HRA Agenda 06-07-2006
.
AGENDA
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - 6:00 p.m.
Bridge Room - Community Center
Commissioners:
Chair Brad Barger, Vice Chair Steve Andrews, Dan Frie, Darrin Lahr, and Bill
Fair.
Council Liaison:
Staff:
1.
2.
3.
4.
.
5.
Wayne Mayer.
Rick Wolfsteller, Ollie Koropchak, and Angela Shumann.
Call to Order.
Consideration to approve the May 3, 2006 HRA minutes.
Consideration of adding or removing items from the agenda.
Consent Agenda.
A. Consideration to approve amending the Contract for Private Development between the
HRA and Master's Fifth Avenue, Inc.
Consideration to approve a resolution adopting the modifications to the TIF Plans for TIP
District Nos. 1-2 (redevelopment district) and 1-24 (qualified housing district).
6. Consideration to approve entering into a Preliminary Development Agreement with Walker
Instore, Inc.
7. Consideration to review the Transformation Home Loan Application Package for possible
amending: Designation of a title company.
8. Consideration to define "qualified business" and "non-qualified business" as it relates to
marketing the Monticello Business Center.
9. Consideration to authorize payment of HRA bills.
10. Consideration ofHRA Executive Report.
II. Committee Reports: Marketing
Fiber Optic
.
12.
Next regular HRA meeting - Wednesday, July 5, 2006. (Decide whether to cancel or to meet)
13. Adjournment.
WORKSHOP TO FOLLOW.
.
.
.
MINUTES
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, May 3, 2006
Commissioners Present:
Chairman Brad Barger, Steve Andrews, Bill Fair, Dan Frie
Commissioners Absent:
Darrin Lahr
Council Liaison Absent:
Wayne Mayer
Staff Present:
Rick Wolfsteller, Ollie Koropchak, Angela Schumann
1. Call to Order.
Chairman Barger called the meeting to order.
2. Consideration to approve the April 5th. 2006 HRA minutes
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FAIR TO APPROVE THE HRA MINUTES
OF APRIL 5th, 2006 AND APRIL 12'\ 2006.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIOENR ANDREWS. MOTION
CARRIED, 4-0.
3. Consideration of adding or removing items from the agenda.
Barger added as item lOa an update on the direction of the Monticello Business
Park.
Koropchak added as item lOb a discussion on funding for marketing efforts
related to the Business Park.
4. Consent agenda.
NONE.
5. Consideration to review and approve a Transformation Home Loan application
for 511 Elm Street.
Koropchak reported that the HRA is asked to consider approving a
Transformation Home Loan for a single-family residence at 511 Elm Street. The
existing house is only about 600-700 square feet, with a detached garage. She
noted that as referenced in the staff report, the applicant is requesting the loan to
.
triple the square footage of the structure. O'Neill had confirmed for Koropchak
that this property is not included in the proposed Ruff redevelopment area.
The Commissioners noted that the loan was intended for this purpose. Koropchak
reported that Anderson had done a preliminary inspection. The total value ofthe
improvements is $160,000 and the applicant does have financing. The bank had
noted to Koropchak that the applicant was going to have work equity into the
improvements. Frie inquired what the maximum loan amount is. Koropchak
explained that the maximum amount is 25%, with cap of $20,000.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREWS TO APPROVE
TRANSFORMATION LOAN NO. 002 FOR 511 ELM STREET, ANTOINETTE
BREIWICK IN THE AMOUNT OF 25% OF THE VERIFIED SWORN
CONSTRUCTION STATEMENT OR NOT GREATER THAN $20,000,
SUBJECT TO A COMMITMENT FROM THE LENDER.
MOTION SECONDED BY FAIR. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0.
Koropchak stated that it was her understanding that the HRA attorney would draft
agreement and closing information.
.
Fair suggested that an update to the brochure could be done to include these two
properties as examples of the program.
Barger asked if anything on the transformation program was on the website.
Koropchak stated that she will check.
6. Consideration to set a workshop date for the sole pumose to discuss ideas and to
target properties or areas for purchase as properties corne on the market.
Koropchak stated that Fair had requested that this be put on the agenda, along
with Wolfsteller's year-end report on the district fund balances. Koropchak stated
that the HRA needs to verify Wolfsteller's report against Ehler's projections,
which includes debt service over the years. Fair asked if we have a deadline in
relationship to the funds on the districts. Koropchak confirmed that there is a
deadline, but stated that the HRA had already completed a modification for one
district, and would be doing districts 2 and 24 in the corning months. She
reminded the Commissioners that they are modifying the budgets, enlarging them,
so that excess tax increment does not have to go back to the County. Those were
the three districts recommended for modification by Ehlers. Fair stated that he
thought there should be a discussion on the whole topic, to look at all the districts
and look at properties that would be cornerstones for downtown redevelopment.
.
Koropchak noted that the HRA does not typically hold a regular July meeting.
.
The Commissioners agreed to hold a workshop in June, after the regular HRA
meeting. Fair requested some digital images, zoning maps, fund balance
information and information on when funds would be available.
Mayer asked what areas the HRA would be talking about. Koropchak stated that
is what will be defined. Fair stated that having a plan will allow staff to start the
process. Mayer asked if Loch would be selling his business. Frie stated that he
had found a tenant, but wanted to retain ownership.
7. Consideration to appoint an HRA Commissioner to the Comprehensive Plan
Update Task Force.
Koropchak explained that the Council had requested that the HRA provide one
representative to the comp plan task force. She reported that the update process is
expected to go about 14 months.
.
Fair stated that he wanted to express concern related to the discussions regarding
the comprehensive plan updates. Fair reminded the group that with three Council
members present at task force meetings, it will be a public meeting and subject to
the open meeting law. Mayer stated that they will post a notice for each meeting.
Fair expressed some concern that 3 council members would be present for the
discussion and wondered how that would impact the Council as a whole. Fair
stated that he would hope that all would attend. Mayer stated that was a valid
question, but by having three attend, it was thought that they would be throwing
the responsibility back to the Council. Andrews stated that having three present
may fosters ownership in the process.
Fair also asked why three township representatives are on the task force. He
noted that it is supposed to be the City's comprehensive plan. Mayer stated that
he agrees and noted that at meetings he has attended the township representatives
have been. Fair stated his concern about influence of township on the task force.
MOTION BY FAIR TO APPOINT COMMISSIONER FRIE TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE TASK FORCE, WITH COMMISSIONER
ANDREWS AS ALTERNATE. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0.
8. Consideration to authorize payment of HRA bills.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREWS TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF
BILLS.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FAIR. MOTION CARRIED, 4-
O.
.
9. Consideration of Executive Director's Report
.
Koropchak reported that she had not yet received final elevations for Karlsburger
and that the City had authorized extension of sewer and water trunk lines across
the property. She also noted that the attached final TlF loan reports for Aroplax
and Suburban and would like to close those out.
10. Committee Renorts
a. Marketing
1) Barger inquired of the other Commissioners their reaction to A VR's
impact on the City's goal ofa high-end industrial park. Barger stated that he
was questioning the intent for the park, as Koropchak has received a number
of inquiries for distribution centers who would purchase the property at fair-
market value. Barger stated that his perspective is that chances are if a cement
plant goes there, the City will not get high-end industrial development. In that
case, perhaps the HRA should sell it as quickly as possible and then target
another area to do a high end industrial park. He indicated that if industry
wants to locate there and they aren't going to get TlF assistance, he doesn't
have a problem with that.
.
Mayer stated that you have to define the type of distribution company.
Koropchak stated that she had gotten direction on Dahlheimer's site as they
are a local business and paid well, so the HRA did do TIF assistance.
Koropchak noted that the covenants in place do not allow outdoor storage, but
do allow trucks or trailers in everyday operation. They have to be in the rear
yard. Koropchak noted that the covenants and criteria are different things.
For market rate, a business just has to meet the covenants and zoning.
Mayer stated that he doesn't know what type of industry doesn't store trailers.
Barger stated that his point is that with an A VR relocation, the HRA may need
to change focus. Koropchak noted that there is a consistency problem with
A VR and other potential users. Barger stated if a business wants assistance,
then they still need to follow the criteria. Mayer stated that he wouldn't come
to a decision too early, holding out hope that A VR doesn't locate there. He
stated that the more growth, the better, especially if businesses are willing to
pay at market rate. Koropchak stated that currently the market is about $3.00
per square foot.
Koropchak stated that initially, the City only purchased 35 acres. Koropchak
stated that she would like Council to authorize buying the balance of the
property, which would include the A VR site. Wolfsteller stated that he
thought it might be best to pay offthe contract for deed.
.
2) Koropchak stated that Marketing Committee currently has about $4000 in
the budget left from the $30,000 initial amount. She reported that the
Committee would like to move forward on the 2006 marketing plan, which
.
includes billboards. She stated that the problem is that the 2006 budget
request is $16,500 and the Council budget is for 2007. Koropchak asked if the
Council doesn't approve the budget, would the HRA be a backup for funding.
Wolfsteller asked what we would be doing in 2007. Barger stated that the
Committee had cut out sponsoring golf outing and classified ads. Barger
stated that the billboard and internet are probably the keys. Koropchak noted
that the business park's entrance sign should be up in a couple of weeks.
Barger noted that the marketing efforts drive people to the park, but they need
some kind of identification once they are there.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREWS TO AUTHORIZE THE HRA
TO PROVIDE FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,500 FOR
MONTICELLO BUSINESS PARK MARKETING EFFORTS, AS A
BACKUP TO COUNCIL FUNDING.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FRIE. MOTION CARRIED,
4-0.
b. Fiber Optics
.
Koropchak reported that the Fiber Optics task force has their first meeting
with the consultant on Wednesday. Andrews stated that he will be there. Fair
asked what would be happening. Mayer stated that the task force will review
the contract for feasibility to make sure there is an understanding of all of the
aspects. They will also be gathering information and perhaps sign the
contract. Barger asked when the feasibility study would be back. Mayer
stated that it is expected in August.
Barger asked what the intended reach is. Mayer stated it would be City- wide.
The depth, reach, and even validity will be determined by the study.
Barger asked about financing. Mayer stated that Springsted will be looking at
that.
II. Adiourn
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREWS TO ADJOURN.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FRIE. MOTION CARRIED,
4-0.
.
. HRA Agenda - 06/07/06
4A. Consideration to approve amendinl! the Contract for Private Development between
the BRA and Master's Fifth Avenue. Inc.
A. Reference and backl!round:
TIF Plan for establishment of District No. 1-35 was approved by Council on September
12, 2005. Ehler's submitted the Request for District Certification to the Wright County
Auditor on December 29,2005. At this time no verification as to the certification date
has been received from the County. The County has until July 1, 2006.
Per Statutes: The duration of District No. 1-35 will be 25 years from the date of
receipt ofthe first increment. The date of receipt of the first tax increment will be
approximately 2008. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any
modifications to the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would
terminate after 2033, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied.
After four years from the date of certification of the District one of the following
activities must have been commenced on each parcel in the District: demolition,
rehabilitation, renovation, or other site preparation. (September 2009)
.
Within five years of certification revenues derived from tax increments must be
expended or obligated to be expended. (September 2010)
The HRA and Master's Fifth A venue, Inc. entered into the Contract for Private
Development on September 7, 2005. The developer is requesting the Commencement
and Completion of Construction be amended as follows:
Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Developer shall commence construction of the
Minimum Improvements by October 1, 2005, amend to 'f\r\,,'1;'\ ,,?-o~cl,ject to
Unavoidable Delays, the Developer shall complete the construction ofthel)
Minimum Improvements by December 31, 2006, amend to 'Qu. ~ \, ?;' All work
with respect to the Minimum Improvements to be constructed or provided by the
Developer on the Development Property shall be in conformity with the
Construction Plans as submitted by the Developer and approved by the Authority.
Definition of Minimum Improvements: The construction on the Development
Property of an approximately 11,000 sq ft retail center, with associated parking,
known as Landmark Square II, and associated parking on an adjacent parcel
("Adjacent Property").
.
Lastly, the Executive Director is requesting direction for the commissioners relative to
payment of Administrative Costs. The Developer initially deposited $7,500 with the
1
.
HRA Agenda - 06/07/06
Authority to be applied toward Administration Costs. Excess or over-run costs are
determined no earlier than the date of which the Developer receives a Certificate of
Completion. Given the unusual time between the Preliminary Agreement execution and
deposit of September 14, 2004; the District Inspection and report completed September
2005; the district established (Ehler's); contract prepared (Kennedy & Graven) and
executed (September 7, 2005); and the proposed extended construction completion date
(thereafter the Certificate of Completion is issued); would the HRA prefer to invoice the
developer for cost over-runs prior to issuance of the certificate of completion as per the
Contract? The HRA has reimbursed the developer $20,000 for costs associated with
removal ofthe Koppy garage and improvements located within Landmark Square I per
the Contract. PLEASE GNE DIRECTION.
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to approve amending the Contract for Private Development by and
among Master's Fifth Avenue, Inc. and the HRA as follows: The Developer shall
commence construction ofthe Minimum Improvements by
Subject to Unavailable delays, the Developer shall complete the construction of
Minimum Improvements by
.
2.
A motion to deny amending the Contract for Private Development by and among
Master's Fifth Avenue, Inc. and the HRA.
3. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
The Administrator and Executive Director recommend alternate no. 1 because the district
will be certified no later than July 1, 2006, the four and five-year rules are not affected;
and the extended time allows the developer to secure tenants.
The Execute Director recommends that the HRA research invoice documentation for
administration costs at this time as accountability after certificate of completion will be
more difficult to track.
D. SUDDortinl! Data:
Excerpts from the Contract.
.
2
.
ARTICLE III
Acquisition of Property; Financial Assistance
Section 3.1. Status of the Development Propertv. As of the date of this Agreement, the
Developer has already purchased the Development Property pursuant to that certain Preliminary
Development Agreement among the Developer and the Authority dated September 14, 2004, in
anticipation of this Agreement. The Authority shall have no obligation to purchase the
Development Property or any portion thereof.
Section 3.2. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the Authority makes no
representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the Development Propeliy or its
fitness for construction of the Minimum Improvements or any other purpose for which the
Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify,
defend. and hold harn1less the Authority, the City, and their governing body members, officers,
agents, servants, and employees, from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of
hazardous wastes or pollutants on the Development Property. The Developer's obligations under
this Section 3.2 shall survive termination of this Agreement.
.
Section 3.3. Pavment of Administrative Costs. The Developer agrees that it will pay upon
demand by the Authority, Administrative Costs (as hereafter defined). For the purposes of this
Agreement, the term "Administrative Costs" means out-of-pocket costs incuned by the Authority
and attributable to or incurred in connection with the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement
and other documents and agreements in connection with the development contemplated hereunder.
Out-of-pocket Administrative Costs shall be evidenced by invoices, statements, or other reasonable \1
written evidence of the costs incurred by the Authority. As of the date of this Agreement, the !\
Developer has deposited $7,500 with the Authority to be applied toward Administrative Costs. The
amount by which this deposit exceeds the Authority'S actual Administrative Costs, if any, shall.
upon demand by the Developer, be returned to the Developer, but no earlier than the date on which
the Developer receives a Certificate of Completion pursuant to Section 4.4 of this Agreement.
Section 3.4. Financing of Land Acquisition Costs. In order to make development of the
Minimum Improvements economically feasible, the Authority will reimburse the Developer for the
Land Acquisition Costs (hereby defined as the Developer's cost of acquiring the Development
Property, not to exceed $170,000 net present valLIe) from Available Tax Increment (as detlned
below) from Tax Increment District No 1-35 in accordance with the following terms and conditions:
.
(a) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. the Land Acquisition Costs
will be reimbursed to the Developer with simple interest thereon at 6.50% per annum, interest
commencing to accrue on the date that the Developer complies with the cost celtitication
requirement described in paragraph (n of this Section. The Land Acquisition Costs will be
reimbursed by the Authority to the Developer in semi-annual installments payable on each February
I and August I ("Payment Dates") commencing August I, 2008 and concluding no later than the
Termination Date. These payments will be made from Available Tax Increment as defined in this
Section 3.4 and from no other source.
;'vl'I"'.'<-267260v 1 0
i'\ilNl()()-II~
7
.
Construction Plans, the Authority shall approve the proposed change and notify the Developer in
"riting of its approval. Such change in the Construction Plans shall, in any event, be deemed
approved by the Authority unless rejected, in whole or in part, by written notice by the Authority to
the Developer, setting forth in detail the reasons therefor. Such rejection shall be made within ten
(10) days after receipt of the notice of such change. The Authority's approval of any such change in
the Construction Plans will not be unreasonably withheld.
Section 4.3. Commencement and Completion of Construction. Subject to Unavoidable
Delays, the Developer shall commence construction of the Minimum lmprovements by October L
100.;;. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Developer shall complete the construction of the
Minimum Improvements by December 31, 200 All work with respect to the Minimum
Improvements to be constructed or provide by the Developer on the Development Property shall
be in conformity with the Construction Plans as submitted by the Developer and approved by the
Authority.
.
The Developer agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, and every successor in interest to
the Development Property, or any part thereof, that the Developer. and such successors and assigns,
shall promptly begin and diligently prosecute to completion the development of the Development
Property through the construction of the Minimum Improvements thereon, and that such
construction shall in any event be commenced and completed within the period specified in this
Section 4.3 of this Agreement. The obligation to construct the Minimum Improvements in
accordance with this Section touches and concerns the land, and shall nm with the property and be
binding upon all successors and assigns to the Development Property. After the date of this
Agreement and until construction of the rvlinimum Improvements has been completed, the
Developer shall make rep0l1s. in such detail and at such times as may reasonably be requested by
the Authority, as to the actual progress of the Developer with respect to such construction.
Section 4.4. Certificate of Completion. (a) Promptly after completion of the Minimum
Improvements in accordance with those provisions of the Agreement relating solely to the
obligations of the Developer to construct the Minimum Improvements (including the dates for
beginning and completion thereof), the Authority will filrnish the Developer with a Certificate
shown as Exhibit B. Such certification and such determination shall not constitute evidence of
compliance with or satisfaction of any obligation of the Developer to any Holder of a Mortgage, or
any insurer of a M0l1gagc, securing money loaned to finance the Minimum Improvements, or any
part thereof
(b) If the Authority shall refuse or fail to provide any cel1ification in accordance with
the provisions of this Section 4.4 of this Agreement, the Authority shall. within thirty (30) days after
written request by the Developer, provide the Developer with a written statement indicating in
adequate detail in what respects the Developer has failed to complete the Minimum Improvements
in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement. or is otherwise in default and what measures
or acts it will be necessmy, in the opinion of the Authority, for the Developer to take or perform in
order to obtain such certification.
.
~nN.26 72(10" 1 0
tvlt-: Il)O~ 1:.5
12
.
.
.
HRA Agenda - 06/07/06
5.
Consideration to aDDrove a resolution adoDtin!!: the modifications to the TIF Plans for
TIF District Nos. 1-2 ffiedeveloDment District) and 1-24 (Qualified Housin!!: District).
A. Reference and back!!:round:
TIF District No. 1-2, MetcalflLarson, a Redevelopment District, was certified in 1983 and the
TIF Plan was modified five times previously to either enlarge the district boundaries and
increase the budget. TIF assistance was used for building and land acquisition, demolition,
relocation, site preparation and public improvements associated with the construction of an
office building, Broadway Square Apartments, and post office egress.
The proposed No. 1-2 modification is to increase the budget only and does not include
enlarging the district boundaries. The budget revenues and expenditures will be increased from
$1,323,421 to $1,705,134. Based on the projected cashflow using the current obligation and
projecting tax increment to the district's statutory limits which is year 2010, the projected
amount of uncommitted revenues available for use is approximately $175,000. Because this is
a pre-1990 district, the tax increment is available for budgeted expenditures in the district or
within the project area.
TIF District No. 1-24, St. Ben's, a Qualified Housing District, was certified in 1998. TIF
assistance was used for site improvements and land acquisition associated with the construction
ofthe independent senior rental housing facility called St. Benedicts. A certain percentage of
the rental units are subject to rental rate and income requirements established through the
National Housing Act. St. Benedict's annually submits a rental and income report to the HRA
Director.
The proposed No. 1-24 modification is to increase the budget only and does not include
enlarging the district boundaries. The budget revenues and expenditures will be increased from
$1,340,000 to $1,940,000. Based on the projected cashflow using the current obligation and
projecting tax increment to the district's statutory limits which is year 2026, the project amount
of uncommitted revenues available for use is approximately $600,000. The tax increment is
available for use within the project area, but must be used for affordable housing.
The BRA requested modifying the Plans for TIF District Nos. 1-2 and 1-24 because:
Due to a recent change in the Minnesota Statutes, the HRA must annually determine
the amount of excess increment for a district based on its Plan in effect December 30
of the year and the increment and revenues received of that year. The HRA must
spend or return the excess increment under the Statute within nine months after the
end of the year. In addition, the HRA may, subject to the limitations set forth herein,
1
.
BRA Agenda - 06/07/06
choose to modify the Plan in order to fmance additional public costs in the
Development District (project area) or TIF District.
The modification to the Plans (budgets) for District Nos. 1-2 and 1-24 will maximize the use of
tax increment for future redevelopment and housing projects within the Central Monticello
Redevelopment Project No. I boundaries.
Any formal modification to a TIF Plan follows the same process as establishment of a new
district. The modification reserves the HRA' s right to incur bonded indebtedness, the
modification does not obligate the HRA to incur debt, future action is necessary to incur debt
(such as approval of a Contract for Private Development.)
The Planning Commission adopted their resolution on June 6, 2006, and the City Council will
hold a public hearing and consider approving the modifications on June 12, 2006. The county
and school district received a copy of the proposed modifications on May 10, 2006, satisfying
the 30-day notification period for comments.
B. Alternative Action:
.
1.
Motion to approve a resolution adopting the modifications to the TlF Plans for TIF
District Nos. 1-2 (Redevelopment District) and 1-24 (Qualified Housing District).
2. A motion to deny approval ofa resolution adopting ..............................................
3. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
The City Administrator and HRA Executive Director recommend Alternative No.1. The
modification of the TlF Plans preserve the tax increment for future redevelopment and
affordable housing projects within the Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1
boundaries.
D. SUDDortinl!: Data:
Resolution for adoption, map, and TlF Plan.
.
2
.
.
.
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NOS. 1-2
(REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT) AND 1-24 (QUALIFIED HOUSING DISTRICT)
WHEREAS, it has been proposed by the Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the Monticello
Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") and the City of Monticello (the "City") that the HRA
adopt the Modifications to the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing District Nos. 1-2
and 1-24 (the "Modifications") therefore, all pursuant to and in confonnity with applicable law, including
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, inclusive, as amended
(the "Act"), all as reflected in the Modifications and presented for the Board's consideration; and
WHEREAS, the HRA has investigated the facts relating to the Modifications and has caused the
Modifications to be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the adoption
of the Modifications, including but not limited to, notification of Wright County and Independent School
District No. 882 and the holding of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law. The City has
also received a recommendation from the City Planning Commission that the Modifications are consistent
with the general development plans of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board as follows:
1. The HRA hereby makes the fmdings set forth in the Modifications, which are incorporated
herein by reference.
2. The adoption of the Modifications conform in all respects to the requirements ofthe Act and
will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the State which is already built up, to provide employment
opportunities, to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of the State and thereby serves a
public purpose and will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs for the City as a
whole, for the development or redevelopment of the project area by private enterprise in that the intent is to
provide only that public assistance necessary to make the private development financially feasible.
3. Conditioned upon the approval thereof by the City Council following its public hearing
thereon, the Modifications, as presented to the HRA on this date, is hereby approved, established and
adopted and shall be placed on file in the office ofthe Executive Director of the HRA.
Approved by the Board of Commissioners of the Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority
this 7th day of June, 2006.
Chair
ATTEST:
Secretary
.
.
0..-1 0<
~o ....:lEo-;
~z ~O
~ Eo-- ~ iZl
~U U~
Eo--~ .....Z
Z"" Eo-- Z
00 Z.....
:;~ O~
~~ :;~
< Eo-- ~ Eo-;
~Z Oz
Eo-- ~ >-;J
Z:; Eo--O
~~ """"u
uO U
....:l Eo-;
~ ==
;, ~
~ .....
~ ~
~ ~
~
.
ill'il
I .!
I .
, I
"I
~
-J
c':
,
,
~.Il .Pi1
"'Il~
~-r
I
I
J
~'
.
o
~
I
"
.
.
.
e
As of May 10, 2006
Draft for Fiscal Implications
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
for the modification of
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-2
(a redevelopment district)
within
CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1
It
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Adopted: September \3, 1983
Modification #1 Adopted: December 9, 1985
Modification #2 Adopted: August 24, 1987
Modification #3 Adopted: September 26,1988
Modification #4 Adopted: January 22, 1996
Modification #5 Adopted: June 24, 1996
Modification #6 Public Hearing: June 12,2006
Modification #6 Adopted:
Prepared by:
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, Minnesota 551 \3-1105
Phone: (651) 697-8500
Fax: (651) 697-8555
E-mail: info@ehlers-inc.com
Web Site: www.ehlers-inc.com
.
.
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CENTRAL MONTICELLO
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1............................... ..............................................1
Foreword.......... ......... ............ ... ........ ......... ............ ......... ....... ........ .... .......... ... ...... ........1
TAX INCREMENT REDEVELOPMENT FINANCE PLAN ...............................................2
A STATUTORY AUTHORITY... ......... .... ..... ..... ....... ....... ....... .... ... ..... ............. .... .........2
B. STATEMENT OF OBJ ECTIVES.. ........ .............. ... ...... .............. ..... ... ............... ........2
C. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. ........... ....... ..... ........... ........... ................... ........ ... ......3
D. PROPERTY ACQUISITION. ...... ..... ......... ..... ......... ..... .... .... ... ........ .... ... ..................5
E. DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES COVERED BY AGREEMENT .................................6
F. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY IN THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
DISTRICT. ................. ....... ....... ........ ......... ..................... ......... ....... ....... ... ...... ......... .....6
G. CLASSIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT ................ 7
H. ESTIMATE OF COSTS ...........................................................................................7
I. ESTIMATE OF INDEBTEDNESS ...........................................................................11
J. SOURCE OF REVENUE........................................................................................11
K. ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE ............................................................................12
L. ESTIMATED CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE.....................................................14
M. DURATION OF THE DiSTRiCT............................................................................14
N. IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS ..................................................14
O. MODIFICATION TO TAX INCREMENT PLAN...................................................... 17
P. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES .................................................18
Q. LIMITATION ON DURATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS ...18
R. LIMITATION ON QUALIFICATION OF PROPERTY IN TAX INCREMENT
DISTRICT NOT SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT .......................................................18
S. LIMITATION ON THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT................................................19
T. NOTIFICATION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS ...................................19
U. EXCESS TAX INCREMENTS ...............................................................................19
V. REQUIREMENT FOR AGREEMENTS WITH THE DEVELOPER.........................20
W. ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS ... .......... ..... ... ........... .... .... ..... ..... ....... ...... ...... ... ...20
X. ADMIINISTRATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TAX INCREMENT ACCOUNT
...................................................................................................................................20
Y. ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS ..........................................................20
Z. ASSUMPTIONS. ................ .... ... .......... .... ..... ... ..... ....... ... ... .... ....... ........... .... ... ... ..... 21
. MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1
Foreword
The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello
Redevelopment Project No.1. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set
forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I. Generally, the
substantive changes include the modification of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-2.
For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment
Project No. I is recommended. It is available from the City Administrator at the City of Monticello.
Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment
Financing Districts located within Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I.
.
.
I
2
.
TAX INCREMENT REDEVELOPMENT FINANCE PLAN
A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY
(As Originally Adopted)
The City of Monticello is authorized to establish a tax increment district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
273.71- 273.78.
(As Modified September 26, 1988)
The Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") and the City of Monticello are
authorized to modify the tax increment finance plan for Redevelopment District #2 pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 4
(As Modified June 13, 2006)
Within the City, there exists areas where public improvement is necessary to cause development or
redevelopmeut to occur. To this end, the City and HRA have certain statutory powers pursuaut to
Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.001 through 469.047, inclusive as amended, aud Minnesota
Statutes Sectious 469.174 through 469.1792, inclusive as amended, to assist in financiug public costs
related to this project.
.
B. STA TEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
(As Originally Adopted)
I) Provide incentive for the expansion of Metcalf/Larson Law Offices in the City of Monticello.
2) Provide expanded tax base.
3) Create a use for currently under-utilized land.
4) Eliminate a blighted, non-conforming structure.
(As Modified-August 24, 1987)
1) Provide opportunities for development and expansion of new business
2) Provide opportunities for growth of the tax base
3) Eliminate blight or deterioration within an area
4) Create a use for currently under-utilized land.
(As Modified September 26, 1988)
.
1) Provide opportunities for development and expansion of new business
2) Provide opportunities for growth of the tax base
3) Eliminate blight or deterioration with an area
4) Create a use for currently under-utilized land
5) Provide needed subsidized elderly housing
.
.
.
c. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
(As Originally Adopted)
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes 273.74, a description of the redevelopment program for the tax
increment financing district is provided.
I) The City of Monticello will acquire the northerly 50 feet of Lots 8, 9, & 10 in Block 50,
original plat and raze the existing blighted, non-conforming structure.
2) The City will convey to Metcalf and Larson, the developers, the above described parcel in a
condition suitable for construction.
3) Metcalf and Larson will construct a 2800 sq. ft. per floor split foyer office building (with
parking facilities) on the above parcel and on land adjoining said parcel.
(As Modified December 9, 1985)
I) Pursuant to Resolution 1985 #31, the District was enlarged to include a residence directly
north of Metcalf & Larson building in Block 50 and three vacant lots owned by the HRA in
Block 51, along with Stelton's Laundromat property and the Marie Gustafson property all in
Block 51.
2) The district was modified to capture increment generated by the construction of the elderly
apartment house project proposed for portions of Block 51. The enlarged Tax Increment
District is expected to be a benefit to the HRA once development occurs on the Hass/K&H
Auto property.
(As Modified August 24, 1987)
I) Modification #1 included the addition of Hollenback, Stelton, Gustafson, and the City of
Monticello parcels to the original Redevelopment District #2
2) Metcalf & Larson, developers, constructed a 3 I-unit elderly home on the City of Monticello
parcel (155-101-051130)
3) Modification #2, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will acquire the Monticello Ford
property, parcels 155-010-051010 and 155-010-051020, and will raze the existing blighted
structure.
(As Modified September 26, 1988)
1) Modification #3, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will acquire the Jones
Manufacturing Company property, parcel 155-010-051011, and will raze the existing
blighted structure and;
2) Modification #3, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will acquire the Monti Truck
Repair property (raw land), parcel 155-0 I 0-051 040 and;
3) Modification #3, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will acquire the Stelton
Laundromat property, parcel 155-010-051050,and will raze the existing blighted structure
and;
3
~
.
.
.
4) Modification #3, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will convey the three above said
parcels plus parcels 155-010-051010 andl 55-010-05 1020 (Modification #2) to the developer,
Broadway Square Limited Partnership, for construction of a 28-unitsubsidized elderly
housing project.
(As Modified August 24, 1987)
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
(As Originally Adopted)
The HRA and Monticello Ford, Inc., Lawrence Flake, President, have executed a purchase agreement for
$75,000.00 for the acquisition of said property located at 249 West Broadway, Monticello, Minnesota.
The HRA paid $500.00 earnest money and will pay $24,500.00 on the closing date. The remaining
balance of $50,000.00 will be on a Contract for Deed at 10% interest rate for 4.5 years. The HRA has the
right of prepayment privileges, without penalty, on the contract for deed payment schedule.
(As Modified September 26, 1988)
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
A purchase agreement has been executed between Alvin and Shirley Jones, Jones Manufacturing
Company, (the "Seller") and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Buyer") for $57,000,
inclusive of moving and relocation expenses ($5,000) for the property located 110 North Locust,
Monticello, Minnesota. The HRA released earnest money of $10,000 with the remaining balance of
$47,000 due at closing date, on or before March I, 1989. Earnest money was a debit to the HRA General
Fund.
A purchase agreement has been executed between Joseph and Clarice O'Connor, Monti Truck Repair,
(the "Seller") and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Buyer") for $55,000, inclusive of
moving and relocation expenses ($5,000) for raw land located at 247 East Broadway, Monticello,
Minnesota. The HRA released earnest money of $10,000 with $40,000 due at closing date, on or before
March I, 1989 and the remaining balance of $5,000 due upon completion of demolition no later than
April I, 1989. Earnest money was a debit to the BRA General Fund.
A purchase agreement has been executed between Ervin and Donna Stelton, Stelton Laundromat, (the
"Seller") and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Buyer") for $65,000, inclusive of moving
and relocation expenses ($5,000) for the property located at 237 West Broadway, Monticello, Minnesota.
The BRA released earnest money of $10,000 with the remaining balance of $55,000 due at closing date,
on or before March I, 1989. Earnest money was a debit to the HRA General Fund.
The HRA proposes to demolish and remove the blighted structures at 110 North Locust and 237 West
Broadway, Monticello, Minnesota, in the spring of 1989, thereafter, the HRA will convey the above
properties plus the Old Ford Garage property to developer, Broadway Square Limited Partnership, for
construction of a 28-unit subsidized elderly housing
4
.
.
(As Modified August 24, 1987)
PAYMENT SCHEDULE
AlvIOUNT PRINCIPAL INTEREST PAYMENT DATE
50,000 5,556 2,500 8,056 June 30, 1988
44,444 5,556 2,222 7,778 December 31, 2988
38,888 5,556 1,994 7,550 June 30, 1989
33,332 5,556 1,667 7,223 December 31,1989
27,776 5,556 1,389 6,945 June 30, 1990
22,220 5,556 I,ll I 6,667 December 31, 1990
16,664 5,556 833 6,389 June 30, 1991
11, I 08 5,556 555 6,111 December 31, 1991
5,552 5,552 278 5,830 June 30, 1992
(As Originally Adopted)
The HRA proposes to demolition and remove the blighted structure prior to the end of year 1987; thereby,
provide opportunity for development of a new business.
D. PROPERTY ACQUISITION
(As Originally Adopted)
The City shall acquire all oftbe northerly 50 feet of Lots 8, 9, & 10 in Block 50, O.P.
Property identified for acquisition will be acquired by the Monticello Autbority in order to accomplish
one of the following: (a) remove, prevent or reduce blight, blighting factors, causes of blight or the spread
of blight and deterioration; (b) eliminate unhealthful, unsafe, and unsanitary structures and conditions; (c)
provide impetus for commercial development and rehabilitation; (d) remove incompatible land use and
eliminate obsolete or detrimental uses; (e) assemble land for redevelopment; and (f) carry out clearance
and/or redevelopment to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan.
(As Modified June 13, 2006)
The City or HRA may acquire any parcel within the District, inclnding interior and adjacent street
rights of way. Properties will be acquired by the City or HRA in order to accomplish one or more
of the following: storm sewer improvements, provide land for needed public streets, utilities and
facilities, transfer to private developers in order to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in
this TIF Plan. The City or HRA may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct
purchase from williug sellers iu order to achieve the objectives in this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions
will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related
costs. The City or HRA may also reimburse the developers for costs of land acquisition in lieu of
direction by the HRA or City.
.
5
I
.
.
.
E. DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES COVERED BY AGREEMENT
(As Originally Adopted)
All activities planned are delineated in the development agreement which is attached as Appendix A. To
date, a purchase agreement has been executed between Metcalf and Larson and Capps, the present owner,
and said agreement has been assigned to the HRA.
F. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY IN THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
(As Originally Adopted)
Lots 1,2,3, the northerly. 50 feet and the easterly 3 feet of the southerly 115 feet of Lot 8, Lot 9, and Lot
10, all in Block 50; Lots 1,2,3,4, the westerly 5.5 feet of Lot 5 and the southerly 15 feet of Lot 15, all in
Block 51, City of Monticello.
(As Modified August 24, 1987)
155-010-050010
155-010-05001 I
155-010-050081
N Y,Lots 1,2, & 3, Block 50
S \I, Lots 1,2, & 3, Block 50
Th p r t of Lots 8 & 9 lyg Sly of fol desc Ine, Beg at SEly cor of
Lot lO,the NEly 102.84 ft to a Ine par/w &dist 62 ft SWly as
meas atRlang to NEly lne of Lots 8, 9 & 10, thc NWly39.21 ft
to POB oflne to desc,thc cont sd lne as ext to apt 3 ft Wly of
Ely lne of Lot 8 & th term. Block 50.
155-010-050082
155-010-050100
N 50 ftofLots 8,9, & 10, Block 50
Th prt of Us 9 & lOdes: Beg SEly cor of U 10; thc NEly alg
SEly In 102.84 ft to In par/w & 62 ft SWlyofNEly In; thc NWly
alg sd parln 39.21 ft to In par/w & 6 ftNWlyofSEly In of Lot
9; thc SWly 102.86ft to SWly In of Lot 9. Block 50.
155-010-051010
155-010-051011
Lot I exc Nly 30 ft Block 51
Nly 30 ft of Us 1 & 2 & Nly 30ft ofW 24 ft ofLt 3. Also S 15 f
t ofLt 15. Block 51
155-010-051020 Lt 2 exc Nly 30 ft & Lt 3 exc Nly 30 ft ofW 24 ft & W 7Y,ft
of Lt 4. Block 51
155-010-051040 E 25 y, ft ofLt 4& W 5 y, ft Lt 5, Block 51
155-010-050111 SY, of Lots 11 & 12, Block 50, Original Plat
155-010-051050 Lot 5, Block 51, exc W 5\1, ft (50Mis-92) Original Plat
155-010-051111 Lots 11 & 12, Block 51, exc S 65 ft and exc tr
sesc in Bk 266-795 Original Plat
155-010-051130 Lots 13, 14, & Nly 150 ft of Lot 15, Block 51, Original Plat
(As Modified September 26, 1988)
155-010-050101
NEly 12 ft ofBlk 50 Lot 10 & E 6 ft ofLot 9 ex N 50 ft of Lots
10 & 9 also the portion of Lots 8 & 9 lying Nly afro I des In Beg
6
.
.
.
at SEly cor of Lot 10 th NEly 102.84 ft to In parlw & dist 62 ft
SWly of as meas at rlang to NEly In of Lots 8, 9 & 10th
G. CLASSIFICA TlON OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
(As Originally Adopted)
The tax increment financing district to be established within the area designated as the Central Monticello
Redevelopment Areas is classified as Redevelopment District.
The property to be included in the district is as follows: (by PIN)
a. 155-010-050010 (Hass)
b. 155-010-050011 (Teslow)
c. 155-010-050081 (Metcalf & arson)
d. 155-01 0-050082 (Capps, CD from Lindberg)
e. 155-010-050100 (Metcalf & arson)
f. 155-010-051010 (Monticello Ford)
g. 155-010-051011 (Jones)
h. 155-010-051020 (Monticello Ford)
i. 155-010-051040 (O'Conner)
j 155-010-050101 (City of Monticello)
Of the ten parcels, all but parcel e. are occupied by structures. Five of the eight structures (parcels a, d, f,
h and i) are considered to be structurally substandard, while parcels band g have structures that are both
non-conforming uses and on lots that are too small for their use.
(As Modified September 26, 1988)
k. 155-010-050111 (Hollenbeck)
I. 155-010-051050 (Stelton)
m. 155-010-051111 (Gustafson)
n. 155-010-051130 (River Park View)
(As Originally Adopted)
This proposal has been found to be in the public interest because it will eliminate blight and non-
conforming use, create use for a vacant lot, provide temporary construction employment, and generate
other improvements within the district. Because this district meets the requirements of MS 273.73,
Subdivision 10, it shall be classified as a Redevelopment District.
H. ESTIMA TE OF COSTS
The estimate of public costs associated with this project, and to be recovered by tax increment financing
are as follows:
7
. (As Originally Adopted)
Land Acquisition $33,000.00
Assessments '84 & beyond 535.00
Site Preparation 5,000.00
$38,535.00
Legal, Contingency,
Administration (8%) 3.082.80
Subtotal $41,617.80
Less up fro n t payment (l0.000.00)
Total HRA Cost *$31.617.80
*Rounded off to $32,000.00
(As Modified August 24, 1987)
BUDGET
Property Acquisition $75,000
Demolition Cost 13,000
Administration Cost 2.000
TOTAL PROJECT COST $90,000
Less payment on purchase agreement 25,000
Less Demolition cost 13,000
. Less Administration cost 2.000
HRA General Fund 40.000
Contract for deed $50,000
(As Modified September 26,1988)
BUDGET
Jones Acquisition
Property $52,000
Moving and relocation expo 5,000
demolition 5,000
O'Connor Acquisition
Property (raw land) $50,000
Moving and relocation expo 5,000
Stelton Acquisition
Property $60,000
Moving and relocation exp 5,000
demolition 5,000
Old Ford Garage (recover costs)
Contract for deed (payoff) $50,000
Interest paid (6/88, 12/88,6/89) 6,716
. Demolition 6,500
Administrative 2,000
Assessments 980
Down payment 25,000
8
.
.
.
Modification #3 Administrative
Bond Discount
Plan modification
Bond issuance
Capitalized interest (24 mos)
TOTAL PROJECT COST
Less FmHA
Less Bond issuance
REMAINING BALANCE
10,954
11,250
2,500
12,000
48,100
$363,000
58,000
260,000
45,000
(As Modified January 22, 1996)
The budgets for the estimated public costs for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos 1-1,1-2,1-3,1-4,]-
5,]-6, ]-7,]-8,1-9,1-10,1-11 ,1-12,1-13,1-14,]-15,1-16,1-] 7,1-18 and 1-19 are hereby modified as follows:
For various land acquisition activities and redevelopment and revitalization studies in the Redeve]opment
Project the current expected costs include:
Land Acquisition
Demolition/Relocation
Contingency
Subtotal
Administration
Tota]
$500,000.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
900,000.00
90,000.00
$990,000.00
Subject to restrictions as applicable to each individual tax increment financing district pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 to 469.176 (including limitations as to the type of development that
may be assisted and geographic boundaries within which increment may be spent), tax increment from
any existing and future tax increment financing district may be used to pay public costs. This budget is in
addition to existing public cost budgets for each tax increment financing district. Interest on any bonds or
other obligations incurred are also to be paid from increment in addition to the line items listed in the
budget above.
(As Modified June 24, 1996)
The budgets for the estimated public costs for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos ]-1,]-2,1-3,1-4,1-
5,1-6,1-7,1-8,1-9,1-10,1-11,1-12,]-13,1-14,1-]5,1-16,1-17,1-18 and ]-19 are hereby modified as follows:
For various land acquisition activities and redevelopment and revitalization studies in the Redeve]opment
Project the current expected costs include:
Land Acquisition
Site Preparation
Demo]ition/Re]ocation
Public Improvements
Subtotal
Administration
Total
$ 900,000.00
400,000.00
300,000.00
900.000.00
2,500.000.00
250.000.00
$2,750,000,00
Subj ect to restrictions as applicable to each individual tax increment financing district pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 to 469.176 (inc]uding limitations as to the type of development that
may be assisted and geographic boundaries within which increment may be spent), tax increment from
9
10
.
any existing and future tax increment financing district may be used to pay public costs. This budget is in
addition to existing public cost budgets for each tax increment financing district. Interest on any bonds or
other obligations incurred are also to be paid from increment in addition to the line items listed in the
budget above.
(As Modified June 13, 2006)
The City and HRA has determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project for
certain costs. To facilitate the development or redevelopment or property in and around District
No. 1-2, this Plan authorizes the use of tax incremeut financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible
expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with District No. 1-2 is outlined
in the following table.
USES OF FUNDS
Land/Buildin s
Site 1m rovements
Administrative
Bond Interest
Loan Interest
Other Pro. ect Area 1m rovements
346,515
120,000
50,000
350,531
201,088
175,000
.
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
Bond Princi al
Loan Princi al
Transfers Out
1,243,134
260,000
72,000
13 0,000
The budget above is organized according the Office of the State Auditor reporting forms. Pursuant
to MN Statute 469.175 Sub 1 (5), it is estimated that the cost of improvemeuts, includiug
administrative expenses which will be paid or financed with tax increments, will equal $1,243,134.
It is estimated that the cost of improvements, including financing which will be paid for with tax
increment will equal $1,705,134 as is presented in the budget on the previous page.
Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories by modification
to the Plan through City Conncil and HRA resolution. The cost of all activities to be considered for
tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the bndget above pursuant to
applicable statutory requirements.
The City or HRA reserves the right to use other sources of revenue legally applicable to the City or
HRA and to the Plan, including, but not limited to, special assessments, general property taxes,
state aid for road maintenance and construction, proceeds from the sale of land, other
contributions from developer and investment income, to pay for the estimated public costs.
.
The City or HRA reserves the right to incur bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness as a result
of the Plan. As presently proposed, the projects will be financed through bonded debt. Additional
indebtedness may be reqnired to finance other authorized activities. The total principal amount of
bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness related to the use of tax increment financing will not
exceed $260,000 without a modification to the Plan pursuant to applicable statutes.
This provision does not obligate the City or HRA to incur debt. The City or HRA will issue bonds
or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City or
HRA. The City or HRA may also finance the activities to be undertaken pursuant to the Plan
.
.
through loans from funds of the City or HRA or to reimburse the developer on a "pay-as-you-go"
basis for eligible costs paid for by a developer.
I. ESTlMA TE OF INDEBTEDNESS
(As Originally Adopted)
The HRA, by action taken at a special meeting held on September 13, 1983, authorized a private
placement of tax exempt securities in the amount of $32,000.00. The BRA intends to retire this debt over
a period of 12 years. The interest rate on this issue is estimated to be 9.5%.
(As Modified August 24, 1987)
An estimate of the maximum amount of bonded indebtedness is expected to be $90,000.00. The estimated
annual tax increment generated from the elderly home ($17,300.00) will be applied to the contract for
deed payments (estimated average annual debt service is $14,000.00). Upon full payment of the contract
for deed, the tax increment from the elderly home will replenish the BRA General Fund for expenses
incurred. Debt retirement to be completed before the duration of Redevelopment District #2. Bonded
indebtedness of $90,000 is an addition to the original budget.
(As Modified September 26, 1988
An estimate of the maximum amount of bonded indebtedness is expected to be $260,000, estimated
annual debt service of $30,193.80. The maximum term of the issue is 18 years, and the interest rate is
expected to be 9.25 percent. The capitalized interest amount for approximately 24 months is estimated to
be $48,100. The difference between the project cost ($363,000), the bond indebtedness ($260,000), and
the Farmers Home Administration Funding ($58,000) is $45,000. Bond sale Spring of 1989.
J. SOURCE OF REVENUE
(As Originally Adopted)
The primary source of revenue to be used to retire the bond issue will be tax increments generated as a
result ofthe development. The other source of income will be the proceeds for the conveyance of the land
from the HRA t 0 the developers. In any given year that the tax increment is not sufficient to retire the
debt, the developers will issue directly to the HRA an amount equal to the shortfall.
(As Modified August 24, 1987)
The primary source ofrevenue to be used to retire the bond indebtedness (contract for deed) will be tax
increments generated from the River Park View Elderly Project, a development completed in 1986 within
Tax Increment District #2. The other initial source of revenue will be from BRA General Funds.
(As Modified September 26,1988)
.
The three sources of revenue used to finance public costs associated with the public development projects
in the redevelopment project are $58,000 Farmers Home Administration Funding, $45,000 Monticello
Housing and Redevelopment Authority 1989 Tax Levy, and the tax increment generated as a result of the
taxation of the land and building expansion in the tax increment financing redevelopment district. Tax
11
~
.
.
.
increment financing refers to a funding technique that utilizes increases in assessed valuation and the
property taxes attributed to new development to finance, or assist in the financing of public development
costs.
The improvements to the land acquired by the Broadway Square Limited Partnership and the previous
improvements of Redevelopment District #2 are expected to generate an average annual tax increment of
$36,084.81 payable in year 199\. The estimated annual tax increment is sufficient to retire the annual
bond debt service of $30,193.80 plus Metcalf and Larson Securities annual debt service of $4,285.00.
Duration of the District Life is 2010.
(As Modified June 13, 2006
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Tax Increment 990,000
Interest 132,134
Market Value Credit 10,000
Salesllease nroceeds 130,000
Developer navment 11,000
PROJECT REVENUES 1,273,134
Bond Proceeds 260,000
Loan Proceeds 72,000
Transfers In 100,000
K. ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE
(As Origina\1y Adopted)
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 273.74, Subdivision I, and 273.76, Subdivision 1, the Original Assessed
Value (OA V) for the Montice\1o District #2 is based on the sum of a\1 ten parcels, Original Assessed
Values, provided by the County Assessor in 1983. This value is $80,863.00. Individual parcel assessed
values are as fo\1ows:
(As Origina\1y Adopted)
155-010-050010
155-010-050011
155-010-050081
155-010-050082
155-010-050100
155-010-051010
155-010-051011
155-010-051020
155-010-051040
155-010-050101
3,077
9,860
13,574
7,616
2,920
3,760
12,070
17,974
6,630
~
77,481
12
.
(As Modified August 24, 1987)
155-010-050010
155-010-050011
155-010-050081
155-010-050082
155-010-050100
155-010-051010
155-010-051011
155-010-051020
155-010-051040
155-010-050111
155-010-051050
155-010-051111
155-010-051130
o
9,860
13,574
7,616
2,920
3,760
12,070
17 ,974
6,630
8,960
10,276
6,277
exempt
(As Modified September 26, 1988)
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.175, Subdivision I, and 469.177, Subdivision 1, the Original Assessed
Value as modified for the Redevelopment District #2 and certified by the County Auditor of Wright
County on the 2nd day of January, 1988. This value is a total of $87,783.00. Individual parcel assessed
values are as follows:
.
PARCEL
155-010-050010
155-010-050011
155-010-050081
155-010-050100
155-010-050101
155-010-050111
155-010-051010
155-010-051011
155-010-051020
155-010-051040
155-010-051050
155-010-051111
155-010-051130
ASSESSED VALUE
EXEMPT
$9,680
$13,574
$10,536
EXEMPT
$8,960
EXEMPT
$12,070
EXEMPT
$6,630
$10,276
$6,277
$9,600
(As Originally Adopted)
.
Each year the Office of the County Auditor will measure the amount of increase or decrease in the total
assessed value of the tax increment Redevelopment District to calculate the tax increment payable to the
Monticello HRA. Each year the County Auditor shall also add to the original assessed value of the
Redevelopment District an amount equal to the original assessed value for the preceding year multiplied
by the average increase in the assessed valuation of all property included in the redevelopment District
during the five years prior to district certification . In any year in which there is an increase in total
assessed valuation in the tax increment Redevelopment District above the annual percentage increase, a
tax increment will be payable. In any year in which the total assessed valuation in the tax increment
Redevelopment District is less than the original assessed value, no assessed valuation will be captured and
no tax increment will be payable. The County Auditor shall certify in each year after the date the original
assessed value was certified, the amount the OA V has increased or decreased as a result of any of the
following:
13
-
.
.
.
I) Change in tax exempt status of property;
2) Alteration of the geographic boundaries of the district;
3) Change due to stipulations, adjustments, negotiated or court ordered abatements.
L. ESTlMA TED CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE
(As Originally Adopted)
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 273.74, Subdivision I and 273.76, Subdivision 2, the estimated Captured
Assessed Value (CA V) of the tax increment Redevelopment District will be $50,480.00. Changes in
assessed values are shown in Exhibit A. The City of Monticello requests 100% of the available increase in
assessed value commencing in 1984 for taxes payable in 1985 be captured for repayment of debt and
current expenditures.
(As Modified September 26, 1988)
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.175, Subdivision I, and 469.177, Subdivision 2, the estimated
Captured Assessed Value (CA V) of the tax increment Redevelopment District will be $369,138.00.
Changes in assessed values are shown in Exhibit A. The City of Monticello requests 100% of the
available increase in assessed value commencing in 1990 for taxes payable in 1991 be captured for
repayment of debt and current expenditures.
M. DURA TlON OF THE DISTRICT
(As Originally Adopted)
The City of Monticello expects to terminate the Monticello Tax Increment Redevelopment District #2 on
January 2, 2010. The 25 year duration of the district is based on the ability of the City to collect tax
increments for 25 years commencing in 1985 and ending in 2010.
(As Modified June 13, 2006)
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Snbdivision 1, and Section 469.176 Subdivision 1,
the duration of Tax Increment Financing District 1-2 must be indicated within the Plan. Pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, section 469.176 Subdivision 1 (b), the duration of Tax Increment Financing
District #1-2 will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment by the city. The date of
receipt by the City of Monticello of the first tax increment was July, 1985. Thus it is estimated that
the Tax Increment Financing District, including any modifications of the Plan for subsequent
phases or other changes, would terminate after 2010, or when the Plan is satisfied. The City
reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date.
N. IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS
(As Originally Adopted)
It is anticipated that $4,269 in tax increment will be captured annually as a result of the proposed
improvement during the first 12 years of the District's 25 years.
14
-
.
.
For taxes payable in 1983, the City of Monticello comprised 24.8% of the mill rate (21.0), School District
#882 comprised 42.8% of the mill rate (36.2), and Wright County comprised 28.3% of the mill levy
(23.9). The Monticello-Big Lake Hospital District made up the final 4.1% with a mill rate of (3.4). A mill
rate of 84.5 mills has been used throughout the debt retirement schedule used in this tax increment
financing plan. Applying the appropriate percentage of the total mill rate levied by each taxing
jurisdiction to the projected mill rate and the annual tax increment of $4,269 reveals the annual forfeit of
tax dollars by each taxing jurisdiction.
The amount of tax dollars foregone by each taxing jurisdiction is listed on the table below:
TABLE I
Percent of tax increment attributable to taxing jurisdictions
Tax Jurisdiction Estimated Mills Percent Annual Tax Inc.
City of Monticello 21.0 24.8 1,059
School District #882 36.2 42.8 1,827
Wright County 23.9 28.3 1,208
Hospital District 3.4 4.1 175
84.5 100.0 4,269
The following table represents the additional mills that would have to be levied by each taxing
jurisdiction to compensate for the tax dollars captured as tax increments. The tax increments derived from
the project alluded to in the tax increment economic development district would not be available to any of
the taxing jurisdictions were it not for the public intervention by the City of Monticello. Although the
increases in assessed value due to the economic development plan will not be available to the other
jurisdictions for the application of their mil1 levy for the duration of the tax increment financing district
this new assessed value will eventually be applied to all jurisdictions assessed valuation and could
conceivably permit a mill levy decrease. If it is assumed that the captured assessed value would be
available for each taxing jurisdiction the amount of tax dollars, represented as tax increments, which
would not be received by the other jurisdictions can be computed. This computation is facilitated
by estimating how much the mill levy for property outside of the tax increment financing district would
have to be increased to raise the same amount of tax dollars in each jurisdiction had the project occurred
without the assistance of the City of Monticello.
TABLE II
Impact on taxing jurisdictions if development occurred without public assistance
Payable 83 Assessed Value Required Mills Annual Tax
Tax Jurisdiction Increment
City of Monticello 58,492,537 .0177 1,059
School District #882 79,049,159 .0226 1,827
Wright County 340,696,792 .0347 1,208
Hospital District 92,564,703 .00185 175
4,269
.
All assessed values exclude the amount of assessed valuation already found in tax increment financing
districts in other municipalities in Wright County.
15
~
.
.
.
(As Modified September 26,1988)
The impact of the loss of tax dollars represented as tax increments is estimated below for each taxing
jurisdiction. This estimate is based on the existing redevelopment proposals and does not include the
possible tax increments derived from other future developments, mill changes, or inflation factors.
Tax Increment Finance District 1/2/88 Total
Total Assessed Value
$87,022
LATEST ASSESSED VALUE OF EACH GOVERNMENT BODY:
% of District
to Total
Wright County
Scho01rhstrict#882
City of Monticello
Other
$407,743,709
$140,784,433
$114,339,670
$190,334,664
.021
.061
.076
.045
Considering all the districts, it can be seen from the above that the school, city, and county districts will
have over 99% of each respective district available for normal growth of tax base or valuation. Applying
the percentage of the total mill rate in 1988 levied by each taxing jurisdiction to the projected mill rate
and the estimated tax increment received reveals the annual loss of tax dollars by each taxing jurisdiction
as listed in the table below assuming development would occur without public assistance.
The modified finance plan indicates we anticipate a tax increment at build out as follows:
Captured Assessed Valuation
Estimated Tax Increment
Received
$36,084
Tax Increment Finance District
$369,138
Based on the current mill rate, the estimated taxes received would be as follows for the taxing bodies:
Mills Percent Tax Increment
City 15.932 16.28 5,874
Wright County 22.728 23.22 8,379
School District #882 55.069 56.26 20,301
Hospital District 4.147 4.24 1,530
Total 97.876 100.00 36,084
The following table represents the additional mills that would have to be levied to compensate for the loss
of tax dollars in estimated tax increments for each taxing jurisdiction. The tax increments derived from
the total Redevelopment District #2 improvements alluded to in the tax increment district would not be
available to any of the taxing jurisdictions were it not for public intervention by the City. Although the
increases in assessed value due to development will not be available for the application of the mill levy
for the duration of the tax increment fmancing district, this new assessed value could eventually permit a
mill levy decrease. If it could be assumed that the captured assessed value was available for each taxing
jurisdiction, the non-receipt of tax dollars represented as tax increments may be determined. This
determination is facilitated by estimating how much the mill levy for property outside of the tax
increment financing district would have to be increased to raise the same amount of tax dollars in each
taxing jurisdiction that would be available if the projects occurred without the assistance of the City.
16
.
.
.
Wright County
School District #882
City of Monticello
Hospital District
Adiusted' Assessed Value
$407,656,687
$140,687,411
$114,252,648
$190,247,642
Reouired Mills
.02
.14
.05
.00
Tax Increment
8,379
20,301
5,874
1,530
, Tax Increment District assessed valuation subtracted
(As Modified June 13, 2006)
The City or HRA does not propose to add any land to District No. 1-2 nor does it anticipate
additional development at this time which will result in additional tax capacity being captured
within District No. 1-2. Since no new land is being added to District No. 1-2 and there is no
additional development expected at this time which will resnlt in additional captured tax capacity,
the City and HRA do not believe this modification will have any fiscal impact on any other taxing
jurisdictions The following table shows the comparison of captured tax capacity from the original
plan estimate as stated above to the captured tax capacity for taxes payable 2006.
ImDact on Tax Base
2005/2006 Tntal Net Captured Tax Percent ofCTC to
Tax Capacity Capacity fCTe) Entitv Total
Wril!:ht Conntv 106,178,099 39,415 .0372%
I.S.D No. 882 20,630,250 39,415 .1911 %
City of Monticello 13,228,292 39,415 .2980%
ImDact on Tax Rates
2005/2006 Potential
Extension Rates Percent of Total fCTe) Taxes
Wril!ht Cou~tv 0.325670 29.53% 39,415 12,836
I.S.D No. 882 0.243720 22.10% 39,415 9,606
citY of Monticello 0.510280 46.26% 39,415 20,113
Other 0.023300 2.11% 39,415 918
Total 1.102970 100.00% 43,473
O. MODtFtCA TtON TO TAX INCREMENT PLAN
(As Originally Adopted)
In accordance with Section 273.74, Subdivision 4 of the Tax Increment Financing Act, the geographic
area of the project or tax increment financing district, increase in the amount of bonded indebtedness to be
incurred, including a determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not part of the
original plan, or to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized, increase in
the portion of the captured assessed value to be retained by the City, increase in total estimated tax
increment expenditures or designation of additional property to be acquired by the authority shall be
approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval upon
the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original plan.
The geographic area of the Monticello Tax Increment Financing District #2 may be reduced, but shall not
be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of original assessed value by the office of
the County Auditor. The Monticello Tax Increment Financing District #2 may therefore be expanded until
1988.
17
.
.
P. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
(As Originally Adopted)
In accordance with M.S. 273.73, Subd. 13 and 273.75, Subd. 3, the administrative expenses means all
expenditures of an authority other than amounts paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to
contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services,
directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the district, relocation benefits
paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the district or amounts used to
pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to M.S. 237.77.
Administrative expenses include amounts paid for services provided by bond council, fiscal consultants
and planning, economic, or legal consultants. No tax increment shall be used to pay any administrative
expenses for a project which exceeds 10% of the total tax increment expenditures authorized by the tax
increment financing plan or the total tax increment expenditures for the project, whichever is less.
Q. LIMITATION ON DURA nON OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS
(As Originally Adopted)
.
Pursuant to M.S. 273.75, Subd. I, "No tax increment shall be paid to an authority three years from the
date of certification by the County Auditor unless within the three year period (l)bonds have been issued
pursuant to Section 273.77 or in aid of a project pursuant to any other law, except revenue bonds issued
pursuant to Chapter 474, prior to the effective date of the act: or (2) the authority has acquired property
within the district: (3) the authority has constructed or caused to be constructed public improvements
within the district ..." The City of Monticello must therefore acquire the property so stipulated in this plan
by October I, 1986, or the office of the County Auditor may dissolve the tax increment district.
R. LIMITATION ON QUALlFICA TION OF PROPERTY IN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT
NOT SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT
(As Originally Adopted)
Subd. 6. Limitation on increment.
.
If, after four years from the date of certification of the original assessed value of the tax increment
financing district pursuant to Section 273.76, no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or
other site preparation, including improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility
service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment
financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment
financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel, and the original assessed value
of that parcel shall be excluded from the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district. If
the authority of the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation
or other site preparation on that parcel including improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in
accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the
activity has commenced, and the county auditor shall certify the assessed value thereof as most recently
certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original assessed value of the tax increment
financing district. For purposes of this subdivision "parcel" means a tract or plat of land established prior
to the certification of the district as a single unit for purposes of assessment.
18
.
.
.
S. LIMIT A T/ON ON THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT
(As Originally Adopted)
All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the tax increment financing plan.
The revenue shall be used to finance or otherwise pay the capital and administrative cost of a
development district pursuant to tI.S. 472A. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent existing levy
limit law. No revenue derived from tax increment shall be used for the construction or renovation of a
municipally owned building used primarily and regularly for conducting. the business of the municipality;
this provision shall not prohibit the use of revenue derived from tax increments for the construction or
renovation of a parking structure, a commons area used as a public park or a facility used for social,
recreational, or conference purposes and not primarily for conducting the business of the municipality.
T. NOT/FICA TION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
(As Originally Adopted)
Pursuant to M.S. 273.76, Subd. 4, the City has reviewed and searched the property to be included in the
tax increment economic development district and found that no building permit has been issued during
the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the tax increment financing plan by the County. If the
building permit had been issued within the 18 month period preceding approval of the tax increment
financing plan by the City, the County Auditor shall increase the original assessed value of the district by
the assessed valuation of the improvements for which the building permit was issued, excluding the
assessed valuation of improvements for which a building permit was issued during the 3 month period
immediately preceding said approval ofthe tax increment financing plan, as certified by the assessor.
U. EXCESS TAX INCREMENTS
(As Originally Adopted)
Pursuant to M.S. 273.75, Subd. 2 of the Tax Increment Financing Act, in any year in which the tax
increment exceeds the amount necessary to pay the costs authorized by the tax increment plan, including
the amount necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in M.S. 475.61, Subd. 3, the City shall use the
excess amount in order selected by the Authority to:
1. Prepay outstanding Bonds;
2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment, Jherefore;
3. Pay into an escrow accouot dedicated to the payment of such Bond;
4. Repay any loans including interest on these loans; or
5. Return the excess amouot to the Couoty for pro rata distribution to the affected taxing
jurisdictions.
(As Modified June 13,2006)
Excess iucrements, as defined in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, shall be used only to do one or more
of the following:
1. Prepay any outstanding bonds;
2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds;
3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or
19
. 4. Return the excess to the County Anditor for redistribution to the respective taxing
jurisdictions in proportion to their local tax rates.
The City or HRA must spend or retnrn the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine
months after the end of the year. In addition, the City may, snbject to the limitations set forth
herein, choose to modify the Plan in order to finance additional pnblic costs in the District
V. REQUIREMENT FOR AGREEMENTS WITH THE DEVELOPER
(As Originally Adopted)
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 5, no more than twenty-five percent (25%)
by acreage of the property (25%) to be acquired by the authority in the redevelopment district shall be
oMled by the Authority as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to Section
273.77 without the Authority having prior to acquisition in excess of twenty-five percent (25%) of the
acreage, concluded an agreement for the development of the property acquired and which provides
recourse for the Authority.
(As Originally Adopted)
W. ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS
.
Pursuant to M.S. 273.76, Subd. 8, the City may, upon entering into a development agreement, enter into
an agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within the tax increment financing district
which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of
the tax increment Redevelopment District. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the County
Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements constructed, review the
market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed, and so
long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears in the judgment of the
assessor to be a reasonable estimate, the assessor may certify the minimum market value agreement.
X. ADMIINISTRA nON AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TAX INCREMENT ACCOUNT
(As Originally Adopted)
Administration of the tax increment financing economic development district will be handled by the City
of Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the office of the City Administrator. The tax
increment received as a result of increases in the assessed value of the tax increment economic
development district will be maintained in a special account separate from all other municipal accounts
and expended only upon sanctioned municipal activities identified in the finance plan as amended.
Y. ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS
.
(As Originally Adopted)
Pursuant to M.S. 273.74, Subd. 5, an authority must file an annual disclosure report for all tax increment
financing districts. The report shall be filed with the school board, county board, and the Minnesota
Department of Energy, Planning and Development. The report shall include the following information:
20
21
.
1. The amount and source of revenue in the account;
2. The amount and purposes of expenditures from the account;
3. The amount of any pledge of revenues, including principal and interest on any
outstanding indebtedness;
4. The original assessed value of the districts;
5. The captured assessed value retained by the authority;
6. The captured assessed value shared with other taxing districts;
7. The tax increment received.
The annual disclosure report is designed to be a two-way medium of information dissemination for both
the office of the County Auditor and the City Council. Should the auditor request additional information
from the City regarding the tax increment financing activities, such information should be requested prior
to submission of the annual disclosure report by the City. Similarly, the City Council may utilize the
annual disclosure report as a means for requesting information from the office of the County Auditor.
Additionally, the authority must annually publish a statement in a newspaper of general circulation in the
municipality showing the tax increment received and expended in that year, the original assessed value,
the captured assessed value, amount of outstanding indebtedness, and any additional information the
authority may deem necessary.
(As Modified June 13, 2006)
.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5, 6, and 6b the HRA must undertake financial reporting
for all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board, County
Auditor and School Board on or before August 1 of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also
provides that an annual statement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the
City on or before Augnst 15.
If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information reqnired by
M.S., Section 469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the OSA will direct the County Auditor to withhold the
distribution oftax increment from the District.
Z. ASSUMPTIONS
(As Originally Adopted)
It was necessary in the preparation of this plan to make certain assumptions regarding income, costs, and
timing of the economic development district. These assumptions are listed below:
1. INCOME
a. Original Market and Assessed Valuation of Tax Increment District #2 (provided by office of
County Assessor).
Market Value
Assessed Value
230,300
77,481
.
b. New Market and Assessed Valuation of Tax Increment District #2 (provided by office of City
Assessor).
Market Value
Assessed Value
Less OA V
Total CAY
Mill Rate
333,364
127,961
77,481
50,480
x.084566
.
.
.
Annual Tax Increment 4,269
(As Modified September 26, 1988)
It was necessary in the preparation of this plan to make certain assumptions regarding income, costs, and
timing of the redevelopment district. These assumptions are listed below:
1. Income
a. Original Market and Assessed Valuation of Tax Increment District #2 (provided by office of
County Assessor).
Market Value (1988) $1,464,600
Assessed Value (1988) $346,474
b. New Market and Assessed Valuation of Tax Increment District #2 (provided by office of the
City and County Assessor).
Market Value
Assessed Value
Less OAV
Total CA V
Less Credits
1988 Mill Rate
Annual Tax Increment $
$1,967,247.00'
$ 456,160.00
$ 87,022.00**
$ 369,138.00
$ 456.13
.097876
36,084.81
Redevelopment District #22 Annual Debt Service
Metcalf and Larson Securities
1989 Bond Issuance
Total Annual Debt Service
$ 4,285.00
$30.193.80
$34,478.80
· Market Value decrease for subsidized apartment units from $27,500 to $24,500.
.. 28,215 sq ft considered vacant land at time of land conveyance from HRA to developer. (after
demolition)
(As Modified June 13, 2006)
The City of Monticello is modifying District No. 1-2 to provide for development and redevelopment
to occur in the City. The modification to Tax Increment Financing Plan for District No. 1-2 was
prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, RosevUle, Minnesota 55113-1105,
telephone (651) 697-8500.
22
.
fa
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
for the modification of
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-24
(a qualified housing district)
within
CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY
ST ATE OF MINNESOTA
Public Hearing: August 24,1998
Adopted: August 24, 1998
Modification #1 Public Hearing: June 12,2006
Modification #1 Adopted:
Prepared by:
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INe.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Rosevil1e, Minnesota 55113-1105
Phone: (651) 697-8500
Fax: (651) 697-8555
E-mail: info@eh1ers-inc.com
Web Site: www.eh1ers-inc.com
.
.
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(for reference purposes only)
SECTION I - MODIFlCA TION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1. . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . .. 1-1
Foreword.. .' . ... .... ... . . .... . . .. . . . ..' ..... . ... .. .. . .. ........ ... ..... . ..... 1-1
SECTION II - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-24 . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-1
Subsection 2-l.F oreword ......................................................... 2-1
Subsection 2-2.statutory Authority. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-1
Subsection 2-3.Statement of Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-1
Subsection 2-4.Redeve10pment Plan Overview ........................................ 2-1
Subsection 2-5.Lega1 Description of Property in Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-24 ..... 2-2
Subsection 2-6.C1assification of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-2
Subsection 2-7.0rigina1 Tax Capacity and Tax Rate .................................... 2-3
Subsection 2-8.Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Va1uelIncrement ..................... 2-4
Subsection 2-9.Property To Be Acquired. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-4
Subsection 2-10.Uses of Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-4
Subsection 2-11.Sources of RevenuelBonded Indebtedness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-5
Subsection 2-12.Definition of Tax Increment Revenues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. 2-6
Subsection 2-13.Duration of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-7
Subsection 2-14.Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions .......................... 2-7
Subsection 2-15.Modifications to Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-8
Subsection 2-16.Administrative Expenses ............................................ 2-9
Subsection 2-17 .Limitation of Increment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-10
Subsection 2-18.Use of Tax Increment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-11
Subsection 2-19.Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ............................ 2-11
Subsection 2-20.Excess Tax Increments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-12
Subsection 2-21.Requirements for Agreements with the Developer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-12
Subsection 2-22.Assessment Agreements. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-12
Subsection 2-23 .Administration of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-13
Subsection 2-24.Financial Reporting Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-13
Subsection 2-25.Municipa1 Approval and Public Purpose ............................... 2-15
Subsection 2-26.0ther Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment. . . . . . .. . . . ... . . .. . . . . . . .. 2-16
Subsection 2-27.Income Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . ... . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. 2-16
Subsection 2-28.County Road Costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. 2-16
Subsection 2-29.Economic Development and Job Creation .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-16
Subsection 2-30.Summary ....................................................... 2-17
APPENDIX A
BOUNDARY MAPS OF CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1 AND
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-I
APPENDIX B
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-24.. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1
.
.
.
.
APPENDIX C
ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DlSTRlCTNO. 1-24 ..... C-I
.
.
.
.
SECTION I - MOD/FICA T10N TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1
Foreword
The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello
Redevelopment Project No. I. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set
forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I. Generally, the
substantive changes include the modification of Tax Increment Financing District 1-24.
For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project
No.1 is recommended. !tis available from the City Administrator at the City of Monticello. Otherrelevant
information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts
located within Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1.
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1
I-I
.
SECT/ON 11- TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-24
Subsection 2-1.
Foreword
The City of Monticello ("City"), the Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), staff and
consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of Tax Increment Financing
DistrictNo. 1-24 ("District No. 1-24"), a qualified housing tax increment financing district, located in Central
Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I.
Subsection 2-2. Statutorv Authority
Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or
redevelopment to occur. To this end, the City and HRA have certain statutory powers pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes ("M.S."), Sections 469.001 through 469.047, inclusive, as amended, and M.S.,
Sections 469.174 through 469.179, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF
Act"), to assist in financing public costs related to this project.
This Section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Plan") for District No. 1-24. Other relevant
information is contained in the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project
No. I.
. Subsection 2-3. Statement of Obiectives
District No. 1-24 currently consists of a portion of one parcel ofland and adjacent and internal rights-of-way.
District No. 1-24 is created to facilitate construction of60 unit independent living senior housing building in
the City of Monticello. Concurrent with the construction of the independent living units will be the
construction of60 units of assisted living units, which will not be included in District No. 1-24. Both facilities
are to be owned by St. Benedict's Center. This plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined
in the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I.
The activities contemplated in the present Modified Redevelopment Plan and the Tax Increment Financing
Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These
activities are anticipated to occur over the life of District No. 1-24 and Central Monticello Redevelopment
Project No.1.
Subsection 2-4. Redevelooment Plan Overview
I. Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within District No. 1-24
may be acquired by the City or HRA and is further described in this Plan.
2. Relocation - Complete relocation services are available pursuant to M.S.,
Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws.
.
3.
Upon approval ofa developer's plan relating to the project and completion
of the necessary legal requirements, the City or HRA may sell to a
developer selected properties that they may acquire within District No. 1-24
or may lease land or facilities to a developer.
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1
2-1
.
.
4.
The City or HRA may perform or provide for some or all necessary
acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and
public streets work within District No. 1-24.
Subsection 2-5. Lel!al Description of Property in Tax Increment Financinl! District No. 1-24
District No. 1-24 encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way identified by the legal description found
in appendix B. Please see the map in Appendix A for further information on the location of District No. 1-24.
Subsection 2-6. Classification of Tax Increment Financinl! District No. 1-24
The City and HRA, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with
MS., Sections 469.174 to 469.179, as amended, inclusive, find that District No. 1-24, to be established, is
a qualified housing district pursuant to MS., Section 469.174, Subd. 11 and MS., Section 273.1399,
Subd. 1 (c) as defined below:
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 11:
.
"Housing district" means a type of tax increment financing district which consists of a project,
or a portion of a project, intended for occupancy, in part, by persons or families of low and
moderate income, as defined in chapter 462A, Title II of the National Housing Act of 1934, the
National Housing Act of 1959. the United States Housing Act of 1937. as amended, Title Vof
the Housing Act of 1949, as amended. any other similar present or future federal, state, or
municipal legislation, or the regulations promulgated under any of those acts. A project does
not qualifY under this subdivision if the fair market value of the improvements which are
constructed for commercial uses or for uses other than low and moderate income housing
consists of more than 20 percent of the total fair market value of the planned improvements
in the development plan or agreement. The fair market value of the improvements may be
determined using the cost of construction, capitalized income, or other appropriate method of
estimating market value.
Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.1399, subd. l(c):
"Qualified Housing District" means a housing district for a residential rental project or
projects in which the only properties receiving assistance from revenues derived form tax
increments from the district meet all of the requirements for a low-income housing credit under
section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1992,
regardless of whether the project actually receives a low-income housing credit.
In meeting the statutory criteria described above, the City and HRA rely on the following facts and findings:
.
District No. 1-24 consists of a portion of one parcel.
The development will consist of 60 units of senior housing.
The market value of non-assisted housing or commercial property will be less than 20% of the total
fair market value ofthe planned improvements.
The development in District No. 1-24 will consist entirely of housing facilities which meet all ofthe .
requirements for a low -income housing credit under section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
.
.
.
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1
2-2
-
.
.
.
Generally, the requirements of Section 42 include rent restrictions and income restrictions, adjusted
for family size for at least 20% or 40% of the tenants. For 1998, the restrictions are as follows
Maximum Rent by Number of Bedrooms
Percentage of Units
I Bedroom
2 Bedrooms
20%
$570
$684
$683
$820
40%
Maximum Income by Family Size
Percentage of Units
I Person
2 People
3 People
20%
$21,300
$25,560
$24,300
$29,160
$27,350
$32,820
40%
Subsection 2-7. Original Tax Capacity aud Tax Rate
Pursuant to MS., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and MS., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax
Capacity (ONTC) as certified for District No. 1-24 is based on the market values placed on the property by
the assessor in 1998 for taxes payable 1999.
Pursuantto MS., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning
in the payment year 1999) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of:
I. change in tax exempt status of property;
2. reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district;
3. change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements;
4. change in the use of the property and classification;
5. change in state law governing class rates; or
6. change in connection with previously issued building permits.
In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity value of District No. 1-24 declines below the ONTC, no
value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the City or HRA.
The original local tax ratefor District No. 1-24 will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 1999. The Original
Tax Capacity and the Original Local Tax Rate for District No. 1-24 appear in the following table.
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1
2-3
.
.
.
$2,500 (Estimate only)
Original Tax Capacity Value
1.18645 (Estimate Only)
Percent Retained by HRA
100%
Original Local Tax Rate
Subsection 2-8. Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/lucrement
Pursuant to MS., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and MS., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated
Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of District No. 1-24, within Central Monticello Redevelopment Project
No.1, upon completion ofthe project, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table
below. The City and HRA request 100 percent ofthe available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its
obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 200 I. The project tax capacity listed
is an estimate of values when the project is completed.
Project Estimated Tax Capacity
upon Completion of Project (PTC)
Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC)
Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTe)
Estimated Annual Tax Increment
47,500
2,500
45,000
(CTC x Local Tax Rate)
$53,390
Subsection 2-9. Property To Be Acquired
The City or HRA may acquire any parcel within DistrictNo. 1-24 including interior and adjacent street rights
of way.
As Modified June 13.2006
The City or HRA may acquire any parcel within the District, including interior and adjacent street
rights of way. Properties will be acquired by the City or HRA in order to accomplish one or more
of the following: storm sewer improvements, provide land for needed public streets, utilities and
facilities, transfer to private developers in order to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth
in this TIF Plan. The City or HRA may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct
purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives in this TIF Plan. Snch acqnisitions
will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related
costs. The City or HRA may also reimburse the developers for costs of land acquisition in lien of
direct acquisition by the HRA or City.
Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds
Currently under consideration for District No. 1-24 is a proposal to facilitate construction of60 unit senior
housing building. The City and HRA has determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I
2-4
.
.
project for certain costs. The HRA has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of
property in and around District No. 1-24. To facilitate the establishment and development orredevelopment
of District No. 1-24, this Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain
eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with District No. 1-24 is outlined
in the following table.
Uses of Funds
Total
Land Acquisition
Site Improvements
Utilities
Interest
Administrative Costs (up to 10%)
$140,000
220,000
170,000
676,500
133,500
TOTAL
$1,340,000
Estimated costs associated with District No. 1-24 are subject to change among categories without
modification of this plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not
exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. The
HRA may expend funds outside of District No. 1-24 boundaries for housing developments that receive or are
eligible to receive low income tax credits under Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code.
.
As Modified June 13, 2006
USES OF FUNDS
LandlBuilding $ 140,000
Site Improvements 220,000
Loan Interest 615,000
Administration 75,000
Other Housing Improvements 890,000
PROJECT COST TOTAL $1,940,000
The above budget is organized according to the Office of the State Auditor reporting forms.
Pursuant to MN Statute 469.175 Sub 1 (5), it is estimated that the cost of improvements, including
administrative expenses which will be paid or financed with tax increments, will equal $1,940,000.
Subsection 2-11.
Sources of RevenuefBonded Indebtedness
.
Land acquisition, site improvement costs, public utilities costs and other costs outlined in the Uses of Funds
will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City or HRA reserves the right
to use other sources of revenue legally applicable to the Modified Redevelopment Plan and the Plan, including,
but not limited to, special assessments, general property taxes, state aid for road maintenance and
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1
2-5
-
.
.
.
construction, proceeds from the sale ofland, other contributions from the developer and investment income,
to pay for the estimated public costs.
The City or HRA reserves the right to incur bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness as a result of the
Plan. As presently proposed, the project will be financed by a pay-as-you-go note. Additional indebtedness
may be required to fmance other authorized activities. The total principal amount of bonded indebtedness or
other indebtedness related to the use of tax increment financing will not exceed $880,000 without a
modification to the Plan pursuant to applicable statutory requirements.
This provision does not obligate the City or HRA to incur debt. The City or HRA will issue bonds or incur
other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The City or HRA
may also finance the activities to be undertaken pursuant to the Plan through loans from funds of the City or
HRA.
The estimated sources of funds for District No. 1-24 are contained in the table below.
Sources of Funds
Total
Tax Increment
Interest
$1,335,000
5,000
TOTAL
$1,340,000
As Modified June 13. 2006
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Tax Increment $1,900,000
Interest 20,000
Down payment/reimbursements/other 20,000
TOTAL $1,940,000
Subsection 2-12.
Definition of Tax Increment Revenues
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment
financing district include all of the following potential revenue sources:
1.
taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed
under M.S., Section 469.177;
the proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, purchased by the
authority with tax increments;
repayments ofloans or other advances made by the authority with tax increments; and
interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments.
2.
3.
4.
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I
2-6
.
Subsection 2-13.
Duration of Tax Increment Financinl! District No. 1-24
Pursuant to MS.. Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1. the duration of District No.
1-24 must be indicated within the Plan. Pursuant to M.s., Section 469.176, Subd. 1(b), the duration of
District No. 1-24 will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment by the HRA. The date of
receipt by the HRA of the first tax increment will be approximately 200 I. Thus, it is estimated that District
No. 1-24, including any modifications ofthe Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate
after 2025, or when the Plan is satisfied. The City or HRA does reserve the right to decertify District No.
1-24 prior to the legally required date.
As Modified June 13.2006
The date of the first tax increment received by the City of Monticello was July 2001. Thus it is
estimated that the Tax Increment Financing District, including any modifications of the Plan for
subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2026, or when the Plan is satisfied.
The City or HRA reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date.
Subsection 2-14.
Estimated Impact on Other Taxinl! Jnrisdictions
.
The estimated impact on other taxingjurisdictions assumes construction which would have occurred without
the creation of District No. 1-24. Ifthe construction is a result of tax increment financing, the impact is $0
to other entities. Notwithstanding, the factthatthe fiscal impact on the other taxing jurisdictions is $0 due to
the fact that the construction would not have occurred without the assistance of the City or HRA, the
following estimated impact of District No. 1-24 would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met:
IMP ACT ON TAX BASE
Wright County
LS.D. No. 882
City of Monticello
1997/1998
Total Net
Tax Capacity
57,211,935
18,427,306
14,381,226
Estimated Captured
Tax Capacity (CTC)
Upon Proiect Completion
45,000
45,000
45,000
Percent of CTC
to Entitv Total
0.0787%
0.2442%
0.3129%
.
IMPACT ON TAX RATES
1997/1998 Percent Potential
Extension Rates of Total CTC Taxes
Wright County 0.308320 25.99% 45,000 13,874
LS.D. No. 882 0.584600 49.27% 45,000 26,307
City of Monticello 0.270010 22.76% 45,000 12,150
Other 0.023520 1.98% 45.000 1.058
Total 1.186450 100.00% 53,390
The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1
2-7
.
used for calculations is the 1997 !Pay 1998 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based
on Pay 1998 figures. District No. 1-24 will be certified under the actual 1998/1 999 rates, which were
unavailable at the time this Plan was prepared.
As Modified June 13, 2006
The City or HRA does not propose to add any land to District No. 1-24 nor does it anticipate
additional development at this time which will resnlt in additional tax capacity being captured within
District No. 1-24. Since no new land is being added to District No. 1-24 and there is no additional
development expected at this time which will result in additional captured tax capacity, the City
and HRA do not believe this modification will have any fiscal impact on any other taxing
jurisdictions. The following table shows the comparison of captured tax capacity from the original
plan estimate as stated above to the captured tax capacity for taxes payable 2006
Impact on Tax Base
I.S.D. No. 882
Ci of Monticello
2005/2006 Total Net
Tax Capacity
106,178,099
20,630,250
13,228,292
Captured Tax
Capacity (CTC)
43,652
43,652
43,652
Percent of CTC
to Entity Total
.0412%
Wright County
.
.2116%
.3300%
Impact on Tax Rates
2005/2006
Extension Percent of Potential
Rates Total (CTC) Taxes
Wright County 0.325670 29.53% 43,652 $14,216
I.S.D. No. 882 0.243720 22.10% 43,652 $10,639
City of Monticello 0.510280 46.26% 43,652 $22,275
Other 0.023300 2.11% 43,652 $1,017
Total 1.102970 $48,147
Subsection 2-15.
Modifications to Tax Increment Financin!! District No. 1-24
.
In accordance with MS., Section 469.175. Subd. 4, any:
1. reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of Central Monticello Redevelopment
Project No. I or District No. 1-24;
2. increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred, including a determination to
capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original plan, or to
increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized;
3. increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the City or HRA;
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. t
2-8
.
4.
5.
increase in total estimated tax increment expenditures; or
designation of additional property to be acquired by the City or HRA,
shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval
of the original plan.
The geographic area of District No. 1-24 may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following
the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county auditor. If a qualified housing district
is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that the addition to the district meets the
criteria of MS, Section 469.179, Subd. 11 and M.S. Section 273.1399, Subd. I(c) must be documented.
The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if(l) the only modification is elimination ofparcel(s) from
Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. 1 or District No. 1-24 and (2) (A) the current net tax capacity
of the parcel(s) eliminated from District No. I -24 equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel( s)
in District No. I-24's original net tax capacity or (B) the HRA agrees that, notwithstanding MS, Section
469.177, Subd. 1, the original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity
of the parcel(s) eliminated from District No. 1-24.
The City or HRA must notifY the County Auditor of any modification that reduces or enlarges the geographic
area of District No. 1-24 or Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1. Modifications to Tax
IncrementFinancingDistrictNo. I -24 in the form ofa budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries
will be recorded in the Plan.
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I
2-9
.
Subsection 2-16.
Administrative Expenses
In accordance with MS, Section 469.174, Subd. 14, and MS, Section 469.176, Subd. 3, administrative
expenses means all expenditures of the City or HRA, other than:
1. amounts paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or others providing
materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected
with the physical development of the real property in the district;
2. relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in
the district; or
3. amounts used to pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued
pursuant to MS., Section 469.178.
Administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants,
and planning or economic development consultants. Tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and
documented administrative expenses for District No. 1-24 up to but notto exceed 10 percent of the total tax
increment expenditures authorized by the tax increment financing plan or the total tax increment expenditures
for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I, whichever is less.
Pursuant to MS., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the county's actual
administrative expenses incurred in connection with District No. 1-24. The county may require payment of
those expenses by February 15 of the year following the year the expenses were incurred.
. Pursuant to M.S, Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the county treasurer shall deduct an amount equal to 0.25
percent of any increment distributed to the City or HRA and the county treasurer shall pay the amount
.
deducted to the state treasurer for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor
for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and
auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing.
Subsection 2-17.
Limitation of Increment
Pursuant to MS.. Section 469.176, Subd. I(a), no tax increment shall be paid to the City or HRA for
District No. 1-24 after three (3) years from the date of certification ofthe Original Net Tax Capacity value
of the taxable property in District No. 1-24 by the County Auditor unless within the three (3) year period:
(a) bonds have been issued pursuant to MS., Section 469.178, or in aid ofa
projectpursuanttoany other law, except revenue bonds issued pursuant to
MS, Sections 469.152 to 469.165, or
(b) the City or HRA has acquired property within District No. 1-24, or
(e) the City or HRA has constructed or caused to be constructed public
improvements within District No. 1-24.
The bonds must be issued, or the City or HRA must acquire property or construct or cause public
improvements to be constructed by approximately August, 200 I.
.
The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and may be
terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow
account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or
redemption date.
Pursuant to MS, Section 469.176, Subd. 6:
.
if, after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the
tax increment financing district pursuant to M.S, Section 469.177, no demolition.
rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified
improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service
including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a
tax increment financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in
accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be
taken from that parcel and the original net tax capacity of that parcel shall be
excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. If
the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition,
rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel including
qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax
increment financing plan, the authority shall certifY to the county auditor that the
activity has commenced and the county auditor shall certifY the net tax capacity thereof
as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net
tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. The county auditor must enforce
the provisions of this subdivision... For purposes of this subdivision, qualified
improvements of a street are limited to (I) construction or opening of a new street, (2)
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1
2.10
.
relocation oj a street, and (3) substantial recons/metion or rebuilding oj an existing
street.
The City or HRA or a property owner must improve parcels within District No. 1-24 by approximately
August, 2002.
Subsection 2-18.
Use of Tax Increment
The City or HRA hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity oftaxable
property located in District No. 1-24 for the following purposes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
. 7.
to pay the principal of and interest on bonds used to finance a project;
to finance, or otherwise pay the capital and administration costs ofthe Central Monticello
Redevelopment Project No. I pursuant to the MS.. Sections 469.124/0 469.134;
to pay for project costs as identified in the budget;
to finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided inMS.. Section 469.176, Subd.
4'
,
to pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to the City or
HRA or for the benefit of Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I by the developer;
to finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance, credit enhancement, or
other security guaranteeing the payment when due of principal and interest on tax increment
bonds or bonds issued pursuant to the Plan or pursuant to MS., Chapter 462C and M.S.,
Sections 469.152 through 469.165, or both; and
to accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and
interest on the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C and
MS., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, or both.
These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other
purposes prohibited by MS., Section 469.176, subd. 4. Revenues derived from tax increment from a
housing district must be used solely to finance the cost of housing projects as defined in M. S., Section
469.174, subd. 11, that also receives ormeetthe requirements forlowincome housing credits under Section
42 ofthe Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The cost of public improvements directly related to the housing
projects and the allocated administrative expenses of the City or HRA may be included in the cost of a
housing project.
Subsection 2-19. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements
The City or HRA shall, after due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County
Auditor or its notice of District No. 1-24 enlargement with a listing of all properties within District No. 1-24
or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months
immediately preceding approval of the Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175. Subd.
3. The County Auditor shall increase the original value of District No. 1-24 by the value of improvements
for which a building permit was issued.
.
Pursuant to MS., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the HRA has reviewed the area to be included in District No.
1-24 and found no parcels for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately
preceding approval of the Plan by the City and HRA.
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. 1
2-11
.
.
.
Subsection 2-20. Excess Tax Increments
Pursuant to MS, Section 469.176, Subd. 2, in any year in which the tax increment exceeds the amount
necessary to pay the costs authorized by the Plan, including the amount necessary to cancel any tax levy as
provided in MS., Section 475.61, Subd. 3, the City or HRA shall use the excess amount to do any of the
following:
I. prepay any outstanding bonds;
2. discharge the pledge of tax increment therefor;
3. pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of such bonds; or
4. return the excess to the County Auditor forredistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions
in proportion to their local tax rates.
As Modified June 13. 2006
The City or HRA must spend or return excess increments under M.S. Section 469.176 Subd 2,
paragraph (c) within nine months after the end of the year.
In addition, the City or HRA may, subjeclto the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify the Plan in order
to finance additional public costs in District No. 1-24 or Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I.
Subsection 2-21. Reauirements for Al!reements with the Developer
The City or HRA will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the
Redevelopment Plan and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the
following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and
electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, siguage system plan, and any
other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the City or HRA to demonstrate the conformance of the
development with city plans and ordinances. The City or HRA may also use the Agreements to address other
issues related to the development.
Pursuant to MS, Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 10 percent, by acreage, of the property to be
acquired in District No. 1-24 as set forth in the Plan shall at any time be owned by the City or HRA as a
result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M.S, Section 469.178, to which tax
increments from property acquired is pledged, without the City or HRA having, prior to acquisition in excess
of I 0 percent ofthe acreage, concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property
acquired and which provides recourse for the City or HRA should the development orredevelopmentnot be
completed.
Subsection 2-22. Assessment Al!reements
Pursuant to MS, Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the City or HRA may enter into an agreement in recordable
form with the developer of property within District No. 1-24 which establishes a minimum market value of
the land and completed improvements for the duration of District No. 1-24. The assessment agreement shall
be presented to the assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements constructed,
review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed
and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears, in the judgment
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I
2-12
.
ofthe assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the assessor may certifY the minimum market value agreement.
Subsection 2-23. Administration of Tax Increment Financinl! District No. 1-24
Administration of District No. 1-24 will be handled by the Executive Director ofthe HRA of the City of
Monticello.
Subsection 2-24. Financial Rellortinl! Requirements
A. Filing with State Auditor, County Auditor, County Board and School Board: Pursuant to M.s., Section
469.175, Subd. 5, the City or HRA must file an annual disclosure report for all tax increment financing
districts, including District No. 1-24. The report shall be filed with the County Board, County Auditor, School
Board, and the State Auditor on or before July 1 (August I beginning forreports to be filed in 1999) of each
year. The report to be filed by the City or HRA shall include the following information:
1.
2.
3.
.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
the amount and source of revenue in the tax increment account;
the amount and purpose of expenditures from the account;
the amount of any pledge of revenues, including principal and interest, on any outstanding
bond indebtedness;
the original net tax capacity of District No. 1-24;
the captured net tax capacity retained by the City or HRA;
the captured net tax capacity shared with other taxing districts;
the tax increment received; and
any additional information necessary to demonstrate compliance with the tax increment
financing plan.
B. Newspaper Statement: M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement shall be
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City showing:
1. the tax increment received and expended in that year,
2. the original net tax capacity,
3. captured net tax capacity,
4. amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness,
5. the amount of District No. I-24's increment paid to other governmental bodies,
6. the amount paid for administrative costs,
7. the sum of increments paid, directly or indirectly, for activities and improvements located
outside of District No. 1-24, and
8. any additional information the City or HRA deems necessary.
C. State Auditor filing for District No. 1-24: Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 6, the City or HRA
must annually submit to the State Auditor, on or before July I (August I beginning for reports to be filed in
1999), a financial report which shall:
.
Monticello HRA
1.
2.
provide for full disclosure of the sources and uses of the public funds in District No. 1-24;
permit comparison and reconciliation with the City and HRA's accounts and financial
reports;
permit auditing of the funds expended on behalf of District No. 1-24 or that is funded in part
3.
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1
2-13
.
4.
or whole through the use of a development account funded with tax increments from other
tax increment districts or with public money; and
be consistent with generally accepted accounting principles.
The financial report must also include the following:
1.
2.
3.
.
4.
the original net tax capacity of District No. 1-24;
the captured net tax capacity of District No. 1-24, including the amount of any captured net
tax capacity shared with other taxing districts;
the amount budgeted under the Plan, and the actual amount expended for, at least, the
following categories (for the reporting period and for the duration of District No. 1-24):
a. acquisition of land and buildings through condemnation or purchase;
b. site improvements or preparation costs;
c. installation of public utilities, parking facilities, streets, roads, sidewalks, or other
similar public improvements;
d. administrative costs, including the allocated cost of the city;
e. public park facilities, facilities for social, recreational, or conference purposes, or
other similar public improvements; and
the total costs of the property to the City or HRA and the price paid the developers (for
properties sold to developers);
the amount of increments rebated or paid to developers or property owners for privately
financed improvements or other qualifYing costs, other than those reported under clause (3),
that were issued on behalf of private entities for facilities located in District No. 1-24.
5.
D. State Auditor filing for all Tax Increment Financing Districts: PursuanttoMS., Section 469.175, Subd.
6a, the City or HRA must also annually report to the State Auditor before or on July 1 (August 1 beginning
for reports to be filed in 1999) of each year the following amounts for the entire City:
1. the total principal amount of nondefeased bonds that are outstanding at the end of the
previous calendar year; and
2. the total annual amount of principal and interest payments that are due for the current
calendar year on:
(i) general obligation tax increment financing bonds and
(ii) other tax increment financing bonds; and
for each tax increment financing district within the City:
.
Monticello HRA
1.
2.
3.
the type of tax increment financing district;
the date on which the district is required to be decertified;
the amount of any payments and the value of in-kind benefits, such as physical improvements
and the uses of building space, that are financed with revenues derived from increments and
are provided to another governmental unit (other than the municipality) during the preceding
calendar year;
the tax increment revenues for taxes payable in the current calendar year;
whether the tax increment financing plan or other governing document permits increment
revenues to be expended outside of each district; and
any additional information that the State Auditor may require.
4.
5.
6.
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I
2-14
.
.
.
Copies of this report must also be provided to the county and school district boards. Ifthe City fails to make
a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by Section 469.1 75 sudb. 5, 6 and 6a, the
State Auditor will direct the County Auditor to hold the distribution of tax increment from DistrictNo. 1-24.
Subsection 2-25. Municipal Approval and Public Purpose
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for
District No. 1-24 as required pursuant to M.S.. Section 469.175. Subd. 3 are as follows:
1. Finding that District No. 1-24 is a qualified housing district as defined in M.S.. Section
469.174, SuM II andM.S., Section 273.1399. SuM 1 (c).
District No. 1-24 consists of a portion of one parcel. The development will consist of 60 units of
senior rental housing. No portion of the property will be used for purposes other than low and
moderate income housing. The development in District No. 1-24 will consist entirely of housing
facilities which meet all ofthe rent and income limitations for a low-income housing credit under
section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
2.
Finding that the proposed development. in the oplnzon of the City Council. would not
reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably
foreseeable future and. therefore. the use of tax increment financing is deemed necessary.
The City has determined that, in view of reduced revenues from a housing facility intended for
occupancy by low and moderate income persons, the development proposed in the Plan would not
be financially feasible without substantial public assistance including tax increment financing. In
making this finding, the City has relied upon the developer's pro forma submitted to the City and
Authority, requirements of other state and local assistance to the development, and analysis of the
need for tax increment assistance prepared by Ehlers and Associates and on file in City Hall.
3.
Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District No. 1-24 conforms to the general
plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole.
The Plan was reviewed by the Planning Commission on August 4, 1998. The Planning Commission
found that the Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City.
4. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District No. 1-24 will afford maximum
opportunity. consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole. for the development or
redevelopment of Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1 by private enterprise.
Through the implementation of the Plan, the City or HRA will increase the tax base of the City, and
will increase the availability of safe and decent life-cycle housing in the City.
Additional findings are set forth in the Authorizing Resolution of the City.
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I
2-15
.
Subsection 2-26. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment
I. General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the
Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay the capital and administration costs
of the Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I pursuant to the M.S.. Sections 469.124 /0
469.134;
These revenues shall not be used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No revenues derived from
tax increment shall be used for the acquisition, construction, renovation, operation or maintenance of
a building to be used primarily and regularly for conducting the business ofa municipality, county,
school district, or any other local unit of government or the state or federal government.
2. Five Year Limitation on Commitment of Tax Increments. Tax increments derived from District No.
1-24 shall be deemed to have been expended within the TIF District only if the five year rule set forth
inMS., Section 469.1763, Subd. 3, has been satisfied; and beginning with the sixth year following
certification of District No. 1-24,80 percent of said tax increments that remain after expenditures
permitted under said five year rule must be used only to pay previously committed expenditures or
credit enhanced bonds as more fully set forth inMS., Section 469.1763, Subd. 5.
Subsection 2-27. Income Requirements
The housing project must satisfy the applicable income limitations and rent restrictions required in connection
. with low income housing tax credits under Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code.
Subsection 2-28, Countv Road Costs
Pursuant toMS., Section 469.175. Subd. la, the county board may require the City or HRA to pay for all
or part ofthe cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment
will, in the judgement ofthe county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of
road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five
years under a capital improvement plan or other county plan.
In the opinion ofthe City and HRA and consultants, the proposed development outlined in this Plan will have
little or no impact upon county roads. If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must
notify the City or HRA within thirty days of receipt of this Plan.
Subsection 2-29. Economic DevelODment and Job Creation
The City or HRA is not providing tax increment financing for the purpose of economic development or job
growth and therefore, the provisions of MS.. Section 116J. 991 , (which states that a business receiving state
or local government assistance for economic development or job growth purposes, including tax increment
financing, must create a net increase injobs and meet wage level goals in Minnesota within two years of
receiving assistance) are not applicable and the City and HRA are not establishing wage and job goals in
connection with District No. 1-24.
.
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I
2-16
Monticello HRA
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1
2-17
.
Subsection 2-30. Summarv
The City of Monticello is establishing District No. 1-24 provide an impetus for safe and decent life-cycle
housing development in the City. The Tax Increment Financing Plan for DistrictNo. I -24 was prepared by
Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55 113-1105, telephone (651) 697-
8500.
.
.
.
.
.
APPENDIX A
BOUNDARY MAPS OF CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1 AND
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-24
A-I
APPENDIX
.
.
.
0..... 0
~o <
~z :j5
~E-o ~oo
~u u~
E-o ~ .... Z
Z"'" E-o Z
e~ ~~
~ ~ ~ ~
~Eo-; ~~
<z o~
c:.:: ~ >-~
E-o:; E-o 0
z~ ""u
~o u
u~ Eo-;
~ ==
;, e,:,
~ ;
~ ~
~
'\
ill Iii
h I
! I
itl
~
-)
,~ <<.4.'-
/0/ .
/I:'q~
/' .$:
l
/..'
i
-1-.
( L-
I
,
L_
p
.1 ~.I"""
. I '
b=t- '
_., I ~_-----l-_
, ' ----I
, '
, . i I
~---'''l -+- I"~ .l
I I !
I
._L_
~~ I ---
"rl i l
L'~~J~-\ i'
,
.
!
.
I
.
-
.
.
.
APPENDIX
APPENDIX B
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-24
Lot 4, Block 1, Church of St. Henry.
B-1
I
.
.
.
THE 4.5 ACRE PARCEL IS A PORTION OF
PARCEL A:
That pa~t of the Southeast Quarter of the southwest Qua~t8r of
Section 12, Township 121, Range 25, wri9ht county, Minnesota
described aa follows' c~ncin9 at the northwest corner of the
Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13 of s.id
Township 121, lIan',)e 25; thence on an essUlIIed bearing of south 89
degrees 39 minutes 28 seconds East along the north line of said
Northwe8t Quarter of the Northeaat Quarter, a diatance of 172.24 feet
to a line parallel with and distant 50.00 feet southwest from the
center line of the .u~lington Northern AS messured at a right angle
fr()ll\ said canter line; thence South 52 de<1X"ees 37 minutes S9 lIecondll
East along said parallel line, a diatance of 915.31 feet; thence
south 28 degrees 45 .inutes 01 seconds West, a dietance of 868.39
fset to the northeasterly right of way line of Interstate Bi9hway Ho.
94; thancs North 63 degrees 30 .inutes 18 ssconds West along said
northeasterly right of way lin., a distance of 1506.5S feet to a
point hereinafter referred to as point Ai thence continue Horth 63
degreell 30 minutes 18 aeconds west aloD9 8aid northeasterly right of
way line, a distance of 1569.36 feet to a point of cu~ve in 8aid
northeasterlY right of way line; thanea northwesterly along said
northeasterly right of way 11ne being a tangential curve concave to
the aouthweat having a radius of 5829.58 feet and a central angle of
3 degreeS 31 minutes 12 seconds, a distance of 358.14 feet to the
_at line of the soutbvellt Quarter of the southweet Quarter of said
Section 12; thence North 1 degree 24 .inutes 50 seconda Bast along
aaid vest line, a distance of 136.83 feet to the north line of the
South 10.00 acres of said 80uthwest Quarter of the Southweat
Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 52 mautes 01 aeconds last along
aa1d north line, a distance of 1300.49 feet to the east line of said ,
Southwest Quarter of the southwest Quarter; thence North 1 degree 24
lli.nutes 40 aeConds East along s8id sast line, a distance of 109.87
feet to the south line of old TerritOrial Road beinq the point of
beginning of the land to be described; thence continue North 1
degree 24 minutes 40 seconds Bast, a distance of 368.77 teet to ·
11ne parelle1 with and distant 50.00 feet southwest of a. measured at
. right angle fr()lll said center Hne of the 1lIIS'1ington Northern
Railroad; thence South 73 degrees 13 .inlltes 23 secon"'s Eaat along
said parallel line, a distance of 246.36 feet; thence southeaeterlY
along eaid parallel line being II tangential curve conCIlVe to the
southwest having II radiuS of 2215.00 feet and a central llDg1e of 20
degrees 35 .1nutss 25 .econds, 8 distance of 817.56 feet; tbence
Soutb 52 degrees 37 minutes 59 seconds East along said parallel llne,
a distance of 12.70 feet to the intersection of a line bearin9 North
28 devrees .5 II1nutes 01 aeconds Baet frea said point A; thanes
South 28 degree. 45 ainutss 01 seconde West, a dietance of 294.43
feet to the intersection of a line beeriDg south 67 degr.es 59
.1nute. 57 seconde Ea.t from the point of beginning; thence North 67
de<;rees 59 .inutea 57 seconds Wsst, II c1istance of 903.28 feet to the
point of beglnn1ng.
97357
TO BE PLATTED IN SEPTEMBER 1998 AND DESCRIBED AS LOT 3. BLOCK 1, CHURCH OF ST. HENRY'S
-._- ----------- -
-
.
.
.
APPENDIX C
ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-24
APPENDIX
C-I
Page I
07/21/98
City ~ Mon\iCeltQ: 60 Unit senior Housing in District No, 1-24
.
T.I.F. CASH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS
0.00000/..
6.500%
1.186450 Pay98
Inflation Rate:
Pay-As-You-Go Interest Rate:
Tax Extension Rate. Oislrict 270-3:
BASE V ALUE INFORMATION
Land
Value
See LagaI oecsription in Exhibit B 100,000
o
o
Total Original Mar1<et Value 100 000
Building Total Pay 99 Tax
Value Value Capacity
0 100.000 2.500
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 100.000 2500
Class Rale: Multi-Family Market Rate
Multi-Family 4(d)
Original Tax Capacily (when cel1ilied):
Original Tax Capacity (when use is changed):
2.5000% Pay 99
1.0000% Pay 99
2,500 Pay 99
2.soo Pay 98
PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION
Type of Tax Increment District:
Qualified Housing
Type Of Units MVPer Total Market Total Tax Year Ve'"
Pro'ect Unit Value C ad Started Po 0
Rental 60 30,000 1.900.000 47,500 1999 2001
Total 60 1 900 000 47 500
Assl.mes no 4(d) 1rlts
SUMMARY
.
Total Annual Taxes.
Total Annual Tax Increment After Admin.
Net Taxes Paid:
Total Arv1u8.l Taxes Per Unit:
Total Annual Tax Increment Per Unit:
56,356
48.051
8,305
939
aDl
.
$enIOr2,wk4
'.''''0'>1
Prepared by ~lnc.
c
07121tSe City 01 MooIicellO; 60 Unit $eoioI HQU$ing in Dislrict No. '-24 Page 2
. TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW
Original Project Captured Semi.Annual Admin Semi-Annual Years of PAYMENT DATE!
'00 BEGINNING Tax Tax Tax Gross Tax at Nel Tax Tax PERIOD ENDING
Mth. y,. Ca ad C aci Ca Incremenl 10.00% Increment Increment Yrs. Mth. y,.
0.0 02-01 1999 2,500 2,500 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.508-<11 1999
0.5 08-01 1999 2,500 2,500 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.002-01 2000
1.002-01 2000 2,500 2,500 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.5 08-01 2000.
1.5 08-01 2000 2,500 2,500 0 0 0 0 0.0 2.0 02-01 2001
2.0 02-01 2001 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 0.5 2.5 08-ot 2001
2.5 08-01 2001 2,500 47.500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 1.0 3.002-01 2002
3.0 02-01 2002 2,500 47.500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 1.5 3.5 08-01 2002
3.508-01 2002 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,610 24.026 2.0 4.0 02-01 ,
20031
4.002..01 2003 2,500 47,500 45.000 26.695 2,670 24,026 2,5 4.5 08-01 20031
4,5 08-01 2003 2,500 47.500 45,000 26.695 2.670 24,026 3.0 5.0 02-01 20041
5.002..()1 2004 2,500 47,500 45,000 26.695 2.670 24,026 3.5 5.5 08-01 2004'
5.5 08-01 2004 2,500 47,500 45,000 26.695 2,610 24,026 4.0 6.0 02-01 20051
6,0 02-01 2005 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 4.5 6.5 08-01 20051
6.5 08-01 2005 2,500 47.500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 5.0 7.002'()1 2006i
7.0 02-01 2006 2,500 47,500 45.000 26,695 2,670 24,026 5.5 7.5 08-01 20061
7.5 08-01 2006 2,500 47.500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24.026 6.0 8.002-01 2007!
8.0 02-01 2007 2,500 47.500 45,000 26.695 2,670 24,026 6,5 8.508-01 2007:
8.5 08-01 2007 2,500 47,500 45,000 26.695 2.670 24.026 7.0 9.002-01 2008 i
9.0 02-01 2008 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24.026 7.5 9.5 08-01 20081
9.5 08-01 2008 2,500 47,500 45.000 26,695 2,670 24,026 8.0 10.002-01 20091
10.0 02-01 2009 2,500 47,500 45,000 26.695 2,610 24.026 8.5 10.5 08-01 2OO9i
10.5 08-01 2009 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24.026 9.0 11.002-01 20101
11.0 02-01 2010 2,500 47.500 45,000 26,695 2.670 24,026 9.5 11.5 08-01 2010
11.5 08-01 2010 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2.670 24.026 10.0 12,002-01 2011
12.0 02-01 2011 2,500 47,500 45.000 26,695 2,670 24,026 10.5 12.5 08-01 2011
12.5 Q8.01 2011 2,500 47.500 45,000 26.695 2.670 24.026 11.0 13.0 02-01 2012
13.0 02-01 2012 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2.670 24,026 11.5 13.5 08-01 2012
13,5 08-01 2012 2,500 47.500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 12.0 14.002-01 2013
..0 02-01 2013 2,500 47,500 45,000 26.695 2,670 24,026 12.5 14.5 08-()1 2013
S 08-01 2013 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,610 24,026 13.0 15.002-(11 2014
, 02-01 2014 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 13.5 15.5 08-01 2014
,.,.5 08-01 2014 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 14.0 16.0 02~1 2015
16.0 02-01 2015 2,500 47.500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 14.5 16.5 08-01 2015
1 B.5 08-01 2015 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 15.0 17.0 02-01 2016
17.0 02-01 2016 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 15.5 17.5 08-01 2016
17,5 08-01 2016 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 18.0 18.0 02-01 2017
18.002.(11 2017 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,610 24,026 16.5 18.5 08-01 2017
18.5 08-01 2017 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 17.0 19,0 02-01 2018
19.0 02-01 2018 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 17.5 19.6 08-01 2018
19.5 08-01 2018 2,500 47.500 45,000 26,695 2,570 24.026 18.0 20.0 02-01 2019
20,0 02-01 2019 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 18.5 20.5 08-01 2019
2O.508-()1 2019 2,500 47.500 45.000 26,695 2,670 24.026 19.0 21.002-01 2020
21,0 02-01 2020 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2.670 24.026 19.5 21.508-01 2020
21.5 08-01 2020 2,500 47,500 45,000 26.695 2.670 24,026 20.0 22.0 02-01 2021
22,0 02-01 2021 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 20,5 22.5 08-01 2021
22.5 08-01 2021 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,870 24,026 21.0 23,0 02-01 2022
23.0 02-01 2022 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2.670 24.026 21,5 23.5 08-01 2022
23.5 08-01 2022 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 22,0 24.0 02-01 2023
24.0 02-01 2023 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 22.5 24.5 08-01 2023
24.5 08-01 2023 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2.670 24,028 23.0 25,0 02-01 2024
25.0 02-01 2024 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 23.5 25.5 08-01 2024
25,5 08-01 2024 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2.670 24,026 24.0 26.0 02-01 2025
26.0 02-01 2025 2,500 47,500 45,000 26,695 2,670 24,026 24.5 26.5 08-01 2025
26.5 08-01 2025 2500 47 500 45 000 26 695 2.670 24 026 25.0 27.0 02-01 2026
Totals 1 334 756 133476 1201 1
PresenlValues 576706 57671 519035
.
MC1QO.01
_..-In<.
...........
.
.
.
BRA Agenda - 06/07/06
6.
Consideration to a rove enterin into a Preliminar
Walker Instore. Inc.
A. Reference and backl!:round:
The HRA is asked to enter into a Preliminary Development Agreement with Walker Instore,
Inc. The company will relocate from lease space in Albertville. Sometime ago, I visited the
company which designs and assembles store displays and packaging. Steve Bubul assessed
and determined that the nature of the business meets the criteria for an Economic TIP District
(manufacturing, warehouse or distribution). Their attorney has reviewed the Preliminary
Development Agreement. Brian Walker and his wife are owners of this small company which
currently employs five people and expects to employee another three people within two years.
They reside in Big Lake.
The company plans to construct a 10,000 sq ft facility this year. The at least 8 full-time
permanent jobs create an average hourly wage of at least $17.39 per hour without benefits.
PLEASE NOTE THE FEBRUARY 10,2006 PROPOSAL. The criteria allows to sell one
acre at the $1.00 per square foot with the option to purchase another Y2 acre at the $2.65 per
square foot plus trunk fees. COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMISSIONERS?
How firm are you at the minimum of a 2-acre lot size? The company has not committed to an
acre site or one and one-half site.
Mr. Walker is out of town for the next two weeks; therefore, will not attend the HRA meeting.
We have a tentative date set in mid-June to determine site location. Mr. Walker requested the
HRA consider entering into the Agreement as the HRA may not meet until August.
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to approve entering into a Preliminary Development Agreement between the
HRA and Walker Instore, Inc.
2. A motion to deny entering into a Preliminary Development Agreement between the
HRA and Walker Instore, Inc. Please state reason for denial.
3. A motion to table any action.
1
~
.
BRA Agenda - 06/07/06
c.
Recommendation.
Although the project is smaller than ideal, it appears to be very professional and well ran
business. Great example of an entrepreneurial business.
D. SUDDortinl!: Data:
Application letter, job and wage-level creation, and agreement for execution.
.
.
2
...-
I l "').- 0 ~ ~
\ - ~~~ & \J ,'.,..r '\
'L\\..- WALKER IN,STORE
.
Monticello Customer Requirement Worksheet
Walker In-Store, Inc.
6551 Jansen Ave NE
Suite 208
Albertville, MN 55301
763-497-8600
763-497-3232 Fax
Brian Walker, President
Consumer Marketing and Retail Advertising Agency
.
Walker In-Store is a retail advertising agency, working with consumer products
companies to expand their presence and improve sales with focused marketing at retail.
Our fIrm develops, designs, oversees manufacturing, inventories and distributes retail
display and marketing materials on behalf of our clients, We supply up to 20,000
supermarkets and mass merchants with these program materials annually, Our scope is
national, with customers and clients across the country, Founded in 1993 and
incorporated in 1995, we have enjoyed consistent and profItable growth since our
inception, We have a history oflong term business relationships with both clients and
suppliers, which has been instrumental in our success,
WlS currently employs fIve full-time professional positions, as well as one permanent
part-time employee. We also regularly employ temporary workers from local staffmg
agencies to assist with our client surge volume. See attached for more detail.
We are presently evaluating area communities to select the site of a new facility, as our
business continues to expand. We have spent the prior six years renting office and
warehouse space in Albertville, Minnesota.
We intend to construct a 10,000 square foot building, split into two bays. Current plans
call for 25-30 percent offIce, and 70-75 percent warehouse space. We anticipate
requiring one to three acres ofland, pending local requirements and codes. We hope to
complete the selection and planning process ad break ground during early spring 2006.
We wish to purchase land in 2005 for this construction. We are presently evaluating
building plans and contractors for this project.
.
0-)") i
anJ' .\;c N . Su,te 7~;8. t, :::;7~~i'ille iv:N SC;3C . "~-:c~' 763 '197 S.6~)C ~pJ 76319/3232. '"':W'\VW-,, ker-ln5~o>ecom
-
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Pholll:: (763) 27 J -3208
Fax (763) 295-44114
Email: ollic.koroDc-haktilci.monticello.mn.us
Economic Development Director
MONTICELW
CITY OF MOl'iTICELLO, MINNESOTA
II
JOB AND WAGE LEVEL - EXISTING JOBS
Please indicate number of current permanent employees at each level and indicate the corresponding bcnetlt level.
.>BS\V;\CiEEXISTI:\[CiFOR\,'
Monticello City Hall. 50S Walnut Street, Suite (. l\.'lonticello, MN 55362-8831 . (763) 295-2711 . Fax: (763) 295-4404
Offlce of Public \Vorks. 909 Golf Course Rd., l'vlonticello, '\:IN 55362 . 0(3) 295-3170. Fax: (763) 271-3272
II
Economic Development Director
Phone'
Fax:
Email:
(763) 271-3208
(7631295-4404
011 ie. kOfODChak,-u'.c I.monticello. mo. us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
---_.~_.-----'---
MONTICELLO
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MIN"IlESOTA
JOB AND WAGE LEVEL GOALS - NEW JOBS
Please indicate number of additional employees at each level and indicate the corresponding benetit level. Number of
new permanent jobs anticipated to be created over the (irs! two years of relocation or expansion.
Job Creation
Hourlv Wage
Level
Hourlv Value
of V oluntarv
Benefits (S)
Full-time
Part-time
(Excl. benefits)
---
Less than $7.00
$7.00 to $7.99
$8.00 to $9.99
'2-
$10.00 to $11.99
-
/
$] 2.00 to $13.99
:3. .;J"
S 14.00 to $15.99
$16.00 to $17.99
$18.00to$19.99
f
$20.00 to $21.99
5.00.
$22.00 and higher
.)8\\/ i\CiFS?-..ll.:\V _ F{)R:vl
i\'lonticello City HalL 505 \\'alnut Street, Suite 1, Monticello, J\'lN 55362-8831 . (763) 295-2711 . Fax: (763) 295-4404
Ofnce of Puhlic Works. 909 Golf Course Rd., rvlonticello, MN 55362 . (763) 295-1170. Fax: (763) 271-3272
--
--
MONTICELLO
"INVEST IN A CITY WITH A FUTURE"
MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
INTERSTATE 94 ACCESS - OTTER CREEK CROSSING
February 10,2006
PREPARED FOR:
Brian Walker
Walker In-Store
6551 Jansen Avenue NE, Suite 208
Albertville, MN 55301
Assumptions: At least 8 full-time permanent jobs at an average hourly wage of at least $17.39
per hour without benefits within two years.
Construction of at least a 10,000 sq. ft. production/office building at a minimum
assessed value of $50 per square foot or $500,000.
$10,000 non-refundable deposit.
Execution of a Contract for Private Development.
.
Value:
_ Approximately 1.00 acre site platted. Mutually agreed upon site location.
_ 1-94 location with direct access via Trunk Higbway 25 and Chelsea Road
West.
_ Nine-ton all-weather road constructed to 44 foot width curb to curb (Chelsea
Road West and School Blvd.)
_ Eight-inch water and sanitary sewer service lines extended to adjacent lots
approximately every 400 feet.
_ Storm sewer stub inlet pipes to undeveloped property.
_ Eight-foot wide bituminous pathway along south side of Chelsea Road and
east side of School Blvd.
- NO assessments.
_ NO water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer trunk fees.
_ Recorded Declaration of Covenants to protect your investment.
_ Market Price, $2.65 per square foot.
PROPOSAL: $1.00 per square foot or $43,560 for 1.00 acres. Subject to approval and
review by Kennedy & Graven. Proposal good throngh June 1,2006.
.
Option of an additional V, acre or 21,780 sq. ft at $2.65 per square foot or
$57,717. Trunk fees paid at closing or a current rate at time of expansion.
Monticello City HalL 505 Walnut Street. Suite 1, Monticello, MN 55362-883 I . (763) 295-271\ . Fax: (763) 295-4404
Office of Public \\.'orks. 909 Golf Course Rd., ~'1onticeHo, ~'lN 55362. (763) 295-3170. Fax: (763) 271 ~3272
~
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Monticello Business Center)
.
Execution copy
May 23, 2006
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
THIS AGREEMENT, dated this day of , 2006, by and between the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota, a public body
corporate and politic under the laws of Minnesota ("Authority") and Walker InStore, Inc., a
Minnesota corporation ("Developer"):
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Authority or the City of Monticello ("City") owns certain property within
the City of Monticello, which property is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto
("Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Developer has submitted a preliminary proposal (the "Proposal") for the
acquisition and development of the Property (the "Development"), which proposal is attached hereto
as Exhibit B; and
.
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested the Authority to explore the use of certain public
assistance to assist with the Development; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has determined that it is in the Authority's best interest that the
Developer be designated sole developer of the Property during the term of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Authority and the Developer are willing and desirous to undertake the
Development if (i) a satisfactory agreement can be reached regarding the Authority's commitment
for public costs necessary for the Development; (ii) satisfactory mortgage and equity financing, or
adequate cash resources for the Development can be secured by the Developer; and (iii) the
economic feasibility and soundness of the Development and other necessary preconditions have
been determined to the satisfaction of the parties; and
WHEREAS, the Authority is willing to evaluate the Development and work toward all
necessary agreements with the Developer if the Developer agrees to make the nonrefundable
deposit described herein, which is intended, in part, to reimburse the Authority for its costs if the
Development is abandoned by Developer or necessary agreements are not reached under the terms
of this Agreement.
.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and
obligations set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:
1. Negotiations between the parties shall proceed in an attempt to formulate a definitive
purchase and development contract ("Contract") based on the following:
291)729v2 MNl MNl90-00125
~
.
.
.
(a) the Developer's Proposal, which shows the scope of the proposed
Development in its latest form as of the date of this Agreement, together with any changes
or modifications required by the Authority;
(b) a mutually satisfactory Contract to be negotiated and agreed upon ill
accordance with negotiations contemplated by this Agreement;
( c) such documentation regarding economic feasibility of the Project as the
Authority may wish to undertake during the term of this Agreement; and
(d) other terms and conditions of this Agreement.
2. It is the intention of the parties that this Agreement: (a) documents the present
understanding and commitments of the parties; and (b) will lead to negotiation and execution of a
mutually satisfactory Contract for the Development prior to the termination date of this Agreement.
The Contract (together with any other agreements entered into between the parties hereto
contemporaneously therewith) when executed, will supersede all obligations of the parties
hereunder.
3. During the term of this Agreement, the Developer shall:
(a) Submit to the Authority a design proposal to be approved by the Authority
showing the location, size, and nature of the proposed Development, including floor layouts,
renderings, elevations, and other graphic or written explanations of the Development. The
design proposal shall be accompanied by a proposed schedule for the starting and
completion of all phases of Development.
(b) Submit an over-all cost estimate for the design and construction of the
Development.
(c) Submit a time schedule for all phases of the Development.
(d) Undertake and obtain such other preliminary economic feasibility studies,
income and expense projections, and such other economic information as the Developer
may desire to further confirm the economic feasibility and soundness of the Development.
(e) Submit to the Authority the Developer's financing plan showing that the
proposed Development is financially feasible, and, to the extent Developer seeks public
financial assistance in any form (including reduced land cost, waiver of fees, and tax
increment financing), evidence that such assistance is reasonably necessary to make the
Development financially feasible.
(t) Furnish satisfactory, financial data to the Authority evidencing the
Developer's ability to undertake the Development.
(g) Cooperate with the Authority and City in replatting of the Property as
described in Section 4.
2
...-
(a) Commence the process necessary to undertake such public assistance as is
necessary pursuant to the terms of the Proposal, including without limitation
commencement of actions necessary to create a tax increment financing district that includes
the Property.
.
4. During the term of this Agreement, the Authority agrees to:
(b) Proceed to seek all necessary information with regard to the anticipated
public costs associated with the Development.
(c) Estimate the Authority's level and method of financial participation, if any,
in the Development and develop a financial plan for the Authority's participation.
.
(d) Either acquire the Property and grant to the Developer, or cause the City to
grant to the Developer, a right of access to the Property for purposes of environmental
and soil testing. Developer agrees to indemnify, save harmless, and defend the Authority
and City, their officers, and employees, from and against any and all claims, actions,
damages, liability and expense in connection with personal injury and/or damage to the
Property arising from or out of any occurrence in, upon or at the Property caused by the
act or omission of the Developer in connection with Developer's entry on the Property.
Further, Developer shall not permit any mechanics', materialmens' or other liens to stand
against the Property or any part thereof for work or materials furnished to Developer in
connection with the right of entry granted pursuant to this Agreement and Developer
agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Authority and City from and against
the same.
(e) Commence replatting of the Property, or cause the City to commence such
replatting, in order to create the parcel described on Exhibit A.
5. It is expressly understood that execution of the Contract shall be subject to:
(a) A determination by the Authority in its sole discretion that its undertakings
are feasible based on (i) the projected tax increment revenues and any other revenues
designated by the Authority (to the extent requested by Developer); (ii) the purposes and
objectives of any tax increment, development, or other plan created or proposed for the
purpose of providing financial assistance for the Development, if any, including the
determination that such assistance is reasonably necessary in order to make the
Development possible; (iii) the best interests of the Authority.
(b) A determination by the Developer that the Development is feasible and in
the best interests of the Developer.
.
6. This Agreement is effective from the date hereof through , 20_, unless
extended with approval of the Authority's board of commissioners. After expiration of the tenn of
this Agreement, neither party shall have any obligation hereunder except as expressly set forth to the
contrary herein.
7. The Developer shall be solely responsible for all costs incurred by the Developer. In
3
-
.
.
.
addition, the Developer shall reimburse the Authority for Administrative Costs, as hereafter defined.
For the purposes of this Agreement, the term "Administrative Costs" means out of pocket costs
incurred by the Authority and City together with staff costs of the Authority and City, all
attributable to or incurred in connection with the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement, the
Contract, and other documents and agreements in connection with the Development, including
without limitation all costs in connection with replatting of the Property and the cost of financial
advisors, attorneys, and planning and environmental consultants.
In order to secure payment of the Administrative Costs, the Developer shall deliver to the
Authority cash or a certified check in the amount of $1 0,000, such delivery to occur upon execution
of this Agreement. If at anyone or more times during the term of this Agreement, the Authority
determines that Administrative Costs will exceed $10,000 and that additional security is required,
the Authority shall notifY the Developer of the amount of such additional security. Within ten
calendar days of receipt of this notice, the Developer shall deliver to the Authority the required
additional security. The Authority will utilize the funds delivered by the Developer to payor
reimburse itself for Administrative Costs. Upon termination of this Agreement, the Authority will
return to the Developer the funds paid by the Developer to the Authority pursuant to this Section 7,
less an amount equal to the Administrative Costs incurred by the Authority through the date of
notice of termination. For the purposes of this paragraph, Administrative Costs are considered to
be incurred if they have been paid, relate to services performed, or are payable under a contract
entered into, on or before the date of the notice of termination.
This Section 7 shall survive termination of this Agreement and shall be binding on the
Developer regardless of the enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement.
8. This Agreement may be terminated upon 5 days written notice by a party to the
other party if:
(a) in the respective sole discretion of the Authority or the Developer, an
impasse has been reached in the negotiation or implementation of any material term or the
completion or execution of any material condition of this Agreement or the Contract; or
(b) the Authority determines that its costs in performing under this Agreement
well exceed $10,000 and the Developer does not deliver additional security to the Authority
pursuant to Section 7; or
(c) a party fails to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement.
If either party terminates the Agreement under this Section 8, the Developer shall remain
liable to the Authority to the extent provided under Section 7 of this Agreement.
9. During the term of this Agreement, the Authority agrees that it will not negotiate
or contract with any other party concerning the sale or development of the Property. The
Developer shall not assign or transfer its rights under this Agreement in full or in part, or enter
into any subcontracts to perform any of its obligations hereunder, without the prior written
consent of the Authority.
10. In the event that the Developer, its heirs, successors or assigns, fail to comply with
4
.
.
.
any of the provisions of this Agreement, the Authority may proceed to enforce this Agreement by
appropriate legal or equitable proceedings, or other similar proceedings, and if the Authority is the
prevailing party, the Developer, its heirs, successors or assigns, agree to pay all costs of such
enforcement, including reasonable attorneys' fees.
II. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such decision shall not affect the validity of any remaining portion of the Agreement.
12. In the event any covenant contained in this Agreement should be breached by one
party and subsequently waived by another party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular
breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent
breach.
13. Notice or demand or other communication between or among the parties shall be
sufficiently given if sent by mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested or delivered personally:
(a) As to the Authority: Housing and Redevelopment Authority
in and for the City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362-8822
Attn: Executive Director
(b)
As to the Developer: Walker InStore, Inc.
6551 Jansen Ave. N.E., Suite 208
Albertville, MN 55301-9685
Attn: Brian Walker
14. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, all
of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
15. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the state of Minnesota. Any disputes, controversies, or claims arising out of this Agreement shall be
heard in the state or federal courts of Minnesota, and all parties to this Agreement waive any
objection to the jurisdiction of these courts, whether based on convenience or otherwise.
16. The Developer hereby agrees to protect, defend and hold the Authority, the City
and their officers, elected and appointed officials, employees, administrators, commissioners,
agents, and representatives harmless from and indemnified against any and all loss, cost, fines,
charges, damage and expenses, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys fees,
consultant and expert witness fees, and travel associated therewith, due to claims or demands of
any kind whatsoever caused by Developer or arising out of actions of Developer (and excluding
those caused by or arising out of the Authority's or City's own acts or conduct) with regard to (i)
the development, marketing, sale or leasing of all or any part of the Property, including, without
limitation, any claims for any lien imposed by law for services, labor or materials furnished to or
for the benefit of the Property, or (ii) any claim by the state of Minnesota or the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency or any other person pertaining to the violation of any permits, orders,
decrees or demands made by said persons or with regard to the presence of any pollutant,
contaminant or hazardous waste on the Property deposited or released by Developer; and (iii) or
5
I
.
.
by reason of the execution of this Agreement or the performance of this Agreement. The
Developer, and the Developer's successors or assigns, agree to protect, defend and save the
Authority, and its officers, agents, and employees, harmless from all such claims, demands,
damages, and causes of action and the costs, disbursements, and expenses of defending the same,
including but not limited to, attorneys fees, consulting engineering services, and other technical,
administrative or professional assistance incurred by the Authority as a result of the actions of
Developer. This indemnity shall be continuing and shall survive the performance, termination or
cancellation of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a limitation of
or waiver by the Authority of any immunities, defenses, or other limitations on liability to which
the Authority is entitled by law, including but not limited to the maximum monetary limits on
liability established by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in
its name and behalf and its seal to be duly affixed hereto and the Developer has caused this
Agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written.
[NAME OF DEVELOPER]
By
Its:
.
6
~
.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
By
Its Chair
By
Its Executive Director
.
.
7
...-
.
EXHIBIT A
Description of Property
.
.
A-I
-
.
EXHIBIT B
Project Proposal
.
.
B-1
.
BRA Agenda - 06/07/06
7. Consideration to review the Transformation Borne Loan A lication Packa e
for oossible amendinl!: Desil!llation of a title comoanv.
A. Reference and backl!round:
The suggestion to "designate a title company" came about with the closing of the Breiwick loan.
The lender of the first mortgage would not close the same day with a public entity loan.
Breiwick's title company was Quality Title of Albertville who were very pleasant and helpful to
work with. The HRA's loan closed a few days later than the lender. The title company did not
charge us and will disburse the HRA funds upon documentation from the borrower. The check
was made out to Quality Title. I will record the HRA's second mortgage as soon as the
document number ofthe first mortgage is available. The cost to the HRA is the recording fee
and document preparation, neither of which is available. The program was written with no fees
to the applicant. In talking with Dan Frie, he suggested the HRA consider as part of the
Application Package, the need to designate a local title company. A designated title company
would understand the HRA program, provide convenience, and the applicant would know up-
front which title company to use. The intent of the program was to keep it simple.
.
The question becomes, would this be viewed as a stumbling block, inconvenient or
cumbersome? I don't know if that would encourage or discourage a lender or influence their
willingness to work with the HRA program. I believe the HRA hoped we'd work with a local
lender and they would disburse the HRA funds.
In the case of the first approved loan to the Petersen's, we have not closed. I've talked with
Dave Madsen, Building Trades Mortgage, LLLP, Maple Grove. There has been some mis-
communication between them and the Petersen which has held up the closing. Waiting to hear
from him about closing date and where.
A copy of the application package is attached.
BASED ON THE HRA'S DISCUSSION AND DECISION, A MOTION TO AMEND
THE APPLICATION PACKAGE MAY BE NECESSARY.
I'll bring a copy of the transformation home loan escrow agreement, mortgage. and note to the
meeting; should a commissioners which to review.
.
I
.......-
~. , I ~
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Economic Development Director
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
(763) 271-3208
(763) 295-4404
ollie. korooc hak(ci::ci. monti cello.ron. us
I
: I
~
MOI'iTlCELLO
Housing and Redevelopment Autbority
in and for tbe City of Monticello, Minnesota
TRANSFORMATION HOME LOAN
2006 APPLICATION PACKAGE
PURPOSE
A "home transformation" means a major home remodel, increasing its livable space and its
value. Residents who enjoy living in the core city and know the benefits of living within
walking distance of the Mississippi River, the community center, and the schools are choosing
to adapt and redevelop their existing homes to meet their current needs. The Transformation
Home Loan was developed to provide incentives for homeowners or home buyers in
Monticello to begin major redevelopment/remodeling activities.
. The Transformation Home Loan seeks to promote and foster a vibrant core city by:
. Encouraging redevelopment of structurally substandard homes.
. Encouraging home owner-occupancy.
. Encouraging investment into the core city.
. Increasing housing market value.
TARGET AREA
The Transformation Home Loan program is available for existing single-family detached
homes located within the core city described as:
. North ofI-94.
. East of Otter Creek
. South of Mississippi River.
. West of Hospital and Middle School.
TARGET VALUE
The Transformation Home Loan program is available for existing single-family detached
. homes with a 2006 assessed market value of$175,000 or less.
!'vlonticcllo City Hall, 505 \Valnut Street Suite 1, Monticello, rvfN 55362-883\ . (763) 295-2711 . Fax: (763) 295-4404
Ottlce of Public \Vorks. 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticello. MN 55362. (763) 295-3170. Fax: (763) 271-3272
.......-
.
TARGET CRITERIA
The Transformation Home Loan program is available for existing single-family detached
homes that meet the redevelopment qualification requirement of structurally substandard as
defined by Tax Increment Financing Law, 469.174.
"Structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural element
or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities. light and
ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of
interior partitions, or similar factors. which defects or deficiencies are of
sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance.
.
A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building
code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building
code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure
of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that
a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding
sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type,
and age of the building, the average costs of plumbing, electrical, or structural
repairs, or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such
a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not
have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and
rehabilitation of the building.
FUNDING SOURCE
The Transformation Home Loan program is a one-year pilot program commencing January 1,
2005, with a limited amount of funds, $150,000. The program was extended in 2006 for one
year.
Program Features:
~ Pre-Remodeling Condition Report. The Monticello Building
Department must assess the age of mechanical systems, measure
square footage, and otherwise note the condition of the home prior
to remodeling. Please call 763-295-3060 for an appointment.
~
The Transformation Loan. The Monticello Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (HRA) characterized the Transformation
Loan as an "incentive loan". The incentive is just a little more
fmancing with terrific terms, so that a homeowner may feel equipped
.
2
-
.
.
.
to move forward on their remodeling project. To apply for the loan,
the cost of your remodeling project must be $30,000 or more. The
loan may be 25% of your remodeling project, when the cost of
remodeling is $30,000 or more. The maximum loan amount is
$20,000. The loan is interest-free, and is payable upon sale of your
property or forgiven after five (5) years. If you have questions, call
763-271-3208. Funds are limited.
Application Procedure:
1, Prior to starting vour proiect. obtain this application package which includes the
builder requirements and summary of design consideration, loan application form, a
list ofremodelers (contractors), and a remodeler form for remodelers who have not
worked under the program previously.
2.
Submit a complete application. A commitment of funds can only be made when all
required items have been received. Please note: The City of Monticello's Building
Department must approve all building plans, and may have requirements
independent of loan requirements, All setback and zoning requirements must
also be met.
3. Applications will be reviewed on a first-come, first-served basis, with priority being
given to projects that are most ready to move forward. Project readiness will be
determined by those that have completed drawings, have total project funding in place
(e.g. have a loan commitment or have closed on mortgage financing), and lor have a
remodeler under contract. Funding will not be held for projects that are not ready.
4. Once an application and other required documents have been received and reviewed,
a loan commitment will be made. Meeting the eligibility criteria does not entitle an
applicant to funding. The distribution of funds is the sole decision of the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority,
Conditions of the Transformation Incentive Loan:
1, Submitted applications will be reviewed for appropriateness and completeness,
Projects generally must be value-added improvements such as renovation or
expanding space. Plans will be reviewed for design considerations,
2.
The loan will be calculated at up to 25% of the initial contract price if the contract
price for remodeling is $30,000 or more, but not to exceed $20,000. The
commitment of funds is made at the beginning of the project.
3
~
4. A Pre-Remodeling Condition Report is required by the HRA to meet city fmancing
and auditing requirements. A property evaluator (not an appraiser) contracted by the
HRA will spend approximately an hour at your home to assess the age of mechanical
systems, measure square footage, and otherwise note the condition of the home prior
to remodeling. This is a one-time report for HRA records and incurs no cost to the
homeowner.
.
3. Funds are limited. You may want to call ahead of time to find out if funds are still
available.
5. Loans will not be considered for work in progress or work completed. The
Transformation Loan can only be considered for projects not yet begun.
6. You will be sent a commitment letter verifying the reservation of funds to be provided
at closing. A copy of the letter will be provided to your lender.
7. A copy of a letter of commitment from your lender verifying approval of the primary
loan is required.
.
8.
The Transformation Home Loan funds will be deposited in an escrow account and
disbursed by a title company. Upon satisfactory verification of work in progress or \L:
upon completion, the escrow account will be drawn upon in pro-rated increments f.
simultaneously as funds are drawn upon from the primary loan to make payments to
the remodeler. Work must be completed prior to final disbursement.
9. The Transformation Home Loan shall be secured by a Mortgage Deed and Note.
10. Final payment of the committed Transformation Loan must be disbursed by the title
company by no later than six months after the date of lender's closing.
Please be informed that financial data shall be submitted to the Lender for purposes of this
loan application. However, the fact that you apply for a Transformation Home Loan, the final
loan amounts are considered public data according to Minnesota Statute Chapter 13.
General Remodeler and Design Criteria:
The HRA does not recommend any particular remodeler. Selected remodelers must
complete a Remodeler Form, and comply with the general criteria established by the
Monticello HRA. "Sweat equity" may be applied toward eligibility costs associated with
. interior improvements such as painting, flooring, etc. or by a Minnesota Licensed Residential
4
.
.
.
Contractor and when verified by a certified appraisal at the applicant's expense.
Summary of Remodeler Reauirements
It is the homeowner's responsibility to check on contractors thoroughly before selecting them.
Your builder should:
I. Demonstrate financial capability by providing a statement from a financial institution of
sufficient construction capital.
2. Possess adequate Builder's Risk, Comprehensive General Liability and Worker's
Compensation insurance coverage.
3. Have a written warranty policy to be shared with the homeowner or written evidence
of commitment to perform warranted repairs required by the Minnesota State Statute.
If the remodeler has not participated in the Transformation Home Program previously, the
HRA will require a Remodeler Form to be completed. A form is attached.
Summary of Housinl!: Desil!:n
The HRA will require the following:
I. Each home shall remain a detached single-family dwelling.
2.
Each home shall be owner-occupied.
3. Garage space may be maintained or expanded, but not reduced.
4. The house building lines, rooflines, doors and window placement should minimize
blank wall mass. House and garage orientation to the street must present a balanced
and pleasing view from all sides.
5. Exterior materials should be low maintenance. Masonite type siding materials are not
acceptable.
6. The site must be fully landscaped, including attractively placed foundation plantings
and complete sod installation, lot line to lot line.
7. Adjoining properties must not be disturbed by the construction process. Construction
planning is important since five foot side yard setbacks limit construction space.
8.
The construction process, site grading, and the finished structure must improve or not
have a detrimental impact on storm water drainage patterns in the neighborhood. Re-
working an existing site grade to improve neighborhood drainage may be requested.
If a roof is pitched towards neighboring homes, gutters may need to be installed to
divert storm water, in addition to improved grading.
5
.
.
.
BRA Agenda - 06/07/06
8.
Consideration to derme "oualified business" and "non-oualified business" as it relates
to marketinl! the Monticello Business Center.
A. Reference and backl!round:
Prior to printing of a small pamphlet marketing the Monticello Business Center and given the
HRA change in selling strategy that a business does not have to meet the criteria to purchase
land, I, again, wanted to clarify this. In other words, we are offering land for $1.00 per square
foot to qualified business and $3.00 per square foot to non-qualified business. 1 would then
suggest the pamphlet under the example read: qualified business and non-qualified business.
Additionally, any reference to savings comparison and land investment savings be changed to
reflect this.
What this means is the HRA's goal is no longer to create job density, high wage-levels, or
building value. The maximum land formula remains in place. At least on the first 35 acres, a
business must comply with the recorded covenants: no outdoor storage, no steel building,
irrigation, etc. I-IA uses only and 1-2 (Heavy Industrial) uses are not permitted.
Do you agree or not agree?
I
.
.
.
_0
::i
~
'"
..... .. ........~
E
o
'-!
"'C
c:
o
....I
.sa
(jj
.!::!
-
c:
o
:E
I
.
.
.
.9.S ~"O ~
... "6 e:1~.~.1t;
8.--gi cio ~.s.E f"8
80-61i':oz~o..
....:f.E_ @[j@~11
- QI QI ~ Sb~.~ <': '" .
~ I'~~ ;(j.E ~..s.Eii
';:' 0. 0 ,..l:; E ti ..... -;;; E
.ea~~ Z;~E~1:~
li!'02!IV 5'~CIl~8t:
== C ""l5ij ':...) $-5 u';::';:
lig-gg- ~]o"5~~
-a'- N';: '"' '" CIl :;: -0....
a~-:;:J '~.9 s'=@ itlj
= ~J:-g &.:!l;q S!.:go
.2~-~'3 -o:;:!:;:;~o..
~O;6~~~.fi&B
-6~~ E .~g:'~gf'",ll
.Sgc2l! g~a~~~
:e5f_o ::2>e*..a~~
~ g ~~:E~~8
E-':::':...)i:L..
~S>::~~]~,.8
-fi'~E$6"'~~
-- t: :::..., ~"(;j '"
<:> B g-.3 E5 ~ 1:; ~
~~~~.-"-'03~
P..8o-gi""2 ~'i
"0... . '" 2 r: jg 1l
t: ~ ::: Of; Sb...l',...__
""' 0 - ... v ,...
~$..o.~'!l Qj~ 5..
'" (;1-3;i3lig,..l:l<Q
c''''' OJ) <:> :::., 0 S,..l:;
!3 ~ \!::..s~11::;g ~
8"g11~'~~o ~
~"''''~]~.~.~
~~]~.g~r;.s
:;;>' 9 1:.-0.- .;;;;..,
.- 0 ::> '" :t: !:lb , t:;
-ou <.J E "'.1: [j ~
ia ~'E 1:Ua 2.2 [
OJ;jE~~.!::!~...
] 0 c g :;: o...~ ~ .
~ 8'"., "-t ~ '"
;::: .t:l ii:'o s 8 '" ::: <3
~ ~ ;h~ ~ I>.C ~ 8 N
g-2 ~
..,f :!J.S
;;~~]
> ~
o . _
02::';;
L-OO
.~ ~;
si! 5
6 '" ~
u ~ .
oJ...-l::
"-g.~ ,12
:9~g..
~.,g ti a::
~:::..Ct....!..
s~~ ~
~...... v ~
~o'<";:;:;
z-. $ i50
"'0 i,c
~ :U'1;:2
$:..,s ,,; u
.. lL.
E "i;'
:ih:i.~."
. "'~ ::I 0
;;---~=a3-~
a.9g.98
~ .8 0""8 .
1!oS='1;;
0"0 C c.s;
-egQ",
'5o_~~
...- GI CII=
ti8o==
0........ .._
01 f]i li!.j
=a...~...
:5&.....$
- II) c.S c..
~8..- ~v
~ .
.~ ~ .~ ~ ~
~~ ~ ~i
"li ~ " "-
[~ ~ E ~~
-~ ~~LJ;2i
~ 0., "0 ~ ~ 5
~~E 2:l1a"?-g:r:
.. 2 ~ 8 ~!Ii ~"O ""'8'
~ "1' ....... ...::::;.~.s
<J.; ..... ~ be ~ ~ 0.. r;: ;!"
:2"'g"E~~.~~~.~~
~;:0~"'~~"28:6h
.:l.t!~E~ .~'"dOa
;; :::l'~""O:: C (: II;: -Iii I'-"
>-~;3g~dl~~ia~li1
.... ~. '" u , ::> -' a...
'~'W E~f'~'"d<ll;:l
,:: ~ 3 ~~;!: "- -; ';: lfJ
a .. ...
o
U
.
.
.
BRA Agenda - 06/07/06
9.
Consideration to authorize Davment of BRA bills.
Recommendation is to authorize payment of the attached invoices.
~
.
.
.
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Leaders in Public Finance
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
(651) 697-8500
Summary Statement
Monticello Housiwl And Redevelopment Authority
505 Walnut Street. Suite 1
Monticello, MI'i 553",2-8822
Statement Date: May 10, 2006
Proiect
Amount
Invoice #
2006 Modification of District 1-2 and 1-24
General
TIF District No 1-37 - Economic Development
$1,050.00
$1,125.00
$3,750.00
332703
332704
332705
Total for this statement
$5,925.00
Monticello Housing And Redevelopment Authority
505 Walnut St,eet. Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362-8822
Invoice #:
I nvoice Date:
332705
May 10, 2006
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Leaders in Public Finance
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
(651) 697 -8500
.
Financial Advisory Services Invoice
Project: TIF District No. 1.37 - Economic Development
Date Worked J2Y.
Descriotion of Services
Hours
Amount
03-20-2006 ED
NS
Prepared: Quality control review of District 1-37
For the Establishment of TIF District No. 1-37
1,50
no charge
3,750.00
1.50 $3,750.00
$3,750.00 !
[Amount Due This Invoice
1-'/ {y 'D?7
w}~l,
'":)~qq
~~
.'" c...
?\'?:>.
~
S~~\-O~
(Detach at perforation and return lower portion to Ehlers & Associates, Inc.)
Monticello Housing And Redevelopment Authority
Invoice #:
Invoice Date:
332705
May 10, 2006
$3,750.00 J
Amount Due This Invoice
-~._-_._--_..- -------
.-".
Please remit payment to: Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Attn: Accounts Receivable
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
Due Upon Receipt
~
----- --_.--- _.~
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Leaders in Public Finance
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
(651) 697-8500
.
Financial Advisory Services Invoice
Monticello Housing And Redevelopment Authority
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, Me, 55362-8822
Invoice #:
Invoice Date:
332704
May 10, 2006
Project: General
Hours Amount
4,00 600.00
1,50 262,50
1.50 262.50
7.00 $1,125.00
$1,125.00 I
---"
Date Worked.fu'. Description of Services
04-12-2006 ED Prepared: TIF issues meeting with staff.
04-12-2006 T JH Attended Meeting: Attended Meeting with Staff on
Financing Plan for Business Park. One-half split w/MR.
04-12-2006 MF, Meeting on accounting for TIF districts
~
9~~:~
cI:~ <~~
~<< \)~ '? ,_ "d-D 0-S ,
--\ Y \ Cj ,,0.. ,,- Vb"
'-\" V' J..." \:
f} \ ~ ' ~ ' VV}-, t,'
,,- '-J:J
~' "
\,_ '? , "- _ 'd- '",,- '
'}
\_ "l-, f) Y}-- ""''''/' ,
.x;: - .-y q, ,
,-
[Amount Due This Invoice
?
\ ~J ~\ l; ~ CJ \ , 9'~ 9
\ . f' !
__~ A[~~ ,---<:19.
~ S-\I,oG
(Detach at per1c,ration and return lower portion to Ehlers & Associates, Inc.)
Monticello Housing And Redevelopment Authority
Invoice #:
Invoice Date:
332704
May 10, 2006
$1,125,00 I
I Amount Due This Invoice
.
[ "000' cem" ,oem'" '"
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Attn: Accounts Receivable
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
Due Upon Receipt
/
_/ ;fICELLO TIMES
X 420
RIVER STREET
,"ONTICELLO MN 55362
(763) 295.3131
Fax(763) 295-3080
11139.43
6640.50 4498.93
.00
.00
Advertising Invoice and Statement
3
04/30/06
133
133
4/~~
4/23/06
4/23/06
CITY OF MONTICELLO
ATTN: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
505 WALNUT ST., SUITE 1
MONTICELLO MN 55362
Amount Paid:
Comments:
605079
RNWl
~
~MPc._,
608136
RW
1
11.75 94.00
!prO~~,. m. ..~'~
~~_..~..w.... """""""8"!"&0'" """'l'~':'fil'O .,,,.,,""jtil'l.1'}"!"0.@>>..,,.....,,,. .J,.O.,O"",Q.Qj
FLUSHING WATER MAINS 2X 4.0 1
MINT MO MTI MO 8.00 7.05 56.40
, '.' ...._.^..-~ ,""''''''''0',0_
.~~, . '~"7"~' ''''*"~'31(:'~!1lY'i' "";""''''''''63<.;:>2;0
IX 22.0 1
22.00 0.00
IX 82.0 1
82.00 0.00 1257.06
COMPOST SURVEY
MINT/MO MSH MO
2X
94.00
56.40
~':" ;.MO~MIP'~l'l0"""",p..,.,w "'*'~'
609158 AGENDA
LEG MTI/MO
609159 PROCEEDINGS-MINUTES
LEG PRICE INCUDES 20% DISC
MTI/MO
609160 PROCEEDINGS-BILLS IX 12.0
LEG MTI/MO 12.00
609162 BIDS, PRO 2003-02 IX 11.5
LEG MTI MO 11.50
609164 HSG & REDEVE~QPMENT AU 2X 2.0
:fjEG MTI/MO ?\~.l.{~ool. SI04.00
608257 FLUSHING WATER MAINS 2X 4.0
RW MINT/MO MSH/MO 8.00
""" ~~h. .,~lt~~lEk.~!lIi!. .... . '. . . ,
E~~;MT'-N!Jj\i'MI1J:~MSH:t.l'IlGll".'f:i;;t,''i':;;;);<:;.&. ;;,:,,</,.,,'8;,:J;l-O,y;,.
421. 30
421.30
1257.06
1
0.00 229.80 229.80
1
0.00 378.35 378.35
1
0.00 76.60 76.6Q
1
11.75 94.00 94.00
.12.;,'50' ,l\tQ.;"QQ~,'>.;c'",,;UhC1,...,~
Statement of Account
rw- '-l
I
- AgIng of Past Due Amounts
I -
~.-
~
.
10.
.
.
HRA Agenda - 06/07/06
Executive Director's reDort.
a) Karlsburger Foods, Inc. - The Purchase and Development Contract was executed on May
22, 2006, and the $10,000 earnest money submitted. The plat was taken to the County for
recording on May 24, this generally a one/two week turn around. Thereafter can the title work
commencement. The installation of water/sewer trunk lines began May 18, de-watering being
the first step. WSB estimates a mid-June completion. No building or site plans have been
submitted nor the selection ofthe lender. They may apply for an EDA loan.
b) A VR - The Settlement Agreement between the City and A VR is being drafted by the City's
Attorney Tom Scott. The agreement is subject to approval of building and site plans. Staff has
met with the architect and contractor. Staff to work with a landscape architect on Tuesday
relative to landscaping and design of screen wall (8 to 12 feet). On the 12-acre site a shop
(9,800 sq ft with six bays), plant (base floor 940 sq ft with silo 80 ft height), and conveyor will
be constructed. Green space, paved parking and trunk route areas, and the remaining Class 5.
Need stock piles - semi enclosed. Would like to start this summer or fall. Will enter site via
Haul Road and exit via Dalton Avenue.
c) Contract for Deed between the City/Chadwick - With the assumption the City and A VR
have reached an agreement, the Council on June 12 may consider purchase of additional land
from Chadwick. WBS recommends purchase of the entire remaining 85 acres allowing the
city to grade the entire site at a lesser cost than grading each lot individually. I concur with that
recommendation or at a minimum to purchase the acreage to the west of proposed Dalton
Avenue. For Rick, it's a question of coming up with the cash. Additionally, is the need to
authorize feasibility study for construction of the road (remainder of Dalton Avenue to the south
and the Haul Road to the west) and utility improvements.
d) 511 Elm Street - We closed on the Antionette Breiwick Transformation Loan on May 18 at
the office of Quality Title in Albertville. The HRA disbursed $20,000 to the title company who
will disburse on behalf of the HRA. The HRA has a Transformation Home Loan Escrow
Agreement, Promissory Note, and Second Mortgage. The lender did not want to close
simultaneously with the HRA loan; therefore, the HRA mortgage will be recorded as soon as I
get the document number of the First Mortgage. The contractor has submitted a building permit
application.
e) 1023 West Broadway - We have not closed with Keith and Jackie Petersen on their
Transformation Home Loan. I've talked to the closer several times and each appears to be
waiting on information. The construction project is complete; however, landscaping is on-
going.
t) Sunny Fresh Foods - The City will host a breakfast recognition honoring Sunny Fresh Foods
as recipient of the 2005 Malcom Balridge National Quality Award. This will be held Friday,
June 16 at 7:30 a.m. in the Community Center. Invitation go out ThursdaylFriday. Mark your
calendar.
g) Dahlheimer's Distribution - I've contacted Greg about the City, IDC, HRA, and Planning
Commission to tour their new facility. A date is forth coming. (Susie and Sandy too)
.
BRA Agenda - 06/07/06
.
h) Marketing - The sign should be up at the entrance of Monticello Business Center; although I
have not confirmed this. The contract with the billboard sign company has been executed and
returned. Contributed $250 to the Wright County Partnership for a Metro Fringe Enterprise
Network Systems Analysis, a collaborate effort between Wright and Sherburne Counties.
Fliers in draft stage for review by HRA on June 7 prior to printing.
i) Monticello's community profile is being updated. Not updated since 2003. This profile is on
the state's web site DEED.state.mn.us. I'm waiting for some organizational information to
complete the task. Also, I've been assigned a password so I can update the city's web site
under economic development. That task yet to do.
j) Preparing an economic development department head presentation for the Council June 12.
k) Leads: New inquiries have been slow oflate.
MANUFACTURER OF FABRICATED GLASS PRODUCTS - see attached response.
ALBERTVILLE COMPANY - Anticipating execution of the Preliminary Development
Agreement between the company and the HRA. 10,000 sq ft building, 8 full time jobs at an
average wage level of $17.39 per hour. Designs and assembles retail communication displays
and packaging.
PRODUCES GRANITE COUNTER TOPS AND FIREPLACES. Worked with this
company and a SMALL CABINET MAKER to see if we could complete the projects
simultaneously in order to meet the criteria. After further checking, the producer of granite
counter tops and fireplaces is a permitted use in an 1-2 district (Heavy Industrial). Therefore
does not meet the I-IA district by use.
48,000 SQ FT WHOLESALE DISTRIBUTION FROM COLD SPRING. Mailed
application.
PRECISION TECHNOLOGIES - Working with Jim Harwood for potential EDA loan for
either lease-hold improvements or machinery/equipment. Leasing in Barger's new building
under construction.
.
2
.2.
.
II
,
MONTICELLO
Request for Information
for
MANUFACTURER OF FABRICATED GLASS PRODUCTS
from
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
May 30, 2006
Proposed Proi ect
Construction of a 60,000 sq ft steel building with some office space and land for future expansion.
Four to eight acre site with convenient highway access and readily available utilities. Forty to 50 jobs
to start and potential of 100 employees in a few years.
City of Monticello
I.
All industrial sites are accessible to [-94 and Trunk Highway 25.
1-2 (Heavy Industrial District) - The above described use (manufacturer of fabricated glass
products) is a permitted use in an 1-2 district.
The Oakwood Industrial Park is zoned 1-2, there are four sites of approximately 4 to 5 acres
each privately-owned with utilities readily available.
Steel buildings are allowed in an 1-2 district.
Electrical provider is Xcel Energy.
3. According to the Wright County Assessor's Office, the median sale price for existing homes in
2004 was $ I 82,000.
4. Incentives: The City of Monticello will consider the use of tax increment financing based on job
creation, wage-levels, and benefits. The City of Monticello also offers a below prime rate (up
to 3% below prime) revolving loan program for real estate development and/or
machinery/equipment.
5.
Ollie Koropchak h
City of Monticello
Economic Development Director
763-271 -3208
ollie.koropchak@ci.monticello.mn.us
Monticello City Hall, 505 Walnut Street. Suite 1, Monticello, MN 55362-8831 . (763) 295-2711 . Fax (763) 295-4404
Office of Public Works. 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticello, MN 55362 . (763) 295-3170 . Fax (763) 271-3272