The URL can be used to link to this page

EDA Agenda 12-12-2012EDA MEETING Wednesday, December 12th, 2012 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room - 505 Walnut Street, Monticello, MN Commissioners: President Bill Demeules, Vice President Bill Tapper, Treasurer Tracy Hinz, Matt Frie, Rod Dragsten and Council members Tom Perrault and Brian Stumpf Staff: Executive Director Jeff O'Neill, Wayne Oberg and Angela Schumann 1. Call to Order. 2. Approve Meeting Minutes: a. October 10th, 2012 Regular Meeting Minutes b. November 14th, 2012 Regular Meeting Minutes 3. Consideration of additional agenda items. 4. Consideration of approving payment of bills. 5. Consideration to adopt resolution 2012- 115 adopting the TIF Analysis and Management Plan for TIF District No. 1 -22 and approving return of tax increments from Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -22 to Wright County. 6. Consideration of 2013 EDA Appointments. 7. Consideration of Director's Report. 8. Adjourn to 2013 EDA Work Plan Workshop. p 'C O � NCd 0 zn .p rw-i y O ct N O _ c 'O V ~ O dw •� A Q L �0 aU �3 aId O O O W N O ti •� ¢ C N O Cd O Z O U N R, .� eq ca� ``' Cd eq y •� o s p0' O N w o ria � � ; • ; � a �b � o p., Q � .•� ; � • � � a 4-4cd 0 cd Z F" O v Go U 7 Arq w a,� 4' z w .� °odd AW °��°t 0 0 cd " 64 '" o 45 00 ee % Z U Ts ° on En Z cl w 0 O° O o o 7a m0 ;� o o �A F"cq i o � e co'rs 0 9L4 W U al F-4 F- U N O N C O 40. O Nis" p O ers o ' O t— CEJ N N O sN. O O C14 4i O 0 N p U N O U N� O cd cd O T - U Qv p 7r eOn C� N ~o� C, N ,� N N U d v') o N cd �N� 3Ni � d N �" +�- '� Q N 3 S~ ,O N cd N "C3 O N 6R3 O N 6F3 N .--, ro rAto cd N A Q U O A. �. �+ N s+ LZa U x N Cd cn to Cd Cd cd C,3 o w°� 0 tai '� w� dc0 �cd o 10 cI to co ° N 'Z, a U s~ ' do 3N No >. H NLn cl F o N o p m E- 4° o m '� �+ F" ,� ^ iN N Q 4, 8 O o .4:`0 bA N N 0 = �' � � N � C M � � ��" iwi O � p � � Ste, � to� p � O O � N cd C,3 w U 0 V f= 'd'y ~ ~�_ O �N cd N Q. N U O ¢ F- O rN- O V cdsN 69 wi � 4-a 7E s." � > S 4° m �-- �" U N v a cd O 0 p 04=4~ d 4-4� N O c ^ �"giO p. eq v�O O O o '�U N N N; p� 'CEl d N (W U o CU 64 Q U�m cd 0 y ��r oO N s , v: cd 4m-1 1-4 N O -� O s �C O bA sem, Q P-4 cn d° M H H °� o c?os m d v U E- o c, �o 0 0 0 4�, ° `C ti CD ° o ° 3 °b i CFJ U o cd Cd Cd ro Q 4.4 vi p �O O cs3 � 4-, cd a) . 4r In -am p a) .� �, w j •�� O , G: cd �"' w �, 'C -+ d .moi V s0, C/1 O ip� N bU 'ty �" cn W cd p +— cd 0 O O O p a"j O 4° O a) ¢ —. LP N. 4? O 0 CIN N N �, .- O O O 'C ' O M N N cN cd [�— +' yNgcd � O� N M M V 1 a] O 0; O O O O N C 'C t1+ 7d 00 O U ¢ U N rn U 4.1V +— a) t3 a) ccdj ¢' O 4. 3 �"" +'. O a) O 00M Cd cd cn wm vCd t8 ti , O o cd ° U C13 cd cn t24 64 4 - to cd � •'� `d ° p' 4'"� Cd .0 (4:4 A c� O cd CZ '.4d- ° ° o Cd ° = � ° >, ai � � c M -b , amQ>Cd,4, o .otiain 55 0 Q O H P, W W W v) ° cd �m cd En ° o d 24'o W O j 'd � 0 W o aq � ° o .:- Q -)opo A bb 79 ;�C cd M Cd o to m � U) 4~ N "" �' b0A Cd 4-1 O O O cd O o 4° U z W OW y O^ v 0 0 W 4° p, 4-. In N O Eti �) a C7 ii 4-4 V1 �+ �+ '� ^0 �O 4-, U �+ A -0 cn -0 0 at +• - as A .� ° a�'"i 'd .� -° ° ami w ° j zCd F' �i '� ami °' 4� CQ C7 o 3 0 y c�°C� 41 a� .-� 'o �. d 0 ° A 'o to '0 ° U Cc, A•�4° �. y cd o co «� d `� °w ani•0 C3 b�o ° > 4 -o �' H ani �' o ° '� (DCd +�, O W U +�" O 2 y Qi C6 S " '� a) '0 —0 y +S U rn +�- O a Q' z O w U N C +0 O d O "" +' U pq p .O z AAwH ° rs °'O �'o ° 0 rn cd 03 o a O 00 N ® ami o o ami o bA 10 c�S s� N O U A U A cd [� v� r-, cd - 0 �' ;� �� ad W O`r' �,� �o QUO tj a3i � •�; � � 3 ani o � � >UD ° OHO ° �• ° �, C^° Onco cq3 c� O U p 3 N Q W O O [�— � C3Z_O �' C W O ° a4, CP � X 04• O �_ O �o d0wx� U0 �x o4- o� AF"�aw Www a �Q C4-1 +, 00 a 7aWHA" ��l trl � cri �•., cd rn >q� cd GO rA W Z H ® o o> as H o ° o -d -C,'a� ° o N vi a ° a� = HJr Z t4-4 o5 �� bn wxd�-, o 43 COOrz 0 N O d 14 F2 MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) Wednesday, November 14, 2012 - 6:00 p.m. Commissioners Present: Vice President Bill Tapper, Treasurer Tracy Hinz, Rod Dragsten, Matt Frie and Council Members Tom Perrault and Brian Stumpf Commissioners Absent: President Bill Demeules Staff. Executive Director Jeff O'Neill, Community Development Director Angela Schumann, City Engineer, Bruce Westby 1. Call to Order Bill Tapper called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. 2. Approve Meeting Minutes a) September 12th, 2012 Regular Meeting Minutes ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 12, 2012 EDA MINUTES AS CORRECTED. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0. (Brian Stumpf did not vote.) b) October 10th, 2012 Regular Meeting Minutes The October 10, 2012 minutes were not provided. 3. Consideration of approving payment of bills Rod Dragsten confirmed that most relocation benefits have already been paid to those tenants that have relocated. Tom Perrault had some questions about the eligibility of an invoice submitted by the dance studio. Staff noted that tenants are eligible to submit costs related to promoting their relocation. Dan Wilson had approved payment of the invoices. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR OCTOBER 2012. TRACY HINZ SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. (Matt Frie arrived just after the vote.) 4. Consideration of additional agenda items a) Resolution supporting expansion of the Interstate 94 West Corridor City Engineer Bruce Westby summarized that MNSHIP, the Minnesota State Economic Development Authority Minutes: 11/14/12 Highway Investment Plan, revised its approach to investing in transportation funding over a twenty year period. The plan is to be updated every four years utilizing risk management planning rather than performance based planning as had previously been the approach. MNSHIP has identified three options for State transportation funding: A) Allocates all funding to pavement preservation B) Allocates some funding for expansion within the metro beltway C) Allocates 6 -8% of funding for expansion outside the metro beltway Westby asked that the EDA approve a resolution supporting Option C which allows for expansion of the Interstate 94 West Corridor from Maple Grove to St. Cloud in response to MNSHIP's proposed approach. Bill Tapper pointed out that the City's Industrial & Economic Development Committee (IEDC) also supported Option C as it would promote inter - regional mobility. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING EXPANSION OF THE INTERSTATE 94 WEST CORRIDOR FROM MAPLE GROVE TO SAINT CLOUD. TRACY HINZ SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0. b) Sponsorship of Frostbite Challenge 5. Consideration to accept the Limited Scope Investigation for 349 W. Broadway (Fred's Auto) and Recommendation for Site Closure The Phase II environmental analysis completed at 349 W. Broadway (Fred's Auto) revealed a fuel oil release on the site most likely resulting from a storage tank located on the rear or north side of the building. Braun Intertec completed the Limited Scope Investigation (LSI) and submitted a report to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for review. The MPCA determined that the investigation and /or cleanup adequately addressed the contamination at the site and recommended site closure. MATT FRIE MOVED TO ACCEPT THE LIMITED SCOPE INVESTIGATION FOR 349 W. BROADWAY (FRED'S AUTO) AND RECOMMENDATION FOR SITE CLOSURE. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0. 6. Consideration to request proposals for identification of front yard underground storage tanks and authorize expenditure for removal of rear yard underground storage tank for 349 W. Broadway (Fred's Auto) The EDA considered follow -up steps to facilitate the future sale and /or redevelopment of the property at 349 W. Broadway. Staff determined that the underground storage tank (UST) located on the north (rear) side of the building was used after 1987 and is therefore not eligible for the Minnesota Economic Development Authority Minutes: 11/14/12 Department of Commerce's Abandoned Tank Removal Program. The EDA could choose to pay for tank removal costs through its General fund or require tank removal by a future user or buyer. It has been the traditional role of the City, EDA or HRA to move forward contamination and clean -up in order to facilitate redevelopment. Staff recommended approval of the Minnesota Petroleum SVC quote as it includes all necessary services including sludge testing and tank excavation oversight. Neither the Phase II analysis nor the LSI identified the presence of USTs on the south (front) of the property. Research indicated, however, that the property was previously used as a gas station and it is likely that underground storage tanks used prior to 1987 exist in that location. The Petrofund would pay to remove older tanks at no cost to the EDA. Staff recommended approval of a Request for Proposal process to identify the location, size and contents of any south (front) yard USTs. Tom Perrault asked if removing tanks might jeopardize the opportunity to use TIF funds for later redevelopment at this location. Staff replied that it would be an issue if removal of tanks required tearing down the building. Rod Dragsten wondered if it might save costs to use the same contractor for the front and rear property tank removal and suggested that the EDA wait to remove the tank in the rear yard until it was determined that Petrofunds would be available for the front yard. Brian Stumpf noted that the EDA had not in the past been refused Petrofunds if property had met the criteria. He asked if there was any urgency in moving forward with tank removal. Bill Tapper suggested that it would be useful to make the property suitable for purchase or lease because there is some current interest in the site. Staff plan to check with Braun Intertec to clarify the results of any analysis conducted during Phase II on the inside of the building. TRACY HINZ MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL BY MINNESOTA PETROLEUM SVC TO REMOVE THE NORTH (REAR) UST AND AUTHORIZE AN EXPENDITURE OF UP TO $2,500 FOR TANK REMOVAL AND FLUID DISPOSAL. MATT FRIE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -1 WITH ROD DRAGSTEN VOTING IN OPPOSITION. MATT FRIE MOVED TO APPROVE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS TO IDENTIFY THE LOCATION, SIZE AND CONTENTS OF THE SOUTH (FRONT) UST. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0. 7. Consideration of an update on the reSTOREin2 Downtown proiect and contract with Economic Development Services As the contract with Economic Development Services is winding down, staff requested Economic Development Authority Minutes: 11/14/12 that Janna King provide the EDA an update as to her work, the progress of downtown planning efforts, the direction that reSTOREing Downtown will take after her contract ends, and her evaluation of the EDA's role in supporting reSTOREing downtown. Janna King indicated that she had contracted with the City in early February to provide guidance and support to a leadership organization focused on revitalizing the downtown. She was specifically tasked with developing a marketing strategy and providing direction on print and electronic communication. She also assisted city staff with the downtown segment of the developer tour, facilitated website migration, worked with leadership teams and provided limited steering committee support. She summarized that ReSTOREing Downtown Monticello is a seven member private sector steering committee focused on advocacy. The committee developed a vision, a mission, guiding principles, budget, and fundraising, marketing, and communication strategies. They have created a database to keep in contact with and act as ambassadors to area stakeholders. They've also developed various flyers to provide information, encourage buy -in and solicit contributions related to the downtown effort. The Chamber of Commerce has taken on role of fiscal agent and provides administrative support and a web presence for the committee. She said that the foundations are in place and proposed a number of recommendations for moving forward with redevelopment. • Do real projects to revitalize the downtown placing priority on developing businesses that generate new tax base. Utilize expiring TIF as seed corn for generating additional tax increment revenue rather than spending TIF on infrastructure. • Market the downtown. The market study provides targets; flyers and websites provide facts; and the strategy lays out approach. Execute the strategy now that the tools are in place. • Coordinate efforts between reSTOREing Downtown and Park board. Plan the interface between the commercial area and the parks /river unique asset with river. • Seek funding for park related improvements (MN Legacy funds, foundations, etc.) • Step up outreach with developers and brokers (MN Shopping Center Association) • Determine role of city staff, consultants, volunteers • Expand volunteer base • Hire a part -time local coordinator • Focus on targeted professional consulting support • Create partnership opportunities: City funding match to stimulate private fundraising Steve Johnson, representing ReSTOREing Downtown, thanked the EDA and the City Council for their support. Bill Tapper thanked Janna King for her work in guiding the project to this point. Janna King said that she had greatly enjoyed her role and was excited about the fantastic opportunities ahead for downtown Monticello. 4-+p W�••'W � ��' � �W � N O Cd COO 0 w d y ° o W Ucd p � alw W o° r° o 0 N cd cd CU C3 00 cn ° U55 t ° -C,3i 0 0 • rs w H GQ U p� p o °' ° cd GO Cd to cz xcn rf 7g) �O cd cd vas cn cl GQ cd O cd Cd O a U . 5 ti cd MO N s cd A-4 cY, �+ cd rn O N U ° dodgy p,o 3 a`�° OSE-�ACd� °4.1 i 3� o N bb � Ri cd �? N> 0 U 0� cn 6F3 w '"� m Oaj 4? N cd cd W Q" W ° O p �O ccdd ; 43 Cd C4 lc� N O c :�cd ° A ° ° o ° via ° o ai x �• d cd �.. fl A o ,.d b 'S o �, q ',AH sem. A ° d ra 4.1 °' a� R� W f�" ;ka) cd 4-0 cn Hr1do U� HUS° Hai a"a3b4 C A wcod 0 3 —Cd � a IM Ell C) to 64 ct Q64 �0o QC), + 42 O. o 4.4 0 o C7 0 Oas �• p +�' sU- p W W rW- .� O prq �;d o a d C°Cd>W Q O 1 ••-� 40 _o �.., cam, 03 H O 03 It U a�a oQ �DW y Uj Ga ' Q % 1-4 o U U V m U cd N Q) do � p U co W Cd IQ)^ 4 N w P i U 4- �' o cd `P4 o U o W ° N �M- L: sCd Ntp pq Ul G, N p C,3 wu�3 C Cd M Adm mon �a �UON >,0 a) bUA w ~ � cd .�°L's �c o Mrd ocri 3 O C Qr p U.,, . o U fid+ 3 O cd 4- U O D U F. on O U � �� xi o c N Economic Development Authority Minutes: 11/14/12 8. Consideration to approve 2013 Wright Countv Economic Development Partnership annual membership dues The EDA had tabled consideration of membership in the Wright County Economic Development Partnership in September pending the final adoption of the 2013 EDA budget. Staff pointed out that membership in this organization provides a net benefit in terms of staff resources in that it acts as a marketing and lead - generating arm on behalf of the City. TRACY HINZ MOVED TO APPROVE AUTHORIZING PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,300.90 FOR 2013 MEMBERSHIP DUES TO WRIGHT COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0. 9. Consideration to review and accept the Monticello Business Center Industrial Park Wetland Delineation The EDA had authorized WSB to prepare a wetland delineation for Monticello Business Center in order to clarify the developable area at the industrial park and development limits for potential users. The Wetland Delineation Report was prepared and submitted to the Technical Evaluation Panel and the delineation boundary was altered slightly as a result. It was determined that the EDA has over 50 developable acres available at the Monticello Business Park. Bill Tapper pointed out that the delineation had exceeded budgeted cost. Staff will ask that WSB itemize the budget overrun and speculated that the additional cost may be partially due to the boundary adjustment required. Brian Stumpf suggested that the EDA should have been made aware of the full potential cost. Matt Frie agreed. ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED TO ACCEPT THE MONTICELLO BUSINESS CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT. MATT FRIE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0. 10. Director Report Fred's Auto - Two users are potentially interested in the 349 W. Broadway property. Staff recommended the EDA delay such discussions until interior and exterior contamination analysis and actions have been completed. The property title objection has cleared. Ace Hardware Relocation - After detailed discussions and financial analysis regarding the possible relocation of Ace Hardware to either Block 34 or the former Walgreen's site, store owner Shawn Grady determined that expansion at the current store location is the best alternative for his business. He will work with Community Development to determine appropriate land use applications for expansion. Embracing Downtown Activity - Relocations for Montgomery Farms are proceeding. Economic Development Authority Minutes: 11/14/12 TIF District 1 -5 - The City Council ratified the use of TIF 1 -5 excess increment for the West 7t' Street Extension project. Economic Development Chapter Comp Plan - The small group of EDA, IEDC and Planning Commission members had some specific recommendations for updating the baseline data of Chapter 4 of the Comp Plan. The next step will be to consolidate data and focus on amending goals and policies. Update on Economic Development Position - Staff has recommended that the Personnel Committee approve hiring an Economic Development Director. Staff will prepare a job description for consideration. MYSA Project The MYSA membership recently decided not to move forward with plans for a new soccer facility in the area on a vote of 60 -40. Staff are hopeful that discussions will continue to evolve. Broadband Conference Jeff O'Neill attended a recent conference in Danville, Virginia to learn about broadband opportunities. TIF 1 -22 Analysis - Staff will bring forward a series of decisions to the EDA related to TIF 1 -22 Knockdown in December. 2013 Workplan - Staff suggested scheduling an informal work session for the purpose of preparing an EDA workplan for 2013. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO SCHEDULE A SPECIAL MEETING TO DISCUSS THE 2013 EDA WORKPLAN FOR WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2012 AT 6:00 PM. MATT FRIE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0. 11. Consideration of items added to the agenda a) Sponsorship of Frostbite Challenge The EDA had, in the past two years, sponsored the Frostbite Challenge with a funding commitment. Sandy Suchy from the Monticello Chamber of Commerce asked that the EDA provide funding to also sponsor the 2013 event. Bill Tapper pointed out that, because the event is no longer nationally sponsored, the potential economic development benefit to the City would be limited. Sandy Suchy indicated that the event would be advertised but would now be expected to draw participants within a 30 -35 mile radius. 6 Economic Development Authority Minutes: 11/14/12 Staff noted that this sponsorship is not specifically a budgeted expense but that it could be funded through the EDA marketing budget. Tom Perrault stated that he'd rather that the event be supported by businesses that would directly benefit from it. Bill Tapper pointed out that the EDA does not sponsor other local events. TOM PERRAULT MOVED TO NOT PROVIDE FUNDING FOR SPONSORSHIP OF THE FROSTBITE CHALLENGE. BILL TAPPER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION FAILED 3 -3 DUE TO A LACK OF A MAJORITY WITH TRACY HINZ, BRIAN STUMPF AND MATT FRIE VOTING IN OPPOSITION. Tracy Hinz asked about sponsorship level options available and how funding might be used to support the event. Suchy indicated that sponsorships could be funded at any amount and designated as requested. TRACY HINZ MOVED TO APPROVE PROVIDING $1,000 IN FUNDING FROM THE 2013 EDA MARKETING BUDGET FOR SPONSORSHIP OF THE FROSTBITE CHALLENGE. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION FAILED 3 -3 DUE TO THE LACK OF A MAJORITY WITH MATT FRIE, TOM PERRAULT AND BILL TAPPER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. 12. Adiourn TOM PERRAULT MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:41 P.M. BILL TAPPER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0. Recorder: Kerry T. Burri Approved: December 12, 2012 Attest: Jeff O'Neill, Executive Director EDA Agenda - 12/12/12 4. Consideration of approving payment of bills. (WO) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Included are the previous month's invoices for approval of payment. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to approve payment of bills through December 12th, 2012. 2. Motion to deny payment of bills through December 12th, 2012. 3. Motion of other. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends approval of payment for submitted invoices. D. SUPPORTING DATA A. Invoices through December 12th, 2012, that have not received prior approval. :m � � im 2 0 a ) ) / q � j ) \ � R ��7 ) � m - - ® ® 00 00 ] \ P-j / R m / � § ) | � | \ ) 4 j 2 ) � � t— 00 \) |§ �® ) - - { \ F4 / 7 ) 7 \ ±a ) / ) ) \\ \) \§ §\ \\ \\ §/ / \ jj /} m �l R ��7 ) � m - - ® ® 00 00 ] \ P-j / R m / � § ) ? ) \ ) 4 j 2 ) t— 00 \) |§ �® ) - - { \ F4 / 7 ) 7 \ ±a ) / ) ) \\ \) \§ §\ \\ \\ §/ / \ jj /} m �l ) - - ® ® 00 00 / m / § & ) ° \ ) ) / \ � \ ) � § / ) ] § / . \ E \ \ \ \ \ j 4 » \ \ j ) } � m q g 0 s s L INVOICE WASTE MANAGIPMNP I' DIRECT INQUIRIES ONLY TO: Waste Management of WI -MN W132 N10487 Grant Drive Germantown, WI 53022 1-1388-960 -0008 Customer Service Hours: Mon -Frl 7am -5pm CST WMEservice @wm.com Customer: Account Number: Invoice Date: Invoice Number: Due Date: WM ezPay Account ID: Previous Balance 3013.81 Total Credits and Adjustments 0.00 Total Payments Received 306.81 - Total Current Cher 307.75 'total Amount Due 307,75 Total Amount Past Due 0100 �'� - • t r e �k,1.1 V,��, ;,. - �..;ihi; j �.i;F�FI��} a:S.i. ?` _ ;�� ik 'Description Amount Commercial 307.76 Total Current Charges 30715 If full payment of the invoiced amount Is not received within 30 days of the Invoice date, you will be charged a monthly late fee of 1.5% of the unpaid amount, with a minimum monthly charge of $5.00, or sudh lesser late fee allowed under applicable law, regulation or contract. Addltlonalty, If your service is suspended for non - payment, you may be charged a resume fee to restart your service. For each returned check, a fee will be assessed on your next biiling equal to the maximum amount permitted by applicable state law. 307.75 0.00 0.00 Pagel of 3 MONTICELLO EDA 593- 0323511- 1593 -9 1010112012 8283097 - 7593 -4 Due Upon Receipt 00010- 92640 -33008 Total Current Charges Total Amount Due �_ 307.75 Please pay total amount due, business. IF PAYING BY CHECK, MAIL To PO BOX sELow WITH PAYMENT COUPON TO AVOID POSTING DELAYS AND SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS. This iltvolce reflects paymenta rouelved as Or 0012612012. i OCT - 3 2012 j Want to pay this bill on -line? Visit www:wm,com and click on My Account to make a convenient, secure payment. 0.00 1 307.75 WUM. Payment Coupon pay You rvvM bill online at Plmse dalach and send with checks anly (no cash), 893-a32S1i11- 75839 w,w mm.ccm. To pay by WASTE MAIYAG,NMENT Please send all other carmmondeuce to your local WM site, phone, call 866.964-2725. DIRECT INOUIRIES ONLY TO: Waste Management of WI -MN W132 N10487 Grant Drlve 10lD712012 6283DB7 -1583-4 Gannanlown, WI 53022 -- ----- 1488- 950 -0008 Customer Service 'zr , t ^'u:. = �' ° ffW + & M a Hours: Mnn -Fri 7amSpm CST WMF_service ®wm.cam Upon Receipt 307,75 Learn howwa Think Green at ^" wwW.Wm.e o 11thlnkgreen 1 593593030351 1062830970000033077500000030775 4 01016MOIA11O,374 -Ak" 17. 0477155367:882701- Ce1- P01139.12 10500044 Itlltt�llllllllltl�ltt ��n��l�tllillllllll��ltlll{I11� tlt�llltl 11111111111111 Jill] 1111111111111tlYil'I1111 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN MONTICELLO EDA PO BOX 4848 505 WALNUT 5T STE 1 CAROL STREAM It- 80197 -4648 N MONTICELLO MN 56362 -8822 � xpk From everyday collection to environmental protection, Thing Green'. Think Waste Management, ►aprktvd er. FOR CHANGE OF ADDRESS OR ANY 5FRVICE ISSUES CONTACT NUMBER ON PAGE 1 M 0 N P O a a i- WASTE MANAGEMIRMT DIRECT INQUIRIES ONLY TO: Waste Management of WI -MN W132 N10487 Grant Drive Germantown, WI 53022 Customer: Account Number: Invoice Date: Invoice Number: Due Date: WM ezPay Account ID; Page 3 of 3 MONTICELLO EDA 593 -0323511- 1693 -9 10/01/2012 6283097- 1693 -4 Due Upon Receipt 00010 - 92640 -33006 Total Payments Received From everyday collection to environmental protection, Think Green' Think Waste Management. FOR CHANGE OF ADDRESS OR ANY SERVICE ISSUES CONTACT NUMBER ON PAGE 1 306.81- Pir0Oil reeyered papa. F v tl ` f5 P 4i 5 •c: , .r,,r:: t , - .i";;:j'.a't ,,�, .S , t¢ ,,E� : , , .. Date Ticket Description Quantity Ulm Rate Amount 101D1112 8 Yd fel 1.00 197.10 10/01/12 Fuel /environmental charge 61,93 10!01112 Administrative fee 4.00 10/01/12 Mn state solid waste tax 17% 44.72 Total Current Charges 307,75 Total Payments Received From everyday collection to environmental protection, Think Green' Think Waste Management. FOR CHANGE OF ADDRESS OR ANY SERVICE ISSUES CONTACT NUMBER ON PAGE 1 306.81- Pir0Oil reeyered papa. V S 0 0 DIRECT INQUIRIES ONLY TO: Waste Management of WI-MN W132 N10487 Grant Drive Germantown, WI 53022 1 -88 8,•960 -0008 Customer Service Hours: Mon -Fri 7am -5pm CST VUMEservlce@wiyi.com Description INVOICE Customer: Account Number: Invoice Date: Invoice Number. Due Date: WM ezPay Account ID; Previous Balance 307.75 Total Credits and Adjustments 0.00 Total Payments Received 307.75 - Total Current Charges _ 320.12 Total Amount Due 320.12 Total Amount Past Due 0.00 Page 1 of 3 MONTICELLO SDA 553- 0323511- 1593-9 11/01/2012 6294190- 1583 -4 Due Upon Receipt 00010- 92840 -33006 Total Current Charges Total Amount Due _ i � ?tr�>�7V,t, a4' Please pay total amount due, Thank you For your business. �t IF PAYING BY CHECK. MAIL To PO BOX BELOW WITH n'iy�� h' o a -' MrsrtY, �� 1.,} ',$f tyraT,t at ifs f`' l PAYMENT COUPON TOAVO€DPO5TINpgEtAYSAND Description Amount SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS. This Invcloe raflecic payments Commercial 320.12 reesivad as of 1012312D12, Total Current Charges 320,12 , 11 If full payment of the invoiced amount is not reoelved within 30 days of the Invoice date, you t ii will be charged a monthly late fee of 1.5°x6 of the unpaid amount, with a minimum monthly .... - 11. O� � charge of $5,00, or such lesser late fee alloweed under applicable law, regulation or contract. Additlonaliy, If your service Is suspended for non - payment, you may be charged a resume fee to restart your service. For each returned check, a fee will be assessed on your next billing �? equal to the maximum amount permitted by appllcable state law.' Want to pay this bill on -Ilne7 Visit www,wm.com and click on My Account to make a convenient, secure payment, 320.12 1 0.00 0.00 1 0 -00 1 0.00 1 320.12 1593a93D3R35llOk294190D OOD003201201100003201r2 9 f (101314601AVO.350 "AUTO TT3 ON) 55362- BB2201- COI- PIS159 -1 1050000 Ikl�rll llllllllflllll��lrrlllllllllill�lllllt�i�llllllllll�lllll Q Irr111�IIlIPIIl1111E 1J11 Hill 1111111 11&61111 Ill 111111111Ill Iill WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN «rr» MONTICELLO EDA PO BOX 4648 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 CAROL STREAM IL 60187 -4849 MONTICELLO MINI 55362 -8822 From everyday collection to environmental ,protection, Think Green! Think Waste Management, regdilted it FOR CHANGE OF ADDRESS OR ANY SIERVICE ISSUES CONTACT NUMBER ON PAGE 1 Payment Coupon.. 17I t Pay your WM bill online at Please dafarh nRd senrf wllh checks onfv (no cash ). , 593 -0323811 - 16839 www.wm.com. To pay by uuA$T4 INpRIAOM MMU'r Please send all otherconesnondenee to.your kwaf WM sire. phone, call 866- 964-2729. DIRECT INQUIRIES ONLY TO: it"? O "`<1130 ii% {`r''�Cr'sj x: NO N ��', 7 6 Waste Management of WI -MN W132 N104V Grant Drive 11/0112012 62941904593.4 Germanlown, WI 53022 1- f38a960- 0008 Customer Service APAIMM Hours: Man -Fri lam -5pm CST WME:,elylr.A@wm,com �Recelliptf Up 320.12 Learn how we Think Green at www.wm.ca mlthi n kg reen 1593a93D3R35llOk294190D OOD003201201100003201r2 9 f (101314601AVO.350 "AUTO TT3 ON) 55362- BB2201- COI- PIS159 -1 1050000 Ikl�rll llllllllflllll��lrrlllllllllill�lllllt�i�llllllllll�lllll Q Irr111�IIlIPIIl1111E 1J11 Hill 1111111 11&61111 Ill 111111111Ill Iill WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN «rr» MONTICELLO EDA PO BOX 4648 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 CAROL STREAM IL 60187 -4849 MONTICELLO MINI 55362 -8822 From everyday collection to environmental ,protection, Think Green! Think Waste Management, regdilted it FOR CHANGE OF ADDRESS OR ANY SIERVICE ISSUES CONTACT NUMBER ON PAGE 1 I- wume WASTE MANAGEMENT DIRECT INQUIRIES ONLY TO: Waste Management of WI-MN W132 M10487 Grant Drive Germantown, WI 63022 Customer: Account Number: Involae Date: Invoice Number: Due Date: VVM ezPay Account ID: Page 3 of 3 MONTICELLO EIDA 593-0323611-1693-9 11101/2012 6294190-1693-4 Due Upon Receipt 00010-92640-33006 Total Payments Received 307.76- (D rAnd an From everyday collection to environmental protection, Think Green. Think Waste Management, rewretad paper, FOR CHANGE OP ADDRESS ORANY SERVICE ISSUES CONTACT NUMBER ON PAGE I Date Ticket Description Quantity Ulm Rate Amount 11101/12 Container service fee 1`01 1.00 7.76 11101112 8 Yd fel 1,00 107.10 11101112 Fuel/environmental charge 64.70 11/01112 Administrative fee 4.00 11101112 Mn state solid waste tax 17% 46.51 Total Current Charges 320,12 _3 Total Payments Received 307.76- (D rAnd an From everyday collection to environmental protection, Think Green. Think Waste Management, rewretad paper, FOR CHANGE OP ADDRESS ORANY SERVICE ISSUES CONTACT NUMBER ON PAGE I menP ide SI M "' 6500 Saukview Drive INVOICE St. Cloud, MN 56303 -0804 Customer Number: 220625800 page I of Ph: (320) 251 -2525 Fax: (320) 253 -7904 Account Type: Charge B+mnii: acctrcc22 @ameripride,com Invoice Number: 2200292580 D209305 DISP T T SCA Invoice Date: 09A912012 2 Sales Route: 12 GARY 5TBIL 2.04 T Service: E4W - WE 8.95 T Deliver To: Bill To: CITY OF MONTICELLO CITY OF MONTICELLO DELIVERY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 202 PINE ST BROADWAY PLAZA 505 WALNUT STREET STE 1 MONTICELLO, MN 55362 MONTICELLO, MN 55362 •------------------ -- - ........ _.... --...................-...-.--...---...------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -. ASK YOUR CSR ABOUT OUR FULL LINE OF RESTROOM SERVICES L---------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -' - - - - -- -`------------------------------..----------------------....--- Sank/ lael Qty Line Type Item Description Locker Emp Name lamp # Inv Bill Qty Total Rent CT40WIIT ROLL TOWEL WHIT EVEXC Rent MN30BNY MAT 3X10 HONEYC Sales BATCCEL AR DISP BATTERY S Sales D141012 TORK ROLL BATH TI EVEXC Rent D209305 DISP T T SCA EVEXC Rent DISPARL DISPENSER AIR FRE 2 Sales GSCNMAN GRNISCZNT MANG EVEXC Rent CDENDWD ROLL TOWEL CAB Sor Chg 22$P08 SERVICE CHARGE Signature lnitlais ovs DEL THRU PIZZA FACTORY CLOSET Balance as of 1010312012 20 7 27.68 T 1 1 16.96T 0 0.00 T 0 0,00T 2 2 0,11T 2 2 24.36T 0 2 0.00T 2 2 2.04 T 8.95 T Subtotal 80.10 Tax 6.875 % 5.51 Total Due; USD 85.61 Current 1 -30 31 -60 Over 60 85.61 0.00 0.00 Please Remit Payment to : AnteriPride Services, P.O. Box 3100, Bemidji, MN, 56619 -3100 within 27 days, Thank you for your businessl 0 z 0 +• a o 0 a or 0r a o 0o n �n m cr, 7 0 0 0 o v, oo ca rn 0 0 O O O G O N N �i oo N vl v1 Z h n n n n U M N i N N N N N N N b W N N p N p N p p N a N _ A N N N LV — N �. r v r n n yr n n n n to o c V zi t' 61 w A ❑ rVj n�"t �✓ u '� N N M M ` ` C rl vi un C `1 0 � � a .. vi o z o H U '� wwww u u j U Gp 5C PC �S X W O N_ N N Cl) N a�o 61 o � a o000 00 00 00 00 o -� M C I Cd N N N N Y N N N N N N v PL. 00 0 N N_ p v O U Q yyy�p 4 v CAMPBELL KNUTSO N Professional AssoC1aUon Attorneys at Law Federal Tax I.D. #41- 1562130 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 5512, (651) 452 -5000 City of Monticello City Hail 505 Walnut Street Monticello MN 55382 RE ADMINISTRATION SERVICES RENDERED TO DATE: • i N OV 15 '6012 Y ":• F r •� r ` Page: 1 October 31, 2012 Account # 2348 -OOOG r 1:23: I N;1V t & 2012' HOURS 10/01/2012 JJJ Community Development - Emails Angela re: tax forfeited property, levied assessment 4111417 Elm, 1.00 140.00 10/o212a12 1b(. 4t9' A -0 JMO Begin formatting Agreement for Professional Services regarding FiberNet. 0,50 37,50 10/03/2012 JMO Continue document clean up for Agreement for Professional Services with Fib©rNet. 0.40 30.00 JJJ Community Development - Emails Mayor and Council, staff, work on resolution decertifying assessment. 1.00 140.00 JJJ Emails and telephone calls Jeff re: dock sections, donations. 0,50 70.00 10/04/2012 JJJ Meeting at City Hall with staff. 1.00 140.00 10/05/2012 JJJ Community Development - Draft resolution decertifying assessment; ema!Is Angela. 1.00 140.00 JJJ Emails Jeff and staff re: Council meeting. 0.50 70.00 10108/2012 JJJ Emails Jeff re: Council agenda, dock contribution; review agenda; telephone call Lloyd re: agenda; follow -ups; telephone call and emails P, Back re: Perry letter to City; telephone call Steve R. re: Pultusker, report, etc. 2.00 280.00 JJJ Council - Attend City Council meeting, 3.50 490.00 City of Monticello RE: ADMINISTRATION SERVICES RENDERED TO DATE: Page. 2 r _� or tober 31, 2012 Account # 2348 -OOOG 123 10109/2012 JJJ Review and follow -ups regarding Council meeting, FiberNet and Cornerstone; contact LMCIT and follow -up regarding Insurance question for Wayne, community center questions with Kitty and Jeff. 10110/2012 JJJ Continuing follow -ups with Angela re: Cornerstone and West Metro; Wayne re: insurance; Jeff re: Bertram Lakes lark transaction documents; FiberNet; calling paint at Community Center, etc. SMM Review City Code re; special assessments, TMS Emails with Jeff O, re: recreation center paint issue; legal research. 10/11/2012 TMS Telephone calls and emails with Jeff O.; research re: open meeting law. 1011212012 JJJ Follow -ups on City projects; community center special meeting; telephone tail Jeff, West Metro anti - Cornerstone letter from Jack ferry. TMS Email with Jeff O'Neill; legal research re: paint statute of repose Issue. 10/15/2012 SMM Conference call with staff; telephone call County Attorney re: warrant. JJJ Community Development - Ernalls Angela, Jeff and Steve re: Cornerstone, agenda Item, TMS Review attorney letter re: Cornerstone PUD. 1 0/1 61201 2 JJJ Community Development - Follow -ups with Angela and Steve re: Cornerstone. JJJ Administration - Emalls Jeff re: EAW for MYSA Soccer Facility, Community Center; telephone call Jeff, HOURS 2.00 280.00 1.00 140.00 0.40 56,00 0.8D 112.00 0.70 98.00 0,50 70,00 1.00 140.00 1.40 196.00 1.00 140.00 0.20 28.00 0.30 42.00 1.00 1 40.00 q;_ r t;` r 10125/2012 JJJ Emails Glen R and Wayne re; land transfer, fallow -ups. 0.50 Page; 3 City f Y Monticello ©ctober3l, 2092 telephone call Angela re: Comerstone /Sell. r�ty,�1 Account # 2348 -OOOG ' 923 RE: ADMINISTRATION ' Voicemail and telephone call Jeff re: MYSA Issues/options. SERVICES RENDERED TO DATE: JMO E -mail to Title Company; draft Quit Claim Deed. 0,30 22.50 HOURS 10/17/2012 JJJ Community Development - Email from DNR approving Wild SMM Review small from Angela; telephone call County Attorney's and Scenic River zoning amendments. q� 9 � l) ' '�D � 0.30 Office; respond to Angela, 0.50 70.00 JJJ Community Development - 'Meeting at City Hall re: 10131/2012 CornerstonelWest Metro. ZC,0" r?—, 2,50 350.00 TMS Telephone conference with Kitty Baltos re: rec center. 0.80 42.00 101118/2012 JJJ Administration - Telephone call Jeff re: projects, 0.50 70.00 JJJ Community Development - Follow -up revisions of DA, staff memo re: Cornerstone appllcation.7,.C,,D ON OZ-4 0.50 70.00 TMS Emails with Jeff O'Neill re: re center roof. 0.30 42.00 10122/2012 THIS Email to Angela Schumann re: hazardous material assessment. 0,20 28,00 TMS Review council packet; legal research re: hazardous materials assessment. 1.00 140.00 TMS Attend city council meeting, 2,50 350,00 10123/2012 JJJ Emalls Jeff and Angela re: resident complaints re: 'ZQ� assessments, council actions, etc., Cornerstone. 1.20 168.00 10125/2012 JJJ Emails Glen R and Wayne re; land transfer, fallow -ups. 0.50 70.00 JJJ Community Development - Emails and voicemails and telephone call Angela re: Comerstone /Sell. r�ty,�1 0.50 70.00 10/2612012 JJJ Voicemail and telephone call Jeff re: MYSA Issues/options. 1.00 140.00 JMO E -mail to Title Company; draft Quit Claim Deed. 0,30 22.50 10129/2012 JJJ Community Development - Email from DNR approving Wild and Scenic River zoning amendments. q� 9 � l) ' '�D � 0.30 42.00 j<O j • 10131/2012 SMM Review smalls and telephone call Angela. 040 56.00 City of Monticello RE: ADMINISTRATION SERVICES RENDERED TO DATE: Page:4 October 31, 2012 Account * 2348 -000G 123 HOURS SMM Legal research re: notice requirements. 0.50 JJJ Community Development - Emalls Angela re: temporary occupancy Development Agreement, CBD retalllwarehousing, multiple lots, revlewlresearchlrespond. 1.00 AMOUNT DUE 35.70 10/03/2012 photocopy expense. 10/3112012 First American Title - last deed of record (2330 Eastwood Clrc'e), 1 0131 1201 2 Westlaw research charges - October. TOTAL. DISBURSEMENTS TOTAL CURRENT WORK PREVIOUS BALANCE 10/0912012 Payment - thank you 10/23/2012 Payment - thank you TOTAL, PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT TOTAL AMOUNT DUE Amounts due over 30 days will be subject to a finance charge of .5% por month (or an annual rata of 6 %). Minimum charge - 50 cents. 70.00 140.00 4,920.00 13.60 25.00 148,40 187.00 5,107.00 $,266.90 - 1,306,90 1,960.00 - 3,266.90 $5,107.00 Megan Barnett- Livgard City of Monticello 505 Walnut St Ste 1 Monticello, MN 55362 -BB31 Fred's Auto Body Limited Site Investigation 349 Broadway Street West Monticello, MN For Professional Services rendered through 11/2/2012 Professional Consulting Services Other Expenses Invoice Total ?LEASE REMIT TO BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION NW 7644 - P.O. BOX 1450 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 66485 -7644 (952) 995 -2086 - FAX (952) 995 -2020 Tax I,D, #41- 1684205 �` rt • t �.. t+ 3 fa NOV 14 2012 ' ' } Invoice Date: 11/9/2012 Invoice # : 361466 Project## : SC- 12- 02455A Client## : M06994 Client Ref : 1,000.00 10011 1,i740.t}p� x/5/4 Please pay from this invoice, We accept Terms; Due on recelpt.l 112% per month after 30 days, 1 S% annual percentage rate. FORM No. ai,z -ot (W12) PLEASE REKNIT TO + BRAUN INIERTEC CORPORATION NW 7644 P P.O, BOX 1450 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55485 -7644 INTERTEC (952) 995 -2086 • FAX (952) 995 -2020 Tax I, d. #41- 1684205 Project: SCA2- 02455A -- Fred's Auto Body Invoice # : 361466 Consulting Services Class / Employee Name Hubbes, Ted R Flynn, Andrea Date Hours /0 2 2.00 09/14/2012 8,00 .....6,66 Consulting Services Total Project: SC- 42- 02,455A -- Fred's Auto Body Rate Amount 100.00 200.06 100.06 800.00 ........................ 800.00 1,000.00 1,000,00 rsa Phase pay from fihis invoice, We accept Terms: due on recefpt,1 112% per month after 30 days, 18% annual percentage rate. FORM NO. 8192 -01 (5112) MONTICELLO 'TIMES 10917 VALLEY VIEW ROAD EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 (962) 392 -8890 Fax(763) 295 -3080 Advertising Involee and Statement CITY OF MONTICELLO ATTN: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 MONTICELLO MN 55362 "In the Community. With the Community. For the Community." 1/01/12 1132�870Y HILLSIDE CUP I i i1 iI 1/ X10 I • NOV 5 2012 P I, r . n JI THERE 13 A $20 CHARGE tOA UNPAID BALANCES OVER 30 Statement of Account - N/A I N/A MONTICELLO TIMES (952) 392.6890 1407715 11/2012 .li l ur Portion V 1X 7.25 2 7.25 182.48 I RETURNED CHECKS. REPDRT ERRORS WITHIN 5 DAYS TO II DAYS OLD INCUR A 1.5% FINANCE CHARGE PER MONTH. of Past Due Amounts 141A I N/A 133 Amount Paid: Comments: n 182.48 182.48 ISURE CONSIDERATION. 48 * UNAPPLIED AMOUNTS ARE INCLUDED IN TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 133 CITY OF MONTICELLO Subscribed and sworn to or affirmed before me on this 1 day of . November . 2012. otary Public JULIA I. KLKENN 140TARY PUBLIC- MINNESOTA „g My Comm. Exp, Jan. 31, 2015 `_N City of Monticello (Ofilcfal Publication) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING M"t5 Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statute 130.04, notice is hereby given that a public hear- ing of the Monticello Planning Commission is scheduled to con- sider the following matter: There AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION may be a quorum of the City Council at this meeting, DATE: November 7, 2012 STATE OF MINNESOTA TIME: 6:00 p.m. SS HEARING LOCATION: Mlssla- COUNTY OF HENNEPIN slppl Room, Monticello Commu nity Center HEARING SUBJECT: Consid- erallon of a request for Condition- al Use Permit for Restaurant and Richard Hendricksoi7_ being duly sworn on an Retail uses under 10,000 square oath, states or affirms that he Is the Chief feet In the F -3 Sub - District of the Financial Officer of the news a er s known CCD (Central Community Dls- IricP�ROPERTY as Monticello Times and has full knowledge of LOCATION: 500 - the facts which are stated below. 560 cedar street PIDs 155029001040 and (A) The newspaper has complied with all of 15500114201 Lengthy Legal- See City Hall the requirements constituting qualification q 9 q for complete legal description as a qualified newspaper as provided by APPLICANT: Hillside Partner - Minn. Stat. § 331A.02, § 331A.07, and ship, LLC Angela Schumann, Communi- other applicable laws as amended. PP ty Development Director B The printed public notice that is attached ( ) p p Oral testimony ywjects, aeptsd on the above subjects, and all was published in the newspaper once persons desiring to be heard on each week for two successive referenced subjects will be heard at this meeting. Written com- weeks ; it was first published on ThurS- (� P menu may be taken at the Mon- day, the `25 day of O.ctob-Qr ticello City Hall, 505 walnut 2012, and was thereafter printed and Street, suite 1, Monticello, MN published on every Thursday to and 55362 until the dale o1 the hear - Ing. Questionsmaybe directed to including Thursday, the 1 day of the City of Monticello at 763-295 - November , 2012; and printed 2711. below Is a c of the lower case alphabet copy P The application, related a this publichearing,canbeviewedon- from A to Z, both inclusive, which is here- line at http: / /www,ci.monticello. by acknowledged as being the size and mn.usAndax.asp ?7ype= B_13ASI kind oft used in the composition and Yl� P 4A SEC 6,9BC1 88E05 B)as 4A69- 9F06,96C13BBEOSDB] as publication of the notice: part of the current Planning Com- abcdef 9 1 op9 xy mission agenda. Note: Recommendations of the Planning Commission will be subject to the approval or denial of the City Council. Date Posted: October, 17 2012 October 25, BY: - 2012& Novelmbe 1, (Oct. 25 & Nov. 1, 2012) MT- HIIIs1deCUP Title: CFO Subscribed and sworn to or affirmed before me on this 1 day of . November . 2012. otary Public JULIA I. KLKENN 140TARY PUBLIC- MINNESOTA „g My Comm. Exp, Jan. 31, 2015 `_N T Xcel Energyv RrYVONSIBLE BY NA-runt- Northern Stales Power Company Please Return This Portion With Your Payment 51- 11623082 -8 1 +2012 TtA[�i — .. L - __ I Or AV 01 002083 14787 B 7 A * *5DOT I1111l1111 Ilulhll,l III „II Inl "II „1111 III III'Il'Ilr1 "1111 }'} MONTICELLO EDA I'1111'll1'I'lllll'Irll�lllll' 1111 ''llfl�tllr�lll111'�IIIIIII'lIE 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 P.O. BOX 9477 MONTICELLO MN 55362 -8831 MPLS, MN 55484 -9477 31 51121212 06230828 00000001580000001301580 416, Questions: Call Please Call: Hearing Impaired: Fax: (800) 311 -0050 Detach and Retain This Podion ror Your Records or write to as at: {000) 481 -4700 Northern States Power Com an b '° s�� 000} 895 -4949 PO BOX 8 p y EAU CLAIREWI54702 -0000 Billing Summary Commercial Previous Balance 10115 Payment Received as of 11114 Balance As Of 11114 Commercial Electric Service 11114 Total Electric Charges Usage Period- 10115/12 to 11/13/12 Invoice # 441315063 Total Energy -kWh r Meter t` Company Reading on 11/13 000052995965 Company Readmg on 10115 Total Usage in 29 Days S15.73 CH Averages for This Last Billino Period _ Year Year �15.80 Avers Temperature 42* 43 �158ti Electric /kwh per Day 0.0 0.0R 1 Degrees, Colder .: .. - Sm Ben Svc lMatarodj 29 Days Basic Service Chg Affordability Chg Energy Charge Winter 0 kWh Resource Adjustment Subtotal City Fees State Tax ®6.875% Total Amount kWh 0 ; NOV 1 9 2012 J ' 1.0p $9.28 $5.50 1.OZ $15.80 For an average non- demand customer, 73% of your bill refers to power plant costs, 10% to high voltage line costs, and 17% to the cost of local wires connected to your business. For an average demand- billed customer, 83% of your total bill refers to power plant costs, 10% to high voltage lines, and 7% to the cost of local wires connected to your business. Thank you for your payment. i MONTICELLO EDA Next Scheduled 4Ee [sae:Y 349 W BROADWAY ST r++letar Reading ate :: —,..- MONTICELLO, MN 55362 -9356 12/18112 12/1212012 $15.80 Please see the back of this bill for more information See back OfirilI for Account & 51- 0623082 -8 regarding the late payment charge. Pay on or before-the more information. date due to avoid assessment of a late payment charge. Page I of 1 Statement Date; 11/14112 Statement # 347317604 6 Promise # 303057358 e� o� r Xcel Energy eEBVOIISINLE 6Y NRTURE" .�. >.:. t1N ^';1h4a1D�1¢;t'w:� ►'i ro h.� � •iSI.fiIM[i.Ytl �; Northern States Power Company 514ZSWR -0 17J17{Al2 $1580 ank Y Please Return This Portion With Your Payment AV 01 002482 14787 3 7 A **5gGT III... III,hI,r,IL €I,u IlJI ,1lnl,rll,lllll�llllll,11111' ll, d, MONTICELLO EDA 111'1111111111f11' 1""1111'11111111111111111111111 MI „ 111'1111 505 WALNUT ST P.O. BOX 9477 MONTICELLO MN 55362 -8831 MPLS, MN 55404 -9477 31 5111212112 05925780 0000000158000000001580 Detach and Retain This Portion For Your Records Wrestions: Call or write to us at Please Call: 80 4814700 Northern States Power Company Hearing Impaired: (ROM 89ss4949 PO BOX8 f p +p4 ,kp l'r )Of3 wtndm f'.,40141rot i Fax: (800} 311 -0050 EAU CLAIRE WI 54702 -0008 �,tuy �� ++f1tfnv.coro. Billing Summary Commercial k �•� ?.. ... `r�;# �:�� =n,:n �fµ�,, Previous Balance 10113 $1532 Payment Received as of 11114 115,72 CR Averages for This Last Balance As Of 11114 sox , f Bllli Period Year Year Commercial Electric Service 11114 115.80 &QFJ p” J ttplgeratur® Total _— 51.80 Electric /kwh per Day 0.0 0.0 Electric Charges Usage Period: 10/13/12 to 11117J12 Invoice # 4473098M Total Energy -kWh Meter# Company Reading on 11112 000007777701 Company Reading on 10113 Total Usage in 30 Days Actual Demand -kW Billable Demand Cost per QIW $D -b9 80.00 'r 0 069FOes Warmer 12007 12607 kWh 0 0.76 0 Sm Gen Svc (Metered) 30 Days Basic Service Chg $8.61 Affardahility Chg $0.67 Energy Charge Winter 0 kWh 0$0,066870 $0.00 Resource Adjustment $0.00 Subtotal $9.20 City Fees $5.50 State Tax 06.875% $1.02 Total Amount $15.80 For an average non - demand customer, 73% of your bill refers to power plant costs, 10% to high voltage line costs, and 17% to the cost of local wires connected to your business. For an average demand - billed customer, 88% of your total bill refers to power plant costs, 10% to high voltage lines, and 7% to the cost of local wires connected to your business. Thank you for your payment k�f �0_ See back of hill for more information. Page 1 of 1 MONTICELLO EDA 202 PINE ST MONTICELLO, MN 5582 Account 4f: 51- 0592578 -0 Statement Date: 11/14112 Next Scheduled f?aRallua pleaskPal Meter Reading Date L 1Z117112 12/12Z112 $15,80 Please see the back of this bill for more information regarding the late payment charge. Pay on or before the date due to avoid assessment of a late payment charge. Statement # 347315372 R Premise # 303547449 N o� 4 arr� Xcel Energy® RESPONSIBLE BYBY NATURCTM Northorn States Power Company Please Return This Portion With Your Payment aLWArvaunl Do x 51- 051731 -� 12J111241`� ayme Plty.: ":: .•MryAinoant fnelosu,l AV 01 000583 14212 B 3 A * *50GT II,II��I,1 „111111” 1111111' nlfl ",flf,nul "IlllHlllf'Illl'I1 MONTICELLO EDA II' III111111fI '1I11111fI,I,IIII,IILhII „1111 "1111 "Ill'lllllll 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 P.O. BOX 9477 MONTICELLO MN 55362 -8831 MPLS, MN 55494 -9471 =ice 31 51121112 05173848 0000000019800000003198 Detach and Retain 7hiss Portion for Your RPM I) Questions: Call 24 Hours 7 Days A Week or writo to us at: Please Call: 80D 895 -4999 Fax: Northern States Power Company z' < eeraa ' Hearing Impaired: B00 895 -4949 {800► 69b 2895 PO BOX x. t { Espa "no {: 880 687 -8778 EAU CLAIHE WI 54T07 0008 Y Brit C,Srs FiBGr11� cosytS 37'�r Biking Summary t laeallcsire5tiiEit5lriai�ttrcl �o qtr m e: -.- Rosidontial o'Y''Y�'�u$S�:.t%.�+a°6'•i, `+iSR:2�z., .,.v' ya��.a�iC&Yt�ft° -:r .,uof�lc°'.�..4 . Previous Balance 10114 Payment Received as of 11113 Ifg �1 ' Averages for This Last Balance As Of 11113 • g Biill %Period Year Year Current Energy Charges 11113 31.)6 Average fietnparatura t3' _ 43 Total 31.98 Electric /kvuh per Day 0 ^ ' 0.0 Cost nor Day.. _1.10 $D.00 * 4 Degrees Warmer urre �. Electric Charges Usage Perioti:10 /14912 to 11/12/12 Invoice # 447184678 Residential Service 29 Days Basic Service Chg Affordability Charge Energy Charge Winter 2D1 kWh 0$0.069150 Fuel Cost Charge 201 kWh ® $0,027413 Resource Adjustment Subtotal City Fees State Tax 06.675% Total Amount Thank you for your payment. # ; , NUV 1 9 2912 64829 64628 201 a MONTICELLO EDA Motor Reading Information 112 E BROADWAY ST Meter (000052245031 MONTICELLO. MN 55362 -9321 Total Energy -kWh $7.11 Company Heading on 11/12 .. ............................... $0.50 Compan Reading on 10114 .............................. Total Usage in 29 Days kWh $]4.01 date due to avoid assessment of a late payment charge. $5.51 Statement # 347194558 1 2 6 Premise # 303608854 0.84 $1.95 $31.96 �j # ; , NUV 1 9 2912 64829 64628 201 a MONTICELLO EDA NextSchoduled ":Datel3Ue PIeast~Isa Motor Reading Date >. 112 E BROADWAY ST { MONTICELLO. MN 55362 -9321 12/17/12 12M1/21012 $31.98 Please see the back of this bill for more information See hack olhill for Account #: 51- 4517384 -8 regarding the Into payment charge. Pay on or before the more information. date due to avoid assessment of a late payment charge. Page 1 of 1 Statement Date: 11/13/12 Statement # 347194558 1 2 6 Premise # 303608854 s O Q� F Xcel Energy 1137eNSIBLE BY NATURE- Northern States Power Company Please RUIUM Tlis Portion With Your Payment. 5t ^I151T365 5 12I12I2 12 $198 -97 �n AT 01 083081 1478913211 A * *3d0T 1{'1111''1 - 111111 I1' 3111111 - 11111101111111111 -1111111111111111 MONTICELLO EDA 11111111111'lll' 11111111111111111 - 11111 - 11.111111111111111,111111 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 P.O. BOX 9477 MONTICELLO MN 55362 -6631 MPLS, MN 55484 -9477 - 31 51121212 05173655 00.000019897001100019897 stash and Amin is Portion For Inur Records Questions: Call or write to as at, Please Call: {BO(1) 461 -4700 Northern States Power Company '1 v arlrpErrser' 1 i1g 1 1 ow- Hearing Impaired: 1800) BS -4949 PO BOX S ;hh te, �f+urdx at s W, 1ire laayz drW�idF V " Fax: 1000] 311 -0050 EAU CLAIRE WI 54702 -0008 Billing Summary Commercial � "` - •�� a°��;:;r:.. . Previous Balance 10113 $185.86 Payment Received as of 11114 SIR5.86 G Averages for This Last Balance As Of 11114 $(LoO V Billing Period Year _ Year Commercial Electric Service 11114 ?E90.97 Av_e1_aj�e Ternporat#1re 43* __ 43" Total $19897 Electric /kwhperDay 53.0 11.0 Costi)ccDW _ $6,64 $0.00_ 0 Degrees Warmer -- --- - - - -- -- - - .... - - -- Electric Charges Osage Period: 10113/12 to 11/12/12 , } Invoice #441310226 Total Energy -kWh Meter # Company Reading on 11112 X3821, , 000007727744 Company Reading on 10113$6$ i + ?;' Total usage in 30 Days kWh NOV 1 g 2012 r` ' Actual Demand -kW 6.4 Billable Demand 6 ¢ Sm Gas Svc (Metered) 30 Days Basic Service Chg $0.61 Affordability Chg $0.67 Energy Charge Winter 953 kWh 0$0.066870 $6333 Fuel Cost Charge 953 kWh 0$0.027838 $'26.53 Resource Adjustment $3.73 Subtotal $10327 City Fees $5.50 State Tax @6.875% $1A5 Total Amount $11625 For an average non - demand customer, 73% of your bill refers to power plant costs, 10% to high voltage line costs, and 17% to the cost of.local wires connected to your business. For an average demand - billed customer, 83% of yourtotal bill refers to power plant costs, 10% to high voltage lines, and 7% to the cost of local wires connected to your Business. MONTICELLO EDA Next Scheduled lice f?,te laicafi Y�ty 306 PINE ST Meter Reading Date MONTICELLO, NIN 902 -8665 12/17/12 12/12/2012 $198.97 1 Please see the back of this bill for more information See back of bill for Account#: 51- 0517365 -5 regarding the late payment charge. Pay on or before the more information. date due to avoid assessment of a late payment charge. Page 1 of 2 Statement Date: 11114112 Statement # 347310675 Premise # 302451493 o fill Xcel Energy BESPONSIBtE BY NATURE^' Northern States Power Company 51- 0517365 -5 12/12/2012 $19597' Thank YOU, Please Return This Portion Witlr Ynur Payment, - MONTICELLO EDA 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 P.D. SOX 9477 MONTICELLO MN 55362 -8822 MPLS, MN 55484 -9471 31 51121212 05173655 Oooaoo19897I1o1 auo19897 etach and Retain This Portion r r kJcords Questions: Call a write to us at: Please Call: �811gj 481 4700 Northern States Power Company Hearing Impaired: (800) 8% -4949 PO BOX 8 ` `° Fax: (800) 311 -0050 EAU CLAIRE WI 54702 0008 ...................... ....... Electric Charges Usage Period: 10/13/12 to 1111 12 Invoice 11447311651 Total Energy -kWh Meter # Company Reading on 11112 000007727732 Company Reading on 10113 Total Usage in 30 Days Actual Demand -kW Billable Demand Averagesfor This Last ailligil Period Year Year Electric /kwh per Day 53,0 0,0 Cas er D�'t SL64 $0.00 - "0 Degrees Warmer . " xm 58790 13 kWh 635 4.58 5 Sm Gen Svc (Metered) 30 Days Basic Service Chg $8.81 Affordability Chg $0.67 Energy Charge Winter 635 kWh 0$0.066970 $42.46 Fuel Cost Charge 635 kWh 0$0.077827 $17.67 Resource Adjustment $2.40 Subtotal $7129 City Fees $5.50 State Tax 06.075% z 33 Total Amount $8232 For an average non - demand customer, 73% of your bill refers to power plant costs, 10% to high voltage line costs, and 17% to the cost of local vvires connected to your business. For an average demand - billed customer, 83% of your total bill refers to power plant costs, l0% to high voltage lines, and 7% to the cost of local wires connected to your business. MONTtCELLOEDA Next Scheduled�gac }rF��a� 112 E BROADWAY ST Meter Reading Date MONTICELLO, MN 55362 -9321 12/17/12 12/12/2012 $198.97 See back of bill for Account#: 51- 0517365.5 more information. Page 2 of 2 Statement Date: 11/14/12 Statement # 3+47310675 6 Premise # 302695149 N �r N r.rY 8� ;3 m 0 O e O z u U M O A v ff m ON N N all , N � N 01 (d 01 T o [V N 0 O N ij N N T (�yy N O N cn } t . In $ m m i W U N afll' �Ry' .N-i r a�i+ O A A R R q .0 y U O �Oy O O v 0 I 0 0 <r I t o 0 o I a, o v u o0 O O V1 GO m b d OR W 0 0 O N 00 oti l� ov O O C' d' 0d1 M nl I N M m h m O M C 00 co 0 o a o 0 N m N N ff m ON N N all , N � N 01 (d 01 T o [V N 0 O N 0O O N N 0 Q (�yy N O N cn } In m m m m ri in W U N afll' �Ry' .N-i r a�i+ O 0 I 0 0 <r I t o 0 o I a, o v u o0 O O V1 GO m b d OR W 0 0 O N 00 oti l� ov O O C' d' 0d1 M nl I N M m h m O M C 00 co 0 o a o 0 N m N N ff m ON N N all , N � N 01 N N 01 T O 0 O N O N N 0 Q (�yy N O ONQ Q N In m m m m ri in W N afll' �Ry' .N-i r a�i+ O A A R R q y U O �Oy O O lu C7 Cw7 U rRn 1.0 w z z Ln U uo O O uo a q w 0 0 A o � U O A R U 6 ff m ON pY , all , er Cl p, ON � 01 U 01 01 01 T 0 o a N cy N N In m m m m ri in N N N N N N N a, N N �j �i ,n O U m 0 z 0 04 O z u u .0 U c� R C9 C O C4 V y N A N .-i tl H x 0 N H N b N zi O N v p� U U �i p G O U WSB d'c Assoclalew� Inc. Engineering I Planning I Environmental I Construcx' �' 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 City of Monticello November 16, 2012 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Attn: Wayne Oberg, Finance Director Project No. 01494-550 Tak 763.541-4800 505 Walnut Street, Suite I Invoice No: a Fax: 763-541-1700 Monticello, MN 65362•8831 Monticello Business Center Wetland Services Professional Services from October 01, 2012 to October 31, 2012 Professional Personnel Environmental Documents Pittman, Bryan Totals Total Labor Billing Limits Total Billings Limit Hours Rate 2.00 79-00 2.00 NOV 2 1 2012' Amount 158:00 158,00 158.00 Current Prior To-Date 168,00 6,448,75 6,606.75 6,606,75 Total this Invoice Comments: Final update to wetland delineation report maps, Approved by: Reviewed by: Bret Weiss Project Manager: Shibani Bisson Minneapolis I St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer $158.00 Economic Development Services, Inc, December 3, 2012 Angela Schumann, Community Development Director City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 -8831 Invoice Economic Development Professional services for November 2012 15.25 hours @ $150 /hour Mileage Monticello (88 miles) @ $.555 —1 trip [Note: balance remaining on contract: $52.08] $2,287.50 48.84 Total $2,336.34 Please make checks payable to Economic Development Services, Inc. Origr Icon evelop.coiTi 612 925 2013 109 VV C'5' )i is S`rept =a it 1, h MV S5 Invoice NORTHLAND SECURITIES INC Yl7VOICe NL1l77bC1': 45 SOUTH 7TH STREET NORTHLAND SECURITIES 307 SUITE 2000 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 F Invoice Date: USA 11/14/12 V01Ce; 6:1.2 -851- -4915 Page: Fax: 612- 851 -59SI Sold To: City of Monticello Wayne Oberg, Finance Director 505 Walnut Street, Suite I Monticello, r4N 55362 NOV -15 2012 Check N o: Subtotal 2,360.00 Sales Tax Total Invoico Amount 2,360.00 Payment Received TOTAL Norehland Secu[ities, Inc. 45 South 7tb Street, Suite 2000, Minneapolis, MN 55402 'ibis P-1 -800 - 851••2920 h „ 612 - 851-5900 1,- 612 -851 -5987 www, wahlandsecuri ties.tom Member FINRA and SIPC NORTHLAND STRATEGIES speciai projects Group Pr,V 1 5 2012 INVOICE SUPPLEMENT Client: City of Monticello Project: TIF District No. 1-22 Review Contact; Wayne Oberg ' City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 Billing Period: October 2012 Services Performed • Prepare memo of findings and xecolnmendation • EDA presentation • Meeting, with city staff • Prepare draft TIF management report for TIF 22 Staff Time uxpenses TotAI'Fhis I'eklod. Position Senior Professional Professtonal Support Total Staff Mileage Printing Other (adjustment to stay within budget) Total Expenses Project Summary Total Budget (contract pending execution by City) Billed This Period Billed Previous Budget Remaining Liam Batp Billable 19.00 $160 $3,040.00 $135 $0.00 $105 $0.00 19,00 $3,040.00 $0.00 $0.00 ($680.00) ($6$0.00) $2,360.00 $ 4,120.00 ($2,360.00) ($3,200.00) $(1,440.00) Northland Securities, Inc, Page 2 of 2 000 McCOMB GROUI; Ltd. ❑0❑ R E T A I L ECSO N S U L T A N T S November 2, 2012 Statement #4050 CITY OF MONTICELLO 505 Walnut Street Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Attention: Mr. Jeff O'Neill STATEMENT — RE: ACE HARDWARE AND BLOCK 34 Previous Balance $ 10,911.21 Payments Received $ 10,911.21 Professional Services & Expenses Maximum amount per agreement $ 35,000.00 Less: Amount previously billed and paid (33,465.11) Subtotal 1,534.89 Total $ 1,534.59 BALANCE DUE $ 1,534,89 Terms: Net ten days. Interest (at a rate of 1.5 percent per month) will be charged on all balances outstanding at the end of the month. 222 South Ninth Street Suite 380 Miameapolis, Minnesota 55102 • (612) 339 -7000 Fax: (612) 338 -5572 G 1-11 WINON Invoice submitted to: City of Monticello Jeff O'Neii, City Administrator 606 Walnut Street Monticello, MN 55362 a• i Wilson Development Services, LLC 510 North Chestnut Street, Suite 200 Chaska, MN 55398 952.448.4630 840.448.4630 FEIN 26- 1629971 � � Nov 1 6 2012 j P F v. • Invoice Date Invoice Number last Bill Date November 14, 2012 22992 10/1012012 In Reference To: Acquisition & Relocatlon Services - Montgomery Farms t Professional Services HrslRate Amount Archambault, Tawhnee -112 E Broadway #1 10/8/2012 LGT Time 010 9.50 Call from Angela regarding windows open, ok to board up apartment? 95,001hr Yes Archambault, Tawhnee -112 E Broadway #1 SUBTOTAL: [ 0.10 9.50' Barbara Lee's Dance Studio 9/2612012 Jf-C Time 2.00 190.00 Prepare final moving claim for tenant. 95.001hr Barbara Lee's Dance Studio 9/2712012 JFC Time 0,70 66.50 Review final claim with Dan, Discuss expense items with client. 95.001hr Barbara Lee's Dance Studio DH W Time 0.30 33.00 Review claim with John 110.001hr Barbara Lee's Dance Studio 10/112012 JFC Time 1.30 123.50 Obtain corrected invoices from move supplier and revise final 96.00/hr relocation claim for tenant, Phone call with tenant to discuss claim City of Montloello Monticello- Montgomery Farms status. Barbara Lee's Dance Studio 10/312012 JFC Time Reviewed with Dan and revised tenant claim #2. Barbara Lee's Dance Studio 10/4/2012 JFC Time Prepared mailing of Claim #2 and malted to tenant for signature. Barbara Lee's Dance Studio 1015/2012 JFC Time Phone call with tenant regarding status of Claim #2 Barbara Lee's Dance Studio 10/8/2012 JFC Time Processed final check request, Prepared cover letter, scanned letter and claim detail and emailed to the City of Monticello. Barbara Lee's Dance Studio SUBTOTAL; BL Used Bike Shop 1018/2012 LGT Time Cali from /to Rob. Left message for Angela. Call to Angie regarding no heat in building. Angle will follow up, Notes to file Call from Angie - heat is on BL Used Bike Shop 1011612012 LGT Time Received signed claim for search fees, scanned claim, drafted check request and emailed to Angela and Angle BL Used Bike Shop 10/19/2012 LGT Time Edited prepared 90 day notice, copied and mailed regular and certified mail to home address BL Used Bike Shop SUBTOTAL: �PS Page 2 Hrs /Rate Amount 0.50 47.50 96.001hr 0.40 38.00 96.00lhr 0.20 19.00 95.00lh r 0.70 66.50 95.00mr [ 6.10 584.00' 0.20 19.00 95.001hr 0.60 47.50 95.O0 /hr 0.80 57.00 95.00 /hr G 1.30 123.60; Bregenzer. Reece 112 C Braodway #2 10/8/2012 LGT Time 010 9.50 Call from Angela regarding windows open, ok to board up apartment? 95.00 /hr Yes Bregenzer, Reece 112 E Braodway #2 City of Monticello Montioello-Montgomery Farms SUBTOTAL: Good Clean Fun Tattoos 10/1912012 JFC Time Help Leah with preparation of 90 Day Notices, Good Clean Fun Tattoos LGT Time Edited prepared 90 day notice, copied and mailed regular and certified mail to home and business address Good Clean Fun Tattoos SUBTOTAL: Pizza Factory (Ekegren) 1 011 91201 2 JFC Time Help Leah with preparation of 90 Day Notices, Pizza Factory (Ekegren) LGT Time Edited prepared 90 day notice, copied and mailed regular and certified mail to PO Box Pizza Factory (Ekegren) 10/26f2012 LGT Time Call from Angela regarding employee eligible for relocation? No Pizza Factory (Ekegren) SUBTOTAL: Wong, Fu-Lakeland Dental Associates 101512012 LGT Time Call from City regarding OK to release check to Dr. Wong? - Yes Wong, Fu- Lakeland Dental Associates 1011612012 LGT Time Received signed copy of check for $50K Business Re- Establishment Wang, Fu- Lakeland Dental Associates HrsiRate Amount [ 0,10 9.50' 0.20 19.00 95.001hr 0,60 57.00 95,00Yhr [ 0,80 76.00' 0,20 19.00 95.001hr 0,60 57.00 95.00 /hr 0,10 9.50 95A01hr [ 0,90 65.50 0.10 0.50 95.00 /hr 0,10 9,50 95.00/hr SUBTOTAL: ( 0.20 19.00' 4' +.. i City of Monticello Monticello- Montgomery Farms page 4 Firs /Rate _ Amount z- Project Management 1011612012 DHW Time 4.20 22,00 Call Angela regarding underground gas tanks, business relocation 110.00/hr costs estimate for complete repair and friendly condemnation.. z- Project Management 10/31/2012 DML Time 1.60 120.00 1011- 10131, 2012 Consultant entries recorded to database for 75.00/hr client/case history, status and file maintenancelbackup. z- Project Management SUBTOTAL: [ 1.80 142.00 For professional services rendered 11.30 $1,049.00 Additional Charges QW /Price BL Used Bike Shop 1 011 9/20 12 LGT Postage 1 5.75 Actual Cost for Postage - Certified Return Receipt Requested letter 5.76 BL Used Bike Shop SUBTOTAL: [ 6,75; Good Clean Fun Tattoos 10/19/2012 LGT Postage 2 11.50 Actual Cost for Postage - 2 Certified Return Receipt Requested letters 5.75 -1 sent to business and 1 to residence Good Clean Fun Tattoos SUBTOTAL: Pizza Facto Eke ren 10/1912012 LGT Postage 1 5.76 Actual Cost for Postage - Certified Return Receipt Requested letter 6.75 Pizza Factory (Ekegren) SUBTOTAL: [ 6,75: City of Monticello Monticello-Montgomery Farms 4. Page 5 Qty /Price Amount z- Project Management 10131/2012 Copies - internal 67 10.05 Copies - 1011 - 10131, 2012 0.15 z- Project Management SUBTOTAL: [ 10.05, Total costs $33.05 For professional services rendered 91.30 $1,082.05 Total amount of this bill $1,082.05 Previous balance $4,709,92 10/912012 Payment -Thank You. Check No. 109327 ($2,654,23 10/23/2012 payment - Thank You. Check No. 109434 ($2,055,69 Total payments and adjustments ($},709.92 Balance due $1,082.05 EDA Agenda - 12/12/12 6. Consideration to Adopt Resolution 2012- 115 Adopting the TIF Analysis and Management Plan for TIF District No. 1 -22 and Approving Return of Tax Increments from Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -22 to Wright County. (AS) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The EDA is asked to review and adopt the TIF 1 -22 Management Plan prepared by Northland Securities. The Management Plan for TIF 1 -22 follows the same format for the overall EDA TIF District Management Plan, providing the EDA with an understanding of the district's history, function, obligations and future capacity. Under this regular agenda item, the EDA is asked only to review and approve the document itself. In the workshop to be held immediately after the regular meeting, the EDA will be asked to apply the information in the management plan, selecting a final management scenario for implementation. (Three possible management scenarios are identified in the report.) Concurrent with adoption of the management plan for 1 -22, the EDA is asked to take action to return increment in compliance with TIF knock -down rules. The knock down analysis completed indicates that 1 -22 includes approximately $42,000 of increment that should be returned to Wright County in order to be in compliance with the knock -down rule. Because the parcel knock -down completed earlier by the City occurred one year later than required, the City received one additional year of tax increment on parcels that did not have certain qualifying activities occur within four years of the certification date of the district. The City of Monticello will receive approximately $17,300 of the $42,000 back through redistribution of the increment as General Fund tax revenue. The resolution attached for EDA consideration includes both the adoption of the TIF 1 -22 Management Plan and the compliance action. Al. Staff Impact: Minor staff time will be incurred in preparing the necessary documentation for the increment return. A2. Budget Impact: The return of increment to Wright County will create a $17,300 positive impact to the City's General Fund. The EDA may wish to request that the Council consider allocation of the funds back to the EDA's "General Sub - Fund" for furthering the accomplishment of EDA goals and objectives. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to adoption Resolution 2012 -115 adopting the TIF Analysis and Management Plan for TIF District No. 1 -22 and approving return of tax increments from Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -22 to Wright County. 2. Motion of other. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the TIF I -22 Management Plan. The plan accomplishes the objectives originally intended by the EDA, including: • Clearly identifying the current boundaries of the district • Determining eligibility of all parcels within the district • Establishing financial capacities of the district, including revenue sources and obligations • Identification of next steps as related to effective management of the district Staff further recommends the return of increment as noted in order to gain compliance with TIF knock -down statutes. D. SUPPORTING DATA A. Resolution 2012 -115 B. TIF 1 -22 Analysis & Management Plan C. TIF 1 -22 Map 2 CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -115 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE TIF ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR TIF DISTRICT NO. 1 -22 REPORT AND APPROVING RETURN OF TAX INCREMENTS FROM TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-22 TO WRIGHT COUNTY WHEREAS, on March 10, 1997, the City and the HRA approved a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan ") for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -22 (the "TIF District ") located within the Redevelopment Project, pursuant to the HRA Act and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, as amended (collectively, the "TIF Act "); and WHEREAS, administration of the TIF District was subsequently transferred to the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority (the "Authority "); and WHEREAS, on June 30, 1997 the County of Wright (the "County ") certified the District; and WHEREAS, the Authority has completed an analysis of financial activity with the District to confirm compliance with the TIF Act; and WHEREAS, the Authority has determined the need to return to the County tax increments in the account for the District that were collected in year 2002 on 186 parcels within the TIF District that did not have development activity begin within four years from the date of certification of the TIF District, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, subd.6. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority as follows: The Authority accepts and adopts the "TIF Analysis and Management Plan Scenarios for TIF District No. 1 -22 Report' prepared by Northland Securities dated December 12, 2012. 2. The Finance Director is authorized and directed to provide the County with documents related to tax increments collected in year 2002 on 186 parcels within the TIF District that did not have development activity begin within four years from the date of certification of the TIF District. 3. The Finance Director is authorized and directed to return $42,563.00 of tax increments in the account for the District to the County for redistribution to other taxing jurisdictions. Approved by the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority this 12th day of December, 2012. President ATTEST: Secretary i 1 TIF Analysis and Management Plan Scenarios For TI F District No. 1 -22 Monticello Economic Development Authority December 12, 2012 NORTHLAND STRATEGIES Special Projects Group Contents Introduction and Executive Summary Introduction................................................................................................................... ..............................1 ExecutiveSummary ..................................................................................................... ..............................1 NextSteps ...................................................................................................................... ............................... 3 Table A - Comparison of Possible Scenarios for Different Decisions on Use of TIF ............ 4 Regulatory Framework and Statutory Factors 5 RegulatoryFramework .............................................................................................. ..............................5 StatutoryFactors ......................................................................................................... ............................... 5 Administrative Expense ............................................................................ ..............................5 4 -Year Knock -Down ................................................................................... ..............................5 Pooling......................................................................................................... ............................... 6 FiveYear Rule ............................................................................................... ..............................6 Decertification............................................................................................ ............................... 7 ExpandedTax Base ..................................................................................................... ............................... 7 District Summary and Potential Scenarios for Use of TIF 8 DistrictSummary ........................................................................................................ ............................... 8 ScenarioA ...................................................................................................................... .............................11 ScenarioB ...................................................................................................................... .............................13 ScenarioC ...................................................................................................................... .............................15 INTRODUCTION This report serves as a follow -up report to the 2012 TIF Management Report adopted by the Economic Devel- opment Authority (EDA) on June 20, 2012 and the City Council on July 9, 2012. This report addresses man- agement strategies that are specific to the Downtown TIF District No. 1 -22 ( "TIF22 "). TIF22 is the largest and most complex district in Mon- ticello. The geographic area of the District is an impor- tant redevelopment focus area in the City's Compre- hensive Plan. Opportunity exists to use tax increment from this district to facilitate project development, with certain limitations. The Five -Year Rule in the TIF Act limits the ability of the EDA to use all of the tax increment that otherwise would be available. The 2012 TIF Management Report recommended the following additional investigation for TIF22: 1. Verify 4 -year knock -down status of parcels. 2. Analyze pooling capacity. 3. Analyze District revenues. 4. Identify Key Investments. This report addresses items 1 through 3 and provides information needed by the EDA to proceed with iden- tification of key investments that it may decide to fund with available tax increment from TIF22. The investigations undertaken for this report did not include a review of tax increments previously paid to the City for the community center area redevelop- ment costs. This was mentioned in the 2012 TIF Man- agement Report as a management strategy to be ad- dressed. City is reviewing and may address this item separately with the EDA. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Knock -Down Status Evidence of Qualifying Activities With limited exception, the analysis shows the EDA is in compliance with the 4 -year knock -down rule. (Explanation of the rule can be found on page 5.) The knock -down date for TIF22 is June 30, 2001. The analysis shows the existing tax increment balance in TIF22 includes approximately $42,000 of increment (which is about 1% of the total tax increment balance) that should be returned to Wright County in compli- ance with the knock -down rule. The City received one additional year (paid in 2002) of tax increment on parcels that did not have certain qualifying activities occur within four years of the certification date of the district. These parcels should have been removed one year earlier than they were. The City of Monticello will receive approximately $17,300 of the $42,000 back through redistribution of the increment as General Fund tax revenue. Reinstatement of Parcels with Activity Parcel analysis shows the EDA has an opportunity to reinstate parcels previously removed from the district. Parcels that had qualifying activities occur after the ini- tial knock -down date of June 30, 2001 are eligible to be reinstated. However, the value of reinstating parcels is limited unless the parcels to be reinstated will have future development to generate tax increment. The law requires that parcels be reinstated at their current value not the value that existed at the time of original certification. Use of tax increment derived from these parcels is limited by the five -year rule and pooling re- strictions. Introduction and Executive Summary 1 Pooling Capacity There is existing tax increment derived from prop- erty within TIF22 that may be spent under pooling authority (see Table A on page 4 for dollar amounts). The EDA may pool up to 25% of the tax increment de- rived from property within the district (over the life of the district). Administrative expenditures must be in- cluded in the 25% limit. Expenditures must be within the Redevelopment Project Area No. 1. The EDA may increase the limit on Pooling by 10% for the purpose of Housing. There are conditions on the use of the ad- ditional pooling for housing that must be met. North- land has provided the EDA with a separate memoran- dum on the authority for pooling for housing. Estimates for future tax increment available for Pool- ing depends on which parcels the EDA decides to keep within TIF22. The EDA has options to remove parcels which are no longer needed to meet obligations. In addition to having a choice on which parcels to retain within the TIF district, the EDA also has the option to reinstate certain qualified parcels that were previously removed that could provide additional tax increment if future development occurs on an undeveloped parcel. Only the revenues derived from tax increments paid by the properties in the TIF district are subject to pooling restrictions and the five -year rule. Proceeds from other revenue such as the sale or lease of property purchased with tax increments, principal and interest received on loans or advances made with tax increments, invest- ment earnings on or from tax increments, repayments to an authority, and market value homestead credit paid to the authority are not subject to the restrictions, even though they are all tax increments. The City has unspent tax increment revenue that was not de- rived from property that is available to be spent on eligible project costs. If the tax increment revenue it is not spent on eligible project costs it will need to be returned to the County as excess tax increment. District Revenues Three different scenarios are presented in the report to provide a framework for the different choices the EDA has with respect to existing and future district revenues. The scenarios are intended to illustrate impact and do not represent the only scenarios. Ulti- mate decisions made by the EDA may represent slight variations of the scenarios shown in the report. The scenarios include projections on future revenues and expenditures. The EDA's decisions on spending of tax increment and selection of parcels to remain in the district has impli- cations to the City's General Fund and to the City's general tax base. Advance removal of parcels from TIF22 (in advance of the 2024 decertification date) will increase the City's general tax base sooner than anticipated. And, a decision to return unspent tax in- crement to the County will provide cash to the City's General Fund. (Excess tax increment is redistributed to the local taxing jurisdictions based on relative share of the tax rate.) The three scenarios presented for use of district rev- enues are as follows: • Scenario A - assumes the EDA acts to retain all cur- rent 58 parcels within TIF22 for the remaining life of the district in order to maximize available tax in- crement to be spent under pooling authority. This scenario provides the greatest amount of resources for development projects. Introduction and Executive Summary 2 • Scenario B - assumes the EDA acts to remove all but three parcels from TIF22 and to therefore limit but still proceed with spending a reduced amount of tax increment under pooling authority. This scenario provides additional resources for devel- opment projects but less than under Scenario A. • Scenario C - is similar to Scenario B in that it as- sumes the EDA acts to remove all but three parcels from TIF22. However, under Scenario C the EDA would not spend increment under pooling author- ity. Unspent tax increment would be returned to the County for redistribution to the local taxing ju- risdictions earlier (possibly as soon as 2013) than under the other two scenarios. Scenario C pro- vides the greatest amount of return of tax incre- ment to the local taxing jurisdictions. The portion of tax increment revenue collected that cannot be used to pay for existing obligations or spent under pooling will need to be declared as excess tax increment and returned to Wright County. The tim- ing of the return of the excess tax increment may be at the end of the district in 2024, or sooner, depending on decisions made about the use of tax increment funds and the timing of expenditures. The City will receive its proportionate share of any tax increment revenue back through redistribution based on the City's re- spective share of the local tax capacity rate. NEXT STEPS The next steps for the EDA to consider for use of dis- trict revenues for TIF22 are as follows: 1. Determine if reason to collect future tax increment. • Which specific projects might the EDA fund with pooled tax increment and what is the cost of these projects? 2. Determine if any parcels should be reinstated. • For what purpose will tax increment gener- ated from the reinstatement of parcels (assum- ing future development were to occur on these parcels) be used? 3. Determine if "usable' funds should be retained or redistributed to the local taxing jurisdictions. • How might the City benefit overall from receiv- ing (one -time) redistributed tax dollars into the City's General Fund and the earlier than antici- pated increase in general tax base (from the re- moval of parcels presently within TIF22)? 4. Make spending plan for usable funds (current and future) and (if needed) modify TIF Plan. 5. As needed, act to decertify parcels. 6. Determine funds for redistribution. Introduction and Executive Summary Introduction and TABLE A Executive Summary Comparison of Possible Scenarios for Different Decisions on Use of TIF from TIF District No. 1-22 Dollar Figures Shown are Estimated Total Life of District Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Retain All Retain Three $0 Parcels Within Parcels Within Retain Three District, District, Parcels Within Authorize Authorize District, No Pooling Pooling Pooling Source of Funds (not including bond proceeds) Tax increment revenue derived from property in district Other tax increment revenue not derived from property in district Total Use of Funds (Spent /Committed and Available for New Projects) Increment spent /committed Increment available for "new" redevelopment projects (incl admin) Increment available for "new" housing projects (income qualified) Return of excess tax increment to County Total Estimated City Portion of Excess Tax Increment Returned for Distribution* * timing of receipt of funds varies across scenarios $7,359,289 $2,155,538 $9,514,827 $4,207,161 $2,099,181 $6,306,343 $4,207,161 $1,884,558 $6,091,719 $2,824,492 $2,824,492 $2,824,492 $3,463,136 $2,618,748 $0 $735,929 $420,716 $0 $2,491,270 $442,386 $3,267,227 $9,514,827 $6,306,342 $6,091,719 $996,508 $176,954 $1,306,891 For a year by year review of estimated increment available for "new" redevelopment projects (including administrative expense) and increment available for "new" housing projects (income qualified) see the "District Summary and Poten- tial Scenarios for Use of TIF' Section of the report. Scenario A is shown on page 12 Scenario B is shown on page 14 Scenario C is shown on page 16 4 Regulatory Framework Tax increment financing is governed by a complex set of statutes that have changed over time. An important nuance of TIF is the relevance of the laws in existence at the time the district was established. These laws es- tablish the majority of critical criteria for the use of tax increment from TIF22. Most aspects for the on -going use of tax increments from the district are governed by the statutes in effect when the district was established. Among these factors are: • Ability to spend money outside of the TIF district (pooling authority). • Application of the 5 -year rule. • Limitations on administrative expense. Within statutory constraints, the parameters for the use of tax increment financing are set in the TIF plan. Tax increments cannot be used for purposes not au- thorized in the plan. The amount of spending cannot exceed the estimated project costs contained in the plan. The City cannot incur bonded indebtedness un- less so authorized by the plan and the amount of debt cannot exceed limits set in the plan. The plan also sets the maximum period of time the City can collect tax increment from the district. Direct reference to the actual TIF plan for TIF22 should be made before mak- ing changes or authorizing new uses of tax increment from any district. Statutory Factors Several elements of State Law are particularly relevant to the ongoing management of TIF22. Administrative Expense Based on the request for certification date for TIF22, June 25, 1997, the limitation on administrative expens- es is that administrative expense cannot exceed 10% of the lesser of the total estimated tax increment ex- penditures authorized by the TIF plan or 10% of the total tax increments for the project. Increments used to pay county administrative expense are not subject to the 10% limit on administrative expense (2009 amend- ment to the TIF Act). 4 -Year Knock -Down The current listing of the 58 parcels in TIF22 (pay 2012) does not match the original list of 231 certified parcels in the TIF Plan. Parcels have been removed /added through a combination of the "knock down rule" and changes in platting. State law requires certain activi- ties to occur on each parcel in the TIF district within four years of certification. These activities are: • Demolition, rehabilitation, or renovation of prop- erty. • Qualified improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service includ- ing sewer or water systems. • Other site preparation. The value of parcels that failed this test have been removed from the tax increment calculations for the district. State Law required that the EDA needed to provide the County with evidence related to qualify- ing activity on each parcel by February 1 of the year following end of the knock down period, which was February 1, 2002 for TIF22. It is important to note that the parcels are not removed from the district. Parcels that are knocked down can be restored to the district when the EDA certifies to the County Auditor that qualifying activity has com- Regulatory Framework and Statutory Factors 5 menced. The value that is restored to the original tax capacity is the most recent tax capacity value of the parcel. The table below provides a summary of the changes in parcels within TIF22 from original certification to today (pay 2012). Pooling Pooling is the ability to spend tax increments outside of the TIF district. Limits on pooling were adopted by the Legislature in 1990 and apply to districts request- ing certification after May 1, 1988. TIF22 is a redevelopment district and is subject to a 25% limitation. The pooling limit is calculated based on total tax increment revenue derived from property within the district. Administrative expense applies to this restriction. The amount that can be spent outside of the TIF district is net of administrative expense. Timing is an important factor in evaluating the poten- tial for expenditures outside of the TIF district. The opportunity for pooling exists only while there are ob- ligations to be paid from tax increments (see Five Year Rule below). Once all obligations have been paid, the district must be decertified. The statutory pooling restrictions applicable to TIF22, allow for an increase by up to 10% in the out of dis- trict expenditures to provide assistance for qualified low- income housing. State Law sets forth the criteria for determining if housing qualifies for this assistance. The TIF plan must authorize the expenditures. Five Year Rule The five -year rule is one of the most important TIF management limitations. TIF22 is subject to the Five Year Rule. In simple terms, the EDA had five years from the date of certification to spend or obligate tax increments. After this time period passes tax incre- ments can only be spent on prior obligations, on ad- ministrative expense, or on authorized expenditures that comply with pooling restrictions. The pooling restrictions apply regardless of whether the tax incre- ments are spent inside or outside of the TIF district. To avoid restriction under the five -year rule, one of the following actions needed to take place within five years of certification of the district: 1. Revenues are actually paid to a third party with respect to the activity. 2. Bonds used to finance eligible activities are issued and sold to a third party. The proceeds of the bonds must be reasonably expected to be spent before the end of the later of (i) the five -year period, or (ii) a reasonable temporary period within the meaning Regulatory Framework and Statutory Factors A Parcels Added Parcels Removed Cumulative Parcels Remaining Original parcels certified 613011997 231 231 Parcels requested for removal by City 111612003 (x8 45 Parcel adjusted by County (i.e, replats and her changes) h (15) 56 Parcels requested for add back by City 21812003 3 59 Parcels requested for add bac0emoval by City 811212003 3 (2) @ Parcels requested for removal by city 1212112010 (2) 58 Pooling Pooling is the ability to spend tax increments outside of the TIF district. Limits on pooling were adopted by the Legislature in 1990 and apply to districts request- ing certification after May 1, 1988. TIF22 is a redevelopment district and is subject to a 25% limitation. The pooling limit is calculated based on total tax increment revenue derived from property within the district. Administrative expense applies to this restriction. The amount that can be spent outside of the TIF district is net of administrative expense. Timing is an important factor in evaluating the poten- tial for expenditures outside of the TIF district. The opportunity for pooling exists only while there are ob- ligations to be paid from tax increments (see Five Year Rule below). Once all obligations have been paid, the district must be decertified. The statutory pooling restrictions applicable to TIF22, allow for an increase by up to 10% in the out of dis- trict expenditures to provide assistance for qualified low- income housing. State Law sets forth the criteria for determining if housing qualifies for this assistance. The TIF plan must authorize the expenditures. Five Year Rule The five -year rule is one of the most important TIF management limitations. TIF22 is subject to the Five Year Rule. In simple terms, the EDA had five years from the date of certification to spend or obligate tax increments. After this time period passes tax incre- ments can only be spent on prior obligations, on ad- ministrative expense, or on authorized expenditures that comply with pooling restrictions. The pooling restrictions apply regardless of whether the tax incre- ments are spent inside or outside of the TIF district. To avoid restriction under the five -year rule, one of the following actions needed to take place within five years of certification of the district: 1. Revenues are actually paid to a third party with respect to the activity. 2. Bonds used to finance eligible activities are issued and sold to a third party. The proceeds of the bonds must be reasonably expected to be spent before the end of the later of (i) the five -year period, or (ii) a reasonable temporary period within the meaning Regulatory Framework and Statutory Factors A 3. Q of the use of that term under section 148(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code, or are deposited in a reasonably required reserve or replacement fund. Binding contracts with a third party are entered into for performance of the activity before or with- in five years after certification of the district and the revenues are spent under the contractual obli- gation. Costs with respect to the activity are paid before or within five years after certification of the district and the revenues are spent to reimburse a party for payment of the costs, including interest on unreim- bursed costs. 5. Expenditures are for special housing and infra- structure purposes authorized by State Law. Decertification The evolution of State Law governing TIF has in- creased the incentive to decertify districts at the earli- est opportunity. The factors that influence the decerti- fication decision include: • The five -year rule and pooling limits restrict the ability to use uncommitted tax increments to sup- port other endeavors. • The value of decertified TIF districts becomes available for general taxation. The result is a lower tax rate. • Excess tax increments are sent to the County for redistribution to taxing jurisdictions. Expanded Tax Base The early removal of developed parcels from the TIF district will not only allow the City to benefit from the redistribution of excess funds, it will also add to the local tax base. The tax capacity value captured by the TIF district becomes available for general taxation. The removal of parcels described in this report (under Scenarios B and C) will add approximately $200,000 in tax capacity to the City's general tax base. At the City tax rate for pay 2012, this value is equivalent to about $95,000 in annual property tax revenue to the City. Regulatory Framework and Statutory Factors 7 The Downtown TIF District (1 -22) is the largest and City Number ...................................................................... ...........................1 -22 most complex district in Monticello. This district County Number ................................ ............................... ............................622 provides an excellent illustration of the challenges of Name ............................ ............................... .......................Downtown District implementing a large TIF district subject to the con- Type .......................................................... ............................... Redevelopment straints of the five -year rule. Established...................................... ............................... ........................3 /10/97 The five -year rule time period has ended. Fund bal- Certification Requested ............. ............................... ........................6 /25/97 ance may only be spent on the following activities: Certified ........................................... ............................... ........................6 /30/97 • Existing obligations Year of First Increment ................... ............................... ...........................1999 4 -Year Knockdown ....................... ............................... ........................6 /30/01 • Administrative expense 5 -Year Rule ...................................... ............................... ........................6 /30/02 • Development activities authorized in the TIF Decertification ............................. ............................... .......................12 /31/24 plan and within the pooling restrictions. Original Tax Rate .......................... ............................... .....................112.618% Tax increments from District 1 -22 is pledged to pay- Original TaxCapacityvalue ....... ............................... ........................157,311 ment of bonds. The pledge of increment to the G.O. Current Base Tax capacity value ............................ ........................178,814 Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2004A, ended in 2010 Current (Pay 2012) Tax Capacity ............................. ........................458,208 when the bonds were called and prepaid in full. (This Parcels (Pay 2012) .............................................................. .............................58 issue was a current refunding of the original $2,150,000 155- 010- 002011 155- 010- 036130 155 - 010 - 005010 G.O. Temporary Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2001.) 155- 010 - 005090 155- 010- 051060 155- 010- 006040 In addition to the prior pledge to the now retired 2004 155- 010- 051100 155- 010 - 007020 155- 010 - 052010 bonds, tax increment from District 1 -22 is pledged to 155- 010- 011030 155- 010 - 052060 155- 010- 011040 the payment of two developer notes. 155- 010 - 052110 155- 010- 014050 155- 010- 053130 155- 010 - 016070 155- 010 - 054030 155- 010 - 016090 1. The development agreement with Master Fifth 155- 010- 069080 155- 010- 016100 155- 040 - 002100 Avenue, Inc. provides for a note in the amount of 155- 010- 017030 155- 076- 001010 155- 010- 017060 $185,000 (shown as 22.5 Amoco in projections). 155- 137 - 000100 155- 010 - 018060 155- 137 - 000200 The note is payable with tax increments from 155- 010 - 018080 155- 137 - 000300 155- 010 - 020010 parcels 155 - 010 - 036130 and 155 - 010 - 036140. The 155 -137- 000400 155 - 010 - 020030 155 -137- 000500 note has an outstanding balance of $184,816 as of 155- 010 - 032020 155- 137 - 000600 155- 010 - 033011 12/31/2011. The note does not accrue interest. The 155- 137 - 000700 155- 010 - 034060 155- 144 - 000010 note is set to terminate no later than 2/1/2023. 155- 010 - 034130 155- 144 - 001020 155- 010 - 034150 2. The development agreement with BBF Properties, 155- 144 - 001030 155- 010 - 035060 155- 144 - 001040 Inc. provides for a note in the amount of $500,000. 155- 010 - 035120 155- 144 - 001050 155- 010 - 035130 The total principal on the note has grown to 155- 144 - 001060 155- 010 - 036040 155- 144 - 001070 $1,047,919 with the accrual of unpaid interest, as 155- 010 - 036061 155- 144 - 001080 155- 010 - 036110 155- 144 - 001090 155- 010 - 036111 155- 010 - 036140 District Summary and Potential Scenarios for Use of TIF District 1 -22 (Downtown) Redevelopment FA r of 12/31/2011 (shown as 22.1 Cub in projections). The note is payable with tax increments from par - cel 155- 076 - 001010. The note is set to terminate no later than 2/1/2020. Tax increment from District 1 -22 was pledged to pay for up to $281,250 in redevelopment costs related to the construction of the Community Center. The EDA (HRA) agreed to pay the City $5,625 semi - annually be- ginning August 1, 2000. The status of the payments is under review by the City to confirm the amount of the outstanding obligation, if any. Actions Taken Since 2009 Outstanding bonds from Series 2004A were called and paid in full in 2010. The City requested guidance from Kennedy & Grav- en (memo dated February 2, 2010) and Ehlers (memo Dated July 5, 2011) on options for use of funds from TIF District 1 -22. The City adopted a spending plan that allows for the temporary expansion of spending authority for Dis- trict 1 -22, as granted by MN Statute 469.176, SubdAm. The spending plan provides authority to use TIF from this District for the purpose of stimulating construc- tion. Construction must commence before July 1, 2012 and the TIF must be spent by December 31, 2012. Ab- sent the temporary flexibility offered by this authority, the EDA would have been required to remove all but three (3) parcels from TIF District 1 -22 after the out- standing obligation for the 2004 Bonds was satisfied in 2010. Administrative Tasks The task of reviewing expenditure transactions that occurred under temporary pooling authority and as authorized by the spending plan adopted by the EDA were completed by city staff. The results of this review did not cause the projected fund balance amounts to vary from what was shown in the adopted 2012 TIF Management Report. Management Strategies District 1 -22 poses a significant management challenge. The area within the District is an important redevelop- ment focus area in the Comprehensive Plan. An exist- ing TIF district and the fund balance in the district cre- ate financial tools needed to facilitate redevelopment projects. However, the five -year rule limits the options and ability of the EDA to use these resources. Temporary Pooling Authority The temporary pooling authority provided by the Leg- islature in the Jobs Bill provided a short term window to access the available fund balance for offering assis- tance to project that would otherwise not qualify for use of funds from District 1 -22. In 2009, the EDA acted to approve a spending plan under the temporary pool- ing authority to assist with development (Walgreens). Additional Investigations As recommended in the adopted 2012 TIF Manage- ment Report for this District, several additional inves- tigations have been completed. 1. Verify knockdown status of parcels. Over the life of this District, parcels have been removed under the knockdown provisions of State Law. The City has evidence that the parcels that remain in the district met the 4 -year knock -down rule. In plan- ning for the future of funds available within TIF22, the analysis completed confirms that the tax capac- ity calculations are based on the correct parcels. District Summary and Potential Scenarios for Use of TIF District Summary and 2. Anal)�ze pooling capacity. The analysis completed Potential Scenarios for provides information on the ability to make expen- Use of TI F ditures within the pooling limits to evaluate future options for TIF22. The analysis required two pieces of information: (1) total estimated administrative expense over the life of the district and (2) total es- timated tax increment revenue derived from prop- erty and tax increment revenue "not" derived from property over the life of the district. The analysis also considered the ability to increase the pooling amount for housing purposes. 3. Analyze District revenues. All prior revenues col- lected in TIF22 were reviewed in order to deter- mine if any funds are not "tax increments ". The analysis did not identify any such monies. The statutory definition of tax increment includes the actual tax revenues derived from property and other funds that are derived from the tax incre- ments (i.e., interest income). 4. Identify Key Investments. This is work that the EDA will need to undertake. Analysis shows that the TIF22 has the legal and financial capacity to continue to undertake development activities in the Downtown area should the EDA to determine it wants to do so. The alternative would be to re- turn the tax increment as excess to the County for redistribution to the local taxing jurisdictions. Satisfy Commitment to Community Center The investigations conducted did not include a review of tax increments previously paid to the City for com- munity center area redevelopment costs. Existing fund balance should be used to pay the remaining amount (estimate to be about $10,000), if there is in fact an out- standing balance. The City will perform this analysis. W SCENARIO A Scenario A assumes the EDA acts to retain all current 58 parcels within TIF22 and acts to maximize avail- able increment for Pooling. This scenario provides the greatest amount of resources for future development projects. It also requires that TIF22 remain in existence the full duration of the district, until year 2024, in or- der to leverage future tax increments and maximize the amount of revenue expended under pooling au- thority in earlier years. It is not assumed under Scenario A that parcels previ- ously removed from the district are reinstated. The reinstatement of parcels will only provide additional tax increment if development occurs on these parcels after reinstatement to the district. Key items to consider with proceeding under Scenario A are as follows: • The amount of future tax increment to be collect- ed and the ability to spend pooled tax increment in earlier years on development projects is maxi- mized. • The City will not realize an immediate benefit from an increase in general tax base that would other- wise result from early removal of 55 of the cur- rent 58 parcels from the district. The approximate $200,000 in tax capacity of the 55 parcels that could be removed represents the equivalent of about $95,000 in annual tax revenue to the City (based on pay 2012 property tax rate). The City will realize an increase in general tax base in the future when TIF22 is decertified. • City receipt of excess tax increment (one -time money) may not be realized until the end of the district, which is year 2024. District Summary and Potential Scenarios for Use of TIF 11 District Summary and City of Monticello Increment spent /committed 2,123,011 87,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 2,824,492 Increment available for "new" redevelopment projects (incl admin) 2,817,598 160,000 160,000 160,000 90,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 15,538 3,463,136 Potential Scenarios for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-22 735,929 Not available for spending- excess increment - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2,491,270 2,491,270 Total Use of Tax Increment 2,123,011 87,794 3,631,321 237,794 237,794 237,794 167,794 87,794 87,794 23,826 23,826 23,826 23,826 2,520,634 9,514,827 12 Use of TIF SCENARIO Projected Scenario A Accounted for in Prior Total Life of Years 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 District Source of Funds Tax increment revenue derived from property in district 3,268,866 314,648 314,648 314,648 314,648 314,648 314,648 314,648 314,648 314,648 314,648 314,648 314,648 314,648 7,359,289 Tax increment revenue not derived from property in district 1,831,657 52,901 59,550 65,145 3 2,843 4,380 5,974 8,999 13,655 18,372 24,462 30,646 36,951 2,155,538 Subtotal tax increment 5,100,523 367,549 374,198 379,793 314,651 317,491 319,028 320,622 323,647 328,303 333,020 339,110 345,294 351,599 9,514,827 Bond proceeds 3,235,142 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3,235,142 Total Source of Funds 8,335,665 367,549 374,198 379,793 314,651 317,491 319,028 320,622 323,647 328,303 333,020 339,110 345,294 351,599 12,749,969 Use of Funds Increment spent /committed (within district) 4,835,929 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 5,527,410 Pooled tax increment expenditures 39,846 - 1,457,598 - - - - - - - - - - - 1,497,444 Administrative expenditures 212,378 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 342,378 Subtotal 252,224 10,000 1,467,598 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 1,839,822 Pooled tax increment for housing purposes - - 735,929 - - - - - - - - - - - 735,929 Expenditure of TIF revenue not dervied from property 270,000 1,350,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 80,000 5,538 2,155,538 Return of excess tax increment to County - - - - - - 2,491,270 2,491,270 Total Use of Funds 5,358,153 87,794 3,631,321 237,794 237,794 237,794 167,794 87,794 87,794 23,826 23,826 23,826 23,826 2,520,634 12,749,969 Beginning Fund Balance - 2,977,512 3,257,267 144 142,144 219,001 298,697 449,931 682,759 918,612 1,223,089 1,532,283 1,847,567 2,169,035 - Ending Fund Balance 2,977,512 3,257,267 144 142,144 219,001 298,697 449,931 682,759 918,612 1,223,089 1,532,283 1,847,567 2,169,035 (0) (0) Estimated City ofMonticello's portion ofexcess tax increment 996,508 996,508 Use of Tax Increment (Spent /Committed Vs. New Spending) Increment spent /committed 2,123,011 87,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 2,824,492 Increment available for "new" redevelopment projects (incl admin) 2,817,598 160,000 160,000 160,000 90,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 15,538 3,463,136 Increment available for "new" housing projects (income qualified) 735,929 - - - - - - - - - - - 735,929 Not available for spending- excess increment - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2,491,270 2,491,270 Total Use of Tax Increment 2,123,011 87,794 3,631,321 237,794 237,794 237,794 167,794 87,794 87,794 23,826 23,826 23,826 23,826 2,520,634 9,514,827 12 SCENARIO B Scenario B assumes the EDA acts to remove 55 of the 58 parcels currently within TIF22 (effective for taxes pay- able in year 2013) and to therefore limit the amount of tax increment revenue that is available for new spend- ing under pooling authority. This scenario provides additional revenue for project spending but less than what otherwise would be available under Scenario A. Key items to consider with proceeding under Scenario B are as follows: • Limits the amount of future tax increment to be collected but still allows for maximizing the abil- ity to pool existing tax increment (currently within TIF22). • City will immediately benefit from an increase in tax base from the removal of parcels from the dis- trict at this time. The unanticipated increase in tax capacity would begin in year 2013 and result in lower than anticipated tax rates for taxes payable in 2013. The estimated $200,000 increase in tax ca- pacity for the City is equivalent to about 1% of the City's tax capacity. • City receipt of excess tax increment (one -time money) may not be realized until the end of the district, which is year 2024. • Scenario B assumes the City does not return excess tax increment until the end of the district and out- standing obligations are met. The City could de- cide to return tax increment sooner, depending on timing of future pooled project spending. District Summary and Potential Scenarios for Use of TIF 13 City of Monticello Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-22 SCENARIO B Source of Funds Tax increment revenue derived from property in district Other tax increment revenue not derived from property in district Subtotal tax increment Bond proceeds District Summary and Potential Scenarios for Use of TIF Projected Scenario B Accounted for in Prior Total Life of Years 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 District 3,268,866 314,648 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 14,656 14,656 14,656 14,656 14,656 4,207,161 1,831,657 52,901 59,550 65,145 8,007 9,127 9,104 9,103 9,101 9,100 9,099 9,097 9,096 9,094 2,099,181 5,100,523 367,549 138,174 143,769 86,631 87,751 87,727 87,727 87,725 23,756 23,755 23,753 23,752 23,750 6,306,343 3,235,142 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3,235,142 Total Source of Funds 8,335,665 367,549 138,174 143,769 86,631 87,751 87,727 87,727 87,725 23,756 23,755 23,753 23,752 23,750 9,541,485 Use of Funds Increment spent /committed (within district) 4,835,929 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 5,527,410 Pooled tax increment expenditures 39,846 - 669,566 - - - - - - - - - - - 709,412 Administrative expenditures 212,378 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 342,378 Subtotal 252,224 10,000 679,566 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 1,051,790 Pooled tax incrementfor housing purposes - - 420,716 - - - - - - - - - - - 420,716 Expenditure of TIF revenue not dervied from property 270,000 1,817,000 12,182 2,099,182 Return of excess tax increment to County - - 442,386 442,386 Total Use of Funds 5,358,153 87,794 2,995,076 87,794 87,794 87,794 87,794 87,794 87,794 23,826 23,826 23,826 23,826 478,394 9,541,484 Beginning Fund Balance - 2,977,512 3,257,267 400,365 456,341 455,178 455,135 455,068 455,001 454,932 454,862 454,791 454,718 454,644 - Ending Fund Balance 2,977,512 3,257,267 400,365 456,341 455,178 455,135 455,068 455,001 454,932 454,862 454,791 454,718 454,644 0 0 Estimated City ofMonticello's portion ofexcess tax increment - - - - - - - - - - - - - 176,954 176,954 Use of Tax Increment (Spent /Committed Vs. New Spending) Increment spent /committed 2,123,011 Increment available for "new" redevelopment projects (incl admin) Increment available for "new" housing projects (income qualified) Not available for spending - excess increment - Total Use of Tax Increment 2,123,011 87,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 2,824,492 2,496,566 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 22,182 2,618,748 420,716 - - - - - - - - - - - 420,716 - - - - - - - - - - - - 442,386 442,386 87,794 2,995,076 87,794 87,794 87,794 87,794 87,794 87,794 23,826 23,826 23,826 23,826 478,394 6,306,342 14 SCENARIO C Scenario C assumes the EDA acts to remove 55 of the 58 parcels currently within TIF22 (effective for taxes payable in year 2013). Under Scenario C, in contrast to Scenario B, the EDA would not act to spend increment under the pooling authority. All available (uncommit- ted) tax increment revenue would be returned imme- diately to the County for distribution to the local tax- ing jurisdictions. This scenario does not provide any additional revenue for project spending. Key items to consider with proceeding under Scenario C are as follows: • Limits the amount of future tax increment to be collected to only what is needed to pay existing outstanding obligations. • City will immediately benefit from an increase in tax base from the removal of parcels from the dis- trict at this time. The unanticipated increase in tax capacity would begin in year 2013 and result in lower than anticipated tax rates for taxes payable in 2013. The estimated $200,000 increase in tax ca- pacity for the City is equivalent to about 1% of the City's tax capacity. • City receipt of excess tax increment through the redistribution of tax revenue to the local taxing ju- risdictions (one -time money) would be realized in year 2013. District Summary and Potential Scenarios for Use of TIF 15 City of Monticello Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-22 SCENARIO C Source of Funds Tax increment revenue derived from property in district Other tax increment revenue not derived from property in district Subtotal tax increment Bond proceeds District Summary and Potential Scenarios for Use of TIF Total Source of Funds 8,335,665 Projected Scenario C 9,326,861 Accounted for in Prior 4,835,929 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 Total Life of Years 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 District 3,268,866 314,648 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 14,656 14,656 14,656 14,656 14,656 4,207,161 1,831,657 52,901 - - - - - - - - - - - - 1,884,558 5,100,523 367,549 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 14,656 14,656 14,656 14,656 14,656 6,091,719 3,235,142 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3,235,142 Total Source of Funds 8,335,665 367,549 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 78,624 14,656 14,656 14,656 14,656 14,656 9,326,861 Use of Funds Increment spent /committed (within district) 4,835,929 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 5,527,410 Pooled tax increment expenditures 39,846 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 39,846 Administrative expenditures 212,378 10,000 222,378 Subtotal 252,224 10,000 262,224 Pooled tax increment for housing purposes - - Expenditure of TIF revenue not dervied from property 270,000 270,000 Return of excess tax increment to County - 3,258,097 9,130 3,267,227 Total Use of Funds 5,358,153 87,794 3,335,891 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 22,956 9,326,861 Beginning Fund Balance - 2,977,512 3,257,267 0 830 1,660 2,490 3,320 4,150 4,980 5,810 6,640 7,470 8,300 - Ending Fund Balance 2,977,512 3,257,267 0 830 1,660 2,490 3,320 4,150 4,980 5,810 6,640 7,470 8,300 0 0 Estimated City ofMonticello's portion ofexcess tax increment - - 1,303,239 - - - - - - - - - - 3,652 1,306,891 Use of Tax Increment (Spent/Committed Vs. New Spending] Increment spent /committed Increment available for "new" redevelopment projects (incl admin) Increment available for "new" housing projects (income qualified) Not available for spending - excess increment Total Use of Tax Increment 2,123,011 87,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 2,824,492 - - 3,258,097 - - - - - - - - - - 9,130 3,267,227 2,123,011 87,794 3,335,891 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 77,794 13,826 13,826 13,826 13,826 22,956 6,091,719 16 a \11 71'/f \m jv g' I \ � f / V® I io e 3 'gee jv 8A ib ' jy8 I I L/ / <!�/ 0 TI F District 1 -22 � _, 1997 Establishment Parcels Q 2012 County Records 1 inch = 100 feet CITY _/ 6. A. B. C. EDA Agenda — 12/12/12 Consideration of 2013 EDA Appointments. (AS) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The EDA is asked to take action as related to 2013 Authority appointments. City records indicate that Commissioner Demeules term on the EDA expires in December of 2012. At the time of this report, Commissioner Demeules had been contacted regarding his willingness to serve another term and staff was awaiting his repsonse. A listing of the current terms is listed below for reference. The EDA's terms are staggered in six year increments. Economic Development Authority Bill Tapper 6 yr 12/2015 (6 -year staggered terms) Tracy Hinz 6 yr 12/2016 Rod Dragsten 6 yr 12/2016 appointed 419112 Bill Demeules 5 yr 12/2012 Matt Frie 6 yr 12/2016 Tom Perrault Council Brian Stumpf Council The City Council will ratify appointments as recommended by the EDA on January 141h 2013. Appointments will be retro- active to January 1St, 2013. The EDA makes appointments for the officer positions of President, Vice - President, Secretary and Treasurer at its annual meeting in February, per EDA bylaws. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to recommend the appointment of Commissioner Demeules for a six -year term on the Monticello Economic Development Authority. 2. Motion of other. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff defers to the Authority in relationship to appointments. D. SUPPORTING DATA None. EDA Agenda - 12/12/12 7. Director's Report (JO, AS) Danville Broadband Conference Verbal Report to be provided at the ozeeting. McCombs Contract Staff has received the final work products from the McComb Group. At the present time, staff is analyzing the information and will ask the EDA and Council to consider the information at a future meeting. Fred's Auto The underground storage tank located at the rear of the building was removed on November 29th, 2012. The contractor will be assisting City staff in preparation of required paperwork for MPCA for the removal. The requests for proposal for the locates of the front year underground storage tanks have been sent to qualified contractors. The RFP is also posted on the City's website. Proposals are due December 17th, 2013. The proposals include a request for identification of any potential impacts to the building of site that may be caused by a removal. Embracing Downtown Activity A site inspection was completed on the potential acquisition subject property located on Block 52 on November 26th, 2012. The property owner, City Administrator /EDA Executive Director Jeff O'Neill, Chief Building Official Ron Hackenmueller and Fire Inspector Marc Simpson were present during the inspection. Based on the findings of the inspection, a formal written offer was mailed to the property owner on November 30th 2012. The offer was consistent with the EDA's motion regarding the potential acquisition. At the time of this report, no counter offer has been received. Other downtown reports: The reSTOREing downtown website is scheduled to go live early the week of December 10th Staff has made contact with two property owners on Block 34 and has set in motion initial property acquisition negotiations for both. More information to follow. Economic Development Chapter — Comp Plan HKGi, the consultant who prepared the 2008 Comprehensive Plan, will be engaged to complete the needed data updates to both Chapter 2 — Community Context and Chapter 4 — Economic Development in draft form.. The small group will be called together to review the updates and discuss other changes to Chapter 4 in January. Update on Economic Development Position Staff have not had an opportunity to finalize the job description for the position. During the EDA Workshop, it is staff s intention to discuss the current direction for the position's description. 2