EDA Minutes 06-19-1997
.
.
.
MINUTES
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Thursday, June 19, 1997 - 7:00 p.m.
City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairperson Ron Hoglund, Vice Chairperson Barb Schwientek,
Assistant Treasurer Ken Maus, Bill Demeules, and Darrin Lahr.
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Clint Herbst and Roger Carlson.
STAFF PRESENT: Treasurer Rick Wolfsteller and Executive Director Ollie Koropchak.
GUEST:
Rusty Fifield, Ehlers and Associates, Inc.
1. Call to order
Chairperson Hoglund called the EDA meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2.
Consideration to approve the May 28, 1997 EDA Minutes.
Barb Schwientek made a motion to approve the May 28, 1997 EDA minutes. Seconded
by Ken Maus and with no corrections or additions, the minutes were approved as written.
3.
Consideration to review for approval the proposed guidelines for a commercial/retail
finance program and the recommendation for council approval thereafter.
Rusty Fifield reported on his rationale for the attached-proposed guidelines drafted from
the discussions of the May 28 EDA meeting. The four points being: The assistance and
incentives should address both public objectives and private needs. The programs must
make best use oflimited public funds. The programs should not substantially increase the
difficulty of redevelopment for the EDA or the property owner. And lastly, the programs
are targeted at existing buildings and smaller projects. They do not preclude the use of tax
increment financing or other forms of financial assistance.
Rusty continued by outlining and explaining the four proposed funding options: Facade
grants, rehabilitation loan, tax abatement, and fee reimbursement. Tax abatement is a new
program passed by Legislators which allows a taxing jurisdiction to abate (to rebate) said
portion of their taxes. It increases the property owner's cash flow for a short term.
EDA members debated over the merits of the tax abatement option and agreed to strike
the "tax abatement" option. One members saw merit to invest in smaller projects and with
I
.
EDA MINUTES
JUNE 19, 1997
people we know. How much of an investment and risk does the EDA want to take? A
meaningful amount without an excessive amount suggested Fifield. One members used
an example: Ifimprovement costs are $80,000 and the EDA has $20,000 invested, the
return is a building with improvements and increased value. Members agreed to a
rehabilitation loan of $20,000 at 2% below prime, 10-year amortization with balloon
payment in five years. Additionally, the investment would foster downtown vitality and
pedestrian traffic. Members agreed the targeted or preference area would be available to
existing buildings in Blocks 35, 36, 51, and 52, Original Plat, City of Monticello.
The front/signage matching facade grant and rear matching facade grant of $2,500 each
could serve to leverage private investment, increase aesthetic appearance, and encourage
private investment and businesses into downtown agreed EDA members. To further
enhance the implementation of downtown revitalization, members agreed to add a side
matching facade grant of $2,500 if applicable. Improvements funded through this
program must meet all MCP Design Guidelines. For new construction projects, Fifield
suggested the use ofTIF with an option for the HRA to suggest EDA funds.
.
One member felt to ask the applicant to borrow money for city fees, bank applications,
and property appraisals for a later repayment didn't make much sense. Members agreed
for a fee reimbursement of city related fees only. Rusty explained a fee reimbursement
rather than fee waiver was politically correct and allowed for accountability.
The program is not to promote a specific business but designed to assist a property owner
(developer) in a certain area. The program is not for equipment financing. It was
anticipated, the lending institution would provide a credit check for the downtown
assistance program. EDA members directed Koropchak to draft an application process
and guidelines for adoption by the EDA at their regular July meeting with Council
adoption in August. The guidelines to be drafted per the agreements of the discussions on
the proposed guidelines as submitted by Fifield. Mayor Fair told EDA members, the
sooner the program is implementated, the better.
4. Consideration to determine funding source for the commercial/retail finance program and
the recommendation of a request for funds.
Recognizing the GMEF cash fund balance of December 31, 1996, was approximately
$275,000 and projected to be approximately $331,000 at year-end 1997, Barb Schwientek
made a motion to allocate $200,000 for the downtown assistance program from the
GMEF as seed money for 1997. The $200,000 seed money to be accounted for
separately. Bill Demeules seconded the motion and with no further discussion, the motion
passed unanimously.
.
2
.
.
.
EDA MINUTES
JUNE 19, 1997
5. Other business
EDA members were reminded ofthe joint commission/council meeting scheduled for June
30, 1997,5:00 p.m., City Hall. Additionally, the EDA agreed to change the time oftheir
July 22 meeting from 7 :00 p.m. to 7 :30 a.m.
6. Adjournment.
The EDA meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
o~'\<C\~[)~
Ollie Koropchak, Executive Director
3