EDA Agenda 08-14-2013EDA MEETING
Wednesday, August 14th, 2013
6:00 p.m.
Mississippi Room - 505 Walnut Street, Monticello, MN
Commissioners: President Bill Demeules, Vice President Bill Tapper, Treasurer
Tracy Hinz, Vice Treasurer Matt Frie, Rod Dragsten and Council members Tom Perrault and
Brian Stumpf
Staff: Executive Director Jeff O'Neill, Wayne Oberg, Angela Schumann
1. Call to Order.
2. Approve Meeting Minutes:
a. July 10th, 2013 - Meeting Minutes
3. Consideration of additional agenda items.
4. Consideration to approve payment of bills
5. Consideration of request to extend the Preliminary Development Agreement between the
Monticello EDA and Rocky MTN Group, LLC.
6. Consideration to approve 2014 contribution to the Initiative Foundation.
7. Consideration to authorize a request for quotes for redevelopment district qualification
and demolition of buildings at EDA -owned property located at 100 and 112 Broadway
East.
8. Consideration to approve funding for Industry of Year/MN Manufacturer's Week
activities.
9. Consideration to approve inclusion of expenses and revenue for the proposed wireless
communication support structure in the 2014 EDA budget and proceed with
documentation for consideration of EDA ownership.
10. Consideration of Director's Report.
11. Adj ourn.
MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) MEETING
Wednesday, July 10, 2013 - 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room
Present: Bill Tapper, Tracy Hinz, Matt Frie, Rod Dragsten, Tom Perrault, Brian Stumpf
Absent: Bill Demeules
Others: Jeff O'Neill, Angela Schumann, Wayne Oberg
1. Call to Order
Bill Tapper called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. Approve Meeting Minutes
a) June 12th, 2013 — Regular Meeting Minutes
MATT FRIE MOVED TO APPROVE THE JUNE 12TH, 2013 REGULAR EDA MEETING
MINUTES. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0.
b) May 8, 2013 — Special Meeting Minutes
TOM PERRAULT MOVED TO APPROVE THE MAY 8TH, 2013 SPECIAL EDA MEETING
MINUTES. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 4 -0. (Matt
Frie and Brian Stumpf did not vote.)
3. Consideration of additional agenda items
a) Market Matching Update (Jeff O'Neill)
4. Consideration of approving payment of bills
Bill Tapper asked why the EDA was still paying bills related to the gas station property. Angela
Schumann said that the EDA is eligible for reimbursement from the Department of Commerce's
Petro Fund for the $7500 cost of the Limited Scope Investigation completed on that property. Braun
had billed the EDA $500 to apply for reimbursement on its behalf.
Rod Dragsten asked about the $14,000 bike shop invoice. Schumann indicated that the EDA is
obligated to pay that invoice as it was related to construction costs for the new building.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE PAYMENT OF BILLS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$15,501.94 THROUGH JULY 2013. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED 6 -0.
5. Consideration to review for comment 2014 preliminary budget documents
Angela Schumann asked that the EDA begin to review the goals included in its 2013 workplan
as part of the 2014 budget preparation process. She suggested that the EDA determine if
existing goals are in line with current priorities or are in need of revision and consider what
EDA Minutes - 7/10/13
resources might be needed to accomplish those goals. This information would be used to update
the workplan and provide a framework which supports EDA funding needs. The City Council
would then consider the EDA's budget request, along with those submitted by City
departments, in terms of the overall goals of the City, and approve the level of funding required
to accomplish the goals identified.
This revised EDA budgeting approach was established in response to the need to create a
long -term and consistent funding source for the EDA general fund. An annual allocation from
the City enables the EDA to fund administrative activities such as marketing and staffing costs.
It also eliminates the need to split operating costs with the City.
Tracy Hinz asked if the EDA relinquished autonomy by seeking Council approval of its budget.
O'Neill indicated that this approach ensures that EDA goals are in sync with the goals of the
City. He also noted that the EDA has full discretion over TIF expenditures.
Staff outlined some preliminary budget recommendations for the EDA to consider.
• Designate $24,000, of the $890,000 which had been transferred from TIF to the
existing EDA general fund, to pay 50% of WSB's Market Matching contract cost
• Continue to fund the "Marketing" line item at $17,000, from existing EDA general
funds, to address any potential gaps in marketing information
• Maintain the "Professional Services -Legal Fees" line item at $10,000 through existing
EDA general funds, to allow for continued access to Kennedy & Graven expertise
• Retain $10,000 in "Miscellaneous Professional Services" and "Other Expenses"
through the EDA general fund, to monitor expenses for future budget years
• Reduce the "Dues and Memberships" line item, from $10,000 to $7,000, within the
City's general fund, due to better partnership leverage through the WSB contract
• Add "Travel Expense" and "Conference and Schools" line items to facilitate
attendance by EDA representatives
• Maximize the total allowable administrative expense (10 %) for TIFs Districts 1 -6 and
1 -22 to cover related in- house, legal, and consulting staff time expenses
Tapper suggested that the EDA budget for a housing study in order to have current
information when considering how to spend increment restricted to housing.
Finance Director Wayne Oberg provided some detail related to spendable fund balance
amounts and responded to questions about the budget process. He noted that, although
EDA Minutes - 7/10/13
workplans and budget priorities provide guidance, they are frequently subject to change.
He pointed to the Market Matching contract as an example of a current priority which
hadn't been specifically planned for in the workplan or budget. He also suggested that it
may have made for easier accounting if the EDA had funded the full Market Matching
contract expense rather than split the cost with the City.
Tracy Hinz asked about vulnerabilities in the EDA budget. Oberg stated that the EDA has
utilized a pooled cash concept to address temporary deficiencies in TIF districts 1 -34, 1 -38
and 1 -39. He indicated that it may be useful to instead establish a separate fund with a cash
balance for each district to allow for interfund activity. He also noted that the annual
transfer out of TIF 1 -34 does not match the income in that district because tax increment
dropped in response to a slowdown in development and the reduced tax levy.
Staff agreed to schedule a budget preparation workshop prior to the next EDA meeting.
6. Consideration of Director's Report
There were no comments related to the written report.
7. Added items
a) Market Matching Update - Jeff O'Neill reported that the City had received a request for
information through a Greater MSP site selector looking to locate a large, highly
sought after, medical manufacturing facility. John Uphoff and staff at W SB prepared a
thorough response to the request on short notice.
b) Property Sale -Bill Tapper noted that negotiations are underway to determine the price
to sell property located at 413 4t' Street W. He explained that the EDA had purchased
and funded the cleanup of the property but the title now indicates that it is owned by the
City. O'Neill said that the EDA may be asked to support the recommendations of the
negotiations team and that proceeds from the sale would be directed to the EDA.
8. Adjourn
MATT FRIE MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT TIME 7:06 P.M. TOM
PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. (Brian Stumpf did
not vote as he had left the meeting.)
Recorder: Kerry Burri
Approved: August 14, 2013
Attest:
Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator
EDA Agenda — 8/14/13
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 July 2013 in the amount of
$220,131.86.
2. Motion to approve the registers with changes directed by the EDA.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff recommends approval of payment for submitted invoices.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Invoices
0
z
O
yq
O
Q
z
G
d
.0
d
A
A
U
A
0
a
rs
O I O
� m
O
M
N 0
m
0 4
Q
w°
r;
A
O L%1
� N
Q CC
WI
0
W
1V�1
�I
U
fA
6
rn
rn
O
M
N
V: IO O
O
0
N
e
o
Q
v°
o �
1
D
W
y
p
VJ
yU7
F
Qi
0
U
Pq
6
c
N
N
mo
It'
N
M
N
.ti
1•w
8
ri F�tii
u
M
v
I
M
0
O
A
0
J
(.y
f�
N � o
�
�
M
QI
*0
o )
�
d
O
�
O
C
C
o
4
�
M
O I O
� m
O
M
N 0
m
0 4
Q
w°
r;
A
O L%1
� N
Q CC
WI
0
W
1V�1
�I
U
fA
6
rn
rn
O
M
N
V: IO O
O
0
N
e
o
Q
v°
o �
1
D
W
y
p
VJ
yU7
F
Qi
0
U
Pq
6
c
N
N
mo
It'
N
M
N
.ti
1•w
8
ri F�tii
u
M
v
I
M
0
O
A
0
J
(.y
a
0
z
0
O
z
d
u
61
R
q
v
d
R
k
v
N V
M M M
O O
M M N N
n rn
n v,
o
CN °a
rn a
QN o
r-�
cn
N N
N
O
o
M N
N
T O�i
�4
N n �S
UN']
[�
a
VNi
° H
oC)
0
�
0
C
0 0
0
o
U
o
C%
V
y
0 o
Vi
N V
M M M
O O
M M N N
n rn
n v,
o
rn rn
CN °a
rn a
QN o
r-�
cn
N N
N
N
N
T O�i
UN'1
P.
UN']
01
VNi
0 0
0
o
U
o
0 o
Vi
�
rj
o
Vi
L�'3 'wU
Cw7
{7
a
w w
0
w
a
IS'
OX
W
aoao
rn rn
CN °a
rn a
QN o
cn
N N
C
kn ��7}
N N N N
00 00
Vl I I Lfl
M
r-�
N
'C
L4
a
w
o
M
0
0
n
0
4
a
q
H
0
z
0
w
zu
N
V
a,
Q
0
U
A
I
e
m M I Ij o c o P I � n o o Ln oo
c Ci on
00 n o 00 00
M N N N
tY N [ M M
0 0 0 00 ov 0000 CIO c o 0 o
D CD CC O O O 00 p 00
O O O O 6 D
O
O C
O O O O
O 6 6 0
P 0 0 0
�n kn
6
00 00 00 00
0 o
N
N
a
N
o 0
Ly
N
0 0 0 0
Nr�� Ncr��
try�
N
0 0 0 0
N N N
M�
kNNLn
�Ln
O
m N
'D
C13
b
MM �ry rl
N c'-1 N
%0
\D �D tD t4
�o 1.0 �o
am - n n
O O
o °o
O O
O P P o
N N N N
O O O O
C
O
In
Lei
G b
A
A
�
�
+�,
m M I Ij o c o P I � n o o Ln oo
c Ci on
00 n o 00 00
M N N N
tY N [ M M
0 0 0 00 ov 0000 CIO c o 0 o
D CD CC O O O 00 p 00
O O O O 6 D
O O
O
O C
O O O O
O 6 6 0
P 0 0 0
�n kn
6
00 00 00 00
0 o
N
N
a
N
o 0
Ly
N
0 0 0 0
Nr�� Ncr��
try�
N
0 0 0 0
N N N
M�
kNNLn
�Ln
v
In
'D
rr c
N N [y
b
MM �ry rl
N c'-1 N
%0
\D �D tD t4
�o 1.0 �o
am - n n
O O
O
O O
O P P o
N N N N
O O O O
G b
A
A
�
�
+�,
•� •�
�
ate+
VJ
Vi
c%]
O O
C1
''�
o co �n
•� .
n 'D
,
ry �
o'A M�
O\
O O O
rK 'A CO
ip
>. T
a
C7 C7
� C7 C7 i7
C] C7 C7 C7
w w
cn to
0000
oa
a�I
000 0
a a a
aa
w w w
w w
O O
O
O C
O O O O
O 6 6 0
P 0 0 0
�n kn
6
00 00 00 00
000 W W 00
ID
0
cl
kNNLn
�Ln
v
In
v) 41�In In
�o �D
10
%0
\D �D tD t4
�o 1.0 �o
.M-1
N NNNN
N N N N
N N N N
M
a
I
�n
�r
M
c
H
n
0
4
a
q
N
4
0
0
�-'
*0
�
O
O
O
�G
00 �
1L
d'
I�
r
00
00
O
O
a
o
V
00
O
O
O
O
�--i
'd' oo
n
N
b
O, 1D
,D
f-
1-
In
-n
M
M
8
N
00
Cl
O
O
O
0.
O
G1
o, Do
%0 d'
00
V'
eh
kn
O
O
m
m
�i
In
in
M
b
n
Zm
0o
00 00
DD
N
00
O
O
O O
0 0
O
O
[,1
m
N
rn
M M
M
W
A
O
N
O
N
N
0 0
N Q
A,
0 0
N N
N
rm-�
Cl
Q
�
O
N
-
V�
m
N
to
M M
Ul
fr) M
In
m
V'1
m
Ln
p
'+<
iD
N
b
� N
b
P
d;
F
40.
w
{J
zj
a
w
>
y
v
°n
c
ti°n o°n
as o°o
a°n
o°o
w
a
a a
fA
U U
Q
O O
Uy
F F
Ln V3
Ln
"
F
cn
aa,
Uqjp
Ork O
W
Ln
e
W
a s
1--
W
zz
��
y
CD
O O
O O
O
O
d
L7
M
o
N
N
N N
N N
00
00
6
N N
N N
N
N
N
N
Pr
M_
O
N
n
O
a-.
O
V
C5
.A
q
4
M
0
z
0
Ag
q
O
z
d
.q
U
w
0
a�
ti
0
b
d
d
i
�i
U
�i
N N
N N
M M
W
V
a
T�
O
cn N
�✓1
M
N
N a d
Cqj
M
a cli
O O
O
v7
O
w
O
0
a o
w
0
z
0
Ag
q
O
z
d
.q
U
w
0
a�
ti
0
b
d
d
i
�i
U
�i
N N
N N
M M
M M
V
a
M
M
N
M
O
v7
O
w
a o
w
s
w
0
n
0
W
U
Q
00
N
v
a
PK
0
ni
m
O
N
N
A
q
C
EDA Agenda - 08/14/13
5. Consideration of request to Extend the Preliminary Development Agreement
Between the Monticello EDA and Rocky MTN Group, LLC. (AS)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
The EDA approved entering into a Preliminary Development Agreement with
Dahlheimer Beverage (Rocky MTN Group, LLC) in May of 2009. The agreement
stipulated that the EDA would hold the property legally described as Outlots A and C of
Otter Creek Crossing under contract with Rocky MTN Group until October 31, 2010.
Subsequent to this meeting, the EDA has approved three extensions to the Preliminary
Development Agreement resulting in an expiration date of August 81h, 2013.
The applicant is respectfully requesting that the EDA extend the terms of the Preliminary
Development Agreement for one more year.
Outlots A and C are located directly south of the current Dahlheimer's facility. The
purchase of the outlots would allow Dahlheimer Beverage to expand their existing
facility by approximately 50,000 — 60,000 square feet.
Staff has verified that Outlot A is a remnant of platting and is not needed for specific
roadway or utility purposes. However, Outlot C does drains to it and that drainage
should be accommodated with site development within either outlot.
In order to move forward with their expansion plans on the Monticello site, Dahlheimer
needs to sell an existing building owned in the city of Ramsey. To date, this building has
not been sold. Dahlheimer's continues to receive inquires from potential buyers,
however, to date there is no signed purchase agreement for the Ramsey property.
Dahlheimer's has indicated that they have developed preliminary site plans and
construction timelines for the development of Outlots A and C, pending the sale of the
Ramsey site.
The EDA attorney has recommended, and the EDA has required, the execution of a
preliminary development contract prior to engaging in actual negotiations related to land
sales involving the potential use of TIF. The drafted agreement for Dahlheimer's is
therefore standard practice, with terms tailored to this particular developer and site.
In reviewing the preliminary development agreement previously prepared and now
presented for extension, it continues to provide for the opportunity for the EDA and
Dahlheimer's to work toward a final development plan, including land sale and TIF
funding, over the course of the agreement term. The agreement specifies that the EDA
would replat the property, although the costs for such may be ultimately incorporated into
the TIF package.
No purchase price is specified by the agreement or within the extension. At such time as
the developer is ready to move forward with development, the EDA would utilize Ehlers
and Associates to assist with TIF package development and economic feasibility for this
site, including an analysis of the existing district. Ehlers and Kennedy & Graven would
assist in the preparation of the final development agreement.
Dahlheimer Beverage has previously put forward the required $10,000 deposit required
as part of this agreement. That deposit remains on file.
B. STAFF RECOMMWNDATION
City staff supports the requested extension and continued efforts to work with existing
businesses on their expansions in the City.
Staff has received inquiries from prospective manufacturing businesses looking to
relocate in the Wright County area. To -date staff has been able to offer prospective
businesses other options within the city -owned industrial park and privately owned
property. Staff have not had any inquires directly related to Outlots A and C. The
agreement with Dahlheimer Beverage has not negatively affected any potential new
manufacturing company from locating in the city.
A representative from Dahlheimer Beverage will be at the EDA meeting to answer any
questions related to efforts they continue to take to sell their facility in Ramsey and move
forward expansion plans in Monticello.
C. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Motion to approve a one year extension to the Preliminary Development Agreement
between Rocky MTN Group, LLC ( Dahlheimer) and the Monticello EDA.
2. Motion to deny entering into a one year extension to the Preliminary Development
Agreement between Rocky MTN Group, LLC and the Monticello EDA.
3. Motion to table item for further research.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A. Letter of Extension Request
B. Proposed revised Preliminary Development Agreement
C. Monticello Business Center Lot Figure
D. Plat of Otter Creek Crossing 3rd Addition
July 26, 2013
Economic Development Authority
City of Monticello
505 Walnut St.
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear EDA,
Dahlheimer Beverage /Rocky Mtn Group entered into a Preliminary
Development Agreement with the EDA to purchase adjacent property to that
which is currently owned by Rocky Mtn Group. That Preliminary
Development Agreement states that the contract is set to expire as of August
gth, 2013. At this time Dahlheimer Beverage/Rocky Mtn Group would like
to request the EDA consider an extension of the Development Agreement
until August 1, 2014. Our overall goal remains to purchase the property in
order to facilitate an expansion of our existing building at 3360 Chelsea
Road West. We have preliminary site plans and possible timelines
depending on the sale of a property in Ramsey, MN. If you would like to
discuss options going forward please contact me directly at 763 -271 -4375.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerel ,
e Dahlheimer
General Manager
Dahlheimer Beverage, LLC
3360 Chelsea Road West • Box 336 o Monticello, MN 55362 e Telephone 763 - 295 -3347
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Monticello Business Center)
THIS AGREEMENT, dated this day of , 2013 by and between the
Monticello Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of
Minnesota ( "Authority ") and Rocky Mtn Group, LLC or its Assigns ( "Developer "):
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Authority owns certain property within the City of Monticello (the "City "),
which property is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto ( "Property "); and
WHEREAS, the Developer has submitted a preliminary proposal (the "Proposal ") for the
acquisition and development of the Property (the "Development "), which proposal is attached hereto
as Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested the Authority to explore the use of certain public
assistance to assist with the Development; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has determined that it is in the Authority's best interest that the
Developer be designated sole developer of the Property during the term of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Authority and the Developer are willing and desirous to undertake the
Development if (i) a satisfactory agreement can be reached regarding the Authority's commitment
for public costs necessary for the Development; (ii) satisfactory mortgage and equity financing, or
adequate cash resources for the Development can be secured by the Developer; and (iii) the
economic feasibility and soundness of the Development and other necessary preconditions have
been determined to the satisfaction of the parties; and
WHEREAS, the Authority is willing to evaluate the Development and work toward all
necessary agreements with the Developer if the Developer agrees to make the nonrefundable
deposit described herein, which is intended, in part, to reimburse the Authority for its costs if the
Development is abandoned by Developer or necessary agreements are not reached under the terms
of this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and
obligations set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:
1. Negotiations between the parties shall proceed in an attempt to formulate a definitive
purchase and development contract ( "Contract ") based on the following:
(a) the Developer's Proposal, which shows the scope of the proposed
Development in its latest form as of the date of this Agreement, together with any changes
or modifications required by the Authority;
(b) a mutually satisfactory Contract to be negotiated and agreed upon in
367304v4 SJB MN190 -135
accordance with negotiations contemplated by this Agreement;
(c) such documentation regarding economic feasibility of the Project as the
Authority may wish to undertake during the term of this Agreement; and
(d) other terms and conditions of this Agreement.
2. It is the intention of the parties that this Agreement: (a) documents the present
understanding and commitments of the parties; and (b) will lead to negotiation and execution of a
mutually satisfactory Contract for the Development prior to the termination date of this Agreement.
The Contract (together with any other agreements entered into between the parties hereto
contemporaneously therewith) when executed, will supersede all obligations of the parties
hereunder.
3. During the term of this Agreement, the Developer shall:
(a) Submit to the Authority a design proposal to be approved by the Authority
showing the location, size, and nature of the proposed Development, including floor layouts,
renderings, elevations, and other graphic or written explanations of the Development. The
design proposal shall be accompanied by a proposed schedule for the starting and
completion of all phases of Development.
(b) Submit an over -all cost estimate for the design and construction of the
Development.
(c) Submit a time schedule for all phases of the Development.
(d) Undertake and obtain such other preliminary economic feasibility studies,
income and expense projections, and such other economic information as the Developer
may desire to further confirm the economic feasibility and soundness of the Development.
(e) Submit to the Authority the Developer's financing plan showing that the
proposed Development is financially feasible, and, to the extent Developer seeks public
financial assistance in any form (including reduced land cost, waiver of fees, and tax
increment financing), evidence that such assistance is reasonably necessary to make the
Development financially feasible.
(f) Furnish satisfactory, financial data to the Authority evidencing the
Developer's ability to undertake the Development.
(g) Cooperate with the Authority and City in replatting of the Property as
described in Section 4.
4. During the term of this Agreement, the Authority agrees to:
(a) Commence the process necessary to undertake such public assistance as is
necessary pursuant to the terms of the Proposal, including without limitation
commencement of actions necessary to expand Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -36
367304v4 SJB MN190 -135 2
to include the Property.
(b) Proceed to seek all necessary information with regard to the anticipated
public costs associated with the Development.
(c) Estimate the Authority's level and method of financial participation, if any,
in the Development and develop a financial plan for the Authority's participation.
(d) Grant to the Developer a right of access to the Property for purposes of
environmental and soil testing. Developer agrees to indemnify, save harmless, and
defend the Authority and City , their officers, and employees, from and against any and
all claims, actions, damages, liability and expense in connection with personal injury
and /or damage to the Property arising from or out of any occurrence in, upon or at the
Property caused by the act or omission of the Developer in connection with Developer's
entry on the Property. Further, Developer shall not permit any mechanics',
materialmens' or other liens to stand against the Property or any part thereof for work or
materials furnished to Developer in connection with the right of entry granted pursuant to
this Agreement and Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the
Authority and City from and against the same.
(e) Commence replatting of the Property in order to create two parcels (with the divide
running parallel to Dalton Way). The parcel immediately adjacent to Developer's
existing parcel would contain 3 acres (referred to as "Parcel 1 "). The parcel adjacent to
Dalton Way would contain 3.19 acres (referred to as "Parcel 2 ").
5. It is expressly understood that execution of the Contract shall be subject to:
(a) A determination by the Authority in its sole discretion that its undertakings
are feasible based on (i) the projected tax increment revenues and any other revenues
designated by the Authority (to the extent requested by Developer); (ii) the purposes and
objectives of any tax increment, development, or other plan created or proposed for the
purpose of providing financial assistance for the Development, if any, including the
determination that such assistance is reasonably necessary in order to make the
Development possible; (iii) the best interests of the Authority.
(b) A determination by the Developer that the Development is feasible and in
the best interests of the Developer.
6. This Agreement is effective from the date hereof through October 31, 2010, unless
extended with approval of the Authority's board of commissioners. After expiration of the term of
this Agreement, neither party shall have any obligation hereunder except as expressly set forth to the
contrary herein.
(a) The EDA herein approved a 6 month extension to the terms of said Preliminary
Development Agreement on November 10, 2010. Said Agreement will be effective until April 30,
2011.
(b) The EDA herein approved a one year extension to the terms of said Preliminary
367304v4 SJB MN190 -135
Development Agreement on May 11, 2011. Said Agreement will be effective until May 11, 2012.
(c) The EDA herein approved a one year extension to the terms of said Preliminary
Development Agreement on August 8, 2012. Said Agreement will be effective until August 8, 2013.
7. The Developer shall be solely responsible for all costs incurred by the Developer. hi
addition, the Developer shall reimburse the Authority for Administrative Costs, as hereafter defined.
For the purposes of this Agreement, the term "Administrative Costs" means out of pocket costs
incurred by the Authority and City together with staff costs of the Authority and City, all
attributable to or incurred in connection with the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement, the
Contract, and other documents and agreements in connection with the Development, including
without limitation all costs in connection with replatting of the Property and the cost of financial
advisors, attorneys, and planning and environmental consultants.
In order to secure payment of the Administrative Costs, the Authority acknowledges that
Developer delivered $5,000 to the Authority upon filing an application for tax increment assistance.
Upon for before execution of this Agreement, Developer shall deliver an additional $5,000 to the
Authority (by cash or a certified check), for a total deposit of $10,000. If at any one or more times
during the term of this Agreement, the Authority determines that Administrative Costs will exceed
$10,000 and that additional security is required, the Authority shall notify the Developer of the
amount of such additional security. Within ten calendar days of receipt of this notice, the Developer
shall deliver to the Authority the required additional security. The Authority will utilize the funds
delivered by the Developer to pay or reimburse itself for Administrative Costs. Upon termination of
this Agreement, the Authority will return to the Developer the funds paid by the Developer to the
Authority pursuant to this Section 7, less an amount equal to the Administrative Costs incurred by
the Authority through the date of notice of termination. For the purposes of this paragraph,
Administrative Costs are considered to be incurred if they have been paid, relate to services
performed, or are payable under a contract entered into, on or before the date of the notice of
termination.
This Section 7 shall survive termination of this Agreement and shall be binding on the
Developer regardless of the enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement.
8. This Agreement may be terminated upon 5 days written notice by a party to the
other party if:
(a) if, in the respective sole discretion of the Authority or the Developer, an
impasse has been reached in the negotiation or implementation of any material term or
condition of this Agreement or the Contract; or
(b) the Authority determines that its costs in performing under this Agreement
well exceed $10,000 and the Developer does not deliver additional security to the Authority
pursuant to Section 7; or
(c) a party fails to perform any of it's obligations under this Agreement.
If either party terminates the Agreement under this Section 8, the Developer shall remain
liable to the Authority to the extent provided under Section 7 of this Agreement.
367304v4 SJB MN190 -135 4
9. The Developer shall not assign or transfer its rights under this Agreement in full
or in part to any person or entity that is not a "Related Parry," or enter into any subcontracts to
perform any of its obligations hereunder, without the prior written consent of the Authority. For
the purposes of this Agreement, a "Related Party" is an entity owned or controlled by Developer,
or owned and controlled by the same person or entity that owns or controls Developer.
10. In the event that the Developer, its heirs, successors or assigns, fail to comply with
any of the provisions of this Agreement, the Authority may proceed to enforce this Agreement by
appropriate legal and /or finance consulting or equitable proceedings, or other similar proceedings,
and the Developer, its heirs, successors or assigns, agree to pay all costs of such enforcement,
including reasonable attorneys' fees.
11. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such decision shall not affect the validity of any remaining portion of the Agreement.
12. In the event any covenant contained in this Agreement should be breached by one
parry and subsequently waived by another party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular
breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent
breach.
13. Notice or demand or other communication between or among the parties shall be
sufficiently given if sent by mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested or delivered personally:
(a) As to the Authority: Monticello Economic Development Authority
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362 -8822
Attn: Executive Director
(b) As to the Developer: Rocky MTN Group, LLC
3360 Chelsea Road
PO Box 336
Monticello MN 55362
14. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, all
of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
15. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the state of Minnesota. Any disputes, controversies, or claims arising out of this Agreement shall be
heard in the state or federal courts of Minnesota, and all parties to this Agreement waive any
objection to the jurisdiction of these courts, whether based on convenience or otherwise.
16. The Developer hereby agrees to protect, defend and hold the Authority, the City
and their officers, elected and appointed officials, employees, administrators, commissioners,
agents, and representatives harmless from and indemnified against any and all loss, cost, fines,
charges, damage and expenses, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys fees,
367304v4 SJB NM190 -135 5
consultant and expert witness fees, and travel associated therewith, due to claims or demands of
any kind whatsoever caused by Developer or arising out of actions of Developer (and excluding
those caused by or arising out of the Authority's or City's own acts or conduct) with regard to (i)
the development, marketing, sale or leasing of all or any part of the Property, including, without
limitation, any claims for any lien imposed by law for services, labor or materials furnished to or
for the benefit of the Property, or (ii) any claim by the state of Minnesota or the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency or any other person pertaining to the violation of any permits, orders,
decrees or demands made by said persons or with regard to the presence of any pollutant,
contaminant or hazardous waste on the Property; and (iii) or by reason of the execution of this
Agreement or the performance of this Agreement. The Developer, and the Developer's
successors or assigns, agree to protect, defend and save the Authority, and its officers, agents,
and employees, harmless from all such claims, demands, damages, and causes of action and the
costs, disbursements, and expenses of defending the same, including but not limited to, attorneys
fees, consulting engineering services, and other technical, administrative or professional
assistance. This indemnity shall be continuing and shall survive the performance, termination or
cancellation of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a limitation of
or waiver by the Authority of any immunities, defenses, or other limitations on liability to which
the Authority is entitled by law, including but not limited to the maximum monetary limits on
liability established by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in
its name and behalf and its seal to be duly affixed hereto and the Developer has caused this
Agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written.
ROCKY MTN GROUP, LLC
By
Its:
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
367304v4 SJB NM190 -135 6
EXHIBIT A
Description of Property
Outlot A, Otter Creek Crossings, 1St Addition, and Outlot C, Otter Creek Crossings 3rd Addition,
according to the recorded plat thereof, Wright County, Minnesota.
367304v4 SJB NM190 -135 A -1
EXHIBIT B
Project Proposal
367304v4 SJB NM190 -135 B -1
itQom" o
tilt
HA
;a
IV,
ImP
t I
it
MIMI AH
is
AH A 1 Ingli't! Vm I Wy I t fa
y me i it,
e
all
C4
w �
r II
------- ------
H
0 ---------
------ — --------------
'�j
4,
0
S
---------------
-----------
UP
V
'- ol
-4
ZC
99 zc
w U
0
Az
0
0
00,01" D
W
0
0
3nN3
AV NOI]v(l
vo Li— — — — -t 7
��76 -7
------------
693,1Z 6
M.00,00.00N
0
J-
0
0
0
7T
aL -tea` -J LU
F- 0
0 — -- — — — — — —
- - — - ----- -----
—_j
-----------
iN3,USV3
--------------------- ;U WaSV3 aU,7 OW00/7 ,Ooj 119i CrAv
----------
M14 -;kq 'o 7N, 7 1 311 A�Dv - -
— — — — — — �TzTq - - - -__ - Z
------------- ------
9V9zc[
�ODWSS02 13.9t,94%OON 3,,99.LLLOS
77
'1- �110 srvlsuor�s 1/3389
'' -- 1071/10 b'OJ MN 133&J &OL, A,'
8107" 30 7 'S-74/,
2
-
0 0
------- ------
H
0 ---------
------ — --------------
'�j
4,
0
S
---------------
-----------
UP
V
'- ol
-4
ZC
99 zc
w U
0
Az
0
0
00,01" D
W
0
0
3nN3
AV NOI]v(l
vo Li— — — — -t 7
��76 -7
------------
693,1Z 6
M.00,00.00N
0
J-
0
0
0
7T
aL -tea` -J LU
F- 0
0 — -- — — — — — —
- - — - ----- -----
—_j
-----------
iN3,USV3
--------------------- ;U WaSV3 aU,7 OW00/7 ,Ooj 119i CrAv
----------
M14 -;kq 'o 7N, 7 1 311 A�Dv - -
— — — — — — �TzTq - - - -__ - Z
------------- ------
9V9zc[
�ODWSS02 13.9t,94%OON 3,,99.LLLOS
77
'1- �110 srvlsuor�s 1/3389
'' -- 1071/10 b'OJ MN 133&J &OL, A,'
8107" 30 7 'S-74/,
EDA Agenda - 08/14/13
6. Consideration of authorizing a 2014 contribution to the Initiative Foundation. (AS)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
The Initiative Foundation is a Central Minnesota community foundation providing
financial assistance to the region's communities, businesses and non - profits.
The Foundation is requesting the Monticello EDA contribute $2,250 to the organization in
2014. The EDA authorized a $2,200 contribution for 2013.
Included with the supporting data to this report is a statement regarding local economic
impact resulting from Initiative efforts. Investments made by local communities in the
Initiative Foundation have resulted in an economic impact of $8.32 in Wright County
alone. $4.5 million has been returned to Wright County since the Foundation's inception
and it is anticipated that $3.5 million will be spent to benefit the Foundation's area in 2014.
It should also be noted that the EDA's contribution to the Foundation is matched by the
McKnight Foundation, thereby doubling the reach and capacity of committed resources.
As part of its 2014 contribution, staff would recommend meeting with representatives from
the Initiative Foundation regarding opportunities for better utilization of Initiative
Foundation funds and /or resources within Monticello. There may be opportunities to
partner with the Initiative Foundation on redevelopment efforts in the downtown, including
the EDA's interest in housing opportunities for the community.
Per State Statute, cities are able to contribute not more than $50,000 annually for
promoting, advertising, improving, or developing the economic and agricultural resources
of the city or town
Al. Budget Impact: The investment of $2,250 for the proposed contribution would come
from the 2014 EDA general fund, Dues and Memberships line item. As currently
proposed, the EDA will have sufficient funds in this line item to cover the estimated costs.
A2. Staff Workload Impact: As noted, it is recommended that staff meet with Initiative
Foundation representatives to discuss partnership opportunities in more detail.
B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends approval of the contribution to the Initiative Foundation. The
Foundation is a well known and established organization that provides economic growth
support to Wright County. The City/EDA's continued support of their activity should be
coupled with renewed efforts to utilize IF services.
C. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Motion to approve contributing $2,250 of the 2014 EDA general fund to the Initiative
Foundation.
2. Motion to deny contributing money to the Initiative Foundation.
3. Motion to table action for further research and discussion.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A. Initiative Foundation Letter of Request and Information
i
lnitiativ�'V
FOUNDATION
Jeff O'Neill June 28, 2013
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Ave Ste 1
Monticello MN 55362 -8822
Dear Mr. O'Neill and members of the Monticello City Council,
Your partnership and support is beyond important to us. It's essential. As you know, the Initiative
Foundation directs all of its resources to stimulate business growth, quality jobs, and a climate for
economic success in Central Minnesota. We see many positive signs in the regional economy, and we
believe that 2014 will be a prime year for business start-up, expansion and hiring.
In pursuit of those goals, we are maintaining a laser -sharp focus in our community investments:
• Proactive efforts that engage leaders to solve problems and capitalize on opportunities
* Smart programs that help nonprofits achieve financial stability and greater effectiveness
* Well -timed loans that help companies expand operations and add living -wage jobs
• Targeted grants that support quality of life amenities and workforce development
Next year, we will invest more than $3.5 million in local efforts that benefit hometowns across the
region. The City of Monticello has been a Foundation investor since 1996, and we are again asking for
your continued support.
We respectfully request a renewal of your annual contribution by allocating $2,250.00 to
the Initiative Foundation in your 2014 budget.
As you know, the initiative Foundation is a sound financial investment with a measurable ROL For every
local dollar contributed, the Foundation has returned $8.32 back to Wright County in grants, business
loans and scholarships. See the enclosed fact sheet for examples of local impact.
After your budget is finalized, could you please return the tear -off card below in the enclosed envelope?
Again, thank you for your continued support of our work in the City of Monticello and throughout
Central Minnesota. Please contact us anytime with questions or to request a staff presentation.
Sincerely,
�
7Owi�a
Kathy Gaalswyk
Matt Kilian
President
Vice President for External Relations
10
VVR I G HT COUNTY
Our Mission: Unlock the power of central Minnesota people to build and sustain thriving communities.
$543y 0in local donationto the Iniliiative Foundation.
$
returned to Wright County in
grants, loans, and scholarships.
Return on Investment
For every local dollar contributed, the Initiative Foundation has invested $832 back into
Wright County. All endowment contributions are matched by The McKnight Foundation.
Economic Impact 1986 to present
• Awarded 217 nonprofit grants totaling $1.2 million
• invested 58 business loans totaling $3.2 million
• Secured 950 quality jobs
• Leveraged $19.7 million In private business financing
WRIGHTCOUNTYINVESTMENT HIGHLIGHTS
For a full listing of Initiative Foundation investments in Wright County, contact us at 811.632.9255.
Grants Thriving Economy, Thriving Communities
Annandale Health & Community Services
Central MN Jolts & Training, Monticello
City of Cokato (Best of 12 Project)
City of Hanover
City of Monticello
City of Montrose
City of Rockford
City of Waverly
Delano Public Schools
Family Education Center, Buffalo
Maple Lake Public Schools
St Michael/Albertville School District
Wright County Economic Development, Rockford
Wright County Economic Development Partnership
Business Financing
Adjust to Wellness, PLLC, Waverly
Cinch Systems, Inc., St Michael
Genereux Fine Wood Products, Monticello
Tnlite Stone Company, Howard lake
Women's Fitness Express, Albertville
Plug Technologies, Hanover
Wright County Faith in Action
Manufacturing skills development program
Support for the 'Best of 12' project including six communities along Highway 12
Conservation design
Business retention & expansion
Business recruitment & highway redevelopment
Business Plan for Crow River Food Cooperative
Downtown Revitalization
Youth development
Support for children of incarcerated parents
Intergenerational program
Diversity education
Commuter transit study, economic development planning
Business Outreach
Local Ownership, Quality Jobs
Chiropractor; 2 initial jobs
High tech hardware & software, 19 initial jobs
Custom cabinetry & parts; 33 initial jobs
Exterior stone products, 9 initial jobs
Women's fitness center; l initial job
Produce equipment used by underground utility contractors, 8 initial jobs
Charitable Funds Activating Generosity
Minnesota Pioneer Park Endowment Fund I Josh Richardson Youth Arts Fund
Three Rivers Community Foundation I Wright County Historical Society Fund
Community Action The Power of Partnership
Awarded grants and engaged citizens in
strategic planning to improve quality of life,
economic vitality, workforce development,
and opportunities for children. Cities include
Annandale, Dassel- Cokato, Delano, Hanover,
Howard Lake, Maple Lake, Montrose, Rockford,
and Waverly.
Regionally trained leaders from 363 nonprofit
organizations in effective management and
financial sustainability including RiverWorks
Community Development, Wright County
Community Action, and Love, INC.
Assisted 23 lake associations to develop
management plans and awarded grants
to address water quality, invasive species,
shoreland restoration and septic systems.
Placed full -time VISTA (a national service
program to help reduce poverty) members within
Functional Industries, Buffalo.
07113
Initiative Foundation
s . C!'1%1
ni
FOUNDATION
About Us >
Grants >
Honprotits >
Businesses >
Business Loans
Technology Business Loans
Green Business Loans
Small Business Loan Guaranties
Seed Investments
How to Apply
FAQ
Economic Initiatives
Search Investment Database
Photo Galleries
Additional Resources
Page 1 of 2
Home
Businesses
Initiative Foundation Loan Funds
> Business Financing Fact Sheet
Besides awarding grants to nonprofit organizations, the Initiative
Foundation also creates economic opportunity by lending funds to locally
owned businesses. This unique ability enables us to strengthen
communities like few other foundations. We finance the risk of new
ventures in order to create quality jobs and reinforce our local economy.
Living wages and benefits offer families such advantages as home
ownership and a greater connection to their community
Communities >
Kral Resources >
When the foundation evaluates a potential business investment, our
strongest consideration is given to community- focused entrepreneurs
Children, Youth Families 7,
whose business plans include quality jobs, especially in the hometowns
.&
Donor Services >
that need them most.
The Initiative Foundation offers the following business financing programs
to meet diverse regional needs. We prioritize technology -based and green
Join Our E -mail List
businesses as well as value -added manufacturing and agriculture
Email: JDIn
operations. Nontraditional business owners such as women and minorities
are especially encouraged to apply.
Business Loans
Technology Business Loans
Ask us anything or offer an opinion. We
• Green Business Loans
will e-mail our response in 48 hours or
• Small Business Loan Guaranties
less.
• Seed Investments
E -Mail:
In 1997, the Initiative Foundation received designation from the U.S.
Treasury as a Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI), a
specialized financial institution that works in market niches that are
Questions 1 Comments:
underserved by traditional financial institutions.
In 2002, the Foundation was awarded a $1.1 million CDFI Fund Core
Program Financial Assistance grant to capitalize the Technology Capital
Fund. In 2010, the Foundation also received a $750,000 CDFI grant to
. . .
support the Technology & Green Loan Funds.
The Foundation is also proud to be a member of the Opportunity Finance
I=nter the code from the ima e.
Network.
Atlwjbroffm CSI PO TLINITYFtInIIANCE M
SUBMIT
MEfi ORK W
http: / /www.ifound.org/business index.php 8/8/2013
EDA Agenda: 08/14/13
7. Consideration to authorize a request for quotes /proposals for redevelopment district
qualification and demolition of buildings at EDA -owned property located at 100 and
112 Broadway East. (AS)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The EDA acquired the properties located at 100 and 112 Broadway East in May of 2012.
The acquisition of the properties was intended to serve the redevelopment goals of the
City per the Embracing Downtown plan, as well as facilitate the construction of planned
intersection improvements at CSAH 75 and TH 25.
Since the acquisition, the EDA has been working with Wilson Development Services to
relocate the residential and commercial tenants located in the buildings. At the present
time, there is one remaining tenant at the properties. The tenant is currently working with
a local real estate agent to relocate within the community.
In tandem with the relocation of tenants, the city has been working with state and local
agencies on funding of the CSAH 75 and TH 25 intersection improvements. The City
has successfully received $1.2 million in federal funding, $506,000 in state funding, and
$90,000 in county funding for the project, which will cover the full cost of the
construction of the planned intersection improvements. The City's plan at this time is to
begin design and permitting in 2014. Pending review of final plan documents and needed
outside agency review and approvals, the City would begin construction on phased
intersection improvements in 2015. The buildings will need to have been removed prior
to that time.
Cognizant of the time it may take to appropriately and legally prepare the site for
construction and redevelopment, the EDA is asked to authorize staff to post requests for
proposal /quote, as appropriate, for the following:
1. Coverage and Blight TIF Evaluation
Evaluation of the properties as "occupied" for coverage purposes and as "sub-
standard" are requirements for future inclusion in a TIF redevelopment district. The
EDA has up to three years from the time it adopts a resolution declaring the
properties sub - standard to establish a redevelopment district. More information on
coverage and blight tests is included with this report.
2. Environmental & Structural Review
The EDA will need confirmation that no environmental or structural hazards would
complicate demolition of the existing structures. In discussion with the City
Department of Building Safety, it was noted that the State of Minnesota Department
of Health and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency will require verification and
notification that no hazardous materials have been found in the building. If such
materials are found, abatement according to their standards prior to demolition will be
required.
EDA Agenda: 08/14/13
In addition, due to the proximity and building conditions between 112 East Broadway
and the adjacent 118 East Broadway building, the City would recommend a structural
analysis regarding impacts mitigation.
Staff would seek individual quotes or proposals for each component of this item.
Responders would have the opportunity to provide one or all of the said services.
3. Abatement/Demolition
A proposal for any required abatement and final demolition in compliance with all
local, state and federal regulations would be requested. This will include dapping of
the existing well within the 112 East Broadway building.
It should also be noted that some level of site restoration will be necessary and will be
considered in relationship to pending timing related to intersection construction and
the limits of construction. Staff will also evaluate the opportunity and costs to
relocate overhead utility lines as part of this project.
Authorization to seek quotes and /or proposals at this time will allow for posting no later
than September 1St, 2013 with a return date of October 15th, 2013. Review and
recommendation would be brought forward to the EDA during their November meeting
for action.
Al. Budget Impact: Staff is requesting authorization to seek quotes in order to determine
budget impact. TIF District 1 -6 has been identified as a possible funding source. Staff
has also inquired of the EDA Attorney whether expenses incurred for these services
could be reimbursed as part of the future TIF district package.
A2. Staff Workload Impact: Staff will prepare draft proposal and quote requests and
prepare a recommendation for the EDA. Staff will also be requesting the assistance of
Ehlers & Associates and Kennedy & Graven as appropriate. Staff has already contacted
Ehlers and Associates for preliminary information and expertise on the processes
described.
The administration and execution of the actual evaluation, analysis and demolition
processes will require the work and coordination between the Community Development,
Department of Building Safety, Engineering and Public Works departments.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to authorize staff to prepare and post requests for quotes /proposals for
redevelopment district qualification, building environmental and structural analysis,
and demolition of buildings at EDA -owned property located at 100 and 112
Broadway East.
2. Motion of other.
EDA Agenda: 08/14/13
C. STAFF RECOMMWNDATION:
City staff recommends Alternative 91. Due to the time involved with any and each of the
three described process, it is advisable to begin work on this process as soon as possible.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Aerial Site Image
Ehlers & Associates Information — Coverage & Blight Tests for Redevelopment TIF
Building Imagery
MPCA Abatement and Demolition Information Handout
How Do These Blight and Coverage Tests Work for Redevelopment Districts? Pagel of 3
• Home
• About
• Ehlers- Inc.com
• TIF
How Do These Blight and Coverage Tests Work for
Redevelopment Districts?
April 14, 2011 an TIF
There are a multitude of TIF districts: housing, economic development, soils, compact development,
hazardous substance, redevelopment, and renewal and renovation. Each of these districts have
different terms and different qualifications. When creating a renewal and renovation district or
redevelopment district, there are certain findings that a city or a county must make.
First is the coverage test. Seventy percent of the area of the district must contain parcels that are
"occupied ". Occupied means having buildings, paved or gravel parking areas, sidewalks, utilities or
other similar structures. In order for a parcel to be considered "occupied ", at least 15% of the
individual parcel must be covered by one of the aforementioned items. If it is, then the entire parcel is
considered to be "occupied ".
Let's assume we have two parcels in a proposed district. If Parcel A is 300,000 s.f. in size and the
other (Parcel B) is 100,000 s.f., then the 300,000 s.f. Parcel A must be "occupied" to qualify. This
gives us 75% of the district with "occupied parcels ".
If 15% of the larger parcel must contain improvements, at least 45,000 s.f. of Parcel A must be
covered by a building or parking lot. The 100,000 s.£ Parcel B can be vacant and still qualify for
inclusion in the district. Parcel B will need to be developed with Parcel A, however, to meet another
restriction.
The coverage test is required because the purpose of providing longer terms for these two TIF districts
is because there are existing structures and/or improvements on the site that warrant providing more
public assistance to remove and clean up. If the land is predominately vacant, not as much public
assistance should be required (i.e. that is why economic development districts are only 9 years).
Second is the substandard building test. For redevelopment districts (26 years), more than 50% of the
buildings need to be considered substandard. For renewal and renovation districts, which have a
shorter term (16 years), the substandard test is reduced to more than 20% of the buildings with the
remaining 30% of the buildings being "obsolete ". Buildings are considered to be substandard if they
have defects in structural elements, etc., and the cost to correct these issues is more than 15% of the
cost to construct a new building of the same size and type. Please note the key words more than
above. For example, if a potential redevelopment district has 2 parcels with 4 buildings, in order to
qualify as a redevelopment TIF district, 3 of the 4 buildings would need to be considered to be
substandard.
TIF authorities are required to use their best efforts to gain access to interiors of buildings to complete
an inspection in order to determine if a building would meet the substandard test. If a TIF authority is
unable to obtain access, they should document their efforts to obtain permission to gain access. If a
http:llwww. ehlers- inc.com/blogl2 011 /04/how -do- these- blight - and - coverage - tests -work- for -... 8/8/2013
How Do These Blight and Coverage Tests Work for Redevelopment Districts? Page 2 of 3
TIF authority is unable to obtain access to a couple of buildings, then they can utilize other
documentation to make these findings as stated in 469.174, Subdivision 10 (c).
In order to determine parcel coverage. and substandard building status, it is recommended to hire a
third parry architect or an experienced building official that is experienced in completing these types
of inspection and analysis. In addition, it is important to have your TIF Attorney review the findings
for compliance with the law.
As a footnote, redevelopment districts can also be created on railroad property, tank facilities or a
disaster area without the coverage or blight requirements. See Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174,
subd. 10.
Tags: Blight, Minnesota Statutes, pares TIF District
No Comments
Leave a Reply
Name *�
Email
Websitel
r
Submit
.fit
• Legislature Passes Technical Tax Bill with TIF Changes May 24, 2011
Recent Posts
• Legislature Passes Technical Tax Bill with TIF Changes
• TIF and Fiscal Disparities
• When to Request Certification for a TIF District?
• What is a Pay -As- You -Go Note?
• April Legislative Update — TIF Special Use Extensions?
• Base Taxes — What Continues to Go to the Regular Taxing Districts During a TIF District?
• How Do These Blight and Coverage Tests Work for Redevelopment Districts?
http :llwww. ehlers- inc.comlblogl2011 /04lhow -do- these - blight- and - coverage- tests - work - for -... 8/8/2013
IXD
a
Sr
a
&101*
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
AQ Doc. #2.17 March 1998
Facts about Asbestos for Local Governments
Asbestos, a naturally- occurring mineral fiber,
is used in more than 3,000 different construc-
tion materials and manufacturing products. It
is commonly found in electrical equipment,
vinyl flooring, cement shake siding, roof
shingles, and insulation.
While asbestos may pose little danger if left
alone, the demolition or renovation of a struc-
ture containing asbestos can cause serious
problems. Asbestos breaks down into tiny
fibers that can become trapped in lung tissue.
Up to 30 years after inhalation, those fibers
can cause cancer.
When a city or town agency has undertaken
the ownership, control or supervision of a
demolition or renovation project, it's up to
that agency to protect the health of employees
and citizens. This fact sheet is designed to
make you aware of applicable regulations.
Asbestos was labeled a hazardous air pollutant
in 1972 under the Federal Clean Air Act.
Today, most asbestos - containing products
have been phased out.
Asbestos is regulated by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), which
administers the national emission standards for
asbestos and other hazardous air pollutants.
When a local government agency is involved
in the demolition of a facility, including any
institutional, commercial, public, industrial, or
residential structure, installation, or building,
procedures for asbestos inspections and
notification to the MPCA must be followed.
The responsibility of adhering to the emission
standards is equally distributed between the
owner and operator(s) of the facility.
Prior to demolition or renovation, the building
or affected portion of the building must be
inspected for the presence of asbestos by an
asbestos inspector accredited through the U.S.
Environmental Agency Asbestos Hazard
Emergency Response Act. If there are more
than 260 linear feet or 160 square feet of
regulated asbestos - containing materials
(ACM) in the facility, then a licensed asbestos
abatement contractor must be hired to remove
the ACM prior to demolition or abatement.
To determine if the ACM needs to be removed
for projects involving residential buildings, the
total ACM for all buildings being demolished
or renovated for a project must be determined.
A complete notification form must be sent
to the MPCA at least 10 working days
prior to demolition. The notice contains
such information as the demolition contractor,
facility description, disposal location, and
dates of demolition.
Some asbestos - containing materials, such as
resilient floor coverings, asphalt roofing
products, and gaskets can be left in place, in
any quantity, for demolitions if the facility will
not be intentionally burned or subject to
sanding, cutting, grinding or abrading.
For a copy of the notice of intent to demolish
a building, or for general information
regarding the asbestos regulations or emission
standards, contact the MPCA at
(651)296 -7300 or (800)657 -3864.
Ack
Printed on paper containing at least 20%
fibers from paper recycled from consumers.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 520 Lafayette Rd. N., St. Paul, MN 55155 -4194
(651)296 -6300, toll -free 800 - 657 -3864, TDD /TTY (651)282 -5332
Upon request, this material can be made available in alternative formats.
EDA Agenda - 08/14/13
8. Consideration to approve funding for Industry of Year/MN Manufacturer's Week
activities. (AS)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The EDA is asked to again fund the materials and activities associated with the Industry of
the Year event.
The Industry of the Year event is a business retention effort coordinated in partnership
between the Industrial and Economic Development Committee (IEDC) and the EDA. The
event is an opportunity to focus on the efforts and contributions of the Monticello
manufacturing and industrial community. It is held each year in conjunction with MN
Manufacturer's Week, this year October 20th - 26th. Attendance at the event is typically
50 -100 persons. The event includes breakfast and a featured speaker, relevant to
economics and industry. The focus of the event is an award presentation to the Industry of
the Year, as voted by the full IEDC membership. The 2012 Industry of the Year recipient
was Cargill Kitchen Solutions.
In the past, the EDA has funded the Industry of the Year activities, with the IEDC
completing the planning for the event itself. Costs for the event include:
• Breakfast— Estimated expense of $700, typically 50 — 100 attendees
• Award trophy — estimated expense of $75
Invitations and promotions for the event are completed in house with no cost to the EDA.
In the past, the EDA and IEDC have also been able to arrange for speakers for the
breakfast without cost.
Should the EDA choose to fund the event for 2013, more information will be forthcoming
based on IEDC planning efforts.
Al. Budget Impact: The estimated expenses for the Industry of the Year event are $800.
The EDA has sufficient funds in its Marketing line item to cover the estimated costs.
A2. Staff Workload Impact: Staff time will be utilized for event coordination and promotion,
estimated at 8 hours.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve funding for the 2013 Industry of the Year event.
2. Motion to deny funding of the 2013 Industry of the Year event at this time.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff recommends Alternative 91.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
2012 Industry of the Year Invitation and Criteria
CITY "' INDUSTRIAL & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Monticello INDUSTRY OF THE YEAR AWARD
Purpose:
The IEDC and EDA desire to recognize industries within Monticello that exhibit business
excellence, innovation, community involvement, high level of customer and employee relations,
and driver of economic growth. The Industry of the Year award will be given to one business
each year at an industry recognition event.
Eligibility:
Industry shall be defined as follows: a business that performs a majority of their commercial
activity with other businesses and a minority of their commercial activity directly with the public
consumer.
Businesses in Monticello that meet the definition of industry are eligible. The company must be
established for at least five years. Upon receiving an award, said business will not be eligible for
at least three years.
Process:
The IEDC will nominate three businesses in August of each year to be considered for the
Industry of the Year. Staff and two members of the IEDC will conduct an on -site interview with
each nominee. At the September IEDC meeting, the Committee will vote to select one business
to receive the Industry of the Year award. The IEDC will forward the nomination to the EDA.
The IEDC will determine the final candidate based on a majority vote.
Criteria for Evaluation:
- Business excellence: Successful business practices, i.e., marketing and promotion of
business ethics; promotion of employee growth and development; contribution to its
industry; and research and development.
- Staff training, motivation, & employee engagement: Philosophy of engaging and
empowering employees. Empowered employees are proactive and persistent, and make
decisions that are consistent with the company's strategic goals and objectives.
Organizations benefit greatly from having an engaged workforce. Research shows strong
connections between employee engagement and turnover, productivity, customer service,
loyalty and corporate financial performance.
- Community involvement: A demonstrated interest in the welfare of the community
through financial contributions, service and civic leadership. Actively supports the
community through participating in volunteering programs and /or events.
- Customer relations: A high level of customer confidence and excellence in customer
services and relations.
- Innovation: Creativity, entrepreneurial, and implementing innovation in business
operations, products and services. Strives to distinguish itself from other businesses in
their industry.
- Economic Growth: Continual increase in tax -base and creation of liveable wage jobs.
Breakfast Catered by
Cornerstone Cafe 3rd Annual
Industry of the Year Event &
Manufacturer's Appreciation
Breakfast
Sponsored by the City of Monticello, Monticello Industrial & Economic
Development Committee and Monticello Economic Development Authority
Wednesday, October 24, 2012. 7:30am- 8:30am
� Monticello Community Center, Mississippi Room
Keynote Speaker: Senator Amy Koch
PLEASE RSVP TO
ELLEN EDEN
763.271.3208
ELLEN.EDEN @CI.
MONTICELLO.MN
.us
The 2011 award
winner was Aroplax.
Attend this year's
event for the unveiling
of the 2012 award
Senator Koch will provide her perspective on issues that remain important,
but unfinished, at the Capitol. Senator Koch will also discuss specific issues
and legislative initiatives that directly impact the Monticello business
community and manufacturing.
EDA Agenda - 08/14/13
9. Consideration of review and follow -up action related to the 2014 EDA Budget
Workshop Session, including budutin2 for TIF 1 -6 increment. (JO /AS)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The EDA held a workshop on August 6th for the purpose of providing staff with general
direction related to the 2014 budget and as related to Council general fund budgeting.
Staff has included the slides from the August 6th Budget Workshop for the EDA's
reference. In addition, the following items were taken as comments related to final
budgeting:
• Consideration of additional administrative /coordinator staff support for economic
development after the first year of Market Matching services is complete and
evaluated.
• Completion of a housing study to determine community housing needs (focusing
on multi - family, low to moderate income and senior options) and then how to
effectively use available housing increment to address the needs. This will include
addressing existing blighted housing and special reference to the downtown area.
Study to include evaluation of existing resources and partners available to the
community for housing.
• Determine whether TIF 1 -6 increment can be used to fund analysis, qualification
and demolition of structures on Block 34 as described in the staff report for item 6.
Staff has discussed this with the EDA attorney, who recommends against this use,
as such expenses can be paid for through the capture of increment in a newly
created district for the impacted area.
• EDA will have the opportunity to provide additional feedback and direction on the
Marketing line item based on the Market Matching situation analysis, to be
presented in September.
• Provide the EDA with more specific detail on past expenses in the Marketing and
Miscellaneous Expense line items.
The above comments will be noted in the overall EDA slide presentation for the City
Council's budget workshop on August 26th. Based on the feedback from the meeting and
as presented in the attached slides, staff will continue to propose a City general fund
allocation of $92,000 for 2014.
In regard to the use of excess increment in TIF 1 -6, the EDA members discussed a number
of potential options. The EDA's attorney has noted that as a pre -1989 district, the funds
are very flexible in terms of use.
Staff will have prepared additional information on the use options outlined below for the
August 14th meeting and may request EDA take action to move forward on a specific item
or items for allocation of TIF 1 -6 funds.
o Communications tower
o Acquisition of target owner - occupied and willing seller properties in
downtown
o Transportation improvements as prioritized by the Transportation Advisory
Committee (TAC)
Al. Budget Impact: To be determined based on additional discussion on this item.
A2. Staff Workload Impact: Not applicable at this time.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Action to be determined based on outcome of EDA discussion.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
None.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
EDA Budget Workshop Information
2
i
o
O
O
N
O_
a
�
o
w
•'
—
—
a�
O
o
O
}'
Q
00
O
5
N
�
O
N
N
LL
LL
:3
:3
N
i
LL
M
N
�+
-
Q+
c6
N
•i
•�
M
a
W
v
W
00
U
LL
W
n
H
H
N
O
O
Q�
Q�
L
LL
O
L
Q�
0
A
U
O
N
N
N
.. E
O
>
a)
■
O
O
L
i
N
U
�aA
cs cs
L
L �
N V
O
O *,
Q�
N
L
{0
N
O
M
O O
O
O
O �
00 o
M
O rl
+r O
N N
cr
� r-I
L �
Q� 1
N O
00 �
O
O
O
CN
O
{�
O
0
�
O
N
N
rl
Q�
>
O
■■
W
+�
N
Z
W
O
W
W
N
H
}'
O
W
Q
�
Q
LL
m
J
O
H
Z
O
O o O
>- O
� 0 O
t6
V z ■�
cc E. L °
N N
O O •� --� O
Sao (L) E ° 000 0 M
Q C13 a.. °
M bq.
V +r O �-- N ■ ■
cc �0 m }' p N a) O p U)
y W
O
CD CL N `- U)
c6 � L) >+ O — p O p O
p '�U N rm>. r N W
O vi to •N M Q M eF
•p '� E m d' O p 00
cn v 0 00 i 0 N N� W
% O i
CD E 0 }' �' � }' O 13
o '� M O O .�
N +�
W
U ca O O O v
ca N a� u O =
-N �� (L) N W
Q c N x 0 M m a (05
O Q O N t� , 0
I- Q
Q Q O N y A V
V V N W ii 'N O
t6 to 0 a
O
.. O u O Q O O O O `� � J
O m 0 0 x 0 0 0 0 0— Q
a O U v O W O O O O M O O
00 O 0%1- 0 0 0 I` O O
Z r-I � r-I r-I r-I r-I M r-I Lo
(0 60 N = 60 60 60 60 60 60 6
■ 0 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
■
r_
O
.N
V
cc
cc
�A
cc
N
V
�
—
N
N
N
C
N
>
CD
p
�
CD
.E
cc
N
0.
U.)
M
Y
.�
+�
O
cB
0
N
N
0
�
N
>
=
O
N
O
x
N
V
.�
N
�
Q
(n
"
N
=
N
cn
i
.N
N
LV
O
>,
(n
_
V
0
>
o�
NN
Y
va
>
,0
N
O
.�
N
LL
_
O
O
N
r
N
N
D
N
O
N
7DA
O
E
N
C
U)
0
O
Q�
— LL
N>
CD
o
O
N
0
1pA
N
>
N—
to
H
*'
O
o
N
to
N
o
O
N
O
O
O
_
.N
N
\
.�
.�
O
O
O
N
O
v
N
—
ii
•r_
0
��
O
m
+'
O
N
N>
O
.�
N
O
N
O
0�
C4
o
c
rl
�=M�
o
ti
ca
E�
CD
r-I
o
-
NO
O
CD
=a
O
a
CD
}'
+LL{i}
0
v
a
0CYaH
as
0
_o
LL
O
m
.
0
0
o
�
0
0
o
�
M
N
M
O
O
�
N
_
�
�
M
N
(D
�
0
_
O
�
O
O
�
—
14-
m
LL
U
O
(D
Q�
Q
U)
ui
Q
—
O
O
o
0
W
O
N
-0
Q
O
O
"
O
�
+a
O
'a)
O
o
CL
>,
o
O
N
CV
CL
TA
60-
■
■
■
O
Q
Q
1a)
0
Q
Q
O
■
C
N .O
O �
+� N
E
_O
Q�
>
a) O
•- U
O
O '
0 O
O
U �
N �
O
Q CL
OR
i
co
to
i
O
4-+
U
i
O
O
Q
O
w
■
EDA Agenda: 08/14/13
10. Economic Development Report
Market Matching Economic Development Services
A summary of the first month's progress by W SB Market Matching team is attached for
reference.
Options Agreement Task Force Progress Summary
The options agreement group has made great progress on a framework for acquisition option
agreements. An outline of the group's mission and goals is attached for reference.
At the last meeting, the group was able to conference with the EDA attorney on the legalities
associated with the development and execution of options for acquisition.
The group will meet again prior to the August 14th regular EDA meeting. The group will be
focused on fine - tuning actual option contracts and hopefully be able to start putting together
the steps for execution strategy. Once the group has concluded their draft work on the options
framework, staff will arrange for a document review and recommendation by the EDA
attorney.
A full outline of the group's work and request to proceed with the option project is intended to
be brought forward to the full EDA in October.
Update on 413 W. 4th
The City Council will be asked to adopt an assessment against the property on August 12th in
anticipation of a purchase agreement and pending sale. An update on the outcome of the
Council's action will be provided at the meeting.
TAC
Next meeting of the TAC is September 12th 2013. At the last TAC meeting, revised draft
alignments for the Fallon Avenue overpass were presented; these are pending the outcome of
the appraisal currently being conducted on the St. Henry's Catholic Church properties.
The group also discussed the possibility of progressing with signalization of the 4th Street
intersection, per the Embracing Downtown plan. The group is expected to discuss this in
more detail at the September meeting. This may also be a TIF 1 -6 spending option.
It is also important to note that the I -94 Coalition was able to arrange a meeting with Sen.
Mary Kiffineyer and U.S. Rep. Michelle Bachmann's offices. The group was able to present
information on the importance of funding the completion of 6 lanes on I -94 from Rogers to St.
Cloud.
WSB
&& Assoc- engineering- planning• environmental • construction 4140 Thielman Lane
Suite 204
St. Cloud, MN 56301
Tel 320 - 252 -4900
Fax 320-252-3100
8/6/13
City of Monticello
Re: Summary Report on Economic Development Services
Introduction
The City of Monticello engaged WSB & Associates, Inc. to provide economic development
services beginning on July 1St, 2013. This is a summary report detailing activities undertaken
during the first 30 days. The format of this summary report is derived from the Scope of
Services outlined in our service agreement.
The first task is data collection. During this task, WSB analyzes existing data related to
Monticello's market sectors. We examine data that is available on the City's website as well as
related city, county, and state -based economic development websites. We also examine
internal documents containing market data. The analysis leads to a Market Data Report, which
consists of a situation analysis and recommendations. The Market Data Report will be
presented to the Monticello EDA on 9/11/2013. The following is a summary of actions and
initial findings related to data collection.
Executive Summary
During the first 30 days WSB performed activities under the task of data collection. The first
step in the data collection process is to understand what data currently exists and to learn how
those data are being deployed. To that end, WSB began the process of analyzing the City's
website as well as the website for the Monticello Chamber of Commerce and the information
deployed by the WCEDP. We have also reviewed the landing page for Positively Minnesota's
shovel ready sites. In addition to reviewing and collecting data for the City's website, we met
with Charlie Pfeffer and Shawn Weinand to begin to build a detailed inventory of the existing
commercial and industrial sites currently listed for sale in Monticello. We collected site data
from Mr. Pfeffer to aid in the creation of materials to support our Market Matching effort;
especially as it relates to responding to RFI's from site selection firms. We will continue this
process to cover all market sectors, including available retail and industrial sites and buildings.
In an effort to find early synergies, we have met with Rachel Leonard to discuss WSB's role in
organizing and deploying market data via the City's website as well as other City marketing
materials.
St. Cloud • Minneapolis • St. Paul
Equal Opportunity Employer
wsbeng.com
F: \Community Development Dimctor\E- -ic Development\Boards\EDA\EDA GO D\2013\Ang.AN081413Utem1O.ED Repo&M ®dcello Summary Report
Summary Report on Economic Development Services
Page 2
As we begin to understand what data currently exists and are available, we are able to see what
data are missing. WSB has begun to collect the market data we will utilize in our direct
outreach efforts and likely deploy on the City's website. The data will also be made available to
the Chamber of Commerce and the WCEDP for deployment.
These activities will coalesce into a Market Data Report. The Market Data Report will include
recommendations for further data collection and deployment measures, including but not
limited to a Housing Market Study and a Market Profile Talking Points Memo. WSB will also
make recommendations on building a profile of the community based upon the unique
attributes embedded in the City and surrounding region. In our process of discovery, we have
met with Mark Pultusker from FNM to explore ways to capitalize on the high speed fiber
network and local competition in the broadband market as these are seen as unique attributes.
During the initial 30 days, WSB deployed data in response to a Request for Information from a
national site selection firm. The process revealed shortcomings in the City's ability to respond
to these types of requests. WSB has begun to design site flyers, which will be immediately
deployable when RFIs are released in the future. WSB is in the process of collaborating with the
WCEDP to ensure regional support in this effort.
Other data deployment actions undertaken in the first 30 days include the initialization of a
database with contacts for commercial and residential developers. WSB contacted over 35
local developers via literature introducing the concept of Market Matching. We are in the
process of following up with each in assembling the first components of our system of targeted
prospect outreach.
Action
1. Analyze Existing Data —The City's (and other local economic development related)
website serves as a marketing tool and plays an important role in providing market data
to those wishing to relocate to the City either as a resident or as a business owner. WSB
has recently spoken to a corporate site selector who indicated they do up to 90% of
their market research online. We reviewed the websites for the City and the Monticello
Chamber of Commerce. In addition, we reviewed the WCEDP and the State of MN
websites containing data relevant to the City of Monticello. We also reviewed internal
documents, including the Comprehensive Plan, Embracing Downtown, etc. to determine
the depth and breadth of the body of data currently available.
Initial Findings
Market Profile Talking Points: WSB reviewed available information sources to analyze
the availability of data related to the market for manufacturing and other industrial type
Summary Report on Economic Development Services
Page 3
firms. Understanding and highlighting the strengths of the local labor market is an
important tool in attracting new business as well as aiding in local business expansion
efforts. Our research shows a lack of labor market data available on the City's Website
as well as the Chamber of Commerce Website. WSB recommends completing a Market
Profile Talking Points Memo that can be deployed on the City and Chamber Websites
and utilized in direct marketing efforts.
Site Flyers: Lack of site flyers puts Monticello at a disadvantage when it comes to
responding to RFIs from site selection firms. Monticello has a lot to offer as it relates to
the competitive marketplace, IE low local tax rates, one of fifteen shovel ready certified
sites, etc., but the lack of a predesigned piece does not allow for a quick response which
is needed to respond to requests from site selectors.
MNDEED Shovel Ready Certified Sites: Otter Creek is 1 of 15 certified shovel ready sites
in Minnesota. The information on the MNDEED's website highlighting Otter Creek
currently has incorrect contact information and needs to be updated. WSB has met
with Jim Gromberg from MNDEED to discuss ways for the City of Monticello to further
leverage the shovel ready status in partnership with the State of Minnesota.
Housing Market Study: The 2010 Monticello Housing Report details housing conditions
and inventory, and lays out a vision for the types of homes desired for the future. It
shows Monticello peaked at a high -point of over 260 residential building permits pulled
in one year and had a low -point of only 2 as recently as 2010. The market for housing
has changed fairly dramatically over the last few years. To that end, WSB recommends
conducting a comprehensive housing market study to determine demand for housing in
Monticello for the next five to ten years.
Downtown Monticello Market Analysis and Retail Sales Potential: There is a great deal
of relevant market data embedded in this report. It is currently fairly difficult to find as
it is contained within the ReStoreingdtmonticello.org website, which is not noticeably
linked to the City's website. WSB recommends distilling some of the data for easy
deployment and digestion as well as linking the City's website to the
ReStoreingdtmonticello.org website.
EDA Downtown Redevelopment Land Control Plan
The Objective
• To gain control of one or more blocks of land in the downtown district which are big enough to
entice a developer to develop the land in accordance with the Embracing Downtown Plan.
• To optimize the value of the land owners holdings.
• Maximize the use of EDA resources to accomplish redevelopment
Concept Principles
• The EDA should be a catalyst for the redevelopment not the developer.
• The land owners should be the driving force and actively participate in identifying a developer.
o We should recognize that individual property owners may not have the contacts to
accomplish this and may need to partner with other property owners, agents or brokers
in order to bring developers to the table
• We collectively (EDA and Land owners) should strive to get the best possible price for the land
owner's property.
• The EDA should structure the program in a way that the EDA is not responsible for tenant
relocation. Thus preserving EDA resources for redevelopment purposes.
• The EDA should expect to financially participate in the future redevelopment project.
• TIF (redevelopment), including demolition
• Combination with adjacent land, parking areas, etc.
o GMEF
• DEED grants /loans
• Environmental
o Planning /engineering
• The EDA should keep properties on the tax rolls as long as possible.
• The EDA should encourage businesses to stay and operate in downtown buildings until
redevelopment occurs.
• The EDA should only own property under certain circumstances.
• Seller wants to sell at county appraised value or less and no tenants are involved.
• The property is distressed and requires EDA intervention to clean up.
• The land is needed for a road or other public improvement purposes.
• The land is acquired by tax foreclosure.
Method
• The EDA to buy options on property as an incentive for landowners to sell their property at a
future time based on a predetermined formula when a developer is identified.
• Methodology for employing strategy and securing options once structure is in place to be
discussed.