Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2016 Final-Budget-Book
LAKE MML- City of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 Phone:651-747-3900 Fax:651-747-3901 Web: www.lakeelmo.org CITY OFFICIALS Mike Pearson, Mayor Justin Bloyer, Councilmember Anne Smith, Councilmember Julie Fliflet, Councilmember Jill Lundgren, Councilmember CITY MANAGEMENT TEAM Clark Schroeder, Interim City Administrator Cathy Bendel, Finance Director Julie Johnson, City Clerk Mike Bouthilet, Public Works Superintendent Stephen Wensman, Director of Planning Greg Malmquist, Fire Chief FINANCE COMMITTEE Julie Fliflet, Finance Committee Chairman and City Council Member Anne Smith, City Council Member Terry Forrest, Retired CFO 12.30.2015 THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO Dear Mayor Pearson, Members of the City Council & Taxpayers of the City of Lake Elmo: I am pleased to present to you the 2016 City of Lake Elmo Budget Book. As presented at the Truth in Taxation hearing on December 1, 2015 there will be a decrease to the 2016 property tax levy of 0.8%. The following pages of the 2016 City of Lake Elmo Budget have been thoughtfully prepared with the focus being minimal impact to the taxpayers while providing services to its residents in a timely, cost efficient manner. This budget represents the anticipated cost of following best practices in local government while providing timely and efficient services to the residents and businesses in our community each day. 2015 will be remembered as a year of change. There were a number of changes during 2015 including the following: • Two new City Council Members were voted ineffective 1/l/2015. New building and development moved forward noticeably during 2015. To date, seven major developments have broken ground in Lake Elmo resulting in 130 additional new homes being built so far in 2015 adding $40 million to the City Tax base. It is projected that this activity will eventually mean 1,800+ new homes for the city. Along highway I-94 the developments include Hunters Crossing, Savona, Boulder Ponds, and Inwood being developed. In the "Old Village" the developments include Easton Village, Wildflower and Village Preserve being developed. In addition, a number of commercial projects are underway that will break ground in 2016. 2015 will forever be remembered as the year that "downtown" Lake Elmo tackled sanitary sewer and the storm water run-off issues. The City partnered with Washington County to maximize cost sharing in order to minimize the cost to the residents and businesses. The City entered into a Cooperative Agreement with Washington County related to the project wherein the County provided payment terms to ease the financial burden to the City and its taxpayers. This project will take several years to fully build out, but a large milestone was accomplished by having a portion of the downtown sewer system connected in late 2015. Stone water run-off has been a problem for the past few decades in the old historic downtown as well, and in 2015 the process of installing a stone water system complete with a large stone water pond south of the railroad tracks by the old lumber yard was finally put into motion. This will help keep the downtown from flooding out in heavy rainfalls and will also take multiple years to complete. • The new ladder truck bonded for and ordered in 2014 was put into service during 2015 in addition to upgrading and adding an additional warning siren; all in keeping with the focus of keeping the residents safe. The Inwood water line project was initiated in 2015 and will be partially funded with the $3.5 million in funding from the State of Minnesota. Even with all the changes impacting the City of Lake Elmo during 2015, the City once again maintained its Aa2 bond rating with Moody's Investor Service in 2015. The Moody's rating report (copy included in the appendix of this budget book) summarizes their rating rationale for Lake Elmo as being based on the Cities "strong finances supported by conservative budgeting and healthy unassigned fund balance". The report also lists the strengths of the City as "affluent tax base favorably located in Twin Cities metropolitan area and strong financial operations and healthy reserves and liquidity". The 2015 Bond rating allowed the City to borrow money at a lower rate and continue with the historical trend of creating a competitive environment for bond issuance. The 2016 Budget was developed based on the continuance of the historical conservative focus while maintaining the healthy reserves at their current level to allow for this to continue and was able to present a total City levy for 2016 which is 0.8% lower than the 2015 total City levy. 2015 audit preparation is once again underway and preliminary estimates indicate that 2015 will come in at $75,000 - $100,000 better than budget indicating the reserves will once again be strengthened. The following represent the highlights of the 2016 budget: • 2016 General Fund budget anticipates 140 additional new homes and 15 commercial new rec units to be built. All of the fees collected related to this new activity will be used to fund • 2016 General Fund Budget included the addition of a new mill and overlay component to the street repair and maintenance program which is anticipated to extend the average street life by up to 10 years. This is in addition to the normal annual programmed street repairs done each year. • Decrease in the 2016 General Fund component of the levy from $2,421,589 to $2,190,706 (-9.5%) • Increase in the 2016 Debt Service component of the levy from $484,814 to $664,541 (37.1%) • Increase in the 2016 Library component of the levy from $223,261 to $256,957 (11.1 %) • Decrease in the overall 2016 City levy from $3,137,664 to $3,112,204 (-0.8%) • All resulting in a net decrease in the City local property tax rate of 4% In summary, 2015 was a year of change for the city on many levels. I want to thank staff for their hard work, willingness to stretch and take on new tasks, and for their dedication to the city and its mission. You are valued more than you can imagine. I also want to thank all the hard working commission and committee members that serve as volunteers to make Lake Elmo a better city. Without these dedicated individuals the city would not be where it is. It is by working together cooperatively that we get things done. The city needs all of us, Council members, staff, Commission/Committee members, businesses, schools and citizens all working together to make the city the best it can be. Together we can make a positive difference. Respectfully, Clark Schroeder Interim City Administrator THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO 2016 BUDGET INDEX 1. Statistical Guide.......................................................................................................................... Section #1 Moody's Credit Rating Report ......................................................................................................... Washington County 2016 Estimated Market Values and Tax Capacity Schedule .......................... Northland Securities Comparison of Key Credit Indicators............................................................ 2. 2016 General Fund Budget Revenue and Expenditure Detail .................................................... Section #2 3. Special Revenue Funds............................................................................................................... Section #3 4. Debt Service Funds..................................................................................................................... Section #4 5. Capital Projects Funds................................................................................................................ Section #5 6. Enterprise Funds......................................................................................................................... Section #6 7. Growth & Development.............................................................................................................. Section #7 8. Appendix..................................................................................................................................... Section #8 Organizational Chart as of 12/31/15 Glossary of Terms City of Lake Elmo 2016 Budget SECTION #1 MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE New Issue: Moody's assigns Aa2 to Lake Elmo, MN's $2.8M GO Bonds, Ser. 2015A Global Credit Research - 29 Jun 2015 Aa2 rating applies to $22.8 million of post -sale GOULT debt LAKE ELMO (CITY OF) MN Cities (including Towns, Villages and Townships) MN Moody's Rating ISSUE RATING General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A Aa2 Sale Amount $2,815,000 Expected Sale Date 07/07/15 Rating Description General Obligation Moody's Outlook NOD NEW YORK, June 29, 2015 --Moody's Investors Service has assigned an Aa2 rating to the City of Lake Elmo's (MN) $2.8 million General Obligation (GO) Bonds, Series 2015A. Concurrently, Moody's maintains the Aa2 rating on city's outstanding GO debt. Post -sale, the city will have $22.8 million of GO debt outstanding. SUMMARY RATING RATIONALE The Aa2 rating reflects the city's modestly -sized and affluent tax base experiencing growth, located in the Twin Cities metro region; strong finances supported by conservative budgeting and healthy unassigned fund balance; moderate direct debt burden; and modest exposure to unfunded pension liabilities. OUTLOOK Outlooks are usually not assigned to local government credits with this amount of debt outstanding. WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATING GO UP -Growth in the city's tax base to levels consistent with higher -rated entities WHAT COULD MOVE THE RATING DOWN -Deterioration of the tax base or weakening of the demographic profile -Material declines in the city's financial reserves -Significant increase in debt levels STRENGTHS -Affluent tax base favorably located in Twin Cities metropolitan area -Strong financial operations and healthy financial reserves and liquidity CHALLENGES -Small tax base size relative to others in the rating category -Above average fixed costs RECENT DEVELOPMENTS Recent developments are incorporated in the Detailed Rating Rationale DETAILED RATING RATIONALE ECONOMY AND TAX BASE: MODESTLY -SIZED AFFLUENT TAX BASE NEAR THE TWIN CITIES EXPERIENCING GROWTH The city's tax base is expected to grow in the medium term due to its favorable location within the Twin Cities metropolitan area and large amount of land available for development. Located in Washington County (Aaa stable), the city lies along the eastern edge of the metropolitan region. The city's full value of $1.3 billion experienced two years of significant growth, following declines in previous years, due to new residential development. In 2014 economic market value increased by 6.8% and in 2015 it increased by a sizeable 12.7%. City officials report that the increases are due to approximately 45% of the city's land being available for development and 60% of that land being developed within the next 5 to 10 years. Major development areas include a mixed use development along I- 94, the "Old Village" section of the city, and the northern edge of the city along Highway 36. Recent estimates show approximately 1,900 new homes being built in city in the next 10 years. Given the planned development for the area, it is expected that the tax base will experience significant growth in the medium term. The city is in the process of constructing substantial water and sewer improvements throughout the city in order to accommodate the planned development. The city has an Infrastructure Debt Participation Policy in place that requires infrastructure for private development to be funded by the developer or benefiting parties. The city collects fees and special assessments at preliminary plat mitigating the risk of non-payment. Lake Elmo is primarily a bedroom community with the majority of residents commuting to employment opportunities throughout the Twin Cities area. Based upon net tax capacity, the city is 77% residential and 15% commercial and industrial. The largest employer of city residents is 3M Company (Aa3 negative), which is headquartered in nearby Maplewood (Aa1) and employs approximately 9,100. Management reports that the city's other major employers and taxpayers remain stable. The city has experienced ongoing population growth in recent decades, including 17.6% growth between 2000 and 2010, and the Metropolitan Council (Minn -St. Paul Area) (Aaa stable) estimates that the city's 2010 population of 8,069 could grow to 20,500 by 2040. Washington County's unemployment rate of 3.7% in March of 2015 remained below the national (5.6%) and state (4.5%) levels for same period. Lake Elmo's resident income levels significantly exceed those of the nation, with median family income equivalent to 194.1 % and of the nation. FINANCIAL OPERATIONS AND RESERVES: STABLE FINANCIAL OPERATIONS SUPPORTED BY HEALTHY RESERVES The city's financial operations are expected to remain stable given its history of sound financial management and maintenance of healthy General Fund liquidity and reserves. The city has demonstrated conservative financial management, having closed five out of the past six fiscal years with modest operating surpluses. Management attributes the surpluses to conservative budgeting of both revenues and expenditures. The city closed fiscal 2014 with a $4,000 operating surplus and a General Fund balance of $3.2 million, or a substantial 93.5% of revenues. Approximately $600,000 of the city's fund balance is reserved for an advance to the city's Old Village Fund. The entire balance is expected to be paid in full by 2016. The city's fiscal 2014 unassigned fund balance of $2.5 million, which is equivalent to 74.7% of revenues, remains healthy and above the city's policy of maintaining unassigned fund balance of 35% to 50% of budgeted operating revenues. For fiscal 2015, the city presented a balanced budget, and year to date estimates indicate that the city is on target and may expect a modest operating surplus of approximately $50,000 due to favorable budget fluctuations. Property taxes comprise 72.3% of Lake Elmo's General Fund revenues, and the city's collection rate is high with few appeals. The city does not receive any local government aid from the state; therefore, it is subject to minimal risk associated with budgetary pressures at the state. The state implemented property tax limits for 2014 only, but the cap did not impact Lake Elmo as the city had planned to keep its levy flat. The city was party to a lawsuit along with the State of Minnesota seeking damages from 3M for allowing perfluorochemicals (PFCs) to leach into groundwater in Washington County over several decades. The city entered a tolling agreement through October 2015, which allowed the city to negotiate with 3M and put on hold the statute of limitations should the city have decided to return to litigation. Conservatively, the city did not include any potential settlement money in its budget projections, and will use any such funds for one time expenditures or to pay debt service. Liquidity In 2014, the city's unrestricted net operating cash position across major operating funds (General Fund and Debt Service Fund) was $3.5 million or a very healthy 86.9% of revenues. DEBT AND PENSIONS: MODERATE DEBT BURDEN WITH MODEST ADDITIONAL BORROWING PLANNED The city's direct debt burden is a moderate 1.7% of full value, and though some additional borrowing is planned, the debt burden is expected to remain manageable given the city's expected growth. The city's direct debt of $23 million includes $13 million of GO debt that is expected to be repaid by the city's self-supporting water enterprise. The city's fixed costs related to debt service, inclusive of the GO debt supported by the water enterprise, were above average at 17.6% of operating expenditures in 2014. The city expects to issue an additional $2 million to $3 million of GO debt annually for water and sewer and road improvements over the next few years. Debt Structure All of the district's direct debt is fixed rate and amortizes over the long term. Principal amortization is below average with 66.3% of all debt retired in ten years. Debt -Related Derivatives The district has no derivative agreements. Pensions and OPEB Moody's three year average adjusted net pension liability (ANPL), through fiscal 2014 is $3.3 million, equivalent to 0.3% of full value, and 0.8 times operating revenue. The ANPL is based upon our allocation of the reported unfunded liabilities of two multi -employer cost -sharing pension plans, the General Employees Retirement Fund (GERF) and the Public Employees Police and Fire Fund (PEPFF), and one single employer pension plan the Lake Elmo Firefighters Relief Association plan. Moody's ANPL reflects certain adjustments we make to improve comparability of reported pension liabilities. The adjustments are not intended to replace the city's reported liability information, but to improve comparability with other rated entities. The actuarial valuation dates for the cost sharing plans are June 30, 2013. The city's total fiscal 2014 contribution to the plans, was $86,000 or 2.1 % of operating expenditures. MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE: STRONG INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK; SIZABLE RESERVES PROVIDE CUSHION Minnesota cities have an institutional framework score of "Aa" or strong. Cities rely on property taxes to fund the majority of operations followed by state aid. State Local Government Aid (LGA) typically comprise the second largest source and ranges approximately from 0% to 80%, or on average 25% of GF revenues. The State increased aid for next biennium, after years of state aid cuts and stagnant aid. Cities typically have above average debt related expenditures. Notably, overall expenditures are predictable and cities have the ability to reduce expenditures if necessary, and benefit from unlimited operating levy authority. We believe management will continue to maintain positive to balanced operations based on the city's trend of growing reserves. KEY STATISTICS -2014 Full value: $1.3 Billion -2014 Estimated full value per capita: $164,000 -2008-2012 Median family income (as a % of US): 194.1 % -Fiscal 2014 Available Operating Fund Balance: 79.5% -Fiscal 2009 to Fiscal 2014 Change in Available Operating Fund Balance as a % of revenues: 10.0% -Fiscal 2014 Operating Fund Cash Balance: 86.9% -Fiscal 2009 to Fiscal 2014 Change in Operating Fund Cash Balance as a % of revenues: 10.5% -Fiscal 2009 to Fiscal 2014 Average Operating Revenues / Operating Expenditures: 0.98x -Institutional Framework: Aa -Net Direct Debt / Full Value: 1.7% -Net Direct Debt / Operating Revenues: 5.6 times -3-year average of Moody's ANPL / Full Value: 0.3% -3-year average of Moody's ANPL / Operating Revenues: 0.8 times OBLIGOR PROFILE Located in Washington County (Aaa stable), the city lies along the eastern edge of the Twin Cities metropolitan region. The 2010 population was 8,069 according to census estimates. LEGAL SECURITY The bonds are secured by the city's general obligation unlimited tax (GOULT) pledge to levy a dedicated debt service tax that is not limited by rate or amount. USE OF PROCEEDS Proceeds of the bonds will be used to finance street improvement and utility projects. PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY The principal methodology used in this rating was US Local Government General Obligation Debt published in January 2014. Please see the Credit Policy page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology. REGULATORY DISCLOSURES For ratings issued on a program, series or category/class of debt, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to each rating of a subsequently issued bond or note of the same series or category/class of debt or pursuant to a program for which the ratings are derived exclusively from existing ratings in accordance with Moody's rating practices. For ratings issued on a support provider, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to the rating action on the support provider and in relation to each particular rating action for securities that derive their credit ratings from the support provider's credit rating. For provisional ratings, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to the provisional rating assigned, and in relation to a definitive rating that may be assigned subsequent to the final issuance of the debt, in each case where the transaction structure and terms have not changed prior to the assignment of the definitive rating in a manner that would have affected the rating. For further information please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page for the respective issuer on www.moodys.com. The following information supplements Disclosure 10 ("Information Relating to Conflicts of Interest as required by Paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(J) of SEC Rule 17g-7") in the regulatory disclosures made at the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com for each credit rating: Moody's was not paid for services other than determining a credit rating in the most recently ended fiscal year by the person that paid Moody's to determine this credit rating. Regulatory disclosures contained in this press release apply to the credit rating and, if applicable, the related rating outlook or rating review. Please see www.moodys.com for any updates on changes to the lead rating analyst and to the Moody's legal entity that has issued the rating. Please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com for additional regulatory disclosures for each credit rating. Analysts Michelle Chalker Lead Analyst Public Finance Group Moody's Investors Service Rachel Cortez Additional Contact Public Finance Group Moody's Investors Service Contacts Journalists: (212) 553-0376 Research Clients: (212) 553-1653 Moody's Investors Service, Inc. 250 Greenwich Street New York, NY 10007 USA MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE © 2015 Moody's Corporation, Moody's Investors Service, Inc., Moody's Analytics, Inc. and/or their licensors and affiliates (collectively, "MOODY'S"). All rights reserved. CREDIT RATINGS ISSUED BY MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE, INC. AND ITS RATINGS AFFILIATES ("MIS") ARE MOODY'S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT -LIKE SECURITIES, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS PUBLISHED BY MOODY'S ("MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS") MAY INCLUDE MOODY'S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT -LIKE SECURITIES. MOODY'S DEFINES CREDIT RISK AS THE RISK THAT AN ENTITY MAY NOT MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL, FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AS THEY COME DUE AND ANY ESTIMATED FINANCIAL LOSS IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET VALUE RISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY'S OPINIONS INCLUDED IN MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT STATEMENTS OF CURRENT OR HISTORICAL FACT. MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS MAY ALSO INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE MODEL -BASED ESTIMATES OF CREDIT RISK AND RELATED OPINIONS OR COMMENTARY PUBLISHED BY MOODY'S ANALYTICS, INC. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIAL ADVICE, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. NEITHER CREDIT RATINGS NOR MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FOR ANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY'S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS AND PUBLISHES MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS WITH THE EXPECTATION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH INVESTOR WILL, WITH DUE CARE, MAKE ITS OWN STUDY AND EVALUATION OF EACH SECURITY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE, HOLDING, OR SALE. MOODY'S CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY RETAIL INVESTORS AND IT WOULD BE RECKLESS FOR RETAIL INVESTORS TO CONSIDER MOODY'S CREDIT RATINGS OR MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS IN MAKING ANY INVESTMENT DECISION. IF IN DOUBT YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVISER. ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COPYRIGHT LAW, AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY'S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY'S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors, however, all information contained herein is provided "AS IS" without warranty of any kind. MOODY'S adopts all necessary measures so that the information it uses in assigning a credit rating is of sufficient quality and from sources MOODY'S considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third -party sources. However, MOODY'S is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information received in the rating process or in preparing the Moody's Publications. To the extent permitted by law, MOODY'S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability to any person or entity for any indirect, special, consequential, or incidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information, even if MOODY'S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers is advised in advance of the possibility of such losses or damages, including but not limited to: (a) any loss of present or prospective profits or (b) any loss or damage arising where the relevant financial instrument is not the subject of a particular credit rating assigned by MOODY'S. To the extent permitted by law, MOODY'S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for any direct or compensatory losses or damages caused to any person or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud, willful misconduct or any other type of liability that, for the avoidance of doubt, by law cannot be excluded) on the part of, or any contingency within or beyond the control of, MOODY'S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information. NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY'S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER. Moody's Investors Service, Inc., a wholly -owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody's Corporation ("MCO"), hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by Moody's Investors Service, Inc. have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to Moody's Investors Service, Inc. for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,500 to approximately $2,500,000. MCO and MIS also maintain policies and procedures to address the independence of MIS's ratings and rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entities who hold ratings from MIS and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%, is posted annually at www.moodys.com under the heading "Investor Relations — Corporate Governance— Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy." For Australia only: Any publication into Australia of this document is pursuant to the Australian Financial Services License of MOODY'S affiliate, Moody's Investors Service Ply Limited ABN 61 003 399 657AFSL 336969 and/or Moody's Analytics Australia Ply Ltd ABN 94105136 972 AFSL 383569 (as applicable). This document is intended to be provided only to "wholesale clients" within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. By continuing to access this document from within Australia, you represent to MOODY'S that you are, or are accessing the document as a representative of, a "wholesale client" and that neither you nor the entity you represent will directly or indirectly disseminate this document or its contents to "retail clients" within the meaning of section 761 G of the Corporations Act 2001. MOODY'S credit rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a debt obligation of the issuer, not on the equity securities of the issuer or any form of security that is available to retail clients. It would be dangerous for "retail clients" to make any investment decision based on MOODY'S credit rating. If in doubt you should contact your financial or other professional adviser. For Japan only: MOODY S Japan K.K. ("MJKK") is a wholly -owned credit rating agency subsidiary of MOODY'S Group Japan G.K., which is wholly -owned by Moody's Overseas Holdings Inc., a wholly -owned subsidiary of MCO. Moody's SF Japan K.K. ("MSFJ") is a wholly -owned credit rating agency subsidiary of MJ KK. MSFJ is not a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization ("NRSRO"). Therefore, credit ratings assigned by MSFJ are Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings. Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings are assigned by an entity that is not a NRSRO and, consequently, the rated obligation will not qualify for certain types of treatment under U.S. laws. MJKK and MSFJ are credit rating agencies reqistered with the Japan Financial Services Agency and their reqistration numbers are FSA Commissioner (Ratings) No. 2 and 3 respectively. MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) hereby disclose that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from JPY200,000 to approximately JPY350,000,000. MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements. WASHINGTON COUNTY PRELIMINARY PAY 2016 VALUES of TAXABLE PROPERTY Note: these values are very mahatma ry and reflect the values as mailed on Valuatten Notices in March 2015. They are prior to Boards of Appeal and Equallz tioa and include state determined utility values from the prior year. Tax Capacities are estimates based on laws In effect for Pay 2015. They are subject to change. Tar AuthorityValue FIaNPa 2015 Prelinumar, Pa 811fi CM1an e0om21115 9 to Preliminary 206 2016EMV Change Duel. 20167MV Change Due IB Estimated Markel Tamble Markel Va'ue Nex Cando Bon Tax DiP.Ity Eslimeletl Markel Value Taxable Markel Value New ConslraP- lion Tax Capecily EMV WV NC TC NC Other NC Other 2 Ba lmm 346,285,000 331,726.000 12,246,100 3.553.t 361,484,m0 353,454.200 9,256.500 3731.637 4% 5% -24% 5 3% 2° 3% 2% Oil Denmark 385,628,400 343]2B,m0 1,133,000 3.517,71 4043821W 313,444,3m 2,590.900 3,]]4,987 5% 7% 129% 7% 1% 4% 1% 6% BOB Ma 652593,m0 m].p66000 2,918,Om 6.293,9 G4],090.mB m2246,4m 2,43I,2W 6.236.952 1% -1% -16% -1% 0% -1 0% -1° 01 Gray GIButl Island 43,970,000 42494.Sm An 461.34fi 44,68],400 43,T/S,Bm ]9,200 dfi0.d93 2% 2% 313% 2% 0% 1° OX I% M4 S611wa@rT, 4m,993,000 40,5434m 2,412,70D 4.02,14 443,329,1m 416,620,700 3,225700 4.232,043 3% 3% M% 3% 1% 2% 1% 2% 017 weal Lakeland B39,9B6.m0 62B385.300 4,954,400 6.50,41 656,986.900 646,004,100 35D3m0 6.733,611 3% 3% -29% 3 1% 2% 1% 2° 100 AfNn 612,012.mD 506.363700 ],034,9D0 6,224,403 63DI61m0 605,63S590 SASLOW 6.437,953 3% 3% -17X 3% 1% 2% 1% 29' 200 Sa rl 23],2B39o0 224,327,900 9,405,500 2,667,949 251,DE2m0 242,591,700 4,1334m 2,842,559 7% 8% 50% 2% 5% 2% 63' m0 Birchwood 118.9M,m0 114,420,3m 101.200 1,181,096 135.574,5m 131,815.900 139,m0 1,369569 14% 15% W% 16% 0% 14% 0% 15 900 6candia 639.473.500 60I,fiB2,5eD 2,999,3m 6,205,473 622.428,5m 589,m1,m0 5,022,300 6,024,54] 3% 3% 70% �% 1% 3% 1% 4% m0 Oellwaed 291,206,300 288,034,700 1.216,0m 3,254,951 306.620,300 30,fi21.600 ]66,Bm 3,433 D35 5% 5% -5]% 5% 0% 5% 0% 5% BOB forest lake f,835713,500 1,]262fi],]m 19,791.100 19,690,0I5 1.BBB.]19,mD t183,1807m 23.381,em 2D261,223 3% 3% 16% 3% 1% 2% 1% 2% ]00 Huao 1.554921,]00 1,444 o58,m0 11,365.700 15,6HM5 1.532,816800 1,41I,54D600 13.585,9m 15,384,663 4% -2% 36% 334 1% 2% 1% 3 SOD Lake Elmo 1.219.643,000 1,104,510,Bm 23,06700 13.181,61 1,271.130.100 1,229,594,ym 20,60,3m 13.695,25 4% 4% -11% 4 2% 3°% 2% 2% 900 Lakeland Shdres 54,4I3,1m 52,868,1m 3Mfi00 5m,646 54,5257m 52,963,0W 140.m0 m1.215 D% OX 5-0% 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 1mD Mahlometli 939,599,500 m5,4W1,2m 8,1i95,3m 9,762,425 1,029.W.000 1.m3,860,1m 6.3I27O 1DB11,502 ID% 11% -2]% 11% 1% 9% 1% 10% 1100 Marine on Sl Crux 128.]]4.9W 126,103,6m 859,9m 1,352,452 135.160,BW 133993,1m 254,200 1,423,359 5% 5% -70% 5 0% 5% 089 5% 1200 N Oman, 600 26B,574,900 429,3m 3,563780 302,I45,5W 282,356.900 1,2B2,M 3,717,863 4% 5% 18D% 4% 0% 4% 0% 5% 13M SO Paul Pak 352,700,000 314,855,1W 1,641,500 3.551119 358,656,900 320 m9.600 292,m0 3.720,591 -2% -2%- -51% 5 0% 1% D% 2° 1400 Landlall 6.0]1,9m 6,8]1,9W 0 133,T] 6,]60.Bm 676B,m0 0 131,I06 -27. -2% 0% 2% 0% -2% 0% -27. 1500 SlilAvaler Ce 2m2.2]3.Sm 1,911,185,]00 W,mfi,900 21,012,164 2014]8.I00 1.952m3,m0 19.265,5m 22223,962 2% 2% 35% 1% 1% 1% 1 1600 Wi6emie 40,58],tm 35.711, 1 D0 0 411,563 3],930,6m 3391DO0D 59,2m 383,M9 -]% 3% 0% ]% 0% -2% 0% _8% Rm Oak Park He'hk ]12,221,6m 6B9,6BO,ODO ].392p00 10,805,6e2 T29,818,m0 ]W.6m.m0 2146.Sm 11,010,445 2% 3% -]1% 2 0% 2% 0% 1800 SOM 's Point ]0,110.000 62,9187m 202m0 736,149 ]043,.Bob 082BDIm 391m 739.065 p% 1% 411% n 0% D° M 1900 Lakeland 211,241,300 20,459,300 760,100 2, 185,842 224,69g2m 210119,100 1,106,200 2,333,291 6% A 44X 7% 1% 6% 1% ] 200 Lahe 3l Croix Beech 92935,700 84,525,600 m8,m0 869,438 96,355.100 80,192.200 401,9m 906,4]1 4% 4% -37% 4 0% 3% D% 4 2100 Pine S 'n 55095,400 5/,523m0 0 50.110 55623,m0 534]8.1m 68,3m 59],829 ]% 2% 0% ]% 0% ]%flG%o% 2200 Cattail 2,941.60I m0 2.705,W5,400 ID.76D,W) 29,642.872 3,024,856,200 2.109,362,1m 25,547,400 30,731.110 3% 3% 28% 3 1X 2% 2500 Wooda ],I12224400 ],35B,B20,3m 15fi.]59200 84,531.99 7,951.784,400 ],616,0B1.0m 137,314.400 8],599,043 3% 3% -12% 4 2% 1% 26m Oakdale 2.335.053,9m 2,162,439,300 6,1223m 25,992 230],693,300 221]733.1m 9,649,m0 26, 115.213 2% 3% 56% n. 0% 2% 2]m GmM P5,05],m0 ]45,5132m 4,6]3,9m ],810,M ]85,254,900 ]56,354,900 3,4I0,500 7,914.178 1% 1% -26% 1 0% 1% I500 Haul 2M2300 2,B423m 0 4855 2,M320D 2M22m 0 48,552 0% M 0% 0% 0% 0%While Bear Lake 31.9030m J5,129,m0 0 452,m 41'mL 39,690,100 0 490,99] 9% 10% D% 0% 0% 9% Grand Taal 2],2671]6Pm 26,2]].002200 02.P3,000 29I,532.66 2359T915.m0 T/.094,516,1m 323,939.900 306.518,396 3% 3% Comparison of Key Credit Indicators Credit Ruling: Maodvs SAP 2010 Census Paneled n % Clmng, since 200D Taxable Full Vuluaitn 5 Year Avg. Annual %Chan, Estimated Full Value Per Capita Pa Capita biennia as %or U.S. Median Family Income ax %of U.S. County Unemployment Rae General Fund Balanre G.F. Bulanm as %or G.F. Revenues Overall Debt Burden Direct Debt Burden G.O. Debt Oaaanding Prinicipal Amonicuien in 10 Years WW2015 Department of Properly Records and Taxpayer Services Taxation Division Lake Elmo Maintained] Minnetrisla Medina Shorewood Sleaurtvillc Aa2 Ana NIA AO AM AO N/A N/A AA+ N/A N/A N/A 9,069 7,676 6,384 4,392 7,307 5,916 17.6% IS% 46.5% 22.2% -1.3% 9.3% $ 1.184,578,800 $ 905,400a00 S 1,223,555,000 $ 1,383,198,652 $ 1,435.845,111 S 302,500,000 0.0% -2A% -2.9% -1.1% -2.2% -0.7% $ 146,806 $ 117,952 S 191,660 $ 282,747 S 19%240 S 51,133 161.3% 155.0% 189.8% 293.5% 214.6% 99.2% 196.6% 176.1% 194A% 224.9% 201.7% 117.4% 2.7% 2.7% 2.9% 2.9% 2.9% 2.4% S 3.181.001 S 4,710,691 3 2,693,786 $ 2.102,951 S 4,085,471 $ 1,048,701 93.5% 99.0°G 59.01% 50.8% 72.9% 49.6% 25% 4.1% 3.4% 3.1% 2.3% 5.8% 0.8% 1.3% 12% 0.9% D.13% 1.4% $ 22,225,000 S 16,750,000 5 16,334,364 5 15.135,000 $ 2,160,000 S 6,522,000 7I.6% 86.8% 66.7% 70.4% ]on 0% 828% Six- injoemurion inuhdes2015 ..diunrinS reports and .ffieidnnreruenta Prepared 1g19Co15 twohlar,6eaukiet In[ Publir Dan- SECTION #2 Ctv of Lake P.1ma Budget 2016 (Bused on 140 new homes and 15 Commercial build outs) Final Levy Certificntian 2015 2015 2011 201E 2013 2014 2014 2015 Projected 2016 to 2016 Account Number Descrlmtion Actual Actual Actual Budeet Actual Budget Actual Budget Chance Notes GENERALFUND Revenue Property Taxes/Franchise Fees 101-000-0000-31010 Current Ad Valorem Taxes $2,271,299 $2,390,638 $2,377,716 $2,565,000 $2,237,110 $2,531,080 $2,359,178 $2,033,198 -13.8% 101-Oo0-0000-31020 Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes $19,395 $44,915 $35,000 $20,D60 $14,986 $15,000 $32,848 $15,000 0.0% 101-000-0000-31030 Mobile Home Tax $9.503 57,376 $9,059 58,000 $15,707 $11,400 512,121 512,000 -1.0% 101-000-0000-31040 Fiscal Disparities $143,647 $112,096 $178,587 $120,000 $140,432 $160,000 $190,797 $157,508 -17.4% Final numbers from WA Cry 101-000-0000.31910 Penalty & Interest on Taxes $146 $5,202 $3,691 $5,180 $9,002 $700 $1,474 $700 -52.5% 101-000-0000-33620 Gravel Tax $925 $689 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O.D% 101-000-0000-33622 Cable Franchise Revenue $38,894 $39,950 $42,852 $42,852 $41,602 $45,000 $71,744 545,000 -37.3% 2015 payout of state grant excess Total Property Taxes/Franchise Fees Licenses and Permits 101-000-0000-32110 Liquor License 101-000-0000-32180 Wastehauler License 101-000-0000-32181 General Contractor License 101-000-0000-32183 1letting Contractor License 101-000-0000-32184 Blacktopping Contractor License 101-000-0000-32210 Building Permits 101-000-000N32210 Re -inspection Fees 101-000-0000.32220 Heating Permits 101-000-0000-32230 Plumbing Permits 101-000-0000-32231 Sewer Permits 101-000-0000-32240 Animal License 101-0004000-32250 Utility Permits 10I-OOD-0000-32260 Burning Permit 101-000-0000-3227D Massage Therapy 101-000-0000-32280 Electrical Permits 101-000-0000-34104 Plan Check Fees Total Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental $2,483,808 $2,600,866 $2,646,905 $2,761,032 $2,458,839 $2,763,180 $2,663,162 $2 263,406 15.2% $10,425 59,375 $16,150 $3,000 $150 $8,350 $11,150 $11,000 -1.3% $0 $0 $0 $0 52,400 $1,680 $1,320 51,680 0.0% $1,725 $0 $265 5165 $0 $0 $0 SO 0.0% $995 $3,560 $5,050 $6,650 $4,920 $2,500 $3,700 $2,500 -32.4% $o so $D so so so so so 0.0% 5138,972 $187,344 $174,625 $170,500 $224,951 $517,600 $387,187 $508,200 31.3% 2015 = 130 actual new homes vs 2016 of 140 new homes and 15 Comm $0 $0 EO $0 $750 $1,000 $400 SO-100.0% $10,230 $16,040 $15,990 $15,600 $23,064 529,040 524,297 $38,000 56.4% $6,316 $10,580 $12,525 $9,000 $21,914 $29,040 $30,622 $46,800 52.8% $0 $0 $485 $485 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% $2,083 $2,320 51,991 $1,991 $2,569 S2,500 $2,156 $2,500 16.0% $6,248 58,225 $21,215 $11,000 $26,427 $5,000 $37,319 $25,000 -33.0% ROW activity driven by development 51,300 $1,360 $2,670 $3,350 $1,650 $2,250 $2,110 $2,750 30.3% $0 $0 SS59 $150 $200 $150 $100 $150 50.0% $0 $0 $0 SO $6,109 $6,051 $9,466 $0-100.0% Moving back to State of MN $52,125 $89,29D $90,610 $82,000 $135,816 $181,923 $197,805 $278,129 40.6% 2015 - 130 actual new homes vs 2016 of 140 new homes and 15 Comm $230,420 $328093 $342 434 5303,891 $450,920 $707,084 $707 632 $916,709 29.5% 101-000-0000-33401 Homestead Credit Aid $7,879 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 N/A 101-000-0000-33418 MSA- Maintenance $83,018 $78,789 $98,022 $98,022 $101,696 $101,696 5137,478 $101,696 26.0% 2015 had onetime excess fonds distribution 101-000-0000-33420 State Fire Aid $40,692 $38,824 $56,778 541,500 $53,446 $41,500 $41,500 $41,500 0.0% 101-0004000-33422 PERA Aid 52,749 $2,749 $2,749 $2,749 $2,749 $2,749 $2,749 $2,749 0.0% 101-000-0000-33426 Miscellaneous State Grants $22,824 $162 $1,365 $1,150 $17,692 $500 $5,124 $5,064 1.2% 101-000-0000-33621 Recycling Grant $15,589 $15,588 SI5,588 $15,500 $15,500 $15,500 $15,500 $15,500 0.0% Total Intergovernmental Charges for Services $172 750 $136 112 $174,502 $158,921 $191,083 $161,945 5202,351 $166,509 -17.7% 101-000-0000-34103 Zoning & Subdivision Fees 511,015 $1,152 $4,680 SI,250 $28,691 $7,500 $26,830 $27,500 2.5% 101-000-0000-34105 Sale of Copies, Books, Maps $173 $287 $323 5206 $301 5175 $138 $175 26.8% 101-000-0000-34107 Assessment Searches $445 51,060 $1,390 51,285 $I 200 5750 $1,635 $1,215 -25.7% I01-000-0000-34109 Clean Up Days $3,058 $3,256 $2,647 $3,000 $0 $2,000 $0 52,000 100.0% 101-000-0000-34111 Cable Operation Reimbursement 52,307 $2,018 $526 $1,950 $2,500 $2,500 $4,051 $4,000 -1.2% Total Charges for Services $16,998 $7,772 $9,566 $7,691 $32,692 $12,925 $32,654 $34,890 6.8% Fines 101-000-0000-35100 Fines 563,818 554,328 $48,718 348,000 $48,647 $48,000 $45,308 $45,000 -0.7% Total Fines $63,818 $54,328 $48,718 $48,000 $48,647 $48,000 $45,308 $45,000 -0.7% Other 101-000-0000-36900 Miscellaneous Revenue $20,405 $58,918 $1,757 $2,400 $125,050 $350 $6,709 $3,500 47.8% 101-000-0000-36201 Internal Charges (Library pmc Fee) $5,458 51,166 $1,092 $1,600 $81$ $640 S392 $0 -100.0% 101-000-0000-36210 Interest Earnings $59,415 520,000 $11,631 $20,000 $71,813 $10,000 $32,730 $55,000 68.0% Reimbursement -Fire $0 50 $0 $0 $11,285 $500 $1,000 $500 -50.0% 1014004000-36230 Donations $9,500 $9,300 $14,000 $0 $11,100 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Total Other $94,778 $89,384 $28,480 $24,000 $220,066 $11,490 $40,831 $59,000 44.5% Total Revenues $3,062,573 $3,216,555 $3,250,604 $3,303,535 $3,402,247 $3,784 624 $3,696,937 S3,485,514 -5.7% Otl,g, Financine Sources 101-000-0000-39200 Transfer In $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO N/A Total Other Financing Sources $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 N/A Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources $3,062,573 5.3,216,555 $3 250,604 $3,303,535 $3,402,247 51,784,624 $3,696,937 $3,485,514 -5.7% 6.3% I16% 12.8% 19.1% 27.4% New Hanes 35 37 41 132 130 140 10 New Commereiml 15 15 ON of Lnkc Elmo Budget 2016 (Based on 140 new homes and 15 new commerical build outs) FINAL Le" Certification 2015 2015 Dept 2011 2012 2013 2014 2014 2015 Projected 2016 to 2016 Number Description Actual Actual Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Change GENERAL FUND Esnendimres by Program & Department General Gavemment 1110 Mayor & Council $36,418 $24,208 $471,770 $45,269 $39,896 $40,955 $46,194 $45,955 -52.00% 1320 Administration $507,492 $484,915 $379,858 $392,494 $412,505 $407,316 $501,238 $329,250 -34.31% 1410 Elections $3,380 $13,857 $1,040 $13,350 $9,874 $1,050 $3,773 $15,800 318.76% 1450 Communications $19,034 $22,512 $44,194 $35,570 $44,407 $70,842 $31,427 $31,747 1.02% 1520 Finance $135,063 $151,572 $157,203 $154,935 $161,541 $134,647 $119,308 $124,835 4.63% 1910 Planning & Zoning $185,039 $165,068 $250,077 $271,859 $252,799 $224,218 $238,489 $284,682 19.37% 1930 Engineering Services $67,639 $69,864 $34,501 $48,000 $36,312 $54,800 $41,623 $48,000 16.33% 1940 City Hall $27,828 $26,327 $26,283 $24,733 $26,355 $50,235 $59,955 $55,082 -S.13% Total General Government $990.893 $958,324 $1,364,926 $986,210 $983,699 $984,063 $1,042,007 $935,351 -10.20% Public Safety 2100 Police $452,262 $492,911 $495,759 $500,000 $515,604 $517,799 $526,256 $527,060 0.15% 2150 Prosecution $46,440 $47,224 $52,104 $51,000 $54,466 $50,000 $55,710 $54,700 -1.81% 2220 Fire $344,417 $336,792 $366,162 $395,456 $400,709 $385,312 $361,695 $377,232 4.30% 2250 Fire Relief $47,867 $39,956 $53,778 $37,324 $53,446 $37,324 $59,166 $37,324 -35.83% 2400 Building inspection $94,863 $132,591 $139,939 $152,974 $143,283 $323,558 $207,045 $260,766 25.95% 2500 Emergency Communications $5,250 $6,194 $3,745 $5,800 $3,373 $7,000 $7,490 $7,400 -1.20% 2700 Animal Control $2,301 $1,319 $13,729 $6,282 $10086 $6,800 $8,573 $7550 -11.93% Total Public Safety $993,400 $1,056,987 $1,125,216 $1,148,736 $1,180,967 $1,327,793 $1,224,934 $1,272032 3.84% Public Works 3100 Public Works $289,985 $295,132 $473,807 $378,609 $386,213 $380,195 $325,977 $411 285 26.17% 3120 Streets $29,268 $190,361 $204,416 $176,800 $49,979 $222,578 $234,007 $413,000 84.37% 3125 Ice &. Snow Removal $75,960 $45,320 $126,648 $96,000 $104,346 $95,500 $86,962 $87,250 0.33% 3160 Street Lighting $30,008 $38,691 $25,988 $28,800 $22,614 $28,000 $23,985 $26,400 10.07% 3200 Recycling $3,929 $12,776 $7,584 $7,400 $5,224 $9,500 $1,068 $5,900 452.42% 3250 Tree Program $10,358 $4,126 $11,325 $5,000 $5,350 $6,000 $3,500 $1,000 -71.43% Total Public Works $439,408 $586,406 $849,768 $692,609 $573,725 $741,773 $665,499 $944,935 41.97% Culture & Recreation 5200 Parks & Recreation $142,096 $144,422 $166,343 $205,239 $207,178 $153,028 $231,104 $231,320 0.09% Total Culture & Recreation $142,096 $144,422 $166,343 $205,239 $207,178 $153028 $231104 $231,320 0.09% IT & Telephone 9000 Compensation Adjustment Debt Service Increase Contingency Fund Other Financing Total Expenditures $48,513 $49?54 $52,916 $70,741 $94,653 $109,560 $71,704 $81,976 14.33% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,000 $0 $20,000 100.00% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $247,118 $247,118 $0-100.00% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 0.00% $230,505 $200,000 $o $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $0-100.00% $2,834,815 $2,995,393 $3,559,169 $3,303,535 $3,240,212 $3 798,335 $3 682,366 $3 485 514 -5.35% SECTION #3 Special Revenue Funds Special revenue funds (a type of governmental fund) are used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than major capital projects) that are legally restricted to expenditure for specified purposes. The city presently has three active special revenue funds: 1. Development Fund — No longer utilized as all activity flows through the Capital Improvement Fund. 2. Event Fund — Used minimally in 2015 and not anticipated to be utilized in 2016 3. Library Fund Annual appropriated budgets are adopted during the year for the city's special revenue funds. BASIS OF ACCOUNTING & BUDGETING The measurement focus for special revenue funds is on a current financial resources basis, where the aim of a set of financial statements is to report the near -term (current) inflows, outflows, and balances of expendable financial resources. The fund balance is considered a measure of expendable resources. Special revenue funds use the modified accrual basis of accounting, under which revenues are not recognized until they are measurable and available, and expenditures are recognized in the period in which governments in general normally liquidate the related liability rather than when that liability is first incurred (if earlier). The basis of budgeting is consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. DEVELOPMENT FUND (203) In the past, a development special revenue fund was created in the City's financial records to account for major developer -related projects. This fund is no longer being utilized as all development activity flows through the Capital Improvement Fund per GASB criteria. EVENT FUND (204) This fund was created to account for community event activities to bring together the residents of Lake Elmo. There were not as many events as in prior years but the account is still active should it be needed. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Donations (36230) Public and private donations to be used in funding the costs of larger special events. EXPENDITURES & OTHER FINANCING USES A variety of line items listing the projected expenditures needed in preparation for and during the various special events LIBRARY FUND (206) BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE This fund was created to account for activities of the local Lake Elmo library REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • Current Ad Valorem Taxes (31010) An annual special property tax levy will be levied by the City for library activities at the direction of the City council. EXPENDITURES & OTHER FINANCING USES A variety of line items listing the projected expenditures needed in preparation for and operations of the library. City of Lake Elmo iludeet to Actual 2016 Library Fund 9udeel ACIuma ga.yr,yem er 313-11 206-Library Fund By Department REVENUE Current Ad Valorem Texas Rental Income Inerest Earning Miccelinneous Revenue Donations Total Revere EXPENSE PISalaries FT Salarirs PERA Contributions FICA Contributions Medicare Contributions HealOdDental Insurance Unemployment Benefits Workers Compensation Library sva supplies Off, ce Supplies Library Collection Maintenance Engineering/Legal Services Canbact Services Telephone Internet infommtion Technology Insurance utilities Refilse Repair/blmtu Bldg Repair/bMlnint NOT Bldg RepairlMaint Equip loon-LFI Impr) Library Card Reimbursements WA Cty Svc Fee Library Service Impmvemenls Miscellaneous Building Purchme Repnn Building-Pmpeuy Tex Sabttripdons Conferences .& Training programs Interest Expense Internal ebarg,' Total Library Updated 12.1.15 Projected 2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015 2016 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET 0.00 0.00 260,07S.00 260,078.00 256.957.00 256.957.00 256.957.00 256,957.00 231,26L00 231,261.00 256,957.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9,340.64 29.750.00 17.000.00 11.400.00 10,751.61 11,400.00 26.214.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 DAD 417.06 OAO 676.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OA0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.00 0.00 35000 OM 1,330.55 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 MOO 0.00 1,405.00 0.00 2566.17 0.00 105.00 0.00 2013 and 2014 included gram monies which may not be 0.00 0.00 260.%8.00 269.488.64 286.]0].00 275,855.06 268.357.00 271200.78 242,661.00 258,910.55 256,957.00 renewed: budgeted conservatively and did not include 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 466.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 1392.50 0.00 0.00 o.o0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 000 000 0,00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 169.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 0.00 Mo 0.00 0.0o 0.00 000 0.00 0.00 0,00 5,458.32 0.00 7,476.56 0,00 Ogg 0.00 0.00 23.000.00 0.00 16000,00 10,238.83 26,260.00 70,000.00 7,595+00 35200.00 16901.13 35.200+00 36.241.58 45.000.00 4.5,500.18 46311.07 0.00 518.02 2,552.00 I,M27 2.552.00 2.598.93 4,422.50 4.151.20 5,442.83 0,00 470.89 2,182,40 1-003.53 3.608.40 2.050.99 3,78100 3,257.84 4,499.41 0.00 110.13 510.40 234.71 843,60 481.47 884.50 761.96 1,052.28 0.00 0.00 13.605.00 2,176.00 13,605.00 12.809.48 12,028.48 13510.92 14,144.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OAO 1.000.00 0.00 1.000.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 450.00 60.00 1.109.79 3,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1, 100.00 274.98 1,100.00 2.500.00 3.071+41 500.00 2,397.34 5.000.00 3,133.10 4,100.00 1,779.73 3400.00 12.000.00 1.618+43 2,000.00 5,337.86 20.000.00 28,951.48 49,700.00 32, 191.03 38,337+41 0.00 J SH.00 600.00 3.240.50 500.00 520.00 2.000.00 2.016.00 1.500.00 0.00 21,100,00 4,400.00 4, 199.95 4.000.00 860.00 3,000.00 353.50 6.000+00 I560.00 1,001.37 2,100.00 1,47729 1,400.00 1,554.80 1,600.00 1.364.28 1560,00 0.00 215.70 900.00 447,35 600.00 459.15 1.000.00 814.62 1.800.00 5.000.00 3,170.00 3,100+00 4,32932 13400.00 5331.16 3.2-10.00 3,100.00 3.100.00 10,32000 0.00 0.00 2.364.65 2,500.00 1,604.69 2,700.00 1.983.00 3500.00 0,00 2,589.38 4.800+00 7,653.67 7,000.00 6,965.93 7550.00 6,976.37 7500.00 0.00 119.59 1,200+00 780.56 800.00 536,73 550.00 593A4 600.00 3,000A0 4,483.11 12,00000 6.818.66 8,000,00 19,326+09 14,000.00 23586.51 12,000.00 0.00 0.00 1500.00 112.50 52,748+00 0.00 0.00 27244.77 0.00 2,400+00 1,130.08 15,300,00 1,136.98 2,500.00 96.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 DAD 0,00 39,000.00 31,780.22 39,000.00 21445.06 24.000.00 24,117.65 12,000.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9,300.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.00000 31.800.00 35.911+27 0.00 28008 30,000.00 986.54 2.000.00 1,198.36 1.800.00 82.400.00 118,560.20 125,400.00 118,560.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21,23120 0.00 2,526.00 2,600.00 2,334+00 1,000.011 40,000.00 45.00 500.00 1.370+88 0.00 56155 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 1,174.23 0.00 371.33 0.00 432.21 2,500.00 330.00 3500.00 0.00 0.00 OAO 0,00 0.00 0.00 7.500.00 0.00 4,600.00 0.00 2.874.33 000 2.354.85 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0400 24828.57 120020 196S127 19500.00 818,00 19600.00 413.00 0.00 261,040.00 213,199+50 273,050.110 239,470.71) 268157.00 152,7993E 2U,987A8 2oe347.17 256,M+00 Part-time permanent staffing (3) Based on accepted offer 7,50% PT included as annual coming to be eligible is$5,100 6.20% 1A5% Dental only increase oF4% Includes databases and stooks Increase to weekly cleaning Increase due to service plan upgrade Includes egninos, hardware and so0ware Electric and Water 2015 include mofrepairs Projected cost to obtain Associate Status Included under programs Includes national conference and dues for the Director New expense category to track expenses ofPmp ams separately NA now that WA Cty nmauaing cards Net Operating fncpmo/(Expense) 0.00 (7.476,56) (962.00) 562S9.14 13,657.00 36,384.36 0.00 118101.42 28.673.52 505G3.38 0.00 Contingency Monies 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 13.650.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.522.39 11,300.41 14522.39 Savings for unknowns (mostly repairs to building...) Proposed CIP 70.000.00 70,000.00 Beginning Cash 0.00 (7,483.07) 43.142.52 85,190.43 205,982.68 205,982.68 186,546.06 Net Disarming bortmel(Expense) (],4]6.56) 56,289.14 36.384.36 113,501,42 28,673.52 50563.38 0.00 CM(seif Ponded) Ogg 0.00 0.00 0.00 (70.000,001 (70000.00) (70,000,00) Library Remodel YE Accmpls/mversals (6,51) (5.663.55) 5466155 2290.83 0.00 0.00 0400 Ending Cash (7,48307) 43.142.52 85.190.43 205,982.68 1605620 186,546.06 116546.0E Balance due to City 7.483.07 112.576.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NOTE: No Saver connection charges are reflected due to liming delay between when pmjcm is completed and when it is essessed Costs to library will not occur until 2016 50%nfaunual operating expenses 3,738.28 106,599.75 119.735.35 76,399.68 106.993.74 104.173.59 128.478.50 Casts Rmerves% 20.24% 35.57% 134.81% 7695% $9.54% 45.36% (Olpce of5tate Auditor recommends 30 - 50%) SECTION #4 Debt Service Funds Debt service funds (a type of governmental fund) are used to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of general long-term debt principal, interest, and related costs. The city has eight debt service funds with outstanding long-term debt: 2009A G.O. Refunding Bonds (2001) 2009B G.O. Improvement Bonds 2010A G.O. Improvement Bonds 2010B CIP Refunding Bond 2011A G.O. Improvement Bonds 2012A G.O. Refunding Bonds (2004) 2012B G.O. Improvement Bonds 2013A G.O. Improvement Bonds 2014A G.O. Improvement Bonds 2015A G.O. Improvement Bonds Annual appropriated budgets are not adopted for debt service funds because effective budgetary control is alternatively achieved through general obligation bond indenture provisions. However, debt service fund budgets are prepared by staff and reviewed by the city council to assist in the city's overall financial planning. BASIS OF ACCOUNTING & BUDGETING The measurement focus for debt service funds is on a current financial resources basis, where the aim of a set of financial statements is to report the near -term (current) inflows, outflows, and balances of expendable financial resources. The fund balance is considered a measure of expendable resources. Debt service funds use the modified accrual basis of accounting, under which revenues are not recognized until they are measurable and available, and expenditures are recognized in the period in which governments in general normally liquidate the related liability rather than when that liability is first incurred (if earlier). The basis of budgeting is consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Attachment 4-1 presents all current debt activity for the City of Lake Elmo. The actual payments due each year as well as the remaining outstanding debt at the end of each year are presented by fund. 2009A G.O. REFUNDING BONDS (2001) (315) The $535,000 2009 G.O. Refunding Bonds were issued in 2009 to refund $525,000 of the 2001 G.O. State Aid and Improvement Bonds. The 2001 bonds were designated as state aid bonds in 2001. Annual appropriations of Municipal State Aid (MSA) are to be received by the City from the State of Minnesota in amounts necessary to make debt service payments on the bonds through 2016. This fund is responsible for the retirement of the general obligation refunding bonds. DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR I PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $70,000 $2,100 TOTAL: $70,000 $2,100 REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • MSA Grant (33426) Municipal State Aid (MSA) appropriations are to be received by the City from the State of Minnesota in amounts necessary to make debt service payments on the bonds through 2016. City of Lake Elmo 2016 Budget 2009B G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS (316) BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE In order to finance 2009 street improvements and the Tablyn Park Entrance project, the 2009 G.O. Improvement Bonds were issued in the amount of $575,000, payable through 2020. To repay the debt, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2019, averaging approximately $50,000. Additionally, special assessments of approximately 30% of the 2009 street improvements costs were levied against benefited property owners in 2010 for payments beginning in 2011. This fund is responsible for the retirement of the general obligation bonds. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $60,000 $8,163 2017 $60,000 $6,663 2018 $65,000 $4,788 2019-2020 $125,000 $3,736 TOTAL: $310,000 $23,350 • Current Ad Valorem Taxes (31010) To repay the bonds, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2019, averaging approximately $50,000, • Special Assessments (36100) These assessments were levied against benefited property owners in 2010 for payments beginning in 2011. 2010A G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS (317) BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE In order to finance 2010 street improvements, the 2010 G.O. Improvement Bonds were issued in the amount of $710,000, payable through 2021. To repay the debt, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2020, averaging approximately $60,000. Additionally, special assessments of approximately 30% of the 2010 street improvements costs were levied against benefited property owners in 2011 for payments beginning in 2012. This fund is responsible for the retirement of the general obligation bonds. DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR I PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $70,000 $9,550 2017 $70,000 $8,255 2018 $70,000 $6,785 2019-2021 $225,000 $9,281 TOTAL: $435,000 $33,871 REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • Current Ad Valorem Taxes (31010) To repay the bonds, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2020, averaging approximately $60,000. • Special Assessments (36100) These assessments were levied against benefited property owners in 2011 for payments beginning in 2012. 2010B G.O. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CROSSOVER REFUNDING BONDS (2004) (318) BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE The $1,970,000 2010B G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Crossover Refunding Bonds were issued in 2010 to crossover refund the 2004 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds on February 1, 2013. By placing the 2010 refunding bond proceeds and $1,000,000 of unspent 2004 bond proceeds into an escrow account in 2010, $2,845,000 of the 2014 through 2025 maturities of the 2004 bonds were defeased in 2013 through the escrow account. DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $150,000 $42,108 2017 $155,000 $39,508 2018-2021 $650,000 $123,228 2022-2025 $730,000 $46,345 TOTAL: $1,685,000 $251,189 This fund is responsible for the retirement of the general obligation bonds. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • Current Ad Valorem Taxes (31010) To repay the bonds, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City from 2015 through 2024 (averaging approximately $170,000). 2011A G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS (319) BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE In order to finance 2011 street improvements, the 2011 G.O. Improvement Bonds were issued in the amount of $845,000, payable through 2022. To repay the debt, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2021, averaging approximately $85,000. Additionally, special assessments of approximately 30% of the 2011 street improvements costs are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2012 for payments beginning in 2013. This fund is responsible for the retirement of the general obligation bonds. DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR I PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $80,000 $13,720 2017 $80,000 $9,234 2018 $85,000 $8,171 2019-2021 $365,000 $12,545 TOTAL: $610,000 $43,670 REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • Current Ad Valorem Taxes (31010) To repay the bonds, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2021, averaging approximately $85,000. • Special Assessments (36100) These assessments are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2012 for payments beginning in 2013. 2012A Water G.O. REFUNDING BOND (2004A - 320 BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE During 2012 the interest rates went to a level where utilizing a crossover advance refunding bond resulted in a large interest savings. An advance refunding requires that the proceeds of the new refunding bonds be invested in government securities and held in escrow until the call date (2015). The funds in the escrow are then used to pay interest on the new refunding bonds until the call date and then prepay the principal of the old bonds. Total net savings as a result of restructuring this bond were $455k with a present value of $366k. 2012B G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS (321) BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE In order to finance 2011 street improvements, the 2011 G.O. Improvement Bonds were issued in the amount of $865,000, payable through 2022. To repay the debt, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2021, averaging approximately $85,000. Additionally, special assessments of approximately 30% of the 2011 street improvements costs are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2012 for payments beginning in 2013. This fund is responsible for the retirement of the general obligation bonds. DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $195,000 $86,044 2017 $190,000 $82,144 2018 1215,000 $78,344 2019 $210,000 $74,043 2020-2030 $3,225,000 $465,247 TOTAL: $4,035,000 $785,822 DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $85,000 $9,751 2017 $85,000 $9,114 2018 $851000 $8,264 2019-2023 $455,000 $21,091 TOTAL: $710,000 $48,220 City of Lake Elmo 2016 Budget REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • Current Ad Valorem Taxes (31010) To repay the bonds, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2021, averaging approximately $85,000. • Special Assessments (36100) These assessments are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2012 for payments beginning in 2013, 2013A G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS (322) To save bonding costs, all necessary 2013 bonding was done through one bonding release. As a result there are three very distinctive components of this bond. SECTION 34 (100% ASSESSED) BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE In order to initiate the Section 34 development project, a bond had to be obtained to cover three key components of that project. G.O. Improvement bonds were issues in the amount of $5,740,000 payable through 2033. The sewer and water funds will be recovered at the time the development occurs. 100% of the Water and Sewer infrastructure costs will be paid by developers through levied assessments in 2013 for payments beginning in 2014. This fund is responsible for the retirement of the general obligation bonds. SECTION 34 DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $105,000 $38,105 2017 $105,000 $36,005 2018 $105,000 $33,905 2019-2028 $1,135,000 $195,955 TOTAL: $1,450,000 $303,970 REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • Special Assessments (36100) - These assessments were levied against benefited property owners in 2013 for payments beginning in 2014. The assessments are considered a lien on the property with the County and will continue for 15 years or until the amount is paid in full (due in full if property is sold). WATER BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE This debt was incurred to fund the remaining portion of the Keats Watermain Project and Well #4 and Pumphouse #4. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • Special Assessments (36100) —A portion of this project will be assessed to the benefitting property owners. These assessments are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2013 for payments beginning in 2014 and will span 15 years WATER DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $50,000 $27,203 2017 $50,000 $26,203 2018 $50,000 $25,203 2019-2028 $765,000 $216,098 TOTAL: $915,000 $294,707 • Water Sales (37100) and Water Connection fees (37150) — The balance of the loan payments will be funded through Water fund revenue. SEWER BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE This debt was incurred to fund the Lake Elmo Avenue Sewer. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Special Assessments (36100) — A portion of this project will be assessed to the benefitting property owners. These assessments are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2013 for payments beginning in 2014 and will span 15 years. Sewer Sales (37200) and Sewer Connection fees (37250) — The SEWER DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $155,000 $81,063 2017 $155,000 $77,963 2018 $160,000 $74,863 2019-2028 $2,255,000 $644,408 TOTAL: $2,725,000 $878,297 balance of the loan payments will be funded through Sewer fund revenue. 2014A G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS (323) To save bonding costs, all necessary 2014 bonding was done through one bonding release. As a result there are three very distinctive components of this bond. GENERALFUND BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE In order to fund the 2014 street project ($1,330k), the 39'h Street project street and trail component ($754k) and the purchase of a new fire truck ($715k) a bond was obtained to cover the funding. G.O. Improvement bonds were issues in the total amount of $6,235,000 payable through 2028. This fund is fund is responsible for the retirement of the general obligation bonds. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Current Ad Valorem Taxes (31010) To repay the bonds, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2028, averaging approximately $230,000, Special Assessments (36100) These assessments are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2014 for payments beginning in 2015. WATER BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE This debt was incurred to fund the Lake Elmo Avenue Water Project. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • Special Assessments (36100) — A portion of this project will be assessed to the benefitting property owners. These assessments are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2014 for payments beginning in 2015 and will span 15 years. • Water Sales 137100) and Water Connection fees 1371501— The DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $180,000 $68,613 2017 $210,000 $64,713 2018 $210,000 $60,737 2019-2030 $2,300,000 $361,206 TOTAL: $2,900,000 $555,269 WATER DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $130,006 $64,371 2017 $155,000 $61,521 2018 $155,000 $58,586 2019-2030 $2,105,000 $391,719 TOTAL: $27545,000 $576,197 balance of the loan payments will be funded through Water fund revenue. SEWER BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE This debt was incurred to fund the Village Eastern Sewer Line Project and the 39th Street Sewer Project. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Special Assessments (36100) — A portion of this project will be assessed to the beneftting property owners. These assessments are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2014 for payments beginning in 2015 and will span 15 years SEWER DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $45,000 $21,199 2017 $50,000 $20,249 2018 $50,000 $19,304 2019-2030 $695,000 $128,676 TOTAL: $840,000 $189,428 Sewer Sales (37200) and Sewer Connection fees (37250) — The balance of the loan payments will be funded through Sewer City of Lake Elmo 2016 Budget 2015A G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS (324) To save bonding costs, all necessary 2015 bonding was done through one bonding release. As a result there are three very distinctive components of this bond. GENERALFUND BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE In order to fund the 2015 street projects ($1,490k), including the 39'" Street project and the EP reconstruction project. G.O. Improvement bonds were issues in the total amount of $2,815,000 payable through 2031. This fund is fund is responsible for the retirement of the general obligation bonds. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • Current Ad Valorem Taxes (31010) To repay the bonds, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2026, averaging approximately $140,000. • Special Assessments (36100) These assessments are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2015 for payments beginning in 2016 and will span 10 years. The Eagle Point street reconstruction was 100% assessed. EQUIPMENT BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE This debt was incurred to fund equipment purchases which included a spray patcher, a tahoe for the fire department and new warning sirens for the City. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Current Ad Valorem Taxes (31010) To repay the bonds, an annual property tax levy will be levied by the City through 2026, averaging approximately $50,000. WATER BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE This debt was incurred to fund the Inwood Booster station project and the increased costs due to a project scope change for the 3Th Street Project. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Special Assessments (36100) -A portion of this project will be assessed to the beneftting property owners. These assessments are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2015 for payments beginning in 2016 and will span 15 years. DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $0 $30,757 2017 $125,000 $30,938 2018 $140,000 $28,288 2019-2026 $1,225,000 $114,955 TOTAL: $1,490,000 $204,938 DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $0 $2,532 2017 $15,000 $2,500 2018 $15,000 $2,200 2019-2028 $100,000 $5,225 TOTAL: $130,000 $12,457 WATER DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $0 $21,667 2017 $45,000 $22,225 2018 $55,000 $21,225 2019-2031 $815,000 $154,013 TOTAL: $915,000 $219,130 Water Sales (37100) and Water Connection fees (37150) - The balance of the loan payments will be funded through Water fund revenue. SEWER BUDGETARY OBJECTIVE This debt was incurred to fund the increased costs due to a scope change in the 39�h Street Sewer Project. REVENUES & OTHER FINANCING SOURCES • Special Assessments (36100) -A portion of this project will be assessed to the benefitting property owners. These assessments are projected to be levied against benefited property owners in 2013 for payments beginning in 2014 and will span 15 years. SEWER DEBT PAYMENT SCHEDULE YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST 2016 $0 $6,593 2017 $15,000 $6,750 2018 $15,000 $6,450 2019-2031 $250,000 $46,000 TOTAL: $280,000 $65,793 0 Sewer Sales (37200) and Sewer Connection fees (37250) - The balance of the loan payments will be funded through Sewer SECTION #5 Capital Projects Funds Capital projects funds (a type of governmental fund) are used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those to be financed by proprietary funds and trust funds). The city presently has four active capital projects funds: 1. Capital Infrastructure Fund 2. Parkland Dedication 3. Vehicle Replacement 4. City Facilities Annual appropriated budgets are not adopted for capital projects funds because effective budgetary control is alternatively accomplished through the use of project controls. However, capital projects fund budgets along with a five-year capital improvement plan are prepared by staff and reviewed by the city council to assist in the city's overall financial planning. BASIS OF ACCOUNTING & BUDGETING The measurement focus for capital projects funds is on a current financial resources basis, where the aim of a set of financial statements is to report the near -term (current) inflows, outflows, and balances of expendable financial resources. The fund balance is considered a measure of expendable resources. Capital projects funds use the modified accrual basis of accounting, under which revenues are not recognized until they are measurable and available, and expenditures are recognized in the period in which governments in general normally liquidate the related liability rather than when that liability is first incurred (if earlier). The basis of budgeting is consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. City afl-aloe Elmn City Bonding I V II2015 2016 - 2020 C@ Potm0al Pature General Fund Vehicle City Facilities State Water Sewer SW Library Park Resident Developer project Bonding (Levy) Food Fund Grant Funds Fund Food Fund Food Fund- Asesment Assessment Told Notes 2016 Lions Park Grading Parks X 0 40,W0 40,000 Reach and update current parks Parks X 0 x 350,000 350,000 Khkwood Levy X 251,000 a 113,000 138,000 251,000 Total increase in 2016 drat costs of$233k Stonegate Levy X 654,000 x 456,000 198,000 654,000 Kelvin Avenue Levy X 29ROW x 188,200 101,800 290,W0 Kelvin Avenue Water X 214,000 x 58,600 155,400 214,W0 Sewer Assessment LIB X 0 3R000 30,R00 Inwood Water Tower hN) Water X 1,100,000 x I1IOR000 I,IW,WO LE AveTrmtown Improvements SPLIT X 5,131,051 x 1,556,072 533,571 0 2,341,667 699,741. 5,131,051 SEE SPLIT DETAILS BELOW (Sower component 100%assessible) Waning sirens -in addn to 2 in 2015 FIRE 4ROW 40,OW 40,000 1¢spection Camem Sewer/SW 50,000 37,501) 12,500 50000 To be used for scorer and storm water line cleoo nuts Marring Trail updates StreetaTarks 23,730 23,730 13,200 36,930 For Rail update by the school and temp easement purchase Tom Lane by Hunters Crossing SUM 25,0W 25,000 50,000 50/50 cost split with developer per CS Sadish Lake sewer (MICA agent -2016) Sewer TBD _ I W %a accusnomproject,per Jack Projected 2016 7,103711 2,402,002 0 0 0 1,692, 171 37,500 2,354,167 30,O00 403,2W 1,292,941 25.000 8,236,981 2017 Rescue Engine Pan X 550.000 x 550,OW 550,000 Replaces 1990Enginewithcombnatio¢vehicle Replacement ofparkng lot at station #2 Fire X 87,560 87,560 87,560 Contingent o¢ devi ion r,ard'mg combined Fbehall Purchase land for combloed&shall Firs X 350,000 350,OW 350,000 Contingent ou decision aegazdiog combined Fuxhall LE AvrNowmown Improvements SPLIT X 4.398,500 x 2,020,889 1,120,I89 0 183,687 1A,,73,734; 4,398,500 SEE SPLIT DETAILS BELOW (Sewer component 100%assessble) Dump T.cWPIOW Wng/SaMer PW X 215,000 215,000 215,000 Replaces 1998 Plow Truck; will be in Vth year ofuseful the; 8mited supphers Replacement ofCV2 (Tahoe #2) Fire X 55,000 x 55,000 55,000 Replaces 2006; purchased used an 2010 Tri-Lakes Area Levy X 1,830,000 x 1,281,000 549,001) 1,830,000 36th, 37th and Irvin Levy X 56LOW x 388,2W 172,8W 561,000 36th, 37th and Irvin Water X 306,000 x 306,000 306,OW No water assessment Hudson Blvd LS Replace & Upon Sewer X 500,000 x 500,000 500,000 Olson Lake Trail Sanitary Sewer Ph 2 Sewer X 180,000 x 18ROW 180,OW 9new connections Pressure reduction station 0 H. Estates- 12" bypass X 120,000 x 120,000 120,000 Can we delay and still use section 34 excess funds?? Village East Trunk Watemann 12"bypass X 110,000 x 110,0W 110,0W 50th Slrem Trait (due to traffic increases) TM 0 Due to the potential additional maf5c from Ca istery and Wedding Venue Pmjested 2017 9,263,060 4,947,648 0 0 0 1,426,189 500,OW 183,687 0 0 1,975,536 230,01)) 9,263,00 2018 Replacement offender l Fve X 450,00 x 450,000 450,W0 Replica 1987 Tender; refurbished in 2004 I Too TruckNump Box PW X 70,00 70,W0 70,000 Replaces 20031 Ton with Plow; wig be at year 15 ofaseful He Replace Loader PW 185,000 185,000 185,000 Replace 1999 Loader; wig he at year 19 of useful He Mivi excavator PW 50,000 50,W0 50,000 Currently rent for S4k per year Add windows in blocked openings LIB X 0 50.000 50,000 38th, 39tb and lmsdale Levy X 1,020,000 705,100 314,900 1,020,W0 38a, 39th and lunsdals Water X 598,W0 175,0W 423,000 598,W0 OVNnofUPRR Levy X 1,100,00 x 770,000 330,W0 LIW,000 OV No of RR Waterman replacement Waler X 300,000 x 300,000 3W,000 OV lateral sewer car No of RR Sewm X 220,000 x 0 220,W0 220,000 Projected 2018 3,993,000 2.230.100 0 0 0 475,O00 0 0 50,000 0 1,287,900 0 4,043,000 2019 Replermoot of U2 Fit. X 75,000 x 75,000 75,00K) Replaces 1994. F-350 Replacement SCBA's F. X 207.000 x 207,000 207,000 Per NITA, max 15 year life; repairs done 9/14 to gain 5 yrs & word life to max Replace Tractor PW X 50,000 50,000 50,O00 Replace 2004 Tenn., will be at year 16 of useful file OV So afUP RR Levy X 1,900,000 x 1,330,000 570,000 I'MILOW N. reduction south.-l2-lower 93 Water X I10,000 x 110,W0 II0,0W Projected 2019 2,342,000 1,66'_,00K) 0 0 0 IIO,000 0 0 0 0 570,000 0 2,342,0W 2020 OV So of RR walennan replacement Water X 710,000 x 7t0,000 710,000 OV lateral sewn ext So DEAR Sewer X 1,120,000 x 0 1, 120,OW 1,120,000 Elevated Storage Tank #3 Water X 2,200,000 x 2.200,000 2,201 New combined the station I. X 3,O00,000 3,000,01H0 3,000,000 Asnomv could range farm 53M to IBM based on other metro 6c sominnsceceotly built Projected 2020 WOW3,OOR000 0 0 0 2,910,OW 0 0 0 0 1,120,000 0 7,030,W0 Good Total 30,431,841 14,241,750 0 0 0 6,613,360 537,500 2,537,854 80000 403,20B 6,246,377 255,W0 30,915,041 LE AvivDOWoEmm improvement Project 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total Streets 1,419,364 1,344,597 2,763,961 Sidmvalks 49,000 676,291 725,291 Trans 0 0 0 Landscaping 87,708 0 87,708 Underground UWitia 0 0 0 ROW 0 0 0 Total -GENERAL FUND 1,556,072 2,020,888 3,576,960 Waterman- WATER FT1ND 533,571 1,120,189 1,653,760 Sanitary Sewn- SEWER FUND (100% assessed) 699,741 1,073,736 1,773,477 Regional Stormwata System -STORv1WATER FUND 2.341,667 193,687 2,525,354 PROJECT BY YEAR 5,131,051 4,398,500 9,529,551 ANNUAL DEBT PMT DUE WA CTY Due1/15/16 513,105 513,105 Due 6/15/16 4,617,946 4,617,946 Due1/15/17 879,700 879,700 Due 6/15/17 3,518,800 3,518,800 0 5,131,051 4,398,500 0 9,529,551 011.INTEREST FROM WA CTY; CITY TO REPAY VIA ANNUAL BONDING SECTION #6 Enterprise Funds Enterprise funds (a type of proprietary fund) are used to report an activity for which a fee is charged to external users for goods or services. Enterprise funds account for operations financed and operated in a manner similar to private business enterprises. The intent of the governing body is that the costs of providing goods or services on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges. For 2015, all enterprise funds have a positive cash flow. The city presently has three enterprise funds: 1. Water 2. Sewer 3. Surface Water Annual appropriated budgets are not adopted for enterprise funds, but budgets are prepared by staff and reviewed by the city council to assist in the city's overall financial planning. BASIS OF ACCOUNTING & BUDGETING Enterprise funds are accounted for on the economic resources measurement focus, where the aim of a set of financial statements is to report all inflows, outflows, and balances affecting or reflecting an entity's net assets. All assets and all liabilities (whether current or non -current) associated with an enterprise fund's activity are included on the balance sheet. Transactions that improve or diminish the economic position of the fund are reported as revenues or expenses. Depreciation, using the straight-line method, is charged against all exhaustible capital assets as an expense against operations. Enterprise funds are accounted for using the accrual basis of accounting, which recognizes the financial effect of transactions, events, and interfund activities when they occur, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. The basis of budgeting is consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. WATER FUND BUDGET SUMMARY 2013 2014 2015 2015 2016 % Actual Actual Budget Projected Budget Chance Operating Revenue 584,317 784,625 959,291 872,405 918,047 5.2% Operating Expense 729,761 740,062 964,225 847,972 912,321 7.6% Operating Income (Loss) 14( 5,444) 44,563 (4,934) 24,432 5,726 -76.6% Non-Oper Income 155,992 902,980 1,287,000 768,000 956,500 24.5% Non-Oper Expense 189,130 306,888 270,487 268,114 289,781 8.1% Non-Oper Income (Loss) (33,138) 596,092 1,016,513 499,886 666,719 33.3% Change in Net Assets (178,582) 640,655 1,011,585 524,318 672,445 28.3% City of Lake Elmo 2016 Budget SEWER FUND BUDGET SUMMARY 2013 2014 2015 2015 2016 % Actual Actual Budget Projected Budget Change Operating Revenue 54,882 202,028 200,884 153,884 175,884 14.3% Operating Expense 95,590 212,980 208,421 106,336 208,466 -96.0% Operating Income (Loss) 87,266 10,952 7,537 47,548 (32,582) -168.5% Non-Oper Income 9,395 714,330 1,415,100 542,900 739,500 36.2% Non -Oyer Expense 0 116,403 135,372 98,875 105,469 -6.7% Non-Oper Income (Loss) 9,395 597,927 1,279,728 444,025 634,031 42.79% Change in Net Assets (77,871) 586,975 1,272,191 491,572 601,450 22.4% SURFACE WATER BUDGET SUMMARY 2013 2014 2015 2015 2016 % Actual Actual Budget Projected Budget Chance Operating Revenue 211,255 215,752 220,000 220,000 226,500 3.0% Operating Expense 116,275 150,723 177,714 128,016 180,889 -41.3% Operating Income (Loss) 94,980 65,029 42,286 91,984 45,611 -50.4% Non-Oper Income 1,098 1,239 1,100 2,500 5,000 100.0% Non-Oper Expense 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% Non-Oper Income (Loss) 1,098 1,239 1,100 2,500 5,000 100.0% Change in Net Assets 96,078 66,268 43,386 94,484 50,611 -46.4% SECTION #7 City of Lake Elmo Developer Activity 2016 Budget RESIDENTIAL Lennar Ryland Hans Hagen Boulder Ponds Easton Village Wildflower at Lake Elmo Village Preserve Village Park Preserve Hammes Reider/Diedrich New Residential Development Open Space Fire/Rebuilds Total New Residential COMMERCIAL Kwik Trip EP Medical Center (Neuro Clinic) EP Medical Center Tenants Projected Commercial Activity New Commercial Development Total Approved Units 310 51 537 163 217 143 97 100 163 48 10-ITZ Total Actual Actual Budgeted Projected 2014 2015 2016 Thru 2016 16 57 40 113 1 21 15 37 0 33 30 63 0 8 20 28 0 3 15 18 0 5 10 15 0 3 10 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 130 140 287 24 10 0 34 0 2 0 2 140 41 142 323 19 19 0 11 11 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 35 30 5 Yet to Build 197 14 474 135 199 128 84 100 163 48 1542 0 19 0 0 11 0 0 0 5 15 15 NA 15 45 ine Spring, 36 1 { -50 St i so 0 fi (T i 0akile Inwood (537 units) IS0 916 Auto Owners Krvrn, rrrN Wildflower at Lake Elmo (143 units) N OpenStreetMap contributors. and the GIS User Community, Sources: Esn. DeLorme. USGS, NIPS 12-20-15 1111: C1"I Y Ol Development Status and Location (End of 2015) LAKE ELMO Final Plat Preliminary Plat Under Contract SECTION #8 CITY OF LAKE ELMO ORGANIZATIONAL CHART 2016 CitizensWl i �` City Council jy Commissions t Committees Administrator #0 1 Planning Commission Park Commission Environmental Finance Economic Development Autborlty Attorne y City Clerk I luman Resources Maintenance Advisory Public Safety Fire1Chief, � "nitY Finance Dir, Administrative As �y`4�� 1 Eqq Dep. CHOI� Accountant °Pe 1 1 i Assessor U161- = Citizen Appointees Contractor Relationship City Engineer sheriff TI-iF CITY OF LAKE ELMO ON as of 12-30-2015 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ACCOUNTING SYSTEM: The total set of records and procedures which are used to record, classify, and report information on the financial status and operations of an entity. ACCRUAL BASIS OF ACCOUNTING: Method of accounting that recognizes the financial effect of transactions, events, and interfund activities when they occur, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. AD VALOREM TAX: A tax based on value, such as the property tax. AGENCY FUNDS: One of four types of fiduciary funds. Agency funds are used to report resources held by the reporting government in a purely custodial capacity (assets equal liabilities). Agency funds typically involve only the receipt, temporary investment, and remittance of fiduciary resources to individuals, private organizations, or other governments. APPROPRIATION: A legal authorization granted by a legislative body to make expenditures and incur obligations, limited by the amount and time in which it may be expended. AUDIT: A systematic collection of the sufficient, competent evidential matter needed to attest to the fairness of management's assertions in the financial statements or to evaluate whether management has efficiently and effectively carried out its responsibilities. BASIS OF ACCOUNTING: Timing of recognition for financial reporting purposes (i.e., when the effects of transactions or events should be recognized in financial statements). BUDGET: A financial operating plan showing proposed expenditures for a given period and the proposed means of financing them (also known as the Operating Budget). BUDGET DOCUMENT: The official written statement prepared by the administration which presents the proposed budget to the legislative body. BUSINESS -TYPE ACTIVITIES: One of two classes of activities reported in the government - wide financial statements. Business -type activities are financed in whole or in part by fees charged to external parties for goods or services. These activities are usually reported in enterprise funds. CAPITAL ASSETS: Land, improvements to land, easements, buildings, building improvements, vehicles, machinery, equipment, works of art and historical treasures, infrastructure, and all other tangible or intangible assets that are used in operations and that have initial useful lives extending beyond a single reporting period. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: A plan of proposed capital expenditures and the means of financing them. The capital budget is enacted as part of the complete annual budget. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS: Fund type used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those to be financed by proprietary funds and trust funds). CHARGES FOR SERVICES: Charges for current services rendered. CURRENT FINANCIAL RESOURCES MEASUREMENT FOCUS: Measurement focus where the aim of a set of financial statements is to report the near -term (current) inflows, outflows, and balances of expendable financial resources. The current financial resources measurement focus is unique to accounting and financial reporting for state and local governments and is used solely for reporting the financial position and results of operations of governmental funds. City of Lake Elmo 2016 Budget GLOSSARY OF TERMS DEBT SERVICE: Payment of interest and repayment of principal to holders of a government's debt instruments. DEBT SERVICE FUNDS: Governmental fund type used to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, general long-term debt principal and interest. DEPRECIATION: The portion of the cost of a capital asset charged as an expense during a particular period, prorated over the estimated useful life of the asset. ECONOMIC RESOURCES MEASUREMENT FOCUS: Measurement focus where the aim of a set of financial statements is to report all inflows, outflows, and balances affecting or reflecting an entity's net assets. The economic resources measurement focus is used for proprietary and trust funds, as well as for government -wide financial reporting. It is also used by business enterprises and nonprofit organizations in the private sector. ENTERPRISE FUNDS: Proprietary fund type used to report an activity for which a fee is charged to external users for goods or services. EXPENDITURES: Under the current financial resources measurement focus, decreases in net financial resources not properly classified as other financing uses. FIDUCIARY FUNDS: Funds used to report assets held in a trustee or agency capacity for others and which therefore cannot be used to support the government's own programs. The fiduciary fund category includes pension (and other employee benefit) trust funds, investment trust funds, private - purpose trust funds, and agency funds. FINES: Revenues from penalties imposed for violation of laws or regulations. FISCAL DISPARITIES: A Minnesota law which provides for the pooling of 40 percent of all new commercial and industrial property valuation in the seven county metropolitan area which is then redistributed to taxing jurisdictions according to specific criteria. FUND: Fiscal and accounting entity with a self - balancing set of accounts recording cash and other financial resources, together with all related liabilities and residual equities or balances, and charges therein, that are segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining certain objectives in accordance with special regulations, restrictions, or limitations. FUND BALANCE: Difference between assets and liabilities reported in a governmental fund. FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS: Basic financial statements presented on the basis of funds, in contrast to government -wide financial statements. FUND TYPE: One of eleven classifications into which all individual funds can be categorized. Governmental fund types include the general fund, special revenue funds, debt service funds, capital projects funds, and permanent funds. Proprietary fund types include enterprise funds and internal service funds. Fiduciary fund types include pension (and other employee benefit) trust funds, investment trust funds, private -purpose trust funds, and agency funds. GENERAL FUND: One of five governmental fund types. The general fund typically serves as the chief operating fund of a government. The general fund is used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS: When a government pledges its full faith and credit to the repayment of the bonds it issues, then those bonds are general obligation (G.O.) bonds. 73 City of Lake Elmo 2015 Budget GLOSSARY OF TERMS GENERALLY ACCEPTED ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES (GAAP): Conventions, rules, and procedures that serve as the norm for the fair presentation of financial statements. GENERALLY ACCEPTED AUDITING STANDARDS (GARS): Rules and procedures that govern the conduct of a financial audit. GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD (GASB): Ultimate authoritative accounting and financial reporting standard -setting body for state and local governments. The GASB was established in June 1984 to replace the NCGA. GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES: Activities generally financed through taxes, intergovernmental revenues, and other nonexchange revenues. These activities are usually reported in governmental funds and internal service funds. GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY: For accounting and financial reporting purposes, an entity subject to the hierarchy of GAAP applicable to state and local governmental units. GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS: Funds generally used to account for tax -supported activities. There are five different types of governmental funds: the general fund, special revenue funds, debt service funds, capital projects funds, and permanent funds. GOVERNMENT -WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS: Financial statements that incorporate all of a government's governmental and business -type activities, as well as its nonfiduciary component units. There are two basic government - wide financial statements: the statement of net assets and the statement of activities. GRANT: A contribution of assets by one governmental unit or other organization to another. Grants are usually made for specified purposes. INFRASTRUCTURE: Long-lived capital assets that normally are stationary in nature and normally can be preserved for a significantly greater number of years than most capital assets. Examples of infrastructure assets include roads, bridges, tunnels, drainage systems, water and sewer systems, dams, and lighting systems. INTERFUND TRANSFERS: Flows of assets (such as cash or goods) between funds and blended component units of the primary government for a price approximating their external exchange value. INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES: Revenues from other governments in the form of grants, entitlements, or shared revenues. INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: Proprietary fund type that may be used to report any activity that provides goods or services to other funds, departments, or agencies of the primary government and its component units, or to other governments, on a cost -reimbursement basis. LICENSES: Revenues received from the sale of business and non -business licenses. LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID (LGA): Intergovernmental revenue from the state to municipalities to help fund general expenditures. MEASUREMENT FOCUS: Types of balances (and related changes) reported in a given set of financial statements (i.e., economic resources, current financial resources, assets and liabilities resulting from cash transactions). MODIFIED ACCRUAL BASIS OF ACCOUNTING: Basis of accounting used in conjunction with the current financial resources measurement focus that modifies the accrual basis of accounting in two important ways 1) revenues are not recognized until they are measurable and available, and 2) expenditures are recognized in the period in which City of Lake Elmo 2016 Budget governments in general normally liquidate the related liability rather than when that liability is first incurred (if earlier). NET ASSETS: The equity associated with general government assets and liabilities. GLOSSARY OF TERMS OTHER FINANCING SOURCES: Increase in current financial resources that is reported separately from revenues to avoid distorting revenue trends. The use of the other financing sources category is limited to items so classified by GAAP (including general long-term debt proceeds, proceeds from the sale of capital assets, and operating transfers in). OTHER FINANCING USES: Decrease in current financial resources that is reported separately from expenditures to avoid distorting expenditure trends. The use of the other financing uses category is limited to items so classified by GAAP (including operating transfers out). PROPRIETARY FUNDS: Funds that focus on the determination of operating income, changes in net assets (or cost recovery), financial position, and cash flows. There are two different types of proprietary funds: enterprise funds and internal service funds. RESERVED FUND BALANCE: Portion of a governmental fund's net assets that is not available for appropriation. RESTRICTED NET ASSETS: Component of net assets calculated by reducing the carrying value of restricted assets by amounts repayable from those assets, excluding capital -related debt. REVENUES: Under the current financial resources measurement focus, increases in net financial resources not properly classified as other financing sources. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT: Compulsory levy made against certain properties to defray all or part of the cost of a specific capital improvement or service deemed to benefit primarily those properties. SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS: Governmental fund type used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than for major capital projects) that are legally restricted to expenditure for specified purposes. TAX LEVY: The total amount to be raised by general property taxes for the purpose stated in the resolution certified to the county auditor. UNRESTRICTED NET ASSETS: That portion of net assets that is neither restricted nor invested in capital assets (net of related debt). Source for some definitions: Governmental Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting, Government Finance Officers Association, 2005.