EDA Agenda 02-22-2000
ANNUAL MEETING AGENDA
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Tuesday, February 22, 2000 - 6:00 p.m.
City Hall
MEMBERS: Chair Ron Hoglund, Vice Chair Barb Schwientek, Assist Treasurer Ken Maus,
Clint Herbst, Roger Carlson, Bill Demeules, and Damn Lahr.
STAFF:
Treasurer Rick Wolfsteller and Executive Director Ollie Koropchak.
GUEST:
Pam Campbell, DAT Chairperson
1. Call to Order.
2. Consideration to approve the September 28, 1999 EDA minutes.
3. Consideration of adding agenda items.
4. Consideration to hear an update relative to the design concepts from Claybaugh
Preservation Architecture, Inc. for three building facade improvements.
5. Consideration to elect 2000 EDA officers.
6. Consideration to review and accept the year-end EDA Financial Statements, Activity
Report, and proposed 2000 Budget.
7. Consideration to review year-end balances of the GMEF, DMRF, UDAG, and ERG
Funds.
8. Consideration to review the GMEF Guidelines for possible amendments.
9. Consideration to ratifY the Target Area ofthe DMRF Guidelines and review for other
possible amendments.
10. Executive Director's Report.
11. Other Business.
12. Adjournment.
Economic Development Authority Minutes - 9/28/99
Fund behind the industrial revenue bonds. Ollie also provided a list of the equipment for
purchase.
Mr. Jay Eller of Twin City Die Castings provided background of the company. Mr. Eller
also stated that they would be bringing approximately three employees from their
Minneapolis facility, but that the majority of the employees will be new and the company
will be providing extensive training as this is a new field they are starting.
Koropchak provided financial reports from 1997 and 1998. She also informed the members
that the company meets all criteria and the City Council did adopt a resolution for
application of State dollars. No action was necessary.
5. Consideration to approve or deny GMEF No. 017 for Twin Citv Die Castings Company.
Ollie Koropchak asked the EDA members to consider the approval or denial of the request
for a $100,000 GMEF loan. Ollie also explained the Minnesota Investment Fund to the
members noting that this is a grant to the City of Monticello from the Minnesota Department
of Trade and Economic Development. The City will loan the $500,000 grant to TCDC, the
EDA will retain the full principal and interest payback on the loan for future projects which
increase the state and local tax base and job and wage-levels. She also noted that it is
anticipated that the State will award the $500,000. The City negotiates the terms and
conditions with the company.
Ollie stated that first, the EDA needed to determine if this GMEF loan application from
TCDC will encourage economic development and secondly, the EDA needed to determine if
the proposed construction real estate project and the acquisition of personal property
application complied with the EDA Business Subsidy Criteria - GMEF Guidelines. Third,
the EDA needed to determine the amount and terms of the loan for approval.
Ollie Koropchak also advised the members that the City Council would be considering
ratification of the EDA's action for compliance of the EDA - GMEF Business Subsidy
Criteria on October 11, 1999, and would approve of the Subsidy Agreement for GMEF No.
017 between the EDA and TCDC on October 25,1999. If approved, the GMEF would be
disbursed at the closing date yet to be determined.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BARB SCHWIENTEK AND SECONDED BY DARRIN
LAHR TO APPROVE GMEF LOAN NO. 017 AT 6.25% FIXED RATE FOR 7
YEARS FOR TWIN CITY DIE CASTING COMPANY, A MINNESOTA
CORPORA TION, IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 WITH TERMS AND
CONDITIONS AS RECOMMENDED. COLLATERAL, GUARANTEES, AND
OTHER CONDITION REQUIREMENTS TO BE DETERMINED AND PREPARED
BY THE GMEF ATTORNEY. THE GMEF LOAN APPROVAL SUBJECT TO
LENDER, SBA, AND THE STATE COMMITMENTS, VERIFICATION OF
-2-
Economic Development Authority Minutes - 9/28/99
COMPANY FINANCIAL CREDIT ABILITY, AND COUNCIL RATIFICATION OF
EDA ACTION. Motion carried.
6. Consideration to review the returned request for proposals relative to cost estimates for
preparation of desilln concepts and approval to fund through DMRF.
Ollie Koropchak noted that at the EDA meeting of August 31, 1999, the commissioners
directed Pam Campbell, DA T Chair, to prepare a letter to architects soliciting request for
proposals. This proposal was to include costs for preparing design concepts for facade
improvements to three identified buildings as well as six identified buildings. The intent of
the EDA was to obtain cost estimates prior to EDA's consideration to fund the costs to
prepare the designed concepts. The building owners have been reluctant to invest dollars for
architectural design options only to find if it may be cost prohibitive to complete. DA T
members feel unqualified, yet they recognize pictures are worth a thousand words. Design
concepts would be a great asset as a marketing tool to promote the downtown revitalization
facade improvement program.
Ollie also noted that at a DA T meeting which followed the last EDA meeting, the DA T
members elected to add to the RFP a third option which included the cost for preparing
design concepts for facade improvements to an entire block of buildings. The RFP's were
due back Monday, September 27 with only one response from Claybaugh Preservation
Architecture Inc.
Ollie requested that after review of the returned RFP's, the EDA members should discuss
their level of interest to fund the architect's proposed fees for preparing the design concepts
and whether to consider funding three, six, or an entire block of buildings. Ollie suggested
that if the members desired to fund the fees, the expenditure should be earmarked from the
EDA-DMRF fund as this is not tied to job creation or the business subsidy criteria.
Pam Campbell, DA T Chair, presented comments to the EDA members regarding the
returned proposal from Claybaugh. Pam noted that some of the sites DA T had looked at
were Cent Com/Dominos; Vacuum Store/Masonic Hall; and Monti Liquors/Zoo Lounge,
which included both older and newer buildings. AE Michaels has also been asking for ideas
for his building. Pam also noted that rear entrances to the downtown businesses were also
being considered. She stated DA T also asked Claybaugh about redesigning a whole block
at once. Some of the EDA members thought Mr. Claybaugh's hourly rates were reasonable,
but noted that its hard to keep the cost down when its hourly.
It was the consensus ofthe EDA members to talk to business owners and tenants first to see
if they have an interest and to advise the approximate cost to them. Once they determine the
likely candidates, DA T would target three businesses at a time and get sketches from the
architect to take back to the business owners. After the owners have the sketches it would be
up to them to proceed with the actual improvements. It was also noted that the EDA could
-3-
Economic Development Authority Minutes - 9/28/99
possibly recoup some of their costs if it were to get a grant fund. It was discussed by the
members to accept the RFP submitted by Claybaugh Preservation Architecture.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BILL DEMEULES AND SECONDED BY KEN MAUS TO
AUTHORlZE THE DESIGN ADVISORY TEAM AN AMOUNT OF $3,000 FOR
ARCHITECTURAL FEES FOR CONCEPT DRAWINGS FOR THREE SELECTED
BUILDING SITES UNDER OAT'S SUPERVISION. Motion carried.
7. Consideration to approve extending the use of the remaininQ: balance of the DMRF through
vear-endinQ:. December 31. 2000.
Ollie Koropchak asked the EDA members to consider to either approve or deny extending
the use of the remaining balance of the DMRF as this item was tabled from the August 31,
1999 meeting. The total amount disbursed since the program began in July of 1997 is
$25,921.92 which was for six facade improvements. Last year the EDA extended the use of
the DMRF through December 31, 1999.
One of D AT's goals for the year 2000 is to market the revitalization program through the
use of design concepts prepared by an architect in hopes of raising the interest level of
property owners.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DARRIN LAHR AND SECONDED BY ROGER
CARLSON TO APPROVE EXTENDING THE USE OF THE REMAINING BALANCE
OF THE DMRF THROUGH YEAR-ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2000. Motion carried.
8. Consideration to approve funding the acquisition and improvement costs associated with the
7-foot walkway through the EDA.
Ollie Koropchak reminded the members that at the EDA meeting in August, OAT requested
the EDA consider requesting the City Council budget approximately $20,000 for the
acquisition of a 7-foot walkway and for construction of the walkway improvements. With
the current discussion by Council to cut budget requests of city departments, the
commissioners did not endorse requesting $20,000 from the City for Budget Year 2000.
Instead, the commissioners directed Koropchak to check if the EDA could legally fund the
walkway acquisition and improvements.
In addition, Koropchak would approach the HRA to fund the walkway acquisition and
improvements at their September meeting, since redevelopment is one of their objectives.
The question posed the HRA was "Is the HRA interested in putting the walkway acquisition
and improvement expenditure of approximately $20,000 in their Year 2000 Budget?" The
response was "No, not at this time."
Koropchak did check with legal counsel and they have no problem with the EDA expending
-4-
Economic Development Authority Minutes - 9/28/99
dollars from the DMRF as these were funds designated for revitalization of downtown.
At this time, Mr. Grassl has not agreed to sell a 7-foot strip. However, it was my
understanding in a previous meeting between Wolfsteller, Grassl, and myself, we had
verbally agreed to a selling price of $6 per square foot. Mr. Grassl suggested the walkway
jog on to the Brad Larson property allowing greater use of the rear of his lot. Thereafter,
Mr. Larson and I met and Mr. Larson agreed to the concept and the $6 per square foot price.
Based on those acquisition prices, it was estimated the cost to acquire the strip plus survey
and closing costs to be approximately $10,000 and another $10,000 for walkway
improvements and lighting.
Did the EDA want to budget the expenditure of $20,000 for acquisition and construction of
improvements for a 7-foot walkway along West Broadway subject to a willing seller for
Year 2000.
The members did not feel the need to make a decision at this time as Mr. Grassl has not
stated whether or not he is willing to sell this parcel. The EDA discussed the option of an
enclosed walkway. They did feel, however that if Mr. Grassl came to the EDA at a later
date wishing to sell this parcel, possibly the EDA could propose helping with new doors,
signage, security, etc. as a trade off.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BARB SCHWIENTEK AND SECONDED BY DARRIN
LAHR TO TABLE ANY ACTION INDEFINITELY. Motion carried.
9. Consideration of Executive Director's Report.
Ollie Koropchak provided the executive director's report.
a) EDA-GMEF Business Subsidy Criteria - Ollie provided a copy of the criteria as
approved by the EDA at the last meeting with the amended changes under Definition
of Public purpose, l.(b) and IV. TERMS AND CONDITIONS, LATE PAYMENT
POLICY. Language for the late payment policy was drafted by the EDA Attorney
at the suggestion of the EDA.
b) GMEF Loan No. 016 - On September 13, the Council ratified the EDA's approval
finding GMEF Loan No. 016 for Aroplax was consistent with the GMEF Subsidy
Criteria. On September 27, the Council will approve the Business Subsidy
Agreement between the EDA and Aroplax as per the new statutory requirements.
Loan closing to follow thereafter. The GMEF loan fee of $200 has been collected.
Will be executing this loan & EDA will sign.
c) City Budget 2000 Process - Although the Council approved a maximum increase of
5% of the levy, it is not the intent of the Council to actually maximize that increase.
No further budget decisions at this time.
d) GMEF Loan No. 014 - At the suggestion of the EDA, I contacted the local lender on
-5-
Economic Development Authority Minutes - 9/28/99
this project. It appeared they were unaware that the property taxes were not paid.
The lender followed through and did talk to the company relative to the seriousness
of non-payment of property taxes. A second letter was addressed to Lake Tool, Inc.
from the HRA with copies to the lender stating the HRA at their October 6 meeting
will consider employing an attorney relative to defaulting on the contract. The
company is now current with GMEF payments.
e) Acquisition of industrial land - City Staff and Council are proceeding with
discussions with Goeman group and Chadwick. Estimated infrastructure costs are
being obtained from city engineer. With inconsistency between the Comprehensive
Plan and MOAA Plan, perhaps the Gold Nugget parcel is another option for future
industrial development. Another meeting is scheduled for next week.
f) PROSPECTS - The Prospect Team visited Systematic Refrigeration on Tuesday,
September 28. This manufacturing company is looking to relocate and expand.
Initial building size 60,000 sq ft with potential to expand to approximately 160,000
sq ft. 42 jobs currently, anticipate a total employment of 80 in ten years. Wage-
levels yet to be determined, D L stated appro x $10 to $15. They've been in business
for approximately 25 years. Clean site, no outside storage no toxins. Will meet
again October 7,1999 to show them around Monticello. Will also provide them w/a
Uses & Sources statement. Ramsey, Albertville, and Monticello are the three site
options under consideration. Potential user of GMEFs. Darrin cautioned that a fair
amount of their employees are from the AnokalRamsey area and Ramsey is near the
Anoka Tech which is where the company goes to hire new employees.
Design and assembly of high-pressured coolants for industrial use - Start-up
company. Has business plan completed. Looking to lease 5,000 sq ft from Brad
Barger. Seeking financing. Potential user of GMEFs. 12 jobs by November, 2000.
$10-12 per hour w/o benefits.
g) EDA fund balance - Ollie enclosed a current accounting of the EDA fund balance
after disbursal of the $100,000 to Aroplax.
h) Industrial Banquet - The Industrial Fundraiser Banquet will be held Tuesday,
October 26 at the Monte Club. Tickets will be mailed out the week of September 27
by the Chamber. If you need tickets, please call Brenda, 295-2700, at the Chamber
Office.
10. Adiourn
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BILL DEMEULES AND SECONDED BY DARRIN
LAHR TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:30 P.M. Motion carried.
Lori Kraemer, Recording Secretary
-6-
EDA Agenda - 2/22/00
4. Consideration to hear an update relative to the desism concepts from Claybaug:h
Preservation Architecture. Inc. for three buildin~ facade improvements.
A. Reference and background:
At the EDA meeting of September 28, 1999, the EDA made a motion to accept the
request for proposal from Claybaugh Preservation Architecture and expend $3,000 from
the balance of the DMRF for design concepts of three downtown buildings. The
commissioners directed DAT to select the three buildings based on interest of property
owners to complete an improvement project within the next year.
Pam Campbell, DAT Chairperson, will update the EDA on the process of working with
both Claybaugh and property owners. No action is required by the EDA.
Also, at the September meeting, the EDA extended the use of the remaining balance of
DMRF through December 31, 2000.
1
(C) The remaining five (5) members shall be initially appointed for
terms other than the terms being served by a member of the city
Council. Those initially appointed, including Council members
serving on the EDA, shall serve for terms of one, two, three, four,
and five years respectivelY and two members for six years. If the
two Council members appointed to the EDA have Council terms that
coincide, then their terms of service on the EDA so.all also
coincide. Thereafter, all commissioners shall be appointed for
six-year terms, except that any person appointed to fill a vacancy
occurring prior to the expiration of the term which his/her
predecessor has been appointed shall be appointed only for the
remainder of such term. Upon the expiration of his/her term of
office, the member shall continue to serve until his/her successor
is appointed.
(0) All members shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council.
Vacancies shall be filled by appointment by the Mayor with the
confirmation of the City Council.
(E) The City council shall make available to the Authority such
appropriations as it deems fit for salaries, fees, and expenses
necessary in the conduct of its work. The Authority shall have
authority to expend all budgeted sums so appropriated and recommend
the expenditures of other sums made available for its use from
grants, gifts, and other sources for the purposes and activities
authorized by this resolution.
(F) A commissioner may be removed by the city Council for inefficiency,
neglect of duty, or misconduct in office. A commissioner shall be
removed only after a hearing. A copy of the charges must be given
to the commissioner at least 10 days before the hearing. The
commissioner must be given an opportunity to be heard in person or
by the counsel at the hearing. When written charges have been
submitted against the commissioner, the City council may
temporarily suspend the commissioner. If the City Council finds
that those charges have not been substantiated, the commissioner
shall be immediately reinstated. If a commissioner is removed, a
record of the proceedings together with the charges and findings
shall be filed in the office of the City Administrator.
2-3-2:
(A) The Authority shall elect a president, vice president, treasurer,
assistant treasurer, and secretary annually. A member must not
serve as president and vice president at the same time. The other
offices may be held by the same member. The other offices of the
secretary and assistant treasurer need not be held by a member.
OFFICERS AND MEETINGS:
TITLE II/Chpt 3/page 2
MONTICELLO CITY ORDINANCE
EDA Agenda - 2/22/00
6. Consideration to review and accept the Year~End EDA Financial Statements.
Activity Report. and 1999 Proposed Budget.
A. Reference and Background:
In order to company with EDA Ordinance Amendment No. 172, Section 2-3-6: The
Authority shall prepare an annual budget projecting anticipated expenses and sources of
revenue. And B: The Authority shall prepare an annual report describing its activities
and providing an accurate statement of its financial condition. Said report shall be
submitted to the City Council by March 1 of each year.
Enclosed are the year-end statements, proposed budget, and activity report.
The EDA will need to review and discuss prior to consideration of the following
alternative action.
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to accept the year-end financial statement and report for submission to
the City Council on February 28,2000.
2. A motion to accept the year-end financial statements and report subject to named
revisions prior to submission to the City Council.
3. A motion to not accept the year-end financial statements and report.
4. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
If the EDA commissioners make a finding that the statements and report are so correct,
recommendation is alternative no. 1.
D. Supporting Data:
Copies of financial statements and report.
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MONTICELLO
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND (GMEF)
Balance Sheet
December 31, 1999
ASSETS
Cash in Bank
Notes Receivable - Tapper, Inc.
Notes Receivable - Muller Theatre
Notes Receivable - SMM, Inc.
Notes Receivable - Aroplax Corp.
Notes Receivable - custom Canopy, Inc.
Notes Receivable - Standard Iron
Notes Receivable - Vector Tool
Notes Receivable - Tapper, Inc.
Notes Receivable - SELUEMED
Notes Receivable - T J Martin
Notes Receivable - Mainline Distribution
Notes Receivable - Aroplax Corp II
Appropriations Receivables -
1999 UDAG
1999 SCREG
TOTAL ASSETS
FUND EOUITY
Fund Balance
Reserved for Participation Loans
(Economic Development)
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY
$635,221.20
$ -0-
$ -0-
$ -0-
$ -0-
$ -0-
$ 38,369.07
$ 44,436.27
$ 90,405.01
$ 41,264.16
$ 87,500.00
$ 98,646.37
$100,000.00
$139,546.38
$ 60,453.62
$1, 335, 842.08
$1, 335, 842.08
$1, 335, 842.08
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MONTICELLO
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND (GMEF)
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance
For the Year Ended December 31, 1999
REVENUES
Appropriations -
1999 GMEF
1999 SCREG
1999 UDAG
Interest Income - Notes
Interest Income - Investment
Loan Fees
Legal Fees
Miscellaneous
$ -0-
$ 60,453.62
$139,546.38
$ 23,256.58
$ 28,117.01
$ 600.00
$ 1,400.00
$ -0-
TOTAL REVENUES
$ 253,373.59
EXPENDITURES
Professional Fees
Service Fees
Miscellaneous Other
Int. Adjustment - Notes
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund $
Legal Fees $
$
$
$
$
$
7,423.54
1,400.00
34.75
-0-
-0-
-0-
o
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$
8,858.29
Excess of Revenues Over Expenditures
$ 244,515.30
FUND BALANCE - Beginning of Year
$1, 091, 326.78
$1, 335, 842.08
FUND BALANCE - End of Year
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND (GMEF)
2000 CASH FLOW PROJECTION
BEGINNING CASH BALANCE, January 2000
RECEIPTS
Appropriations, Expected -
SCERG
UDAG
Notes Amortization Payments -
Tapper Inc.
Muller Theatre
SMM, Inc.
Aroplax Corp.
Notes Receivable
Custom Canopy, Inc.
Standard Iron ($795.49 Mo.) 7-01
Vector Tool ($380.18 Mo.) 11-00
Tapper's II ($760.36 Mo.) 4-01
SELUEMED ($1,031.01 Mo.) 9-03
T.J. Martin ($1,716.12 Mo.) 3-05
Mainline Distrib. ($702.08 Mo.) 6-04
Aroplax Corp. II ($730.93 Mo.) 12-04
TCDC (Est. $1,472.87 Mo.) 6-07
Interest Income - Investment (est.)
Loan Fees
Miscellaneous
TOTAL RECEIPTS
TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE AND RECEIPTS
EXPENDITURES
GMEF Loans -
TCDC (GMEF)
(UDAG)
Other (GMEF)
DMRF Grants
Loans
Bob Claybaugh Architecture
Miscellaneous
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
EXPECTED CASH BALANCE, December 2000
$269,336.48
$ 30,663.52
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
$ 9,545.90
$ 4,181. 98
$ 42,600.00
$ 9,124.32
$ 12,372.12
$ 16,882.76
$ 8,424.96
$ 8,701.60
$ 8,837.22
$ 20,000.00
$ 600.00
$ 1,000.00
$ 69,336.48
$ 30,663.52
$200,000.00
$ 25,000.00
$ 20,000.00
$ 3,000.00
$ 1,000.00
$ 635,221.20
$ 442,270.86
$1,077,492.06
$ 349,000.00
$ 728,492.06
--
<
~
~
-
~
z
~
~
;...
~
I--l
~~
0ez::0I
=001
~~OI
~ ~.....
<~.....
~ ...:l ('f'")
Z < [)
~I--l..o
~ ~ 5
~ < u
OZQ
...:l""'l
~ ~
>
~
~
U
""'I
~
o
z
o
u
~
en
(!)
z
Z
a:
<
w
I-
en
w
a: 0
W CJ) CJ)
I- CJ) CJ)
z .,.... .,....
I-
Z
W
:!:
I-
en
W
>
Z
.,.... I.()
.,.... .,....
Ell- Ell-
N (") '<t I.() CD I'- co
en en en en en en en
CJ) en en en CJ) CJ) en
~ ~ -.:- -.;- ~
~
....
~
(l)
~ ~
~ ~ vi ~ ttj
>-,~ ~ i3~ i3:3
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.... ~ i3 ~. ~ ~ N.2
i'30~. ~ Cc ~ti'i~
~,.2~ ~ 00 0.0:3
~o;c 0222"'2
c .D 0 2 0; 0; 0; ~ 0;
] g~ ] -:^~ ~~~~^
[ij (l).o '" ~.... .>-.<"l"I....
.0>-'", ~ (l)i3" (l)-o~
(flOlo--. tUr.ri^>-..r'->\d)~
...."1 i3 '" >-,....00-0"1 N?o
i'3 -0 >-, ~ 0 i3 ,,1 N ~ 2:> "'2 ~
~' 1;] ~ ~ ~ ::: "2 "2 "€ :3 E -0
N ~ -0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~
"2 E ~ ~ "'2 N 0 Ci ~ e 0' ....
N ~ "'2 N 0 "€ E E ~ <U '" 0
~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ <"l ~ ] ~ ~
o 0.... F= 0 w E Je Q C"! I.ti
E 00 Cil E ,Q ~ Q ;;., \0 ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~"
~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 - ~
00 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ q ~
~ 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 g
o ~ 0 0 0 0 000 g
o ~ g 0 ~ ~" 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0
o ~ 0 q ~ ~ ci 0 W ~ 0
~ .... ci '" '<t ~ ~ 0 ~ = b 0
00 ~ '" 00 W W 0 '"
w~w~ ;,; o.w..::: i:::i:5w
~ ~ '" '" ] ~ ~ '" -0 ~ (l) ~
t ~ t ~ ~ ~ u t ~ ~ ~ ~
8:: ;J e!"J] .c ~ .2 ~ ~ -, "~ 2'
~ ~ ~ ~ 00 0 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
N '<t '" \0 ~ 0 M '<t '" \0
000000
o 000 000 0 0 000
c c c ~ c c c c c c c c
m ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m <"l
000 0 000 0 000 0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ w w w w w w w w
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Q 0 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
<Ii
....
<"l
<1.1
>-,
I.()
'<t
I.()
I.()
N
'<t
co
Ell-
-l
<t:
f-
a
f-
o
<{
a..
~
(j)
W
0:::
W
~
Z
o I.!") 0 <0
<0 0> co .....
00>("") 0
1"--C0'<;f"OO
..... <0 ("") 0)
L!) C0 0 00
'<;f"...............
tA- foA- tA- tA-
1"--......0)0)
'<;f"'<;f"0'<;f"
("')0 I.D 0
/'-/'-coo
NOOO.....
O)L!)("")("")
tA- ...... ..... N
tA- foA- tA-
<.9
z
z
<{
::2:
w
0:::
W
U
z
::5
<{
co
1.D'<;f"
I.D 0)
C")'<;f"
1"--00
'<;f". N
......0
..... ......
tA- tA-
I.D
00
00
L!)
00
N
tA-
0.....
0.....
0......
foA- <0
o
'<;f"
I"--
.....
(J'7
00000/'-/'-......<00/'-000
OOOOOONO......O("')OOO
oooooOO<OL!)'<;f"OcooO)
tA-foA-tA-tA-tA-<O("')OCOO'<;f"0......
("')'<;f"'<;f"NL!)COOCO
OO'<;f"O...../'-OOoo
("')'<;f"O)'<;f"OOO)OO
tA-tA-tA-{J'7tA-foA-.....1.D
foA- tA-
o
<{
a..
---1
<{
a..
U
z
0:::
a..
00000("')("")0)
000000)/'-0)
00000......("")'<;f"
00000("')<00)
OOOOL!)COI.DI.D
OOOOL!)NCOI.DO)
OOlOI.DOO'<;f"("')tA-tA-
tA- foA- foA- tA- fi7 tA-
z
<x:
o
---1
---1
<{
Z
(9
0:::
o
'<;f"0("")
000<0
I.D 0 ("")
C") tA- I.D
I"-- ("")
00 .....
N tA-
tA-
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
OOOOI.DOOOOL!)
OOOOL!)NI.DOOO/,-
OOI.DL!)OO'<;f"I"--I.DO/,-OO
tA-foA-tA-tA-fi7tA-tA-.....tA-tA-
tA-
,--..,
;::;;- I.D ,--..,
'"' 0) 00
,--..,~O) 0)
("")..... 0)
...-... 0>0"-" ~
8 meo--.::::
00>'--'" 000 coo
............N,--.., ....~ 0)0
"" -- 0) N C 0) L-
0) Q) 0) 0) co -0 .... ,-
:s.........O)Uc.8ro0m
.......--..... co UO) c~
xCOc--E-m....... co
:::l Q) co X 0!;Q<~ e:::::!
Q)E.cco.......(/)o..-- c
m r- .... a. (/) ..9:! .- (/) -0 :;:;
c:.;:=;:::lo:::l:J..c- ........
m c.c....U Q)u m~~
(90 :J<x:::a E m o...co;::;:
l::: :2: !;Q ~ c Q) :J a. co """)
Q) l::: Q.; m ~ - co -
o...Q) 0)0 Q)90?f-;u?~
o..............c~/'-o......("')..J.
co.....cou....o.......................
~:2:CO(j)COOOOOO
<::> 0
00
00
00
00
00
00
..... --
tA- foA-
,--..,
0)
0)
0)
......
-- .--...
....0>
.-m 0)
o~
--
Q) x
c co
c a.
co 0
::2:~
I I
L!) co
..... ......
0<::>
ON
0.....
00
foA- 00
("')
/'-
0)
("')
tA-
o
o
o
o
o
00
0)
00
tA-
(j)
---1
~
o
~
o
o
o
N
(0
.,....
N
o
rJ)
x
<i
o
UJ
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND (GMEF)
LOAN STATUS
December 31, 1999
Economic Development Authority (EDA) was created in 1989.
APPROVED LOANS
Tapper/Genereux (1990)
Muller/Monti Theatre (1990)
Barger/Suburban #004 (1992)
Schoen/Aroplax #005 (1992)
Birkeland/Custom Canopy #006 (1993)
Demeules/Standard Iron #007 (1993)
Blue Chip DevNector Tool #010 (1995)
Tapper's #011 (1996)
Standard Iron/Seluemed #013 (1996)
T J Martin #014 (1998)
Mainline Distr #015 (1999)
Aroplax #016 (1999)
$88,000.00
$50,000.00
$50,000.00
$85,000.00
$42,500.00
$75,000.00
$50,000.00
$100,000.00
$70,000.00
$87,500.00
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
TOTAL APPROVED LOANS
$898,000.00
LOAN DISBURSEMENTS
Liquor Fund:
1991 to Tapper
1992 to Suburban
1992 to Aroplax
1994 to Standard Iron
1995 to Vector Tool
1996 to Standard Iron
Total Liquor Fund
UDAG Fund:
1991 to Tapper
1991 to Muller
1992 to Aroplax
1993 to Custom Canopy
1996 to Tapper's
1999 to Mainline
1999 to Aroplax (016
Total UDAG Fund
SCERG Fund:
1998 to T J Martin
1999 to Mainline
Total SCERG Fund
$73,000.00
$50,000.00
$65,000.00
$75,000.00
$50,000.00
$70,000.00
$383,000.00
$15,000.00
$50,000.00
$20,000.00
$42,500.00
$100,000.00
$39,546.38
$100,000.00
$367,046.38
$87,500.00
$60,453.62
$147,953.62
TOTAL LOAN DISBURSEMENTS
$898,000.00
GMEF.xls: 02/16/2000
2000
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACTIVITY REPORT
MEETING DATE
SUBJECTS
Annual Meeting
February 23, 1999
Approved GMEF Loan No. 015 for Mainline Distribution
Properties, LLC dba Groebner & Associates, Inc., $100,000
real estate acquisition. 11 immediate new jobs @ average
hourly wage of $19.90 excluding benefits. An additional 2
jobs at average wage per hour of $1 0-$12 excluding
benefits within two years.
EDA Officers elected for 1999:
President Ron Hoglund
Vice President Barb. Schwientek
Treasurer Rick Wolfsteller
Assistant Treasurer Ken Maus
Secretary Ollie Koropchak
Accepted EDA 1998 Year-End Financial Statements and
Activity Report. All existing GMEF loan paybacks are
current.
Amended GMEF Guidelines to include: At least 90% of the
jobs to pay a rate equal to or greater than 160% of the
Federal minimum wage, exclusive of benefits, for individuals
over the age of20 during the term of the assistance.
Amended DMRF Guidelines to delete MCP from page 4
and 5, and to amend page 4, no. 1 under application process
to read: The applicant will meet with city staff to obtain
information abut the DMRF, discuss the proposed project,
and obtain a funding application form and a copy of section
3,4, and 5 of the Design Guidelines of the Downtown and
Riverfront Revitalization Plan of the Monticello
Comprehensive Plan. The application form to state that
routine maintenance and insured losses will not be covered.
Adopted the EDA five priorities to achieve in
redevelopment of the North Anchor. Darrin Lahr and Bill
Demeules appointed to the North Anchor Committee.
1
EDA Agenda - 2/22/00
7. Consideration to review vear.end balances of the GMEF. DMRF.UDAG. and
SCERG Funds.
A. Reference and Background:
All GMEF loan payback payments are current as accounted for in the 1999 year-end
statements. The Aroplax machinery and equipment loan was paid-off in November 1999
and we anticipate to collect the balloon payment from the Vector Tool real estate loan of
$50,000 in November 2000. Principal and interest payback is anticipated to commence
March 2000 on the $87,500 T. 1. Martin loan as the principal payback was deferred for
two years per the EDA. The Twin City Die Castings $100,000 machinery and equipment
loan was approved by the EDA in 1999 and anticipated to close spring of2000.
Two approved DMRF grants were disbursed in 1999 to Hamond and Topel. No DMRF
grants or loans were approved in 1999. The EDA did commit to paying Claybaugh
Preservation Architecture $3,000 for design concepts to encourage facade improvements.
With the disbursement of the Mainline loan, the SCREG-Aroplax account was closed and
the Mainline loan payback will recycle into the EDA-GMEF. The remaining interest
income - investment will be transferred in 2000.
The balance of the Mainline loan was disbursed from the UDAG fund account and the
second Aroplax loan was disbursed from the UDAG fund account. With the upcoming
disbursement of the TCDC loan it is anticipated the UDAG fund account will be closed
meaning all other EDA sources offunds will be recycled into the EDA-GMEF account.
When the $500,000 State Grant to the City closes in early 2000 because this is monies
from Federal dollars, the City win retain the entire $500,000 principal and interest of 4%
amortized over seven years. However, because this is Federal dollars the payback dollars
can not recycle into the EDA-GMEF account. And forever, each new loan by the City
from these Federal dollars must meet Federal regulations and accountability such as low to
moderate in jobs, Davis-Bacon Rules, etc.
You will note the total dollars available to the EDA for GMEF and DMRF programs less
the commitment to TCDC and Claybaugh is $585,615.94 as ofJanuary 1, 2000.
No action necessary by the EDA.
1
SOURCES OF FUNDS
January 1, 2000
GMEF Cash Balance
$461,143.12
DMRF Cash Balance
$174,078.08
UDAG Cash Balance
$ 43,652.79
SCREG-Aroplax Cash Balance
$ 9,741.95 (1998 Int. Income - Invest.)
TOTAL
$688,615.94
LESS COMMITMENTS
TCDC
Claybaugh Architecture
$100,000.00
$ 3,000.00
BALANCE
$585,615.94
tate $500,000 Grant 4% interest rate amortized over 10 years ballooned in
'7 years commencing July 2000. This remains as City Funds for revolving
loan fund.
SMALL CITIES ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT (SCERG) - AROPLAX
FINANCIAL REPORT
December 31, 1999
Payback began in December, 1992 for 7 years ending in November, 1999.
Annual principal and interest payback total is $29,80 IAO.
First $100,000 principal payback ends January, 1997.
GRANT TOTALS
Principal
Interest
TOTAL
ORIGINAL PAID REMAINING
$170,000.00 $175,615.55 ($5,615.55)
$37,969.92 $24,018.99 $13,950.93
$207,969.92 $199,634.54 $8,335.38
Jan. 1997 GMEF STATE
$170,000.00 $100,000.00 $70,000.00
$29,634.75 $24,018.99 $5,615.76
$199,634.75 $124,018.99 $75,615.76
Principal
Interest
TOTAL
Grant must be expended by December 31, 1994, up to $170,000.
EXPENDED:
$116,556.75
$16,996.18
$12,356.59
$4,021.10
$15,132.50
$4,936.88
$170,000.00
1993
1993
1993
1/18/94
4/13/94
7/20/94
REVENUES
Principal Payback
Interest Payback
Interest Income - Investment:
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
TOTAL REVENUES
$175,615.55
$24,018.99
$1,061.92
$1,256.00
$5,475.97
$7,381.27
$8,770.56
$9,741.95
$233,322.21
EXPENDITURES
Payback to State
Transfer to GMEF
Transfer to GMEF
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$75,626.64
$87,500.00
$60,453.62
$223,580.26
$9,741.95
FUND BALANCE FOR SMALL CITIES GRANT
SCERG-A.xls: 02/16/2000
URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACTION GRANT (UDAG) - FSI
FINANCIAL REPORT
December 3 1, 1999
Payback began in January, 1988 for 12 years ending in January, 2000.
Annual principal and interest payback total is $27,971AO.
GRANT TOTALS
Principal
Interest
TOTAL
REVENUES
Principal Payback
Interest Payback
I nterest Income - Investment:
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
Transfer from GMEF - [company]
TOTAL REVENUES
EXPENDITURES
1991 Transfer to GMEF
1992 Transfer to GMEF
1993 Transfer to GMEF
1996 Transfer to GMEF (Tapper's)
1999 Transfer to GMEF (Aroplax)
1999 Transfer to GMEF (Mainline)
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
ORIGINAL
$256,957.71
$78,700.35
$335,658.06
PAID
$256,957.71
$77,315.88
$334,273.59
REMAINING
$0.00
$1,384.47
$1,384.47
$256,957.71
$77,315.88
$6,342.02
$8,593.59
$8,436.32
$5,227.10
$3,756.77
$12,297.72
$9,775.19
$9,007.60
$12,989.27
$410,699.17
$65,000.00
$20,000.00
$42,500.00
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
$39,546.38
$367,046.38
FUND BALANCE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
$43,652.79
UDAG.xls: 02/16/2000
EDA Agenda - 2/22/00
8. Consideration to review the GMEF Guidelines for possible amendments.
A. Reference and BacklZround:
To comply with the GMEF Guidelines, page 7, Fund Guideline Modification: At a
minimum, the EDA shall review the Fund Guidelines on an annual basis; therefore, this
agenda item appears before the EDA. And no changes to the GMEF Guidelines shall be
instituted without prior approval of the Council.
Attached is a copy of the current GMEF Guidelines for your review. On February 18, the
Industrial Marketing Committee is hosting a Local Lenders Breakfast for purpose of
goodwill and to market the City's funding programs: TIF, GMEF, and DMRF. Perhaps,
the lenders will give some suggestions as to ways to improve the EDA programs or
process. Input will be bought forward to the EDA. EDA Chair Hoglund will attend the
breakfast.
Previously, the EDA has discussed LOAN SIZE criteria, page 5. The definition of the
revolving loan fund balance means the EDA cash-in-bank. However, the EDA has made a
commitment to the DMRF through December 31,2000. Generally for marketing
purposes, I market $100,000 as the maximum loan. In today's world with the costs of
construction and equipment increasing and project sizes increasing a $100,000 loan is
peanuts from the prospective of the borrower and not worth the time. Additionally, I'm
aware that the CMIF increased their loan size to $150,000 and Big Lake recently
established a revolving loan fund program with a maximum loan amount of $200,000.
Under the BUSINESS ELIGIBILITY criteria marketing a $200,000 maximum loan
amount means at least 20 new jobs or an increase of at least $800,000 in property market
valuation must be meet.
Other questions: Can the EDA cash-in-bank afford a maximum loan amount of $200,000
or $150,000? How might the increase of interest rates by lenders effect the marketing of
the EDA progam?
From a marketing prospective of a business, to hear a maximum loan amount of $200,000
is a greater incentive.
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to recommend amending the GMEF Guidelines, EDA Business Subsidy
Criteria, calling for a public hearing of
2. A motion no need to amend the GMEF Guidelines, EDA Business Subsidy
Criteria.
1
EDA Agenda - 2/22/00
3. A motion of support to market the GMEF loan size as a maximum amount of
4. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
The recommendation is Alternative No.2 and 3. In lieu of increased project costs and
business recruitment competition, it is recommended to support increasing the maximum
amount of the loan for marketing purposes.
D. SupportinlZ Data:
Copy of the EDA Business Subsidy Criteria.
2
MONTICELLO
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
Business Subsidy Criteria
Public Hearing and Adoption the 2.!...- day of Augus t
, 1999.
1. PURPOSE
1:01 The purpose ofthis document is to establish the Economic Development Authority's
criteria for granting of business subsidies, as defined in Minnesota Statutes 116J.993,
Subdivision 3, for private development. This criteria shall be used as a guide in processing
and reviewing applications requesting business subsidies.
1: 02 The criteria set forth in this document are guidelines only. The Economic Development
Authority reserves the right in its discretion to approve business subsides that vary from
the criteria stated herein if the Economic Development Authority determines that the
subsidy nevertheless serves a public purpose.
1 : 03 The Economic Development Authority may amend the business subsidy criteria at any
time. Amendments to these criteria are subject to public hearing requirements pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 through 1161.994.
2. STATUTORY LIMITATIONS
2:01 In accordance with the Business Subsidy Criteria, Business Subsidy requests must comply
with applicable State Statutes. The Economic Development Authority ability to grant
business subsidies is governed by the limitations established in Minnesota Statutes
116J.993 through 116J.994.
3. PUBLIC POLICY REQUIREMENT
3:01 All business subsides must meet a public purpose other than increasing the tax base. Job
retention may only be used as a public purpose in cases where job loss is imminent and
demonstrable.
1
Monticello City Hall, 250 E. Broadway, PO Box 1147, Monticello, MN 55362-9245. (612) 295-2711 . Fax: (612) 295-4404
tlffi",j:Io ("\f Pnhllr. WArL--c 0(\0 r:.....lf rnl1f"C'Ql DrI \,,f("\ol"ltll""pll,'\ \,fl\.T .c;.:;:1t;,") . 11:.1'" ..,o&:::: ""11'7(\.. t:i'""...." '';'1." '1"71 "):,.,....,..,
EDA Business Subsidy Criteria
4. BUSINESS SUBSIDY APPROVAL CRITERIA
4:01 All new projects approved by the Economic Development Authority should meet the
following minimum approval criteria. However, it should not be presumed that a project
meeting these criteria will automatically be approved. Meeting these criteria creates no
contractual right on the part of any potential developer or the Economic Development
Authority.
4:02 The project must be in accord with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, or
required changes to the plan and ordinances must be under active consideration by the
City at, the time of approval.
4: 03 Prior to approval of a business subsidies financing plan and when deemed appropriate by
the Economic Development Authority, the developer shall provide any required market
and financial feasibility studies, appraisals, soil boring, information provided to private
lenders for the project, and other information or data as requested.
4: 04 A recipient of a business subsidy must make a commitment to continue operations at the
site where the subsidy is used for a least five years after the benefit date.
4:05 Recipients of any business subsidy will be required to meet wage and job goals determined
by the Economic Development Authority on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to
the nature of the development, the purpose of the subsidy, local economic conditions, and
situational circumstances.
5. GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND PROJECT EVALUATION
CRITERIA
5:01 The Economic Development Authority will utilize the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund
to support the community's long-term economic goals.
5:02 Each Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund subsidy will be analyzed and evaluated by the
Economic Development Authority. Each project shall be measured against the general
criteria in Sections 1 through 4 and the specific criteria in this Section 5 applicable to the
Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund subsidies.
5:03 Following are the evaluation criteria that will be used by the Economic Development
Authority .
2
EDA Business Subsidy Criteria
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND GUIDELINES
CITY OF MONTICELLO
250 EAST BROADWAY
MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 55362
(612) 295-2711
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund (GMEF) is to encourage economic
development by supplementing conventional financing sources available to existing and new
businesses. Through this program administered by the Economic Development Authority and
participating lending institution(s), loans are made to businesses to help them meet a portion of their
financing needs. All loans must serve a public purpose by complying with four or more of the
criteria noted in the next section. In all cases, it is mandatory that criteria #1 be satisfied, which
requires the creation of new jobs. It is the responsibility of the EDA to assure that loans meet the
public purpose standard and comply with all other GMEF policies as defined in this document.
Along with establishing the definition of public purpose, this document is designed to outline the
process involved in obtaining GMEF financing.
DEFINITION OF PUBLIC PURPOSE
1. To provide loans for credit worthy businesses that create new jobs.
(a) One job is equivalentto a total of 37.5 hours per week.
(b) At least 90% of the jobs to pay a rate equal to or greater than 160% of the federal
minimum wage, exclusive of benefits, for individuals over the age of20 during the
term of the assistance. Annual written reports are required until termination date.
Failure to meet the job and wage level goals require partial or full repayment of
the assistance with interest.
2. To provide loans for credit worthy businesses that would increase the community tax base.
3. To assist new or existing industrial or commercial businesses to improve or expand their
operations. Considerations for loans shall take into account factors including, but not limited
to, the nature and extent of the business, the product or service involved, the present
availability of the product or service within the city of Monticello, the compatibility of the
proposed business as it relates to the comprehensive plan and existing zoning policies, and
the potential for adverse environmental effects of the business, if any.
4. To provide loans to be used as a secondary source of financing that is intended to supplement
conventional financing (bank financing).
5. To provide loans in situations in which a funding gap exists.
6. To provide funds for economic development that could be used to assist in obtaining other
funds such as Small Business Administration loans, federal and state grants, etc.
EDA Business Subsidy Criteria
THE GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISES
REVOL VING LOAN FUND POLICIES
I. BUSINESS ELIGIBILITY
*
*
Industrial businesses
Non-competitive commercial businesses which enhance the community
Businesses located within the city of Monticello
Credit worthy existing businesses
Non-credit worthy start-up businesses with worthy feasibility studies (Deny all
historical non-credit worthy businesses)
$10,000 loan per each job created, or $5,000 per every $20,000 increase in property
market valuation, or $5,000 per every $20,000 increase in personal property used for
business purposes, whichever is higher.
*
*
*
*
II. FINANCING METHOD
*
COMP ANION
DIRECT LOAN -
Example: Equity 20%, RLF 30%, and bank 50%.
(All such loans may be subordinated to the primary
lender(s) if requested by the primary lender(s). The
RLF loan is leveraged and the lower interest rate of
the RLF lowers the effective interest rate on the entire
proj ect.)
*
RLF buys a portion of the loan (the RLF is not in a
subordinate position, no collateral is required by the
RLF, and the loan provides a lower interest rate).
PARTICIPATION LOAN -
*
RLF guarantees a portion of the bank loan. (Personal
and real estate guarantees handled separately.)
GUARANTEE LOANS -
III. USE OF PROCEEDS
*
Real property acquisition and development
Real property rehabilitation (expansion or improvements)
Machinery and equipment
*
*
EDA Business Subsidy Criteria
IV. TERMS AND CONDITIONS
* LOAN SIZE - Minimum of$5,000 and maximum not to exceed 50% of the
remaining revolving loan fund balance; for example, if the
remaining revolving loan fund balance is $50,000, the
maximum loan issuance is $25,000.
* LEVERAGING - Minimum 60% private/public non-GMEF
Maximum 30% public (GMEF)
Minimum 10% equity EDA loan
* LOAN TERM - Personal property term not to exceed life of equipment
(generally 5-7 years). Real estate property maximum of 5-
year maturity amortized up to 30 years. Balloon payment at
5 years.
* INTEREST RATE - Fixed rate not less than 2% below Minneapolis prime rate.
Prime rate per National Bank of Minneapolis on date of EDA
loan approval.
* LOAN FEE - Minimum fee of$200 but not to exceed 1.5% of the total loan
project. * Fees are to be documented and no duplication of
fees between the lending institution and the RLF. Loan fee
may be incorporated into project cost. EDA retains the right
to reduce or waive loan fee or portion of loan fee.
*Fee to be paid by applicant to the EDA within 5
working days after City Council approval of GMEF
loan. Nonrefundable.
* PREP A YMENT
POLICY - No penalty for prepayment.
* DEFERRAL OF
PAYMENTS - 1. Approval of the EDA membership by majority vote.
2. Extend the balloon if unable to refinance, verification
letter from two lending institutions subject to Board
approval.
* LATE PAYMENT Failure to pay principal or interest when due may
POLICY result in the loan being immediately called.
EDA Business Subsidy Criteria
*
INTEREST
LIMITATION ON
GUARANTEED
LOANS-
Subject to security and/or reviewal by EDA.
*
ASSUMABILITY
OF LOAN-
None.
*
BUSINESS EQUITY
REQUIREMENTS -
Subject to type of loan; Board of Directors will
determine case by case, analysis under normal lending
guidelines.
*
COLLATERAL-
*
Liens on real property in project (mortgage
deed).
Liens on real property in business (mortgage
deed).
Liens on real property held personally (subject
to Board of Directors - homestead exempt).
Machinery and equipment liens (except
equipment exempt from bankruptcy).
Personalandlorcorporate guarantees (requires
unlimited personal guarantees).
*
*
*
*
*
NON-PERFORMANCE -
An approved GMEF loan shall be null and void if
funds are not drawn upon or disbursed within 180
days from date of ED A approval.
*
NON-PERFORMANCE
EXTENSION -
The 180-day non-performance date can be extended
up to an additional 120 days.
1. A written request is received 30 days prior to
expiration of the ISO-day non-performance
date.
2. Approval of the EDA membership by majority
vote.
*
LEGAL FEE -
Responsibility of the GMEF applicant.
The Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund is operated as an equal opportunity program. All applicants
shall have equal access to GMEF funds regardless of race, sex, age, marital status, or other personal
characteristics.
EDA Business Subsidy Criteria
ORGANIZATION
The Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund is administered by the City of Monticello Economic
Development Authority (EDA), which is a seven-member board consisting oftwo Council members
and five appointed members. EDA members are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City
Council. Formal meetings are held on a quarterly basis. Please see the by-laws of the EDA for more
information on the structure of the organization that administers the Greater Monticello Enterprise
Fund.
PARTICIPATING LENDING INSTITUTION(S)
1. Participating lending institutions(s) shall be determined by the GMEF applicant.
2. Participating lending institution(s) shall cooperate with the EDA and assist in carrying out
the policies of the GMEF as approved by the City Council.
3. Participating lending institution(s) shall analyze the formal application and indicate to the
EDA the level at which the lending institution will participate in the finance package.
LOAN APPLICA TION/ ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
The EDA desires to make the GMEF loan application process as simple as possible. However,
certain procedures must be followed prior to EDA consideration of a loan request. Information
regarding the program and procedures for obtaining a loan are as follows:
City Staff Duties:
The Economic Development Director, working in conjunction with the Assistant City Administrator,
shall carry out GMEF operating procedures as approved by the EDA and Council. Staff is
responsible for assisting businesses in the loan application process and will work closely with
applicants in developing the necessary information.
Apolication Process:
1. Applicant shall complete a preliminary loan application. Staff will review application for
consistency with the policies set forth in the Greater Monticello Fund Guidelines. Staff
consideration of the preliminary loan application should take approximately one week.
Staffwill ask applicant to contact a lending institution regarding financing needs and indicate
to applicant that further action by the EDA on the potential loan will require indication of
support from a lending institution.
2. If applicant gains initial support from lending institution and if the preliminary loan
application is approved, applicant is then asked to complete a formal application. If the
preliminary loan application is not approved by staff, the applicant may request that the EDA
consider approval of the preliminary application at the next regularly scheduled meeting of
the EDA.
EDA Business Subsidy Criteria
3. If the preliminary loan application is approved, applicant shall completea formal application.
Formal application shall include a business plan which will include its management
structure, market analysis, and financial statement. Like documentation necessary for
obtaining the bank loan associated with the proposal is acceptable. Attached with each
formal application is a written release of information executed by the loan applicant.
4. City staff will meet with applicant and other participating lender(s) to refine the plan for
financing the proposed enterprise.
5. City staff shall analyze the formal application and financial statements contained therein to
determine if the proposed business and finance plan is viable. Staff may, at its discretion,
accept the findings of a banking institution regarding applicant credit and financial viability
of the project. After analysis is complete, City staff shall submit a written recommendation
to the EDA. A decision regarding the application shall be made by the EDA within 60 days
of the submittal of a completed formal application.
6. The EDA shall have authority to approve or deny loans; however, within 21 days of EDA
approval, the City Council may reverse a decision by the EDA to approve a loan if it is
determined by Council that such loan was issued in violation of GMEF guidelines.
7. Prior to issuance of an approved loan, the City Attorney shall review and/or prepare all
contracts, legal documents, and intercreditor agreements. After such review is complete, the
City shall issue said loan.
ORIGINAL REVOLVING LOAN FUNDING
"LETTER OF CREDIT" FROM MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL - $200,000
SOURCE - City Liquor Store Fund
City shall transfer needed loan amount from existing accounts at such time that individual loans are
approved. Revenue created through this program shall be under the control ofthe EDA and shall
not be transferred to City funds unless the City Council determines that reserves generated are not
necessary for the successful operation of the Authority. If such is the case, such funds must be
transferred to the debt service funds of the City to be used solely to reduce tax levies for bonded
indebtedness of the City (see Section 5 B of the ordinance establishing the Monticello EDA).
REPORTING
1. Staff shall submit quarterly summaries and/or annual report detailing the status of the
Monticello Enterprise Fund.
FUND GUIDELINES MODIFICATION
1. At a minimum, the EDA shall review the Fund Guidelines on an annual basis. No changes
to the GMEF guidelines shall be instituted without prior approval of the City Council.
EDA Business Subsidy Criteria
LOAN ADMINISTRA TlON
1. City staff shall service City loan, shall monitor City position with regard to the loan, and
shall assure City compliance with intercreditor agreement.
2. All loan documents shall include an intercreditor agreement which must include the
following:
A. Definition of loan default, agreements regarding notification of default.
B. Agreements between lending institution and City regarding reproduction of pertinent
information regarding the loan.
3. All loan documentation shall include agreements between borrower and lenders regarding
release of privacy regarding the status of the loan.
EDA Agenda - 2/22/00
9. Consideration to ratifv the Tared Area of the DMRF Guidelines and review for
other possible amendments.
A. Reference and background:
To comply with the DMRF Guidelines, page 5, Fund Guideline Modification: At a
minimum, the EDA shall review the Fund Guidelines on an annual basis: therefore, this
appears before the EDA. No changes to the DMRF guidelines shall be instituted without
prior approval of the City Council.
The EDA is requested to ratify an earlier poll of members agreeing to enlarge the
TARGET AREA, page 1, of the DMRF Guidelines. As preliminary discussions began
with the potential purchase of the current Senior Citizen Lounge on Cedar Street by
Dennis Anderson from the City, DAT and the MCP began marketing the DMRF.
Knowing the target area description did not include the current senior lounge, some
members ofthe EDA were polled by telephone or in person. At least 4 members saw no
problem did amending the guidelines, one member opposed.
As indicated early by Pam Campbell, DAT Chair, Dennis Anderson is with the
understanding the guidelines will be ratified to include all of Block 53 or at least the senior
building property and is one of the three buildings on-line for design concept drawings
from Claybaugh.
The EDA might also consider including all of Block 34 in the Target Area. The Council
will need to approve amending the DMRF Guidelines.
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to ratify amending the Target Area ofthe DMRF Guidelines to include
all of Block 53.
2. A motion to amend the Target Area of the DMRF Guidelines to include all of
Block 34.
3.
A motion to amend
of the DMRF Guidelines.
4. A motion of no action or no need to amend the DMRF Guidelines.
5. A motion to table any action.
EDA Agenda - 2/22/00
C. Recommendation:
Recommendation is Alternative No. 1 since this is a ratification of a previous poll. The
recommendation also includes Alternative No.2 for consistency of abutting blocks East
Broadway.
D. Supporting Data:
Copy ofDMRF Guidelines and Target Area map current and proposed.
DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO REVITALIZATION FUND GUIDELINES
CITY OF MONTICELLO
250 EAST BROADWAY, POBOX 1147
MONTICELLO, MN 55362
(612) 271-3208
PURPOSE
The Monticello Downtown and Riverfront Plan provides a guide for development in the
downtown area. As part of its efforts to implement the Plan., the Monticello Economic
Development Authority (EDA) offers financial assistance and incentives to property owners
through a program known as the Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund (DMRF).
The DMRF seeks to promote the revitalization of downtown Monticello by:
*
Enhancing storefronts and facades in accordance with the design guidelines in the
Plan.
*
Encouraging the rehabilitation of building interiors to bring them into compliance
with local codes and ordinances.
*
Encouraging building rehabilitation to provide space suitable for the proposed use.
*
Providing funding to close the "gap" between financing needed to undertake the
project and the amount raised by equity and private loans.
*
Providing economic incentives to locate businesses in the Downtown.
These guidelines describe the funding parameters and eligibility criteria for programs offered by
the EDA. Meeting the eligibility criteria does not entitle an applicant to funding. The distribution
offunds is the sole decision of the EDA.
TARGET AREA
These financial incentives and assistance will be available for existing buildings within the planning
area described in the Downtown and Riverfront Plan. Preference will be given to property
located in Lots 6 through 15, Block 34, Lots 1 through 10, Block 53, and Blocks 35,36,51, and
52, Original Plat, City of Monticello.
1
Dl\1RF GUIDELINES
FACADE GRANTS
The EDA may provide matching grants in the following amounts:
*
Up to $2,500 for eligible improvements to the front facade and signage.
*
Up to $2,500 for eligible improvements to promote improvements to the rear
sections of the buildings.
*
Up to $2,500 for eligible improvements to the side facade (if applicable).
To be eligible for grant funds, projects must meet the following criteria:
*
Improvements must comply with applicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances including building permits and inspections.
*
The grant will match private investment up to the stated limit.
*
Grant funds will be provided after completion of the improvements.
*
Applicants will provide the EDA with documentation of the actual cost of the
improvements.
Meeting the eligibility criteria does not entitle an applicant to funding. The distribution of grant
funds is the sole decision of the EDA.
REHABILIT ATION LOAN
The EDA may provide loans for the rehabilitation of existing buildings. The maximum loan
amount is the lesser of25% of total cost of improvements or $20,000. To be eligible for
rehabilitation loans, projects must meet the following criteria:
*
Improvements must comply with applicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances including building permits and guidelines.
*
Applicants must provide proof of financing for costs not funded by the grant.
*
Loan amortization schedule not exceed ten (10) years, balloon payment in five (5)
years.
2
DMRF GUIDELINES
*
The interest rate on the loan will be two percent (2%) below the Prime Rate. The
EDA may reduce the interest rate to encourage the reuse of a currently vacant
building, the retention of an existing business, or the creation of a new business.
*
The rehabilitation loan will be in a subordinated position to the lender.
FEE REIMBURSEMENT
The EDA may grant reimbursement of City fees associated with undertaking improvement and
revitalization projects in the downtown area. The amount of the reimbursement will be the
equivalent often percent (10%) of the total cost of the improvements up to a maximum of$500.
Fees eligible for reimbursement include building permits, other city inspections, and land use
ordinances. To be eligible for fee reimbursement, projects must meet the following criteria:
*
Projects must comply with applicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances including building permits and inspections.
*
Reimbursement will be made after completion of the improvements.
*
Reimbursement will be based on documentation of actual improvement costs and
fees paid.
MAXIl\1UM FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
The maximum amount of financial assistance available to each rehabilitation property is an amount
not to exceed $25,000.
NON-PERFORMANCE
Approved DMRF shall be null and void iffunds are not drawn or disbursed within 270 days from
date of ED A approval.
ORGANIZATION
The Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund is administered by the City of Monticello
Economic Development Authority (EDA), which is a seven-member board consisting of two
Council members and five appointed members. EDA members are appointed by the Mayor and
confinned by the City Council. F onnal meetings are held on a quarterly basis. Please see the
by-laws of the EDA for more information on the structure of the organization that administers the
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund (DMRF).
3
DMRF GUIDELINES
P ARTICIP ATING LENDING INSTITUTION
1. Participating lending institution shall be determined by the DMRF applicant.
2. Participating lending institution shall cooperate with the EDA and assist in carrying out
the policies of the DMRF as approved by the City Council.
3. Participating lending institution shall analyze the funding application and indicate to the
EDA the level at which the lending institution will participate in the finance package.
LOAN APPLICA nON/ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
The EDA desires to make the DMRF application process as simple as possible. However, certain
procedures must be followed prior to EDA consideration of a loan request. Information
regarding the program and procedures for obtaining funding is as follows:
City Staff Duties:
The Economic Development Director, working in conjunction with the Assistant City
Administrator, shall carry out DMRF operating procedures as approved by the EDA and Council.
Staifis responsible for assisting an applicant in the application process and will work with the
applicant in development of the necessary information.
Application Process:
1. The applicant will meet with city staff to obtain information about the DMRF, discuss the
proposed project, and obtain a funding application form and a copy of Section 3, 4, and 5
ofthe Design Guidelines of the Downtown and Riverfront Plan within the Monticello
Comprehensive Plan.
Staffwill direct the applicant to contact the Design Advisory Team as a resource for
suggestions and review of improvements which comply with the design guidelines, codes,
and ordinances of the Downtown and Riverfront Plan within the Monticello
Comprehensive Plan.
Staff will request the applicant contact a lending institution regarding financing needs and
indicate to applicant that further action by the EDA on the potential loan will require
indication of support from a lending institution.
2. The applicant shall complete a DMRF application. Staffwill review the application for
consistency with the policies set forth in the Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund
Guidelines.
4
DMRF GUIDELINES
3. City staff will accept the findings of a lending institution regarding applicant credit and
financial viability of the project. EDA approval will require a letter of support from the
lending institution. Upon receipt of the letter of support, City staff shall submit a written
recommendation to the EDA and a decision regarding the application shall be made by the
EDA within 14 days of submittal of the letter of support from the lending institution.
4. The ED A shall have authority to approve or deny the financial assistance ofthe
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund.
5. The EDA shall not disburse approved DMRF without a written acknowledgment from the
Design Advisory Team that construction of the improvements are complete and comply
with applicable design guidelines and all codes and ordinances.
6. The EDA shall not disburse approved DMRF (grants and reimbursement) without certified
documentation of the actual costs of the improvements and completion of the
improvements.
7. The EDA shall not disburse the approved DMRF (loan) without proof of financing for
costs not funded by the grant and execution of the loan closing documents.
ORIGINAL FUNDING
SOURCE - Economic Development Authority, Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund
AMOUNT - $200,000 (For Year Ending December 31, 1999).
The EDA shall disburse approved DMRF dollars from the payback of GMEF Liquor Fund dollars
at such time the approved DMRF is disbursed.
REPORTING
Staff shall submit quarterly summaries and/or an annual report detailing the status of the DMRF.
FUND GUIDELINE MODIFICATION
At a minimum, the EDA shall review the Fund Guidelines on an annual basis. No changes to the
DMRF guidelines shall be instituted without prior approval ofthe City Council.
5
DMRF GUIDELINES
LOAN ADMINISTRATION
1. City staff shall service and monitor all loans, matching grants, and fee reimbursements.
2. All loan documents shall include at a minimum, a note and mortgage.
DMRF Guidelines 7/97
DMRF Guidelines amended 2/98
DMRF Guidelines amended 5/98
DMRF Guidelines amended 3/99
6
RGET AREA
CURRENT TA
RGET AREA
PROPOSED TA J
c:J
GJ.....'...
,.
,.,liio<"
'.
.,
..
'.
.,
..
'.
~ ~.-"i T:.''''\
~ t~. .'.
NO. 94
I
11-17-99 11:58
From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN
+SIZ3379310
Monticello EDA
Ollie t<Ortlpchak
MN32S.00006 General
AugUSl31, 1999
MonticellO EDA
Ollie KoropC'hak
PO, BOA 1147
Monticello, MN 55362-9245
Page. 2
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South SiAm Street
Suite 470
Mmneapolls, MN 55402
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
SUite 470
MinneapoliS, MN 55402
(612) 337-9300
41-1225694
SeptemOer 3, 1999
In'oOice .. 4061
MN32s.oa006 General
Through August 31, 1999
For All Legal Se~Cl!!S As Follows'
8/27/1999 SJ8 Re\llew EDA Business Sl.lOSldies po"c)'
Tota' Services:
T-079 P,01/01 F-SZl
E:Q~
~
~~~
1P AST ]D)U}W
Hours
025
Amount
3475
34.75
Total Services and Disburaements :
34.75
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GENERAL FUND
250 EAST BROADWAY
MONTICEllO, MN 55362
75-1664
----g;o
NO. 46187
MARQUETTE BANK - MONTICELLO
P 0, BOX 729
MONTICELLO, MN 55362
DATE
CHECK NO.
AMOUNT
12/06/99
46187
$100.000.00
ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND XX/100********************
PAY 10
THE
ORDER
OF
AROPLAX CORPORATION AND
STERNS BANK. N.A.
~,'~;
/ /t-,-:;;:::'''p' 4
~>1<l:.(_/ - '-"./) ~.. ,,,r
/~(; /)j;;;;;;;;~
II- 0 5 7 2 5 711- I: 0 g ~ 0 ~ b b .... 71:
7 bOO 0 ~ 711-
ACCOUNT I P.O. I INVOICE I DESCRIPTION I AMOUNT
UDAG FUND
GMEF 016
...
.J
CITY OF MONTICEllO
October 5, 1999
--
MONTICELLO
Mr. Robert J. Claybaugh
Claybaugh Preservation Architecture, Inc.
361 West Government Street
Taylors Falls, MN 55084
Dear Bob:
On behalf of the Monticello Economic Development Authority (EDA) and the Design Advisory Team
(DAT), thank you for responding to the request for proposal from Pam Campbell dated September 8, 1999.
At the EOA meeting of September 28, 1999, the commissioners accepted the request for proposal from
Claybaugh Preservation Architecture, Inc. and agreed to fund up to $3,000 for preparation of three facade
design concepts. OAT was directed to make the selection of the three buildings based on the level of
interest of property owners to proceed with facade improvements. Pam will be your direct contact and
invoices up to $3,000 can be mailed directly to me at City Hall.
In the future and upon completion of these projects, perhaps, the EDA will again be willing to fund the
preparation of additional design concept drawings.
The EOA and OAT look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
Cj~ '<d\cQ~~
Ollie Koropchak
Executive Director
c:
File V
DAT
Monticello City Hall. 250 E. Rnmdwnv PO Rnx 11117 Mnnti",.lIn MN 'i'i,,,')..Q,)I1'i. ("1,), ')0<;_')"711 . r:;~v. (hl")\ ")0<; AA"A
October 13, 1999
--
MONTICELLO
Mr. Ted Mateski, President
Systematic Refrigeration, Inc.
11660 Troy Lane North
Dayton, MN 55369
Dear Ted:
Members of the Monticello Prospect Team enjoyed meeting you and Ed Sorgatz, Olson General
Contractors, Inc., during your site visit to the City of Monticello on October 7. Those of us, who
had the opportunity to visit the existing Systematic Refrigeration, Inc. facility, found your
manufacturing business to meet the goals and objectives of the City of Monticello.
After consideration and based on your plans to construct a 60,000 square foot office and
manufacturing facility on approximately 8.5 acres ofland and your plans to create the job and
wage goals as discussed, the City of Monticello is prepared to offer up-front Tax Increment
Financing (TIF) assistance in an amount not-to-exceed $300,000 for land and utility trunk fee
costs. This offer is subject to a credit-worthy analysis of the company financial statements and
execution of a Contract for Private Redevelopment including an Assessment Agreement and Tax
Increment Guarantee.
Also, the City of Monticello is prepared to offer a $100,000 low-interest loan for real estate or
machinery/equipment.
In addition to funding programs, the City of Monticello offers amenities to meet the needs and
enjoyment of your employees and their families. Enclosed is the business card of Kitty Baltos,
Community Center Director, as promised.
Should you have questions regarding the offers, please do not hesitate to call me at 612-271-
3208. It is my suggestion, our next step is to meet with the State Department of Trade and
Monticello City Hall, 250 E. Broadway, PO Box 1147, Monticello, MN 55362-9245' (612) 295-2711' Fax: (612) 295-4404
~TO -)
O ~~~U~~ I
,---
r 0 EC 1 6 1999 ~.
December IS, 1999
Ms. Ollie Koropchak
Economic Development Director
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
RE: MIF Application
Twin City Die Castings Company
INVOICE
Preparation of application materials, including the application
forms package, public hearing materials, and follow-up
clarification information to State of Minnesota Department of
Trade and Economic Development
$ 3,000.00
Mileage - 115 Miles @ $ .3 lImile
35.65
Copies - 260 Copies ~-~; $ .05/page
13.00
TOTAL AMOUNT NOW DUE
$ 3,048.65
'f<\~ ,\0', '{\"t\ ~', \.. H "''I y:, I," $- ~ '" T
5353 WAYZAI'A BOULEVARD. ST LOUIS PARK. MN 55416
70t)J BASS LAKE ROAD. NEW HOPE. MN 55428
(612) 544"3544