent taxes not received within 60 days after year end in the fund financial
statements.
Special assessments
Special assessments represent the financing for public improvements paid for by benefiting property owners.These
assessments are recorded as receivables upon certification to the County.Special assessments are recognized as revenue
when they are received in cash or within 60 days after year end.All governmentalfund specialassessments receivable
are offset by a deferred inflow of resourcesliability in the fund financial statements.
Inventories and prepaid items
All inventories are valued at cost using the first-in/first-out (FIFO) method.Inventories of governmental funds are
recorded as expenditures when consumed rather than when purchased.
Certain payments to vendors reflect costs applicable to future accounting periods and are recorded as prepaid items in
both government-wide and fund financial statements.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 1:SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - CONTINUED
Capital assets
Capital assets, which include property, plant, equipment and infrastructure assets (e.g., roads, bridges, sidewalks, and
similar items) are,reported in the applicable governmental or business-type activities columns in the government-wide
financial statements.Capital assets are defined by the City as assets with an initial, individual cost of more than $5,000
(amount not rounded) and an estimated useful life in excess of three years.Such assets are recorded at historical cost or
estimated historical cost if purchased or constructed.Donated capital assets are recorded at estimated fair market value at
the date of donation.
In the case of initial capitalization of general infrastructure assets (i.e., those reported by governmental activities) the
City chose to include items dating back to June 30, 1980.The City was able to estimate the historical cost for the initial
reporting of these assets through back trending(i.e., estimating the current replacement cost of the infrastructure to be
capitalized and using an appropriate price-level index to deflate the cost to the acquisition year or estimated acquisition
year).As the City constructs or acquires capital assets each period, including infrastructure assets, they are capitalized
and reported at historical cost.The reported value excludes normal maintenance and repairs which are essentially
amounts spent in relation to capital assets that do not increase the capacity or efficiency of the item or extend its useful
life beyond the original estimate.In the case of donations the City values these capital assets at the estimated fair value
of the item at the date of its donation.Interest incurred during the construction phase of capital assets of business-type
activities is included as part of the capitalized value of the assets constructed.
Property, plant and equipment of the City are depreciated using the straight-line method over the following estimated
useful lives:
Useful Lives
Assetsin Years
Land improvements4 to 25
Other improvements10 to 20
Buildings and improvements10 to 50
System improvements/infrastructure20 to 50
Machinery and equipment3 to 20
Vehicles3 to 10
Other assets3 to 15
Deferred inflows of resources
In addition to liabilities, the statement of financial position will sometimes report a separate section for deferred inflows
of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred inflows of resources, represents an acquisition of net
position that applies to a future period(s) and so will notbe recognized as an inflow of resources (revenue) until that
time. The government has only one type of item, which arises only under a modified accrual basis of accounting that
qualifies for reporting in this category. Accordingly, the item, unavailable revenue, is reported only in the governmental
funds balance sheet. The governmental funds report unavailable revenues from two sources: property taxes and special
assessments. These amounts are deferred and recognized as an inflow of resources in the period that the amounts become
available.
Compensated absences
It is the City’s policy to permit employees to accumulate earned but unused paid time off benefits to a maximum of
208hours.All paid time off pay is accrued when incurred in the government-wide and proprietary funds.A liability for
these amounts is reported in governmental funds only if they have matured, for example, as a result of employee
resignations and retirements.Union employees are allowed severance equal to their unused compensatory time.In
governmental fund types the cost of these benefits is recognized when payments are made to the employees.The General
fund is typically used to liquidate governmental compensated absences.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 1:SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - CONTINUED
Long-term obligations
In the government-wide financial statements, and proprietary fund types in the fund financial statements, long-term debt
and other long-term obligations are reported as liabilities in the applicable governmental activities, business-type
activities, or proprietary fund type statement of net position. The recognition of bond premiums and discounts are
delayed and amortized over the life of the bonds using the straight-line method. Bonds payable are reported net of the
applicable bond premium or discount. Bond issuance costs are reported asan expense in the period incurred.
In the fund financial statements, governmental fund types recognized bond premiums and discounts, as well as bond
issuance costs, during the current period. The faceamount of debt issued is reported as other financing sources.
Premiums received on debt issuances are reported as other financing sources while discounts on debt issuances are
reported as other financing uses. Issuance costs, whether or not withheld from the actual debt proceeds received, are
reported as debt service expenditures.
Fund balance
In the fund financial statements, fund balance is divided into five classifications based primarily on the extent to which
the City is bound to observe constraints imposed upon the use of resources reported in the governmental funds. These
classificationsare defined as follows:
Nonspendable - Amounts that cannot be spent because they are not in spendable form, such as prepaid items.
Restricted -Amounts related to externally imposed constraints established by creditors, grantors orcontributors; or
constraints imposed by state statutory provisions.
Committed - Amounts constrained for specific purposes that are internally imposed by formal action (resolution) of
the City Council, which is the City’s highest level of decision-making authority. Committed amounts cannot be
used for any other purpose unless the City Council modifies or rescinds the commitment by resolution.
Assigned - Amounts constrained for specific purposes that are internally imposed. In governmental funds other than
the General fund, assigned fund balance represents all remaining amounts that are not classified as nonspendable
and are neither restricted nor committed. In the General fund, assigned amounts represent intended uses established
by the City Council itself or by an official to which the governing body delegates the authority. TheCityCouncil
has adopted a fund balance policy which delegates the authority to assign amounts for specific purposes to the
Finance Director.
Unassigned - The residual classification for the General fund and also negative residual amounts in other funds.
The City considers restricted amounts to be spent first when both restricted and unrestricted fund balance is available.
Additionally, the City would first use committed, then assigned, and lastly unassigned amounts of unrestricted fund
balance when expenditures are made.
The City has formally adopted a fund balance policy for the General fund. The City’s policy is to maintain a minimum
unassigned fund balance of 40-50 percent of budgeted operating expenditures for cash-flow timing needs.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 1:SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - CONTINUED
Net Position
Net positionrepresents the difference between assets and liabilities.Net position isdisplayed in three components:
a.Net investmentin capital assets - Consists of capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation reduced by any
outstanding debt attributable to acquire capital assets.
b.Restricted net position - Consist of net position balancesrestricted when there are limitations imposed ontheir
use through external restrictions imposed by creditors, grantors, laws or regulations of other governments.
c.Unrestricted net position - All other net position balancesthat do not meet the definition of “restricted” or “net
investmentin capital assets”.
Comparative data/reclassifications
Comparative total data for the prior year have been presented only for the individual enterprise funds in the fund
financial statements in order to provide an understanding of the changes in the financial position and operations of these
funds.Also, certain amounts presented in the prior year have been reclassified in order to be consistent with the current
year’s presentation.
Note 2:STEWARDSHIP, COMPLIANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY
A.Budgetary information
Annual budgets are adopted on a basis consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America for the General fund.All annual appropriations lapse at fiscal year end.The City does not use encumbrance
accounting.
In May of each year, all departments of the City submit requests for appropriations to the City Administrator so that a
budget may be prepared.Before September 15th, the proposed budget is presented to theCityCouncil for review.The
CityCouncil holds public hearings anda final budget is prepared and adopted in early December.
The appropriated budget is prepared by fund, function and department.The City’s department heads, with the approval
of the City Administrator, may make transfers of appropriations within a department.Transfers of appropriations
between departments require the approval of theCityCouncil.The legal level of budgetary control is the department
level.There were no budget amendments made during 2013.
B.Deficitfund equity
The following funds had a deficit fund balance as of December 31, 2013:
Fund
Amount
Major
Parks$1,086,915
The Park fund deficitwill be eliminated with transfersin future years.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 3:DETAILED NOTES ON ALL FUNDS
A.Deposits and investments
Deposits
Custodial credit risk for deposits and investments is the risk that in the eventof a bank failure, the City’s deposits and
investments may not be returned or the City will not be able to recover collateral securities in the possession of an
outside party.In accordance with Minnesota statutes and as authorized by theCityCouncil, the City maintains deposits
at those depository banks, all of which are members of the Federal Reserve System.
Minnesota statutes require that all City deposits be protected by insurance, surety bond, or collateral.The market value
of collateral pledged must equal 110percentof the deposits not covered by insurance or bonds.
Authorized collateral in lieu of a corporate surety bond includes:
United States government Treasury bills, Treasury notes, Treasury bonds;
Issues of United States government agencies and instrumentalities as quoted by a recognized industry quotation
service available to the government entity;
General obligation securities of any state or local government with taxing powers which is rated “A” or better
by a national bond rating service, or revenue obligation securities of any state or local government with taxing
powers which is rated “AA” or better by a national bond rating service;
General obligation securities of a local government with taxing powers may be pledged as collateral against
funds deposited by that same local government entity;
Irrevocable standby letters of credit issued by Federal Home Loan Banks to a municipality accompanied by
written evidence that the bank’s public debt is rated “AA” or better by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., or
Standard & Poor’s Corporation; and
Time deposits that are fully insured by any federal agency.
Minnesota statutes require that all collateral shall be placed in safekeeping in a restricted account at a Federal Reserve
Bank, or in an account at a trust department of a commercial bank or other financial institution that is not owned or
controlled by the financial institution furnishing the collateral. The selection should be approved by the City.
At year end, the City’s carrying amountof deposits was $4,712,151,and the bank balance was $4,727,658. Of the bank
balance, $300,888was covered by federal depository insurance and the remaining balance was covered by collateral held
by the City’s agent in the City’s name.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 3:DETAILED NOTES ON ALL FUNDS - CONTINUED
Investments
As of December 31, 2013, the City had the following investments that are insured or registered, or securities held by the
City or its agent in the City’s name.
Fair Value
CreditSegmentedConcentrationand
Quality/TimeofCarrying
Investment Type
Ratings (1)Distribution (2)Credit RiskAmount
Pooled investments
Broker money marketN/AN/AN/A$9,624
Nonpooled investments
Brokered CD'sN/A1 to 3 yearsN/A688,745
Brokered CD'sN/Amore than 3 yearsN/A244,476
Total Brokered CD's933,221
U.S. Government Agency SecuritiesAAAmore than 3 yearsN/A472,435
Total investments$1,415,280
(1)Ratings are provided by various credit rating agencies where applicable to indicate associated credit risk.
(2)Interest rate risk is disclosed using the segmented time distribution method.
N/AIndicates not applicable or available.
The investments of the City are subject to the following risks:
Credit Risk. The credit risk for investments is the risk that an issuer or other counterparty to an investment will
not fulfill its obligations. Ratings are provided by various credit rating agencies and where applicable, indicate
associated credit risk. Minnesota statutes limit the City’s investments to the list on page 53 of the notes.
Custodial Credit Risk. The custodial credit risk for investments is the risk that, in the event of the failure of the
counterparty to a transaction, a government will not be able to recover the value of investment or collateral
securities that are in the possession of an outside party. Generally, the City limits its securities purchases to
those insured and registered under the City’s name.
Concentration of Credit Risk. The concentration of credit risk for investments is the risk of loss attributed to the
magnitude of a government’s investment in a single issuer. The City has invested more than 5 percent of
investments in FHLB(33.4 percent), GE Capital Bank CD (17.3 percent), Comenity Bank CD (14.1 percent),
Discover Bank (17.3 percent) and Amex Centurion Bank (17.3 percent) at year end.
Interest Rate Risk.The interest rate risk for investments is the risk that changes in interest rates will adversely
affect the fair value of an investment.
The City does not currently have aformal investment policy that addresses the above mentioned risks.
A reconciliation of cash and temporary investments as shown on the statement of net positionfor the City follows:
Total
Carrying amount of deposits$4,712,151
Investments1,415,280
Petty cash200
Total$6,127,631
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 3:DETAILED NOTES ON ALL FUNDS - CONTINUED
B.Capital assets
Capital asset activity for the governmental activities for the year ended December 31, 2013was as follows:
BeginningEnding
BalanceIncreasesDecreasesBalance
Governmental activities
Capital assets not being depreciated
Land$3,337,023$-$-$3,337,023
Construction in progress-1,229,234-1,229,234
Total capital assets
not being depreciated3,337,0231,229,234-4,566,257
Capital assets being depreciated
Buildings1,627,438--1,627,438
Infrastructure15,564,72418,145-15,582,869
Machinery and equipment823,4029,322-832,724
Total capital assets
being depreciated18,015,56427,467-18,043,031
Less accumulated depreciation for
Buildings(692,456)(37,290)-(729,746)
Infrastructure(4,235,147)(860,381)(5,095,528)
Machinery and equipment(518,987)(44,813)-(563,800)
Total accumulated depreciation(5,446,590)(942,484)-(6,389,074)
Total capital assets
being depreciated, net12,568,974(915,017)-11,653,957
Governmental activities
capital assets, net$15,905,997$314,217$-$16,220,214
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 3:DETAILED NOTES ON ALL FUNDS - CONTINUED
Capital asset activity for the business-type activitiesfor the year ended December 31, 2013was as follows:
BeginningEnding
BalanceIncreasesDecreasesBalance
Business-type activities
Capital assets not being depreciated
Land$196,255$4,400$-$200,655
Construction in progress-225,983-225,983
Total capital assets
not being depreciated196,255230,383-426,638
Capital assets being depreciated
Buildings414,000--414,000
Infrastructure9,377,61788,778-9,466,395
Machinery and equipment366,108--366,108
Total capital assets
being depreciated10,157,72588,778-10,246,503
Less accumulated depreciation for
Buildings(40,710)(8,280)-(48,990)
Infrastructure(3,201,698)(301,336)-(3,503,034)
Machinery and equipment(238,895)(30,085)-(268,980)
Total accumulated depreciation(3,481,303)(339,701)-(3,821,004)
Total capital assets
being depreciated, net6,676,422(250,923)-6,425,499
Business-type activities
capital assets, net$6,872,677$(20,540)$-$6,852,137
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 3:DETAILED NOTES ON ALL FUNDS - CONTINUED
Depreciation expense was charged to functions/programs of the City as follows:
Governmental activities
General government$13,168
Public safety2,339
Public works819,065
Culture and recreation107,912
Total depreciation expense - governmental activities$942,484
Business-type activities
Water$188,589
Sewer117,790
Storm water33,322
Total depreciation expense - business-type activities$339,701
Construction commitment
As of December 31, 2013, the City has signed contracts in place for one construction project. The following summarizes
this commitment:
SpentRemaining
Project
to DateCommitment
Northdale Construction$ 1,247,187$299,009
C.Interfund balances and transfers
The following is a schedule of interfund transfers as of December 31, 2013:
Transfer In
DebtOther
Fund
ServiceGovernmentalTotal
Transfer out
General$40,000$212,203$252,203
Sewer388,296-388,296
Total$428,296$212,203$640,499
A transfer of $168,900from the Generalfund to other governmentalfunds for funding of future street projects
and maintenance.
A transfer of $388,296 from the Sewer fund to the Debt Service fund was made to eliminatethe interfund loan
between the funds.
A transfer of $40,000 from the General fund to the Debt Service fund for future debt service payments.
A transfer of $43,303 from the General fund to other governmental funds to establish a new capital equipment
revolving fund.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 3:DETAILED NOTES ON ALL FUNDS - CONTINUED
D.Advances from/to other funds
The following is a schedule of interfund advances:
Receivable Fund
Payable FundAmount
Due to/from other funds
Sewer Park$1,124,937
Sewer Storm water66,980
Subtotal of interfund balances1,191,917
Interfund activity eliminated from government-wide statements(66,980)
Total internal balances - government-wide statements$1,124,937
All of the above interfund advances have associated amortization schedules, of which current payments are being made.
E.Long-term debt
General obligation bonds
The Cityissues general obligation bonds to provide funds for the acquisition and construction of major capital facilities.
General obligation bonds have been issued for governmental activities.
General obligation bonds are direct obligations and pledge the full faith and credit of the City.General obligation bonds
currently outstanding are as follows:
General obligation improvement bonds
The following bonds were issued to finance various improvements and will be repaid primarily from special assessments
collections and tax levies.
Interest
AuthorizedIssueMaturityBalance at
DescriptionRate
and IssuedDateDateYear End
G.O. Improvement
Bonds of 2009A$3,715,0002.65 - 5.60%08/19/0908/01/25$3,450,000
G.O. Crossover
Bonds of 2009B2,430,0002.00 - 3.0010/29/0909/01/181,945,000
G.O. Improvement
Bonds of 2011A2,760,000.70 - 2.4504/14/1107/01/192,215,000
G.O. Improvement Refunding
Bonds of 2012A515,0001.00 - 1.7006/14/1202/01/21455,000
G.O. Improvement
Bonds of 2013A1,465,0001.63 - 3.0006/01/1302/01/291,485,000
Total General Obligation Improvement Bonds$9,550,000
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 3:DETAILED NOTES ON ALL FUNDS - CONTINUED
Annual debt service requirements for general obligation improvement bonds are as follows:
General Obligation Improvement Bonds
Governmental Activities
Year Ending
December 31,PrincipalInterestTotal
2014$855,000$298,871$1,153,871
2015880,000276,0781,156,078
2016895,000255,5331,150,533
2017920,000231,4641,151,464
20181,935,000190,0402,125,040
2019 - 20232,470,000542,2893,012,289
2024 - 20281,445,000115,7211,560,721
2029150,0002,250152,250
Total$9,550,000$1,912,246$11,462,246
Changes in long-term liabilities
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the following changes occurredin noncurrent liabilities:
BeginningEndingDue Within
BalanceIncreasesDecreasesBalanceOne Year
Governmental activities
G.O Bonds$9,294,981$1,485,000$(1,229,981)$9,550,000$855,000
Compensated absences
payable32,30448,071(43,444)36,93132,036
Governmental activities
long-term liabilities$9,327,285$1,533,071$(1,273,425)$9,586,931$887,036
Business-type activities
Compensated absences
payable$13,102$15,964$(13,351)$15,715$12,979
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 3:DETAILED NOTES ON ALL FUNDS - CONTINUED
F.Fund equity
At December 31, 2013, portions of the City’s fund balance are not available for appropriation due to not being in
spendable form (Nonspendable), legal restrictions (Restricted), City Council action (Committed), policy and/or intent
(Assigned). The following is a summary of the components of fund balance:
2013Other
Debt StreetGovernmental
GeneralServiceParkProjectFundsTotal
Nonspendable
Prepaid items$4,607$25,622$-$-$-$30,229
Restricted for
Debt service-1,806,632---1,806,632
Capital projects---237,170-237,170
Cable TV----15,06115,061
Committed for
Parks and recreation3,041----3,041
Assigned for
Street maintenance----350,646350,646
Capital equipment----43,30343,303
Capital projects----15,62215,622
Unassigned1,250,948-(1,086,915)--164,033
Total$1,258,596$ (1,086,915)$237,170$424,632$2,665,737
$ 1,832,254
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 4:DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE
A.Plan description
All full-time and certain part-time employees of the City of Centerville are covered by defined benefit plans
administered by the Public Employees Retirement Association of Minnesota (PERA).PERA administers the General
Employees Retirement Fund (GERF), which is a cost-sharing, multiple-employer retirement plan.The plan is established
and administered in accordance with Minnesota statutes, chapters 353 and 356.
GERF members belong to either the Coordinated Plan or the Basic Plan.Coordinated Plan members are covered by
Social Security and Basic Plan membersare not.All new members must participate in the Coordinated Plan.
PERA provides retirement benefits as well as disability benefits to members, and benefits to survivors upon death of
eligible members.Benefits are established by Minnesota statute, and vest after three years of credited service.The
defined retirement benefits are based on a member’s highest average salary for any five successive years of allowable
service, age and years of credit at termination of service.
Two methods are used to compute benefits for PERA’s Coordinated and Basic Plan members.The retiring member
receives the higher of a step-rate benefit accrual formula (Method 1) or a level accrual formula (Method 2).Under
Method1, the annuity accrual rate for a Basic Plan member is 2.2 percent of average salary for each of the first 10years
of service and 2.7 percent for each remaining year.The annuity accrual rate for a Coordinated Plan member is
1.2percent of average salary for each of the first 10 years and 1.7 percent for eachremaining year.Under Method2, the
annuity accrual rate is 2.7 percent of average salary for Basic Plan members and 1.7 percent for Coordinated Plan
members for each year of service.GERF members hired prior to July 1, 1989 whose annuity is calculated using
Method1, a full annuity is available when age plus years of service equal 90. Normal retirement age is the age for
unreduced Social Security benefits capped at 66 for Coordinated members hired on or after July 1, 1989. A reduced
retirement annuityisalso availabletoeligible members seeking early retirement.
erent types of annuities availableto members upon retirement. A single-life annuityisa lifetime annuity that
There are diff
ceases upon the death of the retiree -- no survivor annuityis payable. There are also various types ofjoint and survivor
annuityoptions available whichwill be payable over joint lives.Members mayalsoleave their contributions in the fund
upon termination of public service inorderto qualify for adeferred annuity at retirement age. Refunds of contributions
are availableat any time to members who leave public service, but before retirement benefits begin.
The benefit provisions stated in the previous paragraphs of this section are current provisions and apply to active plan
participants.Vested, terminated employees who are entitled to benefits but are not receiving them yet are bound by the
provisions in effect at the time they last terminated their public service.
PERA issues a publicly available financial reportthat includes financial statements and requiredsupplementary
information for GERF.That report may be obtained on the Internetat www.mnpera.org, by writing to PERAat
60Empire Drive, Suite 200, St. Paul, Minnesota 55103-2088 or by calling (651)296-7460 or (800)652-9026.
B.Funding policy
Minnesota statutes, chapter 353 sets the rates for employer and employee contributions. These statutes are established
and amended by the State legislature. The City makes annual contributions to the pension plans equal to the amount
required by Minnesota statutes. GERF Basis Plan members and Coordinated Plan members were required tocontribute
9.10percent and 6.25percent, respectively, of their annual covered salary in 2013.In 2013, the City of Centerville was
required to contribute the following percentages of annual covered payroll: 11.78 percent for Basic Plan GERF members
and 7.25percent for Coordinated Plan GERF members.The City’s contributions to the GERF for the year ended
December 31, 2013,2012and 2011were$38,179,$38,899, and $45,034, respectively. The City’s contributions were
equal to the contractually required contributions for each year as set by Minnesota statute.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 5: JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTS
A.Centennial Fire District
The Centennial Fire District (the District) was formed under the authority of Minnesota statutes 471.59 in 1985 by
agreement of the member cities of Centerville, Lino Lakes and Circle Pines.The district was created to provide fire
protection services to the residents of the member cities.The District is managed through a three tier system consisting
of a Fire Chief, a Steering Committee, and theCity Councils of the member cities.The Fire Chief is an appointed
position.Each member city appoints two commissioners.One of these commissioners must be an elected official of the
City.Each member city contributes funds to cover the budgeted costsof operations as determined by the commissioners.
The amount of contributions required by each member is based on each city’s population, number of fire calls, and
assessed valuations.Contributions made by member cities for2012, the most recent data available,were as follows:
City of Centerville$122,61113.50%
City of Circle Pines156,21617.20
City of Lino Lakes629,40369.30
Total$908,230100.00%
Volunteer firefighters of the District are members of the Centennial Firefighter’s Relief Association (the Association).
The Association is a single-employer pension plan (the Plan) that operates under the provisions of Minnesota statutes69
and 424, as amended.It is governed by a board of six officers and trustees elected by the members of the Association for
three-year terms.The ex-officio, non-voting members of the Board of trustees are two representatives from the
Centennial Fire Steering Committee and the Fire Chief of the District.
The Association issues a publicly available financial report that includes financial statements and required supplementary
information.The report may be obtained by writingto the Centennial Fire District 7741 Lake Drive, Lino Lakes, MN
55014.
B.Centennial Lakes Police Department
The Centennial Lakes Police Department (the Department) was formed under the authority if Minnesota statutes 436.06
in 2005 by agreement of the member cities of Centerville, Circle Pines and Lexington. The Department was created to
provide police protection services to its member cities. The Department is managed through a three tier system
consisting of a Governing Board, an Operations committee, and a Chief of Police. The Governing Board consists of six
members, two elected officials appointed by each member city. The Operations Committee is made up of the City
administrators from each member city and the Chief of Police. The Chief of Police is appointed by mutual agreement of
the City Councils of all member cities. Annual contributions required by each member city are calculated based on
complaint history, population, and staffing formulas. Contributions made by member cities for 2012, the most recent
data available,were as follows:
City of Centerville$661,00831.51%
City of Circle Pines842,64440.16
City of Lexington594,43828.33
Total$2,098,090100.00%
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 5:JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTS – CONTINUED
C.Summary financial information of the joint powers agreements entities
The contribution to the joint fire district and the joint police commission are reflected as expenditures in the City’s
General fund.The fire district and police commission’s assets, liabilities, equity and operations are excluded from the
City’s financial statements as further explained in note 1A.
The following information is from the financial statements of the District and theDepartment as of December31,2011,
the most recentaudited information available at the time of this report.The amounts reported for the District are those
presented in its government-wide financial statements.These financial statements are available for viewing at the
Centerville City hall.
Centennial
Lakes Police
Centennial
Department
Fire District
$632,201
Total assets$1,704,824
294,796
Total liabilities116,628
337,405
Total net position1,588,196
2,194,530
Total revenue1,069,635
2,219,211
Total expenses896,930
Volunteer firefighters of theDistrict are members of the Centennial Firefighter’s Relief Association (the Association).
The Association is a single-employer pension plan (the Plan) that operates under the provisions of Minnesota
statutes 69 and 424, as amended.It is governed by a board of six officers and trustees elected by the members of the
Association for three-year terms.The ex-officio, non-voting members of the Board of trustees are two representatives
from the Centennial Fire Steering Committee and the Fire Chief of the District.
The Association issues a publicly available financial report that includes financial statements and required supplementary
information.The report may be obtained by writing to theCentennial Fire District7741 Lake Drive, Lino Lakes, MN
55014.
D.North Metro Telecommunications Commission
The general purpose of the Commission is to award, administer and enforce a cable communications franchise in
member municipalities. The member Cities included the City of Blaine, Centerville, Circle Pines, Ham Lake, Lexington,
Lino Lakes, and Spring Lake Park. Each member has a representative on the Commissions Board.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Note 6: OTHER INFORMATION
A.Risk management
The City is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts; theft of, damage to and destruction of assets; errors and
omissions; injuries to employees; and natural disasters for which the City carries insurance.The City obtains insurance
through participation in the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT), which is a risk sharing pool with
approximately 800 other governmental units.The City pays an annual premium to LMCIT for its workers compensation
and property and casualty insurance.The LMCIT is self-sustainingthrough member premiums and will reinsure for
claims above a prescribed dollar amount for each insurance event.Settled claims have not exceeded the City’s coverage
in any of the past three fiscal years.
Liabilities are reported when it is probable that a loss has occurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably
estimated.Liabilities, if any, include an amount for claims that have been incurred but not reported (IBNRs).The City’s
management is not aware of any incurred but not reported claims.
B.Legal debt margin
In accordance with Minnesota statutes, the City may not incur or be subject to net debt in excess of 3 percent of the
market value of taxable property within theCity.Net debt is payable solely from ad valorem taxes and, therefore,
excludes debt financed partially or entirely by special assessments, Enterprise fund revenues or tax increments.The
market value of taxable property is $292,948,400which leaves a debt margin of $8,788,452.Currently the City has
$455,000 of general obligation debt outstanding, leaving a debt margin of $8,333,452.
COMBINING AND INDIVIDUAL FUND
FINANCIAL STATEMENTSAND SCHEDULES
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2013
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
COMBINING BALANCE SHEET
DECEMBER 31, 2013
Special
Capital Project Funds
Revenue Fund
614401414409Total
RevolvingCapital Nonmajor
StreetPedestrianEquipmentGovernmental
Cable T.V.FundTrail WaysRevolvingFunds
ASSETS
Cash and temporary investments$ 4,506$ 355,136$ 15,622$ 43,303$ 418,567
Due from other governments10,641---10,641
TOTAL ASSETS$ 15,147$ 355,136$ 15,622$ 43,303$ 429,208
LIABILITIES
Accounts and contracts payable$ -$ 4,490$ -$ -$ 4,490
Accrued salaries payable86---86
TOTAL LIABILITIES864,490--4,576
FUND BALANCES
Restricted for
Cable TV15,061---15,061
Assigned for
Street maintenance-350,646--350,646
Capital equipment---43,30343,303
Trail projects--15,622-15,622
TOTAL FUND BALANCES15,061350,64615,62243,303424,632
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND
FUND BALANCES$ 15,147$ 355,136$ 15,622$ 43,303$ 429,208
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES
AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
Special
Capital Project Funds
Revenue Fund
614401414409Total
RevolvingCapital Nonmajor
StreetPedestrianEquipmentGovernmental
Cable T.V.FundTrail WaysRevolvingFunds
REVENUES
Interest on investments$ 138$ 384$ 155$ 677
$ -
Miscellaneous--18,230-18,230
Refunds and reimbursements10,641---10,641
TOTAL REVENUES10,77938418,385-29,548
EXPENDITURES
Current
Culture and recreation
Personal services12,875---12,875
Supplies2,917---2,917
Other services and charges52---52
Capital outlay
Public works-6,488--6,488
TOTAL EXPENDITURES15,8446,488--22,332
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES
OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES(5,065)(6,104)18,385-7,216
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES
Transfers in-168,900-43,303212,203
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES (5,065)162,79618,38543,303219,419
FUND BALANCES, JANUARY 120,126187,850(2,763)-205,213
FUND BALANCES, DECEMBER 31$ 15,061$ 350,646$ 15,622$ 43,303$ 424,632
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
BUDGET AND ACTUAL - CONTINUED ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
(With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 2012)
2013
2012
Budgeted Amounts
ActualVariance withActual
OriginalFinalAmountsFinal BudgetAmounts
REVENUES
Taxes
General property$ 1,739,600$ 1,739,600$ 1,751,963$ 12,363$ 1,737,813
Gambling--6,2806,2801,157
Total1,739,6001,739,6001,758,24318,6431,738,970
Licenses and permits
Business24,50024,50021,024(3,476)24,010
Nonbusiness80,00080,000101,97021,970105,414
Total104,500104,500122,99418,494129,424
Intergovernmental
State
Market value agricultural credit--9898298
State grants aid2,3002,3001,333(967)1,333
Police aid35,00035,00034,587(413)31,272
2% fire relief aid102,000102,000148,87246,872109,005
County - other16,50016,50018,3221,82281,042
Total155,800155,800203,21247,412222,950
Charges for services
General government1,0001,0001,2352351,985
Culture and recreation2,3002,3004,6312,3315,443
Other10010023(77)68
Total3,4003,4005,8892,4897,496
Fines and forfeitures33,50033,50034,8281,32844,836
Special assessments24,00024,00057,82133,82127,543
Interest on investments15,00015,000-(15,000)11,334
Miscellaneous
Refunds and reimbursements7,0007,00012,0535,05374,799
Other50050064214214,936
Total7,5007,50012,6955,19589,735
TOTAL REVENUES2,083,3002,083,3002,195,682112,3822,272,288
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
BUDGET AND ACTUAL - CONTINUED
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
(With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 2012)
2013
2012
Budgeted Amounts
ActualVariance withActual
OriginalFinalAmountsFinal BudgetAmounts
EXPENDITURES
Current
General government
Mayor and Council
Personal services$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,114$ (14)$ 30,097
Other services and charges1,4001,400301,370129
Total31,50031,50030,1441,35630,226
Elections
Personal services----4,509
Supplies----619
Other services and charges----938
Total----6,066
Planning and zoning
Other services and charges2,5002,5001,3321,1682,231
Administration
Personal services262,700262,700232,86029,840267,099
Supplies2,2002,2002,344(144)1,964
Other services and charges68,60068,60046,63021,97043,730
Total333,500333,500281,83451,666312,793
Assessing
Other services and charges--15,662(15,662)15,622
Legal and auditing
Other services and charges96,00096,00098,484(2,484)96,644
General government building
Personal services2,8002,8001,3501,4501,431
Supplies300300370(70)1,004
Other services and charges15,70015,70011,1684,5329,725
Total18,80018,80012,8885,91212,160
Total general government482,300482,300440,34441,956475,742
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
BUDGET AND ACTUAL - CONTINUED
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
(With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 2012)
2013
2012
Budgeted Amounts
ActualVariance withActual
OriginalFinalAmountsFinal BudgetAmounts
EXPENDITURES - CONTINUED
Current - continued
Public safety
Police protection
Other services and charges$ 678,500$ 678,500$ 676,908$ 1,592$ 662,554
Fire protection
Remittance to relief association102,000102,000148,872(46,872)109,005
Other services and charges123,900123,900123,650250122,942
Total225,900225,900272,522(46,622)231,947
Building inspection
Personal services99,10099,10086,36012,740102,539
Supplies2,2002,2002,649(449)1,893
Other services and charges12,60012,60011,4941,1069,263
Total113,900113,900100,50313,397113,695
Civil defense
Other services and charges1,5001,5001,658(158)1,004
Animal control
Other services and charges1,1001,100-1,100-
Total public safety1,020,9001,020,9001,051,591(30,691)1,009,200
Public works
Streets
Personal services130,400130,400132,482(2,082)123,993
Supplies34,70034,70032,0712,62927,875
Other services and charges82,40082,40087,905(5,505)234,393
Total247,500247,500252,458(4,958)386,261
Recycling
Personal services8,6008,6008,541594,174
Supplies100100-10039
Other services and charges8,0008,0003,5184,48211,829
Total16,70016,70012,0594,64116,042
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
BUDGET AND ACTUAL - CONTINUED
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
(With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 2012)
2013
2012
Budgeted Amounts
ActualVariance withActual
OriginalFinalAmountsFinal BudgetAmounts
EXPENDITURES - CONTINUED
Current - continued
Public works - continued
Engineering services
Other services and charges$ 2,500$ 2,500$ 32,954$ (30,454)$ 6,058
Total public works266,700266,700297,471(30,771)408,361
Culture and recreation
Parks and recreation
Personal services37,10037,10034,5432,55736,585
Supplies5,8005,8001,9243,8766,308
Other services and charges42,10042,10037,4394,66139,791
Total 85,00085,00073,90611,09482,684
City Festival
Other services and charges5,5005,5005,950(450)5,569
Total culture and recreation90,50090,50079,85610,64488,253
Economic development
Other services and charges--2,038(2,038)2,400
Total current expenditures1,860,4001,860,4001,871,300(10,900)1,983,956
Capital outlay
General government24,00024,00011,24812,752-
Public works30,00030,000-30,000-
Culture and recreation--18,155(18,155)-
Economic development----29,000
Total capital outlay54,00054,00029,40324,59729,000
Debt service
Principal----6,833
TOTAL EXPENDITURES1,914,4001,914,4001,900,70313,6972,019,789
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
BUDGET AND ACTUAL - CONTINUED
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
(With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 2012)
2013
2012
Budgeted Amounts
ActualVariance withActual
OriginalFinalAmountsFinal BudgetAmounts
EXCESS OF REVENUES
OVER EXPENDITURES$ 168,900$ 168,900$ 294,979$ 126,079$ 252,499
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Sale of capital assets--10,000(10,000)-
Transfers out(168,900)(168,900)(252,203)(83,303)(189,000)
TOTAL OTHER FINANCING
SOURCES (USES)(168,900)(168,900)(242,203)(93,303)(189,000)
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES--52,77632,77663,499
FUND BALANCES, JANUARY 11,205,8201,205,8201,205,820-1,142,321
FUND BALANCES, DECEMBER 31$ 1,205,820$ 1,205,820$ 1,258,596$ 32,776$ 1,205,820
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
COMBINING BALANCE SHEET
DECEMBER 31, 2013
309348349
JointG.O.G.O.
PoliceImprovementImprovement
StationBonds ofBonds of
2012A2006A2007A
ASSETS
Cash and temporary investments $ 55,044$ 374,315$ 427,360
Receivables
Taxes1,147-3,998
Special assessments-37,716441,476
Prepaid items5,521-20,101
TOTAL ASSETS$ 61,712$ 412,031$ 892,935
DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Unavailable revenue - special assessments-37,716441,052
FUND BALANCE
Restricted for debt service61,712374,315451,883
TOTAL DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES AND FUND BALANCE$ 61,712$ 412,031$ 892,935
351352
G.O.G.O.
ImprovementImprovement
Bonds ofBonds of
2009A2013ATotal
$ 879,666$ 60,711$ 1,797,096
3,523-8,668
706,913255,0441,441,149
--25,622
$ 1,590,102$ 315,755$ 3,272,535
706,469255,0441,440,281
883,63360,7111,832,254
$ 1,590,102$ 315,755$ 3,272,535
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
COMBINING SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES
AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013
309348349
JointG.O.G.O.
PoliceImprovementImprovement
StationBonds ofBonds of
2012A2006A2007A
REVENUES
Property taxes$ 69,969$ -$ 243,892
Special assessments-218,869103,465
Interest on investments8259191,551
TOTAL REVENUES70,794219,788348,908
EXPENDITURES
Current
Public works-61,468-
Debt service
Principal569,981175,000350,000
Interest and other6,87762,73343,078
TOTAL EXPENDITURES576,858299,201393,078
EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES
OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES(506,064)(79,413)(44,170)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES
Transfers in-428,296-
Bonds issued---
TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCES -428,296-
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES (506,064)348,883(44,170)
FUND BALANCES, JANUARY 1567,77625,432496,053
FUND BALANCES, DECEMBER 31$ 61,712$ 374,315$ 451,883
351352
G.O.G.O.
ImprovementImprovement
Bonds ofBonds of
2009A2013ATotal
$ 214,905$ -$ 528,766
133,80552,228508,367
1,6779765,948
350,38753,2041,043,081
--61,468
135,000-1,229,981
108,903-221,591
243,903-1,513,040
106,48453,204(469,959)
--428,296
-7,5077,507
-7,507435,803
106,48460,711(34,156)
777,149-1,866,410
$ 883,633$ 60,711$ 1,832,254
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
SUMMARY FINANCIAL REPORT
REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR GENERAL OPERATIONS
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012 AND 2011
Percent
TotalIncrease
(Decrease)
20132012
REVENUES
Taxes$ 2,287,009$ 2,267,2270.87%
Licenses and permits122,994129,424(4.97)
Intergovernmental203,212281,151(27.72)
Charges for services5,8897,496(21.44)
Fines and forfeitures34,82844,836(22.32)
Special assessments566,188357,86958.21
Interest on investments6,86230,478(77.49)
Miscellaneous41,566110,394(62.35)
TOTAL REVENUES$ 3,268,548$ 3,228,8751.23%
Per Capita$ 851$ 8490.25%
EXPENDITURES
Current
General government$ 440,344$ 475,742(7.44)%
Public safety1,051,5911,009,2004.20
Public works358,939410,563(12.57)
Culture and recreation95,700101,206(5.44)
Economic development2,0382,400(15.08)
Capital outlay
General government11,248-100.00
Public works1,236,53385,0191,354.42
Culture and recreation18,15513,37335.76
Economic development-29,000(100.00)
Debt service
Principal1,229,981552,437122.65
Interest and other238,216319,715(25.49)
Bond issuance costs10,278-100.00
TOTAL EXPENDITURES$ 4,693,023$ 2,998,65556.50%
Per Capita$ 1,222$ 78855.00%
Total Long-term Indebtedness$ 9,550,000$ 9,294,9812.74%
Per Capita2,4862,4431.75
General Fund Balance - December 31$ 1,258,596$ 1,205,8204.38%
Per Capita3283173.37
The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of financial information concerning the City of Centerville to interested
citizens. The complete financial statements may be examined at City Hall, 1880 Main Street, Centerville, MN 55038. Questions
about this report should be directed to City Hall at (651) 429-3232.
OTHER REQUIRED REPORT
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2013
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON MINNESOTA LEGAL COMPLIANCE
Honorable Mayor andCityCouncil
City of Centerville, Minnesota
We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, the financial statements of
thegovernmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of theCity of
Centerville, Minnesota (the City), as of and for the year endedDecember 31, 2013,and the related notes to the financial statements,
and have issued our report thereon dated March 29, 2014.
Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Political Subdivisions
The , promulgated by the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota
Statute§6.65, contains seven categories of compliance to be tested: contracting and bidding, deposits and investments, conflicts of
interest, public indebtedness, claims and disbursements, miscellaneous provisions, and tax increment financing.Our study included all
of the listed categories except that we did not test for compliance in tax increment financing because the City has not established a tax
increment financing district.
In connection with our audit, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the City failed to comply with theprovisions
Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Political Subdivisions
of the . However, our audit was not directed primarily toward
obtaining knowledge of such noncompliance. Accordingly, had we performed additional procedures, other matters may have come to
our attention regarding the City’s noncompliance with the above referenced provisions.
This report is intended solely for the information and use those charged with governance and management of the City and the State
Auditor and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
ABDO, EICK& MEYERS, LLP
Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 29, 2014
Notice of Hearing on Proposed Assessment
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Notice is hereby given that the council will meet at 6:30 p.m. on April 9, 2014 at City Hall,
1880 Main Street, Centerville, MN, to consider amending the assessment for the
improvement of 21" Avenue from a point approximately 600 feet south of Main Street to a
point approximately 1,400 feet south of Main Street and continuing on a new unnamed
street (now Commerce Drive) parallel to Main Street westerly to 20 Avenue by
installation of watermain, sanitary sewer street pavement, curb, storm sewer and related
drainage improvements. Adoption by the council of the amended assessment may occur at
the hearing. The area proposed to be assessed is the abutting property.
Repayment of the amended special assessment is proposed to be in accordance with the
terms of Resolution Number 09 -015 adopted on June 10, 2009. The City intends to
determine the application of interest due on the special assessment, and this amount is
accumulating daily.
The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at the City Clerk's office. The
total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,609,930. Written or oral objections will be
considered at the meeting. No appeal to district court may be taken as to the amount of an
assessment unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is filed with
the municipal clerk prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at
the hearing. The council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of a
proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the
affected property owners as it deems advisable.
An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081 by
serving notice of the appeal upon the mayor or clerk of the city within 30 days after the
adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the district court within ten days
after service upon the Mayor or Clerk.
Published in the Quad Community Press on March 25, 2014
Teresa Bender, CMC
City Clerk
110
ASSESSMENT ROLL
Property ID Owner Name Assessment
24.31.22.23.0014 City of Centerville $1,337,930
24.31.22.23.0015 Sheehy Const. Co $ 249,000
111
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
March 26, 2014
6:30 p.m.
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City of Centerville held their regularly scheduled
meeting of March 26, 2014 at City Hall, 1880 Main Street.
PRESENT: Mayor Tom Wilharber
Council Member Steve King
Council Member Jeff Paar
T-, 'r eT. N 3
ABSENT: Council Member D. Love
Council Member Ben Fehrenbacher
STAFF: City Administrator Dallas Larson
City Engineer Mark Statz
Legal Counsel Kurt Glaser
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Wilharber called the meeting to order at 6: 37 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Subsequent to the pledge, Mayor Wilharber noted that the input meeting was noticed for 7:00
p.m. and suggested that the remainder of the agenda be addressed prior to 7:00 p.m.
III. PUBLIC INPUT(S) (Commenced at 7:00 p.m.)
1. Proposed Improvements — 2014 Watermain Project — (Royal Meadows Development)
Administrator Larson stated the improvement that is being considered this evening is within the
Royal Meadows development along 20 Avenue North and encompasses Cardinal Drive, North,
South, and West Robin Lanes. Administrator Larson stated that the City was successful in
obtaining a Community Development Block Grant through Anoka County to assist residents that
meet income guidelines the ability to connect to municipal water services for little or no cost.
Administrator Larson reviewed that within the development, several types of letters were
forwarded to residents: those that met the income qualifications received a letter stating that they
qualified for connection at no cost, those that did not meet the income qualifications received a
letter stating that they did not qualify for connection at no cost along with a price breakout
showing connection costs and and a third letter to those that had not submitted a completed
survey. Administrator Larson stated that any resident in this subdivision that does not meet the
income guidelines desires to connect, the cost would normally be approximately $11,922.
However, because of the location in the City's "Wellhead Protection Area," if they chose to
connect in 2014 along with the project, they would receive a fee waiver incentive of $2,050
112
City of Centerville
Council Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2014
bringing the total cost to approximately $9,942. Administrator Larson stated that at this time a
resident did not have to connect, however, current City Code states that mandatory connection to
municipal services if available would be by December 31, 2021. Administrator Larson stated
that if residents that did not qualify for grant funding desired to connect, they could enter into an
agreement with the City allowing the City to specially assess their property for the connection
over a period of approximately 15 years at 5% interest leaving an annual payment of
approximately $960 per year.
Engineer Statz stated that the Royal Meadows Development was constructed in the early 80's
without municipal water, houses are close together, area streets are in satisfactory condition,
directional boring would provide the best installation of water main to the vicinity with the least
amount of traffic disturbance, tree removal, yard or driveway restoration. Engineer Statz also
stated that all properties will receive a water stub to the property whether or not they desire to
connect at this time, explained property line boundaries, drainage utility easements /right -of-
ways, grouping of service lines, hydrant location, the need for a 6" water main due to looping
and benefits homeowners would receive from strong water pressure for their homes and fighting
fires.
Engineer Statz reiterated that this evenings meeting is an input meeting and not a public hearing
regarding special assessments as individuals are not required to connect at this time and therefor
would not incur a special assessment unless they choose to do so. Both Engineer Statz and
Administrator Larson stated that residents that connected with this project would be required to
seal their wells and that the cost is included in the estimate of assessments forwarded to
residents. Engineer Statz reviewed with residents that the development is within the City's well-
head protection area/plan which provides that unused/ abandoned, due to other available sources
(municipal services) wells be sealed due to potential for contamination and close proximity the
City's water supply well.
Mayor Wilharber questioned whether if one of the residents that had not returned a survey still
had an opportunity to do so. Administrator Larson stated yes, however a deadline for acceptance
would be within the next few weeks.
Mayor Wilharber opened the meeting for public input on the project.
Ms. Melinda Hughes, 7187 West Robin Lane, questioned whether the City would attempt to
protect existing trees and landscaping, location of fire hydrants, whether driveways would be
involved, the projects commencement and notification of same.
Engineer Statz stated that the contractors would do their best to disturb as little as possible such
as existing trees and landscaping, reviewed the location of the proposed fire hydrants and stated
that due to directional drilling there would be minimal, if no disruption of the items that she
questioned. Engineer Statz stated that Lead Project Coordinator, Greg Burmeister would be on
site throughout the project and he would attempt to minimize disruption. Administrator Larson
stated that it is customary to hold neighborhood meetings with residents to obtain input/concerns
and inform them of upcoming stages of the project.
Page 2 of 7
113
City of Centerville
Council Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2014
Ms. Jennifer Hicks, 1989 North Robin Lane, questioned whether the survey should request net
income rather than gross income, average cost for water services on a bi- monthly basis, the
location of the connection to her home, inability to pay once the assessment once connected and
existing wet conditions in the spring in the rear yard and basements within the neighborhood.
Ms. Hicks also questioned the ramifications of not connecting by the deadline date.
Administrator Larson addressed the question of the survey by stating that the survey was
provided to the City by Anoka County and the City can not deviate from its usage, however, he
would contact the County to determine whether special family circumstances can be considered
in calculating gross income. Administrator Larson stated that water charges are based upon
consumption so it is very individualized for each household but she is currently paying a small
water management fee just for the services being available throughout the City and that the
metered fee is $2 per 1,000 gallons. Legal Counsel Glaser stated that if she desired to connect,
she would sign an agreement waiving all rights to appeal the assessment; it would appear on her
property taxes and become a lien on the property. Legal Counsel Glaser stated that if the home
were foreclosed upon or she desired to sell, the assessment would be usually be paid for by the
current owner at closing, but that assessments can be assumed by a buyer.
Engineer Statz stated that the resident can purchase flood insurance to assist with flooding issues,
that they City has areas within the City that have been given priority to receiving improvements
related to drainage and thanked Ms. Hicks for enlightening Council on this drainage issue.
Administrator Larson stated that the City does have a program that with cost sharing
(resident/City) funding is available for drainage issues within developments. Administrator
Larson stated that he would be in contact with Ms. Hicks in the near future to address her issues
related to income.
Mr. Stanley Angerhofer, 1989 Cardinal Drive, stated that he would be retiring in April of this
year which would would lower his income to where he may qualify for grant funding but at this
time he does not. Administrator Larson stated that he would speak with Anoka County regarding
the closeness of Mr. Angerhofer's retirement, potential for resubmission of his survey and get
back to him. Mr. Angerhofer questioned at what point the City would need to obtain a resident's
desire to connect and interest rate that would be charged on the assessment. Administrator
Larson stated by the end of May and 5 %. Attorney Glaser stated that if Mr. Angerhofer was 65
years old he could qualify for assessment deferment, however, interest would accrue during the
deferred period. Mr. Angerhofer stated that he would be turning 65 on July 5, 2014. Attorney
Glaser stated that Mr. Angerhofer would have ninety days from the date of the resolution
adopting the assessments to apply for the deferment.
Mr. Jeffery Maher, 1984 North Robin Lane, questioned the installation of the water line and
amount of disturbance of his property and in his home. Mr. Maher also questioned the process'
for signing forms if connection was desired.
Engineer Statz explained that the water main would be installed through directional
drilling/tunneling with each property receiving a water stub whether they desired to connect at
this time. Engineer Statz also explained that a 2' x 2' area in the home's basement/crawl space
would be cut allowing the water line being brought into home for connection to the existing
Page 3 of 7
114
City of Centerville
Council Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2014
piping. Administrator Larson stated that the City would be forwarding documents for voluntary
connection within the next month.
Ms. Marguerite McGown, 1988 Cardinal Drive, stated that the electrical for her home runs
underneath her garage and could pose a concern during connection. Ms. McGown also stated
that she would prefer if directional drilling is performed near her existing trees that they be
removed due to believed disruption of the root system. Ms. McGown also stated that she runs
two to three dehumidifiers all year round.
Engineer Statz stated that if the existing trees would be disrupted and Ms. McGown desired for
them to be removed, they would be. Engineer Statz addressed the electrical concerns of Ms.
McGown by stating that they would not be disturbed and locates would be completed prior to
each phase of the project. Engineer Statz again reiterated that the City has a program for
drainage issues and a program where cost sharing (resident/City) funding is available for
drainage issues within developments.
Ms. Hughes questioned the benefit of a city water connection.
Engineer Statz stated that it is a personal decision, most cities have a water system that serves the
entire City and is shared by the entire community which is the goal of the City Council, looping,
fire services, water pressures, incentive for connection at this time and a safe drinking water
source versus one with greater potential for contamination.
Mr. Angerhoffer stated that his well is within a closet with his pressure tank and wondered if that
would be removed. Engineer Statz stated that generally the well is in the ground outside the
home and that he may have a pressure tank inside. Engineer Statz also stated that with this
installation everything would be turn-key, meaning all of the work and costs are included.
Mayor Wilharber called for additional questions from the audience, hearing none closed the
input meeting at 7:48 p.m.
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mayor Wilharber added Centerville Claims (Check #28589- 28599).
Motion by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Paar to approve the Set
Agenda with the above stated amendment All in favor. Motion passed
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. March 12, 2014 City Council Meeting Minutes
The Mayor provided Council Members with an opportunity to amend the presented minutes.
Page 4 of 7
115
City of Centerville
Council Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2014
Motion by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Paar to approve the
minutes of the March 12, 2014 City Council Meeting as presented. All in favor. Motion
passed.
VI. CONSENT AGENDA
City of Centerville March 13, 2014 through March 26, 2014 Claims (Check #28573-
28535)
2. Centennial Police Department Claims through March 13, 2014 (Check #9822 -9838)
3. Centennial Fire District Claims through March 11, 2014 (Check #6287 -6304)
4. Successful Performance Review — Public Works Technician/Building Inspector, Dan
Schmitz
Mayor Wilharber reported that a resident approached him as stated that Dan had recently been to
their home and was very pleasant and knowledgeable.
Motion by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Paar to approve the
Consent Agenda as presented. All in favor. Motion passed.
VII. AWARDS /PRESENTATIONS /APPEARANCES
1. None.
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
1. None.
IX. NEW BUSINESS (Delayed to the completion of the input meeting)
1. Res. #14 -018 — Awarding Bids — Royal Meadows Improvement Project (Watermain)
(Materials & Labor)
Engineer Statz stated that the City received separate bids for labor and materials to take
advantage of the sales tax exemption similar to the 2014 Street Improvement Project. Engineer
Statz briefly reviewed the submitted bids stating that Ferguson Water Works (Materials) and C &
I Excavating, Inc. (Labor) were low bidders.
Motion by Council Member Paar, seconded by Council Member King to approve Res. #14-
018 — Awarding Bids — Royal Meadows Improvement Proiect (Watermain — Materials &
Labor as presented. All in favor. Motion passed.
2. Anoka County Fire Protection Council Joint Powers Agreement
Legal Counsel Glaser explained the agreement, its intent, the similarities between the Joint Law
Enforcement Council Agreement with Anoka County and the ease of amending that agreement
to include Fire Protection; Emergency Services, the agreements necessity of a newly formed
Page 5 of 7
116
City of Centerville
Council Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2014
entity that would require management, municipal funding and staff time, potential for loss of
municipal control and governance, the lack of expiration date of the agreement not allowing for
restructuring per changing needs and insurance coverage requirements. Consensus of Council
was that it was not a time sensitive agreement and could be tabled until more information is
available.
Motion by Council Member Paar seconded by Council Member Kine to table this item All
in favor. Motion passed.
X. ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES
1. Administrator Larson reminded Council of their Joint Work Session with the Parks &
Recreation Committee and the Planning & Zoning Commission to be held on April 9,
2014 at 7:00 p.m.
2. Administrator Larson stated that the Parks & Recreation Committee has requested
additional information regarding the property for sale and owned by the City at 7212
Mill Road. Committee believes that this property has been dedicated for park
purposes in some fashion, has been known as park property in the past and if sold the
proceeds should benefit park purposes. Administrator Larson stated that to this point,
all research does not support this claim and he would be forwarding a memorandum
to the Committee and Council shortly.
3. Administrator Larson stated that the Annual Local Public Officials Meeting is
scheduled for April 30, 2014 at the Harvest Grill in Coon Rapids and if any Council
Members desired to attend to notify Staff.
4. Mayor Wilharber stated that the packet contained a letter from the City's Assessor
notifying the City that Anoka County believes that some valuations do not meet their
Revenue Departments standards and should be increased from his figures of 7.4% to
12.8% for 2015.
5. Administrator Larson stated that Council did not act as the Local Board of Appeal &
Equalization last year due to a lapse in certification. However, several members have
been trained and Council will need to take action on a resolution to all the Council to
again assume those duties and responsibilities. Dallas stated that the County will be
holding the Open Book method at their facilities again this year, but that Mr.
Tolzmann will attend an upcoming Council meeting to provide a report.
6. Council Member King stated that the FCC found in favor of local cable commissions
regarding charges that Comcast was billing their subscribers for DTA equipment
calling it a service fee. The FCC has ordered Comcast to unbundle all equipment
costs in the DTA service fee, the HD Technology Fee and the HD/DVR service fees.
Council Member King stated that the FCC did not find in favor of local cable
commissions regarding aggregation method used to set the rates for SD and HD
converter equipment and declined to take jurisdiction of the $5.99 "convenience fee ".
7. Mayor Wilharber stated that recently the Parks & Recreation Committee purchased
park benches from Minncor for several parks. They will be installed by city forces
this spring.
8. Council Member Paar reminded residents and businesses of the Fete des Lacs
celebration that would be taking place on July 25, 26 & 27, 2014, registration for the
Page 6 of 7
117
City of Centerville
Council Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2014
parade is on the City's website and that there will be no Lions Street Dance. Council
Member Paar stated that on July 25, 2014 there will be the organized JAM prior to
the fireworks at dusk. Council Member Paar also stated that subsequent to the City of
Lino Lake's withdraw from the Centennial Fire District, Chief Streich has informed
the Fire Steering Committee that he is a finalist for another Fire Chief position in
another community. Council member Paar stated that the Fire Steering Committee
cancelled their next meeting and rescheduled for April 24, 2014.
9. Attorney Glaser reported that some progress has been made with the residents of
7121 Centerville regarding ongoing cleanup and building violations. Attorney Glaser
stated that the legislature remains in session and no further information regarding the
Ticket Education Programs has been brought forward.
10. Engineer Statz reported that no new information has been brought forward in the
legislature regarding clarification for the municipal sales tax exemption(s). Engineer
Statz stated that the County is currently acquiring right of way easements from
residents that abut Centerville Road, desired for Council to consider installation of
municipal sewer and water along with the CSAH21 /Centerville Road project so that
the County could be informed of the Councils wishes. Administrator Larson stated
that the City could invite those residents that expressed a desire for connection to a
meeting to discuss the item in the near future. Consensus was thjat staff should meet
with affected property owners first, to gage their interest in city services.
11. Mayor Wilharber reported that Anoka County recently held a meeting regarding the
Chain of Lakes Bald Eagle Regional Trail Plan here in Council Chambers and that he
and several members of the Parks & Recreation Committee attended. Mayor
Wilharber reported that the Parks & Recreation Committee would like to see the
trailway be located in an alternative location and throughout the proposed park being
constructed by the City of Lino Lakes at the corner of Centerville Road and Birch
Street. Mayor Wilharber stated that the proposed Chain of Lakes Bald Eagle
Regional Trail is not expected to be completely constructed for 10 years.
Administrator Larson stated that the County would be applying for grant funding
which potentially would reimburse the City for 50% of the cost of the trail along
Centerville Road.
12. Council Member Paar requested an update on the colored concrete study that has
been taking place within the downtown area. Engineer Statz stated that the study is
coming to a conclusion of uncertainties and they are unable to point to one thing that
has caused the deterioration. Engineer Statz stated that a section of the study was to
suggest repair options but it appears that a full depth removal would be needed.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Council Member Paar, seconded by Council Member King to Adiourn the
regularly scheduled Council meeting of March 26, 2014 at 8:05 p.m. All in favor. Motion
passed.
Transcribed by City Staff Member Teresa Bender, City Clerk
Page 7 of 7
118
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
04/04/14 9.41 AM
Check Detail - 04 -09 -2014 Page 1
Check
Date Check # Vender Name Comments Amount
4/9/2014 028600 CONNEXUS ENERGY 2085 W CEDAR ST - SERV THRU 3 -17 -14 $314.48
4/9/2014 028600 CONNEXUS ENERGY STREET LIGHTS - 395653 - 219678 - SERV THRU 3 -20 -14 $74.71
4/9/2014 028600 CONNEXUS ENERGY STREET LIGHTS - 395653 - 219699 - SERV THRU 3 -20 -14 $106.71
4/9/2014 028600 CONNEXUS ENERGY 7087 20TH AVE N- SERV THRU 3 -17 -14 $156.64
4/9/2014 028600 CONNEXUS ENERGY 6900 20TH AVE - LIFT STAT - SERV THRU 3 -17 -14 $61.65
4/9/2014 028600 CONNEXUS ENERGY 7100 20TH AVE N - TRAFSG - SERV THRU 3 -24 -14 $74.25
4/9/2014 028600 CONNEXUS ENERGY 6800 - 20 RADIO SCADA - SERV THRU 3 -21 -14 $16.24
4/9/2014 028600 CONNEXUS ENERGY 6800 - 20 RADIO SCADA - SERV THRU 3 -21 -14 16.25
Check Nbr 028600 CONNEXUS ENERGY
820.93
4/9/2014 028601 ALL COVERED INC. TREND MICRO WORY FREEE - SECURITY $88.02
4/9/2014 028601 ALL COVERED INC. TREND MICRO WORY FREEE - SECURITY $88 02
4/9/2014 028601 ALL COVERED INC. TREND MICRO WORY FREEE - SECURITY $88.01
4/9/2014 028601 ALL COVERED INC. TREND MICRO WORY FREEE - SECURITY 88.02
Check Nbr 028601 ALL COVERED INC
4/9/2014 028602 AMUNDSEN, KEVIN P & R MEETINGS - 1 -8 -14, 2 -5 -14 & 3 -5 -14 $352.07
Check Nbr 028602 AMUNDSEN KEVIN
4/9/2014 028603 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS 1880 MAIN ST -23 3122 13 0015- 2014 PROPERTY TAXES 0.00
4/9/2014 028603 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS 24 3122 33 0002 - 2014 PROPERTY TAXES $69.14
$
4/9/2014 028603 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS 22 -31 -22-41 -0047 - 1601 LAMOTTE DR - 2014 PROPERTY 33.06
Check Nbr 028603 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS X171 34
4/9/2014 028604 BRANCH, PATRICK P & R MEETING - 1 -8 -14
Check Nbr 028604 BRANCH PATRICK
4/9/2014 028605 BURNET TITLE 1832 PRAIRIE DR - REFUND - OVERPYMT FINAL BILL 20.00
Check Nbr 028605 BURNET TITLE
64.13
4/9/2014 028607 CENTER POINT ENERGY 1880 MAIN ST - SERV THRU 3 -26 -14 $968.66
4/9/2014 028607 CENTER POINT ENERGY 2085 W CEDAR ST - SERV THRU 3 -26 -14 $1,138.12
4/9/2014 028607 CENTER POINT ENERGY 1785 PELTIER LAKE DR - SER THRU 3 -26 -14 $15
4/9/2014 028607 CENTER POINT ENERGY 7087 - 20TH AVE S - SERV THRU 3 -26 -14 $1(
4/9/2014 028607 CENTER POINT ENERGY 1737 MAIN ST - SERV THRU 1 -27 -14 $10.x,_
4/9/2014 028607 CENTER POINT ENERGY 6970 LAMOTTE DR - SERV THRU 3 -26 -14 $170.15
Check Nbr 028607 CENTER POINT ENERGY
4/9/2014 028608 CHRIS BETTINGER P & R MEETINGS - 1 -8 -14, 2 -5 -14 & 3 -5 -14 2 314.08
Check Nbr 028608 CHRIS BETTINGER
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA D.SCHMITZ - TRAINING CERTIFICATE COLLECTION SYSTEM 6 .0
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA TRAVEL EXPENSES - D. SCHMITZ - ST. CLOUD SEMINAR $355.0
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA POSTAGE - WATER SAMPLES $1 $3.04
3.06 6
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA COMPUTERS - P.W. $
$2,127.51
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA COMPUTER - P.W
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA COMPUTER - ACCOUNT CLERK $915.20
$1,186.46
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA BSN SPORTS SUPPLY - TENNIS COURT - SUPPLIES
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA SUPPLIES $
$38.82
.93
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA REPAIRS TO BOBCAT $38
$1,542.59
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA SUPPLIES $325.57
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA HYBRID TV TUNER/W VIDEO $$
6 5
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA FUEL $65.98
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA BACK UP DRIVES $286.21
$179.98
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA ENDICA POSTAGE
4/9/2014 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA FUEL $9.95
- heck Nbr 028609 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - MASTERCA 533.06
4/9/2014 028610 CITY OF CIRCLE PINES 2014 POLICE BLDG PYMT $7,963.36 $496.46
4/9/2014 028610 CITY OF CIRCLE PINES 2014 POLICE BLDG PYMT 5 000.00
:heck Nbr 028610 CITY OF CIRCLE PINES
4/9/2014 028611 FLINT, JAMES 5 496.46
P & Z MEETING - 1 -7 -14
;heck Nbr 028611 FLINT JAMES
4/9/2014 028612 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC SERVICE THRU MARCH 2014 20.00
4/9/2014 028612 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC SERVICE THRU MARCH 2014 $10.92
:heck Nbr 028612 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC 11Q.93
4/9/2014 028613 GRAHEK, JOHN 21
P& R MEETINGS - 1 -8 -14, 2 -5 -14 & 3 -5 -14
;heck Nbr 028613 GRAHEK JOHN
60.00
119
CITY OF CENTERVILLE 04/04/14 9:41 AM
Page 2
Check Detail — 04 -09 -2014
Check
Date Check # Vender Name Comments Amount
4/9/2014 028614 INTEGRA PHONE SERV 4 -22 -14
Check Nbr 028614 INTEGRA $34.57
4/9/2014 028615 KOSKI, RUSSELL P & Z MEETING - 1 -7 -14
Check Nbr 028615 KOSKI, RUSSELL $20.00
4/9/2014 028616 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY SURCHARGE - BUILDING PERMITS $56.25
4/9/2014 028616 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY SURCHARGE - MECHANICAL PERMITS $43.75
4/9/2014 028616 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY SURCHARGE - ELECTRICAL PERMITS $53.75
4/9/2014 028616 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY SURCHARGE - PLUMBING PERMITS $13.75
(hark Nbr 028616 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY $167.50
4/9/2014 028617 MONTAIN, MATTHEW P & Z MEETING - 1 -7 -14
Check Nbr 028617 MONTAIN, MATTHEW $20.00
4/9/2014 028618 MOSHER, DARRIN P & Z MEETING - 1 -7 -14
Check Nbr 028618 MOSHER, DARRIN $20.00
4/9/2014 028619 PETERSON, BRIAN P & R MEETINGS - 1 -8 -14, 2 -5 -14 & 3 -5 -14
Check Nbr 028619 PETERSON, BRIAN $60.00
4/9/2014 028620 PRESS PUBLICATIONS HEARING - PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS
Check Nbr 028620 PRESS PUBLICATIONS $66.16
4/9/2014 028621 SEELEY, SUZANNE P & R MEETINGS - 1 -8 -14, 2 -5 -14 & 3 -5 -14
Check Nbr 028621 SEELEY, SUZANNE $60.00
4/9/2014 028622 TWOHY, NICK P & R MEETINGS - 1 -8 -14, 2 -5 -14 & 3 -5-14
Check Nbr 028622 TWOHY, NICK $60.00
4/9/2014 028623 WAEGHE, KEVIN P & R MEETINGS - 1 -8 -14, 2 -5 -14 & 3 -5 -14
Check Nbr 028623 WAEGHE, KEVIN $60.00
4/9/2014 028624 WOOD, TOM P & Z MEETING - 1 -7 -14
Check Nbr 028624 WOOD, TOM $20.00
4/9/2014 028625 CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPT 2013 CREDIT - OVER PAYMENT - $10,894.02
4/9/2014 028625 CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPT POLICE SERVICES - APRIL 2014 $57,321.25
C jbr 028625 CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPT $46.427.23
TOTAL CHECKS $64,439.68
VOIDED CHECK #28606
120
CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPT Check Register- Police GL without invoice numbers Page: 1
Check Issue Dates: 3/14/2014 - 3/27/2014 Mar 27, 2014 11:30AM
Report Criteria:
Report type: Summary
GL Check Ck No Description Check
Period Issue Date Payee Amount
03/14 03/27/2014 9839 AVENET, LLC WEBSITE HOSTING /DESIGN 450.00
03/14 03/27/2014 9840 BCA CJTE TRAINING BJ 570.00
03/14 03/27/2014 9841 CENTENNIAL UTILITIES FEB UTILITIES 1,140.61
03/14 03/27/2014 9842 CONNEXUS ENERGY FEB ELECTRIC 3,489.09
03/14 03/27/2014 9843 DELL MARKETING L.P. 3 COMPUTERS 3,358.39
03/14 03/27/2014 9844 DEPUTY REGISTRAR #150 VEH RENEWAL 12.00
03/14 03/27/2014 9845 DON'S CIRCLE SERVICE, INC VEH REPAIRS & MTC 2,084.50
03/14 03/27/2014 9846 ENVENTIS TELECOM, INC PHONES & LONG DISTANCE 402.51
03/14 03/27/2014 9847 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT ANNUAL APS ACCESS FEE 204.00
03/14 03/27/2014 9848 NAC MECHANICAL & ELEC SERVICES BLDG HEATER REPAIR 1,019.34
03/14 03/27/2014 9849 PITNEY BOWES INC POSTAGE METER RENTAL 73.77
03/14 03/27/2014 9850 QUILL CORPORATION TONER/MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 375.66
03/14 03/27/2014 9851 PAUL H STEFFEL INS AGENT OF RECORD 1,500.00
03/14 03/27/2014 9852 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL APRIL LIFE /DISABILITY 95.86
Grand Totals: 14,775.73
M = Manual Check, V = Void Check
121
CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPT Check Register - Police GL without invoice numbers Page: 1
Check Issue Dates: 3/28/2014 - 3/28/2014 Mar 28, 2014 03:13PM
Report Criteria:
Report type: Summary
GL Check Ck No Description Check
Period Issue Date Payee Amount
03/14 03/28/2014 9772 PUBLIC AGENCY TRAINING COUNCIL TRAINING AK 1,180.00- V
03/14 03/28/2014 9853 CITY OF CENTERVILLE DUI FORFEITURE DISTRIBUTION 27.09
03/14 03/28/2014 9854 DON'S CIRCLE SERVICE, INC VEH REPAIRS & MTC 22.00
03/14 03/28/2014 9855 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS,I MEDICAL SUPPLIES 418.73
Grand Totals: 712.18 -
M = Manual Check, V = Void Check
122
CENTENNIAL FIRE DISTRICT Check Register - FIRE GL Page: 1
Check Issue Dates: 3/12/2014 - 3/21/2014 Mar 21, 2014 02:34PM
Report Criteria:
Report type: Summary
GL Check Check Vendor Description Check
Period Issue Date Number Number Payee Amount
03/14 03/21/2014 6305 20150 BETHEL FIRE PPE EQUIPMENT 1,600.00
03/14 03/21/2014 6306 30480 CENTENNIAL UTILITIES FEB UTILITIES 839.43
03/14 03/21/2014 6307 30500 CENTURY LINK CENTERVILLE PHONE 57.18
03/14 03/21/2014 6308 30575 CITY OF CIRCLE PINES 2014 EAP SERVICES 1,414.67
03/14 03/21/2014 6309 31137 CONNEXUS ENERGY ELECTRIC STATION 1 567.84
03/14 03/21/2014 6310 50050 DARREN ECKART AWARDS BANQUET SUPPLIES/ 145.93
03/14 03/21/2014 6311 120450 CITY OF LINO LAKES FEB FEMA REIMB -INS 62,299.39
03/14 03/21/2014 6312 160130 PERFORMANCE PLUS LLC MEDICAL EXAM 288.00
03/14 03/21/2014 6313 160493 PREMIUM WATERS, INC BOTTLED WATER 18.29
03/14 03/21/2014 6314 180600 CITY OF ROSEVILLE MARCH PHONE 1,155.00
03/14 03/21/2014 6315 200150 THOMAS MOTORS, INC VEH REPAIR 03 FORD AMB 1,247.32
03/14 03/21/2014 6316 220200 VERIZON WIRELESS CELL PHONES 105.74
03/14 03/21/2014 6317 240100 XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC STATION 2 754.36
Grand Totals: 70,493.15
M = Manual Check, V = Void Check
123
RESOLUTION #14 -0
A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND
EQUALIZATION, PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTE 274.014, SUBD 3 (C)
WHEREAS, the City of Centerville is authorized to serve as the Local Board of Appeals
& Equalization pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 274.01; and
WHEREAS, the City of Centerville's powers to act as the Local Board of Appeals &
Equalization were transferred to Anoka County temporarily, pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes 274.014, Subd 3(a), for the year 2013 and 2014, and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 274.014, Subd. 3 (c) provides for the reinstatement of
the governing body of a City to serve as the Local Board of Appeals & Equalization by
resolution of said City Council and upon proof of compliance with Minnesota Statute
274.014, Subd. 2.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City
of Centerville, Minnesota, to establish the Centerville City Council as the Local Board of
Appeals & Equalization pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 274.014, Subd. 3 (c); and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Centerville City Clerk is hereby directed to
submit a certified copy of this resolution, along with proof of compliance with the
requirements of Minnesota Statutes 274.014, Subd. 2., to the Anoka County Assessor
before December 1, 2014.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Centerville this day of 9 2014.
Tom Wilharber, Mayor
Attest:
Teresa Bender, City Clerk
124
MINNESOTA- REVENUE
Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Training Attendance List
Updated to include all courses offered through 121212013
µ *W' .. 714
4901 Wielinski Val Supervisor Turner Twp Aitkin 7/1/2010 11/30/2014 ^
AFZ♦ak� 1 0161 7
1868 Horsman Lynda Supervisor Verdon Twp Aitkin 6/30/2011 7/1/2015
Aft 10f l 11 016
2487 Kuhlman Alam Supervisor Wagner Twp Aitkin 11/9/2011 7/1/2015
I. �zts � Aitldr►
< -� /.' - 10 milli T1 /2016
3398 Palmer Robert Supervisor Wagner Twp Aitkin 6/30/2011 7/1/2015
«, :" Aiitt 11 f9/11 7/112CM 5
2851 Martz Robert Chairman Waukenabo Township Aitkin 9/12/2013 7/1/2017
m ; W OUlill Aft
9/12M 7fi 7 '
52 Allison Sally Supervisor Waukenabo Twp Aitkin 9/13/2010 11/30/2014
2825 Maljamaa Ed Supervisor Wealthwood Twp Aitkin 6/28/2012 7/1/2016
Adn
1OW12 :,.,.
Na 4996 Workman Jeff Su ervisor Wealthwood Tw Aitkin 6/28/2012 7/1/2016
2545 Langenbach Doug Supervisor Williams Twp Aitkin 6/28/2012 7/1/2016
320 Berg Jim Supervisor Workman Twp Aitkin 6/28/2012 r 7/1/2016
1836 Holsten Marvin Supervisor Workman Twp Aitkin 6/30/2011 7/1/2015
942 Dickinson Jim City Administrator Andover Anoka 11/12/2013 7/1/2017
4625 Trude Julie Council Member Andover Anoka 11/12/2013 7/1/2017
.,�.., tip -° - "F " !� ,r• r.:'Y .�n.°
4000 Schmidt Steve Council Member Anoka Anoka 11/12/2013 7/1/2017 ~
3035 Miller Todd Mayor Bethel City ^ Anoka 11/13/2012 7/1/2016 Ae js*
853 Daniels Jane Chair of the Board Blaine Anoka 11/12/2013 7/1/2017
3469 Pekarik Laurie Board member Blaine City Anoka 11/13/2012 7/1/2016
2725 Love D. Council Member Centerville Anoka 11/12/2013 7/1/2017
Rev" ^/0212013
Par 1 38
MINNESOTA- REVENUE
Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Training Attendance List
Updated to include all courses offered through 121212013
- ADOUAS Centewige Arwke 11M2013' i/1112017
3777 Roeser Dave Council Member City of Lino Lakes Anoka 9/18/2013 7/1/2017
Courdalletwult Col unbia Hoo Anoka 11/12/2013 71U2017
1040 Duraine Jeff Council Member Columbus Anoka 11/12/2013 7/1/2017
ITI Croundmodw Columbus Anoka 1111212013 701/2017
w 3504 Peterson Denny Council Member Columbus Anoka 11/12/2013 7/1/2017
s ° OW4COEW Columbus Anoka 11/1212013 71112017
2437 Krebs Bill Council Member Elect Columbus City Anoka 11/16/2010 11/30/2014
°..
Abyor E Columbus City Anoka 11/16/2010 11130/2014
3890 Sanders Bruce Council member Coon Rapids City Anoka 11/13/2012 7/1/2016
. {t, East Bethel City Anoka 3/28/2011 11/30/2014
3052 Moegede • Heidi Council Member East Bethel City Anoka 3/28/2011 11/30/2014
41 IWW � F Anoka 11/12/2013 711/2017
3870 Saefke Jim Council Member Fridley Anoka 11/12/2013 7/1/2017
{ F Anoka 3/2812011 1101201
ro 444 Bolkcom Ann Council Member Fridley City Anoka 3/28/2011 11/30/2014
F t Ando 312812011 :11, 14
{
191 Bailey Betty Council member Lexington City Anoka 10/8/2012 7/1/2016
��.. L Mitt 10/8012 I11=111
3368 Osterhus Philip Township Supervisor Lindwood Twp Anoka 3128/2011 11/30/2014
114 Wt Lam. Anoka 612 12013 112017
3369 Osterhus Philip Supervisor Linwood Twp Anoka 6/20/2013 7/1/2017
A ° ° Anoka 9/17 7
2374 Koch Jerry City Council Coon Rapids City Anoka 11/13/2012 7/1/2016
7/24/21313 ,�: T
4 Mike Supervisor Atlanta Twp Becker 7/25/2012 7/1/2016
g AUMW Cit - %&or 8!23120 1 - 7 12115
331 Bergerson Carol Council Member Audubon City Becker 7/25/2012 7/1/2016
1198 Felker Sean Supervisor Audubon Twp Becker 8/23/2011 7/1/2015
1476 Green David Supervisor Burlington Twp Becker 6/24/2013 7/112017
VIM
1874 Hoskins Butch Supervisor Burlington Twp Becker 6/27/2011 7/1/2015
481 Boyer Dale Council Member Callaway City Becker 7/21/2010 11/30/2014
Revised 12/02/2013 Page 5 of 138
' terodfe
EfW ffz&WM57 Centerville
Special Event Permit Application
1. TITLE, PURPOSE, AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF EVENT: ? _ q S )e r
New Application: Renewal of or Change in Application:
CONTACT PERSON: '4T- 04 a' �
W
TELEPHONE: OR
2. IDENTIFYING INFORMATION:
Attach a written communication from the organization(s) in whose name the event will be advertised which
authorizes you, the applicant, to apply /- for .
u r this special event permit on its /their behalf
Applicant's Name: j c)A ej Cp, etpJl' Title:
Address: — 1 (2A
Mailing Address:
Affiliation:
Day Phone: (,:sk . �'2 Ep , _Evening Phone: to w p
Emergency Phone:
3. EVENT PRINCIPALS:
Following, please list the names, addresses and telephone numbers of all the principals involved in any of the
proposed special event. Include professional event organizers, event promoters, financial underwriters, commercial
sponsors, charitable agencies for whose benefit the event is being produced, the organization(s) in whose name the
event is being advertised, and all others administratively, financially and organizationally involved as principals in
the production of the proposed special event. Make additional copies of the following as needed to include as of the
principals involved in the proposed special event.
m
Nae: kL L �Vt) o Nn Ri
Organization/Business /Agency /Affiliation:
Is this a non - profit organization? VZYes No
If you are making application under non-profit status, proof of non profit status must be attached to! his ap plication
Mailing Address: la — 2 j
'o I 1 N g N
r
Day Phone: [ _ 0 3 4 - Evening Phone:
Title and functional responsibility with regard to the event: CIS ?-.p
Page 1 of 10
127
4. REQUESTED EVENT COMPONENTS:
Date requested: 4 — 1 � — 2_m Ll Alternate date:
Requested hours of operation: I pj» (a /"1_1 p.m.) To: -A
Set up beginning date and time: —
Complete dismantle date and time: Zcv i
Describe the number and type of animals (if any) to be used in this event: WA^-e
Attach a draft of the entry form for participants and /or spectators.
Anticipated number of participants: k p 0 u Spectators:
5. INSURANCE:
Attach to this application either an insurance policy or a certificate of insurance including the policy number,
amount, and the provisions that the City of Centerville is included as an additional insured. (Please note that
insurance requirements depend upon the risk level of the event. Also, if your event can be classified as first
amendment expressive activity, insurance requirements can be waived under certain circumstances.)
6. SANITATION:
Attach your "Plan for clean- up/Material Preservation ". Include number, type and location of trash containers to be
provided for the event. Indicate who and how man will be responsible for emptying and cleaning up around
containers during the event. Indicate who and how many will be responsible for cleaning up after animals if they are
present during the event. Indicate who and how many will be responsible for cleaning up after the event. Describe
the number, type and location of portable toilets to be provided for the event (or permanent'toilets to be used in the
event.) Include any other plan you have for ensuring post -event cleanliness and material preservation of city
facilities, equipment, premises and streets A deposit of $500 will be required for clean -up and restoration. If
premises are left in satisfactory condition, this deposit will be refunded in full followin¢ inspection.
7. LOCATION:
Please attach a map of your event land design. Check off below items that apply to your event
and indicate them on the attached map. Use, where necessary, a "to scale" drawing.
A. If a route is involved, the beginning and finish area with arrows.
B. If a route is involved, the places where buses, autos or other motorized vehicles need to
be considered.
C. If a route is involved, attach separate maps giving two or more alternate routes.
D. Entertainment or stage locations (grandstand operators should provide you with a
"to scale" drawing.)
E. Alcoholic beverage concession area.
F. Non - alcoholic concession area.
G. Food concession area.
H. General Merchandise concession areas. \ ��
I. Portable toilet facilities (indicate number).
J. Event participant and/or spectator parking areas.
K. Event organizer's command post.
Page 2of10
128
L. First aid facilities. /
M. Fireworks or pyrotechnics site.
N. Vehicle fuel handling sit.
O. Cooking areas.
P. Electrical sources to be used for cooking.
Q. tables, enclosures, etc.
R. Temporary or permanent structures constructed for t]
S. Site of electrical wiring to be installed for the event.
T. Trash receptacles (indicate number)
U. Other - Please describe. g
8. AVAILABILITY OF FOOD, BEVERAGES AND /OR ENTERTAINMENT:
If there will be music, sound amplification or any other noise impact, please describe, including
the intended hours of the music, sound or noise: (J. S �� S+n, 71 c b►� — n
Will alcoholic beverages be served? Yes No L/
PLEASE NOTE THAT SALES OF LIOUOR/ALCOHOL IS PROHIBITED IN CITY
PARKS UNLESS THE EVENT IS A CITY CELEBRATION AND PRIOR APPROVAL
AND APPROPRIATE LICENSES ARE OBTAINED BY CITY COUNCIL ACTION.
If yes, describe what system will be used to ensure that alcoholic beverages will be consumed by
persons 21 years and older:
If yes, describe how, where, when and by whom the alcoholic beverages will be served:
If a casino party, a dance, or live entertainment is part of your event, please describe:
Please describe all of the activities of your event for which a license is required, for example: a
cabaret license, etc. Attach all required licenses to this application Please note that certain
licensing may be required by City, County and State agencies such as a Large Assembly
License for gatherings over 1,000 People, some types of food handling licensing Gambling
License, Cabaret License, etc. It is Your responsibility to check with the City Clerk or local
authorities to determine what licensing is required Prior to submitting this application
Page 3 of 10
129
Will food and/or non - alcoholic beverages be served? Yes No
If yes, describe sanitation measures, food handling procedures and the nature of the food (such as
pre - packaged foods, hot dogs, pre -mixed soda, unpeeled fruit, raw meats, vegetables, fish or
peeled and cut fruit.)
If yes, you will need a permit from the Anoka County Department of Environmental
Health. Please attach a copy of the permit to this application.
9. SECURITY AND SAFETY PROCEDURES:
Describe your proposed procedures for set up, operation, internal security and crowd control: —
a r
If the event is to occur at night, describe how you are going to light the event area in order to
increase the safety of participants and spectators coming to and leaving the event:
If your event includes vehicles or animals, describe the minimum and maximum speeds of the
event and the minimum and maximum intervals of space to be maintained between units:
Attach to this application a copy of your building permit(s) if you are installing any electrical
wiring on temporary or permanent basis and /or if you are building any temporary or permanent
structures such as bleachers, scaffolding, a grandstand, stages or platforms.
Attach a copy of your fire department permit(s) to this application if you will use parade floats;
an open flame; fireworks or pyrotechnics; vehicle fuel; cooking facilities; enclosures (and tables
within those closures); tents, air supported structures, canopies, or fabric shelters.
Give the name, address and phone numbers of the agency or agencies which will provide first aid
staff and equipment if required. Attach additional sheets if necessary.
Name of agency:
Name of Representative:
Address:
Day phone: Evening phone:
Indicate medical services (if required) that will be provided for this event:
Page 4 of 10
130
Ambulances: Doctors:
Nurses: Paramedics:
10. VENDORS OR CONCESSIONAIRES:
Describe what vendors /concessionaires you will allow in conjunction with the event, and the
purpose of these concessions:
Describe how you intend to regulate, monitor and control the type, number and quality of
vendors /concessionaires whom you may permit to operate in conjunction with the event:
11. CITY SERVICES /EQUIPMENT:
Describe city services and /or equipment requested for this event: City barricades, cones, signs,
picnic tables and other equipment which may be borrowed on an as- available basis. You should
make advance arrangements to pick up and return this equipment. If you or any volunteers
cannot pick up and return this equipment, please attach a letter requesting these services and
explaining why your organization cannot perform them. This will be reviewed, then appr eyi or
denied by the public works foreman.
QS
ACV
12. OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION:
Please list below any other miscellaneous information you feel would be important and have a
bearing on the approval of this Special Event Permit request:
13. FEE STRUCTURE / EVENT CHARGES:
If there is a fee or donation required as a condition of attendance or participation of this event,
please describe the amounts to be collected from various categories of participants or spectators:
14. If a donation is requested on a purely voluntary basis, describe how you intend to inform
participants /spectators or others that they may participate in the event whether they make a
donation or not:
Page 5of10
131
Centerville
Special Event P
NAME AND TYPE OF EVENT: tf�) S CD (0 OU h/ I
DAY, DATE AND TIME: 4 1 \ a wl Z V vn
1. PA W AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
FINAA APPROVAL AND SIGN OFF
ature Title
Date:
Please check or use N/A (not applicable) where appropriate:
1. Final check has been made of application requirements.
2. Event is approved by City Council.
3. All required permits are issued and on file.
4. Refundable clean up fee has been paid.
5. Insurance Certificate is on file with City Clerk
6. Surety Bond is on file to secure payment for applicant's obligation to the
City.
7. Application is complete.
8. Special conditions are attached.
REVOCATION: Upon mutual consent, the City Council may revoke a special event permit if
the conditions set fourth in the permit application are not being followed.
Permit is hereby revoked:
Signature Title
Date:
Reason(s) for revocation:
TO BE REVIEWED /APPROVED AND SIGNED BY AFFECTED
CITY DEPARTMENT HEADS
Page 6 of 10
132
April 3, 2014
Dallas Larson, Centerville City Administrator
Jim Keinath, Circle Pines City Administrator
Jeff Karlson, Lino Lakes City Administrator
Gentleman,
Please accept this as my official letter of resignation from the Centennial Fire District. I have
accepted a position with the City of Andover and it was formally approved by their Council on
Tuesday night. In order to meet the requirements of the City of Lino Lakes policy for separation,
my last week will be the week of April 21 If I am not needed at the Fire Steering meeting on
the 24 I will likely take some time off before the end of the week and go someplace warm.
Words cannot express the enjoyment I have had working for the Centennial Fire District. The
complexities of a joint powers operation allowed me to learn so many aspects of leading teams
and operating a fire district. I will always be thankful for our relationship and the opportunities
you gave me and will carry the lessons I have learned here with me forever.
As a new chief in a complex system, your mentorship and guidance helped me make sound
decisions and direct the fire district to a new level. The collaboration amongst the steering
committee members assisted in raising organizational morale by providing a safer and more
family friendly environment for our volunteers.
Over the past five months however, the latest move by Lino Lakes to withdraw from the district
is providing an opposite affect and I am afraid it has had a negative impact on our personnel
and public safety overall. Though I understand all sides of the issue, I believe it could have
been resolved if more time were offered and the insults were left at the door. The withdrawal
will cost every city more money and will be a loss for everyone. My biggest fear is the decision
will reduce safety for the firefighters and lower service for all if not designed using national
standards and best practices. I encourage each of you to continue to support the firefighters
and their families as they are the foundation to everything needed to have an effective fire
department. Anyone can build a patch, but that does not build a fire department!
Thank yo a continued support and I wish you all the best with the challenges before you.
i er ,
L. eich
ervilhe 1880 Nam Street, Cetttef%114 MNSS038
` EStaffish &i 1857 6S1- 429- 3232or 'Fax 6S1- 429 -8629
April 1, 2014
Phil Belfiori, Administrator
Rice Creek Watershed District
4325 Pheasant Ridge DR. NE #611
Blaine, MN 55449 -4539
Re: FEMA -FIRM maps
Dear Mr. Belfiori:
As you know, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is revising its flood plain
mapping in Anoka County. During the data gathering phase, FEMA was supplied with the flood
plain study done by RCWD (Houston Engineering) for Clearwater Creek. The RCWD study was
more favorable to development than the earlier FEMA mapping. Several months ago, it was
evident that FEMA would not be able to use the RCWD mapping data, without additional work
being done. At the same time, I understood that RCWD would work with us to get FEMA what
they needed, but any costs to provide that date, would need to come from the City of Centerville
or the benefitting landowners.
In a memo from FEMA dated February 20, 2014, we received specific details outlining what
additional information would be needed. We then asked your consultant to review what FEMA
was asking for and provide an updated cost estimate. At that point Houston received signals that
they would not be working for RCWD and that they (Houston) would have to determine if they
wanted to do the work for Centerville. Houston declined to do the work, citing potential conflict
of interest.
We have always viewed RCWD as a partner working with the City toward mutual goals, and this
seems like something we should be able to accomplish cooperatively. We want our property
owners to be able to develop their land within the constraints of reasonable regulation. If the
FEMA flood plains are more burdensome than they need to be, we should be able to work
together to fix that.
The City Council of Centerville passed a resolution on March 12, 2014, requesting that the Board
of Managers of RCWD assist in securing the additional data requested by FEMA. We do not
expect RCWD to pay for any of the costs of the additional work I will attend the April 9, Board
meeting to discuss this matter. Thank you.
Yours truly,
VARAA -fmft ,aM.
Dallas Larson, Administrator
Enc.
RESOLUTION #14017
A RESOLUTION PETITIONING RCWD FOR ASSISTANCE WITH FLOOD
PLAIN STUDY
WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has undertaken a
study to update flood insurance rate maps (FIRMS) for Centerville as well as other parts
of Anoka County, and
WHEREAS, Rice Creek Watershed District completed a flood study in 2011 which
shows flood protection elevations along portions of Clearwater Creek should be as much
as four feet lower than the findings of FEMA, and
WHEREAS, the lowered regulatory elevations if accepted by FEMA could save
Centerville property owners and residents thousands of dollars in flood insurance
premiums as well as substantially lower development costs for unimproved properties
near Clearwater Creek, and
WHEREAS, FEMA has indicated that it may be able to use the RCWD study findings, if
certain additional work is completed and the data is submitted, and
WHEREAS, RCWD, apparently believing that it may be burdensome on staff to
participate with the city, has been reluctant to assist the city with securing the additional
work requested by FEMA, even though the most cost effective way of gathering the
required data would be to have RCWD consultant engineers do the additional work.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA,
1. The City hereby petitions the Board of Managers of Rice Creek Watershed
District to assist in securing the additional engineering work to sustain the
regulatory flood elevations of RCWD's previous study.
2. The City would enter into a written agreement to pay consultant fees to do the
additional flood plain study and would reimburse reasonable costs incurred by
RCWD for its assistance.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Centerville this 12th da o f March, 2014.
Tom Wilharber, Mayor
c. Attu;
Teresa Bender, City Clerk
lemo
To: File
From: Laura Chap Emall:
Phone: Date: Feb 20, 2014
Ref: cc:
Subject: Comments regarding potential appeal of flood hazard boundaries in the City of
Centerville and Lino Lakes
Background
New Zone A modeling and mapping was provided for the Clearwater Creek watershed in Anoka County. it
was partially incorporated into the preliminary DFIRMs, however the effective LOMR 95 -05 -339P for the City
of Centerville was not superseded with this new data as it includes detailed study and a floodway, and
detailed study may not be replaced with approximate analyses. The effective LOMR is based on TR -20 and
HEC -2 analyses, and was delineated on USGS topographic data.
The purpose of this review is to provide the City of Centerville with guidance on what information would need
to be submitted to upgrade the existing Zone A modeling within Anoka County to a detailed study.
For purposes of this review, Atkins used the exported XP -SWMM synthetic event models. Atkins ran these
in version 2011. Additionally, the time interval in the global rainfall data was corrected (it appears the 24
hour data is given in 0.1 hr increments, not 1 hour increments). While an overall review was performed for
the model, the focus of the review was on the areas within Anoka County_
Comments
1. The effective data is Zone AE and includes a floodway. The current Zone A model includes the 10-,
50-, and 100-yr storms. The revised modeling would need to include a 500 -year profile as well as a
floodway run_ Please see the following document regarding floodway modeling in SWMM:
httol/www.fema. media library-d ata/20130726- 1553- 204904M80/frm swmm pdf
2. Only the 100 -yr floodpiain delineation was provided. Please provide the 500 -yr delineation as well
as a mapped floodway.
3. The model was developed in lnfOSWMM, and the synthetic storms were exported to XPSWMM.
However, notes included with the model indicate that the XP -SWMM model results do not match the
InfoSWMM results. InfoSWMM is not on the FEMA approved models list In order for this model to
be the effective detailed model for the area, the model will need lo be exported to either EPASWMM
or XPSWMM and run in one of those models.
4. The report states that the 100 -yr maximum profile was created by choosing the maximum elevations
from the 24 -hour rainfall and the 10-day runoff event. Please provide the 10-day runoff model. Also,
please note that this method may cause difficulties with the floodway analysis, and it may be better
to break the model into segments so that only one event per segment is being used for the 100 -year
profile.
5. Please provide a map of the sub -basin delineation which includes the topographic data_ This can be
digital (provide the digital contours) or a pdf /paper map.
6. For flood insurance studies, FEMA requires that XP -SWMM models are calibrated to
actual events. The review memo included in the supplemental data indicates that
the model cannot be considered calibrated for flood events due to the lack of data,
and that Clearwater Creek cannot be compared to regression values as the
drainage areas are too urbanized. Please provide comparisons of modeled flows to
either regression equations with urban aclustments, or rational method calculations,
as appropriate.
oMM
Documentl
l emo
7. FEMA standards are that models use normal depth as the downstream boundary condition. The
backwater condition from the receiving waters is then drawn in the FIS profile as a level line on the
downstream end until it meets the modeled profile. Please use normal depth as the model boundary
conditions, if practical.
8., There are a number of warning messages that appear when the model is run in XP -SWMM. Many
of the conduit lengths are less than the default minimum conduit length parameter in the model.
9_ There are warning messages in the output file for storage nodes where the area decreases between
stages. These nodes are SJ3BR3 060, SJ3MT 046, SJ3MT SJ3MT SJ3MT 099,
SJ3P1 007 and SJ3P1 008_ Please review and revise if necessary.
10. Please specify which vertical datum (NGVD29 or NAVD88) was used for the model input data and
results.
11. Please note that the model will have to be checked for map-model agreement for water surface
elevations before incorporation into the final maps. The model documentation indicates that the XP-
SWMM results do not match the InfoSWMM elevations used to generate the floodplains. The final
model results (whether XP -SWMM or EPA -SWMM) must match the mapped floodplain elevations.
12. The current Zone A floodplain mapping does not extend all the way downstream to Peltier Lake. As
the differences in elevation between the Zone A modeling and the effective elevations appear to be
significant, the tie-in point may be Peltier Lake.
13. For purposes of the FIS, the modeled and mapped lengths along the profile baseline must agree
within 25 feet. Calculated link lengths from GIS were compared to the modeled link lengths, and the
following links had length discrepancies that could not be explained by the presence of storage
areas: CJ3MT 013, CJ3MT 014, CJ3MT 001, CJ3MT 029, CJ3P1 003 and CJ3MT 012.
(Typically, XP -§WMM storage areas along the profile baseline are shown in profile as areas of
constant water surface elevation; they are measured from the map as their length is not represented
in the model; these areas are added manually to the profile after the model results are exported.)
14. Please verify the link length of CJ3BEL 013, as the model data, GIS attributes, and calculated GIS
lengths all disagree.
15. There are areas of disconnected flooding: two near node SJ3P1 007, one near node J3P1 006,
one near node J3MT 017, three near SJ3P1 016, one near node SJ3MT 021, one near J3MT 012,
one near SJ3MT 013 and one near SJ3MT 036_ Please clarify whether these should be shown as
separate ponding areas with stillwater elevations, connected to the floodplain, shown as a separate
profile and connected with ditches/culverts that contain the 100 -yr flood, or deleted entirety.
16. There is a gap in the flooding along the link between J3MT 029 and J3MT 030 that does not appear
to be due to a culvert, please adjust the delineation.
17. Please submit the floodplain and floodway delineations on a topographic workmap with the vertical
datum used, signed by a professional engineer.
DIEM AM ero.�uw.
sincc,e.
Documentl
ev tery ffe
r / / 1880 Wai Street, Centerville, .WX55038
E- ;wbfish 'l! 185 651 -429 -3232 or Far, 651- 429 -8629
March 26, 2014
To: Park and Rec Committee
Re: Property at Mill Road —Lot 4, Block 2, Petersons Old Homestead Addition
Background. Last summer, the Council determined that several parcels of property were surplus
and that they should be sold. Those were listed with Gaughan Realty. The Council late in 2013,
passed a resolution directing that the proceeds of the sale of all of the parcels be directed toward
paying down the debt that financed 21" Avenue \Commerce Drive improvement.
Recently, the Park and Rec Committee asked the question of whether the proceeds from the sale
of the referenced lot, should go to benefit Park and Rec purposes. That suggestion is a valid
request, if the property was either dedicated in the subdivision for park use, or was gifted with
that restriction.
1. Was the lot dedicated on the plat for park use? The answer to that question is no. The
plat was recorded with no park identified. The lot in question has no restrictions
mentioned on the plat, other than the typical drainage and utility easements along the
boundaries.
2. Was the lot transferred to the city to meet park dedication requirements? That answer
also seems to be no. The minutes of the Council meeting of July 26, 1978, mention a $50
per lot "park fee" to be collected on all building permits in the plat. We cannot find
minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings for February and March 2008,
so any recommendations from that body are not available, but we would expect the
Council action to be the final word on the issue. Building permits subsequently issued,
show collection of $50 each for "park" fee. This amount is consistent with a plat
approved for 20 lots of Rehbein Estates in 1979, which also required $50 per lot park fee.
3. Was the property purchased by the city, or was it gifted; with the understanding that it
would be used for park purposes. The fact that the deed was given to the city
approximately one year after the plat was filed would indicate that the transfer likely had
nothing to do with subdividing the property into lots. The ownership was transferred by
Certificate of Title in the fall of 1979. The Title has no use restrictions, but does mention
the property is subject to drainage and utility easements. Also, I could not find any listing
in the minutes of a disbursement to Peterson indicating the property was paid for in the
normal sense.
I could only find two mentions of the lot in the Council minutes. On August 8, 1979, it
mentions the lot in conjunction with ditch work being done on Mill Road: "...cost would
be determined if fill dirt could be used off of Lot 4, Block 2, Peterson's Old Homestead
Addition. Mayor was to check with realtor concerning Lot 4." At the same time, a
paving project for this section of Mill Road was completed in 1979.
On August 22, 1979, the meeting minutes state: "Charlotte Peterson appeared before the
Council concerning the conveyance of Lot 4, Block 2, Peterson's Old Homestead
Addition to the City." "Letter stating same is attached to and made a part of these
minutes." A motion was then made to accept lot. Two letters were attached to the
minutes, but neither seem to have a bearing on this property. They refer to another
property transaction involving Petersons and a party named Wegleitners. There was also
a request from Petersons for a variance on other nearby property that they owned. It is
possible that the conveyance had something to do with those transactions, but the minutes
do not say.
Conclusion. The records are not completely clear on why or how the city came into ownership.
It seems certain that it had nothing to do with the platting or development of the subdivision, as a
park fee was collected with building permits during that time frame on this and other
subdivisions and approval of the plats mention the park fee.
Was the lot gifted to the city, or was it in exchange for some consideration relating to the street
improvement, the ditch project, the Wegleitner transaction or variances? We just cannot be
certain, the records are not clear. If the Petersons did gift it to the city, there should have been
mention of restrictions on its use mentioned in the minutes.
Where does that leave us? Over the years the property was shown on various maps as public and
later as "future park." So it is easy to see why Park and Rec Committee would conclude that it
should have any proceeds from the sale. Even though a past Council may have listed the property
on maps for a future anticipated use, there is no binding commitment if there are no deed or plat
restrictions requiring the property to be used in that manner. In my opinion, the decision to sell
the property and what to do with the proceeds is up to the Council of today.
Dallas Larson, Administrator
3/12/2014
Printable View
To print this document please press Print
t WON= to the Web site of
Anoka County
Property Account Summary
Trent General Information
Property ID 14- 31 -22 -43 -0013
Situs Address UNASSIGNED SITUS , CENTERVILLE, MN 55038 -0000
Property Description PETERSONS OLD HOMESTEAD ADDITION LOT 4 BLK 2 PETERSONS OLD HOMESTEAD ADD(SUBJ
TO EASE AS SHOWN ON PLAT)
Last Sale Price
Last Sale Date
Last Sale Document
Type
Linked Property Group
Position
Status Active
Abstract/Torrens 1A ll Torrens
Parties
Role Name
Owner ICENTERVILLE CITY OF
Document Recording Process Dates
Abstract Documents Have Been Recorded Through 03/07/2014
Abstract Documents Have Been Mailed Through 03/07/2014
Torrens Documents Have Been Recorded Through 03/07/2014
Torrens Documents Have Been Mailed Through 03/07/2014
A ctive Certificates Of Title
Type lCertificate Number Certificate Date
CRTST CERTIFICATE OF TITLE - STANDARD 147576 10/09/1979
Documents Recorded Within 30 Days Of "Recorded Through" Dates Above
Type JA bstract/Torrens lRecorded Number lRecorded Date
No Documents Found
IlProperty Characteristics
Lot Size W100* 165
* Lot Size: Approximate lot size in feet, clockwise beginning with the direction the lot faces
T ax District Information
School District Number and Name CENTENNIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT #12
City Name CENTERVILLE
Watershed RICE CREEK WATERSHED
Property Classification
Tax Year Classification
2014 5E- Exempt Properties
2013 5E- Exempt Properties
Property Values
Tax Year Description Amount
1/2
VOLUME No. 266 PAGE 47576
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
No. 47576
Transferred from Certificate Number(s): 47330
Originally registered on the 13th day of September, 1971, Volume 113 Page 320, DISTRICT COURT FILE No. T -1909
STATE OF MINNESOTA t S.S. REGISTRATION
COUNTY OF ANOKA f
This is to certify that t t
City of Centerville, a corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, whose address is 1694 Sorel Street, in the City of
Centerville and State of MN, 55038
is now the owner of an estate, in fee simple of and in the following described land, situated in the County of Anoka and State of Minnesota,
Lot 4, Block 2, PETERSON'S OLD HOMESTEAD ADDITION, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of
the Anoka County Registrar of Titles.
Subject to drainage and utility easements as shown on plat PETERSON'S OLD HOMESTEAD ADDITION filed as Doc. # 100772
on July 27, 1978.
THIS CERTIFICATE OF TITLE IS GIVEN TO REPLACE THE PAPER COPY OF THE SAME CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
NUMBER SHOWN IN VOLUME 151, PAGE 56 BY TED J. OMDAHL, THE ANOKA COUNTY REGISTRAR OF TITLES.
Subject to the encumbrances, hens and Interest —ted by the memorial underwritten or endorsed hereon, and subject to the following rights or encumbrances subsuhntg, as
provided to Section 508 23, Minnesota Statutes, nianely
I Liens, clauns or rights arising under the laws or the Consutuuon of the United States, which the statutes of this state cauu,t require to appear of record
2 Any real property tax or special assessment
3 Aim lease for a period not erceeding three years, when there u actual occupation of the premises under the lease
4 All rights m public highways upon the land
S Such right of appeal or right to appear and contest the apphcat— as u allowed by law
6 The rights of any person in possession under deedor contract for deedfrom the owner of the certificate of title
7 Any outstanding mechanics hen rights which may east under Section 514 01 to 51417
Certificate of Title Number 47576 page I of 1
MEMORIAL
OF ESTATES, EASEMENTS OR CHARGES ON THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE CERTIFICATE OF TITLE HERETO ATTACHED
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed
my name and affixed the seal of my office
this 9th day of October, 1979
Maureen J. Devine, Registrar of Titles,
In and for the County of Anoka
and State of Minnesota.
a — i N
f r from No. 47330 OrWm2k re isterad the 13th day of September 1971 Volume 113 page 320
�l'ATE �MiNNB510TA, S.S. �
CbumYoFAwoKA �- --
a una A+ +h lam of hp
o aau/, � G ��� , � � a � , �r�uua� r�vl �rr��nr �,, �. r, �. ai. �nd��ad� ,��°�%�
Lot 4, Block 2, PETERSON'S OID HOMESTEAD ADDITION, according to the plat thereof
on file and of record in the office of the Anoka County Registrar arab2
Subject to drainage and utility easements as shown on p].a +.F,ETi6cN,S OM
HOMESTEAD ADDITION filed as Doe. #100772 on Julj 27 ; 41 78.
° s�' suel►. WW. artll�s +a►t/tt[eai/Ate�eac�i
��x S/lJ:i�i, 7Jl*s� AraweaG� %°"�•° 9•
6, � ,lo,�y�.I1Ft- ,�.�wrGA�..GFr .�,.i%.r�alr+%E(y.Gf.R,vfyi4ta
e City of Cent is a corporation orp 8 and s XTS t y3
- - �h�1811B.�f.E12_St$ta_pf Rii �mRanl.a ha��i nv i {�� t• nevi �l �lanp of ,
* CenteTVille Minrfesota 550 Q
�R lB� beta le .�,�Iwoy��kg 111101 do&s-,g —
-�
By a parr
0P.f14TATE6, EAS$AfENTS OR C HARCE9 ONTTIE4'LVD DESCRIBED LVTHE L$RTT/°"TE 0P93'=BZWV ATTACHED.
DOCUMENT KIND pP F DATE OF MOISTMT$ON DATE Or UKTAUMDIT
NUMMA INFTRUKDM MOMTN DAY YEAR A.M. M. P.M. AMOUMT RUNNING fN FAVOR OF SIGNATURE OF REGISTRAR
MONTN DAY YEAR
Planning & Zoning Meeting
Tuesday, December 6, 1977
7:00 PM
Present,
Bob LaMotte, Chairman Bob Lindgren
Mel Dupre Jerry Sundberg
Tom Wilharber Walter Prachar, liaison
Clarence Smith of Amenity One, Inc., made presentation on
his company's qualifications as an urban and regional
planner, park planning projects, drawing up new zoning
regulations, and updating land use controls. Matter
will be turned over to City Council for advisement.
Ray Murray, Joe Perkowski and Frank Zimny appeared before
P & Z with reference to becoming eligible for participation
on the board in 1978.
John Peterson appeared before committee with preliminary
sketch of his plat centered around Mill Road and Main Street.
Plat covers approximately 28 acres. P & Z looked at land
for park dedication, possibly phasing of portions of plat
over the next few years and recommending that the double
bungalows shown on the plat be called multiple dwellings.
John will appear at next P & Z meeting on December 20th
for further consideration.
Bob LaMotte requested the P & Z to look at his property
on Heritage Street, which is 3 lots, centered by his house
which he would like a variance granted. Mel Dupre recommended
that a variance be granted on Ordinance #15, Section 6,
paragraph 10 on the following piece of property:
PLAT 27853- Parcel 2545 - Part of Lot 15, Auditor's Sub -
Division No. 48 Revised described as follows: That part
of Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision No 48 commencing at a
point where Northerly line of Lot 15 intersects westerly
line of right of way of Anoka County State Aid Road No 4;
thence westerly 6 yards along northerly line of said Lot
15 a distance of 350 feet; thence southerly and at right
angles to said northerly line of said Lot 15 a distance of
125 feet; thence easterly and parallel to northerly line
of Lot 15 a distance of 350 feet; more or less to westerly
line of Anoka County right of way of State Aid Road No. 4;
thence northerly along westerly line of said right of way
a distance of 125 feet to point of commencement. - except
west 8 feet of above description and part of lot 15
Auditor's Subdivision No 48 revised described as followai
that part of Lot 15 Auditor's Subdivision No 48 described
as follows; commencing at NE corner of said Lot 15;
thence southerly along east line of said Lot 15 225 feet;
thence west at right angles 200 feet to point of the land
to be conveyed; thence continuing west at right angles 142
feet to a point; thence North at right angles 130 feet to a
point; thence east at right angles 142 feet to a point;
thence south at right angles 1301 to the point of
beginning. +"M
. �. � � �
_:. �'?�
��� � ��
�. � �
-� � �
�.,, � ���
�' `\ � � �, �` i
�� � - � w
�. �,� '
��
�y
�� ,_
� , .��
�� �
.�
���.
��
4�
The City Council of the City of Centerville met on Wednesday,
March 8, 1978 in the City Hall. Mayor Prachar called the meeting
to order at 7100 pm. Present were: Burque, L'Allier, Murray,
Peterson and Attorney Hawkins.
Elmer Murray made a motion to accept minutes of meeting held
February 22, 1978, Fran Burque seconded it, motion carried.
Leon L'Allier made a motion to issue a license to D -C General
Builders for sewer construction work in the City of Centerville
during 1978, Fran Burque seconded it, motion carried. Elmer
Murray made a motion to adopt Resolution #7, Leon L'Allier
seconded it, motion carried. Resolution #7 is attached to and
made a part of these minutes.
Mayor Prachar advised council of a request from the Rice Creek
Watershed District asking for copies of our meeting minutes.
Council advised clerk to put them on mailing list.
Discussion was held on the 1978 fire contract with Lino Lakes.
Clerk from Lino has informed Centerville clerk of change in
square mile coverage from 20 to 15. Lino council was to discuss
contract at their council meeting on March 13 and advise Centerville
accordingly. Matter was tabled until the March 22 council meeting.
Complaint has been voiced on the condition of property at 6892
Centerville Road. Clerk was asked to inform Building Inspector
of situation and report back.
Elmer Murray made a motion to approve agreement with Barton -
Aschman, City Planners, John Peterson seconded it, motion carried.
Discussion was held on preliminary plat of LeRoux Addition.
Matter tabled until next meeting. Council requested the Attorney
and Bngineer to work on "old" Mound Trail legal description.
Clerk informed City Council Board of Review for the City would
be held on Wednesday, May 17 at 7 :00 pm in the City Hall.
Clerk read letter from Walt Williams on the Clearwater Creek
Report prepared by the Corp of Engineers. Council instructed
Mayor to draft letter to the Corp of Engineers advising them
that the City is not entirely pleased with their report.
Street restoration study was discussed. Council consensus was
to go along with Plan A and the Mayor was to call the Anoka
County Highway Department to find out what the County plans
to pick up on the cost of the 2 -block Centerville Road restoration.
Walt Williams was to come to March 22nd meeting with two plans:
Plan A - The County picking up half of the Centerville Road
2 -block restoration and city picking up other halfi
Plan A - Dropping Centerville Road restoration completely.
page two
City Council meeting
minutes - March 8, 1978
Planning and Zoning have recommended that the City give
approval to the preliminary plat of Old Homestead Addition
(John Peterson). Elmer Murray made a motion to approve
the preliminary plat of Old Homestead Addition pending
approval by the Rice Creek Watershed, Fran Burque seconded
it, motion carried.
Consensus of council that the tennis court committee could
make decision on colors for tennis court surface.
John Peterson made a motion to pay bills from General Fund
checks #3303 -3330, Leon L'Allier seconded it, motion carried.
Copy of invoices to be paid is attached to and made a part
of these minutes.
John Peterson made a motion to pay bills from Sanitary Sewer
Fund, checks #2156 -2159, Leon L'Allier seconded it, motion
carried. Copy of invoices to be paid is attached to and made
a part of these minutes.
Leon L'Allier made a motion to adjourn meeting, Elmer Murray
seconded it, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10:20 pm.
Res tful y submitted,
Lu Pr char, Clerk- Treasurer
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council of the
City of Centerville held a public hearing on July 26, 1978 at
7 :30 pm in the City Hall. Present were: Burque, Laska, Murray -
late L'Allier. Purpose of hearing was to discuss the street
restoration project. Clerk advised council that the city has not
received word from HUD on their pre - application and Fran Burque
made motion to continue hearing on the above Wednesday, August
9, 1978 at 7 :30 pm, Leon L'Allier seconded it, motion carried.
Mayor Prachar called the regular meeting to order at 8 :00 pm.
Presents Burque, L'Allier, Laska and Murray. Fran Burque made
a motion to accept minutes of meetings held July 12 and July 21,
Floyd Laska seconded it, motion carried.
PETITIONS AND COMPLAINTS: Items were discussed which have to be
completed before C. W. Houle Landscaping receives final payment
on the sewer project. They are: (1 The combination storm
sewer and sanitary sewer on Centerville Road should be corrected;
(2) The dead sod in Mrs. Carpenter's yard should be replaced;
(3) Correct the infiltration on Mound Trail; (4) Make the
necessary corrections on LaBossiere's driveway; (5) Sod the
disturbed area by Romie's service; (6) Make the nessary cor-
rections on Leon L'Allier's driveway. Leon L'Allier made a motion
to pay contractor the remaining $11,656.78 when above items are
taken care of, Floyd Laska seconded it, motion carried.
Discussion was held on extending sewer service to existing homes
of James Palmer and John Lundblad situated in the Center Oaks
project. The two parties do not wish sewer service at this time.
Mr. Arthur Raudio of First Guaranty was in attendance advising
council he has not received easements from the two parties which
are required for proper drainage in front of their homes. Floyd
Laska made a motion to extend time limit until August 2nd for
Palmer and Lundblad to resolve the drainage easement problem and
if not done at that time, council grants permission to First
Guaranty to provide drainage on the back lot lines of Palmer and
Lundblad homes along Lots 7 - 19, Block 2 of Center Oaks #1,
Elmer Murray seconded it, motion carried.
Discussion was held on amending Development Contract between City
and First Guaranty. Elmer Murray made a motion to extend time
limit on all requirements of contract until October 1, 1978 with
the exception of blacktopping streets which is extended until
July 1, 1979 or at which time the City Engineer recommends it be
done., Floyd Laska seconded it, motion carried. No building per-
mits will be issued until rough grading is done, a Certificate of
Occupancy will not be issued until streets are completed or partial
street base is ready for blacktopping and there will be no con-
nection to sewer line until line is approved by City Engineer.
Final plat of Peterson's Old Homestead Addition was presented to
council. Leon L'Allier made a motion to approve Peterson's Old
Homestead Addition, Fran. Burque seconded it, motion carried. A
$50. park fee will be required on all building permits issued on
this plat.
r
City Council. meeting
minutes - July 26, 1978
page two
Registered Land Survey # 65'was presented to council which is
a part of Registered Land #47 and named Peltier Lake
Hills. Floyd Laska made a motion to approve R.L.S. #,S and
authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign on behalf of the City,
Fran Burque seconded it, motion carried.
Attorney Hawkins advised council Mr. & Mrs. Harold Leibel's
attorney has written him that it is the Leibels" opinion
that the City of Centerville has made a wrongful taking of
their real estate by the lift station being placed on their
property without condemnation and also that there have been
other encroachments on their property without the proper pro-
ceedings. Attorney Hawkins advised council of his answer
after consulting with City Engineer.
Elmer Murray made a motion to appoint Mrs. Val Carpenter to
the Community Education Advisory Council, Floyd Laska seconded
it, motion carried.
Fran Burque made a motion to adjourn meeting, Leon seconded it,
motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10,15 pm.
Res a fu y ubmitted,
Lu Pr ch r, Clerk
i
`'BUILMNG 'PERMIT . ,
VIIJ AM OF ' CEIVTEItVILM 111M. �
Z-L -* •�'
- -- - - - - --
B
Adftm 7 + � � Address - - - -- — s r : - , - - - -- -- -- - -- -- -
Zoe motion Number '
LEGAL DBSC�TION 4
ftft of 14
Adoo
nsSC; oi�t o�
Foam W= e
-- ' A go -
Type
Valnstian a-
(coeetrad or MarW Value) a srgest Mrbootal Craw $ecdoq)
VAItAN=
Deaa'Ip = of Ordnance Varim*x) it granted wttL thb permit•
pwft San. Swror I water I Stoem Sewer _ suet
> lase' Sm+ehatBs s
r 1 n UG Z5
pimdolm In beeeby seafeted
a butldfng as bo do doeo *o& Tbb permit is Seaabed upod w e:j = coed tim that Se peesoq peke a c*k% .lhm a ooepoea= .
tbia t0 wbodn it b gesntbd etbw with his q pnK employees. workmm and obwaftacbm apse to Wde by and ooafaeai to all
OWInanees d the •'Viilelp'•at Centerville rag e+diap the 000steucdoo. atteratION maintnsni e repair lend dWWdm of %43d s
witbbn the Ctty; =d that,b permit may be re mkW at any time upon - wNwoe of violadons of mw of IM pco, of ■ N
rergd by 04 ; pm* v tbm eta (ft "s tl�. �eeaof aid �o
• r l.' '1�:'ryy IS' �_,{� A 1. l•' 1.
p!I) dqa eiM1 b flee its tloei of tills peemtt ae pravUsd b7 Oedbana. ' :
� I:? =`• ��:t�v� "•'." :�; ?7:',•�:`�i''vl;, 4 -' , "iiti }, s2 ki`+ : ;Yi:Y`.t:•i� y -
'BUILDING PERMIT
Vn"GE OF CEIVIE tvnjLIEI NOM
DaW, - vwma 10_
d&vn
Local= OF PROFOM -BUX[mm
LEG"
PIA of I& La MO&
OF PROPOSED WOU
J
Type of -NO. Of stmies:__
s 44. 4 Am-
vahattim
(Comiam or (Laisw H=i=uw Cross seqdm)
mAfiAW=
D esoriptlon
of 0rdhkffiWeVa&nce(s) If VanW with is ig ALL
TOW
i Pzww pus
Fin sure - Tot*
to
ftmkdm Is haft granted r
a bubft as bwdn dose gm& Tift -penta Wlgrgn%d up= ft man M &tLm that the person, p arto I p, &M or 0011vom-
tim to wham it is grated. UW&w with Ws agents, employees, workmen and wbombuam a" to abide by =d C mfoem to au
0MJavmm6ftb*' Village otC9ntwvMe r 1 9 1239 ft mm-w akmtk)z6 m - 1p4 repair add dmivm)H ion (*bund1hW
Oxdhmnwfthb ft C1W god - dW tthis ft pwm may be revalued at my time upon "Wem of vwxdm of mw at tdp pwbmm at am
r
m
The covered by this pwn* wft1ft silly d" of 09 dde bftW and to dGmip
suspen lob or abmdmm" d smh week ftr ps": 4f. jjW'
all M&'wq& by.'" 7. -1
twes�r (ate MR pqvfM by 0!
sa
I ?x
'BUILDING PERMIT
VHJA4M OF-CMnMVU1X, MM.
AR
Imts: lo7 --morwt NO
0 .
Address IC C" 0
LOUTM W PROPOM XMMM
?AM*W
7 - ,-i 0 0
LEGAL
Pad of Lot Lot Block %dden at sob*v.
Dwoulwirsm OF PROPOSED WORK . . . . . .
Demn"M 7101e,-1�4
Z4
Type of C onstrmitloi_ —NO. Of storie•
V I
(Comb*& or Market Value) (Largest HO&Onfal CM0.
VARIANM
Dommiptim of Ordhm= Varhme(s) if granted with We mmit:
A (Doe wo 2ma pwa"
Parks && sewer ,. water mom-sow Street Olow TOW
]Fee per &&sup
/ l am--
Lz 7 0,
Permisdan is ,� Sra�ed tQ�'":..:....�'. -�_� ����.,� .._.�.�.�'��" • •
a bullcift as "Wdo &ouft& M& permit is Scanted upon rim wpm condition that t pares Mina or
.
tici to whom It i S . toget M* k" ammft emob"M workmen and sabomtractma asm to OW-W mdL 0006w to all
'041oances of lbe'Vglqo of Centerville regarding the motruction, alteratim nftWunm repair and d..Wm ot • bdWWp
witMa the Mr. and that Ibis permit may be rw*ed at any time upon whence of vkkdm of SEW of the pov isioos of Add
Ordiftnow
7bb M ored by this permit within qty,(" dip of b*4@WhwW. - - - - - - 2.&-
r
or 41 a
"noty ( �ftw two is im - 860m" iiromadom at oft.pormsit as p 1►
v M.T.
ANN.
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council
of the City of Centerville held a special meeting on
Monday, July 16th in City Hall. Mayor Prachar called the
meeting to order at 7930 pm. Present were Burque, L'Allier,
Laska; absent, Savela.
Discussion on the park fee arrangement for Rehbein Estates
plat was held. Consensus was for the 10 acre, 20 lot plat
the park fee would be $50. a lot totaling $1,000. payable
before the plat is signed by the mayor and clerk. Clerk
will advise Gerald Rehbein of same.
Gunnar Pederson of the Metropolitan Inspection Service
appeared before the council for being hired as the city's
building inspector /official. Mr. Pederson advised council
of his location and how his operation works as per telephone
calls for inspection, he would collect 80% of the building
permit fee, one -half of the building permit fee would be
collected as a plan inspection fee. His associate is
Edward Lebus. Floyd Laska made a motion to hire Gunnar
Pederson dba Metropolitan Inspection Service as our city's
building official for the balance of 1979, Leon L'Allier
seconded it, motion carried.
Mr. Pederson would take over as per the July permits and
Mr. Mobley would be responsible for the January to June
permits already issued.
Meeting adjourned at 8940 pm.
Re ct ully sub itted,
u Pr char, Clerk
i
I
I
I
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council of the
City of Centerville held their regular meeting on Wednesday,
August 8, 1979 in the City Hall. Mayor Prachar called the
meeting to order at 8:00 pm. Present were: L'Allier, Laska,
Savela, Assistant Attorney Burke and Engineer Williams. Absent:
Burque.
Floyd Laska made a motion to accept the minutes of the July 25
meeting, Gary Savela seconded it, motion carried.
PETITIONS AND COMPLAINTS: Discussion held on the culvert and
other debris laying on the Peltier Lake Hills Addition property.
Kids are playing in culvert and could get hurt. Development
contract with Husnick /Granger was discussed. According to
contract, all improvements were to be completed by July 1, 1979•
Assistant Attorney Burke was directed to write Husnick and request
his attendance at next meeting to extend the development contract
to a later date and that there will be no additional building
permits issued until the contract is taken care of.
Mr. Krieger of Oak Hill Sand & Gravel was in attendance and
discussion held on the ditch work to be done on Mill Road. If
weather holds, Kreiger estimated the work to be done at an
hourly rate of approximately $40. and would take 8 -16 hours,
cost would be determined if fill dirt could be used off of Lot 4,
Block 2, Peterson's Old Homestead Addition. Mayor was to check
with realtor concerning Lot 4. Also discussion on the concrete
slab work to be done on two manholes on Mill Road at a cost of
approximately $1,000.
Council viewed the Brian Drive change order work to be done
before meeting and Leon L'Allier made a motion to extend the
tee on Brian Drive about 75' to make it more feasible, cost
approximately $1,000., Floyd Laska seconded it, motion carried.
Discussion held on amendment to Ordinance #10 relating to ditches
on city streets. Leon L'Allier made a motion to adopt amendment
to Ordinance #10, Floyd Laska seconded it, motion carried. Copy
of amendment to Ordinance #10 is attached to and made a part of
these minutes.
Mary Jane Johnson realtor, representing Russel Ritter appeared
before council for discussion of problem between Ritter and
Mr. and Mrs. Harold Leibel.
Preliminary plat of Clearwater Creek Estates was presented to
council. It had previously been presented to P & Z with no
additions or corrections. Park fee was discussed and developer
wishes to pay 10% of subdivision land value which in this case
is $4,000. or $160. per lot. Floyd Laska made a motion to
approve preliminary plat of Clearwater Creek Estates, contingent
on Rice Creek Watershed approval, Leon L'Allier seconded it,
motion carried.
page two - City Council
meeting minutes - August
8, 1979
Charlotte Peterson had appeared before P & Z on August 7
with request for variance on lots she owns in Centerville.
One variance involved Lot 13, Block 1, Peterson's Addition
to Centerville and Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Peterson's Addition
to Centerville. The lots are 50 x 150 and by addition of
more land to each parcel, they would be more feasible for
selling of property. Floyd Laska made a motion to grant
variance to Ordinance #15, Section 6, paragraph 10 on the
following described property, legal description now reading
Lot 13, Block 1, Peterson's Addition to Centerville and now
reading: That part of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast
quarter, Section 23, Township 31, Range 22, south of Peterson's
Addition to Cenerville and North of the centerline of Clear-
water Creek and west of the west line, if extended, of Lot
13, Block 1, Peterson's Addition to Centerville excepting
an easement for ingress and egress, in, over and upon, that
part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
(SE! of NE4) of Section 23, Township 31, Range 22, described
as follows: Beginning at the SE corner of Lot 1, Block �,
Peterson's Addition to Centerville thence South along the
southerly extension of the East line of said Lot 1, to its
intersection with the centerline of Clearwater Creek; thence
east along said centerline of Clearwater Creek to its inter-
section with the extension southerly of the west line of Lot
13, Block 1, Peterson's Addition to Centerville; thence North
along the southerly extension of said West line to the SW
corner of said Lot 13; thence west to the point of beginning
and there terminating., Gary Savela seconded it, motion carried.
Leon L'Allier made a motion to grant variance to Ordinance
$15, Section 6, paragraph 10 on the following described
property, legal description now reading Lots 1 and 2, Block
2, Peterson's Addition to Centerville and now reading:
Lot 1 and 2 of Block 2, Peterson's Addition to Centerville,
Minnesota, and that part of Lot 10, Auditor's Subdivision #48
revised Anoka County, Minnesota lying north and east of the
centerline of Clearwater Creek, also known as County Ditch #47,
and an easement for ingress and egress, in, over and u on that
part of the so theast quarter of the Northeast quarter ( of
NEJ) of Section 23, Township 31, Range 22, described as follows:
Beginning at the SE corner of Lot 1, Block 2, Peterson's Add-
ition to Centerville thence south along the southerly extension
of the east line of said Lot 1, to its intersection with the
centerline of Clearwater Creek; thence east along said center-
line of Clearwater Creek to its intersection with the extension
southerly of the west line of Lot 13, Block 1, Peterson's Addi-
tion to Centerville; thence north along the southerly extension'
of said west line to the SW corner of said Lot 13; thence west
to the point of beginning and there terminating., Floyd Laska
seconded it, motion carried.
page three - City Council
meeting minutes - August
8, 1979
Discussion was held on the City putting out bids for the
planting of trees in connection with the shade tree program.
Clerk was instructed to call three nurseries and request
bid on the 50 trees planted and unplanted.
Discussion held on the sample ordinance dealing with stock-
piling and storage of elm logs. Tabled until further meeting.
Budget meeting is set for Monday, September 17 at City Hall.
Clerk read items of concern from the Fire department.
Gary Savela made a motion to pay bill as per attached
sheet, Leon L'Allier seconded it, motion carried.
Floyd Laska made a motion to adjourn meeting, Leon L'Allier
seconded it, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 11:15 pm.
R, e ully submi ted,
I
Lu achar, Clerk
I
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council of
Centerville met on Wednesday, August 22, 1979 for their regular
meeting in the Centerville City Hall. Mayor Prachar called the
meeting to order at 8:00 pm. Present were: Burque, L'Allier,
Laska and Savela.
Leon L'Allier made a motion to accept the minutes of the August
8th meeting, Gary Savela seconded it, motion carried.
Mrs. Charlotte Peterson appeared before council concerning
the conveyance of Lot 4, Block 2, Peterson's Old Homestead
Addition to the City. Letter stating same is attached to
and made a part of these minutes. Fran Burque made a motion
for the city to accept Lot 4, Block 2, Peterson's Old Homestead
Addition, Floyd Laska seconded it, motion carried.
Fran Burque made a motion to accept letters from Mrs. Peterson
concerning her contract with Eugene Wegleitner which are made
a part of these minutes and also on file with the city clerk,
Floyd Laska seconded it, motion carried.
Arthur Raudio appeared before council for discussion on
Center Oaks #2. Mr. Raudio will be requesting an extension
on the final plat presentation of Center Oaks #2 and will be
taken up at the September 12th meeting.
Council discovered an error in letter to James Husnick from
our city attorney. Clerk will advise Mr. Husnick to appear
at the September 12th meeting for discussion on his development
contract for Peltier Lake Hills Addition.
Disucssion held on area at end of Sorel Street to use for
communter parking for the people riding the bus to St. Paul.
The council and engineer went over the assessment roll for
the street restoration project. Senior citizen deferrments
on the project were discussed. Leon L'Allier made a motion
to include the assessment for street improvements in our
senior citizen deferrment policy, Fran Burque seconded it,
motion carried.
Discussion held on the excavating and grading permits which
are to be issued under Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code.
Floyd Laska made a motion to adopt Resolution Declaring Cost
to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessment,
Leon L'Allier seconded it, motion carried. Copy of Resolution
is attached to and made a part of these minutes.
Gary Savela made a motion to adopt Resolution for Hearing on
Proposed Assessment, Fran Burque seconded it, motion carried.
Copy of Resolution is attached to and made a part of these
minutes.
Fran Burque made a motion to adjourn, Leon L'Allier seconded
it, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10 :55 pm.
Res ctf ly submi ted,
Lu Prac ar, Clerk
r
August 7, 1979 - PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING
PRESENT: Frank Zimny, Chairman ABSENT: Bob Lindgren
Tom Wilharber Joe Perkowski
Robert LaMotte
Mel Dupre
Jerry Sundberg
Ray Murray
Walt Prachar, liaison
Frank Zimny called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
Chairman read_ the public hearing notice for preliminary plat
presentation of Clearwater Creek Estates. This consists of
25 lots, 13.66 acres description as follows:
That part of the west 56 rods of the NW quarter of the NE
quarter of Section 23, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County,
Minnesota, lying southerly of the south line of Block 3 and
its easterly and westerly extensions, PETERSON'S OLD HOME-
STEAD ADDITION, excepting the South 250' of the West 433'
of the Ni of the NE-1 of Section 23, Township 31, Range 22,
Anoka County, Minnesota.
Discussion was held on the plat. Ray Murray made a motion
to accept the preliminary plat of CLEARWATER CREEK ESTATES
pending approval of Rice Creek Watershed, Mel Dupre seconded
it, motion carried.
Charlotte Peterson appeared before P & Z with request for
variance on lots she owns in Centerville. One variance
involved Lot 13, Block 1, Peterson's Addition to Centerville
and Lots land 2, Block 2, Peterson's Addition to Centerville.
The lots are 50 x 150 and by addition of more land to each
parcel, they would be more feasible for selling of property.
Bob LaMotte made a motion to grant variance to Ordinance #15,
Section 6, paragraph 10 on above lots, Jerry Sundberg
seconded it, motion carried.
I
Park Committee members Floyd Kruger and Leon L'Allier
appeared before P & Z with recommendations from the Park
Committee on property they are interested in acquiring
for park land.
The Park Committee members will be in attendance at next
P & Z meeting when Mr. Short will be here to discuss park
land acquirement. The meeting is set for September 4 at
7:00 pm.
Ray Murray made a motion to adjourn, Jerry Sundberg seconded
it, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 9s25 pm.
Resp tfully submitted,
Lu Prac ar, Clerk
6
CIT OF CENTERVILLE
1694 Sorel Street, Centerville, Minnesota 55038 429 -3232
August 13, 1979
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
RE: Contract between Charlotte
Peterson and Eugene T.
Wegleitner
The contract between the two above named parties on
PLAT 27823 - PARCEL 0760, conditions of which state
that there shall be no change in the topography of
said parcel. This is to instruct the City of Center-
ville that Charlotte Peterson shall be notified at
any time that Mr. Wegleitner applies for a permit to f
do any grading, excavating, etc., that would change
the topography of said parcel.
1
i
I
7
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
1694 Sorel Street, Centerville, Minnesota 55038 429 -3232
August 13, 1979
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
RE: Contract between Charlotte
Peterson and Eugene T.
Wegleitner
The contract between the two above named parties on
PLAT 27814 - PARCEL 8700, conditions of which state
that there shall be no change in the topography of
said parcel. This is to instruct the City of Center-
ville that Charlotte Peterson shall be notified at
any time that Mr. Wegleitner applies for a permit to
do any grading, excavating, etc., that would change
the topography of said parcel. 9
I
I
i
PLANNING & ZONING MEETING - TUESDAY, SEPTCMBER 4, 1979
PRESENT: Frank Zimny, Chairman Bob LaMotte
Bob Lindgren Jerry Sundberg
Ray Murray Tom Wilharber
Walt Prachar,liaison Bill Short, City Planner
Floyd Kruger, Park Comm. representative
ABSENT: Mel Dupre Joe Perkowski
Mr. Short reviewed the Clearwater Creek Estates plat. Several
items were mentioned:
1. Did not agree with location of the four lots on Main Street
2. Coordinate streets with Rehbein Estates
3. Soil problems within plat
4. No park land dedication within plat
5. Rezoning all except "exception" to residential
Park plan for Centerville was discussed, small parks for children,
large park for being considered City Park. Possibilities for
park area at the end of Heritage Street and also sharing school
property on a joint basis. Park Committee's recommendation was
to look into the Heritage Street property for possible park site.
P & Z consensus was to look into both sites. P & Z went over
the Prkland Dedication Summary presented by Mr. Short.
Mr. Short presented review on the land use chapter of the city
plan. After much discussion on various land uses, the subject
of duplexes, tri -plea, etc., was discussed. Ray Murray made
a motion for the City Council to consider for purposes of
discussion, their enforcement in cases of duplexes being restricted
to lot size of 22,500 square feet or our equivalent of a lot and
one -half, Jerry Sunderberg seconded it, motion carried. P & Z
also recommended having a moratorium on the building of multiple
dwellings of 3 or more family units for one year.
I
Flood Plain ordinance was discussed. Jerry Sundberg made a
motion to go along with the HUD minimum level requirement,
Bob LaMotte seconded it, motion carried.
P & Z will hold special meeting on Tuesday, September 18 at
7:00 pm at City Hall. Mr. Short will be in attendance at the
October 2nd P & Z meeting.
Jerry Sundberg made a motion to adjourn, Robert Lindgren
seconded it, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10:25 pm.
; Re,5 p ctfully submitted,
u char
0
CD
CD
O
ADOPTED _ 611 212 01 3
GOAL STEP Council Star Consultant Other Time Frame
1 Commercial/Industrial Development.
Endeavor to make contact annually with major commercial
and industrial businesses to determine plans for expansion
A and relocation XX XX Aug -Sept. 2013
Maintain and update a listing of available commercial and
industrial building sites. Where appropriate, facilitate listing
available sites on MNPro and MetroMSP development
B websites. XX July 1, 2013
Participate with Anoka County cities in business and
C industrial development meetings. XX
Respond quickly to inquiries of commercial or industrial
D prospects. XX
Consider use of any available resource such as securing
outside grants and tax increment financing (TIF) and tax
abatement to induce new commercial and industrial
E development. XX
2 Sale of surplus city property.
A Secure council action to designate available sites. XX May 31, 2013
B Secure an appraisal of available parcels when appropriate. XX June 30, 2013
Select a realtor to market the properties that are deemed
C available for sale. XX August 1, 2013
ADOPTED _ 611 212 01 3
GOAL STEP Council Statr Consultant Other Time Frame
3 Collabora with neighboring communities.
Continue monthly meetings with neighboring cities to build
A relationships conducive to collaboration. XX
Continue semi - annual meetings of council representatives to
coordinate collaboration efforts and provide liaison with full
B city council of each city. XX August 31 2013
Continue working with neighboring cities to study the
C feasibility of a joint water and/or sewer utility. XX XX
Consider any proposal for collaboration which could improve
D efficiency or save costs. XX XX