The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2006 04-10 CC PACKETCITY OF GEM LAKE MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARING NO. C2006-01 10 April 2006 Gem Lake Public Hearing No. C2006-01 was convened at 7:04 PM on Monday, 10 April 2006 in the first floor meeting room of Tousley Ford. Mayor Emeott, Councilors Watson, Bosak, Schilling and Rasmussen, Clerk Magnuson anti Prniect 1=nvineer Mitchell were present_ Also present were the following residents: Molly McPhillips Ben McPhillips Carol Schacht Mary Janssen 3619 Big Fox Road 3619 Big Fox Road 1201 Little Fox Lane 1161 Little Fox Lane Cheryl Kirchoff Ken Kirchoff Jim Kohler Rollie Birkebak 3744 Big Fox Road 3744 Big Fox Road 3673 Big Fox Road 3775 Big Fox Road Tim Heil Sherren Heil Kimberly Anderson-Uzpen Robert Uzpen 3800 Big Fox Road 3800 Big Fox Road 3646 Big Fox Road 3646 Big Fox Road Kelly Jonas Duane Berkas Diane Sweet Mark Sweet 3647 Big Fox Road 3674 Big Fox Road 3756 Big Fox Road 3756 Big Fox Road Dawn Segennark Craig Rafferty 3635 Big Fox Road 3750 Big Fox Road Motion by Bosak, Second by Watson to approve the agenda for the public hearing was unanimously approved. Clerk Magnuson reported that the public hearing was properly noticed with Public Notice No. 2006-09a published in the White Bear Press on 29 March 2006 and Public Notice No. 2006-09d mailed on 28 March 2006 to all fee title owners of real property on Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane based upon records of Ramsey County Property Records and Revenue. Mayor Emeott made opening remarks, stating that the process of securing a feasability study for the reconstruction of city streets began 2003, was ordered in April, 2005, upgraded in July 2005 to include city water and sewer, and ^� reviewed in March, 2006. The final feasability study for the work is to be presented here this evening. Emeott noted the inclusion of city water and sewer in he feasability study was consistent with best management practices and the time line established in the Gem Lake Comprehensive Municipal Plan of 1997. Emeott indicated that the City is also having a feasability study completed for development of a City Water Plan which at some time in the near future could put city water in proximity to the Big Fox/Little Fox neighborhood. The primary purpose of this hearing is to receive the Project Engineer's Feasability Study and receive public comment from those affected by the proposed improvements. Engineer Mitchell then presented the Feasability Study and the Summary, copies of which are attached hereto. Following Mitchell's presentation, Motion by Schilling, Second by Bosak to accept the Feasability Report for Public Improvement Project No. 2006-01 was unanimously approved. Clerk Magnuson then read into the record written comments received from Don Hewitt of 3614 Big Fox Road and Thomas Hansen of 1231 Little Fox Lane, copies of which are attached hereto. Mayor Emeott then opened the floor for public comment as follows: CAROL SCHACHT Why 3 '/2" asphalt? Mitchell responds to provide for 1 ''/2" overlay in future - additional $80m for 2". Discussion of financing. Magnuson- 5% to 6% interest (guess) and up to 20 years. Opposed to installation of speed bumps. DIANE SWEET Would water be installed to property lines? Magnuson -Yes. MARK SWEET Do costs shown include drain tiles and replacement of subsurface soils as needed or planned. Mitchell responds per plans. Are there estimates of pipe installation costs for the future? Mitchell -No. They have terrible well water and spend a substantial amount to treat same. - 1 - 10 April 2006 Public Hearing No. C2006-01 KIMBERLY ANDERSON UZPEN ` Her property is clay on north half and sand on south half. Is degradation of road more likely with sand or clay and do you do different things for each soil type? Mitchell - clay contributes more to degradation as sand filters water away and remains stable. Mitchell -plans detail handling sand vs. clay. Will run off be directed to the pond on her property? Mitchell -No. Requested a straw poll on water and sewer. SHERREN HEIL Is there an estimate of when mandated sewer and water might be implemented by a body other than Gem Lake? Emeott-No. KEN KIRCHOFF Is extremely fond of Gem Lake's rural character and believes that installation of sewer and water might provide a platform for future owners to intensify land use damaging character of Gem Lake and therefore opposes sewer and water installation at this time. Can we install speed bumps? Magnuson -yes, although they raise problems with snow plowing. ROLLIE BIRKEBAK Can we legislate no sewer and water in this area? Magnuson -probably not. Discussion of regrinding and recycling roadway materials with Mitchell. ROBERT UZPEN Their water is excellent and sees no benefit to them, especially considering the additional costs of piping sewer and water across their large lot adding substantially to the overall costs. TIM HEIL Do we invite mandates to complete if we lay pipes now? No answer. CRAIG RAFFERTY Favors minimum work now until all plans are complete. Comments by the City Council were as follows: HUTCH SCHILLING Following discussion on mandated sewer and water by the Metropolitan Council, Mr. Schilling noted he was aware of a western suburb near Lake Minnetonka whose mandated costs were14 times what they might have been with a plan. CHUCK WATSON Timing and inconvenience to residents? Mitchell-3/4 weeks. How do we control costs of we find more subsurface problems -adequately provided for in feasability study. TOM RASMUSSEN Pleased to hear residents supporting rural atmosphere in our community. PAUL EMEOTT Postponing pipe installation could damage mature plantings in the neighborhood although directional boring could be employed at additional costs. Mayor Emeott then conducted a straw poll of the 13 properties represented: 1) Those in favor of city sewer proposal 00 Aye, 13 Nay, 00 Abstain 2) Those in favor of city water proposal 01 Aye, 12 Nay, 00 Abstain 3) Those in favor of patch and overlay proposal 11 Aye, 01 Nay, 01 Abstain 4) Those in favor of complete reconstruction proposal 01 Aye, 11 Nay, 01 Abstain Clerk Magnuson then indicated that since Big Fox and Little Fox were only a portion of the proposed project with the portion devoted to Haven Lane and Tessier Road to be discussed Wednesday, 12 April 2006, it would be appropriate for the City Council to delay action to it's regular meeting on Monday, 17 April 2006. Mayor Emeott agreed and ordered the matter held over for action to Monday, 17 April 2006. -2- 10 April 2006 Public Hearing No. C2006-01 Mayor Emeott then thanked all for coming and participating and declared the Public Hearing adjourned at 8:45 PM. AUTHORED: 11 April 2006 APPROVED: 17 April 2006 ATTEST: Frederic C. Ma u City Clerk ATTEST: Paul R. Emeott Mayor efile: Minutes\Hearings\2006\Counci3PubHrg2006-Ol.wpd -3- Summary Sheet City of Gem Lake 2006 Street Improvement Project April 10, 2006 Big Fox Road & Little Fox Lane Gem Lake City Council authorized the preparation of a Feasibility Report to review existing conditions and possible improvements in the residential areas adjacent to Big Fox Road, Little Fox Lane, Haven Lane, and Tessier Road. The summary below is specific to Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane. Details of this information can be found in the Feasibility Report prepared for the City. Existing Conditions • No public sanitary sewer or water services • No reports of failing wells or septic systems • 24' wide bituminous streets that are severely deteriorated in areas with large block cracking in much of the other areas Estimated Costs • Sanitary Sewer - $159,200 • Water Main - $227,400 • Street o Full Reconstruction - $344,500 o Patch and overlay - $106,000 • Not recommended if utilities are installed Improvements Considered • Sanitary Sewer Main • Water Main • Street Improvements o Complete Reconstruction with no curb and gutter, or, o Selective Patching with 2" overlay Estimated Assessments • Sanitary Sewer - $8,400 per home • Water Main - $ 12,000 per home • Street o Full Reconstruction - $18,100 per home o Patch and overlay - $5,580 per home - Assessments based on 100% of project costs being assessed to property owners Conclusions The City should evaluate the timeframe of future sanitary sewer and water service to this area prior to finalizing a plan to reconstruct the street • If utilities are expected in the immediate future, less than 5-7 years, installing utilities with a full reconstruction of the street is feasible. • If utilities are expected in less than 15 years, a patch and overlay project appears to be the most feasible option with a total reconstruct of the streets at the time that utilities are installed. • If utilities are not expected for at least 20-30 years, complete reconstruction of the streets at this time with no utilities is the most feasible. 2006 Street Improvements A-GEMLK0503.00 Gem Lake, Minnesota Page 1 1 t Telephone: ( 651) 426 - 6443 Mobile: ( 612) 812 — 6139 AOA19��* aw CITY OF GEM LAKE Office of the City Clerk 1369 County Road "E" East Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 Is"Mea&iLla W PUBLIC NOTICE NO.2006-09 DATE: 23 March 2006 FROM: Fritz Magnuson, City Clerk TO: Press Publications, Legal Publications @ lesals0sherbtel.net RE: Legal Notice To Be Published To Whom It May Concern, Facsimile: ( 651) 426 — 6444 Email: GemLakeCity@aol.com The following Legal (Public) Notice is to be published in the Legal Notices Section of the 29 March 2006 edition of the White Bear Press. Please confirm receipt and verify content is in acceptable form for use. CITY OF GEM LAKE PUBLIC NOTICE NO.2006-09 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Gem Lake City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, 10 April 2006, at 7:00 pm in the first floor meeting room of Tousley Ford located at 1493 East County Road E in the City of Gem Lake to receive public comment on Public Improvement Project 2006-01, proposed 2006 improvements to Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane based upon a Feasibility Study completed by the City Engineer. If approved, the cost of improvements will be assessed against all real property identified as follows: 283022440013 283022440007 283022440001 283022440012 283022440008 283022440009 283022440011 283022440010 283022410008 283022410011 273022320019 273022320020 283022410003 283022410006 283022420005 283022440003 283022410005 283022440002 283022410004 Attend the public hearing. Anyone wishing to be heard may attend the public hearing or may submit written comments to the City Clerk at 1369 East County Road E, Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231. Ss//Frederic C. Magnuson, City Clerk efile: Legals/2006/PublicNoticeNo.2006-09 - 4 f4 � - Telephone: ( 651 ) 426 - 6443 �/o�nuro� Qh C/eiF Gem Lake Residents Big Fox Road Little Fox Lane Dear Residents, CITY OF GEM LAKE Office of the City Clerk 1369 County Road "E" East Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 Email: gemlakecity@aol.com fnau/c.�meo%f 9�layoi Facsimile: ( 651 ) 426 - 6444 CY01106 Co6.orz eTiaararni 28 March 2006 As most of you know, we have been (re)patching Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane for the last several years. In the past several months, our engineers (SEH, Inc.) have completed an evaluation of these roadways and have made several recommendations to the city regarding what potential measures could be taken to restore these roadways. The Gein Lake City Council requests you attend a public hearing at 7:00 PM on Monday, 10 April 2006, in the first floor meeting room of Tousley Ford to hear and discuss these proposals, to provide a platform for public comment on the various proposals, and to help the City Council determine a course of action. It is clear from the engineers evaluation that it is impractical to simply continue to patch these surfaces. We urge you to attend the public hearing. Anyone unable to attend may submit their comments in writing to me at the address above prior to the public hearing. If you have questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Regards, CITY OF GEM LAKE F. C. "Fritz" Magnuson City Clerk efile: PublicNoticeNo2006-09d.wpd Summary Sheet City of Gem Lake 2006 Street Improvement Project April 10, 2006 Big Fox Road & Little Fox Lane Gem Lake City Council authorized the preparation of a Feasibility Report to review existing conditions and possible improvements in the residential areas adjacent to Big Fox Road, Little Fox Lane, Haven Lane, and Tessier Road. The summary below is specific to Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane. Details of this information can be found in the Feasibility Report prepared for the City. Existing Conditions • No public sanitary sewer or water services • No reports of failing wells or septic systems • 24' wide bituminous streets that are severely deteriorated in areas with large block cracking in much of the other areas - Estimated Costs • Sanitary Sewer - $159,200 • Water Main - $227,400 • Street o Full Reconstruction - $344,500 o Patch and overlay - $106,000 • Not recommended if utilities are installed Improvements Considered • Sanitary Sewer Main • Water Main • Street Improvements o Complete Reconstruction with no curb and gutter, or, o Selective Patching with 2" overlay Estimated Assessments • Sanitary Sewer - $8,400 per home • Water Main - $ 12,000 per home • Street o Full Reconstruction - $18,100 per home o Patch and overlay - $5,580 per home - Assessments based on 100% of project costs being assessed to property owners Conclusions The City should evaluate the timeframe of future sanitary sewer and water service to this area prior to finalizing a plan to reconstruct the street • If utilities are expected in the immediate future, less than 5-7 years, installing utilities with a full reconstruction of the street is feasible. • If utilities are expected in less than 15 years, a patch and overlay project appears to be the most feasible option with a total reconstruct of the streets at the time that utilities are installed. • If utilities are not expected for at least 20-30 years, complete reconstruction of the streets at this time with no utilities is the most feasible. 2006 Street Improvements A-GEMLK0503.00 Gem Lake, Minnesota Page 1 April 6, 2006 Fritz Magnuson, City Clerk City of Gem Lake 1369 E County Road E Gem Lake, MN 55110 RE: Road Improvement Proposal: Little Fox Lane Public Hearing: Monday, April 10, 2006 7:00 PM Dear Fritz, Members of the Gem Lake City Council and Planning Commission, Thank you for the public notice concerning road improvements on Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane. Obviously, the roads have been in need on extensive repairs for several years. We are pleased that the City is moving forward to address the appropriate solutions to the road issues. I suspect the road proposals may include; road resurfacing, curb and gutter, and possibility inclusion of public utilities (water, sewer, etc). It is a common expectation that public improvements will always benefit the public (safety, convenience, etc.) and also benefit the property owners who usually fund the ' project. We would therefore conclude, that if the City of Gem Lake approves extensive road improvements (including utilities), which incur substantial costs to us (property owner), we would be entitled to a reasonable benefit and use of the property consistent with the cost of the improvements and land usage in the area. In order to recoup extensive improvement costs, we would expect the City of Gem Lake to re -zone our property to allow for greater residential density (from 3 acre to 1 acre lots). Obviously if water and sewer were available on Little Fox Lane, greater density would constitute a good and reasonable use of the land while continuing to maintain and add to an already wonderful neighborhood. Thank you for your continued work and service to the residents of Gem Lake. Please update us as this decision -making process evolves. (TMHEAHna,AOL.COM) Respect Thomas M. Hansen 1231 Little Fox Lane, Gem Lake, MN 55110 (651) 429-3445 Fritz, I spoke with Paul Emeott on Monday, 3rd, and he briefly outlined the expected alternatives and costs for Big Fox Road improvements. Also, the approximate costs for water and sewer lines. I don't have all the numbers straight in my notes, and am unclear as to the number of "shares of responsibility for payment" for each of the alternatives. I would like to have better specifics, not better than Paul gave me, but better than my somewhat dyslexic notes. I suppose these will be available at the April 10 meeting, and perhaps in writing (maybe via e-mail?), shortly thereafter. I will not be able to attend the meeting, due to health reasons, but would like to give my initial thoughts to you now. 1). I prefer the most temporary and least expensive option; just patch the road one more time. I think Paul called this the "two year option". I realize this is a questionable tactic due to the poor condition (or absence), of the roadbed under the broken pavement. But it may buy some time for Gem Lake city water and sewer plans to be finalized and maybe implementation schedules fixed. 2). I would prefer the "20 year complete rebuild", if it weren't for the water -sewer pipes consideration. 3). I might even consider favorably the "20 year rebuild, plus water and sewer pipes", if we would be ready to connect up to Gem Lake City water and sewer when complete (and if I understood fully the actual cost and financing for my property). However, I understand the Gem Lake City water and sewer are another project, still in (early?) planning stages. The road needs immediate attention, and will probably only deteriorate further if not patched. Therefore, lets take the cheap expedient for now. Thanks for your consideration of my thoughts, and if appropriate, please forward the above, starting with item 1), to the mayor and city council. Kindest regards, Don Hewitt J CITY OF GEM LAKE MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARING NO. C2006-02 10 April 2006 Gem Lake Public Hearing No. C2006-02 was convened at 7:08 PM on Wednesday, 12 April 2006 in the first floor meeting room ofTousley Ford. Mayor Emeott, Councilors Watson, Bosak, and Rasmussen, Clerk Magnuson and Project Engineer Mitchell were present. Also present were the followin- residents: Richard Pientka Roberta Pientka Lenore Bolfing Rich Nordstrom 3970 Tessier Road 3970 Tessier Road 3930 Haven Lane 3955 Tessier Road Carolyn Nordstrom Val Cremin Pete Cremin Al Schriber 3955 Tessier Road 3920 Haven Lane 3920 Haven Lane 3960 Haven Lane Gordon Kordosky Roys Andrews Jerry Larsen Deb Larsen 3911 Haven Lane 3950 Haven Lane 3945 Tessier Road 3945 Tessier Road Motion by Bosak, Second by Watson to approve the agenda for the public hearing was unanimously approved. Clerk Magnuson reported that the public hearing was properly noticed with Public Notice No. 2006-10a published in the White Bear Press on 29 March 2006 and Public Notice No. 2006-10d mailed on 28 March 2006 to all fee title owners of real property on Tessier Road and Haven Lane based upon records of Ramsey County Property Records and Revenue. Mayor Emeott made opening remarks, stating that the process of securing a feasability study for the reconstruction of city streets began 2003, was ordered in April, 2005, upgraded in July 2005 to include city water and sewer, and reviewed in March, 2006. The final feasability study for the work is to be presented here this evening. Emeott noted the inclusion of city water and sewer in he feasability study was consistent with best management practices and the time line established in the Gem Lake Comprehensive Municipal Plan of 1997. Emeott indicated that the City is also having a feasability study completed for development of a City Water Plan which at some time in the near future could put city water in proximity to the Big Fox/Little Fox neighborhood. The primary purpose of this hearing is to receive the Project Engineer's Feasability Study and receive public comment from those affected by the proposed improvements. Engineer Mitchell then presented the Feasability Study and the Summary, copies of which are attached hereto. As the Feasability Study was already accepted at Public Hearing No. 2006-01, acceptance was waived. Clerk Magnuson then identified several scenarios for needing to suddenly install city water including, but not limited to, chemicals spills from adjacent industry or transportation, groundwater contamination, influence or mandate by other govermnent agencies (MPCA, DNR, Public Health, Met Council, etc). Emeott cited North Oaks problems from former dump. Magnuson cited recent fire at paint factory just north of the neighborhood and spills at wood treatment plant. Magnuson asked if anyone present has had their well tested recently to which no response was received. Discussion followed regarding mandatory well testing and the Clerk made note to consider the project asking the neighbors to draft a petition requesting same. Clerk Magnuson then read into the record written comments received from Dan and Sally Hendrickson of 3930 Tessier Road, a copy of which is attached hereto. Mayor Emeott then opened the floor for public comment as follows: DEB LARSEN If no one is pressing to install sewer, and water, why install the pipes? Emeott -best management practices encourage looking at the possibility and we would be remiss in our duties as a Council not to do so, especially when we are unaware of your feelings toward sewer and water. Inappropriate to dig up recently paved road to install sewer and/or water if mandated. What are costs and what is included. Mitchell responded per summary sheet. Magnuson also indicated perhaps some of the maintenance money budgeted this year could be used for a portion of the curb reconstruction. The snow plowing contractor may also have a stake in the matter due to snow plow damage. JERRY LARSEN Is there a time line under which sewer and/or water might be mandated by others? Magnuson - None that we are aware of now but that is subject to the decisions of others. Unplanned installations are substantially more expensive. -1- 12 April 2006 Public Hearing No. C2006-02 ROBERTA PIENTKA 'i Where would sewer and water lines run? Mitchell -In street to railroad where right-of-way would have to be secured and then west to Vadnais Heights. Discussion followed regarding routing and rights -of -way. GORD KORDOSKY How did the residents of Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane determine to go forward. Emeott-a straw vote type poll of the property owners present indicated only one person in favor of city water and none in favor of city sewer. The poll also indicated one in favor of total reconstruction and the rest in favor of patch and overlay. Discussion followed regarding Big Fox Road intersection with County Road E. PETE CREMIN Works on public works projects in St. Paul. Putting pipes in road and not using them is not good for the pipes either and does not favor installation of pipes without a plan to employ them RICH NORDSTROM How will costs be billed? Magnuson - bonds issued in an anticipated amount, actual project costs paid, final bond amount determined and financed over either a 5, 10, 15 or 20 years period. Magnuson presented approximate payments based on Summary Report. Additional discussion of curb reconstruction, tree removal and the like followed. Mitchell was charged with establishing cost of curb reconstruction and removal of necessary trees by street locations. Mayor Emeott then opened the floor for City Council comment as follows: CHUCK WATSON We are not here with an agenda to push, but rather to determine your wishes on how to proceed and to represent those wishes. We do not want to ignore best management practices and dig up new roads within a few years and ask you to pay twice. We need your opinions to take reasonable action. Mayor Emeott then conducted a straw poll of the 8 properties represented: 1) Those in favor of city sewer proposal 0 Aye, 8 Nay, 0 Abstain 2) Those in favor of city water proposal 0 Aye, 8 Nay, 0 Abstain 3) Those in favor of patch and overlay proposal 5 Aye, 1 Nay, 0 Abstain 4) Those in favor of complete reconstruction proposal 1 Aye, 8 Nay, 0 Abstain 5) Those in favor of no action (patch only) 3 Aye, 5 Nay, 0 Abstain Clerk Magnuson then indicated that it would be appropriate for the City Council to delay action to it's regular meeting on Monday, 17 April 2006. Mayor Emeott agreed and ordered the matter held over for action to Monday, 17 April 2006. Mayor Emeotttlien thanked all for coming and participating and declared the Public Hearing adjourned at 8:45 PM. AUTHORED: 13 April 2006 APPROVED: 17 April 2006 ATTEST: Frederic C. Magnuson City Clerk J ATTEST: Paul R. Emeott Mayor efile: Minutes\Hearings\2006\CouncilPubHrg2006-02.wpd -2- Summary Sheet 1 City of Gem Lake 2006 Street Improvement Project April 12, 2006 Haven Lane and Tessier Road Gem Lake City Council authorized the preparation of a Feasibility Report to review existing conditions and possible improvements in the residential areas adjacent to Big Fox Road, Little Fox Lane, Haven Lane, and Tessier Road. The summary below is specific to Haven Lane and Tessier Road. Details of this information can be found in the Feasibility Report prepared for the City. Existing Conditions • No public sanitary sewer or water services • No reports of failing wells or septic systems • 24' wide bituminous streets that are severely deteriorated in areas with large block cracking in much of the other areas Estimated Costs • Sanitary Sewer - $64,200 • Water Main - $97,100 • Street o Full Reconstruction - $137,400 o Patch and overlay - $42,000 • Not recommended if installed Improvements Considered • Sanitary Sewer Main • Water Main • Street Improvements o Complete Reconstruction with no curb and gutter, or, o Selective Patching with 2" overlay Estimated Assessments • Sanitary Sewer - $4,600 per home • Water Main - $ 6,900 per home • Street o Full Reconstruction - $9,800 per home utilities are o Patch and overlay - $3,000 per home - Assessments based on 100% of project costs being assessed to property owners Conclusions The City should evaluate the time frame of future sanitary sewer and water service to this area prior to finalizing a plan to reconstruct the street • If utilities are expected in the immediate future, less than 5-7 years, installing utilities with a full reconstruction of the street is feasible. • If utilities are expected in less than 15 years, a patch and overlay project appears to be the most feasible option with a total reconstruct of the streets at the time that utilities are installed. • If utilities are not expected for at least 20-30 years, complete reconstruction of the streets at this time with no utilities is the most feasible. 2006 Street Improvements A-GEMLK0503.00 Gem Lake, Minnesota - 3 - Page 3 Telephone: ( 651) 426 - 6443 Mobile: ( 612) 812 — 6139 CITY OF GEM LAKE Office of the City Clerk 1369 County Road "E" East Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 A;'1' �--ffine, /1%W PUBLIC NOTICE NO.2006-10 DATE: 23 March 2006 FROM: Fritz Magnuson, City Clerk TO: Press Publications, Legal Publications @ Iegals@slierbtel.net RE: Legal Notice To Be Published To Whom It May Concern, Facsimile: ( 651 ) 426 — 6444 Email: GemLakeCity@aol.com �iiali CQGrars, �e�� The following Legal (Public) Notice is to be published in the Legal Notices Section of the 29 March 2006 edition of the White Bear Press. Please confirm receipt and verify content is in acceptable form for use. CITY OF GEM LAKE PUBLIC NOTICE NO.2006-10 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Gem Lake City Council will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, 12 April 2006, at 7:00 pm in the first floor meeting room of Tousley Ford located at 1493 East County Road E in the City of Gem Lake to receive public comment on Public Improvement Project 2006-01, proposed 2006 improvements to Haven Lane and Tessier Road based upon a Feasibility Study completed by the City Engineer, If approved, the cost of improvements will be assessed against all real property identified as follows: 283022140002 283022140001 283022110006 283022110007 283022110011 283022110009 283022110010 283022140008 283022140003 283022140004 283022140007 283022140005 283022140006 283022110008 Attend the public hearing. Anyone wishing to be heard may attend the public hearing or may submit written comments to the City Clerk at 1369 East County Road E, Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231. Ss//Frederic C. Magnuson, City Clerk efile: Legals/2006/PublicNoticeNo.2006-10 Telephone: ( 651 ) 426 - 6443 q1-1%z -5;* iWm Cify Clerk Gem Lake Residents Haven Lane Tessier Road Dear Residents, CITY OF GEM LAKE Office of the City Clerk 1369 County Road "E" East Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 Email: gemlakecity@aol.com fnoul [Gimeo�f �ayar r Facsimile: ( 651 ) 426 - 6444 &.IdO COXi= �Tie�ssuiei 28 March 2006 As most of you know, we have been (re)patching Haven Lane and, to a lesser extent, Tessier Road for the last several years. In the past several months, our engineers (SEH, Inc.) have completed an evaluation of these roadways and have made several recommendations to the city regarding what potential measures could be taken to restore these roadways. The Gem Lake City Council requests you attend a public hearing at 7:00 PM on Wednesday, 12 April 2006, in the first floor meeting room of Tousley Ford to hear and discuss these proposals, to provide a platform for public comment on the various proposals, and to help the City Council determine a course of action. It is clear from the engineers evaluation that it is impractical to simply continue to patch these surfaces. We urge you to attend the public hearing. Anyone unable to attend may submit their comments in writing to me at the address above prior to the public hearing. If you have questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Regards, CITY OF GEM LAKE 3;�& ,, Q F. C. "Fritz" Magnuson City Clerk J efile: PublicNoticeNo2006-10d.wpd Summary Sheet City of Gem Lake 2006 Street Improvement Project April 12, 2006 Haven Lane and Tessier Road Gem Lake City Council authorized the preparation of a Feasibility Report to review existing conditions and possible improvements in the residential areas adjacent to Big Fox Road, Little Fox Lane, Haven Lane, and Tessier Road. The summary below is specific to Haven Lane and Tessier Road. Details of this information can be found in the Feasibility Report prepared for the City. Existing Conditions • No public sanitary sewer or water services • No reports of failing wells or septic systems • 24' wide bituminous streets that are severely deteriorated in areas with large block cracking in much of the other areas Estimated Costs • Sanitary Sewer - $64,200 • Water Main - $97,100 • Street o Full Reconstruction - $137,400 o Patch and overlay - $42,000 • Not recommended if installed Improvements Considered • Sanitary Sewer Main • Water Main • Street Improvements o Complete Reconstruction with no curb and gutter, or, o Selective Patching with 2" overlay Estimated Assessments • Sanitary Sewer - $4,600 per home • Water Main - $ 6,900 per home • Street o Full Reconstruction - $9,800 per home utilities are o Patch and overlay - $3,000 per home - Assessments based on 100% of project costs being assessed to property owners Conclusions The City should evaluate the time frame of future sanitary sewer and water service to this area prior to finalizing a plan to reconstruct the street • If utilities are expected in the immediate future, less than 5-7 years, installing utilities with a full reconstruction of the street is feasible. • If utilities are expected in less than 15 years, a patch and overlay project appears to be the most feasible option with a total reconstruct of the streets at the time that utilities are installed. • If utilities are not expected for at least 20-30 years, complete reconstruction of the streets at this time with no utilities is the most feasible. 2006 Street Improvements A-GEMLK0503.00 Gem Lake, Minnesota Page 1 i�%.L %Z-�C�c.E'•�1� ��(1-cam � 1 Z LZXl1�-tom ��'ie_. 1 0a /Y 3 1-30 fiCf65/ C/4 L'a h o- &A-r Lie, 6:5 � -�a6- 5Ye� � Feasibility Report Street and Utility Improvements 2006 Street Improvements Prepared for the City of Gem Lake SEH No. A-GEMLK0503.00 APRIL 10, 2006 I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State. o.f'Minnesota. U14/-j ru-/ — — David D. Mitchell, PE Date: April 10.2006 Reg. No.: 20028 Introduction Location The project is located in two areas of western Gem Lake. Area A includes Haven Lane and Tessier Road between Goose Lake Road and to the Burlington Northern Railroad. Access is provided from Goose Lake Road. Area B includes Little Fox Lane off Labore Road and Big Fox Road off County Road E. The area is accessed from Labore Road and County Road E. Both areas are residential in nature with Area A having much smaller lots compared to those typical of Area B. Project Purpose The project would reconstruct the street section in the areas. The new section would be similar in nature to the existing roadway with an anticipated life of 20-30 years with proper maintenance. The City has requested that the project explore providing future sanitary sewer and water service to the properties in these areas. This seems prudent in light of the City's desire to serve the areas with City water and sewer. An independent report is exploring providing water to the entire community. Sewer is available through connections to neighboring community systems. Existing Conditions Streets All four residential streets in areas A and B have a 24' wide driving surface that are generally in poor to moderate condition. The streets in area A have a rolled bituminous edge to direct drainage in the area. Streets in area B do not have a rolled curb. Drainage for the area is provided through roadside swales. Public Utilities There is no sanitary sewer or water main in the project areas. In area A, on Haven Lane there is storm sewer that collects water at the north end of the cul-de-sac and drains it north to the Railroad right-of-way. On Tessier Road there is a culvert located mid block that provides drainage from one low area to another. In area B, there are no public utilities. Private Utilities Electric, telephone, gas, and cable TV exist in the right of way on all streets in both areas A and B. The location of each utility will be verified during the design phase of the proj ect. 2006 Street Improvements A-GEMLK0503.00 Gem Lake, Minnesota Page 2 Septic & Well Systems All houses in areas A and B are on their own septic and well systems. The condition of those systems is unknown at this time. Proposed Improvements Sanitary Sewer Area A Install sanitary sewer from the intersection of Goose Lake Road and Haven Lane to the cul-de-sac at the north end of Haven Lane. The sewer would be stubbed to the right of way at the north end of cul-de-sac. A similar installation would occur on Tessier Road. Sanitary sewer would be installed from the intersection at Goose Lake Road to cul-de-sac and stub to railroad right of way. The stubs to the right of way on both streets will allow for connection to a future sewer anticipated sewer along the north line of the developed area, adjacent to the railroad. Area B Sanitary sewer would be installed in Little Fox Lane and Big Fox Road. Drainage would flow to Labore Road and County Road E. It is anticipated that future sewer mains would be installed that would connect these systems to sewer that is available at the intersection of County Road E and Labore Road. The project would include the installation of service wyes with services to the property line for all houses and parcels. Water main Area A Water main would be installed on both Haven Lane and Tessier Road from the intersections at Goose Lake Road through the cul-de-sacs to the right of way. Both runs will be terminating at the right of way for the installation of future hydrants when City water is extended to the area. Area B Water main would be installed from the intersection at Labore Road and Little Fox Lane to Big Fox Road, where it will connect to the water main on Big Fox Road. Water main would be installed from the cul-de-sac at the north end of Big Fox Road to County Road E on the south end. Future service to the area could be provided in a number of areas depending on how future improvements are staged. The water main in both areas would be installed in the boulevard area to facilitate future connections. Hydrant leads would be installed approximately every 400' for future hydrants. Service taps and service lines would be installed when homes actually connect to the City water system. 2006 Street Improvements A-GEMLK0503.00 Gem Lake, Minnesota Page 3 IJ Council has asked that the installation of sanitary sewer and water main be reviewed as part of this study. Although these utilities may ultimately be installed in these areas, it may not be prudent to this at this time. Specifically, recovering the cost related to the installation of these utilities from the benefited properties cannot be accomplished until actual service is provided to the properties. The Council must consider the likely timeframe of service being available to these areas and the financial impact related to the period when considering installing utilities at this time. Roadway Option I - A proposed pavement section of 3.5" of bituminous pavement over 6" of Class 5 aggregate base and l' of select granular borrow would be installed under this option. There will be no concrete curb. Instead, a rolled bituminous edge will be used similar to the existing road edge. There will be minimal restoration costs for ditches, yards, and miscellaneous features. The street related cost of full reconstruction totals $137,400 for Area A and $344,500 for Area B. This option is recommended if sewer and water utilities were installed at this time or if the timeframe for the installation of utilities extends beyond 20 years. Option 2 — An alternative roadway improvement plan would be to overlay the streets with 2" of bituminous pavement. This would be sufficient to extend the life of the existing streets to a time when sewer and water utilities are installed. Areas currently experiencing severe distress would be patched prior to overlay to further extend the life of those areas. The street related cost of a 2" overlay with appropriate patching totals $42,000 for Area A and $106,000 for Area B. This option is recommended if sewer and water utilities were not installed at this time and are expected to be installed in the next 10-15 years. The street restoration program selected will determine the life expectancy of the street. An overlay maintenance action typically has a life of 10-15 years depending on the condition of the sub grade below the existing pavement. A total reconstruction has a design life of 20 years, but will often last 30-40 years if properly maintained. Maintenance Impact The construction of the above -proposed improvements will result in the addition of sanitary sewer and water main. These will require periodic inspection and maintenance in the future when they are put in service. Road maintenance would require periodic seal coating and crack sealing, similar to the current roadway. Right of Way and Easements It is anticipated that all of the construction will occur within the existing right of way. 2006 Street Improvements A-GEMLK0503.00 Gem Lake, Minnesota Page 4 Permits Permits would have to be obtained from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) for the sanitary sewer. A permit would have to be obtained from the Minnesota Dept. of Health (MDH) for the water main. A permit would have to be obtained from the MPCA and governing watershed district for the drainage and erosion control. Estimated Costs A detailed cost estimate is attached to this report. The estimate was developed based on anticipated construction costs for the 2006 construction season. The estimate includes a 10% contingency for construction and a 35% administrative fee for legal, engineering, administrative, and financing costs. The following is a summary of the project costs: Area A Area B Total Sanitary Sewer $ 64,200 $ 159,200 $ 223,400 Water Main 97,100 227,400 324,500 Street 137,400 344,500 481,900 Total $298,700 $731,100 $1,029,8001 1 Total reflects full reconstruction of street with installation of sanitary sewer and water main Financing Financing through assessments for this type of project can be limited. State Statute provides guidance regarding the capacity to assess for public improvement projects. Generally, assessments are limited to the increased property value for the benefited properties unless specifically waived by the property owners. The City, in past practice, has assessed the total cost of street rehabilitation projects. Using this, the estimated assessment for each area is shown below. Area A Area B (14lots) (19lots) Full Reconstruction $ 9,800 $ 18,100 2" Overlay $3,000 $5,580 The installation of new sanitary sewer and water main is typically fully assessed to the benefited property. However, it is recommended that the cost of the installation not be assessed at this time because no service will be available at the completion of the project. Rather, if installed, it is recommended that the City finance the sanitary sewer and water main improvements through other means while either deferring assessments or developing specific connection charges that will recover costs related to the improvements when service is available. 2006 Street Improvements A-GEMLK0503.00 Gem Lake, Minnesota Page 5 Using this, the estimated cost recovery from each area is shown below. Area A Area B (14 lots) (19 lots) Sanitary Sewer $ 4,600 $ 8,400 Water Main $ 6,900 $12,000 Total (per lot) $11,500 $ 20,400 Using the information above, it's estimated that the project would be finance through a combination of funding sources with funds coming from immediate assessments for street improvements. It's anticipated that nearly $548,600 could be collected at a future date through connection charges or deferred assessments when sewer and water service is available to the areas. Conclusions and Recommendations This project is feasible from and engineering standpoint. The project is necessary to address the needs of the area for improved sanitary sewer and water service, and street improvements. This project is a cost effective means to address the needs of the area. Based on finding of this report, discussions with the City of Gem Lake, we recommend the following course of action for the City of Gem Lake: • This report is accepted as the feasibility report for the herein described project. • A Public Hearing is held to discuss the proposed improvements and assessments. • The City evaluates the future of sanitary sewer and water service to these areas. It is recommended that the City proceed with a project in accordance with the following schedule: • Order Feasibility Report • Review Preliminary Report and Order Public Hearing • Receive Feasibility Report and Conduct Public Hearing • Order Improvements • Approve Plans and Authorize Ad for Bid • Open Bids • Award Construction Contract • Begin Construction • Substantially Complete Construction • Construction Complete • Assessment Hearing 2006 Street Improvements Gem Lake, Minnesota November 16, 2005 March 20, 2006 April 10, 2006 May 15, 2006 July 17, 2006 August 17, 2006 August 21, 2006 September 11, 2006 November 30, 2006 July 20, 2007 September 18, 2007 A-GEMLK0503.00 Page 6 I FUTURE SANITARY SEWER C:;, EXISTING STORM -S ' T 4;• ` I , l.y At (6) ` •i' UTILITIES 6 \�V (6) 1�3 (1 �O 1 (5) �A2 , 2 Y 1 6 .66 At "00I / 1 I 13 ' •' (1t) 6 ,r,• 6 rr 6 'rAt�i - ' ❑ 11.01 Al, k' 3 Q (11) 1� N 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 200 0 200 400 .�. . FUTURE HYDRANT LOCATION ❑ I scole 100 feet J FILE No. PROPOSED WATERMAIN & SANITARY SEWER FIGURE NO. / A-GEMLK0503 � PROJECT AREA A SEH DATE GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA w aM K p (6) I 7 _ 1 r � STUB WATERMAIN TO Q RIGHT OF WAY au K (7) r •.. wr1�r pt � r��i 1 n T___ nnK H I 3 9) S I O J •••\ i� D I I O (4) \• 9 w t _ 10 (s) 1 4 YrA 7w...xan 1 a 1 � 1 \ 1 i O -- _ G 1 r' 1 ` ,•. (9) \1 (4) O 1 Y1 K 1 STUB WATERMAIN TO RIGHT OF WAY \ 6 (12) (5) (6) f I ( T i,y 6 (7) N � (6) ❑ (LLLJJJ ❑ �— COUNTY ROAD E -� FUTURE HYDRANT LOCATION 300 0 300 600 scale 150 feet i - J FILE "°. PROPOSED WATERMAIN & SANITARY SEWER FIGURE NO. A-cEMLKosoa PROJECT AREA B SEH DATE GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA I E TING S WER / 6 " ' T s f FOR FILE NO. A-G F-M LK0503 SEH DATE 24' F-F ' ; 0 pt Q�2) 12' RCP CUL 24' i-i 1.06 AC. ❑ (6) (12) (13) .66 AC. 3�- ❑ 35.07 At Q (11) N 200 0 200 400 scale 100 feet PROPOSED STREET & STORM SEWER I FIGURE NO. PROJECT AREA A GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA 300 scale 150 E CONSTRUCTION fY SEE STANDARD DETAIL Ill SHEET U SUBGRADE PRFPARAi1URJ1 OR IN PRIJECT SPECIiICAyiw INCLUDE 12' SCARIFY NOTES, TYPICAL STREET SECTION m SUITATII� GRADINGMATERIALSOD R9 6• N1NIMUN TOPSOIL AND S® INSET A Y TYPE LY4 WEARING COURSE N135030D IIYYK LY41 HOWWWING COURSE CLASS Y AGGt1CWTE SAM E X CRUVU S=l GRANULAR BORROW FIGURE NO. PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTIONS GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA .� 9 O LLI L Q T cn r Z CW G � W o acn o v r N L U O W " ED N � N � J W O d O 04 0 U Y ¢ c a .. W cr O N � a) a - - p O O 0 O 0 170 0 " 0 O 0 <O I O 0 r I CD 0 N 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 W p 0 p 0 t(j 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to O N O O CJ to 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 t0 0 O 0 0 O 0 O 0 O r N p p 0 0 a �� (O 0 0 0 0 0 t0 O O O N O O t0 T 0 O n- t0 0 0 0 9 7 O Ch O N 0 69 0 69 (O t 0 U) 0 0 W N N �t � n 0 (O Cl) C7 N 69 N EH 0 (O (O 69 O 69 (D Efi (O 69 N N Ch V3 69 Ki 69 m C U 3 u3 6s to ER 69 69 d3 (Q J O O L Cl) QM }} F- tO 0 0o0 0 0 Mt0n � px m 0tLO N t0 N C\l0 O NW m OQ N Q d O O O o O O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 G 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 N 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O O N (O O (O O O O O O tO O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O N O 0 O 0 O (A O t0 O (0 O 0 NO p O 0 O N M m• W 6% O O O O (O N O O O CD V V3 O 0) cO ( n N N 0 0 O CD O N CD � N U ER a0 10 CL) V u3 CO (O v) � V 69 64 69 � Q O 69 (C J O QN r F x tO 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 m COO N O m t00 � 0 p p2 O V Ch M N O O N Z n Q O C00 N N N r V m N 00 V r M O Q O O O O C.V G "' O p 0 O G O O O G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ci O N O in W O O O to O O O 0 O (\ O O O O O O n 0 CD 0 N 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 tO 0 t0 0 0 0 0 0 tf7 0 0 0 O O W F- U Q O O O O O N n tO V N � 0 0 0 0 0 O O r CO (D [A � (n V (O N to C7 Cl) n r O m O co tO C n (O O t0 O 10 n (n (� N (7) W Z_ rL J p^ Cl) N K3 m 0 (O co to 0 to 'a 0 (D 69 t0 16% 69 ff3 n 69 � 69 69 0 N (0 V3 V7 V3 Cn :.� Z O 69 69 69 69 W W O Q F- 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COO COO O O 4 Cl) N m 0 T 0 0 0 co 0 Cl) t0 r t0 r (O t Ch m M COO 0 t0 ^ O to N (D m a) M O Q n n d pp o O o O n r 00 o O 0 O 0 (D 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 r 0 O o O G O 0 O o O 0 O 0 O o O 0 to p O O O o O 0 O 0 O 0 O N O p Cy 6 C6 O � (O N O cD V t0 N fA 7 N 0 (0 0 N N 0 O 0 O 0 M tc) m M 69 O O O O O O to N � 69 N 60 U O O ff3 69 EA � 69 0 N3 69 69 6 69 W3 69 E9 (o m 69 69 't O O H m Cl) 69 !fl Z 69 �- J J J Z O Z 0 O Z 0 O J a LL J Q W LL J LL J Q W Q W LL J LL J U m Q W Q W Cn J LL} J Cn Z W U U U h U( L m N 7 i m U a Z O li O a N U c0 'o c a) c � c006 m > m a 2 aEi a () E N O U .x 0 Co C L p r o cn W ro d LL> d a 3 w o U c~ O U) cm ro Y m a� U c (No U CD 3 x c° x m cFa c 3 o ro ff u) mp j io co m 3 3 ca LL' CD W E m m 3 m c ro CO> Un U ro ro E E u E CO o °> 0 3 "' W N O 7 a U L a> > ro ro N Q ro O J O m fn (n m N (0 C7 Cl) 0- > a d 'C U _Q' CA CO.7 C C cc > > Oi Q O O — C U LL U U O O 76 d LL 01 c ro — a� � 2 M it m Un U U) F 0)m a M 10 � m eD io U a F in US 0 (O m 2 (`7 N O N N N N O O N O N O V N O 0 O m O N O N O Cl) CO O O 0 O CD N O O n (h N t0 O O Z O CO O to O to 0 t0 t0 (O 0 ( 0 t0 t0 0 1C9 0 CO (O (O CO CD CO (O t('. (O (O to to t0 a v v tri tri 0 r o o to t t0 of O Cl) O Cl) O CO O v� O O a v O O v O 0 O m O 0 0 a 0 ri VO n n W N p 0 0 0 O_ O N O N O N N N t0 (7 N Cl) N M N t/7 N (O N t0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 0 N N 0 N to N to N o N 0 N (O tf i N N F' N N N N N D 00 O O 0000 O O O O N I m 001 A O> r O O 40 (a tO n (a !O fR O O O 00 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r O M O r n Go N N N n 0) 69 � � O O coo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O N Cl) N C) I cq Cn N to CI W (D to (D N Q C V =O N N O +O+ y V O U = C E O 004 a 0 O " o O r IMF. 0 N rn ro d SEH MEMORANDUM TO: Dave Mitchell, PE FROM: A.J. Schwidder, PE DATE: January 18, 2006 RE: 2006 Streets, Gem Lake, Minnesota - Geotechnical Recommendations SEH No. AGEMLK0503.00 14.00 The purpose of this memo is to provide the geotechnical recommendations for the 2006 Street Reconstruction Project in Gem Lake, Minnesota. The memo contains a project description, a description of the geotechnical investigation, existing conditions, recommended pavement section, pavement subgrade preparation, and construction of buried utilities. Project Description This project includes reconstruction of Tessier Road, Haven Lane, Little Fox Lane and Big Fox Lane. We expect that the work will include complete removal of the existing pavement, construction of new utilities beneath the streets, and construction of new pavement. The width of each street is expected to remain the same as the -existing street. Buried utilities will consist of sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water main. Geotechnical Investigation The geotechnical drilling and laboratory testing was conducted by American Engineering Testing, Inc. of St. Paul, Minnesota. The boring logs and laboratory test results are attached, along with a table showing the boring number, street, elevation, and county coordinates. Please be aware that the borings for the 2006 Streets Project were performed at the same time as the borings for the Scheuneman Road Reconstruction. All borings (1 through 10) are enclosed, but only Borings 1 through 7 pertain to the 2006 Streets. Geotechnical recommendations for Scheuneman Road are discussed in a separate memorandum. Borings 1 through 7 were drilled up to a depth of 21 feet on December 2, 2005. Existing Conditions The following Table 1 shows the existing bituminous and aggregate base thicknesses by street, and Table 2 shows soil conditions encountered below the pavement. Table 1. Existing Pavement by Street Street Bituminous Thickness (inches) Aggregate Base Thickness (inches) Tessier Road 3 — 5.5 6.0 — 7.0 Haven Lane 5.5 Not Discernable in Boring Little Fox Lane 2.5 Not Discernable in Boring Big Fox Road 2.75 — 3.0 5.0 — 6.5 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110-5196 SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.com 1 651.490.2000 1 800.325.2055 1 651.490.2150 fax 2006 Streets, Gem Lake, Minnesota - Geotechnical Recommendations January 18, 2006 Page 2 Table 2. Soil Conditions Beneath Bituminous and/or Aggregate Base Street Soil Description 1 to 3 feet of fill consisting of silty sand, clayey sand, and lean clay Tessier Road underlain by alternating layers of silty sand, sand with silt, poorly graded sand, and claye sand Haven Lane 2 feet of silty sand and clayey sand fill underlain by 4.5 feet of clayey sand, underlain by 2.5 feet of silty sand with gravel, underlain by sand 2 feet of fill consisting of silty sand with gravel, underlain by 2 feet of Little Fox Lane clayey sand, underlain by 2.5 feet of silty sand, underlain by sand and sand with gravel 2.5 to 9 feet of fill consisting of lean clay with sand, lean clay, clayey Big Fox Road sand, silt, silty sand, and sandy lean clay. The underlying soils are mainly sand in the north part of the street, silty sand in the middle of the street, and sandy lean clay/clayey sand in the south part of the street. No ground water was encountered during drilling in any of these borings. Pavement Section The recommended pavement section for all streets is as follows: 1.5 inches LVWE35030C Bituminous Wear Course 2.0 inches LVWE35030C Bituminous Wear Course 6.0 inches Class 5 Aggregate Base Course The bituminous mixes all follow Mn/DOT Standard Specification 2360. The aggregate base course follows Mn/DOT Standard Specification 3138. This is based on an R-value of 20 for Tessier Road and an R-value of 10 for Haven Lane, Little Fox Lane, and Big Fox Road. The 20 year ESAL for each road is 20,000. However, at these low traffic volumes, the pavement section is governed by constructability instead of traffic. When taking into consideration the select granular borrow in the subgrade (discussed below), the G.E. of the pavement section is 19.8, which is adequate for a 20 year ESAL of 100,000. Pavement Subgrade Preparation Due to sandy lean clay and clayey sand subgrade in many locations on Haven Lane, Little Fox Lane, and Big Fox Road, as well as the silty sand at Tessier Drive, we recommend that a minimum of 1 foot of select granular borrow (Mn/DOT 3149.2) be placed beneath the aggregate base course on these streets. Prior to placing the select granular borrow, test roll the existing soils according to Mn/DOT 2111. Place perforated PE drain tile at the bottom of the select granular borrow, underneath the back of the curb or the edge of the pavement on each side of the street. The drain tile shall have a minimum diameter of 3 inches and be wrapped in a Type I geotextile sock (Mn/DOT 3733). Connect the drain tile to catch basin or manhole structures, or daylight it at a slope. If the drain tile is daylighted at a slope, connect the pipe to a headwall where it daylights. Mn/DOT Standard Plate 3131 C is a suitable headwall. The drain tile shall discharge to a structure or slope at intervals of not more than 400 feet. 2006 Streets, Gem Lake, Minnesota - Geotechnical Recommendations January 18, 2006 Page 3 Compact the select granular borrow to a minimum of 100 percent of Standard Proctor maximum density, according to ASTM D698. Use the Specified Density Method in Mn/DOT 2105 to verify the density, and run a minimum of 3 density tests (sand cone or nuclear gauge) per street in the select granular borrow. Utility Construction Trench excavation should be sloped in accordance with OSHA regulations. The soils encountered vary from sand to sandy lean clay, which corresponds to Type A, B, and C soils according to OSHA. Therefore, for planning purposes, use the worst case soils (Type C) to determine the steepest allowable trench side slopes. This is 1.5(H):l(V) for excavations 20 feet deep or less. OSHA requires that excavations in excess of 20 feet be designed by a licensed Professional Engineer. OSHA regulations state that trench and excavation shoring are solely the responsibility of the contractor. Trenches can be excavated in the on -site soils using conventional methods and equipment (i.e., backhoes). Excavate trenches to the bottom elevation of the pipe, then scarify and re -compact the bottom 6 inches of the trench. Place the pipe on the compacted soil at the bottom of the trench. The backfill around the bottom and sides of the pipe, up to 6 inches above the top of the pipe, must not consist of clay (CL), clayey sand (SC), or silt (ML), or silty sand (SM). Where the bottom of the trench is in these soils, use on -site soils consisting of sand (SP) or sand with silt (SP-SM) for backfill around the pipe. If there is not enough of this type of sand on -site, granular bedding (Mn/DOT 3149.217) will need to be imported. We expect that imported granular bedding will be necessary in the southern 2/3 of Big Fox Road, and in sporadic, isolated locations on the other streets. When the utility cross sections and profiles are available, we recommend that an SEH geotechnical engineer review them to more precisely define where imported granular bedding will be necessary. Place the soils (either suitable on -site soils or imported granular bedding) from the bottom of the trench to 6 inches above the top of the pipe in lifts of not more than 6 inches and compact to a minimum of 95 percent of Standard Proctor maximum density according to ASTM D698. More than 6 inches above the pipe, any on -site soils may be used as backfill in the trench up to the select granular backfill subgrade zone. The soils placed above the pipe must be placed in lifts of not more than 12 inches and compacted to 100 percent of Standard Proctor maximum density (ASTM D698). The on -site clay (CL), clayey sand (SC), and silty sand (SM) tend to be sensitive to fluctuations in moisture content. If these soils are allowed to become wet, achieving the required density for compaction will be very difficult. If this happens, sand will need to be imported from off -site to backfill the trench. This is more likely to happen in the fall, when the weather tends to be relatively cool, cloudy, and rainy. We expect these types of soils to be encountered in the middle and south portions of Big Fox Road, and they occur intermittently on the other streets in this project. In order to achieve proper compaction of the trench backfill, a self-propelled vibrating sheepsfoot roller will be necessary. If utility service lines cross the upper portion of the trench on regular intervals (gas and telephone lines, for example), these services will need to be relocated prior to excavating the trench. There must be enough space to allow proper compaction equipment into the trench, and to allow that equipment to operate without damaging the services. Utilities installed as described above correspond to a Type 5 bedding in AWWA C600-99 and AWWA C605-94. Concrete pipe installed as described above would have Class B bedding according to the Concrete Pipe Design Manual from the American Concrete Pipe Association. 2006 Streets, Gem Lake, Minnesota - Geotechnical Recommendations January 18, 2006 Page 4 Once profiles and cross sections are available for utilities, we recommend that an SEH geotechnical engineer review them. This will allow zones of unsuitable soil in the utility trenches to be more precisely identified on the plans. It will also assist the project designer in assigning quantities/costs for replacing these soils. aj s Enclosures: Report from AET (20 pages), Table of Boring Locations (1 page), Boring Location Plan (1 page) GEOTECHNICAL BORINGS 2006 STREETS AND SCHEUNEMAN ROAD GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA SEH Project Numbers AGEMLK0502.00 and AGEMLK0503.00 17-Jan-06 Boring Number Street Elevation Ramsey Cou ty Coordinates X Y 1 Tessier 947.00 586185,626 198585.940 2 Tessier 957.50 586649.521 198369.701 3 Haven Lane 952.80 586898.240 198599.837 4 Little Fox Lane 956.00 586087.592 196096.682 5 Big Fox Road 965.80 586675.441 196374.539 6 Big Fox Road 976.00 586805.977 195796.793 7 Big Fox Road 958.40 586073.400 195140.724 8 Scheuneman Road 973.00 590492.990 196296.519 9 Scheuneman Road 967.00 590485.493 195773.857 10 Scheuneman Road 961.00 590413.593 194906.827 J AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING INC$ REPORT OF SUBSURFACE BORINGS PROJECT: REPORTED TO: CONSULTANTS . GEOTECHNICAL . MATERIALS . ENVIRONMENTAL VARIOUS ROADS SEH GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE ST. PAUL, MN 55110 AET JOB NO.: 01-02676 ATTN: AJ SCHWIDER DATE: JANUARY 12, 2006 INTRODUCTION During the period of December 2-5, 2005, American Engineering Testing drilled 10 test borings for the referenced project. The scope of services (boring location, depth, etc.) was as requested by SEH. AUTHORIZED WORK SCOPE Soil Borings Procedures The boring locations were made at the approximate locations selected by SEH. We have not included a sketch indicating the boring locations or ground surface elevations at the boring locations as it is our understanding this information will be supplied by others. The boring and sampling was done using the split -spoon and auger methods. Refer to the attached sheets (Field Sampling and Testing Methods) for additional information. This document shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval of American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North . St. Paul, MN 55114 . 651-659-9001 . Fax 651-659-1379 Duluth . Mankato . Marshall . Rochester . Wausau . Rapid City . Pierre . Sioux Falls AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER AET #01-02676 - Page 2 of 3 All boreholes were backfilled with drill cuttings. The surface at each boring location was patched with blacktop patch. A field log was maintained for each soil boring. Information on field logs include: contacts between soil layers; geologic identification (driller's opinion) of materials; notes; and other information. Soil samples were then examined in the laboratory, and soil classification information was added to the field logs. Soil identifications and descriptions are in accordance (generally) with the ASTM Visual -Manual (D2488) system as shown on the attached sheet. The samples will be discarded or returned to the Client at AET's discretion; unless within 30 days' of the report date, the client provides a written request that AET store or ship the samples, at the client's expense. Typed logs were then prepared from field logs. The typed logs may not contain all information shown on field logs. (Field logs are available for inspection by our client.) Results Typed copies of the field logs are enclosed. Refer to the attached logs for a description of the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings. The logs show: the depths to the contacts between the soil layers; the identification and geology of the soils; water level measurements; standard penetration resistance (N-column); the results of laboratory tests; and other information. We wish to point out that the split spoon samples were collected using a modified hammer weight calibrated to No values. For an explanation of this sampling method please refer to the attached Exploration/ Classification Method sheet. Please refer to the other attached sheets for descriptions of terminology used on the logs. Laboratory Tests Standard Proctor, moisture content, Atterberg Limits, sieve analysis, and R-value tests were performed on samples selected by SEH. The results of the tests are presented on the attached boring logs, gradation curves, and R-value data sheet. J AET #01-02676 - Page 3 of 3 REMARKS Subsurface soil and ground water conditions can vary from that encountered in the borings at other locations, depths and times. Refer to the attached sheet for more information regarding limitations of subsurface exploration. As requested by SEH, this is a factual report only. To protect the addressee, the public, and ourselves, this report (and all supporting information) is provided for the addressee's own use. No representations are made to parties other than the addressee. American Engineering Testing, Inc. appreciates this opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions or need further help, please call me at (651) 659-1356. Report Prepared By: American Engineering Testing, Inc. Pat Francis Drilling Manager AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET JOB NO: 01-02676 LOG OF BORING NO. 1 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Various Roads: Gem Lake. MN DEEPNTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TEE IN 5.5" Bituminous pavement SU 1 6" FILL, silty sand, a little gravel, brown, frozen to about I V (possible base FILL 23 F/M SS 12 2 FILL, mostly silt • sand a little lean clay,brown SILTY SAND, fine grained, light brown, moist, 9 M SS 12 48 3 loose (SM) 4 5 13 M SS 10 6 SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, 7 light brown, moist, medium dense (SP) 13 M SS 6 8 9 10 14 M SS 8 11 COARSE 12 :. ALLUVIUM 13 14 M SS 10 14 15 SAND WITH SILT, fine grained, light brown, 23 M SS 10 moist, medium dense (SP-SM) 16 17 18 23 M SS 3 SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, 19 light brown, moist, medium dense (SP) 20 23 M SS 10 21 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-19'/2' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH DRILLING FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 12/2/05 2:30 21.0 19.5 20.9 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF COMPLETED: 12/2/05 TERMINOLOGY ON DR: DS LG: JB Rig 33C THIS LOG 06/04 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET JOB NO: 01-02676 LOG OF BORING NO. 2 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Various Roads; Gem Lake, MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL 'a-#20( FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE 3" Bituminous pavement SU 1 _ 7" FILL, sand with silt, a little gravel, brown, frozen to 10" (possible base 14 F/M SS 12 FILL, mixture of silty sand and clayey sand, a 2 FILL 3 - little gravel, brown 9 M SS 12 4- 5- SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine to COARSE 13 M SS 8 6 - medium grained, brown, moist, medium dense ALLUVIUM (Sp-SM) 7- 8- 16 M SS 10 9- 10- CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, brown, stiff TILL 14 M SS 18 (SC) l i — 12- 13 — 10 M SS 12 SAND, fine to medium grained, brown, moist, 14 loose, lenses of silt and laminations of silty sand (Sp) 15 COARSE 9 M SS 10 16 ALLUVIUM 17 18 10 M SS 8 19- 9 SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, 20 - light brown, moist, medium dense (SP) 13 M SS 12 21 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-19'/2' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH DRILLING FLUIDLEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 12/2/05 1:45 21.0 19.5 20.8 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING COMPLETED: 12/2/05 TERMINOLOGY ON DR: DS LG: JB Rig: 33C THIS LOG 06/04 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET JOB NO: 01-02676 LOG OF BORING NO. 3 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Various Roads; Gem Lake, MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL %20 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TEE IN. 2.5" Bituminous pavement SU 1 FILL, mixture of silty sand and clayey sand, a FILL little gravel, brown, frozen to 1.5' F/M SS 6 2 8 M SS 12 3 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, brown, firm to TILL 4 stiff, lenses of silty sand (SC) 9 5 11 M SS 12 25 6- SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL, fine to medium ' : COARSE 7— 8 grained, brown, moist, dense (SM) : ALLUVIUM 32 M SS 12 OR TILL 9 SAND, fine grained, brown, moist, medium 10 dense, lenses of lean clay (SP) 13 M SS 10 11 12 COARSE ALLUVIUM 26 M SS 12 13 SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, 14 light brown, moist, medium dense (SP) 15 30 M SS 10 16 17 26 M SS 10 18 19 20 26 M SS 12 21 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-19/: 3.25" HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH DRILLING FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVELTTHEATTACHED 12/5/05 9:40 21.0 19.5 20.8 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 12/5/05 DR: DS LG: JB Rig: 33C THIS LOG 06104 AMERICAN 1 ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG nn nT nnDTATr-' ATn A !n 1 of 11 AET JUB NU: U 1—VGy / u- PROJECT: Various Roads: Gem Lake MN DEPTH FEET SURFACE ELEVATION: MATERIAL DESCRIPTION GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE TYPE' REC FIELD &LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL o #20 2.I" Bituminous avement 1 FILL F SU FILL, mostly silty sand, a little gravel, brown, frozen to 2' 2 3 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, reddish brown, stiff (SC) WEATHEREE TILL 10 M SS 12 4 5 SILTY SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium 18 M SS 12 6grained, brown, moist, medium dense (SM) 7 12 M SS 10 8 SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, 9 brown, moist, medium dense (SP) 10 14 M x SS 10 11 - - COARSE 12 13 SAND WITH GRAVEL, possible cobbles, fine to medium grained, light brown, moist, medium dense (SP) ALLUVIUM 26 M SS 8 14 15 21 M SS 10 16 17 SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, light brown, moist, medium dense (SP) 21 M x SS 10 18 - 19 20 22 M SS 8 21 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-19%:' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN I DEPTH DRILLING FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 12/5/05 10:30 21.0 19.5 20.7 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BOPJNG TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 1215/05 THIS LOG DR: DS LG: JB Rig: 33C 06/04 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET JOB NO: 01-02676 LOG OF BORING NO. 5 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Various Roads; Gem Lake. MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL 4-420 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION N MC TYPE IN. 3" Bituminous pavement 1 F SU 2 FILL, mixture of lean clay with sand, sand}, lean FILL 13 M SS 12 3 clay, clayey sand and silt, a little gravel, a piece of bituminous at about 5', brown and reddish 4 brown, frozen to 2' 5 21 M SS 12 6 7- 9 g 18 M SS 15 9 10 SAND, fine grained, light brown, moist, medium = 22 M SS 12 11 dense, lenses and laminations of silt and silty sand (SP) 12 13 - 25 M SS 12 14 COARSE 15 ALLUVIUM 21 M SS 10 16 SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, light brown, moist, medium dense (SP) 17 18 - 19 20 26 M SS 12 21 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-19%' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH DRILLING FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 12/5/05 11:30 21.0 19.5 20.8 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING COMPLETED: 12/5/05 TERMINOLOGY ON DR: DS LG: JB Rig: 33C THIS LOG Q6/U4 AMERICAN 1 ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET 70B NO: 01-02676 LOG OF BORING NO. 6 (p. I of 1) PROJECT: Various Roads; Gem Lake, MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL 464201 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. 3" Bituminous pavement 1 _ 6.5" FILL, silty sand with gravel, brown, frozen F SU (apparent base 2 - FILL FILL, mostly silty sand, a little gravel, brown, frozen to 2' 18 M SS 12 3 _ 4- — 5 6 M SS 15 6- SILTY SAND, trace roots, fine grained, brown, 7 - moist, loose to medium dense, laminations of sand and lean clay (SM) 12 M SS 12 8- 9- 10 10 M SS 10 11 COARSE ALLUVIUM 12 18 M SS 12 13 14 -- 15 — SAND WITH SILT WITH GRAVEL, possible 41 M SS 12 16 — cobbles, fine grained, light brown, moist, dense (SP-SM) 17 — 18 -- 19 — SAND WITH GRAVEL, fine to medium grained, light brown, moist, medium dense (SP) 20 — 29 M SS 10 21 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 1 n 0-19/z 3.25 HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CAVE-IN DEP H FLUID LEEVEL LEVEL THE ATTACHED 12/5/05 12:15 21.0 19.5 20.7 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 12/5/05 DR: DS LG: JB Rig: 33C I T THIS LOG 06104 AMERICAN 1 ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET JOB NO: 01-02676 LOG OF BORING NO. 7 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Various Roads; Gem Lake, MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN' WC DEN LL PL 46420 2.75" Bituminous pavement F SU FILL, silty sand with gravel, brown, frozen (apparent base 2 — FILL FILL, mostly sand with silt, a little gravel, brown frozen 22 M SS 10 FILL, mostly sandy lean clay with gravel, a 3 — 4- 9 5 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, brown to 14 M SS 18 6 _ reddish brown, stiff to very stiff (SC) 7- 25 M SS 12 8_ TILL 9- 10 - 22 M SS 18 11 - 9 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, reddish 12 brown, very stiff, laminations of gray silty sand 18 M SS 18 13 - (CL) 14 - — 15 20 M SS 12 16 — SILTY SAND, fine grained, brown, moist, COARSE 17 — medium dense, lenses of silt (SM) ALLUVIUM 18 — 19 — 20 — 29 M SS 15 21 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO DATE TIIv1E SAMPLED CASING CDEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL T� ATTACHED " 0-19/: 3.25 HSA 12/5/05 1:30 21.0 19.5 20.9 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 12/5/05 THIS LOG DR: DS LG: JB Rig: 33C 06/04 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET JOB NO: 01-02676 LOG OF BORING NO. 8 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Various Roads; Gem Lake, MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL 464201 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. 6.75" Bituminous pavement SU 6" FILL, sand with silt with gravel, brown, 1 _ frozen to 1' (apparent base 26 F/M SS 12 2- 8 M x SS 18 3_ FILL, mostly silty sand, a little gravel, dark FILL 4 - brown and brown 9 5 - 5 M SS 18 6- LEAN CLAY, brown, firm (CL) (may be fill) FINE 7 6 M SS 10 8 - OR FILL 9- 10 - SILTY SAND, fine grained, brown, moist, loose COARSE ALLUVIUM 6 M SS 12 ( SM) (may be fill) OR FILL 11- SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine to 12 13 medium grained, brown, moist, loose (SP-SM) 10 M SS 12 14 15 - SAND, a little fine to medium grained, COARSE 9 M SS 12 16 gravel, brown, moist, loose, a lense of lean clay at about :'•' ALLUVIUM 18' (SP) 17 - 7 M SS 10 18 - SILTY SAND, fine grained, brown, a little dark 19 brown mottled, moist to wet, loose, laminations 20 - of lean clay (SM) 7 M/W SS 12 21 - SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, gray and TILL TW 24 22 brown mottled to grayish brown, firm to stiff 23 - (CL) 15 M SS 18 24 - [END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO " 0-23 3.25 HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTTH DEPTHING FLUID LEVEL LEVEL T� ATTACHED 12/2/05 11:10 24.5 23.0 24.5 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 12/2/05 THIS LOG DR: DS LG: JB Rig: 33C 06/04 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET JOB NO: 01-02676 LOG OF BORING NO. 9 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Various Roads; Gem Lake, MN DEEP�TH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL 46420 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. 7" Bituminous pavement SU 1 _ FILL FILL, mostly clayey sand with gravel, dark brown, frozen to F 23 M SS 5 2 12 M SS 10 3 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, brown, TILL OR 11 35 14 50 4 - stiff, a lense of clayey sand (CL) (may be fill) 1 FILL 9 5 14 M SS 12 6- 9 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, trace TILL 7 8 - roots, brown and light grayish brown mottled, 14 M SS 18 stiff (CL) 9- - to - 19 M SS 10 11- 12 SAND WITH GRAVEL, fine to medium COARSE 13 grained, light brown, moist, medium dense to .ALLUVIUM 25 M SS 5 dense (SP) 14- 15 - 19 M SS 8 16 - 17 - 26 M SS 3 18 - 19- 20 32 M SS 0 21 END OF BORING Note: Collective bag sample taken 2'--5' in adjacent boring. *Results from tests on collective bag sample Maximum Dry Density =116.3 pcf Optimum Moisture = 14.3% DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 11 0-19/: 3.25 HSA DATE TIME S DEPTH DEPTH CASING DEPTH FLUIDLEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 12/2/05 10:10 21.0 19.5 20.5 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 12/2/05 I DR: DS LG: JB Rig: 33C THIS LOG 06104 AMERICAN 1 ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET JOB NO: 01-02676 LOG OF BORING NO. 10 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Various Roads; Gem Lake, A N DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL o-#20 IN FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. 5.5" Bituminous pavement SU 4" FILL, silty sand, a little gravel, brown, frozen 1 _ a arentbase 37 M SS 10 2 - FILL, mostly silty sand, a little gravel, pieces of bituminous dark brown frozen to about 1' 8 M SS 15 3 FILL, mixture of sandy lean clay and clayey FILL 9 4 _ sand, a little gravel and organic clay, trace roots, 5 _ dark gray, grayish brown and black 7 M SS 18 6- 7- 9 M SS 18 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, gray, WEATTAEREI 8 _ brown and dark brown mottled, stiff (CL) (may TILL OR 9 --_be fill) FILL 9 10__ SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, gray, WEATHEREE 9 M SS 18 brown and reddish brown mottled, stiff (CL) TILL 11 - 12 - TW 15 13 - SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, brown TILL 10 M SS 18 14 and gray mottled, stiff, a lense of lean clay at about 14.5' (CL) 15 - 15 M SS 15 16- 17 -- 18 - SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, COARSE 37 M SS 10 light brown, moist, dense to medium dense (SP) ALLUVIUM 19 - 9 20 28 M SS 10 21 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO DATE TIME HED S DEPTH DE DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL T� ATTACHED " 0-19/: 3.25 HSA 12/2/05 9:20 21.0 19.5 20.8 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF TERMINOLOGY ON COORINGMPLETED: 12/2/05 THIS LOG DR: DS LG: JB Rig. 33C 06/04 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 1. 1G On fn IM )nn 95 90 85 80 P 75 E R 70 C E 65 N T 60 F I 55 N E 50 R 45 B Y 40 W E 35 I G 30 H T 25 20 IS 10 5 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLHAETERS COBBLES I GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification #1 2.8' Classification SILTY SAND MC% LL PL PI Cc Cu NP NP NP I Specimen Identification I D100 I D60 I D30 D10 %Gravel I %Sand I %Silt I %Clay *I #1 2.8' 1 9.50 1 0.10 1 0.1 52.2 47.6 PROJECT Various Roads; Gem Lake, MN I AET JOB NO. 01-0267, DATE 12/2/05 AMERICAN ENGINEERING GRADATION CURVES TESTING, INC. U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 1M 9 L 1n 14 in cn _ inn _ inn 100 95 90 a5 so P 75 E R 70 C E 65 N T 60 F I 55 N E 50 R 45 B Y 40 W E 35 I G 30 H T 25 20 15 10 5 0 Itll(I��Nl�lt�ulliii'3��l�Itl��l1��L1�e1�,1� 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLRAETERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coazse fine I coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification MC% LL PL PI Cc Cu #3 5.3' CLAYEY SAND NP NP NP I Specimen Identification l D100 I D60 D30 I 1310 %Gravel I %Sand 1 %Silt I %Clay I 0#3 5.3' 1 9.50 1 0.31 1 0.109 1 1 1.5 1 73.1 I 25.4 1 PROJECT Various Roads; Gem Lake, MN DATE JOB NO. 01-02676 DATE 12/5/05 AMERICAN ENGINEERING GRADATION CURVES �� TESTING, INC. U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER c 4 q 2 14 1 ai4 1/2 aix 3 a 6 s 10 1416 20 30 40 50 70 100 140 200 100 95 90 85 80 P 75 R70 C E 65 N T 60 I55 N E so R B 45 Y 40 W E 35 I G 30 H T 25 20 15 10 5 iI Hill M110% lismi-lililloollilili 111111111111M 1111011 liililloo INN 01111111111 1! NONE in I NEI MINE 011,11 Iloilo RISE Iloilo llinsEiiiiiiism ilmmiiiiiilmmiiiiiiimEllill 1111111111111 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse I fine coarse I medium I fine Specimen Identification #9 3.5' Classification SANDY LEAN CLAY MC% LL PL PI Cc Cu 11 35 14 21 Specimen Identification 13100 D60 D30 D10 I %Gravel I %Sand I %Silt I %Clay #9 3.5' 12.50 0.16 2.4 47.2 50.4 I PROJECT Various Roads; AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. MN GRADATION CURVES AET JOB NO. DATE R - VALUE PROJECT NUMBER 32926 DATA SHEET J.N. 01-2676 BORING NUMBER: 9 @ 2'-5' SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Brown Sandy Clay Item a SPECIMEN b c Mold Number 13 14 15 Water added, grams 120 90 78 Initial Test Water, % 16.7 14.1 13.0 Compact Gage Pressure,psi 45 100 150 Exudation Pressure., psi 223 396 5919 Height Sample;; Inches 2.52 2A8 Gross Weight Mold, grams 318Q —2-:55 3229 3215 Tare Weight -Mold, grams 2089 2080 2076 Sample Wet Weight, grams 1091 11,49 1139 Expansion., Inches x 1 Oexp-4 0 22 45 Stability 2,000 1bs (1 00psi) 61 1 142 49 / 123 43 1 112 Turns Displacement 3.27 2.58 2.37 R-Value Undarrected 9 23.* 31 R-Value Corrected 9 23 31 Dry Density, pcf 112.4 1 19Y 123.2 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA Traffic Index Assumed: 4.0 4.*10 4.0 G.E. byStability 0.93 0.79 0.71 G. E. by Expansion 0.00 0.73 1.50 Equilibrium R-Value 11 by EXUDATION Examined & Checked: 12 /28/ 05 Il k, REMARKS: Gf = 1.25 0.0% Retained on the 3/4" sieve. - 0, n R.—M`a- tE 306159 The data above is based upon processing and testing arifotei--ci�,,-,,ieeved from the field. Test procedures in accordance with Physical Research'gWc n', Office of Research Coordination, Minnesota Department of Highways, Investigation No. 176. R-VALUE GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION PROJECT NO. 32 2/n 400 0 247,6 J 350 BORING NO. I Q Z1-5' 300 DATE 200 TRAFFIC INDEXA,,cSQ-vneJ 41.0 100 C) R-VALUE BY EXUDATION 0 R-VALUE BY EXPANSION uCD ,Lqops, 800 700 600 500 400 3001200 100 91=09immmilulp M-9 g FAS a k W ON mill ims-eigms—affimm aF;f2ZM-ffggNR Mr gilffigillwic.- CCSs NO 5MR1 3iMmm— UFA go Emig OEM—, N9,0901 i 9 M I rill go 9 - 2-1 pa i I W. I FE ISM 9 WS r-1 i 5-m—liffiNFAMRI5l. MENIENER9 I M 1g rill M "199iii-l! on-ET-WRNMEN-99 FA i sm r Ep MES MEN Firl i 3-11191 rl I 1.0 2.0 3.0 COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION,, FT. 100 90 $o 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 4.0 15 ON dWEEW IN 157 .0 &S 0/0' MOISTURE AT FABRICATION le mm=mmmmu mmmm=mlff mmim mmmil mmmm mffEs = lifffiffilim W = ME 6 a = Pon ffifflEffmam mown NO 15,0 % MOISTURE 0 is R-VALUE vs. EXUD. PRES. 14 14 T by EXUDATION A EXUD. T vs. EXPAN. T A A A T by EXPANSION REMARKS ,�� -- 1. -z5- Mi nneso�q � 4.1 1 3.1 2.( a lj:ilk4k,,k * Annin PROFESSIONAL PAVEMENT ENGINEERING BORING LOG NOTES DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS TESL' SYMBOLS Symbol Definition Symbol Definition CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test B,H,N: Size of flush -joint casing DEN: Dry density, pcf CA: Crew Assistant (initials) DST: Direct shear test CAS: Pipe casing, number indicates nominal diameter in E: Pressuremeter Modulus, tsf inches HYD: Hydrometer analysis CC: Crew Chief (initials) LL: Liquid Limit, % COT: Clean -out tube LP: Pressuremeter Limit Pressure, tsf DC: Drive casing; number indicates diameter in inches OC: Organic Content, % DM: Drilling mud or bentonite slurry PERM: Coefficient of permeability (K) test; F - Field; DR: Driller (initials) L - Laboratory DS: Disturbed sample from auger flights PL: Plastic Limit, % FA: Flight auger; number indicates outside diameter in qP: Pocket Penetrometer strength, tsf (approximate) inches qc: Static cone bearing pressure; tsf HA: Hand auger; number indicates outside diameter q": Unconfined compressive strength, psf HSA: Hollow stem auger; number indicates inside diameter R: Electrical Resistivity, ohm -eras in inches RQD: Rock,Quality Designation ofRock Core, in percent LG: Field logger (initials) (aggregate length of core pieces 4" or more in length MC: Column used to describe moisture condition of as a percent of total core ru ) samples and for the groundwater level symbols SA: Sieve analysis N (BPF): Standard penetration resistance (N-value) in blows per TRX: Triaxial compression test foot (see notes) VSR: Vane shear strength, remoulded (field), psf NQ wireline core barrel VSU: Vane shear strength, undisturbed (field), psf PQ wireline core barrel WC: Water content, as.percent of dry weight Rotary drilling with fluid and roller or drag bit %-200: Percent of material finer than #200 sieve REC: In split -spoon (see notes) and thin -walled tube sampling, the recovered length (in inches) of sample. STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NOTES In rock coring, the length of core recovered (Calibrated Hammer Weight) (expressed as percent of the total core run). Zero The standard penetration test consists of driving a split -spoon indicates no sample recovered. sampler with a drop hammer (calibrated weight varies to provide REV: Revert drilling fluid N60 values) and counting the number of blows applied in each of SS: Standard split -spoon sampler (steel; 1%" is inside three 6" increments of penetration. If the sampler is driven less diameter; 2" outside diameter); unless indicated than 18" (usually in highly resistant material), permitted in otherwise ASTM:D1586, the blows for each complete 6" increment and SU Spin -up sample from hollow stem auger for each partial increment is on the boring log. For partial TW: Thin -walled tube; number indicates inside diameter increments, the number of blows is shown to the nearest 0.1' in inches below the slash. WASH: Sample of material obtained by screening returning rotary drilling fluid or by which has collected inside The length of sample recovered, as shown on the "REC" the borehole after "falling" through drilling fluid column, may be greater than the distance indicated in the N WH: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod and column. The disparity is because the N-value is recorded below hammer the initial 6" set (unless partial penetration defined in WR: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod ASTM:D1586 is encountered) whereas the length of sample 94mm: 94 millimeter wireline core barrel recovered is for the entire sampler drive (which may even V • Water level directly measured in boring extend more than 18"). 0: Estimated water level based solely on sample appearance O1REP052C(O1/05) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ASTM Designations: D 2487, D2488 Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests" Group Svmbol Soil Classification Group Name Coarse -Grained Gravels Moro Clean Gravels Cu>4 and 1<Cc<3 GW Well graded gravel Soils More than 50016 coarse Less than 5% than 50% fraction retained frnese Cu<4 and/or I>Cc>3 GP Poorly graded gravel retained on on No. 4 sieve No. 200 sieve Gravels with Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel Fines more than 12% fines c Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel Sands 50%or Clean Sands Cu>6 and I<Cc<3` SW Well -graded sand' more of coarse Less than 5% fraction passes fines Cu<6 or 1>Cc>3 SP Poorly -graded San No. 4 sieve Sands with Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand Fines more than 12%fines o Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand Fine -Grained Silts and Clays inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above CL Lean cla Soils 50%or Liquid limit less "A" liner more passes than 50 PI<4 or ?lots below ML Sil the No. 200 "A" line sieve organic Liquid limit-ovn dried m.7s OL Organic cl (see Plasticity Liquid limit —not dried Organic sih--"to Chart below) Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat cla Liquid limit 50 or more PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic sil organic Liouid limit --oven dried <o,7S OH Organic cla liquid limit —not dried Organic sih-"Q Highly organic Primarily organic matter, dark PT Pea soil in color, and organic in odor SIM AN'u vats F" a. a.r}—s.."^..—� ■ AMERICAN ENGINEERING 13 TESTING, INC. Notes "Based on the material passing the 3-in V5-min) sieve. If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name. cGravels with S to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well -graded gravel with silt GW-GC weH-graded gravel with clay GP -GM poorly graded gravel with silt GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay °Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well -graded sand with silt SW -SC well -graded sand with clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay (Dw)2. ECu = D6o /Dio, Cc- Diox Dw FIf soil contains >15% sand, add "with sand" to group name. olffines classify as CL-MI, use dual s7mbol GC -GM, or SC-SM. If fines are organic, add -with organic fines" to group name. 'if soil contains >15% gravel, add "with ravel" to group name. If Atterberg limits plot is hatched area, soils is a CL-ML silty clay. xIf soil contains 15 to 294/6 plus No. 200 add "with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is predominant. LIf soil contains >30% plus No. 200, predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. MY soil contains >30% plusNo.200, predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. 8PI>4 and plots on or above "A" line oPl<4 or plots below "A" line. PPI plots on or above "A" line. QPI plots below "A" line. RFiber Content description shown below • . I a u .1 0 10 ti io n 40 x a) M a 1 to PAInteLE &M N MLLtAErEA6 UOUDMIT (Ly 20 u Plasticity Chart ADDMONAL TERMWOLOGY2NOTES:USED BY,AETFOR SOIL`IDENTIFICA-TION AND DESCRIPTION. Grain Size Term Panicle Sint Gravel Pmtritaees Term Percent Consistcncv of Plastic Soils Relative Density of Non -Plastic Soils Term N-Value, BPF Term N-Value. BPF Boulders Over 12" Cobbles 3" to 12" Gravel #4 sieve to 3" Sand #200 to #4 sieve Fines (silt & clay) Pass #200 sieve A Little Gravel 3% -14% With Gravel 15%- 29% Gravelly 30Yo - Yr/o Very Soft less than 2 Soft 2-4 Firm 5-8 Stiff 9 - 15 Very Stiff 16 - 30 Hard Greater than 30 Very Loose 0-4 Loose 5 - 10 Medium Dense 11 - 30 Dense 31 -50 Very Dense Greater than 50 Alnicture/Frost Condition (MC Column) D (Dry): Absense of moisture, dusty, dry to touch. M (Moist): Damp, although free water not visible. Soil may still have a high water content (over "optimum"). Laverine Notes Laminations: Layers less than W thick of differing material or color. Lenses: Pockets or layers Fiber Content of Peat Fiber Content Term (Visual Estimate) Fibric Peat: Greater than 67% Hemic Peat: 33 — 67% Sapric Peat: Less than 33% Organic/Roos Description (if no lab tests) Soils are described as organicif soil is not peat and is judged to have sufficient organic fines content to influence the soil properties. !,s ightly onzanic used for borderline cases. With roots: Judged to have sufficient quantity W (Wet/ Free water visible intended to greater than h" Waterbearing): describe non -plastic soils. thick of differing Waterbearing usually relates to material or color. sands and sand with silt F (Frozen): Soil frozen of roots to influence the soil properties. Trace roots: Small roots present, but not judged to be in sufficient quantity to significantly affect soil properties. O1CLS021(2/04) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. CITY OF GEM LAKE MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING 17 APRIL 2006 The April, 2006 regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Gem Lake was called to order by Mayor Emeott on Monday, 17 April 2006 at 7:02 PM in the first floor meeting room of Tousley Ford. Mayor Emeott, Councilors Bosak, Schilling, Rasmussen and Watson and Clerk Magnuson were present. Also present were Jim Lindner of the Planning Commission, Mr. & Mrs. Swomley, Mr. & Mrs. Pientka, Mr. & Mrs. Hendrickson and Ms. Heffern. Following Mayor Emeott's request for additions, deletions, or corrections, the following actions were taken: 1) unanimous approval of the 20 March 2006 Minutes of the City Council meeting as presented on Motion by Bosak, Second by Watson; 2) unanimous approval of the Minutes of the City Council Public Hearing of 10 April 2006 on Motion by Bosak, Second by Schilling; 3) unanimous approval of the Minutes of the City Council Public Hearing of 12 April 2006 on Motion by Bosak, Second by Watson; 4) unanimous approval of the 17 April 2006 Agenda of the City Council meeting as amended on Motion by Bosak, Second by Watson. The Clerk then presented General Announcements. The report of the Planning Commission was presented by Mayor Emeott in the form of a letter from the Chairman to Mayor Emeott, said report having been distributed electronically to the Council in advance. Motion by Watson, Second by Schilling to accept the Chairman's report was unanimously approved. Staff reports were presented by the Clerk and included comments as follows: 1) The application for a variance submitted by Mr. Macalus remains incomplete and it is noted for the record that Mr. Macalus failed to appear before the Planning Commission and present supplemental data as requested. Notice to Mr. Macalus will be sent again. 2) The pending application by Flanagan Properties of 1567 East County Road E and Enterprise Car Rental has been delayed due to unexpected terms included in the lease by Enterprise. The matter may still come before the Planning Commission and City Council in April. Magnuson then reported on the status ofthe following ongoing proj ects: 1) SEH sewer protocols are near completion and will, upon review, be sent out for bid; and, 2) the SEH water feasability study nearing completion and a preliminary draft is forthcoming; and, 3) 1" quarter recycling; and, 4) street maintenance including sweeping Scheuneman Road and Tessier Road; and, 5) Public Safety projects and Sheriff s reports that continue to be sent to Council and interested parties via the internet; and, 6) no response from Mr. McNulty regarding requested sewer dedication in accordance with the developers agreement. Motion by Emeott, Second by Watson to adopt Resolution No. 2006-11, "A Resolution Establishing the City of Gem Lake Plan Review Commission As An Advisory Board To The City Council and City Staff And Defining It's Function" was unanimously approved. Following discussion with several residents present and in review of public comments made at the public hearings, Motion by Watson, Second by Schilling to adopt Resolution No. 2006-12, "A Resolution Of The City Of Gem Lake, Minnesota Ordering Certain Public Improvements" was unanimously approved. At the request of several residents of the Haven Lane/Tessier Road neighborhood, the City Council ordered the City Clerk to prepare a possible "Well Testing Ordinance" for presentation prior to the end of August, 2006. Motion by Emeott, Second by Bosak to implement a Public Works project for the design, manufacture and installation of City Limit Signs was unanimously approved. Motion by Schilling, Second by Rasmussen to continue to support Cooperation Agreements with Ramsey County to assist in securing Community Development Block Grants and to empower Mayor Emeottto execute said agreement with Ramsey County was unanimously approved. Due to the early meeting date of the April Council meeting, data from Premier Bank has not been received to provide Treasurer's Reports for March, 2006. March Treasurer Reports will be provided for the May meeting. Payment of bills totaling $40,340.07 was unanimously approved. Page 1 of 5 The Clerk then presented the 2005 Annual Financial Report as prepared by Smith Schafer, including the report submitted to the State Auditor as required by law. Following discussion, Motion by Watson, Second by Bosak to accept the 2005 Annual Financial Report as prepared by Smith Schafer was unanimously approved and a summary of sane is hereby ordered for publication. Magnuson then discussed potential pursuit of securing a one-half (0.005 or'/2%) percent sales tax during the 2007 legislative session. In order to proceed, we need to begin now to have a complete capital plan ready by the fall. This would also require us to identify grants to be sought to support the plan as well. Consensus was to proceed with getting all necessary information to commence the process in the fall. The next meeting of the Gem Lake City Council is scheduled for 15 May 2006. Additional public hearings are scheduled for Monday, 24 April 2006 for business residents. The Planning Commission is scheduled to meet on Tuesday, 06 June 2006. There being no further business, Motion by Watson, Second by Schilling to adjourn at 8:44 PM was unanimously approved. AUTHORED: 05 May 2006 APPROVED: 15 May 2006 ATTEST: ATTEST: Frederic C. Ma on Hugh Schilling 000l City Clerk Acting Mayor jjj efile: Minuccsl2 /W194aprm.wpd Page 2 of 5 RAMSEY COUNTY Working %ith You to Enhance our Quality of We Office of the County Manager David J. Twa, County Manager 250 Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55102 MEMORANDUM TO: City Managers/Administrators FROM: Mary Lou Egan..'1,1ti,�ti'� Community & Econdmiclvelopmien DATE: June 2, 2006 SUBJECT: CDBG Requalification Agreement Tel:651-266-8000 Fax:651-266-8039 e-mail: david.twa@co.ramsey.mn.us Enclosed is a copy of the fully executed Requalification Agreement relating to Ramsey County's Community & Economic Development Program for your records. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call me at 651- 266-8025. sam Enclosure Excellence* Respect • Diversity Printed on recycled paper with a minimum of 10% post -consumer content AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT This Agreement ("Agreement") is between the Ramsey County Housing and Redevelopment Authority ("Authority") and Lo- ("Municipality") each a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, and is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, as amended. WHEREAS Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §5301 et seg., as amended, ("CDBG Act") provides for a program of community development block grants; and. WHEREAS, computation of a county's population as an Urban County may include persons residing in units of general local government within the county with which it has entered into cooperative agreements to undertake or to assist in the undertaking of essential activities l pursuant to community development block grants; and WHEREAS, Ramsey County, Minnesota qualifies as an "Urban County" as that term is used in the CDBG Act and is eligible to receive community development block grant funds; and, WHEREAS, the HOME Investment Partnerships Act, Title II of the Cranston -Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §12701 et seq., as amended ("HOME Act") provides for support for affordable housing activities; and WHEREAS, Ramsey County is a member of the Anoka, Dakota, Ramsey, and Washington Counties HOME Consortium ("Consortium") formed pursuant to the HOME Act; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to a Joint Powers Agreement executed May 4, 1993, the Authority assumed all rights and duties of Ramsey County related to the administration of CDBG and RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Pagel of 7 j HOME funds received from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Now, Therefore, the Parties agree: 1. DEFINITIONS For the purposes of this Agreement, the terms defined in this section have the meanings given to them: "Act" means either the CDBG Act or the HOME Act, or both, depending upon the context. "CDBG Regulations" means those regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 570, as amended. "Cooperating Community" means any city, town, or township in Ramsey County which has entered into a Cooperation Agreement, as amended, substantially similar to this Agreement and its Amendments. "HOME Regulations" means those regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 92, as amended. "Regulations" means either the CDBG Regulations or the HOME Regulations, or both, depending upon the context. 2. SCOPE The Authority and Municipality will cooperate to undertake or assist in undertaking community renewal and low and moderate income housing assistance activities and other eligible activities authorized by the CDBG Act and HOME Act. RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 2 of 7 The Authority and Municipality will cooperate in establishing priorities and in preparation of the application for a grant. The Authority will prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies, all necessary applications for a basic grant amount under the CDBG Act and the HOME Act. In preparing the grant application and allocating grant funds received, the Authority will consider projects proposed by the Municipality. The Authority reserves the right to propose projects which are both consistent with the mutually established goals, needs and priorities and within its statutory implementation authority. No Municipality shall be required to propose a project. The Authority shall have final responsibility for selecting projects and will distribute to the Municipality such funds as are determined appropriate for the Municipality to use in implementing a project. The Authority may implement projects within the Municipality as are determined appropriate by the Authority. 3. TERM The term of this Agreement is for Federal Fiscal Years 2007 - 2009. The Agreement remains in effect until the CDBG and HOME funds and program income received with respect to activities carried out during the initial three year qualification period, and any successive qualification periods, are expended and the funded activities completed. Neither the Authority nor the Municipality may terminate or withdraw from this Agreement during that period. This Agreement will be automatically renewed for participation in successive three year qualification periods, unless the Authority or the Municipality provide written notice it elects not to participate in a new qualification period. By the date specified in HUD's urban county RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 3 of 7 qualification notice for the next qualification period, the Authority will notify the Municipality in writing of its right not to participate. Both the Authority and Municipality are required to adopt any amendment to this Agreement incorporating changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in an Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for a subsequent three year urban county qualification period. Failure to adopt the necessary amendment will void the automatic renewal for such qualification period. 4. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS A. The CDBG Act and CDBG Regulations are incorporated herein by reference. The HOME Act and HOME Regulations are incorporated herein by reference. B. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent or otherwise modify or abrogate the right of the Authority or Municipality to submit individual applications for discretionary funds in the event Ramsey County does not receive designation as an Urban County entity under the CDBG Act C. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude the Municipality from establishing a Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469. D. In the event that there is a revision of the Act and/or Regulations which would make this Agreement out of compliance with the Act or Regulations, both parties will review this Agreement to renegotiate those items necessary to bring the Agreement into compliance. E. The Municipality shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the Authority, Ramsey County, their officials, agents, and employees against any and all liability, losses, costs, damages, expenses, claims or actions, including attorney's fees, which the Authority, Ramsey County, their officials, agents, or employees may hereafter sustain, incur or be RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 4 of 7 required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any act or omission of the Municipality, its officials, agents or employees, in the execution, performance, or failure to adequately perform its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. F. The Authority shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Municipality, its officials, agents, and employees against any and all liability, losses, costs, damages, expenses, claims or actions, including attorney's fees, which the Municipality, its officials, agents, or employees may hereafter sustain, incur or be required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any act or omission of the Authority, its officials, agents or employees, in the execution, performance, or failure to adequately perform its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. G. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver by the Authority, Ramsey County, or the Municipality of any statutory or common law immunities, limits, or exceptions on liability. H. The Authority and the Municipality shall maintain financial and other records and accounts in accordance with the requirements of the Act and Regulations. Such records and accounts will be in such form as to permit the Authority to prepare required reports and to permit the tracing of grant funds and program income to final expenditure. I. The Authority and the Municipality agree to make available all records and accounts with respect to matters covered by this Agreement at all reasonable times to their respective personnel and duly authorized federal officials. Such records shall be retained as provided by law, but in no event for a period of less than six years from the date of completion of any activity funded under the Act or less than three years from the last receipt of program income resulting from activity implementation. The Authority shall RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 5 of 7 perform all audits of the basic grant amounts and resulting program income as required under the Act and Regulations. J. All projects undertaken pursuant to this Agreement shall be subject to home rule charter provisions, assessment, planning, zoning, sanitary, and building laws, ordinances and regulations applicable to the Municipality in which the project is situated. K. The parties further agree that pursuant to 24 CFR 570.501 (b), the Municipality is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including a written agreement as set forth in 24 CFR 570.503. L. By executing this Agreement the Municipality understands that it: 1. may not apply for grants from appropriations under the Small Cities or State CDBG Programs for fiscal years during the period in which it participates in the Authority's CDBG program; and 2. may participate in a HOME Program only through the Authority. If Ramsey County does not receive a HOME formula allocation, the Municipality may not form a HOME consortium with other units of general local government. M. Both the Authority and Municipality are obliged to take all actions necessary to assure compliance with Ramsey County's certification required by section l 04(b) of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act, section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, and other applicable laws. The Authority is prohibited from funding for activities, in or in support of, any cooperating unit of general local government that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes its actions to comply with its fair housing certification. N. The Municipality has adopted and is enforcing: RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 6 of 7 1. a policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in non-violent civil rights demonstrations; and 2. a policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such non-violent civil rights demonstrations within jurisdictions. RAMSEY COUNTY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY—.... By: David Twa Ramsey County Manager Dated: APPROVED AST ORM H D. McPeak Assistant Ramsey County Attorney This Document Drafted By: Office of the Ramsey County Attorney St. Paul, Minnesota RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 7 of 7 MUNICIPALITY Its: M /4 ro /4 CITY OF GEM LAKE Office of the City Clerk 1369 County Road "E" East Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 Telephone: ( 651) 426 - 6443 Email: gemlakecity@aol.com -4� -mil o-/ —1 yam Memo to: Mayor Emeott From: Jack Hoeschler, Planning Commission Chair Date: April 6, 2006 Re: Planning Commission Meeting of April 4, 2006 Facsimile: ( 651) 426 - 6444 The Gem Lake Planning Commission held its March meeting at 7 pm on Tuesday, April 4, 2006, at Tousley Ford. All members except Mrs. Robins were present along with Paul Emeott acting as co -zoning administrator, Rick Rossow and Bryan Hades for the McNulty team and Gretchen Swomley and Mary Shearen for the public. We discussed the following: 1. Review of Hillary Farm Site Plan Review Process. Mr. Hoeschler explained that the City and the McNulty team were trying to flesh out a procedure and process for the site plan review that is called for in the Developer's Agreement. The City has designated Mr. Emeott and Craig Rafferty as initial representatives of a site plan review committee that will be formally appointed by the Council if this process seems fruitful. The idea is that the site plan review committee will be delegated authority by the Council to make decisions that will be binding on the City regarding up or down review and approval of site plans for specific lot developments in Hillary Farm. The City and the McNulty team will describe the process agreed upon in an amendment to the Developer's Agreement. In the near term, we are testing and developing the concept by means of negotiations involving the landscaping that will be required for those homes already under construction or completed. Mr. Rafferty then gave a slide presentation reporting on the progress made regarding the landscaping for Lots 6 and 7. (Landscaping for the model has been previously discussed.) He showed views of the lakefront homes and structures and emphasized the "peek-a-boo" quality of the relationship between existing structures and the lake as a result of the screening of the structures provided by trees and topography. He also reported that the new process attempted to move away from repeated responses by the City to proposals by the developer in which the developer has to "guess" what the City wants to an iterative process by which the City describes graphically the values and features it hopes to protect and see and the developer responds with detailed drawings based (in this case) upon discussions with the lot owners. At the end of his presentation Mr. Rafferty showed a screening plan that he had presented to McNulty and the responding landscaping plan that Bryan Hades had prepared. Mr. Rafferty spoke approvingly of the process and the result. The audience members then gave their comments. Mrs. Shearen expressed concern that the screening of the Lot 6 house (Larkin's) was too minimal. She urged Mr. Rafferty to continue his efforts on behalf of the plan he outlined originally. Mrs. Swomley also wanted to see more screening and expressed concern that the proposed plan did not address the north border of Lot 7. Mr. Hades said that the Tangwell's were considering lilacs along that fence. But Mrs. Swomley invited Mr. Rafferty to view the Tangwell house from her property to see how large it looms on the horizon. Mr. Rafferty felt that they were within a handful of trees of an agreed plan. Mr. Hoeschler asked Mr. Hades whether there were any plans to alter the elevation and grove of trees on the westerly boundary of Lot 6. Mr. Hades said that there were no such plans even though Mr. Hoeschler pointed to a contour grade model that had been sent from HKGI to Mr. Rafferty. He said he knew nothing of that model again assured Mr. Hoeschler that the grove would not be disturbed. Mr. Hoeschler (joined by Mr. Wippich) said that the developer should not regard the view corridor as either a bowling alley or a landing strip. They urged inclusion of trees within the view corridor to offset the light well quality that currently exists to the view from the Bemis house because of the mass of the two buildings on either side. Mr. Hoeschler also urged Mr. Rafferty to make sure that the final landscaping plan that is agreed upon documents the initial size and number of trees. He urged use of spade planted trees as opposed to saplings in 2 gallon buckets. He said it was important to have a clear document so that everyone (including the homeowners) knows and agrees upon what will be done.and what is expected. Mr. Hoeschler agreed with Mr. Rossow that the procedures of the site review process would be incorporated in an amendment to the Developer's Agreement. Mr. Rossow said he heard the calls for more trees, but they wanted to be careful not to over -promise what could or would be done. He stressed recognition of the view easement for the benefit of the Bemis house. Mr. Rafferty asked for direction. He was told that the audience supported his proposals for additional screening but he was assured that he (and Mr. Emeott) had authority to make a fmal deal with McNulty but the deal should be well documented. 2. Review of Outstanding Zoning Code Issues. The discussion then turned to a Summary of Open Zoning Code Issues that had been circulated by Mr. Hoeschler. He said he wanted to receive direction from the Commission on these issues as he and Mr. Emeott continue to draft the final code language. He said that the code would apply to Hillary Farm after the August moratorium runs out and he therefore invited input by Mr. Rossow. A. Height restrictions and method of measurement. After lengthy discussion, it was the sense of the majority that (i) the IBC measurement method ( to the mean roof level) should be used; (ii) the bottom starting point should be ground level 6 feet from the front door; (iii) District limits should be 30 feet for R-1 and 25 feet for R24; (iv) lake lots should not have two fronts for height measurement purposes; (v) front heights should be limited as stated, but back or side walkout facades with greater height (up to 40 feet in R-1 and 35 feet in R2-4) would be allowed with a SUP that would address the following factors: a. The facade should be 60% screened from the views of neighbors through a 90 degree arc centered on the fagade in question. That is, at least 60% of the facade should be screened by vegetation considered at full bloom when viewed from any angle starting and ending 45 degrees to the fagade in question This screening can be by existing or planted and maintained trees, and the natural topography of the lot and surrounding areas; b. The shear verticality of the facade should be interrupted by decks, balconies, bow windows, bays and other design features so that there is no more than a 35 foot shear vertical plane at any point; c. The fenestration should be designed to avoid large sheets of glass that attract birds and create glare; d. Weather vanes, antennas and decorative cupolas should not be counted as an element of the structure for height measurement; e. A walkout will not be allowed on a lot by virtue of any artificial grading. The lot topography must naturally allow a walkout; and f. Any time the side or rear elevation of a building exceeds the standard limit, it needs to be further set back from the standard side setback line 2 feet for every 1 foot of extra height above the standard. (vi) accessory buildings cannot exceed absolute height as follows: a. R-1 = 25 feet b. R-24 = 15 feet B. Set Backs. Set back restrictions should be changed as follows: a. Instead of 100 foot set back for stables, barns, kennels, etc., their set back should be determ ined by Special Use Permit based on the following factors: i. Screening available or to be provided; ii. Distance from wells, ISTS and neighbor's buildings must be at least 100 feet; and iii. Drainage characteristics of the land must be such that pollution of neighboring property or any wells is avoided. b. Lake lots should have 200-foot lake f Towage for purposes of width and setback but not height rules. c. The following structures can be allowed within setbacks at a point behind the rear line of the house: i. Fences; ii. Patios; iii. Fireplaces; iv. Sheds; and V. Pools d. While the 100 foot set back rule for barns and stables is removed in favor of a requirement set by SUP, the minimum pasture areas of acre per horse continues. C. Swim►ning Pools. a. Fences should be 4 feet and otherwise comply with the building code. j CITY OF GEM LAKE RESOLUTION NO.2006-11 17 APRIL 2006 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF GEM LAKE PLAN REVIEW COMMISSION AS AN ADVISORY BOARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND TO CITY STAFF AND DEFINING IT'S FUNCTION. WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City of Gem Lake to preserve and promote an attractive and stable "small town"residential and commercial environment for it's citizens in accordance with the Comprehensive Municipal Plan as adopted and, from time to time, amended; and WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City of Gem Lake to encourage and to use best management practices to insure high quality residential and commercial development with compatible land uses within the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Gem Lake is required by the Gem Lake ordinances including, but not limited to the Zoning Ordinance as adopted and, from time to time amended, to perform a review of all site plans to insure that all building plans conform with Ordinances enacted and, from time to time amended, by the City and development agreements entered into by the City; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that in accordance with MN Statutes Chapter 412.111, the City Council of the City of Gem Lake does hereby establish an advisory board to be known as the "Gem Lake Plan Review Commission" with said committee to consist of not more than three (3) members to be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by a simple majority vote of the City Council, providing, however, that one of said members shall be a duly appointed zoning administrator for the City of Gem Lake; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the membership of the Commission shall be annually renewed and, as necessary new appointments made, by resolution at the first meeting of the City Council in each calendar year; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that it shall be the function of said commission to: 1) establish criteria for examination of construction plans by the Commission based upon local ordinances, the Comprehensive Municipal Plan and development agreements entered into by the City; and, 2) to review all residential and commercial construction plans requiring building permits to be issued by the City of Gem Lake to insure compliance with the criteria; and, 3) to refer all such J plans to the Certified Building Official appointed by the City of Gem Lake who shall further inspect said plans to insure compliance with all codes adopted by the City of Gem Lake; and, 4) to refer all commercial plans to the City Engineer and other such competent authority as may be necessary for further technical review; and, 5) to make recommendations to administrative staff charged with the issuance of building and building related permits regarding the plan's compliance with all criteria required by the Commission, the Senior Building Official, and the City Engineer; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, in the event the Commission recommends denial of a building permit and is unable through negotiation with the applicant to resolve the conflict causing said recommendation for denial then the matter shall be referred to the City Council who shall act as the Board of Appeals in all such matters. The foregoing Resolution was offered by Councilor Emeott and was supported by Councilor Watson and was riarinreri adnntnd haled nnnn the fnllnwing vote: NAME EMEOTT WATSON RASMUSSEN SCHILLING BOSAK VOTE Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye ATTEST I, Frederic C. Magnuson, the duly qualified City Clerk of the City of Gem Lake, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and accurate representation of action taken by the City Council of the City of Gem Lake on the date first written. Frederic C. Magnuson, City Clerk Date J&rtif ieb MCOB e-file: reso1ution\2006\no2006-1 I Page 3 of 5 CITY OF GEM LAKE RESOLUTION NO.2006-12 17 April 2006 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA ODERING CERTAIN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Gem Lake, Minnesota (the "City") did in April, 2005 commission SEH, INC., acting as City Engineer to conduct a Feasability Report (the "Feasibility Report") indicating the current condition and repair needs of Big Fox Road, Little Fox Lane, Tessier Road and Haven Lane; and WHEREAS, the City did, in October, 2005, expand the scope of the Feasability Report to include consideration of extension of city municipal sanitary sewer and city water to the affected areas with the belief that said considerations were best considered when streets were under construction and were also considered timely in accordance with the City of Gem Lake Comprehensive Municipal Plan; and WHEREAS, the City did review the Feasability Report as presented in March, 2006 and did order public hearings on the matter to be duly noticed, published and convened on 10 April 2006 for Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane and on 12 April 2006 for Tessier Road and Haven Lane; and WHEREAS, ten (10) days mailed notices and two (2) weeks published notices of the Hearings were given to affected homeowners; and, WHEREAS, the City did convene said public hearings on the dates prescribed, did present the Feasability Reports, did present a reasonable estimate of the impact of the assessment for the Improvement, and did prepare records of the proceedings which are identified as Minutes of Public Hearing No. 2006-01 and Minutes of Public Hearing No. 2006-01 and which indicate acceptance of the Project Engineers findings; and WHEREAS, the (re)construction of the City streets identified as Big Fox Road, Little Fox Lane, Tessier Road and Haven Lane is hereinafter referred to as the "Improvements" and shall also be identified as Public Improvement Project No. 2006-01; and -� WHEREAS, all affected homeowners and persons who desired to be heard with respect to the proposed Improvements were given an opportunity to be heard. J NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEM LAKE AS FOLLOWS: I . The Improvements are necessary, cost-effective and feasible as described in the Feasibility Report prepared by SEH. 2. The total estimated cost of the Improvements based upon the Project Engineers estimates for Patch and Overlay with rolled shoulder instead of curbing is as follows: A. Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane at $106,000; and B. Haven lane at $21,000 plus removal of problematic trees on at approximately $1,000 each or $2,000 total; and 3. To order patching and hot oil/rock treatment as necessary and without cost estimate for Tessier Road as part of the project. 4. The Improvements are hereby ordered. 5. SEH is hereby designated as the engineer for the Improvements. SEH shall prepare plans and specifications for make of the Improvements. Kennedy & Graven, Chartered is hereby designated as special counsel to the City with respect to the Improvements and Ehler's Associates is hereby designated as financial consultant to the City with respect to the Improvements. The foregoing Resolution was offered by Councilor Watson and was supported by Councilor Schilling and was declared udnntod hn.¢ed innn the following vote: NAME EMEOTT WATSON BOSAK SCHILLING RASMUSSEN VOTE Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Page 4 of 5 ATTEST I, Frederic C. Magnuson, the duly qualified City Clerk of the City of Gem Lake, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and accurate representation of action taken by the City Council of the City of Gem Lake on the date first written. Frederic C. Magnuson, City Clerk Certif ieb CoPB -17 *m�1,2006- Date e-file: resolution\20Wno2006-12 Page 5 of 5 Why are the four roadways being treated the same? Why can't we on Tessier Road go with the "do nothing" approach (which the vote indicated at the meeting with the 3 to 1 vote)? BIG FOX- LITTLE FOX - Age of roadway in the 35 year range (roadway life for this type of road- 30 years) - Roadway has no base and is in very bad shape - 0 years remaining of roadway life HAVEN LANE - Age of roadway in the 35 year range (roadway life for this type of road- 35 to 40 years) - No base and 3" blacktop- bad shape - 0 to 5 years remaining on roadway life TESSIER ROAD - Age of roadway 17 years (1989) (roadway life for this type of road- 35 to 40 years) - Good base and 3" to 5" blacktop- 3 potholes to fill [not filled last summer- now after winter potholes are larger then they should be if maintained correctly] - 18 to 23 years (50% to 60%) remaining on roadway life - Maintenance last 17 years--- less then 6 potholes filled and seal coated one time Why should we have to do the same repairs as the other three roadways?? 39-70 Tess�eR� . ~1 RAMSEY COUNTY Working with You to Enhance ourQuafltyof Life J Office of the County Manager David J.1%va, County Manager 250 Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55102 March 13, 2006 Fritz Magnuson, City Clerk City of Gem Lake 1369 East County Road E Gem Lake, MN 55110 Dear Mr. Magnuson Tel: 651-266-8000 Fax:651-266-8039 e-mail: david.twa@eo.ramsey.mn.us Twenty-one years ago, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, determined that Ramsey County would be eligible to become an Entitlement Urban County and receive an annual allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) dollars in excess of one million dollars. Sixteen suburban communities have chosen to participate in the agreement process over the past eighteen years, thus ensuring that a guaranteed annual allocation would be earmarked for the County and those suburban municipalities that desire to actively participate in the program. Recently, HUD has notified us that in order to remain eligible to continue our participation in this federal program, the participating cities and Ramsey County must execute a new cooperation agreement incorporating all the amendments of the past agreements. Each community already approved these amendments, but HUD now requires an all-inclusive agreement. This agreement will have no specified end date, so that it will renew automatically. Of course, at the time of the renewal, all communities will be notified of the opportunity to "opt out" of the agreement. Our eligibility and the actual dollar amount we receive are based upon the population accumulated through the number of jurisdictions that join with us. Our records show that since 1985, your community has signed cooperation agreements with the County to ensure our eligibility. A copy of the agreement is attached to this letter. Please have it approved by your City Council or Town Board and return a fully executed copy to us no later than April 30, 2006. If, however, your community does choose to "opt out", please be advised that you may not have an opportunity to participate with us for the next three years_ "Opt out' notification must be made to both the County and the local HUD office no later than April 30, 2006. Excellence - Respect o Diversity Printed on recycled paper with a mininmrn of 10% post -consumer content M D Page Two March 13, 2006 Letter to City Managers INCLUSION IN THE COUNTY ENTITLEMENT DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT YOU ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM. IT DOES PROVIDE THE COUNTY WITH THE NEEDED POPULATION TO QUALIFY AND INFLUENCES OUR ANNUAL ALLOCATION. We are pleased with the active participation of our municipalities over the past several years. Our suburban communities, as a group, have set countywide priorities for use of CDBG and HOME funds. These priorities have resulted in the creation/retention of over 500 jobs, and over 1,800 low-income, suburban homeowners receiving rehabilitation funding. The HOME funds, which are exclusively for affordable housing, have resulted in the addition of several large-scale rehabilitation projects, many new rental units, and expanded homeownership opportunities in suburban Ramsey County for families and senior citizens. Should you have any questions, or need assistance, please contact Denise Beigbeder or Mary Lou Egan in Community and Economic Development, at 651-266-8000. Sincerely, <;� �44elw David Twa Ramsey County Manager sam N AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT This Agreement ("Agreement") is between the Ramsey County Housing and Redevelopment Authority ("Authority") and ("Municipality"), each a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, and is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, as amended. WHEREAS Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §5301 et seg., as amended, ("CDBG Act") provides for a program of community development block grants; and. WHEREAS, computation of a county's population as an Urban County may include persons residing in units of general local government within the county with which it has entered into cooperative agreements to undertake or to assist in the undertaking of essential activities pursuant to community development block grants; and WHEREAS, Ramsey County, Minnesota qualifies as an "Urban County" as that term is used in the CDBG Act and is eligible to receive community development block grant funds; and, WHEREAS, the HOME Investment Partnerships Act, Title II of the Cranston -Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12701 et seq., as amended ("HOME Act") provides for support for affordable housing activities; and WHEREAS, Ramsey County is a member of the Anoka, Dakota, Ramsey, and Washington Counties HOME Consortium ("Consortium") formed pursuant to the HOME Act; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to a Joint Powers Agreement executed May 4, 1993, the Authority assumed all rights and duties of Ramsey County related to the administration of CDBG and RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Pagel of 7 '—) HOME funds received from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") Now, Therefore, the Parties agree: 1. DEFINITIONS For the purposes of this Agreement, the terms defined in this section have the meanings given to them: "Act" means either the CDBG Act or the HOME Act, or both, depending upon the context. "CDBG Regulations" means those regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 570, as amended. "Cooperating Community" means any city, town, or township in Ramsey County which has entered into a Cooperation Agreement, as amended, substantially similar to this Agreement and its Amendments. 0 "HOME Regulations" means those regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 92, as amended. "Regulations" means either the CDBG Regulations or the HOME Regulations, or both, depending upon the context. 2. SCOPE The Authority and Municipality will cooperate to undertake or assist in undertaking community renewal and low and moderate income housing assistance activities and other eligible activities authorized by the CDBG Act and HOME Act. RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 2 of 7 The Authority and Municipality will cooperate in establishing priorities and in preparation of the application for a grant. The Authority will prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies, all necessary applications for a basic grant amount under the CDBG Act and the HOME Act. In preparing the grant application and allocating grant funds received, the Authority will consider projects proposed by the Municipality. The Authority reserves the right to propose projects which are both consistent with the mutually established goals, needs and priorities and within its statutory implementation authority. No Municipality shall be required to propose a prof ect. The Authority shall have final responsibility for selecting projects and will distribute to the Municipality such funds as are determined appropriate for the Municipality to use in l implementing a project. The Authority may implement projects within the Municipality as are l determined appropriate by the Authority. 3. TERM The term of this Agreement is for Federal Fiscal Years 2007 - 2009. The Agreement remains in effect until the CDBG and HOME funds and program income received with respect to activities carried out during the initial three year qualification period, and any successive qualification periods, are expended and the funded activities completed. Neither the Authority nor the Municipality may terminate or withdraw from this Agreement during that period. This Agreement will be automatically renewed for participation in successive three year qualification periods, unless the Authority or the Municipality provide written notice it elects not to participate in a new qualification period. By the date specified in HM's urban county RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 3 of 7 qualification notice for the next qualification period, the Authority will notify the Municipality in writing of its right not to participate. Both the Authority and Municipality are required to adopt any amendment to this Agreement incorporating changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in an Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for a subsequent three year urban county qualification period. Failure to adopt the necessary amendment will void the automatic renewal for such qualification period. 4. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS A. The CDBG Act and CDBG Regulations are incorporated herein by reference. The HOME Act and HOME Regulations are incorporated herein by reference. B. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent or otherwise modify or abrogate - the right of the Authority or Municipality to submit individual applications for discretionary funds in the event Ramsey County does not receive designation as an Urban County entity under the CDBG Act C. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude the Municipality from establishing a Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469. D. In the event that there is a revision of the Act and/or Regulations which would make this Agreement out of compliance with the Act or Regulations, both parties will review this Agreement to renegotiate those items necessary to bring the Agreement into compliance. E. The Municipality shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the Authority, Ramsey County, their officials, agents, and employees against any and all liability, losses, costs, damages, expenses, claims or actions, including attomey's fees, which the Authority, Ramsey County, their officials, agents, or employees may hereafter sustain, incur or be RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 4 of 7 -,\1 required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any act or omission of the Municipality, its officials, agents or employees, in the execution, performance, or failure to adequately perforni its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. F. The Authority shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Municipality, its officials, agents, and employees against any and all liability, losses, costs, damages, expenses, claims or actions, including attorney's fees, which the Municipality, its officials, agents, or employees may hereafter sustain, incur or be required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any act or omission of the Authority, its officials, agents or employees, in the execution, performance, or failure to adequately perform its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. G. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver by the Authority, Ramsey County, or the Municipality of any statutory or common law immunities, limits, or exceptions on /_) liability. H. The Authority and the Municipality shall maintain financial and other records and accounts in accordance with the requirements of the Act and Regulations. Such records and accounts will be in such form as to permit the Authority to prepare required reports and to permit the tracing of grant funds and program income to final expenditure. I. The Authority and the Municipality agree to make available all records and accounts with respect to matters covered by this Agreement at all reasonable times to their respective personnel and duly authorized federal officials. Such records shall be retained as provided by law, but in no event for a period of less than six years from the date of completion of any activity funded under the Act or less than three years from the last receipt of program income resulting from activity implementation. The Authority shall JRESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 5 of 7 perform all audits of the basic grant amounts and resulting program income as required under the Act and Regulations. J. All projects undertaken pursuant to this Agreement shall be subject to home rule charter provisions, assessment, planning, zoning, sanitary, and building laws, ordinances and regulations applicable to the Municipality in which the project is situated. K. The parties further agree that pursuant to 24 CFR 570.501 (b), the Municipality is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including a written agreement as set forth in 24 CFR 570.503. L. By executing this Agreement the Municipality understands that it: 1. may not apply for grants from appropriations under the Small Cities or State CDBG Programs for fiscal years during the period in which it participates in the Authority's CDBG program; and 2. may participate in a HOME Program only through the Authority. If Ramsey County does not receive a HOME formula allocation, the Municipality may not form a HOME consortium with other units of general local government. M. Both the Authority and Municipality are obliged to take all actions necessary to assure compliance with Ramsey County's certification required by section 104(b) of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act, section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, and other applicable laws. The Authority is prohibited from funding for activities, in or in support of, any cooperating unit of general local government that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes its actions to comply with its fair housing certification. N. The Municipality has adopted and is enforcing: RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 6 of 7 I . a policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in non-violent civil rights demonstrations; and 2. a policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such non-violent civil rights demonstrations within jurisdictions. RAMSEY COUNTY HOUSING AND NMUNICIPALITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By: _ By: David Twa Ramsey County Manager Its: Dated: Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM Harry D. McPeak Assistant Ramsey County Attorney This Document Drafted By. Office of the Ramsey County Attorney St. Paul, Minnesota RESTATED JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 7 of 7 Q f U � O O ^ N � N � C', ro U = W � � Q 1 a 1+ O _ U � Ln 0 c c� z 0 u u Q O z O in Q o u U LL Q Q o?J U � u O a n N u G1 U QU � _ � V Q] a o � r N N N D M NCD M M N M 7 N 4�9 O O O M O W O O O O O O o O r O 0 00 � � T V O 7 N 5q V 00 M M V V1 M 10 A O M 10 r Ic c z w G7 O Cl O N �O O N CD C� O 7 U r M N M V1 T a 0 a m F• Q V N T O d a (LI � O U o a`. ILI x U T x p N Q y U E U o. ,� ,� ," 3 0 x a w C] a w U cn U � •• U rn cG oDo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 OO O IDO 00 O ^ N M V O O rl O OO O_ ^ N_ 3" O O O ^ O CI O N O N O N CIO N N O N O N Cl N O N O N O M O M O M O M O M O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O\ M N M M N O. .--• W ^ N N �D t�l �D M to M J X LO CD U D L.L CD a) N O cm ^cu LL �1 Z �' cd z e o= �I\ ' ) Q In M >\ O N (] Q � F U �-= Q � � o o N W m U � W Q � F � � In o oN _ a5 U � ZD 0 0 c� z O U U Q O z o _ Q O U U [z. Q � U 0 a \\ U 0 V U Q 0] n o M a N o O Cl O In �n 'D m O O O^ O O l� 0 o 10 10 �D m crl N N T o0 In lD �O N V1 N N D N N N O O O O O CD in O O CD O o CD CD Cl CD O o O O O o o CD O CD O 'D N O �D rh O V O V1 O 10 O ^ O N O O Cl o Ol in ^ M M O o O CD O O o O 0 o 0 Vl 00 ^ n m -- a � vi � o n Cl �D 'o^ o lr r- Orn oo n p N (V O M � cn cy, O � ^ o0 M N 7 rl O O CD O O O O O CD O O In O In In 'o co 'DN Cl Cl O M O O O 1- �D � CD1D O t� 10 10 co O �n to ' M 10 7 N O� oo Vl %C �O N �n N N In �Li N N N O C 0 p Q � ca on on J _ .a U = c0 O 3 O � V) V] Yd 0 T y L N Y o 0 U' ms° ai P n ^� a a ° nbD o a man o o° o .o u ro .-1 rn .-1 °� z U o .0 Y on U U �= rn aCi c U ,� r° c U N rd � rd � o L O O H U € j a co w x a rn v, F C) z a ao a w a O O co D. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o ^ N rl O O O O O O O O O O o O- Q` 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 In 0 'D 0 r 0 o 0^ -- N M 7 �n v1 In to [- O1 -- O N O^ rn M N rn M M 7 M O 0 N 1 N n N n o O -- - o N 7 O rn 7 O 7 o 7 O 7 o 7 0 In 0 - Cl vl o vl O �n O 'n O �n o �n 0 V1 o �n o �/'1 O �n O �n o vl 0 n 0 In o In O In o In O 'O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rn rn �n �n In In In In In In In In In �n In �n In �n In �n �n In In In �n In In r� M rn rn rn o a rn a rn rn rn rn rn rn o, a, a, rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn U) J X Q 0 LL m U N L.L O Qi N O N N 0) ^cu LL i z E Q � 0 N Q CIF W Y r � � Y oz ¢ Z F-. U Q 7 O O _ � p U M � E F — Y O � Q Fey U j 0 o N � z 0 u U Q O z O Q o U U w Q U U 0 U :J ¢ _ q O r O T O O Cl M o, O N N N r r O O O O O O M O m '- r t o O 00 p oo a, ClO T M CD N 7 M n O 7 N Cl �O In N O O O O O O O O p N O M N N p p O O O O p p O O p N O N d N N co O O O r of N N V N 0o O O O 10 O_ 10 o O O oro oro lc� ^ N N N 7 M O O O O M o0 O O O 7 M _ N Q` r O n O O O O O O O O O Cl M O W r - oo O 0o O U O O1 O 7 n T �O N V O V1 N 0 3 o U PLILI Z E �> w N > > on N LL w V C C U N �V.. wJ C4 .17 .2 N .O O aJ N N N ,V' U E 'o N Y. E R c o o t E c a s ,�-y c ` v] R R ._ n. n. 0. V V 0 _ _ E .> ¢ H F m o It v .22 'w 'u. U N C N N O R a O O t3 O O C vUi N L U rn a cL N> .-,O rn F a w cAtl U cL U cn U O O — N O N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 O— O O O O O O — O O O CD N M O O In O �O O r O 0 O 0 O O O O 0 O EC O^ CC N M O O O 01 r r r o0 00 00 0\ T O, Q\ O, 0, U 0, O^ ^ N N M M M M M M O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N N N N N N N N N N N ... �n �n In In 1) U1 In In 1) 1) In V1 'n 'n M M O O M M O, U of D\ 01 C, o. U U\ m a, U O` o, T In In M M M M M M M N 4- 0 cM N LL R to a: o 'z F 3 W 0 0] O ^ O Y rq N Q � � � F U 7 O � N _ R � 05 LLI a - C• F � � Q O ^ N U � ZD 0 � N F 7- 0 U U Q O F 0 Q o U � L Q a u � 0 a n U V U V Q 4: 3t _ p] v \ R rn n �n M lc� 6s 10 O o a, 00 0 � O 01 N O p O O n O� b9 rn n M G 7 �n CDrn CDN O O - N t` 1n O 7 M 69 r�l M 6H .o O o 0 o rn n O O O O ^ M D O cl 01 N M 69 w 3 w •o c F w v a v W. w � c a .a E E E E W wE o 0 0 0 W. o U- z w U. W. w w w w w S c c c F 0 0 0 0 O O o 0 N 0 M 0 7 0 vn 0 O 7 7 IcD 7 7 1c) Ic, c, N N N N N N N 7 7 7 7 v 7 7 7 7 7 U) J X Q l!i O LL. m U LL C 6 4- N O m m ^ LL ro I� `J' Q n _ N ,� n0- N Q _1 E Q O F U OCD- N O � Q W � CC c�d V E J F � Q _ LL] czcz n F ( fi U O -0 O o ON C cz U � 0 C cat F 7- 6 U U Q O z o _ Q o U � p. Q M 9 V) J� � V 0 a N Q \` 4t Y u U u � M Im C] N a 0 0 °^ oo 6v M O oo O O ON In ^ 00 O O O O O O N M O N O en Q O O CDO O IN CD CIry O N m ol" r N N 10 69 O O O �D M O O O O Cl V rn M rn InM rn rn M p v1 vn cry l� O N N O N oO n n n n p ^ 16 .- In -- N N 10 69 N r N � CD Cl O NO cl N N W m p 1 Cq V J 69 7 rn M rn M (01 M rn M !. oN0 N cl N oc m r r - 10 In O N N 6) / O O, T In 10 oo O O O O O N 7-O O, M O O m In N zf - 10 sH _ In O In 10 In O O 10 m O O r- V rn M rn M ON M rn M M O N I� In w N M N In 6S - U U N C cn In V) U c y C = U O N O �- `^ C - O y c E � N 1a E c ¢ Ncn w o C; 3 o FL F x U ¢ c E o y E ai N O E a E c� U a� a O p T G O O O W N N N N a° ad c Ti c O D U w �>E 2 a o V w w W W a° w .4 o u° c uv U LZ W W c W 0. a; 3S v� c3i p" c W W a� e°�i� is E U 'D O O E •� O O U c0 7 7 7 O O t3C aw33' Y. o u Ew¢¢¢ �w Uuuu En c o O O O O O O O o O O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O- N O\ O O O O N O O O-- N In 7 '- O O^ C N N N N INM M 7 V' '/1 Vl �O �O �O Q` O -- '-' ' '-• O ' E;O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C,4 O N O O O O O InE; a a rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn o 00 00 00 0o 0o V� In O\ co J X O LL_ U U- CD N O LO LL r� T/ tY+ Q A � � `G Q F U O O N � � N A J Q � W c F n U � Ln 0 O N F Z O U U Q O z o y F � Q o U � LL Q u n 7 M O O O o0 7 0 0 0 0 7 'n 'n O a\ w o N O O^ M N N m a' OO OO M O O O O n � r O ID O O O O Z)O O O ^ CD O O O M V W� C rr1 rn r ^ In 1 In ^ M M M 7 'n of O M N ^ O 7 I- t- ^ M M M In M 10 'n V M M O 'n O r- N M N 10 o0 op 'n 7 'n 'n O O N 10 O O O 'n 'n O o\ O O 1- C 4 In w 7 0+ W O O �D N N N i 'n 2 0 Cl Cl �. o N 48 y C C O IS O O N N U o� •--. H C o O N ^ L•� W N o€€ w E o o o .o ''-' Z c rn Q� v 'n vi Q .�. F O p E No v fn C C .^..i O N "ccfn V] V] V] 'u a v v 0 a�i ILI a a A c a P o a E a� .E I-f1. 0.. �Di o a� E S O a z n3 v3 v3 v! en ° ro L U Q� C U bU M to bq 3 12 C C D U 13 O V - M '�. b➢ C C ' C 'C C 'C .. b E U y O C cd E V Q C E O O O 7 N 7 N ti u U E'^ U �_ t" M o P. rn W W x a W� N NO N N N a 0] x a. W N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O- N N N N O^ M M N cn o` M O O- O N -: O N O rr1 O : O 'n O �D O [- [. N r- M n cr O^ W W N W M W 7 � D\ O Q\ N N N N N N N M C1 M M M M M M M M C1 M M M M M M M M In M O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O M In In M M M M M r�1 M M M M M C1 M M M M M M M M M M M M M 00 00 00 00 00 02 00 00 GO 00 GO 00 00 G2 0 2 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 N N M M M - U) J X LO O LL m U Ln LL 0 a) N O O a) a m a- a Z � z E O E ¢ v' M o � G' td -1 F F- U � O^ O � N W � Q — U Q � Q LY ' O C) � _ � c3 J Hti U � C C c� F- z a O U U Q O O Q o U U U Ct Q U 0 �c i a N C] U ¢ y # � C1 7 O ----------------- � ----- N N Ol O O D\ N 0 0 0 �O � ^� b� _ ON O � t N 0o O CDD\ n Wf, 'n N "n n in 10 � � fr1 M O O O O ID CD CD�n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O ON ON O 8 8 O CD CD 'noo V ^- 0) oo ro O N op O po N N N O � � � O m 10 In �D O O r- 7 10 * O 02 O O 7 N O� 'n � ^� O� U O In ^ 00 CA V1 ^-- COO ool V In N N M 7 rn ^ N O O -� N O 7 ao 0 �O 0 O 0 O 0 V Q, �O al O O M •--• M 00 0 0o 0 Cl vl �n �n V 7 INv1 00 00 7 •-- vl o0 0o O 'o M V C c O id 0 V cOd > ¢ l E 0 � u 48 o to m U w Z Ca Y a O •U O D.c n. O O �' On .= N > o C 1 Ll • m y T y p Y .E bn G G C C •t3 UV> H �j V V QE on c U a O a C c U a c_ -�JJ L InU O E d ME yc O �"� O V .O W U C V Q CD O 0 3 oS :a to 'c m aj� ca c •� y c 'y E G a 2 E If on E v E v 7 E a� a c ` u o n n Q> a cC cG a tr, U O O O O O O Cl) O O O O O O O O O O O— N O O -• N M V D\ O O O O O N 1 7 C'1 O O O O N M �/'1 rD O N N ^' N ^ N N N M N M N M N In N InM IN O In O— r N C N v N N v CD 0 N C, 0 N v 0 M v 0 O\ a 0 CD'-• C,(D 0 0 Cn 0 Cn 0 Cn 0 Cn Cl 0 0 Cn 0 0 0 Cn 0 0 0 vi 0 Cn 0 vi 0 Cn 0 vi 00 0 vi 0 n 0 Cn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 °O 0O o0 0O o0 °O DO N N N IN N IN IN rl ---------------- M fr1 70 711 — P1 N N N N N N M M rr1 M rr1 M M M M M J X O LL U LL O Lr— W ro O E ¢ rn � n F W U F U � O O Q� N U � E W_ ¢ n C' \ L F U . 0 O C> _ O � � Q U � 0 O N F z D O U U O O ¢ O U ¢ C o U s > d H L1 U U Q V7 � a N rr� M O\ Vl 'n M O O O 'n n M M 00 M O CD O 10 T N N C 1� O O) V IN O 10 O N 'n O N N M O, 10 10 \0 T N M NN O 'n 'n 'n O O O O O O O O In 0 0 0 0 O O O CD O CD O In N O O M r� rV O N N N -- �O CD r� CD O CD O r` O O V 'n O V N \O 7 N 7 7 N 00 0o 10 M O t` O CIw O Q. 10 7 Ol 0o V O 'n O 10 'n 10 O O N N M n Q` oo 7 O N V M V In, 10 ^ O N M O� N l� -- M N — t` 7 0 00 0 0 In l� 10 w O_ O O [� �D O �O V V O O N 'n Cl !` M m10 V m lo M 7 ono l0 �O N \D \O M M 10 4 M N o U y U O _ T 7 U It c c 3 N G G U IZ U -0 'O N O P-i E _ a F Q O O O Q Q �O+ NO N U E 5 O cC O C� � 5 C O W C N N O C '3 ,o E E w 1 :u o a c E R Y N Q y c 7 c 7 C 3 T E C 0.. —_ Q�� U F O Q U W 7 o U U wc Y ca o E ;a ca -0 a N Pl O O N .� O C V y T T T N I O t D U Q .O. O Q N Q Q U [n U fx CL Ri .G. rn W U 5 O O O O O O O O O O ^ N M V O O O N ID Cl O O O O O ID O O O O O— N M 7 'n T O^ --� ^ — N M V 7 'n 0, O^ N M CDN M 1. oo O, 'n 'n v, 'n : 'n Id: 'n � 'n v 'n 'n 'fi 'n In 'n 'n 'n 'n 'n 'n 'n 'n 'n 'n 'n ") 'n 'n 'n 'n 'n In 'n 'n 'n In "o 'n 'n \0 'n '0 'n rn 'n rn 'n rn 'n rn 'n o. 'n rn 'n - 'n 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 o O In 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 I'D 0 0 0 0 r1 r�1 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 00 W 00 00 00 00 00 W 00 00 OO 00 00 00 W 00 00 W ^ ^ ^ 00 00 00 In W W N N N N M M V 7 M M M M M M M O N O N O N M M M N 7 N 7 N V 7 7 7 V 7 V CIO X Q In O U- m U 1� L.L ^0 W W N O 00 N F F _O � Q n o � N G1 � � Q U O p N � _ _ ro U E r- Q E cG ZD LL Q O 1-+ N U 0 o c� � z O u U Q O Z O Q o U L Q M � U d C n O 0 0 0 0 0 'n N 7 t` O O r` m 'n N O Cl a0 0 CD O T oo N 10 'n O n O O M C, N M IM p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o t` Cl O O O O M � 7 n O m m-,r N a N 00 n n [- O O O O O O N m N O O O of � W IN �D O CD In M n 10 Q+ 7 7 N M �n o o � o O U U X 3 �O„ 0 v U fn on V] en = O U U = � C o O c c o o __ x 2 c 'm 'E c u u N A .. �, a Q o€ Z c c .E c y aS o x E° a3 U Ci v� WH W • E on , 10 W o C4 E �w o o.�!z uE 3L wE .oc E g t— o U u W U E O N d bf) = 011 = a" O a� O = N F 'E F v O y �i 4i p > O_ ,._, _ N M 7 V W 4% cw O. Q. R Q C. 4 W hA d 0 •4 0 0 0 0 CD 0 = �C E V O O O O O O O `O O O O O oA =_ ` O N = Y C aj E= E O O O O O O O O O O O _ _ 4 4 C C 4 .E 4 .� V ;d ON C4 0. N Cl N N N R. C1. f1. C �vV+i l-' i' U O' D " .4 a 4. Q. P. P.. f3. L1. 0. 6. E O.. ry 6. (� C W QQ U U P. � W G. V 4 0.. a P. Q. Cl. C. W O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O -- N O— IN V U O '- N Ili O O O O N O In O D, O O O O -- O N O In O 'It o In o ID O �D O to O ID IDyr �O lo to �o to to to �o �o �o �o �o ri rr ri r r — w 00 w 00 00 w w GO w Go 0 0 '1 0 fn 0 r�1 0 M 0 M 0 Cn 0 M 0 fn 0 M 0 M o rn O M 0 f�1 0 M 0 M 0 M Cl Infn 0 1,=) 0 In 0 M 0 M Cl M 0 M 00 rn In o In 0 Infn 0 0 f1) 0 In 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 a0 a0 00 00 GO 0 r1 rn M frl fn T fn M M M M M M M n n r co J X Q LO CD Ln U- CD U a v R O F [n Q \l (y� O � E E O YI UU r � Q � CG U r ¢ E F ¢ Cn Cl J 05 �1 U a: 0 o N F z O U U 0 z O j Q O _U [L ¢ � U o O 'n C, O O N � O, � 69 O n O O T � O D 6q CD O O 'l? O n vi CD 0 00 o � o rl ol b9 O � N M M �n N M In EsA ol M v M Ol M In M 69 H z w W t w a u 3 0 72 ] U y o11 c? 3 a p F ri cn P. U Ca W FO O O O O O N z w R F ad cF F � Is F F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) 0 0 o O� 0 In 0 0 00 O\ O1 O\ Ol m O\ I'D D\ O; a, 0 0 0 0 In 0 In 0 In CD In O rn 11) O C. O O O O O O, N O+ O\ N N N 't �n V 7 In In V', O O N a�oIClC lo°Ool� 'l9IO IO I 69I� In 10 69IOIC I 7 V n V �lO Io I�I� 69 I N I \O I In 7 N M rl C In C I"" D N r 7 yr M a r rn M �� I — 10 .A 1\0 � F 117, �l�v 0 0 I. I.d 0 0 C O O O O C O O O O C — N V U O C O C C, -T77 '7 I V N NC, O C, Cl In W 10 N yj O M O IN ^ ^ ^ 69 C� O N N O O O n M O M �C N V N N � N ^ M M O O Cl O O n 10 0 0 O C O M va N I n Cl 0o M vl 0 O 0 O 0 O Cl 0 O 10 O O V 69 10 N ' 'n f M 69 CN Q\ Q\ Cl Cl O O ^ Cn r V C� N 00 N (A 7 In � O N � 0. In rn o o O o 0 0 0 0 �n v V 6M4 N N O O O N T N ol N Wni ^ V3 0 z W � N O In W 10 N a 't10 ^ i N N 3 � La •r. O 10 r N w — � n In N 10 w � Q - > w IIn o t 10 U v E W V) 0� eI w, ° E y ai `° •o W w Wwza� L oz u U U v¢i o 3 W w ri C7 a U Q" w H u o > u Q o z o 0 0 0 3 ILI W Wv) p U u a a 0 O o. c I w w w w C O O C C) O C C O O C O O CD O O ^ o N o O C) C CD O o O 0 O 0 CD 0 0 O 0 C)0 0 0 C) 0 O C O^ N O^ O -- ^^ N O M O— D\ O^ N M 7 0 O O O O O C) CD CD C) CD C) (z)O 7 'n C) 'n O 'n C, vl C 'n CD 'n In C) In CDC, C, In In In In In In n In In In In , In In In In . In In In �n v v c v v - v v U) X Q O L/L � V m U LL O N 1 i% � � � r.K � Q F F U O O N Q CG U M Q L J C� cz U � Ln 0 o c� � z O U U Q O �� N N I+ 'n T _ O N 7 N O � b9 M CD O �n 0 0 o 'D ClV O O �D N 34 ll 0 C O 'D 'O cl o lD 'I 7 N 7 O N O N •-- ID 55 `p M 00 O - 00 M �^ 69 N � 10 M O O O O O O O O M n O o ^ 69 ^ 3 C4 M N EA f 7 W O pp O Vl CD.-. V 1- CT M O O 10 CD "s7 V 1- O o0 oo O o0 * 'n O 10 M n N M 1 cn 10 N 7 NIn O r � o � v3 'n 0(D N } N \O 10 O T O O [� p 6e z O U) uo U W po CG v o n W CZ w F `n F w w U rn Zo Q F N U C M CO m w- C�C G N O ai i Q 3� v U z > ¢ � � c Ro �� c a c Z z R U Y W Q W FU ._ z aZi m W o (7 ` •E . T UMC/o) a N a e g y y U z o o D o 3 o 0j y N O LQ c LQ en o CG a U O O O O O O O O O O o O O O CD o O O O O O O O O b O O O O O O O CD O CD O O CDN CD O CD 7 CDO ^ N M F. o O "I: O O C O N O N M V N O M ^ M N M N M N M M M 7 M �n M ICD CD 7 V O 10 ^ 10 ID lc� 10 10 ^ 10 N �o 10 T J X Q lf� O L. CD U E Q W N 4-- 0 N_ N ca a- i i z O Y Q 0 U w Q Q � u � U U at _ o] 00 7 D� t� ^-• vl �D t� — [� �n 'n N 10 V 7 1� 1- V 'o CD.--� vl N N w w O O O O GO N GO M D� O ^ [- 7 M ^ Vl N N o0 Q\ T N \O M V M In CD � N CDo0 O cq 69 M M V3 69 ^ Vi Z4 ^ 69 Clq 69 611 0o T .-• �D n O �n 7 [� l� O v-, -- W O CD O Cl � N � M ^ O O w .-. D\ 1 7 O N O Cl n V3 7 In M M W V1 VVi N M ^ M 69 10 [� ol In V1 T O N ID O D\ Cl CD 1D In �n 'D N U O O N �n 10 ^ .- 0o Di M r- 7 ll I- C, N Cl N N Om V 10 O, vl N 7 oo N to O M V3 M M V3 69 •-- V3 V3 •-- V3 6s ^ N 69 �o 1� O, InD� n O N 'D 't O D` O Cl O �D M 'n '- 10 N N [- D� �o CD O N CD Cl 'n n �D l� O N M 7 r- C ^ lO O v1 ^ oo In 7 [- O N N O 7 w 'o T n (V w N r1 O O N 69 In In69 ^ 69 V1 be 6-9 69 V) :i. s f �^ 3 o ` y o0 ON v Cl CDVl CD ON I. w �n v G 3 N ,n v1 ; Cl - v o N In N M N M N M r � a Ln p y Q H (7 a� .�, �°� E w U q q q N A r• p N N Ca i c w Z c c w u O O W O O r O y w m o°' O m W a v LtQ3�11 coo'" 3 N �C]3�mO..w3w m J X Q LO O LL (u U (n LL CD 0 cm m ^ LL a p EI cL o 'cl Cl N A m E W E U cn A P] Cn o _ o .E N A E O � F U � Q � N � O O _ � � N A U ¢ E � C U In � �— Q W_� 1O O a� N — cc U � C c� F z 0 u u O O Q o U � u.. Q 3 U 0 �c > a N A rm U U Q _ v 3t Y M zm C O 10 Cl V/ of 10 O a\ ado O W Ol ono Qn 10 �n o rn o 0o ao � ,-• �n � 00 �D 0o O O V1 oo 00 M lD � N b N v 7 N N N M O\ 10� CD1 0 ON 10 r m In 10 T Cl n M 00 N D\ O0 10 .-• " 00 O M 69 N 69 1) ! N M 69 •-- �n 10 of m O 10 o\ �O l� op 41 00 Q� O CD O O �o l� 10 M 10 t— Vl M 00 O CDo0 M 10 C, 'o �C o0 � l• M GG 00 - - .- .. N O �p �o n t1i CD CD O vj N O, w Ge 6M4 M es 7 4i i C = � 0 c w 's. o Z In C w 'O ON vl o N Z 5 Y .o 3 C IDin N CD V7 U� M N W M N N = M V N L N N 3 E79 y N D Lv E u 3 i w a v'rau d ai E G. c W 3 F CF9 c Q 3 c 6. c O 3 c r c p N '❑ y o v p c a a o Y c .t F' �+ c a E v L_ E E E m E m Cc a° Y F a �, L c 0 p 3 w A a d a (� F 3 C. P w a CC CL tl mom a��m m U) J X Q LO O L.L_ cu U A) E O 6 N 0 W Not 7 C 00 7 — rq n O 7 co N 1� N lol� O M ol a. In n o 00 7 10 O N n lc N n v "I w 00 l- O In N S9 69 CD w n z a co �w CD M Q E ccn v U 3 A z IS � c� o s c z � a R Q rcis u J X LO 0 LL CD m U LL a) N O LO ID tm cu 0— � } � « z x \ S / = % 2 �|\ u|\ k \ Q J a \ \2 6 / � b �} ( ƒ_ § \± c O ƒ \j 7 = / U � y k w e { \ \ § _ \ \ \ \ w § eClw= z z r= J r. r r '0r& c� ./ .[ ± ± ) ) ((§ (( \\ § $ E E 0 0 [E q z § z E b z[{§/§ ff=EƒE 7/ 7 ,.� 2 �q o o oo==m==c 4§ 5 2 2 2 2 2 12 2 2 Z 2 U u @ m W P= °§! w c 4 o 2 U u= 2) u 2 u 2 c 2=___ u u o u u � ) � § ) $ 5 < ) ) 2\ y\;$\k/\ 3/J&=eee E 2a%£�® 22[/&%0C / z / ) ± a / j \ j) & % § m 2 k « m 0 ± 3 ƒ LL 0 k % C\l 0 c 0 a_ �E O M >\ o � N Q � N W ct a Q F U Q o� N F E � O m R U c Q E cri LLJ C' U Q O N cq U � O O c� F z a O U U Q w O H z M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Inm M M M M M M M M M M M M InM M M M M M M[ M ffi O N aJ w N N w N N w N aJ w N a) w N N w UJ a) w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N a) w N a) w N aJ w N N w N a) w N N w N a) w N N w N a) w N a) w N a) w w aim48m4848 a3m48m-'i- admm m od48alafma3m ,dm a� v ai a aD bD ao on t an � tin b an ai `n on on en on can a �n ai cn o`n on a`�i �n �n on tin ai a� �n cu on `n R `n `n z U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a) ) F" � Z U 15 aci aci aci aci aci aci aci aci aci aci aci aci aci aci aci aci aci a=i u Ec uuuuuuuuuuc'>ciuuuuuuuuuuuuuu a M zcn U Lta U a w w L M t � d E 3 a � iQ w v a� a� a a a� oc c a� c a c c a� c a c c c ai c z� c c c c c c a� c a� c c c a c •" �' a a a a a a '� a a a .-� a a a .-i .a a s .a a s .a d x .c°-i .�-i .� E€ E E E E€ E E E E€ E E ,o G C w w w w w Id ""' w w w w V. w P. w V. W. w w P. d E aaaIS��R��R��R�� a aaa2:,a O -- N M ul o� O N C C C C c C C C C G C C C C C C C C G c C C c z n ctdi > c`6i > c�i > a > . m m m c`�i > c`di ? > c`Oi > c�tli > chi > c�i > c�i > c`di > cctli > > c`di > u > c`di > c�i > chi > > > > > CO J X Q LC) O LL m U N L- C) N O cB a_ O E i W N � N � `z r u Q o o q U Q � O � C (i U Q O V N R U � 0 O N F- Z O U U Q O z O in Q O U u w Q Q U .- O M rn r�l In M rn M M M M M M M M M M 1O l� M In l M M In M M M M O �/l In M M M l M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w N D`ll N `U 41 o`q N OD QJ b�q N `Il N b17 N M N by N 0`A N M N b`q N b`q N GI1 N bA N � N �1 6N! �4 N � N �4 N � N � N bill N 04 N 00 N M td N b--0 R N op N CI1 N b`A OJ dl R R td L Is L. R -aL m w L m L R L Is L= m m L w L R i R -aL ppJ� R R tC L R L R S cd L cd L L L t3 L t0 L R L R L UUUc.�uuUuuc.iUUuUUUut uuuUuuUuUuuuc..i � 0 `: 3 a`� 3 a`� 3 a`� M 3 V � 3 � 3 . 3 u 3 3 . 3 . 3 3 3 3 o 3 3 o 3 3 o 3 u 3 o 3 0 3 o 3 v 3 a) 3 a� 3 3 o 3 0 u oLn o a� U o u U o 0 0 o coo V) t o tN U U U U U V V V U U U O D U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U V a �r a a c o a o o � c ' = F cC R R E t=d V U O Pi R E R E = R L R C O FC CG F 7 N N Is = tad R4 7 C CL o Z o d.. R -0 13 m O a�i C4 o o c t� N o L R o O Z= E o R O Ri O CG R td E R E = R V rn �" U Vl �^ R E C rn L v F F V rn E U (n V fL F O co C m 94 V N o C d O w e R E v V n c v c o R V U T T j R: O a= F Is E S N L N L aEi = = a0 In E N pp F R 7 L N 7 00 .M... O W V N T o N R = x c u Cn u !n u E u u v ti o u E E E o,x 4 w' T 0 L U p) 7 n o U 0 T li ci ri x N x " o 7 O V 7 t v v a rn o ry In In q N a = R Z y M o CA czc, v —vo n 0 R R R M cq j > � Qa � Q .O Q. C ��'' �"�. N � � Q� `V CS � `� `a N N v v ` r^—• N O L E u u Q p WF •• z s a CL F U > j c C 5 Y cLi cLi c c 2 r >>>¢ cRi a cG x a C, q w° i 0 i SL C7 ti¢ Ca C] C7 n J X Q LO O LL m U LL O N O 00 N 0) m a_ F U A 7 CD o N _ � U W`/ E � O � C � Q 0 oN tYi U � Ln 0 o N F z O U U Q O z Q O U U w Q � L 3 � U a C O .a a_ V U �? y � co co F• I\ r�l fr1 O M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M � N M M frl M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M frl N N w N U w N N w N N w N N w N N w UJ N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N U w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N U w N N w N N w N N w on ai `n On e`n on �r �n Do on ul m Q ern tin V, e`n UM �n ai en own ai en a on m v El u 0 ai a 0 0 on d a 0 can �n a> on u L U L U L U •' U m L u ..0 U L U a L U A U L U L U � U L c.% L U Lt L U .L U L U L U .L U L c.i L u a .L U L U L U ..0 U e ,L U L U L U 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ° 3 ° 3 ° 3 ° 3 ° 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 cn En° ° ° ° o c ai c a> clo c cloa� a� c a� c o c ° c ° c ° c c c c n c c c c c c c c c c k c PH c p k t k k k k t k t k t k k t k k t t t _ U 7 U U u U U u U U U u U 7 U 7 U 7 U 7 U 7 u 3 U 7 U 7 U 7 U � U 3 u O U 7 U 3 :) O u 7 u � u o v e o•� C m o o m a b m O R' o ° r o cba 04 �( PC � v 04 o a a F E v wo td E cd E lo° m .D `° E �° •v r- aEi t° `�° ° c p m C4 Is � = w 3 c � c o 7 c6 E 5 cd E y C 7 aoi L 3 0 o E C fn .o cd O N O Nw N N L = Q4 O N E L 7 CJ O N O o o0 V] V C m O E N O V1 W N-i V V] G V rn V O V L U C RS E U V U 7 E �i U L u° U O O O cn E C N L O G O M fn E U 7' U ?� 7 C (n O U En n NO N O N 7 U I� N .�.. 7 �. 7 pp v N V � 12 M rn N U u O t E N 0 0 0 3 o .1 U cd y L L U fn cD v ti'o y O G O L U C N Y d) Y U N In In O .�..i O ..i �, N s rj rn F rn o A rn o A V O .� N M O rn U 4 `m u L o ��. w� V] G ° td U° E 7 o .�_. G 44: o .cd w> �p o> 52 E rnE W" rA °i o. v Mo x �' F v, o _o o o �, y ° .^� T Y v .� L ,�'� Y �•o+ G V T L �U.. C M �" w ^ C t-^ ¢ .�+ N 0.. C7 C L V� LL V; .4 `d F� E4SL �� as E3� O �3 was �-' N N V T d 7 > =_ ° C o� E T O N o r0+ C T v Q a U n° 0> Q 3 m ° �C r� v� 3 ��>rL¢F•xFaw�a 4 U) J X O LL CD fa U A E 0 bi a) N O 0) a) N CM m a_ O �n Ul CD CD CD �n O O �n CDO �n vl O M O M O M o M 0 M o M O M M 't M M M 7 o M 0 M 0 M 0 ") 0 M 0 M 7 7 N V D N N w N N w N N W. N v w N V P. N N w N N W. N N w N N W. N U w N N w N N W. N N w N N w N N w N V w N N w N N w N V w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w N N w dl V w N U w 3S ai a! 08 a3 43 a3 C�3 C�3 Q� C�3 33 a3 a3 a3 33 23 33 33 33 Q3 di 33 C;d O�8 43 33 48 a3 ai W1 `h to bn ba b2 bp 29 bA by v M d9 al 29 0 by al M v bU 0 b 0 v r�J U tO U cd U id U td U td U R U ttl td U cd U fC U t3 U ctl U t3 U N U [0 U cd U W U td U tC U W U ctl U tC U cd U [tl U W U N U cb U [3 U cd U v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v a� a�cn v v v t e t t t= t c r= c c c r r t r r rr c U U U U U Ulu U U Ulu U U V U U U U U U U Ulu U U U U U U U x a •o w x E E � o x � Uo v ^ x a v E x x x E u o U U W n K o y E o a^ o 'v cL E E E E v E v c 7 t a c tC c v z ,-. _ ,-, W o W W W 'o W c ° c cG ca _ v v x E o '4 c, rn H oaEi � c v r4 cL E E CJ W oo o y z �O v a4 00 7 'O � yE„ w E C a cN„ 'n o0 U C, E N a7i L O aE _ '" y x ?5 cL �+' U o o E 3 O `M E V E v c 7 v n u o 7 v 7 v R V L 7 Z x �' U U N V U w xi .Y. O .`C. w O V C C7 4_E O E N ti N d W 7 N V U GJ t O O z U .-7 w 1� W ,_, O O in vl O .�7." 3 ,9 N �.. D V fn M M¢ M 'o �" U (n \o fn W N U T fv O O W M n V1 .N E N O O v N o' [� j v� — E 7 O M v X m ca 4 (n M [� M I� E o E v o a� v v n a� y t c 5 a U o a L U o o onc> CJ c v 3 v 3¢ S a o o U L¢ t3 O p..i E O O U N 'O U S. O C `a L C. E d O v3 VJ c a> a U C7 j Ca ¢ Z> w [— a> a a x O a¢ off. s 1 E N o o w 3 3 3 3 3 3= 4, 3 M pq z F w x x U¢ 3 w U A 0 0 0 A Qi� w F d x A d U F F U) J X Lf) O LL m U N LL 0 U N O O N U O m a_ 5 F z 0 u U ¢ O C�1 O n O In V1 01 ~ 10 C 7 V 01 10 N b9 I- 69 01 69 N N Y W CJ W 6J W N N -'d d8 v u u 29 e W R R R t U U U U U U U L L L 3 3 3 u u u d � a3i U U U U L U L U L U F F O O EaQ w w aC4acn3 w o cal w V] VJ z 'a E N E 0 E N cD v a a O a rn cn V) o w W A W A W o N o w w 3 w w ao=aa a 0 0 o 0 x a a a M O O FHA=aFHa v fA pa F" v s O a 0 F F F C7 cn F U) J X Q LO O LL m U LL O N v- O N m ^ LL CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake C(--'ty of Ramsey lave the duties of the clerk and treasurer been combined? O Yes * No )o total revenues for ALL funds of the City exceed $158,850? * Yes O No audit Firm: f your city was audited, did the auditor issue a Management Letter? O Yes O No 'ost of Financial Statement Preparation (Outside Vendor): 1,500 'ost of Audit: 0 FORM Date: SECTION I: REVENUES Includes all governmental funds, expendable trust funds and component units 'ax Revenues (31000): Property Taxes: 167,011 Tax Increments (TIF): 0 Franchise Taxes: 2,198 Local Sales Taxes: 0 Hotel/Motel Taxes: 0 Gambling Tax: 3,448 Gravel Tax: 0 __)apecial Assessments (36100): 54,675 Licenses and Permits (32000): 50,551 ntergovernmental Revenues(33000): Federal: Community Development Block Grant: 0 Other Federal Grants: 0 State: Local Government Aid (LGA): 0 Residential Market Value Credit: 0 Agricultural Market Value Credit: 0 Taconite Homestead Credit: 0 Taconite Aids: 0 PERA Aid: 0 Highways (State Aid Streets): 0 Other State Grants and Aids: 0 County: Highways: 170,000 Other County Grants: 752 Local Units: IRRRB Grants: 0 Other Local Grants: 0 1 CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake Cc — of Ramsey 'harges for Services (34000): General Government: Police and Fire Contracts: Other Public Safety: Streets and Highways: Garbage, Recycling, and Other Refuse: Libraries: Parks and Recreation: Airports: Transit: Cemetery: Other Service Charges: 'ines and Forfeits (35000): Ziscellaneous Revenue (36200): Interest Earnings: All Other Revenue: MisccllnI)eous 75,288 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 534 1,493 5,492 604 Iotal Revenues: 532,046 )ther Financing Sources: Investments - Sold or matured: 0 Borrowing - Bonds Issued: 0 Borrowing - Other Long-term Debt: 0 Borrowing - Short-term Debt: 0 Other Financing Sources: 0 Operating Transfers from Enterprise and Internal Service Funds: 1,500 Operating Transfers from Governmental Funds: 0 'ot--' Revenues and Other Financing Sources: 533,546 CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake C% -tv of Ramsey SECTION II: EXPENDITURES General Government Expenditures (41000): Mayor and Council: 5,598 Administration and Finance: 6,443 Other General Government: 190,604 General Government Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Public Safety Expenditures (42000): Police Current Expenditures: 60,409 Police Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Ambulance Current Expenditures: 0 Ambulance Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Fire Current Expenditures: 15,519 Fire Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Other Public Safety Current Expenditures: 31,276 Other Public Safety Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 streets and Highways Expenditures (43100): Street Maintenance and Storm Sewers: 3,992 Snow and Ice Removal: 6,481 Street Engineering: 0 Street Lighting: 820 Street Construction Capital Outlay: 476,432 Street - Other Capital Outlay: 0 Sanitation (Excluding Sewer) Expenditures (43200): Garbage and Other Refuse Collection and Disposal: 0 Other Sanitation Current Expenditures: 3,535 Sanitation Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 3ealth Expenditures (44100): Health Current Expenditures: 0 Health Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 -ulture and Recreation Expenditures (45000): Libraries Current Expenditures: 0 Libraries Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Parks and Recreation Current Expenditures: 0 Parks and Recreation Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 3 CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake Cl- ,ty of Ramsey lousing and Economic Development Expenditures (46300 - 46500): Housing and Urban Redevelopment Current Expenditures: 0 Housing and Urban Redevelopment Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Economic Development Current Expenditures: 0 Economic Development Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 ,'onservation of Natural Resources Expenditures: Conservation of Natural Resources Current Expenditures: 0 Conservation of Natural Resources Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Ziscellaneous Expenditures (46600 - 49200): Airports Current Expenditures: 0 Airports Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Transit Current Expenditures: 0 Transit Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Cemetery Current Expenditures: 0 Cemetery Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Pension Contribution: 0 Insurance: 1,378 l All Other Current Expenditures: 7,721 All Other Capital Outlay Expenditures: 0 Capital Project Fund Outlay for Enterprise Funds: 0 )ebt Service Expenditures (47000 - 47500): Principal Payments on Bonds: 0 Principal Payments on Other Long-term Debt and Short-term Debt: 0 Interest and Fiscal Chages: 16,141 'otal Expenditures: 826,349 )ther Financing Uses: Investments - Purchases: 0 Principal Payments - Refunded Bonds: 0 Other Financing Uses: 0 Operating Transfers to Enterprise and Internal Service Funds: 0 Operating Transfers to Governmental Funds: 0 ,otal Expenditures and Other Financing Uses: 826,349 4i CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 C City of Gem Lake t� of Ramsey SECTION III: ENTERPRISE FUNDS - LIQUOR STORE see page 10 for all other enterprise funds Additional Information: 0 )perating Revenues: 0 Operating Transfers In from Other Funds: ;ost of Sales: 0 Operating Transfers Out to Other Funds: 0 1ross Profit: 0 Capital Outlay During the Year: 0 Borrowing - Bonds Issued: 0 )perating Expenses: 0 Interest Paid and Fiscal Charges: 0 )perating Income (Loss): 0 Debt Paid - Bonds: 0 Debt Paid - Other Long-term Debt: 0 ton -operating Revenues: 0 Outstanding Bonded Debt - End of Year: 0 ton -operating Expenses: 0 Outstanding Other Long-term Debt - Year End: 0 let Income (Loss) - Depreciation: 0 Before Transfers: 0 Type of Liquor Store: O Off Sale Only O On and Off Sale Number of liquor stores operated by city: 0 If discontinued liquor operations, indicate effective date: SECTION IV: DEBT STATEMENT - ALL FUNDS Beginning Issued During Paid During of Year the Year the Year End of Year ieneral Obligation: 0 J.O. Tax Increment: 0 I evenue Tax Increment: 0 J.O. Special Assessment: 586,000 J.O. Revenue (G.O. backed): 0 Zevenue: 0 ether -Identify: 0 Fatal Bonded Debt: 586,000 0 0 586,000 Zefunding Bonds: 1 0 Total Other Long-term Debt*: 0F 0 0 0 Short-term Debt: 0 0 0 0 Interfund Debt: 0 0 01 0 )ther -Identifed: 5 CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake of Ramsey Special General Revenue Fund Funds All Other Total All Funds Funds ,ccounts Payable - December 31 oil 0 28,576 28,576 SECTION V: CASH AND INVESTMENTS - ALL FUNDS Total All General Fund Special Reveue Funds Governmental Funds lerk's Cash Balance - End of Year: 173,120 1 146,768 ederal Securities: 0 0 0 Dther Investments: 13 3,90 10 133,961 Cotal Cash and Investments: 207,021 F 0 280,669 SECTION VI: PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES - ALL FUNDS -ersonnel Expenditures - salaries, wages, and city officers' per diem: 111,200 SECTION VII: JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTS see page 11 SECTION VIII: SPECIAL DISTRICTS see page 12 SECTION IX: EMPLOYEE SALARY AND BENEFITS ,eneral Government (Administration) Number of Full-time Employees: 0 Number of Part-time Employees: 7 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Employees: 11,200 Total Amount of Benefits for Employees: 0 'olice Department Number of Full-time Employees: 0 Number of Part-time Employees: 0 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Employees: 0 Total Amount of Benefits for Employees: 0 'ire Department Number of Full-time Employees: 0 L'Number of Part-time Employees: 0 ._. total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Employees: 0 Total Amount of Benefits for Employees: 0 G CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake of Ramsey ,treet Department Number of Full-time Employees: 0 Number of Part-time Employees: 0 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Employees: 0 Total Amount of Benefits for Employees: 0 sanitation Department Number of Full-time Employees: 0 Number of Part-time Employees: 0 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Employees: 0 Total Amount of Benefits for Employees: 0 .ibrary Number of Full-time Employees: 0 Number of Part-time Employees: 0 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Employees: 0 Total Amount of Benefits for Employees: 0 'ark and Recreation Department Number of Full-time Employees: 0 Number of Part-time Employees: 0 ~Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Employees: 0 Total Amount of Benefits for Employees: 0 k11 Other Governmental Fund Employees Number of Full-time Employees: 0 Number of Part-time Employees: 0 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Employees: 0 Total Amount of Benefits for Employees: 0 Cotal Governmental Fund Employees Number of Full-time Employees: 0 Number of Part-time Employees: 7 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Employees: 11200 Total Amount of Benefits for Employees: 0 :nterprise Fund Employees Number of Full-time Employees: 0 Number of Part-time Employees: 0 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Employees: 0 Total Amount of Benefits for Employees: 0 'ost-Retirement Benefits jiVumber of Retired Employees Receiving Post -Retirement Benefits: 0 Total Amount of Post -Retirement Benefits Paid: 0 7 CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake Cr ty of Ramsey SECTION X: UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES AND OTHER COMMENTS Unique Circumstances 'lease indicate anything unique to your town or any extraordinary circumstances that occurred which may have npacted the 2005 financial statements (ie., natural disasters, major capital improvements, etc.). 8 CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake Cr—)ty of Ramsey t� J Additional Comments E CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake Cr ,ty of Ramsey SECTION III: ENTERPRISE FUNDS Enterprise: Sewer Fund Additional Information: Operating Revenues: 45,659 Taxes: 0 Operating Expenses: 39,806 Federal Grants 0 Operating Income (Loss): 5,853 State Grants: 0 County Grants / Local Grants: 0 Non -operating Revenues: 7,566 Operating Transfers In from Other Funds: 0 Non -operating Expenses: 0 Operating Transfers Out to Other Funds: 1,500 Net Income (Loss) - Capital Outlay During the Year: 0 Before Transfers: 13,419 Interfund Debt Borrowed: 0 Interfund Debt Paid: 0 Borrowing - Bonds Issued: 0 Interest Paid and Fiscal Charges: 0 Debt Paid - Bonds: 0 Debt Paid - Other Long-term Debt: 0 Outstanding Bonded Debt - End of Year: 0 Outstanding Other Long-term Debt - Year End: 0 Depreciation: 980 10.1 CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake C' 'Ity of Ramsey SECTION VII: JOINT POWERS Participating Included Organization Purpose of Agreement Governmental Units In Report ;ity of White Bear Lake Fire protection 2 Yes ,ity of Vadnais Heights Sewer flushing 2 Yes ;ity of Vadnais Heights Snow plowing 2 Yes ;ity of Vadnais Heights City water FA Iwo CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake Cr -Ity of Ramsey SECTION VII: JOINT POWERS Organization Purpose of Agreement :amsey County Police protection several Participating Governmental Units Included In Report Yes 11.2 CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake C� Ity of Ramsey SECTION VIII: SPECIAL DISTRICTS Type of District Governing Bodies of Organization TLAWMO Vadnais Heights, Gem Lake, White Bear Township, White Bear Lake, North Oaks, St. Paul, Shoreview, Little Canada 12.1 CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 City of Gem Lake Cr •ty of Ramsey Contacts Greeting Name Title Address Line 1: Address Line 2: City: Email: Phone Number: W. rederic Magnuson City Clerk 1369 County Road E East Gem Lake State: ZIP: 55110-5231 gemlakecity@aol.com (651) 426-6443 FAX Number: (651) 426-6444 Roles 'rimary Contact Administrator/Administrative Finance Clerk Contacts Greeting Name Title Ms. Sarah Cobian I ITreasurer Address Line 1: 1369 County Road E East A,"-ess Line 2: City: IGem Lake I State: ZIP: 55110-5231 Email: gemlakecity@aol.com Phone Number: (651) 426-6443 FAX Number: (651) 426-6444 Roles Treasurer Contacts Greeting Name Title jMr. IPaul Emeott II%,Iayor Address Line 1: 11369 County Road E East Address Line 2: City: IGem Lake State: ZIP: 155110-5231 Email: gemlakecity@aol.com Phone Number: (651) 426-6040 1 FAX Number: (651) 426-6444 Roles ;lected Official Mayor 13. 1 CASH CITY FINANCIAL REPORTING FORM For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 Cr City of Gem Lake V of Ramsey Greetin Contacts Mr. Ipason Miller Address Line 1: 2035 East County Road D Address Line 2: City: IMapiewood Email: j.miller@smithschafer.com Phone Number: (651) 770-8414 1 FAX Number: .j Name Title ccountine Firm (651) 770-5175 Roles Form Preparer State:I MN IZIP:155109 Accounting Firm Contact - 13.2 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA SPECIAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL REPORTS DECEMBER 31, 2005 AND 2004 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTORY SECTION TRANSMITTAL CITY OFFICIALS FINANCIAL SECTION Reference Page INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S COMPILATION REPORT 1 FINANCIAL REPORTS Statement of Cash Receipts, Disbursements, Balances and Investments Schedule 1 2-3 Statements of Cash Receipts — General Fund Schedule 2 4 Statements of Cash Disbursements — General Fund Schedule 2 5-6 Statements of Cash Receipts and Disbursements — Scheuneman Road Debt Service Fund Schedule 2 7 Statements of Cash Receipts and Disbursements — Scheuneman Road Capital Projects Fund Schedule 2 8 Balance Sheets — Sewer Enterprise Fund Schedule 3 9 Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes In Retained Earnings — Sewer Enterprise Fund Schedule 4 10 Statements of Changes in Working Capital — Sewer Enterprise Fund Schedule 5 11 Statement of City Indebtedness Schedule 6 12 Statements of Accounts Receivable and Payable Schedule 7 13 Statement of Investment Activity Schedule 8 14 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA INTRODUCTORY SECTION TRANSMITTAL CITY FINANCIAL STATEMENT CITY OF GEM LAKE RAMSEY COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA March 28, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: I hereby submit to you the City of Gem Lake's Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2005. This financial report contains statements of receipts and disbursements, a balance sheet, an operating statement and a statement of financial position for the enterprise fund, a statement of outstanding indebtedness and a statement of investment activity for all funds of the city. This report was prepared pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 471.698. Respectfully submitted, v Frederic Magnuson City Clerk CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA CITY OFFICIALS DECEMBER 31, 2005 Paul Emeott Mayor and Council Member Hugh Schilling Council Member Richard Bosak Council Member Tom Rasmussen Council Member Chuck Watson Council Member Frederic Magnuson Clerk Sarah Cobian Treasurer CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA FINANCIAL SECTION DECEMBER 31, 2005 AND 2004 l ZA MITH, SCHAFER & ASSOCIATES, L T D. Certified Public Accountants and Consultants Members of American Institute of CPA's, Private Companies Practice Section, Minnesota Society of CPA's INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S COMPILATION REPORT Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Gem Lake, Minnesota We have compiled the accompanying special purpose financial reports for the City of Gem Lake, Minnesota as of December 31, 2005 and 2004 and for the years ended, in accordance with Statements on Standards for Accounting and Review Services issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. All information included in these financial reports is the representation of management of the City of Gem Lake, Minnesota. A compilation is limited to presenting in the form of financial statements information that is the representation of management. We have not audited or reviewed the accompanying special purpose financial reports, and accordingly, do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance on them. The accompanying special purpose financial reports were prepared for the purpose of complying with "Reporting and Publishing Requirements for Cities Under 2,500 in Population — Reporting on the Cash Basis of Accounting" as prescribed by the Minnesota Office of the State Auditor, and are not intended to be a presentation in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. This financial report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council of Gem Lake and the Office of the Minnesota State Auditor, and should not be used for any other purpose. eJ. Maplewood, Minnesota March 28, 2006 J 2035 E. County Road D • Suite A • Maplewood, MN 55109 • PH (651) 770-8414 • FAX (651) 770-5175 j Rochester Office: • 220 South Broadway • Suite 102 • Rochester, MN 55904 • PH (507) 288-3277 • FAX (507) 288-4571 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2005 PUBLICATION REQUIREMENTS I� I U CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA Summary Financial Report The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of financial information concerning the City of Gem Lake to interested citizens. The complete financial statements may be examined at the City Office, 1369 County Road E East. Questions about this report should be directed to Mr. Frederic C. Magnuson, City Clerk at (651) 426-6443. Receipts and Disbursements for General Operations (Governmental Funds) RECEIPTS: Property Taxes Other taxes Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Investment Earnings Miscellaneous Total Receipts Per Capita DISBURSEMENTS: Current: General Government Streets and Highways Zoning and Inspection Services Public Safety Miscellaneous Capital Outlay Total Disbursements Per Capita Total Long-term Indebtedness Per Capita General Fund Cash Fund Balance - December 31* Per Capita * Includes General Fund Investments Percent Total Total Increase 2005 2004 (Decrease) $ 167,011 $ 144,195 15.82% 3,448 3,106 11.01 % 52,749 54,002 -2.32% 752 1,577 -52.31 % 77,315 43,987 75.77% 5,492 4,158 32.08% 604 166 263.86% $ 307,371 $ 251,191 22.37% 683.05 599.50 13.94% $ 203,985 $ 128,969 58.17% 14,828 25,664 -42.22% 31,276 32,840 -4.76% 75,928 70,039 8.41% 7,721 3,509 120.03% - 3,745 -100.00% $ 333,738 $ 264,766 26.05% 741.64 631.90 17.37% $ 586,000 $ 586,000 N/A 1,302.22 1,398.57 N/A $ 207,021 $ 231,888-10.72% 460.05 553.43-16.87% I j CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND BALANCE SHEET PROPRIETARY FUND December 31, 2005 ASSETS Current Assets Sewer Fund (Total All Proprietary Funds) Cash and cash equivalents $ 42,969 Investments 231,176 Accounts receivable 10,080 Interest receivable 5,711 Due from capital projects fund - Total Current Assets 289,936 Property and Equipment, at Cost Sewer system 49,000 Less: Accumulated depreciation 3,267 Property and Equipment, Net 45,733 TOTAL ASSETS $ 335,669 LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY Fund Equity Retained earnings, unrestricted $ 302,863 Paid -in capital 32,806 Total Fund Equity 335,669 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY $ 335,669 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA STATEMENTS OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN WORKING CAPITAL SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 �j I Sewer Fund (Total All Proprietary Funds) Operating Revenues Charges for services $ 45,659 Operating Expenses Depreciation 980 Power and pumping - Utilities 11,429 Engineering fees 20,900 Repairs and maintenance 1,361 Outside services 4,556 Miscellaneous 555 Office supplies and expense 25 Total Operating Expenses 39,806 Operating Income 5,853 Nonoperating Revenues Interest income 7,566 Net Income Before Transfers $ 13,419 Sources and (Uses) of Working Capital Net Income Before Transfers $ 13,419 Depreciation 980 Transfers In - Transfers Out (1,500) Increase in Working Capital $ 12,899 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA STATEMENT OF CASH RECEIPTS, DISBURSEMENTS, BALANCES, AND INVESTMENTS For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 Fund Name General Fund Debt Service Fund Scheuneman Road Debt Service Capital Projects Fund Scheuneman Road Construction Enterprise Fund Total Clerk's Sale Balance Of Transfers Jan. 1 Receipts Investments In $ 81,376 $ 307,371 $ 150,512 $ 1,500 26,869 54,675 314,715 170,000 - 134,315 52.046 128,110 $ 557,275 $ 584,092 $ 278,622 $ 1,500 See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 2 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA FINANCIAL REPORTS DECEMBER 31, 2005 AND 2004 Schedule 1 Purchase Clerk's Investments Disburse- Of Transfers Balance Balance Ments Investments Out Dec.31 Dec.31 $ 333,738 $ 133,901 $ - $ 73,120 $ 133,901 16,179 - - 65,365 - 476,432 - - 8,283 - 38,826 231,176 1 500 42,969 231,176 $ 865,175 $ 365.077 $ 1,500 $ 189,737 $ 365.077 3 Schedule 2 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA GENERALFUND STATEMENTS OF CASH RECEIPTS For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 and 2004 RECEIPTS Local Taxes General tax levy Gambling taxes (voluntary contribution) Total Local Taxes Licenses, Permits and Other Fees Intergovernmental Receipts Score Grants Charges for Services Interest Income Miscellaneous Receipts Total Receipts Before Transfers OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Transfer from Sewer Enterprise Fund TOTAL RECEIPTS AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 2005 2004 $ 167,011 $ 144,195 3,448 3,106 170,459 147,301 52,749 54,002 752 1,577 77,316 43,987 5,492 4,158 604 166 307,371 251,191 1,500 1,500 $ 308,871 $ 252,691 See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 4 Schedule 2 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA GENERAL FUND STATEMENTS OF CASH DISBURSEMENTS For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 and 2004 DISBURSEMENTS 2005 2004 General Government Mayor and Council Salaries $ 5,200 $ 5,200 Payroll taxes 398 398 Total Mayor and Council 5,598 5,598 Finance and Administration Election judges 137 4,847 City clerk 3,000 3,000 Treasurer salary 3,000 2,600 Payroll taxes 443 428 Telephone and internet service expense 3,536 3,448 Office supplies and expense 4,698 5,320 Dues and subscriptions 2,629 2,355 Insurance and bonds 1,378 1,574 Total Finance and Administration 18,821 23,572 Professional Services Engineering fees 66,472 28,627 Legal, accounting and administrative 113,094 71,172 Total Professional Services 179,566 99,799 Total General Government $ 203,985 $ 128,969 See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 5 Schedule 2 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA GENERAL FUND STATEMENTS OF CASH DISBURSEMENTS For the Years Ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 DISBURSEMENTS (Continued) 2006 2004 Public Works Highways, Streets and Alleys Street maintenance and snow removal $ 10,473 $ 21,525 Capital outlay - construction - 3,745 Curbside recycling 3,635 3,376 Street lighting 820 763 Total Highways, Streets and Alleys 14,828 29,409 Zoning and Inspection Services Building inspection services 17,253 11,757 Zoning administration services 14,023 21,083 Total Zoning and Inspection Services 31,276 32,840 Total Public Works 46,104 62,249 Public Safety Ramsey County law enforcement 60,409 56,822 White Bear Lake fire and paramedic services 15,519 13,217 Total Public Safety 76,928 70,039 Miscellaneous 7,721 3,509 Total Disbursements Before Transfers 333,738 264,766 OTHER FINANCING USES Transfer to Sewer Fund - 2,000 TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS AND OTHER FINANCING USES $ 333,738 $ 266,766 See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 6 Schedule 2 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA SCHEUNEMAN ROAD DEBT SERVICE FUND STATEMENTS OF CASH RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS For the Years Ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 RECEIPTS Special Assessments OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Borrowing - proceeds from sale of bonds TOTAL RECEIPTS AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES DISBURSEMENTS Interest expense Bank charges TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS 2005 2004 $ 54,675 $ - 26,869 $ 54,675 $ 26,869 $ 16,141 $ - 38 - $ 16,179 $ - See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 7 Schedule 2 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA SCHEUNEMAN ROAD CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND STATEMENTS OF CASH RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS For the Years Ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 RECEIPTS Intergovernmental Revenues OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Borrowing - proceeds from sale of bonds Intergovernmental revenues TOTAL RECEIPTS AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES DISBURSEMENTS Public Works Capital outlay - construction Legal, accounting and administrative Bank charges TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS 2005 2004 $ 170,000 $ - - 545,858 $ 170,000 $ 545,858 $ 476,432 $ 221,555 - 9,500 88 $ 476,432 $ 231,143 See Indenendent Accountant's Comoilation Report 8 Schedule 3 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND BALANCE SHEETS December 31, 2005 and 2004 ASSETS Current Assets Cash and cash equivalents Investments Accounts receivable Interest receivable Due from capital projects fund Total Current Assets Property and Equipment, at Cost Sewer system Less: Accumulated depreciation Property and Equipment, Net TOTAL ASSETS LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY Fund Equity Retained earnings Paid -in capital Total Fund Equity TOTAL LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY 2005 2004 $ 42,969 $ 134,315 231,176 128,110 10,080 7,542 5,711 1,887 - 5,183 289,936 277,037 49,000 49,000 3,267 2,287 45,733 46,713 $ 335,669 $ 323,750 $ 302,863 $ 290,944 32,806 32,806 335,669 323,750 $ 335,669 $ 323,750 See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 9 Schedule 4 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND STATEMENTS OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS For the Years Ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 2005 2004 Operating Revenues Charges for services $ 45,659 $ 33,499 Operating Expenses Depreciation 980 980 Met Council user fees 11,429 10,480 Engineering fees 20,900 - Repairs and maintenance 1,361 5,374 Outside services 4,556 195 Miscellaneous 555 - Office supplies and expense 25 123 Total Operating Expenses 39,806 17,152 Operating Income 5,853 16,347 Nonoperating Revenues Interest income 7,566 3,171 Net Income Before Transfers 13,419 19,518 Transfer from General Fund - 2,000 Transfer to General Fund (1,500) (1,500) NET INCOME 11,919 20,018 RETAINED EARNINGS, JANUARY 1 290,944 270,926 RETAINED EARNINGS, DECEMBER 31 $ 302,863 $ 290,944 See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 10 Schedule 5 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN WORKING CAPITAL For the Years Ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 WORKING CAPITAL PROVIDED BY: Operations: Net income before transfers Transfers from General Fund Items not requiring working capital - depreciation Total Sources of Working Capital WORKING CAPITAL USED FOR: Transfers to General Fund NET INCREASE IN WORKING CAPITAL I j See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 1 11 2005 2004 $ 13,419 $ 19,518 - 2,000 980 980 14,399 22,498 1,500 1,500 $ 12,899 $ 20,998 Schedule 6 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA STATEMENT OF CITY INDEBTEDNESS For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 FINAL OUTSTANDING OUTSTANDING BONDED INTEREST ISSUE MATURITY JAN.1, ISSUED PAID DEC.31, INDEBTEDNESS RATE DATE DATE 2005 IN 2005 IN 2005 2005 Special Assessment Bonds Scheuneman Road Improvement 2004 3.70% 11/3/2004 2/1/2016 $ 586.000 $ $ - $ 586,000 Total City Indebtedness $ 586.000 $ - $ - $ 586,000 See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 12 Schedule 7 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA STATEMENTS OF ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AND PAYABLE December 31, 2005 and 2004 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE Fund Source of Revenue and Purpose General Charges for services Sewer User charges Total Accounts Receivable ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES Fund Vendor Name Item and Purpose Cap Proj BelAir Builders, Inc. Construction costs Cap Proj SEH, Inc. Engineering fees Cap Proj Leonard O'Brien Law Legal services Total Accounts Payable and Contingent Liabilities See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 13 Amount at December 31, 2005 2004 $ 2,757 $ 9,992 10,080 7,542 $ 12,837 $ 17,534 Claim Amount at December 31, Number 2005 2004 N/A $ 27,217 $ - N/A 496 - N/A 863 - $ 28,676 $ - Schedule 8 CITY OF GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT ACTIVITY For the Year Ended December 31, 2005 FUND NAME Investment Balance January 1, 2005 Sale of Investments Purchase of Investments Investment Balance December 31, 2005 General Fund $ 150,512 $ 150,512 $ 133,901 $ 133,901 Enterprise Fund Sewer Fund 128,110 128,110 231,176 231,176 Total $ 278,622 $ 278.622 $ 365.077 $ 365,077 See Independent Accountant's Compilation Report 14 Claims For Payment CITY OF GEM LAKE Period Ending 04/15/2006 Paul Emeott, Mayor Chuck Watson, Council Hutch Schilling, Council Richard Bosak, Council Tom Rasmussen, Councils Frederic Magnuson, Clerk SignaluEeL Approving Claims For Payment Date Of Approval t DATE / I ./!(, �C' _ �! J DATE r / � DATE /1 / 7 0- DATE A / DATE / DATE CL MINI# DATI? PAIp PAID TO DESCRIPTION OF CLAIM $ AMOUNT I GENERAL FUND I SEWER FUND SP 2108 17-Apr-2006 Metropolitan Council Current User Charges: May 2005 1,038.47 1,038.47 SP 2109 17-Apr-2006 Gopher State One -Call 6 Tix n $1.45/ea 8.70 . _8-70 SI' 2110 17-Apr-2006 Hillary Farm, LLC Sanitary Sewer Dedication 1.00 _ 1.00 SP 21 1 1 17-Apr-2006 SEH, Inc. Sewer Maintenence Protocol 1,25620 _ 1,256.20 SP 2112 17-Apr-2006 CITY OF GEM LAKE GENERAL FUND TOTAL CLAIM 1,71470 SP 21 12 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC SewerAdministration:Feb/Mar-12.5 hours _ 975.00 SP 21 12 17-Apr-2006 MagmlSOn & Associates. LLC AsstCIerkSewer: Feb/Mar-03.75 hours 243.75 SP 21 12 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC SewerAdministration:Mar/Apr-04.9 hours _ 382.20 SP 21 12 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC AsstClerkSewer.Mar/Apr-01.75 hours 113.75 GP 6819 17-Apr-2006 PRESS PUBLICATIONS TOTAL CLAIM t 22.00' GP 6819 17-Apr-2006 Press Publications VOluntarySubscription:4/1/2006-9/30/06 11.00 GI' 0819 17-Apr-2006 Press Publications VOluntarySubscription:10/1/2006-3/31/07 11.00 GP 6820 17-Apr-2006 CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE TOTALCLAIM 1.264.33 GI' 6820 17-Apr-2006 City of White Bear Lake Fire & Paramedic: April 2006 t 942.33 GI' 6820 17-Apr-2006 City of White Bear Lake Fire Marshall & Inspections: April 2006 322.00 G1' 6821 17-Apr-2006 Ramsey County Law Enforcement: April 2006 5.533.58 5,533.581 GI' 6822 17-Apr-2006 SMITH SCHAFER & ASSOCIATES, LTD. TOTAL CLAIM 3.700.00. _ GP 6822 17-Apr-2006 Smith Schafer & Associates, Ltd, Aceiing&Bookkping/FundBalToAd_just05YrEndBal 1,500.00 GP 6822 17-Apr-2006 Smith Schafer & Associates, Ltd. CompilFinStmntsFor2005ForStateAuditorOtMN1 1,500.00 GP 6822 17-Apr-2006 Smith Schafer & Associates, Ltd. Cityl'inancReport ingForm/DocsToMeetPubRegsl 700,00- GI' 6823 17-Apr-2006 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE TOTAL CLAIM 441.24 GI' 6823 17-Apr-2006 Internal Revenue Service 1 st Qtr 2006: Employee SS Payment 178.79 GI' 6823 17-Apr-2006 Internal Revenue Service Ist Qtr 2006: City SS Payment 178.79 Gil 6823 17-Apr-2006 Internal Revenue Service I st Qtr 2006: Employee Medicare Payment 41.83 GI' 6823 17-Apr-2006 Internal Revenue Service 1 s[ Qtr 2006: City Medicare Payment 41 83 GP 6824 17-Apr-2006 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUS"I TOTAL CLAIM 242.74 GP 6824 17-Apr-2006 Department of Labor and Industry 1st Qtr 2006: Building Pen nits (Fixed Fees>$1,010) 3.24 GP 6824 17-Apr-2006 Department of Labor and Industry I st Qtr 2006: Building Permits (Per Valuation) 262.00I GP 6824 17-Apr-2006 Department of Labor and Industry Ist Qtr 2006: Plumbing Permits 1 00, GP 6824 17-Apr-2006 Department of Labor and Industry Ist Qtr 2006: Mechanical Permits L50 G P 6824 17-Apr-2006 Department ol' Labor and Industry 1st Qtr 2006: Permit Retention (25.00) GP 6825 17-Apr-2006 PRESS PUBLICATIONS TOTAL CLAIM 172.13 GP 6825 17-Apr-2006 Press Publications LegTrans#347987: Change of Meeting 25.50 GP 6825 17-Apr-2006 Press Publications LegTrans#348365: Annual Meeting 3815 GP 6825 17-Apr-2006 Press Publications LegTrans#349045: Public Hearing2006-09 57.38 GI' 6825 17-Apr-2006 Press Publications LegTrans4349046: Public Hearing2006-10 _ 51.00 GP 6820 17-Apr-2006 Waste Management Curbside Recycling: April 2006 314,00. 314.00 _ GI' 6827 17-Apr-2006 Xcel Energy Street Lighting: March 2006 73.85 73.85 � GI' 6828 17-Apr-2006 LEONARD,O'BRIEN,SPENCER,G & S TOTAL CLAIM 8,538.79 GP 6828 17-Apr-2006 Leo nard,OBricn,Spencer,Gale&Sayre MIInICMtrs:ZoningCommitteeToRvwSitePlans 88.50 GP 6828 17-Apr-2006 I.eonard,OBricn,Spencer,Gale&Sayre Hillary Farm Subdivision 412.50 GP 6828 17-Apr-2006 Leo nard,OBrien,Spencer,Gale&Savre Hansen Detach/Annex 7,809.25 GI' 6828 17-Apr-2006 Leo nard,O'Brien, Spencer,Gale&Sayre Hansen Detach/Ann ex: Park ing/WestlawCompUsage 22,29 GP 6828 17-Apr-2006 Leonard,OBricn,Spencer,Gale&Sayre Hartford Group 206.25 GI' 6829 17-Apr-2006 Hilary R. Magnuson Public Hearing Notice Mailing: 1 hr x $25/hr 25.00 25.00 GP 6930 17-Apr-2006 SEH. INC. TOTAL CLAIM 8,925.22 Run: 04/17/2006 at 04:04:20 PM Page 1 of 2 File: 06claim04.123 .Claims For Payment CITY OF GEM LAKE Period Ending 04/15/2006 Paul Emeott, Mayor Chuck Watson, Council Hutch Schilling, Council Richard Bosak, Council Tom Rasmussen, CounttSL Frederic Magnuson, Clerk Signatures Approving Claims For Payment Date Of Approval J ,s� � - �a 4"71 r. DATE LsG DATE �Y DATE 1121 0&/ DATE / / / DATE / DATE C'I AINI# DATE PAID PAID TO DESCRIPTION OF CLAIM $ AMOUNT GENERAL FUND SEWER FUND GP 6830 17-Apr-2006 SEH, Inc. CityEngSvcs:Miscellaneous Extra Service 16.50 GP 6830 17-Apr-2006 SEH, Inc. Hillary Fann Subdivision 448.00 GP 6830 17-Apr-2006 SEH, Inc. GenEngSvcs:City Assessment Policy 384.00 GI' 6830 17-Apr-2006 SEH, Inc. PIP 2006-02 Water Feasibility 4.843.72 GP 6830 17-Apr-2006 SEH, Inc. PIP 2006-04 BusSew/Wat Feasibility 1,616.50 GP 6830 17-Apr-2006 SEH, Inc. PIP 2006-01 Road Feasibility 1,616.50 GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 MAGNUSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC TOTAL CLAIM Ma/Aprr06 6,57020 j GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC Telephone&FacsimileService: GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC OfficeSupplies,Copying&Postage: Mar/Apr06 196.10 GI' 6831 17-Apr 2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC Mileage(24 @ $0.445):Ma/Aprr06 10.68 GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC InternetAccess-(50%):Ma/Aprr06 11.95' GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC GeneralAdministration:Mar/Apr-38.4 hours 2.993.20 GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC BillableAdministration:Mar/Apr-04.60urs 358.80 GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC SewerAdministration:Mar/Apr-04.9 hours 382.20 GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC Capita IProjectAdministration:Mar/Apr-15.5 hours 1,209.00 GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC ElectionAdministration:Mar/Apr-00. hours 0.00 GP 683 t 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates, LLC AsstClerkGeneral: Mar/Aprr-1 7A hours 1,131.00 GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC AsstCIerkSewer: Mar/Apr-01.75 hours 113.75 GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC AsstClerkRecycling:Mar/Apr-0.35 hours 22.75 r j GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC AsstCIerk:PIP2006-01-Mar/Apr-1.50 hours 97.50' GP 6831 17-Apr-2006 Magnuson & Associates. LLC AsstClerk:PIP2006-03-Mar/Apr-4.00 hours 260.00 GP 6832 17-Apr-2006 PAUL R. EMEOTT TOTAL CLAIM 497.92 _ GI' 6832 17-Apr-2006 Paul R. Emeott IntergovMtgs:3x$20/ea(VLAWMO) 60.00 GP 6832 17-Apr-2006 Paul R. EmeotL Lonine Adnun Plan Review I hr x $78/hr (Pratt) 78.00' GP 6832 17-Apr-2006 Paul R. Emeott NPDESAdmin 1.5 hrx$78/hr(SiltFeneclnsps) 117.001 GP 6832 17-Apr-2006 Paul R. Emeott SewcrAdmin: Sewcr Locating .75hr x $78 58.50 GP 6832 17-Apr-2006 Paul R. Emeott AticndcdClass: NewStormWaterManual-NPDES 75.001 GP 6832 17-Apr-2006 Paul R. Emeott PrintFirstGditionGLCityHistory 100.22 GI' 6832 17-Apr-2006 Paul R. Emeott 011iceSpls:ColorCopiesolHartfordDa(a.Postage 9.20 ALL 04/17/2006 APRILSUNIMARY TOTAL FOR APRIL $40,340.07! $36,662.45 $4,019.07 8.33% Of Budget Monthly % Annual Budget 11.00% i 10.00% 1.10% ALI, 04/17/2006 YEAR-TO-DATE SUMMARY TOTAL YEAR-TO-DATE $178,804.051 $170,489.24, $8,656.26 33.33% Of Year Completed % Annual Budget 48.75% i 53.82%; 17,33% ALL, 04/17/2006 VERSUS ANNUAL BUDGET Annual Budget$Under/($Over) ($56,555.38) ($64,890.57) $7,993.74 33.33% Of Year Completed Annual Budget %Under/-%Over -15.42% i-20.48%'' 16.00% j Run: 04/17/2006 at 04:04:20 PM Page 2 of 2 File: 06claim04.123 GENERAL FUND CHECKING 2006 CITY OF GEM LAKE TREASURER'S REPORT GENERAL C 141939.90 142079.28 V OF GEM LAKE FUND H 01/01/2005 START 73120.25 'Comb Road "E" East CHECKING K 142,620.38 -141754.09 210573.74 68819.65 Gem MN 55110-5231 PAYMENT FOR I N BANK BALANCE DEBIT CREDIT 141939.90 BALANCE TRAM TRAM CHECKS TO FROM DATE # DEPOSITS Charitable Gamblin Donation: 2005 Charitable Gambling Donation: 2005 3 3 46800 2,480.00 179.134.27 176.654.27 179,134.27 176.654.27 20-Mar-06 P6797 Lake Area Transit Willow Lane Mcmrn School 13-Mar-06 7981 07-Mar-06 P6799 Friends of the Parks & Trails Clreritab a Gamblin Donation: 2005 3 (200.00 176,454.27 176.45427 27-Feb 06 P6800 Min -CODA Gambli Donation: 2005 (300.00 176.154.27 176,454.27 03-Mar-06 I Jim Lindner Attnd 2006 Land Use W GTS 3 (125.00 176.029.27 176,32927 09-Mar-06 P6802 RAMSEY COUNTY TOTAL CLAIM 3 SAI.87 170,727.40 171,027.40 169 763.07 24-Mar-06 P6803 CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE TOTAL CLAIM 3 1,264.33 169,463.07 169149.07 169449.07 29-Mar-06 P6804 Waste Curbside a March 2006 3 3 314.00 (150.00 169,999.07 169,299.07 23-Mar-06 P6805 of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust Accident Plan For City Volunteers:l/l/06-1/1 24-Mar-06 P6306 RAMSEY COUNTY TOTAL CLAIM 3 (1,335.58 167.663.49 167,255.49 167,963.49 167,555.49 23-Mar-06 P6807 PRESS PUBLICATIONS TOTAL CLAIM 3 3 408.00 (75.95 167,179.54 167.479.54 24-Mar-06 P6808 Xcel EwV Street lightin& F 2006 3 (535.60 166,643.94 166,943.94 23-Mar-06 P6809 PAUL R. EMEOTT TOTAL CLAIM 1 st '06 Salery�S206.00.12.77ss-2.99mm) 3 190.24 166.453.70 166,753.70 27-Mar-06 P6909 Richard Bosak 1st '06 ($206.00.12.77ss-2.99mm 190.24 166,263.46 166,753.70 20-Mar-06 P6811 Tom Rasmussen IstQtr'06Sab" $206.00-12.77ss-2.99mm) (190.24 166,073.22 166.753.70 20-Mar-06 P6812 Hutch 1st Otr '06 $2W.00-12.77ss-2.99mm 3 190.24 165,882.98 166.563.46 28-Mar-06 21-Mar-06 13 P6814 Chuck Watson Sarah Cobian IstQtr'06 Salwy (f772.50.47.89ss-11.20mm) 3 713.41 165,169.57 165,950.05 23-Mar-O P6815 Frederic C. uson 1st '06 S772.50�47.89ss•11.20mm 3 13.41 164,456.16 165,136.64 15-A 10 P6916 LEONARD,O'BRIEN,SPENCER,G & S TOTAL CLAIM 3 6,612.29 157,943.87 158,524.35 23-Mar-06 P6817 SEH, INC. TOTAL CLAIM 3 12,23272 145,611.15 146,291.63 137,167.02 137.947.50 23-Mar-06 P6918 MAGNUSON & ASSOCIA7ES, LLC TOTAL CLAIM 3 8,444.13 03-Mar-06 1 Comcast 2005 Annual Franchise Fee Payment 3 7,882.30 140,049.32 140 729.80 035Z 6 2 DUNN PLUMBING & MECHANICAL TOTAL PAYMENT 3 469.00 140 18.32 141,068.32 141,198.80 141,748.80 03-Mar-06 3 THE TRIKE SHOP TOTAL PAYMENT 3 550.00 62.00 141 130.32 141 810.80 09-Mar-O 1 State of Minnesota Wire 7taQs Traffic Fines: F 2006 3 10.65 141,140.97 141,821.45 09-Mar-06 1 Chris Doehrmann Document Sales: Ordinance (No. 43) 3 110.00 141.250.97 141.931.45 2 MICHAEL R GERNER TOTAL PAYMENT 3 182.00 141,432.97 142,113.45 L06 aarr-06 1 SUMMIT FARMS REALTY CO. TOTAL PAYMENT 3 IS-Mw-06 2 T lirue Advwising, lnc. S' Permit #S2006-02 3 50.00 141,482.97 142,163.45 31-Mar-06 1 Premier Bank Interest Paid This Period 3 456.93 141,939.90 142,620.38 IN Run Date: 04/10/2006 at 11:00:25 AM E-File: CheckinglGenFund06.123 Page 1 of I _ Premier "I'veR Bank Minnesota Owned. Minnesota Operated. MEMBER FDIC CITY OF GEM LAKE GENERAL FUND 1369 COUNTY ROAD E E GEM LAKE MN 55110-5231 PREFERRED ELITE Page: 1 Account Number: 6005590 Statement Date: 3/31/06 Checks/Items Enclosed: 29 Now offering Health Savings Accounts Contact your branch office for more infromation CITY OF GEM LAKE GE14ERAL FUND Beginning Balance 3/01/06 Deposits / Misc Credits 5 Withdrawals / Misc Debits 26 ** Ending Balance 3/31/06 Service Charge Interest Paid Thru 3/31/06 Interest Paid Year To Date Annual Percentage Yield Earned Number of Days for A.P.Y.E. Average Balance for A.P.Y.E. Average Collected Balance Minimum Balance Enclosures Miscellaneous Credits 86 Acct 6005590 187,102.21 4,772.88 ✓ 49,254.71 (40e a W-.rdttt -& 2005 V142,620.38 ** eAeck 456.93 921.06 3.22 31 169,714.41 169,714 142,163 29 Date Deposits Withdrawals Activity Description 3/03 3,901.30 DEPOSIT 3/09 120.65 DEPOSIT 3/09 62.00 MN STATE FINANCE/ACH PYMT GEM LAKE CITY OF 3/15 232.00 DEPOSIT 3/31 456.93 Interest Earned SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CITY OF GM4 LAKE Paid Checks Date Check No. 3/06-- - 66-78 3/09 6780* 3/06 6785* 3/01 6787* 3/07 6789* 3/03 6791* 3/03 6793* 3/20 6797* 3/13 6798 Daily Balance Summary `_e Balance 3/01 186,788.21 3/03 188,627.57 3/06 188,507.57 3/07 188,234.57 3/09 178,059.35 Account Number: Statement Date: Page: 2 6005590 3/31/06 *'indicates skip in check numbers Amount Date Check No. Amount Date Check No. Amount 20.00 3/07 6799 200-.00— -3/23 6809- 535.60 5,056.00 3/03 6801* 125.00 3/27 6810 190.24 100.00 3/09 6802 5,301.67 3/28 6813* 190.24 314.00 3/24 6803 1,264.33 3/21 6814 713.41 73.00 3/29 6804 314.00 3/23 6815 713.41 102.13 3/23 6805 150.00 3/24 6816 6,612.29 1,834.81 3/24 6806 1,335.58 3/23 6817 12,232.72 468.00 3/23 6807 408.00 3/23 6818 8,444.13 2,480.00 3/24 6808 75.95 Date Balance Date Balance 3/13 175,579.35 3/24 142,857.93 3/15 175,811.35 3/27 142,667.69 3/20 175,343.35 3/28 142,477.45 3/21 174,629.94 3/29 142,163.45 3/23 152,146.08 3/31 142,620.38 SEWER FUND CHECKING 2006 CITY OF GEM LAKE TREASURER'S REPORT rY OF GEM LAKE County Road "E" East t;em Lake, MN 55110-5231 TRAN TRAN CHECKS TO DATE # DEPOSITS FROM SEWER FUND CHECKING C H K I N 05 Jan START 42,968.82 26280.55 BANK BALANCE -23027.86 7378.641 30406.50 PAYMENT FOR DEBIT CREDIT 26280.55 BALANCE 23-Mar-06 SP2105 h4thypolitan Council Current User Charges: jqnil 2006 3 -1038.47 25003.87 25003.87 27-Mar-06 SP2106 Gopher State One -Call 5 Tix @ $1.45/ea 3 -7.25 24996.62 24996.62 61-Mar-06 SP2107 Hilwy Mepuson Delinquent Sewer Acct Mailin . lhoar 3 -25.00 24971.62 24971.62 09-Mar-06 1 GARY COOK TOTAL PAYMENT 3 212.10 25183.72 25183.72 09-Mar-06 2 SINGH ENTERPRISES, LLC TOTAL PAYMENT 3 858.00 26041.72 26041.72 09-Mar-06 3 PODS TIRE & WHEEL TOTAL PAYMENT 3 157.30 26199.02 26199.02 15-Mar-06 1 SANDRA KUCHENMEISTER TOTAL PAYMENT 3 36.50 26235.52 26235.52 15-Mar-06 2 MARY BURKE CARDENAS TOTAL PAYMENT 3 1 40.501 26276.02 26276.02 31-Mar-06 1 I Premier Bank Interest Paid This Period 3 1 1 4.531 26280.55 26280.55 Run Date: 04/10/2006 at 11:35:48 AM E-File: Checldng2SewerFund06.123 Page 1 Premier Bank Minnesota Owned. Minnesota Operated. CITY OF GEM LAKE SEWER FUND 1369 COUNTY ROAD E E GEM LAKE MN 55110-5231 Page: 1 Account Number: 6005582 Statement Date: 3/31/06 Checks/Items Enclosed: 7 86 NOW OFFERING Health Savings Accounts & Remote Deposit Capture NON PROFIT PPMUER PLUS CITY OF GEM LAKE Acct 6005582 SEWER FUND LENGcR fe7EROBER FDIC Beginning Balance 3/01/06 27,225.31 Deposits / Misc Credits 3 1,308.93'' Withdrawals / Misc Debits 5 2,253.69 ** Ending Balance 3/31/06 26,280.55I/** Service Charge .00 Interest Paid Thru 3/31/06 4.53 Interest Paid Year To Date 16.74 Annual Percentage Yield Earned .20 Number of Days for A.P.Y.E. 31 Average Balance for A.P.Y.E. 26,650.60 Average Collected Balance 26,651 Minam= Balance 26,017 Enclosures 7 Miscellaneous Credits Date Deposits Withdrawals Activity Description 3/09 1,227.40 DEPOSIT 3/15 77.00 DEPOSIT 3/31 4.53 Interest Earned Paid Checks * indicates skip in check numbers Date Check No. Amount Date Check No. Amount Date Check No. Amount 3/02 2101 1,038.47 3/23 2105* 1,038.47 3/01 2107 25.00 3/01 2102 144:50 3/27 ._2106„_ 7.25 SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Page: 2 CITY OF GM T•A'RF: Account Number: 6005582 statement Date: 3/31/06 Daily Balance summary Date Balance Date Balance — 3/01-----ZT,U55.Erl-- -- — -3/15 27;321-7C--- 3/02 26,017.34 3/23 26,283.27 3/09 27,244.74 6W Date Balance 3/31 26,280.55 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND CHECKING 2006 CITY OF GEM LAKE TREASURER'S REPORT OF GEM LAKE ) Coaaty Road "E" East J %.em Lake, MN 5_5110-5231 TRAN CITE 'K CHECKS TO 2004 - 2006 BONDS CAPITAL PROJECT FUND CHECKING #6103844 C H K I PREMIER BANK WBL 03-Nov-04 START 0.00 -755287.57 755287.57 545957.95 — -0.00 BANK -0.00 DATE # DEPOSITS FROM I A PAYMENT FOR N DEBIT CREDIT BALANCE BALANCE i 0.00 0.00' O Run Date: 04/10/2006 at 11:36:43 AM E-File: Checking3Project06.123 Page 1 Premier InOmift Bank Minnesota Owned. Minnesota Operated. CITY OF GEN LANE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 1369 COUNTY ROAD E E GENT LAKE MN 55110-5231 Page: 1 Account Number: 6103844 Statement Date: 3/31/06 Checks/Items Enclosed: 0 86 NOW OFFERING Health Savings Accounts & Remote Deposit Capture NON PROFIT PREMIER PLUS CITY OF GEM LANE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Acct 6103844 Beginning Balance 3/01/06 .00 Deposits / Misc. Credits 0 .00 Withdrawals / Misc Debits 0 .00 ** Ending Balance 3/31/06 .00 ** Service Charge .00 Average Balance 0 Average Collected Balance 0 Minimum Balance 0 ,J LENDER MEMBER FDIC SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION DEBIT FUND CHECKING 2006 CITY OF GEM LAKE TREASURER'S REPORT " ,Y OF GEM LAKE 2006 BONDS FROM PIP200"I C 1 County Road "E" East DEBT SERVICE H 01-Ian-05 START 0.00 -utm Lake, MN 55110.5231 CHECKING #6103780 K -27019.61 71461.50 26868.85 71310.74 TRAN TRAN CHECKS TO I 71310.74 BANK DATE # DEPOSITS FROM PAYMENT FOR N DEBIT CREDIT BALANCE BALANCE 71310.74 71310.74 Run Date: 04/10/2006 at 11:37:22 AM E-File: Chmking4Bonds06.123 Page 1 Premier 1�12 Bank Minnesota Owned. Minnesota Operated. MEMBER FDIC Page: 1 CITY OF GEM LARE 6103780 SERVICE 2004 DEBIT FUND Account Number: 1369 COUNTY ROAD E E Statement Date: 3/31/06 GEM LANE Mai 55110-5231 Checks/Items Enclosed: 0 86 NOW OFFERING Health Savings Accounts & Remote Deposit Capture NON PROFIT PR UER PLUS CITY OF GEM LAKE SERVICE 2004 DEBIT FUND Beginning Balance 3/01/06 Deposits / Misc Credits 0 Withdrawals / Misc Debits 0 ** Ending BaianCe 3/31/06 Service Charge Average Balance Average Collected Balance Minimum Balance Acct 6103780 71,310.74 .00 .00 71,310.74 ** .00 71,311 71,311 71,310 SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION