Loading...
IDC Minutes 06-20-1985 . MIN~TES MONTICELLO INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE June 20, 198 - 7:00 A.M. Monticello City Hall Members Present: Tom Eidem, Arve I rimsmo, Shelly Johnson, Harvey Kendall, Dale Lu gwitz, Chair Jay Morrell, Bud Schrupp, Don Smith, Vice-Chair Gary Wieber, and Allen Pelvit. Chair Morrell opened the meeting asking for approval of the 5/16/85 minutes. Dale Lungwitz moved to a prove said minutes, was seconded by Shelly Johnson, and passed 10-0. The first item on the agenda was back to allow Tom Godlewski and Gay Veit of Veit Construction to make their presentation to the Committee. Allen explained his past attempts with Veits trying to erect a spec building. e went on to describe the property in this proposed project as Lots 1-10, Block 15, and very briefly stated that the buil ing would be approximately 35,000 sq. ft. Allen stated that this item needed no action taken and was informational only. He then turned the floor over to Tom Godlewski. . Mr. Godlewski is a project manage for Veit Construction of Rogers, Minnesota. He explained how over the previous 30-60 days they have been negotiating with Mr. Ec on his property. The proposal would be contingent upon obtainin the properties, correcting the soils, obtaining the use of t x increment financing, and so forth. Mr. Godlewski ran thro gh the properties costs, both raw land and soil correction cost. Chair Morrell asked for clarifica ion on a few questions and then stated that the Industrial D velopment Committee does not have any authority in the process.. He added that the Committee did, however, have members on othr committees, councils, etc., and that might be beneficial for iding their cause. Morrell stated that we could help find te ants, etc. Shelly Johnson asked if the tenan were compatible with the property Mr. Godlewski assured him that it on whether the 35,000 sq. ft. bui tenant or more. Mr. Godlewski st would be leased by one tenant, wi for speculative purposes. He als building was more workable than a and nature of the business and the appropriate zoning. was. Chair Morrell commented ding would be leased by one ted that approximately 25,000 sq. h the remaining 10,000 sq. ft. stated that a 35,000 sq. ft. 25,000 sq. ft. building. ft. . Arve Grimsmo stated that he felt lessoning the value of a centrall little uncomfortable with located piece of property . IDC Minutes - 6/20/85 by deducting the soil correction a ounts. He stated that the Oakwood property sold for $3.00/s . ft., while others in the nearby area went for around $2.75/sq. ft. He encouraged the proposal but indicated to be care~ 1 on how it's handled. Chair Morrell cautioned the developer a out MN/DOT's plans for improving Highway 25 in 1986. Tom Eidem ex lained that since MN/DOT has completed their plans for channelization and left turn lanes, they would allow access to the pr erty from the 5~ Street point. If 6th Street is constructed, MN/D T will only allow access/egress from 6th Street. Morrell then em hasized the necessity to plan their entrances/exits from the pr posed 6th Street. Eidem explained that staff felt the first tax inc ements should be applied toward the construction of 6th Street wi h additional increments possibly to cover sewer improvements and fOnally land write down. Mr. Godlewski asked about the pos Cities Development Grant/Loan tha Tom Eidem explained that this was allowed only one application per application will be used for anot these programs are on a competiti . - type of business - number of new jobs cr - addition to the City' - private to public fin - number of jobs create ibility of obtaining a small might be up to $250,000.00. true; however, each city is ear, and our present proposed er project. Allen added that e basis and stress the following: ated tax base ncial ratio /dollar, etc. He stated that industrial/manufac uring businesses are considered more favorable; and in a competitOve situation, this type of proposal has not done well in the past. Eidem explained that if the project falls through, the Veits could ask for assistance. Vice-Chair Wieber asked Mr. Godle ski what their time frame was. Tom Godlewski stated that perhaps 60 days could complete the front end red tape with perhaps a September construction date. Chairman Morrell summarized the p oject and stated that the IDC appreciates getting involved in tie proposal; however, they must proceed with meeting with the HRA and City staff. He also stated that the Committee could assist t e developers in locating a tenant for the speculative space nd additional financing alternatives. . Mr. Godlewski asked if the city h with proposals for the property, and perhaps asked if tax incremen Tom Eidem explained that in the 1 been the first to actually propos increment financing. Others have declined to pursue because of the An additional property owner may s previously been approached een made an offer on the property, financing could he utilized. st three years, Veits have a project and request tax expressed interest but have extraordinary expenses involved. lso have complicated the situation. 2- . IDC Minutes - 6/20/85 At this point, Veits met with Tom Eidem, City Administrator, and the Committee proceeded with heir meeting. The Committee took the next few minutes to disc ss the proposal and its impact. There was some concern about the umbers that were used. The City's property would produce a g oss revenue of $95,900.00, and with soil corrections $35,900.,00. The question to be answered by the City is, is an unproductiv piece of swamp worth $36,000.00. Allen stated that this entire pro of tax increment financing. Beca of the property and the extensive would be eligible for a 25-year T that it was staff's feeling, as tax increment not be used for lan use for the increment would be to such as 6th Street construction a is tax increment remaining, then toward the land cost. To apply i write down would be contrary to t osal is dependent on the use se of the unproductive state improvements needed, the area x Increment District. He added ell as the HRA's, that the write down. The appropriate cover the cost of improvements d sewer construction. If there erhaps it could be applied crement initially to the land x increment laws. The rest of the discussion ed itself with problem areas in the construction areas, lot, street construction, Highway 25, and drainage. lly Johnson, Superintendent of ISD #882, discussed the school district's concerns on using tax increment financing and state that in this particular case, he felt that tax increment financ'ng would be to the overall advantage of the City. In establ'shing this Tax Increment Financing District, we must meet certain cr'teria pertaining to blight, etc., and will attempt to tie in ther properties like Clifford Olson's for future redevelopment. . In other business, Chair Morrell a thank you letter to all banquet that we send letters next year pr Harvey Kendall so moved, was seco unanimously. A discussion was he from the banquet. Allen stated t $7,100.00 this year. It was the have Committee members sell the r sales people sell those who were This should be on the July agenda The next meeting is scheduled for River Inn. There being no furthe adjourned. . _:~w~~- G Allen L. Pelvit Director of Economic Development uggested Allen and Jay prepare contributors. He also suggested paring them for the 1986 banquet. ded by Dale Lungwitz, and passed d concerning the net income at we netted approximately oncensus of the Committee to gulars, but to have Don Smith's tubborn or never bought before. for further discussion. July 16, 12:00 noon, at the business, the meeting was -3-