City Council Resolution 2021-57CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-57
RESOLUTION APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-22,
LOCATED WITHIN CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 IN
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Monticello, Minnesota
(the "City"), as follows:
Section 1 Recitals
1.01. By a resolution approved March 10, 1997, the City and the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority r1 and for the City of Monticello (the "HRA") established Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1-22 (the "TIF District"), a redevelopment district located
within Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Project") and
approved a tax increment financing plan ("TIF Plan") for the TIF District. The administration of
the TIF District was subsequently transferred to the City of Monticello Economic Development
Authority (the "Authority"). The Authority has proposed that the City adopt a Modification to
the TIF Plan (the "TIF Plan Modification"), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to
469.1794, as amended (the "Act").
1.02. The TIF Plan Modification consists of the removal of the following four parcels
from the TIF District (the "Removed Parcels"):
155-010-016070
155-010-016090
155-010-016100
155-010-069080
1.03. Because one of the Removed Parcels has a current market value below the
frozen value established at the time of certification of the TIF District, the City must hold a
public hearing on the TIF Plan Modification pursuant to Section 469.175, subd. 6 of the Act.
1.04. The City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the
adoption and approval of the proposed TIF Plan Modification, including, but not limited to,
notification of Wright County and Independent School District No. 882, having taxing
jurisdiction over the property included in the TIF District, and the holding of a public hearing
upon published notice as required by law.
MN190\1 01\731730.v2
1.05. The City is not modifying the boundaries of the Redevelopment Project.
Section 2 .Findings for the TIF Plan Modification. The Council hereby reaffirms the original
findings for the TIF District, and specifically finds that at the time the TIF District was
established, the totality of the parcels remaining in the TI F District after removal of the
Removed Parcels would have qualified as a redevelopment district under the Act. The Council
further affirms and ratifies the findings set forth in the TIF Plan.
Section 3. Public Purpose. The adoption of the TIF Plan Modification conforms in all
respects to the requirements of the Act and will facilitate the expansion of a successful business
within the Redevelopment Project by permitting the business owner to combine certain
Removed Parcels with parcels located outside the TIF District. The TIF Plan Modification also
furthers the implementation of the City's redevelopment plan for the downtown area by
encouraging other redevelopment projects. These public purposes and benefits exceed any
benefits expected to be received by private developers.
Section 4. Approval and Adoption of the Modification
4.01. The TIF Plan Modification is hereby approved, and shall be placed on file in the
office of the Economic Development Director of the City. Approval of the TIF Plan Modification
does not constitute approval of any project or a development agreement with any developer.
4.02. City staff is authorized to file the TIF Plan Modification with the Commissioner of
Revenue, the Office of the State Auditor and the Wright County Auditor.
4.03. City staff, advisors, and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed
with the implementation of the TIF Plan Modification and for this purpose to negotiate, draft,
prepare and present to this Council for its consideration all further modifications, resolutions,
documents and contracts necessary for this purpose.
The motion by Council member Gabler for the adoption of the foregoing resolution
was duly seconded by Council member Murdoff, and upon a vote being taken thereon, the
following voted infavor thereof:
Davidson, Gabler, Hilgart, Hudgins, and Murdoff
and the following voted against the same:
None.
Dated: July 26, 2021
ATTEST:
,,—� , P I L� " 7 " /
Mayr (4City Clerk
M N 190\I0I\731730.v2