HRA Agenda 12-07-2005
.
.
.
AGENDA
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - 6:00 p.m.
Bridge Room - Community Center
Commissioners:
Chair Darrin Lahr, Vice Chair Dan Frie, Steve Andrews, Brad Barger, and Bill
Fair.
Council Liaison:
Wayne Mayer.
Staff: Rick Wolfsteller, Ollie Koropchak, and Angela Shumann.
Gucst: Mark Ruff, Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
1. Call to Order.
2. Considcration to approve the November 2, 2005 HRA minutes.
3. Consideration of adding or removing items from the agenda.
4.
Consent Agenda.
A. Consideration to approve ratification of the Third Amendment and to approve the Fourth
Amendment of the License Agrecment betwecn the HRA, the City, and Rocky Mtn
Group, LLC.
5. Consideration to adopt a resolution requesting the City Council of the City of Monticello call for a
public hearing on a modi fication to TlF Plan for TIF District No. 1-6, a Rcdevelopment District.
6. Consideration to review and discuss excess increment calculations for each active TIF District
and authorizc direction i I' necessary.
7. Consideration to hear requcst by Ehlers to further discuss their proposed fee increase outlined in
the October 12, 2005 letter.
8. Consideration to discuss term expiration datcs of HRA Commissioners.
9. Consideration to authorize payment of HRA bi lis.
10. Consideration of lIRA Executive Rcport.
II.
Committee Reports:
Marketing
Fiber Optic
12. Next lIRA meeting - Wednesday, January 4, 2006.
13.
Adjournment.
.
.
.
MINUTES
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, October 5th, 2005
505 Walnut Street - Bridge Room
Commissioners Present:
Steve Andrews, Darrin Lahr, and Dan Frie
Commissioners Present:
Brad Barger, Bill Fair
Council Liaison Present:
Wayne Mayer
Staff Present:
Rick Wolfsteller, Ollie Koropchak, and Angela Schumann.
1. Call to Ordcr.
Chairman Lahr called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM and dcclared a quorum,
noting the absence of Commissioners Barger and Fair.
2. Consideration to approvc the October 5t\ 2005 HRA meeting minutes.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREWS TO APPROVE THE MINUTES
OF THE HRA MEETING OF OCTOBER 5th, 2005.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FRIE. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
3. Consideration of adding or removing items from thc agenda.
Koropchak added as item 9 consideration to participate in case study regarding
emincnt domain.
4. Consent agenda.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREWS TO APPROVE THE CONSENT
AGENDA:
1. Consideration to ratify the amendment and second amendment to thc License
Agreement bctween the liRA, the City, and Rocky Mountain Group, LLC.
2. Consideration to approve the partial rcleasc of the Contract for Private
Rcdevelopment by and bctween the lIRA and Blue Chip Developmcnt
Company.
HRA Minutes 10/05/2005
.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FRIE.
MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
5. Consideration to review proposal and approve hiring LHB to commence
preparation of a redevelopment inspection report for proposed Redevelopment
TIF District No. 1-37.
Koropchak reported that the developers had not yet signed the predevc10pment
agrcement and had not provided thc required deposit. Koropchak indicated that
shc and Wolfsteller had met with Chuck and Mike Van Heel, along with Stevc
Rubul and Mark Rulf. At that mceting, it was discussed that with the projected
increment, a $4 million gap remained. Ruff had also recommended adding more
funding for relocation to the developer's budget. Frie noted that the project would
probably have to change signiiIcantly to make up the gap between what the
developer had sought and what Ehlers projected in increment. Koropchak
recommended not moving forward to hire LHB for the inspections at this point.
MOTION OF NO ACTION BY COMMISSIONER FRIE.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LAHR.
.
MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
6. Consideration to review and accept:
a. Increase in fees by Ehlers & Associates
Koropchak stated that Ruff had askcd her to discuss with the BRA thc alteration
in rates for thc cstablishment and management of 1'1 F districts. Eh lcrs had
proposed a rate increase for the coming year, with incremental increases annually
after. The Commissioners noted that Ehlers, along with Kenncdy and Graven, do
thc majority of the TIF work within the mctro area. Lahr noted that Ehlers knows
thc history of what thc City is trying to accomplish. Lahr also noted that Ehlers
tcnds to stay current on TIF laws and rcgulations. Koropchak referred to previous
providers and their track record fiJr the I IRA.
Frie askcd Koropchak if many communities do not usc TIF, as Ehlers had stated
that Monticello is one of thcir more active clients.
.
Koropchak responded that some citcs do not use TIF financing, many do not use
it as frcquently as Monticello. Koropchak refcrred to the proposed rate chart
prepared by Ehlers. Lahr asked about what wc are paying now. Koropchak statcd
that the fee is normally $5000 plus attorney fccs; the final total seems to be in thc
2
I IRA Minutes 10/05/2005
.
range of $7,500. She noted that some redevelopment districts may also incur
more expense. Koropchak explained that the hourly rate is for TIF reporting and
modifications to contracts. Koropchak stated that duc to changes in TIF law, each
year the City has to pay the County excess tax increment by projections and hope
there is no shortfall when decertified.
Lahr asked what happens if the City does not agree to the increase. Koropchak
stated that then Ehlers will most likely need to consider the client relationship.
Korochak stated that the work required by the state legislature grows every year,
which may account for some of the increase.
Lahr noted that they have proposed only one increase in ten years. Lahr
suggestcd that perhaps a good alternative to what had been proposed by Ehlers,
would be to raise the rate once, then not raise it again for a period of timc.
Mayer questioned the ratio of increase. Mayer and Lahr indicated they do not like
the annual automatic adders.
Andrews suggested countering at $150.00 for the hourly rate. Lahr asked ifthis
proposed fee structure is just for Monticello. Koropehak stated that she believed
that it was Ehlers basic fee structure. She indicated that the 1'IF district
establishment costs are still being paid by City clients.
.
The Commissioner recommended that Koropchak counter to Ehlers with a $140
hourly rate and with $6750 as the low end cost for economic district creation.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LAIIR TO PROPOSE A FLAT FEE RATE
INCREASE FOR EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES BASED ON $140 PER I lOUR,
AND ON THE NUMBER OF I lOURS INCLUDED IN 1'1 IEIR FLAT FEE
SCHEDULE, WITH NO AUTOMATIC INCREASE, BASED ON
MONTICELLO'S CURRENT CLIENT RELATIONSHIP WITH EHLERS AND
ASSOCIATES.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FRIE.
MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
Frie suggested recommending to Ehlers that they come back with another
proposal using that range. Andrews stated that Ehlers can also estimate projects
as they come in.
Mayer asked if Lahr wanted a time frame for Ehlers response. Lahr indicated that
he did not want to set a deadline, but that in the meantime, Koropehak could
research other firms.
.
3
HRA Minutes 10/05/2005
.
Prie asked about other companies who do similar work. Koropchak noted the
Springsted is another prominent firm handling T1F.
h. Revisions to the Preliminary Development Agreement
Koropehak explained that the Preliminary Development Agreement the HRA uses
most often is for economic districts. That agreement tlmnat has not changed
much, other than what the new deposit may be changed to. However, the
Monticello Business Center agreement, involving the purchase of property, will
be changing quite a hit. Koropchak noted the differences hetween the two
different types of agreements. Koropchak discussed the addition of a deadline for
project closings within the agreement.
.
Lahr asked why the HRA would extend the term of the project closing.
Koropehak stated that if negotiations are not resolved, they have the option to
extend at their charge. Koropchak stated that it is easier to get the money up front,
and this clause allows them to do so. Lahr stated that his point is that if the
developer pays at the end and the contract indicates that they arc responsible for
all costs anyway, why add anothcr layer. Koropchak stated that it may encourage
them to cnter into thc contract sooner and moves them along in the huilding
process. The extended term option payment is thc cost to tie-up the parcel. Lahr
statcd that it seems like a lot of work when the goal is to simply get developers to
covcr their costs. Frie noted that thcrc are always delays in any project and so this
may be a bit frustrating.
The HRA hriefly discussed the title issues occurring on the Montiecllo Busincss
Ccnter. Koropchak notcd that there is not clear title on the business park
property. The City is questioning why these questions weren't answered prior to
closing with Chadwick, with the purchase of title insurance. Pric asked who
discovcrcd the problem. Koropchak rcported that Dahlheimer's attorney caught it
through a survey conducted by Dahlheimer's. llowever, the City is still hoping to
close Monday. 'I'he goal ofthe City is to provide a quick and easy transaction.
Prie suggested that title insurancc package bc supplied by the City.
Lahr noted other changes in thc agreemcnt relating to the option payment and
extension payment. Lahr stated that he is concerned about the administrative
issues associated with this policy.
.
Mayer asked if Labr is suggesting removing the option altogether. Lahr stated
that perhaps the HRA should instead require more up front and then reimburse.
Koropchak asked what happens if plans are made and no progress is made into
getting into other agreement. IAlhr stated that it is at their expense. Koropchak
stated that it is much more diHicult to recoup those costs. Lahr stated that is why
the City may want to collect more up front. Koropchak noted that the
development agreemcnt requires that Koropchak reconcile the costs, and then the
4
HRA Minutes 10/05/2005
.
developer than pays those costs, adding a layer of administrative work.
Koropchak noted that the HRA had been concerned about scaring buyers oil with
higher fees as a mitigation of that proposal. Frie noted this agreement is primarily
for the Business Center for property purchase.
Frie asked if the HRA could exclude thc option and leave the rate at $10,000.
Mayer stated that if the l-1RA requires the large deposit up front, that seems to
make number 10 null and void. Koropchak stated that the contract also outlines
the terms relating to the date of offer.
hie asked if other communities arc developing business parks and would be in
competition with Monticello, where the up~front fee may be a concern.
Koropchak stated that there are not many business parks being developed or with
much land availability in surrounding communities.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LAHR TO REMOVE THE EXTENSION
OPTfON AND TO REQUIRE AN UP-FRONT DEPOSIT OF $10,000 ON THE
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AS PROPOSED.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FRIE.
MOTION CARRfED, 3-0.
.
7. Paymcnt of bills.
hie asked if some of the bills related to the Sun Tide project. Koropchak
confirmed.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FRIE TO AUTHORIZE PA YMENT OF THE
BILLS.
Mayer asked ifmoving the stockpile on the Dahlheimer's site cost $70,000.
Koropchak stated that the bill was in the amount of$45,OOO. Lahr clarified that
the grading was to be final grading. Koropchak stated that in October, the HRA
approved $25,637.50 to remove the stockpile. She stated that the grading hill
came in at exactly the amount within the contract.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDREWS
MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
.
5
HRA Minutes 10/05/2005
.
8. Consideration of the Executive Director's Report.
Koropchak noted that construction of Landmark Square project probably
wouldn't start until spring. Koropchak stated that the developer is considering a
reduction in the quality of product due to increased costs. Koropchak stated that
the bank has provided evidence of financing. l,ahr noted for the record that any
reduction in the quality has to go back through the Planning Commission and
DA T. Koropchak also noted that the project is on a time clock due to agreement
deadlines.
Koropehsk stated that Rocky Mountain, the Dhalheimer's project is now
scheduled to close on the ih and that the EDA had closed on the Tapper loan.
Koropchak noted the dates and times of the upcoming Fiber Optics and Marketing
committee meetings.
Koropchak reported that a copy of the response from the State Auditor was in the
Commissioners packets.
Koropchak stated that A VR was asked to responds to the City's offer by the
(' '1 . I 14th
,0unCl meetmg on t le .
.
Koropchak reported that 8arry Fluth had indicated that the property at 107 Locust
Street had come up for sale and had stated that if the HRA is interested in the
property, Masters 5th Avenue would do the negotiating. The Commissioners
indicated no interest in the property.
9. Committee Reports:
None.
10. Other Business
Koropchak reported that she had completed a survey prepared by the League of
MN Cities which asked for information on eminent domain related to projects
other than public improvements. Koropchak had reported on the Front Street
project, later known as the Hans Hagen Riverwalk development.
Koropchak stated that there are about 18 cities that have used eminent domain for
that type of purpose. ERA attorney Steve I3ubul expects that eminent domain for
economic development purposes will be a subject of much discussion in the
legislature. The] ,eague is now looking for communities to volunteer to serve as
case studies for further discussion and review.
.
(-)
HRA Minutes 10/05/2005
.
Koropchak reported that the League sent a summary from her telephone
conversation. Koropchak had asked the Mayor's opinion on the issue of eminent
domain and the possibility of acting as a case study, as it is a community
sensitivity issue. The Mayor had responded more in terms of where he saw the
City's stance on eminent domain, rather than hom the case study perspective.
Koropchak noted that acting as a case study could be very public. 'I'he Monticello
HRA could be in the newspaper, or called to testify to the legislature on this item.
She asked the I-IRA how they wanted to proceed.
Lahr inquired whether the HRA can check off which items they would like to do
in terms of providi ng further information, Koropehak stated that she did not think
so. Lahr indicated that he is not in favor of participating. Lahr stated that it is too
divisive an issue at this time, and that Monticello does not need that type of
exposure.
Frie asked how the League believes this study would affect the legislature.
Koropchak stated that it provides evidence of legitimate uses.
Lar stated that the HRA knows their case wen, but he is not sure it would be
understood by those without the direct experience in the matter.
.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LAI [R TO NOT TO PARTICIPATE AS A
CASE STUDY FOR THE LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA'S REPORT ON
EMINENT DOMAIN.
MOTION SECONDED BY COMM[SSIONER FRIE,
MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
11. Adjournment
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FRIE TO ADJOURN AT 7:10 PM.
M(JrrON SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDREWS.
MOTION CARRIED, 3-0.
Secretary
.
7
.
4A.
.
.
HRA Agenda - 12/07/05
Consideration to a rove ratification of the Third Amendment and to a rove a Fourth
Amendment to the License Al!reement between the HRA. the Citv. and Rockv Mtn
GrouP LLC.
A. Reference and backl!round:
The HRA is asked to ratify the Third Amendment to License Agreement between the HRA, the
City, and Rocky Mtn Group LLC which was executcd by all parties on November 11,2005.
The BRA, the City, and Rocky Mtn Group LLC (the "rcdeveloper") entcred into a Licensc
Agreement on September 26, 2005, allowing the redeveloper early entry to Lot 1, Block 1,
Ottcr Creek Crossing 1 st Addition for thc purpose of flnal grading and installation of footings.
It was anticipated the closing datc would occur on or before October 14,2005, conveying thc
Otter Creek Crossing property from the City to thc HRA to the redcvelopcr.
Based on the titlc commitment, thcre are a number oftitle issues which need to be resolved and
the redevelopcr's attorney and the I-IRA Attorney arc working to resolve thcse issucs. The plat
was recorded on September 28,2005.
The First Amendmcnt to the License Agreement simply extended the termination date of thc
Agrcement from October 14 to October 31, 2005 and allows construction of structural walls
and roofing of the minimum improvcmcnts as described within the Contract.
The Second Amendment to the License Agrecment simply extended the termination date of the
Agreement from October 31, 2005 to Novembcr 11, 2005, extending the early entry for final
grading and installation of footings, foundation, structural walls and roofing. The Third
Amendment to the License Agreement simply extends the termination date of the
Agreement from November 11,2005, to November 30, 2005. The Fourth Amendment
to the License Agreement simply extends the termination date of the Agreement from
November 30, 2005, to December 9, 2005.
Third Amcndment.
Thc HRA Attorncy informed me of the nced for a Third Amendment as the title issues arc not
resolved. Dahlheimer's conductcd a survey of their 8.6 acrcs ofland in hopcs most of the title
objections don't apply to their property. The survey identificd a temporary road casemcnt
across the southwesterly tip of the parcel. They anticipate title issues to be rcsolved and to
close November 30, 2005, the proposcd "termination date." I asked thc BRA Attorncy to
rescarch the title insurance policy purchased for the closing of the 35 acres from Chadwick to
.
HRA Agenda - 12/07/05
the City and why these items weren't taken care of and to elear them up prior to the next land
transaction. One ofthc purpose ofthc city owned-land was to provide the applicant with a
smooth purchasc and eonveyanec process.
Fourth Amendment
In order to elear the title issues, signatures are required from Chadwick and Bowcrs and it
appears one or the othcr is out of range to get signaturcs.
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to approve ratification ofthc Third Amendment and to approve the Fourth
Amendment to License Agreement between the HRA, the City, and Rocky Mtn Group
LLC
2. A motion to dcny approval ratifying the Third Amendment and to deny approval to the
Fourth Amendment to License Agreement between the HRA, the City, and Rocky Mtn
Group LLC.
.
"l
_J.
A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation.
The City Administrator and Economic Development Director recommend alternative no. 1.
D. Supoortine Data:
Copy of the Third Amendment and if drafted, copy of the Fourth Amendment to Licensc
Agreement.
.
2
.
.
.
THIRD AMENDMENT TO LICENSE AGREEMENT
-\\...
This Third Amendment to License Agreement entered into ~ day of '{\} h J,J '€ \N\ \s, , Q \f'
2005, by and between HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of Minnesota (the
"Authority"), the CITY OF MONTICELLO, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City") and
ROCKY MTN GROUP, LLC, a Minncsota limitcd liability company (the "Redeveloper").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Authority and Redeveloper entered into a Purchase and Redevelopment
Contract dated as of Septembcr 2, 2005 (the "Contract"), under which the authority agreed to
convey to Redevelopcr certain property described in the Contract as the Redevelopment Property;
and
WlIEREAS, the Authority, City and Developer entered into a License Agreemcnt dated as
of September 26, 2005 (the "License Agreement"), under which Redeveloper is granted the right to
enter upon the Redcvelopment Property prior to transfer of title of the Redevelopment Propel1y to
Redeveloper in ordcr to commencc site improvements on that property; and
WHEREAS, the partics prcviously extendcd thc Closing Date under the Agreement to
October 3 L 2005 pursuant to a First Amendmcnt To License Agreemcnt datcd as of Octobcr 14,
2005 and a Second Amendment To Liccnsc Agrccment dated October 3 1,2005; and
WHEREAS, dcspite Redeveloper and Authority best eff011s, H.edeveloper and Authority
havc not been able to rcsolve title issLles discovered in that certain Conmlitment for Title Insurance
File No. 25669 f.'irst Supplemental issued by Commercial Pm1ners Title, LL'(~; and
WHEREAS, Authority is willing to further extend the Closing Date and extend the early
entry f(Jr final grading and installation of footings to installation of foundation, structural walls and
roofing to November 30, 2005.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other
good and valuahle considcration, thc parties hcreto agree that the Third Amendment to License
Agreement is hcreby amended as follows:
1. Extension of Time. The termination date under Section 10(b) of the License
Agreement is extended to November 30, 200S; and the Closing date under the Contract, previously
extended LInder Section I] of the License Agreement and the First and Second Amendment thercto
is extended to November 30, 2005.
NKE-2709()7v]
MNI ')()-I2!
.
.
.
') No Other Changes. Except as specifically modified herein, the License
Agreemcnt shall remain unchangcd aJld in full force and effect.
(The remaining pagc left intentionally blank)
.
.
.
fN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned have executed this instrument the day
and date first written.
l-IOUSING AND REDEVELOP
AND FOR TlIE CITY OF MON
By: ~..,-
lts~
By: a~ \<ffi0Qi)~
Its Executive Director "
-".-"
NKF-270<,)07v I
MN!<')O-12!
.
.
.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
By:_ (J y ?LI/
lts~
ByLP~
Its City Administrator
NKF-270907vl
MN190-121
.
.
.
CONSENT OF INTERMEDIARY
The undersigned, as assignee of Rocky Mtn Group, LLC under the Replacement PropeJ1y
Assignment Agreement dated September 6, 2005, consents to the foregoing Third Amendment
License Agreement among the City of Monticello, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in
and for the City of Monticello and Rocky MtI1 Group, LLC.
Dated:
ROCKY MTN EXCI-lANGE HOLDING COMPANY 25254, LLC
By:_____
Its Chief Manager
NKE-270907vl
MN190-121
.
.
.
HRA Agenda - 12/07/05
5.
Consideration to ado t a resolution rc uestin the Cit Council of the Ci of
Monticello call for a public hearine on a modification to TIF Plan for TIF District No.
1-6. a Redevelopment District.
A. Reference and back~round:
As you recall in the letter from the Office of the State Auditor dated September 21,2005, they
asked to explain why TIF District No. 1-6 was not decertified and the excess increment
returned to the county? The 2004 TIF Report indicates a $172,183 cash on hand and a
$70,000 outstanding debt. My October 7, 2005, response was: The outstanding bond
payments are made in accordance to the Bond and Interest Payment Record. Additionally,
there are outstanding projects to be completed; therefore, the TIF District has not been
dccertified.
District No. 1-6, a Rcdevelopment District, was certified in 1985 and the requircd
decertification date is 2013 or anothcr eight years. The district assisted the developer
(Raindance) with the acquisition, soil corrections, and public street improvemcnt costs
associated with the Maus Foods project. The original bond amount was $350,000. This
District and District No. 1-5 (Construction 5) have been known as the HRA's cash-cows as
increment from pre-Mayl990 districts can be spent anywhere within the project boundaries
(Central Monticello Redevelopmcnt Projcct No.1.)
The modification of the TIF Plan is to enlarge the district budget which requires the same
process as to establish a new district. This will allow the HRA to maximize thc tax incremcnt
rather than decertify and return excess increment to the county.
The HRA will actually approve the modification to the Plan on February 1,2006. At this time,
the attached resolution simply requests the Council to set a public hearing date of February 13,
2006.
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to adopt a resolution requesting the City Council of the City of Monticello call
for a public hearing on a modification to the TIF Plan for TIF District No. 1-6.
2. A motion to deny adoption of a resolution requesting the City Council of the City of
Monticello call for a public hearing on a modification to the TIF Plan for TIF District
No. 1-6.
HRA Agenda - 12/07/05
.
3.
A motion to table any action.
c.
Recommendation:
As this has long been thc intent of the HRA to maximize thc tax increment from this district, the
City Administrator and Executivc Dircctor recommend alternative no. 1.
D. Supportine Data:
Resolution for adoption, schedule, distribution list, and 2004 TIF report.
.
.
2
.
.
.
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF MONTICELLO
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MONTICELLO CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A MODIFICATION TO THE
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
DISTRICT 1-6 (A REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT)
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the Monticello Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City")
established Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-6 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.] 74 through 469.1799, inclusive, as amended, in an effort to encourage the development and
redevelopment of certain designated areas within the City; and
WHEREAS, the HRA is proposing a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1-6, all pursuant to, and in accordance with, Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469. I 74 through 469.1799 and Sections 469.00 I to 469.047, inclusive, as amended;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED hy the Board as follows:
1. The HRA hereby requests that the Council call for a public hearing on February 13,2006, to consider
the proposed adoption of a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for 'fax Increment
Financing District No. 1-6, a redevelopment district, (the "Modification") and cause notice of said
public hearing to be given as required by law.
2. The liRA directs the Executive Director to transmit copies of the Modification to the Planning
Commission of the City and requests the Planning Commission's written opinion indicating whether
the pFOposed Modification is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, prior to the
date of the public hearing.
3. The Executive Director of the BRA is hereby directed to submit a copy of the Modification to the
Council for its approval.
4. The !-IRA directs the Executive Director to transmit the Modification to the county and the school
district(s) in which Tax Increment r:inancing District No. 1-6 is located not later than January 13,
2006.
5. Staff and consultants arc authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to prepare the
Mod ification and related documents and to undertake other actions necessary to bring the
Modification before the Council.
Approved by the Board on December 7,2006.
Chair
ATTEST:
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AND THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY , MINNESOTA
FOR THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
PLAN
FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-6
(a redevelopment district)
.
December 7, 2005 BRA requests that the City Council call for a puhlic hearing on the proposed
Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing
District No. 1-6.
December 12,2005 City Council calls for public hcaring on the proposed Modification to the
Redevelopment Plall for Central Monticcllo Redevelopment Project No.1 and thc
December 27,2005 Project information (property identification numhers and legal descriptions,
detailed projcct description, maps, but/for statement, and list of sources and uses of
funds) for drafting necessary documentation sent to Ehlers & Associates.
January J 3,2006 Fiscal/economic impl ications received by School Board Clerk and COLlnty Auditor
(at least 30 days prior to public hearing). [Ehlers & Associates willfax & mail by
Janu.ary J J, 20()6.}
January 3, 2006 Letter received by County Commissioner giving notice of a modification to the
redevelopment tax increment financing district (at least 30 days prior to publication
of public hearing notice.) [Ehlers (II- Associates willfax and mail by December 30,
2006-1
.
January 30, 2006
February 1, 2006
February 2,2006
February 7, 2006
February 13,2006
Ehlers & Associates conducts internal rcview of Modification to determine if thcy
are in compliance with City's comprehensive plan.
HRA considers the Modification and adopts a resolution approving the
Modification.
Date of publication of hearing notice and map (at least 10 days but not more than
30 days prior to hearing). [Monticello Times puhlication deadline. January 27,
2()06 _ Ehlers & Associates will e-mail notice and map to newspaper hy January
27, 2()()6.}
Planning Commission reviews Modification.
City COUlleil holds public hearing at 7:00 P.M. on a Modification to the Tax
Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. J -6, and passes
resolution approving the Modification. [Ehlers dt Associates will email Council
packet infimnation to the City hy February 6, 2006.}
Ehlers & Associates files Modification with the MN Department of Revenue and
the Office of the State Auditor, and requests certification of the TrF District with
Wright County.
**Because the City staff believes that tbe proposed tax increment district will not require unplanned county road improvements,
the TIP Plan was not forwarded to the County Board 45 days prior to the public hearing. The County Board. by Jaw, has 45 day;;
to review the plan to determine if any county roads will be impucted by the development. Plea;;e be aware that the County Bourd
could claim that tax increment should be used for county ronds. even after the public hearing.
^n action under ;;uhdivision 1. paragraph (a). conte;;ting the validity of a cktermination by an authority under section 4(,9.175.
subdivision 3. must be cOnlmeneed within tbe later of:
.
(1) 1 XO days atter the municipality";; approval under section 469.175. ;;ubdivision 3: or
(2) 90 days ,liter the reque;;t for certification of the district is filed with the county auditor under section 469.177. subdivi;;ionl.
e
EHLERS
t ... ~ ~ 0 C I'" ) E SIN ~
.
.
.
DISTRIBUTION LIST
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AND THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
FOR THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-6
(a redevelopment district)
CITY:
DEVELOPMENT
COliNSEL:
DEVELOPMENT
ADVISOR:
Ollie Koropchak
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362-883]
Steve Bubul
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402-1458
Todd Hagen
thagenlZUeh lers- inc.eom
Mark Ruff
mark(Zileh lers- inc.com
Nikki Shannon
nshannon(cJJ.eh lers-i nC.com
Elizabeth Diaz
ed iazw)eh lers-inc.com
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55] ] 3-11 05
651-697-8555 Fax
e ~,tt~,~,~,~
763-27] -3208 Direct
763-295-2711 Main Phone
763-295-4404 Fax
011 ie.koropchak(Ziki .111onticello.mn.us
www.ci.monticello.mn.us
612-337-9228 Phone
612-337-9310 Fax
sbu hul(a)kennedy-graven .com
651-697 -8508 Phone
651-697-8505 Phone
651-697-8518 Phone
651-697-8519 Phone
Tax Incrcment Financing District Report
For the Year Ended December 31,2004
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-06
Tax lncrenl~nt financing District Nall1~
Raindance
Common Nall1~
23
COllnty NlIlllber(s)
City of Monticello
TIF AlIlhority
Wright
COllnty Wher~ TIF District is Located
City of Monticello
MlInicipality That Approv~d 'I'll' District
Monticello
CityfTown Wher~ Tlf District is Located
Adm in istrator
Titk
(763) 795-271 I
Phone N lIm b~r
Rick Wolfsteller
TIF AlIthority's AlIthorized R~present,ltive
City of Monticello
Employer of AlIth()riz~d R.epr~selltaliv~ (if difli:rent from Tll' A lIlhority)
505 Walnut Street Suite 1
Address
(763) 29'1-4404
Fax NUlnb~r
rick. wolf,teller(([ki .monticello, mn. us
E-mail Address
Monticello
City
MN
Slate
55362
Zip Code
I. TIF District type (check one):
D Pre-IlJ79
D Housing
o Uncodified Law, specified:
~ Redevelopment
o Economic Development
D Renewal and Renovation
D Soils Condition
Y~al'
Chapter
Article
Section
7 Is th is a "Quali fied Ilousing District" as defined in M inn. Stat. Sec. 469_ 175, subd_ 29 (20m)'! DYes
[g] No
.
Note; Please provide an explanation on a separate sheet of paper if any of the current year answers (dates)
to lines 3 through 8 al"e different from those reported on last year's T1F reports.
3, TIl' plan approval date
A, Original
II /l21 1985
B_ Modification(s) ...............................
03/0 I 12000
DN/A
4. CertifIcation request dates
A. Original................................
12/05/1985
B. Geographic Enlargement(s)
[g]N/A
lZlN/A
C. Hazardous Substance Subdistricl.................
-..............,-..................................................-....
5. Certitkation date
A. Original...........
...,........... .'...........--..............,...............................................--..........
12/051 Ins
13. Geographic Enlargement(s)
lZlN/A
~N/A
C. Hazardous Substance Subdistricl............
-...............,..............-.............................................
6, Month and year first tax increment payment received (actual or anticipated) ............................. 07/l988
7. Date of required deccI1ification ........,.......................................................................................... 12/31/2013
.
7a Duration of the district is based on the:
o TIF Plan
~ Statutory maximum duration
o
Special legislation
8. Actual decertification date .......__..........
[g] N/ A
.
Tax Capacity for Taxes Payable in 2004 Not Applicable 0
Value
9. Current net tax capacity + $34,745
10. Original nettax capacity - $120
II. Captured net tax capacity = $34,625
12. Fiscal disparity deduction, if applicable - $0
13. Captured net tax capacity shared with other taxing jurisdictions - $0
14. CaDtured net tax caDaeitv retained bv TIF authority c- $34,625
IS. Is this TIF district is located in a fiscal disparities area and is it under option A?
DYes
DNo
[gJ N/A
16. If yes, indicate the amount of total tax increase from the
Commissioner of Revcnue Fiscal Disparities Contribution Statement
$0
[gJ N/ A
17. Does the TIF plan or other governing doeument permit tax increment to be expended:
A. To pay bonds, the proceeds of wh ich were or may be expended on activitics located
outside the TIF district?
B. For deposit into a common fund that may expend money on activities located outside
the TI F district?
C. To otherwise finance activities located outside the TIF distriet?
L3J Yes DNo
DYes [gJNo
[;g] Yes DNo
DYes [gJ No
18. Has the municipality ereated a speeial taxing district for this 'fIF district?
.
Tax Increment Rehates or Payments (Direct or Indirect) Not Applicable D
I Accounted for 2004
in Prior Years Amount
19. To governmental units other than thc municipality $0 $0
20.A Value of in-kind benefits to other govcrnmcntal units (describe) $0 $0
20.B (describe here) $0 $0
20.C (describe here) $0 $0
20.D (describe here) $0 $0
20.E (describe here) $0 $0
71 For activities and imnrovements outside TIF district $140.6'i4 $0
22. Total $140654 $0
Real Estate Transactions Not Applicable 0
Cost to TI F I Price Paid
Authority by Developer
23.A Lots 1 - ] 0, B1k ] 5, except underly 20' of Hwy right of way $232,076 $64,150
23.8 $0 $0
23.C $0 $0
n.D $0 $0
73.E $0 $0
Total $232,1176 I $64,150
.
TlF District Name: Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-06
2004 TI F District Report - Page 2
Revenues and Other Financing Sources (OFSs)
24. Tax increment revenue
. 25. Market Value Horncstead Credit
26. Investment earnings
27. Bond proceeds
28 Loan proceeds
29, Special assessments
30. Sales/lease proceeds
3l. Loan/adv(lIlee n:pnyrnents
32 (;rants
3.1 A Developcrs Payment
34 Trunsfers in (from line (6)
35. Total Revenue and OFSs
Expenditures & Other Financing Uses (OFUs)
.
36, Land/building acquisition
37. Site improvements/preparation costs
3R. Installation of public utilities
39, Public parking faeilitics
40. Streets and sidewalks
41. Public park facilities
42, Social. recrcational or conference facilities
43. Intcrest rcduction puymcl1ls
44. Bond prineipal paymcnts
45, Bond interest payments
46. l.oan principal paymcnts
47. Loan/note interest payments
4R. Adlninistrative expenses
49.A Other Iloisington Redcvcl Study
49, H Other Paying Agent
50, lranskrs out (frorn line 70)
51. Total Ex lenditures and OFUs
52. Revenues Over (Under) Ex lenditures
53. Fund Balance - 12/31/2003
54. Fund Balance - 12/3112004
.
\..Jpcraullg ~lalt:JJ1Clll
A. Icumulativ~' Mod ified I C. D.
Original TIF~Plan Accounted for in
Budl.!et Amount i Tlr-Plan RudQet Prior Yenrs 2004 Amount
$967.210 $44,R62
$0 $0
$0 $0 $25.928 $2.751\
$350.000 $350.000 $350.000 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$62,150 $62,150 $64.150 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $2.500 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$L437.150 $1,437.150 I $1,409,7X1\ $47.620
$229,000 $229JlOO $232J)76 $0
$0 $2R.OOO $2R.OOO $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$75,000 $100.000 $91\.066 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$350J)O() $350.000 $250.000 $30.000
$692.000 $692.000 $31\3,211\ $7.700
$0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0
$38.150 $38.150 $33.5R9 $0
$0 $0 $7X,RR2 $0
$0 $0 $3 J)40 $0
$0 $0 $140.654 $0
$1.JR4.150 $1,437.150 $1.247,525 $37.700
$53.000 i $0 $9.920
$162.263
$172-183
TIF District Name: Tax Increment Finaneing District No. 1-06
2004 TIF District Report - Page 3
Balance Sheet
As of I As of
Assets 12/31/2003 12/31/2 004
55. Cash $ 162,263 $172,183
56. Due from other funds $0 $0
57.A Other assets $0 $0
57. B Other assets $0 $0
57.C Other assets $0 i $0
I
58. Total Assets $162.263 $172 183
Lia bilities I I
59. Due to other funds $0 $0
60.A Other liabilities $0 . $0
60.8 Other liabilitics $0 I $0
60.C Othcr liabilities $0 $0
61. Total liabilities $0 I $0
62. Fund halance $162263 I $172 183
63. Totalliahilities and fund balanee $162263 $172 183
Transfers
Not Applicable
D
TJ-ansfers In - From Other 1'1 F Districts or Funds
Aecounted for
in Prior Years
2004 Amount
64. Frolll other TIF districts
A.
B.
C.
65. From other funds
A.
8.
C.
66. Total Transfers In (to line 34)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
T,'ansfers Out - To Other TIF Districts or Funds
67. To other TIF districts
A. TIFNo.I-1 and 1-3 IXI $68,877 $0
8. $0 $0
68. Tax increment to other funds
A. liRA General Fund $71,777 $0
B. $0 $0
69. Non-tax incrcment to othcr funds
A. $0 $0
8. $0 $0
70. Total Transfers Out (to line 50) $140,654 $0
.
TIF J}istrict Name: Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-06
211114 TI F District Report - Page 4
I nvcstment Earnings
Not Applicable
D
el 71. Investment earninus
On or hefore 7/1/97
$503
On or After 7/2/97
$28 183
Property Sales/Leases and Advance/Loan Repayments Not Applicable D
I On or before 6/30/97 On or After 7/1/97
72. Proceeds from sale or lease of property I $64,150 $0
73. Renavment of advanees and loans (exclude interest) $0 $0
Outstanding Non-Pooled TIF Bonds and Other Financial Obligations Not Applicable D
T1 F Bonds Other
General OhlhJation Revenue Financial Obliaations
74. Issue amount(s) $350,000 $0 $0
75. Principal paid in 2004 $30.000 $0 $0
76. Principal issued in 2004 $0 $0 $0
77. Interest paid in 2004 $7,700 $0 $0
78. Outstanding 12/31/2004 $70,000 $0 $0
79 Principal due in 2005 $35,000 $0 $0
80. Interest due in 2005 $4,410 $0 $0
.
81. Amount of tax increment held that is dedicated to the payment of non-pooled TIF bonds
$0
[8] N/A
82. Is amount on line 81 held in an escrow account')
DYes D No [8] N/A
83. 1 f refunding bonds have been issued, indicate the year(s) and amollnt(s) of the refunding issue(s):
[8] N/A
84. If pay-as-you-go financing is being used, report the amount of documented
developer costs incurred through December 3 1,2004
$0
[gJ N/A
85. I f property owners have received reimbursement of special assessments, report
the amount reimbursed through December 3],2004
$0
[8] N/A
86. Please list the estimate, if any, contained in the TIF-plan of the amount of
the cost of the project, including administrative expenses, that will be paid
or financed with tax increment.
$1,437.150
D N/A
87. (fthe TIF district has special legislation, please specify the year, chapter, article, and section of the law.
[8] N/ A
Year
Chapter
Article
Section
.
TIF District Name: Tax Increment Financing Distriet No. 1-06
2004 TI F District Report - Page 5
.
.
.
88.
Include a copy of the annual disclosure statement as required by Minn. Stat. See 469.175, subd. 5 to be
published in a local newspaper. (TIF reports are incomplete if the annual disclosure statement is not
submitted or does not include all required elements.) Write the name of the local newspaper in which the
annual disclosure statement was or will be published. Indicate the aetual or anticipated date of the
publication of the annual disclosure statement. (An affidavit of publication is not required.)
Monticello Times
NWTle or I.ocal Newspaper
8/ II /2005
Date of I'uhlicatiun (actual 01' anticipated)
TIF District Name: Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-06
2004 1'1 F District Report - Page 6
.
.
.
HRA Agenda - 12107/05
6.
Consideration to review and discuss excess increment calculations for each active TIF
District and authorize direction if necessary.
A. Reference and back!!round:
This is somewhat in relationship to the previolls agenda item. It is my understanding, Elhers ran
excess increment calculations for each of the active Monticello TIF Districts. New legislation is:
An excess increment calculation must be done as of December 31, of each year. Now is the
time for modifications. An authority must spend or return the excess increment pursuant TIF
Act constraints, within nine months after the end of year.
More information at the meeting.
.
.
.
HRA Agenda - 12/07/05
7.
Consideration to hear re uest b Ehlers to further discuss their ro osed fee inerease
outlined in the October 12. 2005 letter.
A. Reference and back!!round:
Mark RulI has requested to address the BRA commissioners explaining the justHication of the
proposed increase in fees. Please find attached the October 15 memo and fee schedule from
Ehlers and a copy ofthe BRA's action of November 2,2005.
1
.
.
.
o
~
w
~
~ ~,
EHLERS
& ASSOCIATES INC
To:
Ollie Koropchak, City of Monticello
Mark Ruff
October 12, 2005
From:
Date:
Subject: Fees
Our tlnn appreciates the opportunity to work with the City of Monticello and the Monticello
BRA. I appreciate the professional challenges of redevelopment and new growth that your
city presents on a regular basis.
As you are aware, our firm has not raised its hourly fees and fees for TIF districts for the
HRA for several years. I recall that since we started working with the City in 1995, we have
raised our fees only once. Currently we are at $125 per hour. Almost all of the other clients
I serve are at hourly rates of $175 to $185 per hour. In addition, new requirements for TIF
districts have recently been passed in Minnesota regarding disclosurc of fiscal implications
which will complicate TIF plans aftcr the end of 2005.
To avoid these large increases in rates in the future, I would propose that we raise our
hourly fees to $150 per hour and then incrcasc $5 per hour annually for the next four
calendar years. This is still bclow our market ratc for other clients, but Monticello is one of
Our more active clients and 1 sincerely appreciate the relationship we have developed with
the City and BRA over the past decade.
Attached is a chart with our standard fees for TIF districts. Please call with any questions.
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE
l.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113-1105
Phone: 651-697-8505 Fax: 651-697-8555
mark@ehlers-inc.com
.
.
l.()
o
o
N
.
~
::s
-
u
::s
L.
-
en
Q)
Q)
u.
-
n:I
u:
......Nro......(O<ON<o<oMN
O'l;:::<O~~"""'<t """goo
00(0<0......<000 oN......
<O~"""O'l"""MM(OMN(O
"ti
~
o
~
Ql
e
l.'?
..-;
Ql
.$
.....
6
.....
o
Ql
'::"
e
Q.
Ql
:S
.....
o
~
~
~
o
o
Ql
:S
1
g.
'"0
Ql
13
.Q
~
!tl
1Il
Ql
tt
000000000000
000000000000
<0 o_~<o o.~<o 0 <0 <0 0.0_
'<000 -ON - - - -00
O'l.............O'lN......~~N~<OM
Wwwb')-b')-b')-WWWWww
000000000000
000000000000
<0 <0 Ln,<o 0_<0 0 0 0 0 0_0_
~-O'l-N ~'<O t---<o-<o'......-<o-<O 0
b')-W;;W;;wwwww~;;
'0
c::
.z
Q)
I I .~
uo a.
55 2 L-
. en en ::J.3
coo ~~ ~
Q) c:: c LL '5>'0, L.
EQ)Q)_Q)Q) Q)
Q.EEf-.......... S
.QQ.Q..~~ >.
Q)oo.....(jj(jj -a
>QjQjg :J
Q)>>......rnrn Ci5
o Q) Q) .!Q "t, '(3 >. Q)
.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ] & j
o Q) .S:: ii:: ii:: if) ~ 0....
C f/) ........ __
orn~:J >.>...0.....0....
o E ro 0 Q) ill Q) ...... _
UJif)---lI~~O::JO
LLLL
~~
c en
ro en
0::: ~
C e
Q) 0.... ~
Ec'6
~.Q :J
ro1il(jj
c:: .9-......
ro 0 0
~ 'E [
rn8:E
'g .S:! rn
ro:Co
c:: :J en
ii::o....u::
~
o
~
November 3,2005
MONTICELLO
Mr. Mark Ruff
Ehlers & Associates, Inc,
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113-1105
Dear MarIc
At the meeting of the I-lousing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello held on
November 2,2005, the commissioners reviewed and discussed your fee increase proposal of October
12,2005.
. Although the commissioners appreciate the expertise ancl service of Ehlers & Associates, the follovving
motion was approved: The HRA approved a counter proposal consisting of a flat fee of $140.00 per
hour and no annual increases.
Should you wish to discllss this with the commissioners, the next meeting of the ERA is December 7,
2005, or please feel free to call me at 763-271-3208.
Respectfully,
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR 'n IE CITY or MONTICELLO
C0~ \~tf\0,<i)~
Ollie Koropchak
Execllti ve Director
c: Rick Wolfstcller, Administrator
Clint Herbst, Mayor
.
n ...__".._~"". ^ .. _.... ..'."_N'"
Monticello City Hall, 505 Walnut Street, Suite I, Monticello, MN 55362-SR31 . (763) 295-2711 . Fax: (763) 295-4404
Office of Public Works, 909 (Jolf Course Rd., Monticello, MN 55362 . (763) 295-3170. Fax: (763) 271-3272
.
.
.
BRA Agenda - 12107/05
8.
Consideration to discuss term expiration dates of liRA Commissioners.
As you reeall, at the first meeting in January of each year, the Mayor and Couneil appoints or,
in most cases, re-appoints the commissioner whose term expires in Decembcr to another five-
year term. Per thc City records, here are the tcrms of the ERA Commissioners:
Commissioner
Darrin Lahr
Bill Fair
Steve Andrews
Dan Frie
Brad Barger
Term exoires
12/2005
12/2006
12/2007
1212008
12/2009
Although the ERA will meet prior to the January 9 Council meeting, please discuss for
direction. As you can see, Darrin Lahr's term is up. Darrin, will you consider another five
years? It is assumed, the other commissioners will serve-out their term.
.
.
.
ORA Agcnda - 12/07/05
9.
Consideration to authorize pavmcnt of HRA bills.
I've requested Kennedy & Gravcn to scparate the fees associated with preparation of thc
Contract and Purchase Agreement for Rocky Mtn and clcaring title from the closing betwcen
City and Otter Crcek Crossing LI,C.
Invoice # 331584 from Ehlers has not becn sent through to thc Finance Departmcnt as
preparation of doeuments may be completc but no finished product submitted to liRA. On
HRA agenda in December.
.
.
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 337-9300
Tax 10 No. 41-1225694
November 14, 2005
City of Monticello
Accounts Payable
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Throuah Seotember 30.2005 r ^A.
MN190~00001 General ..,...,...
~
'q ~"
MN190-00101 General HRA Matters ...~
MN190-00115 Landmark Square (Commercial Development)
MN190-00119 TIF District 1-34 (Interchange Project)
MN190-00121 Economic Development TIF (Dahlheimer Distributing)
MN190-00122 Block 53 Redevelopment
.
..... rj:'lr)"
U LU, J
.'"" .,.' ...'" '^ _.~. ,.. ,...".",.",. . .
~. '.'
126.00
595.35
4,086.00
162.00
6,293.73
99.00
Total Current Billing:
11,362.08
~o. V" T~'''''l ':J '^Y'') ..' ~,
"". r.,. ,'.~' r/"''\I _~
J--' .'"'' "..Ii ,''''. ,
\.....' (J leJ (::~ ,
I .. 'ti.....! _Q
I r !! ..,(1jL~~_.--L~?J..~O $
~~
.
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 337-9300
41.1225694
?~(.
v0~
~~
November 14, 2005
Invoice # 68669
City of Monticello
Accounts Payable
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
MN190~00001
General
Through September 30, 2005
For All Legal Services As Follows:
8/17/2005 SJB Phone with R. Wolfsteller re: County/City agreement
8/24/2005 SJB Emails wi R. Wolfsteller re: County/City agreement for
interchange
Total Services:
.
Hours
0.50
0.20
$
Total Services and Disbursements:$
.
Amount
90.00
36.00
126.00
126.00
.
City of Monticello
September 30, 2005
Page: 2
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
MN190-00101 General HRA Matters
Through September 30, 2005
For All Legal Services As Follows:
8/10/2005 SJB Emails with Koropchak re: B. Fluth garage agreement
~ 8/11/2005 SJB
?-\"? .~~e_'9/1/2005E:.. SJB
o 9/28/2005 SJB
.
For All Disbursements As Follows:
9/1/2005
.
~ :-.,,'" y
."4
,V
Hours
0.20
Phone with Q. Koropchak re: acquisition/demo of garage 0.20
Meet with City Staff re: EDAlHRA organizational option~ 2.50
Phone call with Q. Koropchak re: form of PDA 0.25
Total Services:
Stephen J. Bubul; Mileage Expense
Total Disbursements:
Total Services and Disbursements:$
Amount
$
567.00
$
28.3
28.35
595.35
~s
'?~S . 0
-~
~ \ '-\
'" S "D S . 3 e "/'0
_ -:} \ 0 ~~ ~ q] .:tt:.
'i ~
~
.
Page: 3
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
~o'tO
~?~
'-\ \.0 0
\~.
? ~ ,_o?
\\.,,,?-
City of Monticello
September 30,2005
MN190-00115 Landmark Square (Commercial Development)
Through September 30,2005
For All Legal Services As Follows: Hours Amount
8/1/2005 SJB Emails w/ Ruff, Koropchak re: inspection, continuance of 0.20 36.00
hearing
8/8/2005 SJB Phone with O. Koropchak re: moving one house, effect on 0.30 54.00
TIF district
8/10/2005 SJB Email w/ Koropchak re: TIF Trans 0.20 36.00
. 8/11/2005 SJB phone with O. Koropchak re: TIF boundaries 0.25 45.00
8/15/2005 SJB Hone with O. Koropchak re: parcels to include, contract 0.20 36.00
terms
8/16/2005 MTN Intraoffice conference with S Bubul re: status of file; review 1.10 209.00
file; review Ehler's draft TIF Plan.
8/17/2005 SJB phone with Ollie re: business transaction; conference with 0.75 135.00
M Norton re: contract
8/18/2005 MTN Commence drafting CPD. 0.90 171.00
8/22/2005 MTN Draft CPD; email to/from Ollie re: terms and related 1.80 342.00
issues.
8/23/2005 MTN Draft and revise CPD. 1.60 304.00
8/24/2005 MTN Revise CPD and transmit to Ollie. 0.90 171.00
8/25/2005 SJB Phone with O. Koropchak re: CHB results, parcel 0.30 54.00
configuration
8/26/2005 MTN Review CPD with Ollie; edit same. 1.20 228.00
8/31/2005 SJB Conference with M Norton re: terms; phone with Ruff, 0.60 108.00
Koropchak re: same
8/31/2005 MTN Review emails re: status of drafts and resolutions; review 2.40 456.00
Ehlers resolutions for TIF 1-35, removal of parcels, revised
. cash flow analysis; edit TIF plans resolution; draft and edit
Inter fund loan resolution; draft resolution approving
contract; telephone conference with Ollie re structure of
$20K advance; intraoffice conference with S Bubul re:
.
Page: 4
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis. MN 55402
City of Monticello
September 30, 2005
same.
9/1/2005 SJB Phone call with 0 Koropchak re: terms for garage/parking; 0.50 90.00
conference with M Norton re: same
9/1/2005 MTN Email to/from Ollie and Steve re: structure of payment of 1.50 285.00
$20K from TIF 1-22; review 1-22 plans and amendments
re: uses of TIF; edit CPO and resolution re: CPO approval
and 1-22 funds; intraoffice conference with S Bubul re: use
of 1-22 funds for parking purposes.
9/2/2005 SJB Conference with M Norton re: TIF findings, resolutions 0.30 54.00
9/2/2005 MTN Voicemail to Mike Fischer re: coverage/substandard 0.90 171.00
. analysis issues; edit HRA resolution and CPO.
9/6/2005 NKE Review legal descriptions and development agreement; 0.75 82.50
search website; phone call to M. Norton
9/6/2005 MTN Edit CPO and HRA resolution approving CPO; transmit to 0.60 114.00
Ollie.
9/8/2005 SJB Review TIF resolution; emails with M Norton re: same 0.25 45.00
9/8/2005 MTN Review Ehlers resolution/maps relating to parcel 2.20 418.00
elimination; email Ollie and Susan Landrum re: same;
review LHB report, review statute re: requirements for
substandard properties; review Ehlers draft resolution
approving 1-35; telephone conference with Susan Landrum
re: same; draft and edit same.
9/9/2005 NKE Search county website; phone call to O. Koropchak 0.50 55.00
9/9/2005 MTN Review Walser issue with Steve re: public purpose finding 0.60 114.00
for resolution approving TIF District 1-35; edit same.
9/13/2005 MTN Email from Ollie re: garage condition for TI F 1-35 approval; 0.30 57.00
telephone conference with Steve re: same; email to Ollie
re: same.
9/14/2005 NKE Phone call with O. Koropchak; research Wright County 0.50 55.00
website for plat; review legal descriptions
9/21/2005 MTN Edit CPO per Ollie's direction. 0.70 133.00
. 9/22/2005 NKE Intraoffice meeting with M. Hyatt to obtain legal 0.25 27.50
descriptions to be inserted in development agreement
.
.
.
Page: 5
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
City of Monticello
September 30, 2005
Total Services:
Total Services and Disbursements: $
$
4,086.00
4,086.00
.
.
.
Page: 6
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
City of Monticello
r' \; '1.7 '
September 30, 2005
MN 190-00119 TIF District 1-34 (Interchange Project)
Through September 30, 2005
For All Legal Services As Follows:
8/23/2005 CAW Review and organize TIF documents.
8/25/2005
OJK Intraoffice conference with S Bubul re County~City
Contract re intersection
Total Services:
u ?O l..fO
'""P t j
'-V~c;,
~ S
l _0
\\_':k
Hours
0.90
0.30
Amount
103.50
58.50
$
162.00
Total Services and Disbursements:$
162.00
.
Page: 7
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
City of Monticello
September 30, 2005
~"C
?;O
/l....lJ; ..
<=? I.J'
~
~/? 0'7-
\......
\\.- ?
MN190-00121 Economic Development TIF (Dahlheimer Distributing)
Through September 30, 2005
For All Legal Services As Follows: Hours Amount
8/1/2005 SJB Review hearing notice; phone with Q. Koropchak re: 0.50 90.00
contract terms
8/2/2005 SJB Phone with Q. Koropchak, M. Ruff re: terms of 4.00 720.00
assistance, draft contract
8/3/2005 SJB Work on contract; phone with Q. Koropchak, M. Ruff re: 4.00 720.00
same
8/4/2005 SJB Revise Contract; phone with Ruff, Koropchak, phone with 2.40 432.00
P. Zisla
8/7/2005 SJ8 Review HRA resolution re: T1F; draft HRAlCity resolution 0.75 135.00
re: contract, land sale
8/11/2005 SJ8 Review TIF Plan; phone with Koropchak re: hearing notice, 1.25 225.00
revise same
8/12/2005 SJB Emails to/from D. Johnson re: contract, schedule, emails 1.50 270.00
re: revised hearing schedule
8/15/2005 SJB Emails/phone with O. Koropchak re: status, revise 0.50 90.00
Council resolution
8/16/2005 SJ8 phone with P. Johnson re: Contract; phone with Q. 3.00 540.00
Koropchak re: same
8/17/2005 SJB Phone with Q Koropchak D Johnson re: stockpiled dirt 2.00 360.00
matter, revise contract per Koropchak changes
8/24/2005 SJB phone with Koropchak re: status of soil matter, contract 0.25 45.00
8/24/2005 MTN Review emails/file re: stockpile issue; voicemail to David 0.60 114.00
Johnson re: status of same.
8/25/2005 SJB Review K, phone with D. Johnson; draft City/HRA 1.75 315.00
resolutions; revise contract
8/26/2005 SJB Phone with Koropchak; message to/from D. Johnson 0.25 45.00
8/29/2005 SJB phone with D Johnson, 0 Koropchak re: contract 0.75 135.00
.
.
.
Page: 8
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
City of Monticello
September 30, 2005
.
.
.
Page: 9
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
City of Monticello
September 30, 2005
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
Photocopies
Metro Legal Services; Messenger service
Platinum Courier; Messenger Service
Total Disbursements:
Total Services and Disbursements:$
$
0.80
6.78
6.78
14.73
6,293.73
.
.
.
Page: 10
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
City of Monticello
September 30,2005
MN190-00122 Block 53 Redevelopment
Through September 30, 2005
For All Legal Services As Follows:
9/22/2005 SJB Emails from/to O. Koropchak re: Block 53, land
acquisition
9/28/2005
SJB Phone call with O. Koropchak re: new redevelopment
proposal/Slack 53
Total Services:
?:> (j '-4."0
~O\
u\;V
"? ' C1-,
?\ e-r..r-. oS
\ ?-\"-
\ ~
Hours
0.25
Total Services and Disbursements:$
Amount
45.00
0.30
54.00
$
99.00
99.00
.
.
.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
(651) 697-8500
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Leaders in Public Finance
Financial Advisory Services Invoice
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362-8822
Invoice #:
Invoice Date:
331583
November 10, 2005
Project: Block 53
Date Worked l2Y... Description of Services
Hours
Amount
10-12-2005 MTR Meeting at the City
~
1.75
218,75
$218.75
~mou~~ DU! Thi~_lnvoice-=-==:__-=~=~218.75l
" --
O. ~... 'T
'I "IIi::;. ',.
;,~'~~ '.~, t' .f"'<) /
:,'" ~ (; ~\~.o 1I.t.-
:, ?:l ~~_t t... ~_~__l . 'b \ q 9
.___~_____.._._~L::.L?- os..
CC'I....l1
. \./'(.A
(Detach at perforation afld retum lower portion to Ehlers & Associates, Inc;}
City of Monticello
Invoice #: 331583
Invoice Date: November 10, 2005
[~Am()~_~t o.~e Th~iS Invoic~:=:__:== -=-'_=S218!5l
. ---- ---- --.. ---"-- ----....--.-. -......----..----..-.--..--------.-----. ....----.----.----. - ------'-.-------l
Please remit payment to: Ehlers & Associates, Inc. ..
Attn: Accounts Receivable Due Upon Receipt
3060 Centre Pointe Drive I
Roseville, MN 55113 I
l__"..
--- ----- ---- - ----- ------"----. --,.--_. - .-... --..-.--.-....-- _._.__.,.~
.
.
.
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, MN 55362-8822
Invoice #:
Invoice Date:
331584
November 10, 2005
Project: General
Date Worked l2Y... Description of Services
Hours
Amount
10-07-2005
10-24-2005
10-24-2005
10-25-2005
10-25-2005
10-26-2005
ED
ED
ED
ED
ED
ED
Attended Meeting: Review OSA response and discuss w/staff
Prepared: TIF #62005 modification
Prepared: Excess increment calculation
Prepared: Excess increment calculation
Prepared: TIF #62005 modification
Prepared: TIF#6 modification
1.00
1.50
4.25
5.00
1.25
6.00
19.00
125.00
187.50
531.25
625.00
156.25
750.00
$2,375.00
~_:~;;~u~t DU~_ This~n~oice - --==-~~~==--__~"$~,375:0~
0'./ Tr'\
....., <" ,V'
"'(? 3?~1.,~1~,ci.
.
I' I
, ,
Cf)de: ').t"O .: Y ~ ~O (~ ? L q '1
i 'I ;f, "'1!
,I,!!."c;d
(Detach at perforation and return lower portion to Ehlers & Associates, Inc.)
Monticello Housing And Redevelopment Authority
Invoice #:
Invoice Date:
331584
November 10, 2005
i_~~o~_n~yue This -1-~VOi?;---=~=--=_===~:__ $~~~75~~~-]
[-- ------- ------ --- ----- --- -- - -- --- -- - -- -- - --- -- --- "'---'---~----"---"--
Please remit payment to: Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Attn: Accounts Receivable Due Upon Receipt
3060 Centre Pointe Drive I
Roseville, MN 55113
______ ____ _ ___ ____ ___ _ __ _____ __ ___ _ ____ __ __ _ __ __ _ _____ __.. _______ __-..J
.
.
.
HRA Agenda - 12/07/05
10.
Executive Director's Reoort.
a) Visicom DMRF Loan No. 111 - Copy of follow-up letter to Bruce (Uld Cindy Hamond.
b) The EDA on Novemher 29 approved a 0% interest rate with 3 year balloon payment or not less
than 3% below prime rate with 5 year balloon payment for reuse of Federal dollars. This as an
incentive to use these restrictive dollars ($500,000 plus interest payback from TCDC grant) and an
additional incentive for the industrial park. Council needs to approve modification to guidelines and
approve a resolution transferring these dollars to the EDA. Plans are to be on Council agenda of
December 12. The EDA will hold a public hearing on December 13 to modify the EDA Business
Subsidy Criteria.
c) Potential EDA applicant - I visited a company in New I lope with the real estate agent who has
completed the bOA Preliminary Application. The company is looking to purchase the Clow Stamping
huilding. A purchase agreement has been accepted by the seller and a proposed lender is in the
process of completing a credit analysis and before their bank review board. Should those two pieces
come together, I suggest the EDA consider a loan for real estate acquisition or machinery/equipment.
Ideally, Clow would like to sell the 30,000 sq n facility ffild lease-back 12,000 sq ft. The prospective
buyer wants to use the entire building.
d) Dahlheimer land closing - I'm hopeful we can close on this lffild transaction by the 30th of
November. The HRA Attorney is working hard to clear the title. Update in HRA agenda.
e) Potential buyer - This food processing company looked at lot options today: They preliminarily
selected two lots to further research. 20,000 sq ft building.
t) Sunny Fresh Foods ~ Hats off to the stakeholders as they were awarded the 2005 Malcolm Baldrige
Award for the second time. First in 1999. Attended a celebration November 22.
g) A VR relocation site continues to be under negotiations.
h) IDC requested to add to future agenda: BRE survey and 1-94 transportation corridor.
i) bOA memhership ~ The six~year term of Bill Oemeules expires December 2005.
j) Reschedule visit with Albertville business from November 30 at 10:30 a.m. Per their request.
k) Fiber optic task force - meetings scheduled for November 29, 1 :00 p.m. and December 1,4:30
p.m. RFP draft: going bef()re Council, December 12. Steve or Wayne can give update.
1) Marketing Committee - will participate in the Industrial Real Estate Summit on December 7, from
8:00 to noon at the Bloomington Sheraton. Includes seat on panel, name and logo on all ads and
marketing materials, half-page article and half-page 4-eolo1' ad in special insert, table-top exhibit, name
and logo on signage at event, list of conference attendees, and 5 free passes to event. Will meet on
December 1 at S1. Thomas Minneapolis Campus to prepare for panel discussion. Perhaps with
Mark's expertise, the HRA might discuss percentag;e of commission paid to real estate
agents and how it effects the Monticello Business Center land costs.
m) Met with Don Tomann, UMC, on November IS about interruption of telephone and electric service
along Chelsea Road East. That day the phones were down and previous weeks electrical. r called
Suburban, TCDC, and Tapper (two facilities) and all have experienced the same. It appears this may
result from the construction of the interchange, City Engineer Bruce Westly to address this at
Wednesday interchange meetings. Bruce's follow-up: Nov 15 phone interruption was due to cut in
phone cable at interchange construction. At the interchange project trailer, they too notice in the
.
.
.
HRA Ag;enda - 12/07/05
morning that during the evening interruption of electrical service or clectrical surges. Darrin requested
tcederlevel read.
n) Attended Wright County Economic Development Partnership Board meeting on November 15, in
Maple Lake.
0) Aliicle ffild photos of Bondhus Corporation and Aroplax Corporation will appear in the City
Newsletter out this week. Manuf~lcturing Dircctory was given to Kathy so labels can be made to mail
local manufacturers a copy. I madc up a list of questions for consistency and plan to go alphabetically.
p) Latcst copy ofTIF Division Newsletter.
q) Wright County Economic Development Partncrship - Results of a survey conducted by the
Partnership of Wright County communities as to TIF or ]Offil fees charged.
r) Copy of the rcvised Preliminary Developmcnt Agreement (Monticello Business Center) per action
taken by the lIRA in October.
s) Transformation Loan Program - Had people interested again of latc. This party has a great vision;
however, market value of home in 2005 is $171 ,000.
t) Landmark Square II - Staff has met with the architect to determine ways to retain project quality and
meet the suggested downtown landscape improvements. Some costs were reduced hy public utility
alignmcnts. You will notice the Koppy garage is gone and the two houscs demolished.
u) I left a message for Chuck Van Ifeel for an update on their proposed redevelopment of the block
consisting of the old thcater. Staff has not heard anything.
v) I'll be out of the office starting December 16 returning Deccmber 28.
2
~
.,
.
.
,.o\\\\\"{)IT1f!ill/Ij,'q
,ij" \'>-~\"-':'c'-' if. Q'>/(>
/$1,,",. . :,,"\l'L~~Y.v(;".:. ~"<}
rc;-\oo..Y.. . '"~,( .,.'U,)' c/'
ir':/,'i;~~ ~ ..:~\-~
t~~:~' ..~~~
l~I,~~~J
''!;..,f.', ,. -. ...~l!
'?~<J"'~' .' "" q
'v->0"'V'''s'
" {'-:/j'J({tr)j~~~\.r'i.\)(>'>)-"'
)0. ~.
November 2005
Tax Increment Financing Division Newsletter
. Pooling-jor-Deficits Explained
. Tax Rejorm Deficit Procedure Simpl~fied
. Pooling-jor-Deficits Trumps Other Pooling Limitations
. TIF Division Will Not Take Action on TIF Plan Modification
Question
Pooline-for-Deficits Exvlained
Reform of the Minnesota property tax system in
years 1997 through 200 I substantially reduced TlF
revenues available to meet debt service and other
pre-existing obligations in pre-2001 T[F districts,
often causing deficits. Possible payment of these
deficits is provided through an exception to the
T'IF Act pooling limitations, referred to as
"pooling-for-deficits". The exception permits TIF
revenues from another authority or district in the
municipality to be used to cover such deficits if (i)
the cetiification request date (CRU) of the T[F
district is prior to August 1, 2001, (i i) the deficient
T[ F district has used all its avai lable TIF revenues
to eliminate the deficit, and (iii) the reduction in
increments is a result of the property tax reform
class rate changes or the elimination of the general
education tax levy.
MlI1n. Star .~' "M. /763. subd 6
Tax Reform Deficit Procedure Simolified
[t was di meult to calculate pati two of the above
statutory provision, meant to demonstrate the
reduction in T[F revenues in a TIF district was a
result of tax reform measures. A 2005 TIF Act
amendment permits an authority to now skip that
part of the calculation if it makes an irrevocable
commitment, by resolution, to use transferred
increments from other districts to only covcr
qualified deficits and county administrative
expenses. In addition, Minn. Stat. * 469. [76,
subd. 2 (b) (iv), the "excess increment provision",
was clarified so excess increments from other
districts can be transferred to cover qualified
pool ing- for-deficit costs.
Poolinf!-for-Deficits Trumps Other Poolinf!
Limitations
The pooling-far-deficits exception ran counter to
TIF Act provisions limiting pooling of TIF
revenues from other types ofT[F districts. A 2005
T[F Act amendment clarified that, upon a finding
that a qualified deficit exists, TIF revenues from
these types of districts can be used !()f pooling-for-
deficits purposes.
Minn Stat. ,f 4691763. subd. 6(e)(l)
Tl F Division Will Not Take Action on Tl F Plan
Modification Ouestion
The law is unclear whether T[F plan budgets from
other districts must be modified, or how the plans
should be modified, to permit them to make
pooling-for-deficit expenditures. A 2006
clarifying amendment is anticipated. In the
interim, the TIF Division will not take any action
with respect to this question due to lack of
statutory clarity, as long as there is a counci I
resolution, with required findings, approving
pooling-far-deficit expenditures.
Arlin Waelti
05/ -2i)()-7979 fIr/in. Wae/liid!slLt1f.,flU1JO:
Kurt Mueller
65/ -297-368() El!!:!ildu!~/{(ni/slale. mil. us
Lisa McGuire
65/ -2i)()-1J2 55 Lisa. AlcGyirci.(iJ5!U!cmn.lIs
I{you have any questions please contact us:
Suk Shah
65 /-2IJo-700 / Suk.Shoh@"V!I!r;mIl.US
Marsha Pattison
05/ -296-47 / 0 A1ru:,\h(ll'a//isomd).\:((lNtJ.!tL!Fi.
Maggie Gebhard
651-296-7440 ;1.laEl<!e,{;ch!1ilr,frti)stale, mn.J!Y
.
.
.
l D cy ,
FEES FOR ApPLICATIONS OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
IN WRIGHT COUNTY COMMUNITIES:
CITY TIF ABATE- REVOLVING COMMENTS
MENT LOAN FUNDS
Cokato Requires reimbursement of
attorney & administration
expenses upon city council
approval.
Howard I Jake $2,500 $2,500 No charge
Monticello $7,500 to cover $200 up front. TIF fees are not
administrative costs, Plus attorney due until
attorney and financial fees collected at execution of
Consultant Fees. Any loan closing. Preliminary
amount more is required of Development
the applicant and any Agreement.
amount less is returned
Montrose Applicant pays all fees; an
escrow of $2,500 is
req uired.
St. Michael No charge No charge No loan program
Filed under grand and loan applications.
Form
. Oetober 7,Novcmber 3. 2005
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF' MONTICRLLO, MINNESOTA
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Monticello Business Center)
THIS AGREEMENT, dated this _ day of ___, 20_.__~_ 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
___ ("Developer"):
WITNESSETH:
WlIEREAS, 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 "Developmcnt"), which proposal is attached
hereto as Exhibit B; and
.
WHEREAS, the Developer has requcsted 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
Developcr be designated solc dcvcloper of the Property during the term ofthis Agreemcnt; and
WIIEREAS, the Authority and the Devclopcr are willing and desirous to undertake the
Development if (i) a satisfactory agreement can bc rcached regarding the Authority's
commitment fix public costs neccssary for the Development; (ii) satisfactory mortgage and
equity financing, or adequatc cash resources for the Development can be secured by thc
Developer; and (iii) the economic feasibility and soundness of the Dcvelopment and other
neccssary preconditions havc bccn 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 agrecs to make the nonrefundahle
deposit described herein, which is intended, in part, to reimburse the Authority for its costs if thc
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 sct forth herein, the parties agrcc as follows:
.
1. Negotiations hetween thc parties shall proceed in an attempt to formulate a
defInitive purchasc and development contract ("Contract") based on the following:
....
......
.
.
(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 he negotiated and agreed upon 111
accordance with negotiations contemplated hy this Agreemcnt;
(c) such documcntation regarding economic feasibility of the Project as the
Authority may wish to undertake during the term of this Agrcement; and
(d) other terms and conditions of this Agreement.
2. It is the intcntion of the partics that this Agreement: (a) documents the present
undcrstanding and commitments of the parties; and (b) will lead to negotiation and execution of
a 111utually satisfactory Contract for the Development prior to the termination date of this
Agrecment. The Contract (together with any other agreements entered into between the parties
hereto contcmporaneously therewith) when executed, will supersede all obligations of the parties
hereunder.
J. During the term of this Agreement, the Dcveloper shall:
(a) Submit to the Authority a design proposal to be approved hy the Authority
showing the location, size, and nature of the proposed Development, including 1100r
layouts, rendcrings, elevations, and other graphic or written explanations of the
Development. The design proposal shall be aeeompanied by a proposed schedule for the
starting and completion of all phases of Development.
(b) Suhmit an over-all cost estimate for the design and construction of the
Development.
(c) Submit a time sehedule for all phases of the Developmcnt.
(d) Undertake and obtain such other preliminary economic feasibility studies,
income and expense projections, and such other economic information as thc Developer
may desire to furthcr confIrm the cconomic feasibility and soundness of the
Development.
(e) Submit to thc Authority the Developer's tlnancing plan showing that the
proposed Developmcnt is financially feasible, and, to the extent Developer seeks public
financial assistancc in any form (including rcduced land cost, waivcr of fces, and tax
incremcnt financing), evidcnce that such assistance is reasonably nccessary to make the
Devclopment financially feasible.
(I) Furnish satisfactory, fInancial data to the Authority evidencing the
Dcveloper's ability to undertake the Development.
(g)
Cooperatc with thc Authority and City in replatting of the Property as
SJB-200895v2
MNIl)()-41
2
.
described in Section 4.
4.
During the term of this Agreement, the Authority agrees to:
(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 financi ng district that
includes the Property.
(b) Proceed to seek all necessary information with regard to the anticipated
public costs associatcd 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 agrecs to indemnify, save harmlcss, 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, Devcloper shall not pcrmit any mechanics', matcrialmcns' 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 Devclopcr
agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Authority and City from and against
the same.
(e) Commencc rcplatting of the Property, or cause the City to commcnee such
replatting, in order to create the parcel described on Exhibit A.
5. It is expressly understood that exccution of the Contract shall bc subjcct to:
(a) A determination by the Authority in its sole discretion that its
undertakings are feasible based on (i) the projected tax increment revenucs and any other
rcvenues designated by the Authority (to the extent requested by Devclopcr); (ii) the
purposes and objectivcs of any tax incremcnt, development, or other plan created or
proposed tlW the purpose of providing financial assistance for the Development, if any,
including the determination that such assistancc 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 Devclopment is feasible and in
the best interests of the Developer.
.
6. This Agreement is effective from the date hereof through ,20-ftfle
"Initial Term"); provided that the term of the Agreement may be extended through ,
-'.--"..".,.--
20____ (the "Extendcd Term") if Devclopcr exercises the option describcdin Section 8 hereot~
unless extended with annroval of the Authority's board of commissioners. After expiration
SJB-100S95vl
MN 190-41
J
.
of the Initial Term without action by Developer under Scction 8, or upon c)cpiration of the
Extcnded Term if Developer e)(crcises its rights under Section 8,term of this Al!reement.
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 addition, the Developer shall reimbursc the Authority for Administrative Costs, as hereafter
defincd. For the purposes of this Agreement, the term "Administrative Costs" means out of
poeket eosts 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 Contraet, and other documents and agreements in connection with the
Development, ineluding without limitation all costs in connection with replatting of the Property
and the cost of finaneial 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 eheck in the amount of $10,000, 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 exeeed $10,000 and that additional seeurity
is rcquired, the Authority shall notify the Developer of the amount of sueh additional security.
Within ten calendar days of receipt of this notiee, 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 cqual to the Administrative Costs incurred by the Authority
through the date of noticc of termination. For the purposes of this paragraph, Administrative
Costs are eonsidercd to be incurred if they have been paid, relate to services pcrformed, or are
payable uncler a contract entered into, on or beforc the date of the notiee of termination.
This Section 7 shall survive termination of this Agreemcnt and shall be binding on the
Developcr regardless of the enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement.
R. (a) The parties agrcc and under:;tand that the final Contract is expected to provide
for convcyance of all or a portion of the Propcrty from the ,'\uthority to the Developer or its
ac_;signs, undcr term:; agrccd upon in the Contract. The partie:; currently anticipate that thc
Property \ViII be convey(Cd for a puroha:;e price to be detcrmined and :;ubject to satisL:ction of
contingeneic:; specified in thc Contraot. As noted in Section 1 0 hereof~ tho Authority may not
sell, or negotiat(C for the sale of, uny portion of the Property to any other person or entity durin!:;
the term of this "^.!:;rccment. /\.s e0nsicleration for sueh eKclusivo rights, if Developer wishes to
e)ctcnd the Initial T(Crm of this "^.greement, the Developer agrees to pay to the /\uthority an option
payment of $ .. (the "Option Payment") upon or before enpiration of the Initial Term. If
Developor makes sLleh timely payment, the term of thc Agreement i:; automatically eJ(tended
through :he Extended Term :;pecified in Section 6.
.
(b) If u Contract is e)(ccuted \vithin thc I:xtended Term, and any portion of the
Property is conveyed to the Developer in accordunce with its terms, a pro rat~: portion of the
Option Payment shall he applied u!:;ainst the pureha:;e priee of the fiJ':;t portion of the Property so
conveyed. The term "pro rata portion" means a pereentage based on the arca of the portion of
SJB"200895v2
MN19().41
4
.
the Property first conveyed as a shHre of the tot:11 square footH!:;e of the property owned by the
"t\uthority. The balance of Option Payment shall be applied against the purchase price of
subsequent portion~; of the Property on the same bnsi,;.
(c) If for any reason a Contract i:; not negotiatcd and 8Jwcuted within the E)(tended
Tenn or any mutually approved extension thereof, or if this /\greement is terminated pur:;unnt to
Section 9 hereof (other than d'.Je to breach by the Authority), or if the Contract i~; terminated
pursu::nt to its terms for any reuson (other than due to breach by the "t\uthority) hefore closing on
conveyancc of any portion of the Property the Developer, then the /\uthority shall retain the
Option Payment. The Developer shall have no rights or interest in any interest earnin!:;:; on the
Option Payment or in thc amount retained by the Authority under this Secti(m. The substantial
terms of this Section shall he ineorporatedin any Contract entered pur:;tlHnt to this ,t\.greement.
9. This Agreement may be terminated upon 5 days written notice by a party to the
other party if:
(a) if, in the respective sole discrction of the Authority or the Developer, an
impasse has been reached in the negotiation or implementation of any material term or
condition of this Agreement or the Contract; or
(b) the Authority detcrmines that its costs in perf(H'ming under this Agreement
well exceed $10,000 and the Developer does not deliver additional security to thc
Authority pursuant to Section 7; or
.
(c)
a party fails to pcrform any of it's obligations under this Agreement.
If either party terminates the Agreement under this Section 9,~ the Developer shall
rcmain liable to the Authority to the extent provided under Sections 7 and 8Section 7 of this
Agreement.
+-4:-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 developmcnt 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 perilwm any of its obligations hcreunder, without the prior written
consent of the Authority.
--I--t--:-.l!1. In the event that the Developer, its heirs, successors or assigns, fail to comply
with any of the provisions of this Agreement, the Authority may proceed to enforce this
Agreement by appropriate legal or equitablc proceedings, or other similar proceedings, and the
Developer, its heirs, successors or assigns, agree to pay all costs of such enforcement, including
reasonable attorneys' fees.
~1L If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid hy 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
sm-200895v2
MN190-41
5
.
.
.
breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or suhsequent
breach.
+4:-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: I lousing and Redevelopment Authority
in and for the City of Montieello
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362-8822
Attn: Executive Director
(b) As to the Developer:
-8-,.14.... This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts,
all of which shall eonstitute one and the same instrument.
*l5.... 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.
--1--7.,.16.... The Developer hereby agrees to protect, defend and hold the Authority, the City
and their ollicers, elected and appointed oilicials, 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 cxpert 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 ,my part of the Property, including, without
limitation, any claims for any lien imposed by law tlW services, labor or materials furnished to or
for the henefit 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,
cont,uninant or hazardous waste on the Property; and (iii) or by reason of the execution of this
Agreement or the performance of this Agreement. The Developer, and the Devcloper'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 expcnses of defending the same, including hut not limited to, attorneys
fees, consulting engineering services, and other technical, administrative or professional
assistance. This indemnity shall be continuing and shall survive the performance, termination or
cancellation of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agrccment shall be construed as a limitation of
S.lB.200IN5v2
MNI90-4!
6
.
.
.
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 he 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 flrst above written.
[NAME Or: DEVELOPER]
By
Its:
S.lB-200895v2
MN190-ill
7
.
.
.
S.IB-200895v2
MN190-41
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
By
Its Chair
By
Its Executive Director
8
--~..-
.mo" /"
-.-......-.~--_.--...__.-..-.-...-........__.~.- 1 (:', '"7 ;
._______.._..._.....m_..__..._._..__ U
DO
DO
DO
.
-~
~
~
I~
.
DO
DO
.
DO
DO I~
DO
DO DO
DO