EDA Agenda 12-16-2002AGENDA
M(:)NTICryELLO ECONOMIC llF;VEL(:)PMENT AUT110R1"I'Y
Monday, December IG, 2002 - 4:00 p.m.
City Hall -Academy Room
ML.MB~RS: Chair Bill Demeules, Vice Chair Barb Schwienlel., Assist 'I'-'easurcr Ken Malls,
Clint Hel-bst, Roger Carlson, Kon Hoglund, and Darrin Lal1r,
S"h~1Fh': TI-casul-cr Kick Wolfsteller, kixecutive Director Ollie Koropchak, Recorder Lori
Kraemer.
Gi_1EST: Pam Campbell, DA"1' Chair.
I . (:all to Order.
?. Consideration to approve the October 8, 2002 1~.DA minutes.
~. Consideration of:adding or removing agenda itcl7ls,
4. Consideration to approve cxtendillg the non-pcrformalace date for GMI~F Loan No. 021
('Tapper, Inc.).
5. Col1tllllled - COI1s1der3t1011 to reV1eW alld aW~ll'd a bld IOC dl'altlllg COS111etIC C1eS1gI1
sketches for rear facade improvements on F31ock 35.
6. Consideration of status report of CiM[?1, Loal1 No. 014 (T. ,I. Martin).
7. Consideration to discuss for approval authorizing the replacement ol~the Liquor Funds.
8. Collsidcration ol~ 200i L'DA membership appointments.
~~. Cxccutive [)irector's 1Zcport.
1 (~. C)t11CI' Bllsmess.
11. /~dlOlll"Illl7ent.
L'
MINUTES
NIONTICF:[.L,O ECONOM[(.' UFVFLOPiM[~.NT A[iTHORITY
Tuesday, October 8, 2002 - :I:DO p.m.
City Hall -Academy Room
Members Present: Chair Bill Demeules- Clint flerbst. Roger Carlson and Uarrin Lahr
Staff Present: Eaccutive Director Ullie Koropchak and Recorder Lori Kraemer
Guests: Pam Campbell, UAT Chair; Susie Wojchouski, Chamber Director,
Sharon Odegaard and Sara Watters, Little Mountain Qt.tilt Shop;
Sheri Mano, Monticello Mercantile; Jane and 1"-Toward Maass. A Prairie's
Edge Gallery; Karen Schneider, Karetl's Kustom Draperies; atld
Jamie Paulson, A Stitch in Time
• Call to Order.
Chair Uemeulcs called the nleetitlg to order ai 4: I 0 p.m. and declared a gttorutll.
2. Consideration to a rove the Au rust 20. 2002 EDA mitlLties.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY R()GER CARLSON TO APPROVE 7"HE MIN[_1T1/S OF
I'I-IE AUGUST 20. 2002 EDA MEE'I"ING. DARRIN LAI-IR SECONDED THE
MO7"ION. 1\1O~fIUN ('ARRIIU 11NANIMULJSLY.
~~ Consideration of addin~~ ol• rt[Ilovin<< a~~enda iterns. Notre
~• Consideration of C"ouncil Referral to Research Assistance or Other U tions for Broadway
Business (hvncrs.
Ullie Koropchak advised the EDA members that at the direction of the City Council, the
EDA was to review researched assistance or other options for the Broadway business
owners affected by the County Road 75 improvement project. The research completed by
Koropchak outlined several ways to conlpcnsate business owners, either through City tai
abatement or the E[)A-DIVIRF. 7'a~ abate-llent is not an option in Monticello because the
west Broadway parcels are located within the Downtown TIF District. Koropchak also
advised that the F.DA Attorney had cautioned about settin~~
added that she. had spoken to the City Administrator of Cokatotas to any aKist t~ce tllev
lead provided to the business owners located t1lon`~ Highway 12 during the recetlt
Highway 12 improvement project. She was advised that working vvith MnDO'I', the City
of Cokato had contributed Icss than $10.000 ti-om their general tutu] for additional
signage and advertisement itl the local newspaper. but tlo compensation to the business
owners.
Itotopchak stated that Ille Public Works Director atld City Etlgineet• had iilt~t•med her that
1:Dn Minutes- ~oiosio~
additional money was spent for extra crews in order to speed up the CSA[I 7~ project.
Also provided to the nlcmhers Was intol-n7ation received From the Chamber with the
outcome of a recent poll tllcy conducted re~~ardin~~ whether to continue With the project
this tall or delay until next sprin;~. as \vell as an estimated percentage ofhusiness revenue
lost during consU'uction.
Koropchak stlnlmarizeci the input of the three EDA nlcn7bers Who Were absent from the
mcetin~~. They did not support compensating the business owners to avoid setting a
precedence and noted the difficulty of determining justifiable compensation.
Koropchak provided several alternatives for the EDA to consider. With several husincss
owners present and Chamber President Wojchouski, the EDA asked the husincss owners
for their input. "I~hcy noted better signage earlier would have been helpful, not today.
They gave an exa-77p1c of no left turn on Broadway at fine Street. Customers preceded to
take a left at River Street' however. the customer became confused as Where to access the
parking lot with Waillut Street not being a through street. 'I'hcy also advised that the
contractor's employees at the Anloco site arc parking in the hLlil7p-N-NIU11CI1 lot W111C11
haci been arranged as temporary business parking for their customers.
Koropchak advised of the anticipated completion dates for both T:ast and WCSt Broadway,
barring, nu raln. 1111s could posslbly he finished up by October 16`''. Demeules advised
that the E:DA IIleI17be1's Call nOt Cleterl11111e Whethel' the COlI11lV Road 7~ project continues
• or not. and as tar as COI11pCllSatl017, l1C statecl Ile did IlOt Want t0 set a precedence. Carlson
a~~l•eed \vith }-lerbst to Work on signagc and advertisill~~, and possibly the EDA and/or C ity
COLIICi p(ly 101" th~lt. ,lal1e Maass alldl:Cl that slle WOLIId hke a 1"CCOllllllt'ildatiol7 fi-o111 the
EDA tonight. 1 hel"c W'aS x150 d1SCUSSlpl7 Whether ally 1LI17C{In~~ Should be between the
IDA, the C1tV, and the Chamber 01 COI11n1erCe.
T11eI'e \Va5 s1~~11111Callt dISCUSSl017 re~~ardlll~~ options For the EDA to assist the husllless
o\vllcrs. The consensus was to hold a Broadway grand opening celebl•ation this fall to
hrin~~ customers hack. Sug;~estions Were for the EDA to fund acivertisenlellt in the
Monticello Shopper in the forn7 of a front page ad and possible supplement listin~~ all of
the downtown busitlcsscs and promotin4~ the "celebration".
I he l:l)t~ 117e111berS 1'eC0`~I11Led file Clallla4~e W'a5 already dol7e aI1CI 17()tCd 101" tLltlll"e
pro.jccts, the City e0 111 111 11I11Cate vvlth tI1C hllSll7eSS OW11e1"5 pl"lOC t0 COnstl'L1ctlOll 10C lllpllt.
} lel'htit Ad\ lsed that this illattCl" wY)LIId Come befol'e the C'lt}' COU11Cll On OCtobel' 1-1.
A MOTION WAS MAD[ BY UARRIN I_AI-IR TO ALJTI-{ORIZE THE EDA TO
PROVIDh [•-[.JNDS IN AN Aiv10lJN-h NO"I' "LO F:\CI•:FD'~~,000 FRO~1 T'HE DIv1R1=
f1S f\ ONI~ TIME C'ON"I-RIBL!TION I~OR "CEIE PI..~RPOSE~ Ol~ AN [;VL:Nh OR
ADVI~R"fISING ~'1IIC'I I WOULD B[~NE:FIT f\I..[. TEIE BIiSINESSES IN THIS: i7MRF
T.~1RGE"I' AREA. 1'I IE C'I IAi\~[BER PRESIDENT TO WORK ~~%I~hH ~i-HE BLJSINESS
• O~~'NE:RS ON ~I~l IE L:VI~:N l~.
EDA Minutes - 10/08/02
fhe:re was Further discussion by Demeulcs to make note of this for future construction In
• rey~acd to adequate signa~~e so that this matter will not come back to them again in the
spring with the next phase, atld that this is a one time offer.
'I"here being no further- discussion. CI..IN"f fIERBS"C' SECONDED TIDE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSC.Y.
5. Status (.)f C,MEF Loan No. 014 and consideration to authorize ursuin recovery of funds.
Koropchak had provided the information in the agenda packet stating the recommendation
is for authorization, statin~~ by doing this it puts the EDA in a position to work with the
business and the lender to pursue other matters. She added also that she does not know if
they would have enou~~h revenues to retire the EDA loan.
They asked how the cump~uly could sell their egL-ipnlent when they had a UCC tiled and
Koropchak stat4d she laid not know and also until the EDA authorizes pursLling recovery.
the COI11pa11V Can do Whtite\'ll' t11eV Wailt.
A MO"LION WAS MAO[: BY DARRIN LAI-IR "fO AU'I"1-IORI7-.E Pi1RSUING
Rh.COVERY OI~ FUNDS FOR GMEF LOAN NO. 014. T.J. MARTIN, CNC. ROGER
CARL,SON SECONDED TI-IE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED LINANIMOtJSLY.
• O Consideration to a>>rovc the First Anlendnlent to the L,oall A~,reemellt for CiMF:F Loan
- No. 017.
Koropchak advised the nlClllbl'1's that this IS t0 bC COIICUCCeIIt Wltll t11C Loall bet\v4'ell the
City anll I \vln c'lty Dle Castings based on job creation. This was federal money from
state to city a11d the CCItCI"la 1S a hit tougher ,adding she wanted to be consistent. S11e did
state that the City Council coLlld, in .Iuly of 2003. hold a public hearing and extend it
a~~ain. She also stand that the state only accepted 40 of the GS jobs due to that these were
not all full tinge pernulncnt lobs. S11I11e weCC tLlll tulle te111p01'ary. Tlley n1L15t I11eet the 51%
requircnlent. Koropchak added that they are only moving the compliance date.
A MO"PION ~~'.~~5 1\l.~D[: Bl" ROGI=R CARLSON TO APl'ROV)/ TIIE FIRS"l~
AMI-:NDMENT "I"O "MIL LO:~N AGREh:Mh.N1" 6I:"fWI:EN THE E[)A ANI) Z~WIN
CITY DII_~ CASTINGS. 111O~1'ION W ~~S SECONDED I3Y GLINT I-IERBST. MOTION
CARRII~D UN~\N1NlOUSI-Y.
7. C:ontinucd - Oust L:stlnlatCs aI1lI ideas t01' dCatt111~r COS117et1C rear taCildC; gill rovements for
Block 35 anll 1[1 lit trlllll bllsllles5 11\vllel'S.
KO1'opChak pl'(wldtd a sketch Cl~ilCCpt tl'Olll Clt~' h1a1111CC Steve C•iClttlllan with ideas lilt
park111g Iillpl'O\ elllelltti Mild a Cl1St cstllllale tOC 1"eaC Clesl;:ll sketch options. She advised that
she did IIUt thlllk lhC\ \\~Ce loukin~~ at redesi~~ning the parking behind Country ~I~ravcl. but
Bill Dr-mcules stated that was \\-here the businesses \vere piling the snow. Pang Campbell,
3
EDA MII1LItlS - 10/Og/0?
DA~h Chair. aclviscd that Grittnlan had sl:etchcd this in for a possible nevv huildin+~,
showin~~ 17uw to get to the pal-king lot without going all the way around the block.
Campbell also previously advised Karen Schneider that this was only a sug~,estion. adding
that Schl7eicter \yas nut in favor of the concept plan.
I-icrbst stated he does nut see this moving furwarci until it is detcrn7irled wlu) owns the
alley property. which he thought the EDA had asked City Administrator Wolfsteller to do.
Koropchak added that she had previously asked the property owners to determine
ownership.
"i"here was discussion by Lahr that assuming ownership is 50/S0, and assul77ing there is an
eascn7cnt. what does the EDA want to do. Demeules stated that until ownership is
dctern7incd, the EDA cannot set a dollar amount in regard to how much they are willing to
contribute tol- these proposed improvements. [t was also noted that they did not want to
proceed with any pal•king lot il77proven7ents until after the South side of~Broadway. West
of hlighway 25, was co-77pleted.
C17air Demeules vvas excused at 5:30 p.m.
'I here w'as C[15Cllssl(111 (ln pOSSlhly plltlln~~ together a package to present to the businesses
advisin~~ them of•options for t~lcade and parking lot improvements. Campbell advised that
she had spul:cn with Michele Hertwi~~ to see il'she was interested in puttin~~ to~~ether sollle
Opllolls- all(i ~~~()~C:hl)uskl stated tllat Parl:cr MacDonald may also be interested in working
with I-lcrt\vi~~ Un this package. Can7phell adVlscd that 1lrrrtWlg Cflarwes $50/hour and that
they cstinultccl the cost to he approximately $000.00. Again they discussed the potential
prohlen7 if only a sn7All number of businesses were willing to participate.
Lahr felt the htlsinessrs should come up with their own ideas to present to the EDA and
leave the snuW issue alone. }lerbst su~,~gestcd coming up with a cost for potential
improvements to the huilcfiny~s. the 1/DA to toot all but a suggested dollar amount. to see
if the businesses are willin+,t to pa--ticipatc prior to spcndit7g n7ore n7oney on clravvin4~s.
"I'hcy also added that they COllld 17ot torl77alIV act OI1 this 117atter at this tlI77C aS they did 11ot
haVC A CIUOI'llm presen[.
Koropchak advised the Illcmhers oftl7cit• balance statin~~ it was just under $150.000. not
I11(:Illding assistance to the do\vntu\vn businesses for an event/aclvertisin~,. The consensus
\vas to direct !'anl Campbell to get a furnlal cost and provide that to Koropchak for her to
conduct a yut~ of the 1•:Dr1 tllclllhcrs. either via mail or pllonc, to dctet'mine \yhether or not
to proceed. Carlson also asked Koropchak to discuss with Rick Wolfsteller gettin~~ a
SUI'\'eV (ICtel'nllllln`~ the u\\nership of the alley And She 5lACed She \VOUId.
8. I•:~ccutiy~ Dircctul; s 1:~17urt.
horopchak provided the report. -l~hcrc \ycrc nu additions.
~I
EDA Min~ites - 10/08/02
9. Other I3usiness. None
10. Adjournment.
"I'I-IE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED A'I' 6:00 P. M.
Recorder
•
EDA Agenda - 12/16/02
• 4. Consideration to a rove extenclin the non- crforn~ance date for GMEF Loan No.
021. (Tipper's Inc.)
A. Reference ind background:
C)n .Tune 18, 2002, the EDA approved and Council ratifted a machinery and equipment
loan for rl,apper's Inc. dba. Generertx I~'inc Wood Products, Inc. The $SS,000, 2.75%, _5-
ycir loan is to assist in the financing of'i CNC router, vacuum lift, and saw. "I'he non-
perlormance date is December 18, 2002.
'Che CNC' router and vacuum lift have been delivered. Because the saw has not been
delivered, the borrower sloes not wish to close on the lo~.tn and incur principal and interest
payments. Therefore, the I~,DA is asked to approve extending the non-performance date
for GMEr l.,oan. No. 021. I'cr the EDA B~.tsiness Subsidy ('riteria, the 180-day non-
performancc date can be extended up to an additional 120 days provided: 1. A written
request is received ;0 days prior to expiration of the 180-day non-performance date. ?.
Approval of the EDA membership by majority vote.
Attached is a copy of ~.i lett.er from Tipper's Inc. requesting an extension. An addition
120-day would extend the non-pcrforrnance date to April 1 b, 2001.
Ii. Altcrnativc Action:
A motion to approve extending the non-performance date I`or GMI_;t~ Loin No.
021 for Tipper's Inc. froth December 18, 2002, to Apri 118, 2003.
2. A motion io deny extending the note-performance date for C7MEP Loan No. 021
for Tipper's Inc.
i. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
The recornmendaliotl is Altcrnativc No. 1 to encourage b~isiness retention and expansion.
U. 5up~orting Dita:
Uriginil EI)A approval form, excerpt from .k~.[)A business subsidy criteria, and letter or
request.
•
APPROVAL OF
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUNDS
BY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN ANll FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
Preliminary Loan Application Approval.
Loan terms negotiated and agreed upon between
the developer, the lending institution, and the
EDA Executive Director.
Formal Loan Application and Financial Statement
analyzed by the lending institution, BDS, Inc. or City
staff.
Building and Site Plan Preliminary and/or Final Review.
Building Permit approval or construction commitment.
Loan documents reviewed and/or prepared by the
City Attorney.
YEs
YES
LETTER OF CREDIT WORTHINESS FROM LENDER
NOT APPLICABLE
DAN GREENSWEIG, KENNEDY & GRAVEN
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL:
LOAN NUMBER: GMEF No. 021 LOAN APPROVED: YEs
BORROWER: TAPPER' S INC .
ADDRESS:~~t~__rxFT.S~,,R.(~.AIL~2N_T_7S'~'T.T,d, t~rt~t ~~~~2 DISAPPROVED:
LOAN AMOUNT: EIFTY--~'zy~ THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($55,000.00) MACHINERY & EQU=
RATE: 2.75 FIXED INTERE5T RATE DATE: JUNE 1$, 2002 LOAN
TERMS AMORTIZED OVER FIVE REARS. ,
FEE $200 DUE AND PAYMENT NOT LATER THAN JULY 1, 2002. ~p,.~.•t-+~-+~ '~iV`~
**OTHER (SECOND PAGE
A motion was made by EDA Commissioner KEN MAUS to (approve - ~~~)
Greater Monticello Enterprise Funds in the amount of FIFTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS
$55 > 000.00 dollars anal cents to developer
this 18th day of JUNE 2002
Seconded by EDA Commissioner RON xoGLUND
YEAS: KEN MAUS
RON HOGLUND, BILL DEMEULES
AND ROGER CARLSON
NAYS: , ~~
.,,ABSENT: cL u~.R~~~~-A'RB SCHWIENTEK, AND DARRTN LAHR.
GMEF disbursed ____~ ~ by Check No. _
EDA Treasurer
CITY COUNCIL MAY REVERSE AN EDA LOAN DECISION WITHIN TWENTY-ONE DAYS OF EDA
APPROVAL. TO CITY COUNCIL, TO COUNCIL JUNE 24, 2002 L.`_ ~,~.,_._,__:~,a~-
i ~ 1~.~~'~,y~-li,-.vim
GMEF Approval
Page 2
ACCEPTANCE OF TERMS
l (We) hereby accept the terms stated above as approved by the Economic Development Authority in and for the
City of Monticello. ,-~_._7
,.-
~ ,.
^.....
.~.r-~-
DATED: ~~ ~~~ ~' ~ _. N _..~.
~ / ~~
/' ~ / 1
(?'~
f
GMEF N0. 021 I5 A MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT LOAN (CNC ROUTER, VACUUM LIFT, AND SAW).
JOB GOALS: 6 NEW FULL-TIME JOBS WITHIN Z YEARS
4 @ $10.00 to $1.1.99 w/o benefits
1 @ $16.00 to $17.99 w/o benefits
1 @ $20.00 to $21.99 w/o BENEFITES
CURRENTLY HAS S$ FULL TIME JOBS.
SECOND POSITION BEHIND LENDER STEARNS BANK.
GMEF LEGAL FEES RESPONSBILITY OF APPLICANT.
COLLATERAL: PERSONAL/CORPORATE GUARANTEES (REQUIRES UNLIMITED PERSONAL GUARANTEES)
OR PER THE EDA ATTORNEY.
LOAN BECOMES NUL AND VOID DECEMBER 18, 2002 IF FUNDS HAVE NOT BEEN DISBURESED.
GMEF DOLLARS DISBURSED FROM GMEF BALANCES.
C]
•
L
•
EC.) ~~ Business Suhsidv Cl-Ittl'i~l
L(.),~NS - Subject to scctu~ity and:'or rep ic~~al h~ I:DA.
~~ ASSUMABII.I7Y
O}= LOAN - None.
* BUSINESS EQUITY
REQUIREMENTS - Subject to type of~ loan: Board of Directors evil] determine
case by case. analysis under normal Icndin~ guidelines.
* COLLATERAL - * Liens on real propety in project (n~or-tea;-~e deed).
* Liens on real properly in business (mort~~age
deed).
* Liens on real property held personally (subject to
Board of Directors -homestead exempt).
Machinery aa-~d equipme~at liens (except equipment
exempt from bankruptcy).
* Personal and/or corporate guarantees (requires
unlimited personal 17uarantees).
* NON-PERFORMANCE - An approved GMEF loan shall be null and void if fiuads
are not drawn upon or disbursed within 180 davs from
date of EDA approval.
* NUN-PERFORMANCE
EXTENSION - The 180-day non-performance date can be extended up to
an additional 1?0 davs.
1. A written request is received 30 days prior to
expiration of the 180-day non-performance date.
2. Approval of the EDA membership by majority
~~ote.
* LEGAL FEE - Responsibility of the GMEF applicant.
The Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund is operaied as an egtia) oppoc-tu»ity pro~~ram. All applicants
shall have equal access to GMEF fiends regardless of` race, sex. age, n~arita] status, or other personal
characteristics. 4
DAWN/WORD/POLIGIES 10/30/00
7
F~l~ae mod 1}racl~LCtr
2/2 C,lirrb~c~r IZorrd, l~fo~rtrcc~lln, r~'fN SS~(2
(7(i 3) ?95-42?2
November 15, 2002
To Whom It May Concern
Genereux Fine Wood Products is requesting an extension to the closing date on its
Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund loan. '"his request is presented because the custonn
manufactured optimizing saw, tht-t we have being built, is not going to ship on schedule.
A three month extension will be sufficient.
T'han:K Yore
[,arxce Hartkopf~
Plant Manag~:r
EllA Agenda - 12/16/02
5. Continued -Consideration to review and award a laid for draftin r cosmetic desi n
sketches for rear facade im rovements on Block 3.5.
A. Reference and background:
As you recall this in not a new agenda item for the EDA. in April 2002, the l~;.DA
discontinued the DMRF program a.nd reserved the remaining balance of tl~e DMRI~' funds
for a 131oc1: i_5 project in 200 ~. It has been the interest of the CDA to expend dollars to
create an attractive and appealing rear entrance and plaza and to eliminate the ice build-up
in the alley area of f~locl< ~_5. Prior to the IJDA expending dollars to replace the catch
basis and alley parking/trash improvements, the commissioners would like a commitment
from the property owners to improve the rear b~iilding facades through a cosmetic design
improvement. This to cre~.ite a public/private partnership via an agreement.
At the last CDA meeting, the commissioners agreed that in order to encourage
participation by the property owners, the h'DA would -~eed to prepare sketches ol`
cosmetic design options for rear facade improvements along with cost estimates prior to
approaching the property owners. The City Plannirag Consultant submitted a bid at the
October meeting and the a~mtnissioners reclucsted the DAT Chair to get a seccmd formal
hid li-o-tt Michele Hertwig as was suggested by the DA"I" Chair.
• DAT Chair Campbell, DAT Member Wojchouski, anal Koropchak have worked diligently
-- to seek a second. bid irom Hertwig. Assuming a second bid is received, tl~e 1/DA is asked
to consider awarduig the bid to prepare cosmetic design sketches. Koropcllak has not
asked Wolfsteller for a survey of the alley until some indication oI~ interest or
commitment Irotn the property owners.
B- Alternative Action:
A motion awarding the bid to prepare cosmetic design sl<etchcs I`or the rear facade
of buildings on I31oc1: i5 to at a cost of
2. A motion to not award a bid for preparation of cosmetic design sketches Ii~r the
rear Iacade of buildings on 131ock i5.
A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
Assuming the LDA is still interested in this project and in order to proceed, the
recommendation is alternative no. 1 whether or not a second bid is received.
•
EDA Agenda - 12/1 G/02
D. Supporting Data:
Copy of bid. from No--thwest Associates and copy ol~allcy/~arkii~g lay-o~it. Copy oI' hid
from Hertwi~ if available.
•
OCT-08-2002 15 15 NAC
~ct0~7@r 8, 2002
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATEp CONSULTANTS, INC.
• 5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Tel: 952.595.9636 Fax 952.595.9837 email: sgrittman onacplanning.com
TRANSMITTAL
DATE:
612 595 9837 P.01i02
TO: Ollie Kvropcak
2
FROM: Steve Grittman
QUANTITY= MATERIAVDESCRIPTIQN:
NUMBER OF
PAGES
INCLUDING
COVER:
DATED:
w.,
ViA:
REMARKS:
Delivery
Mail Pick Up
A copy of a revised srts plan fvr showing parking on the sou#h side of the alley nth
regard #o design concepts, the architect in my office es#imates that we could provide a
"palette" of ideas for the b/ock that individua/ property owners could consider for
$2,000 to $3,000, depending on the /avel of detail. If we ended up doing some spec/f!c
de#ailing for ind/vidual buildings, the costs would be increased.
-'Sg
CITY/PROJECT NAME:
• JOB NUMBER: _ ^_
•
3
a
Q
a
•
ACT-08-2082 15 15
5Z '~ 1
612 595 983? P.02i®2
~ ,~ ~ ~
_, a
x-~-t z ~
_,
a
~ ~~~
_~ ~
~,
t Y ', ,
'1~ ~~f1N'"1*dM.
NRC
0
TDTAL P.02
EDA Agenda - 12/16/02
6. Consideration of status re ort of GMEF Loan 110. 01.4. (T. J. Martin)
A. Reference and back round:
Ai the EI)A n~cetitlg of October 8, 2002, the commissioners authorised pursuing recove--y
ol` funds for GMEI: Loan No. 014 ("l'. J. Martin, Inc.). 7 he attached letter was nlailcd by
using Return Receipt Service on October l 1, 2002.
Repayment of` the $87,_500 machinery and equipment loan began March l , 2000, the
unpaid principal balance of the loan is $4.5,88G.66 per the Finance DepartYllent. No
payments were wired by the lender in November or December, 2002.
'1'lF/I IRA ~ X7,900 Note Status - Un November ] 8, 2002, the Lake Tool building on
I)undas Circle was pLirchased by DH1, 1/ntcrprises (Dwayne, Hollie, and Lisa Hoglund.)
and the Contract for Private R.edevelop~llent was not assigned to the new owner. The
seller agreed to pay-olf the I IRA Note including the outstanding load anal dcticiencies in
the amount oI`$21,7 ~4. Upon receiving delinquent tax increment from Wright County
•lanuary, 2001, the HRA will declare the Contract for Private Redcveloptllent null and
void. The 11RA will also consider whether to decertify TIF' [)istrict No. 1-21,
I've been in contact with both with Carl or Eric Bondhus ~.ind Greg Hohlen, H'i~'st National
Bank of Elk .River, relative to the EDA loan. With the liquidation sale and property sale,
it is the hope of the Bondhus' to have sufficient lands to retire their debts. First National
Bank holds the first mortgage on the EDA machinery and equipment loan. Carl will give
Ille all LlpdatC of their receivables al Monday, the 1 G`~', and in the nleantinle, hopefully,
Greg Auld I earl connect. It's the lender's position to work with the F3ondllus' to avoid any
formal action.
•
October I I. 3003
Eric Bondhus and Dennis Bondhus
T. 1. Martin, Inc.
1347 Dundas Circle
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: Notice of Default by Borrower
EDA - GMEF No. O 14
Dear Eric and Dennis:
At the Monticello Economic Development Authotity (EDA) meeting of October 8, ?002, the commissioners were
informed that T. J. Martin, Inc. (the "Borrower'-) had sold the certain equipment (Attachment A) designed for use at
the Minimum Improvements and financed by the Monticello Econolraic Development Authority (the "Lender") per
the Loan Agreement dated February 18. 1998, between T. J. Nlar-tin, Inc. and the Monticello Economic
Development Authority. Per the Borrower, the certain equipment had been sold by the Burrower during a
liquidation sale.
The commissioners made a motion !o Gnlthnri,e ptu•suin~r /'L'C'Ol'L'/:)' Of f2li'7[GS fi)r G;t/EF;Vn. OI-! (T. J. ,l/u/-tin. /nc./
per the Loan Agreement, l„enders Remedies a on Borro~~ er•s Default. Upi)n an Event of Default by Burrower and
after recraipt of written notice From Lender. Under shall have the ri~~ht to exercise any or all of the folluwin~
remedies (and any other ri~,hts and remecli4s available to it):.......-.
Flereby, this letter serves as the written notice from the Lender to the Borrower. For your information, as of the
be~~innin~~ of September ?OOZ. the remaining principal balance of the loan was $45,886.66.
Should you have cluestians, please call the Office of Economic Development at 763-271-3208.
Sincerely,
~dia~a~{ uan~aE{ ~i~sauaoQ sz~o eras rac~zol
~ (pir~d s~ aa{ puFr
'~ pajsanbaa it (flop) ssa.lppy s,aassa)ppy 43
V66 t aagwa]aa `L l! SE uaao3 Sd
(auabyan a . ~ppy) :aarileu6is 'g
(auieN luu~) :rfg paniaoa~ .5
~ UO~ ~ as!pueyaaaW )o}ldia~ay~ uanlaJ ^ ,'
y
~ paansu~ i`1
t' ~ieW ssa)dx~ ^
~ pai111aatJ pa~alsitiaH ^
_ ~ adr~l aoinaa5 'GV
-,i _I ~ ~ 1,/ ..l C•. 1, 1-,;,}I
~ I,aqu)nN a~o!1)V ~'b
t
l
~' 1,
of passaappy a~.)i}~~ g
~aal.lo} .la}sew}sod l~nsuo~ ~'~r`jn!i;,,u
ale{) 71x1 I)lIF {) 17anl~a(] 'HM 8r~l~lr ay{ u)oiaM of Mor.ls ~I!M lrl!aoay wnl ~U ;)yl ^
~ 3npap paloialsa~{ iarµunu a~~ili 3r.g Moloq aoa!r11!r u) 041 uo„p~lsnnhx)}~ Ir1ra0:da r.r)nFal-/, al!.iM ^
.z ,~r)),~~r~
~' . , appy S,aaSSalppf/ [J l loo ;anp o n ds {! ~IoF>~1 )yl uo )o ~ )aidpeul )rll to µio)l alal of waol ~!'ll 4onlly ^
nnR 01 P)E!:7
m
' (aa} Eta)xa sn}l r.i.inla.i i.irao '9M {ey{ os u).io} siyl l(7 ,isr>n,3) E7~{{ uu ~~s.~appe pua aweu .ino% luia,~ ^
UB 10}~ SaUIn1aS F~UIMU~~O} '9V pur"('b'E 9U.1-)q alalrluio`) ^
ayl aniaoaa o} ~.~SIM oS~L' ~ ';aa!n)as ~ei)n!pppe iol Z )o/pue { iU18)I ~},]~(IILgJ •
~a~arv~s
295-271 I • Fax: (763) 295-4404
- -. ...,~..•.°~•. ..,. ~~~~~ - ~ ro~~ aya-3170 • Fax: (763) 271-3272
MOIVTICELLO
~~ Y
~4
0?-18-:1998
____ 60 ~ o~
;~6D ~
~ 2 ~p
_
.
~ ~~_-3 .....___
~ 3 U<
'
_ ~
~- a o .~~ ~: o
'S ~ ~~, __._._ 5 D f
I l ~
U
~
___._---- ~ .__. ,.-_
_
...
...., ~--..._~.3-_l ~ l----
h ~r ("
~~,~~,~ ~,~_~ • ~ 11
3.2
'~ ~ jul ~ ~ 3 ~ 3 % 7.3
//
~~~~~ 7~7 / v / ~'~ ~ ~~ o
__.r~~~•~ l x/ 3/0 !' SSA ~ 21 ~
~i~~~ ~ a~~~ 23 c
24
lv ~`~
~L' ~fr' .;~~~ /U .~. ~ 6 ~ 26 C
32 _
33
v
34
35
36
37 I
38 ~
39 ~
~r b I
41 ~
42 ~
43
44
45
Y EAR
46
47
48
•+~
.k..k n~f~J~.[~IZ7?:r.7:c~~r sc:~»vr_~ ~* oa : 29 :36
( Ar:'Lt.ta1./360 ) P~.~e 7.
/ ~ `
~~~ l ,
T~ u
~~~~<
°Cw
,~ b~` N,i
V ~ ',
" ~ ~. ~~-n
x/07_/01 389.44 i 1326.68 t~cs~~~~ . ~.~
7/01:/C}7_ 369 . G9 U- 1345.43 6690;3 82
__.
3/01/gl 374.4~i / 1341.64 ~ 6=,562 18
a/01/01 356.97 ~ 1349.15 64213.63
3%1/01 347.82.E 1368.30 6284."73
1/01/01 351. "76 +% ]_364.36 6140.37
z/U1/o~. 333.02: 13e3 . ici f 6ao9 7.27
2081 !}538.68 16054.76 68097.27
x/01/02 336.38 / 1379.74/ 587..1.7.53
2./81/0?. 328.66v' 1181.46 ~ '~~r'330.•07
3/01/02 239.84.E 1426.28 55903.'79 ~.~
4/01/0?. 312.91. 7_~~~~...2~./~. 5500.5$ ; Yv`~/ .~
5/U1_/n2 295 . z7_:. 14zo . 97:- ca:3g79.6~ ;'.~t~ `'
6/81/02 29'7.10v ?47..9.02u -' S1660.6~
7/(17_/02 :?79.83:, 3.436.29- 50224.36
(3%U"1/02 287_.1'?. ~ 1~1:35.OU~ 48789.36
9/01_%02 2."/3.q8~ 7.443.04 47346.32
.0/07../02 256.46 / 1459.66 ~ 5886.66 ~'
.1/01%02 256 . E34 1459.2€i 44427.38
.2/01/02 240.65 1.4"7~i _ 47 42951.97..
2002 34413.03 17135.36 42951..91.
13.; 01./03 ~ 240.41 1475.77.. 41416.2q
12/01/83 ~ 232.7.5 1483.9'7 3992.2.3
)3jg1/U3 202.]..8 151:~i:94 38<a.78.29
)4/01/03 ?..7.5.37 150q . 7> 360'77.54
)5/0/03 200.30 1~i15.82 I 35461.72
15/011 03 198.4y 1.511.63 I 33`744.OJ
)7/01/q,, 1F33.86 153': X26 3::417_.83
)C3/01/U3 1137_ . ~i2 1534.70 30137"1.13
)9/gl/03 7.72.83 1543.29 29333.84
Lq/07_%83 7.58.89 155'7.23 27776.61
L1/U'1/03 155.47 1560.65 262:1.5.96
l2/O1/q3 7:42.00 1.574.17, :?4641.84
2003 2233.37 1831q.!)7 24641.84
71/07./04 137.93 1578.9 23063.55
)2/01/04 129 . q9 1~= 8'7.03 21476.62.
73/01/04 112.45 3.603.6'7 ~ 19872.95
J~k/U7./q4 11.:1...23 1F>04 . f7~] ( 'I.F.;26Et , 06
Monticello City Hull, SUS Walnut Street, Suite 1, Monticello, MN 55362-3$3 (• ('7(~3) 295.2.71(• Fax: (ry63) 295-<J11U4
Office of Public Works, 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticello. M~ 553F2 • (7~SZ1 ~QS_2 t7n . c..... ~-..~..-.. ____
1?.DA Agenda - 12/1G/02
7. Cryonsideration to discuss fur a royal authorizin =the re lace~nent of the Li uor
Funrlc_
A. Reference and background:
Ila order to be self=sul`licient, Ola ApI•II 2001, tl1C EDA Iaaclde the folloWln~T, In()tloll:
To authori~c repaymelt of the Liquor Funds in the alnoulat of I O`% of the (iMEF
cash balance, not to drop below a cash. balance of $400,000, to be reviewed on aIa
annual basis. Repayment per the EDA Business Subsidy Criteria.
Except Bona the Busiless Subsidy Criteria:
Il` 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 iladebtedlaess of the City
(see Section SB of the ordinance establishilag the Monticello EDA).
On April 2>, 2002, tlae EDA made the following motion:
To table action on repayment otthe Liquor Fwads until year-end.
Therefore, this item appears on the EDA agelada for consideratiola.
Attached is a copy of the 2002 Cash Flow Projection which inclLlded a $79,000 - 2002
repayment to the [,iquor l~'I.uad. Adjustlnelats were made to the expenditures. "1'hc i-aitial
total ~unount transferred to the EDA 1`rom the Liquor Hund was $38 x,000. After the 2001
$77,000 repaynacnt, the remaining b~.ll~.uace is $ ~OG,000. "1'he EDA/Liquor h'und dollars
are non-restr°ictivc fiuads which can be used for Block :35 unlike the MIF/"1'C'[)(' dollars
(Federal $500,000) which must be acco(uated for separately or not. interlaaingled with the
EDA/l:iquor F~'und dollars. T'he MIF/UMC dollars (State $290,000) must be accounted
for separately but can be used for various economic dcvelopmelat purposes. City retains
$ I00,000 plus interest.
II~ the EDA would completely repay the Liq(lor Fuaad and expend the remaining balance
of the DMRF, $150,000 for Block ~5, the remaining cash balance ol`the EDA/Liquor
I~I.Ind would be approximately $1]7,000. At the end of'2001, there was a remaining
halancc of unpaid principal I`or the 8 existing loans in the arnoun.t of approximately
$500,000.
•
EUA. Agenda - 12/1G/02
I3. Alternative Action:
n motion to authorise a 2002 repayment ()f the L1gL101' I''L111dS 111 llle a1110L1nt O1
$79,000 for use solely to red(lce tat levies for bonded indebtedness of the City.
2. A motion to autllorize a 2002 repaynlcnt oi'ihe Liquor Funds in the amount of
_ _ for use solely to rccluce lax levies for bonded indebtedness of
the City.
3. A motion of no interest to authorise a 2002 rcpaynlent of the Liquor Tunds.
4. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
Although the MIF/"l'CDC $500,000 are restriclivc funds to be adnlinistercd by the I-:[)A
but approved by the Ciiy Council and can be used for industrial loa.lls, tllc 17epal-tnlcnt of
"C'rade <:uxl I•:conomic I)eveloprnelti does not ~:lcivisc the EDA or City disburse a.ny of these
lilnds as TCUC has not yet created the S_5 filll time jobs. Mole importantly ol't.he jobs
creatccl, _51 °/~ must be low to nlocicrate incolnc levels - H'cderal requirement. If the 51 °/,
requirement is not lnet, the lull $500,000 must be repaid. I1~thcy create 60 jobs total and
1 arc low to moderate illcolne, they repay a only portion of the $500,000. ~I'11is does not
<:1p1.11y to the MII~/LJMC dollars. At ibis time, the EUA has sullicicnt CDA/Liquor Funds
to authorise a 2002 repayment.
D. Su ortin Data;
2002 Cash blow Projections and. MIl~' (State) i'olicy adopted by the Council on December
9, 2002, see page ?for eligible projects and activities.
•
MONTTCELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
GREATER MONTTCELLO ENTERPRISE FUND (GMEF)
2002 CASH FLOW PROJECTION
BEGINNING CASH BALANCE, ~Tanuary 2002
RECEIPTS
Appropriations, Expected --
GMEF $ _0_
Notes Amortization Payments -
Tapper Inc. _0_
ML~11er Theatre _ 0 _
SMM, Inc . _. 0 _
Aroplax Corp. ..0_
Notes Receivable ~0_
Custom Canopy, Inc. _0_
Standard Iron _0_
Vector Tool ($509.98 Mo.) 11-03 $ 6,119.76
Tipper's II _0_
SELUEMED $ 20,6'67.08
T.J. Martin ($1,716.12 Mo.) 3-05 $ 20,593.44
Ma.inlin.e Distrib.($702.08 Mo.) 6-04 $ 8,424.96
Aroplax Corp. II ($730.93 Mo.) 12-04 $ 8,771.16
TCDC ($1,457.29 Mo.) 7-07 $ 17,487.48
IRTI ($549.57 Mo.) 1.0-06 $ 6,570.84
EDMA ($193.89 Mo.) 9-06 $ 2,326.68
VisiCom ($115.78 Mo.) 5-04 $ 1,389.36
Interest Income - Investment (est.) $ 30,000.00
Loan Fees
$
400.00
Loan Fees Other $ 191.75
Miscellaneous 1 000.00
TOTAL RECEIPTS
TO'T'AL BEGINNING BALANCE AND RECEIPTS
EXPENDITURES
GMEF Loans -
p1^hr~1]CF i nn C'~ V m4 , v, J ~({,A ~.~'/~+ ~`' 7 r' t (1 f1n n. n~
~ti ,
UMC $200,000.00
Re-payment to Liquor Fund $ 79,000.'00
DMRF Grants $ ~~~:~~
Chamber. ~ $ 2,172.82
:Loans
Legal ~ c-,
t p
b ~ ~
.~
-0-
~ $ 7W , 000.00
~~[i.scel_laneous _$ _ ~_~~~
• TOTAL EXPF;NDITIJRES
$ 790,782.40
123 942.51
$ 914,724.91
SS,ao 0
~-l . "1 c~ c7
'+j y l . "'~~~ . g '~-
EXPECTED CASF-I BAI.~ANCE, December 2002. $
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MONTICELLO
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND (GMEF)
Balance Sheet
December 31, 20 01
ASSETS
Cash in Bank $ 790,782.40
Notes Receivable - Tapper, Inc. $ _0_
Notes Receivable - Muller Theatre $ _0_
Notes Receivable - SMM, Inc. $ _0_
Notes Receivable - Aroplax Corp. $ _0_
Notes Receivable - Custam Canopy, Inc. $ -0-_
Notes Receivable - Standard Iron $ _p_
Notes Receivable - Vector Tool $ 39,369.58
Notes Receivable - Tapper, Inc. $ _0_
Notes Receivable - SELUEMED $ 20,467.90
Notes Receivable - T J Martin $ 60,097.27
Notes Receivable - Mainline Distribution $ 92,569.07
Notes Receivable - Aroplax Corp TI $ 94,643.96
Notes Receivable - TCDC $ 82,243.72
dotes Receivable - XRTI $ 72,192.02
~otes Receivable - GWJ,LLC $ 79,7'77 68
otes Receivable - VisiCom $ 9,741.42
Appropriations Re ceivables -
2001 $ _0_
TOTAL ASSETS ,$1,291,885.02
FUND E UITY
Fund Balance
Reserved. for Participatiorr Loans
(Economic L7evelopment) X1.1.291, 885.02
TOTAL L~ABILITTES AND FUND EQiJITY ~. 291 885.02
* 2001 transfer to Liquor Fund $77,000
Original Liquor Fund transfer to EDA $383,000.
•
City of Monticello
Minnesota InvestmentFund
Revolving Loan Fund Policy
(This• Pnhc:y does rrol creole nr• ~r•crr71 any rid,>1~Ls• in the Ftr`~cl r~r cn~~~ pcrr•! /hereof)
The criteria set forth in this Policy are intended to provide guidelines for the City to evaluate
applications for loans ol~ funds from its Minnesota Investment Fund (1~und). The City reco~~ni~es
that every project is unique and that there will be projects that satisfy the criteria in dais Policy but
will not receive a loan from the Fund. At the same tia~~c, there may be projects that do not meet all
of these criteria, but that may still receive a loan, to the extent permitted by state and federal
guidelia~es. Thus. each application will be evaluated on its owls merits. In all cases, however,
applicants should consult all other City policies applicable to their projects, including but not limited
to the City's tax increment policy, its business subsidy policy, and other similar policies, none of
which are waived or amended by this Policy.
I. Purpose
The purpose of tl~e Fund is to facilitate job creation and retention through business sta~•t-ups,
expaaasions. and retentions. This will be accomplished by using tl~e Fund to:
A. create or retain pern~aneaat private sector jobs in order to create above average
economic growth;
B. stimulate or leverage private investment to ensure economic renewal and
competitiveness;
C. increase the City's tax base;
D. improve employment and economic opportunities and create a reasonable standard
of~livin;, in the City; aa~d
•
n.lc-?~=~ul=~~ l 1
MN19p-]01 ~ ~~
E. stinnalaie the growth oi~ productivity throu+.~h improved manul~tcturing or new
tecl~a~ologics.
II. Eligible E~nenditu~•cs
-l-he Fund will be used to provide assistance for infrastructure,loges, loan guarantees, interest buy-
downs, and ocher forans of participation with private financing. ~1'hc Fua1d will not be the source of
more than one-half of the cost of any project.
III. Eligible Pro'ects
e following criteria will be used to determine whether to make a loan from tl~e Fund:
A. ~vhethea- the project will create or retain jobs;
B. ~r~hether tlae project will increase the tax base;
C. «hether the loan will induce the investment of~ private lands;
D, whether the project can demonstrate excessive public infrastructure or improvement
costs that are otherwise beyond the n~cans of the City and the applicant;
E. whether the project provides highea' wage levels or adds value to existing workforce
skills;
F. whether the assistance is necessary to retain existing business or attract business
from outside o` Mii~alesota, provided that this criteria is not by itself sufficient to
justify use of the Fund.
~' Eligible Acti~~ities
The Fund will be used only to make loans for:
A. acquisition of land;
B. construction, reconstruction, and rehabilitation of commercial or industrial
buildings;
C
u.lo-zzao l ~, I
MN190-101
~j 1.~
C. site improvements;
U. utilities or inG-astruct>_n-e;
E. machinery and equipment:
F. workforce development inrludin~~ job trainin4~ anc~ placement; and
G. housin4~ development
V. 1 ncli~iblc Acti~~ities
The Func1 will not be used to provide loans 1~n-:
A. Opel'a11011 OI' expallsloll Ot a Caslllo;
B. for a project related to a building that has a protcssional sprn-ts team as a principal
tenant: or
C. operation or expansion of a store which is used solely or principally Ian- retail sales.
Vl. P1;-oiect Costs and Financial RepuirCmcnts
The following underwriting criteria alone with any Othel" Inf01.171atlon deC177ed rC1C\'llnt by the City,
will he used to determine whether to make a loan 11.0171 t17C 1"'und:
A. Breakdown of project costs \vill he analyzed, including all activities involved in t17e
pro.lcct;
B. Letters of commitment from all funding sources;
C. The applicant must review the sales, expenses, debt service, and returns on equity
investments of the project. The extent of t11is review will be appropriate for the size
and complexity of the project and should use industry standards for similar projects,
taking into account factors such as risk and location. The review will also include
whether or not the amount of equity participation is reasonable given general
industry standards for rates of return on equity for similar projects with similar risks
r ~
~....~
Izlc;-~zau I a~- i
MN 19q-I fl I
3
G', i
and ~~iven the financial capacity of the applicant to Illake additional tlnanclal
11lve.SClllellls.
D. An evaluation of the pl-oject~s marl:et share, sales level_ ~,ro\vih potential, projections
of revenue, project expenses and debt service io determine if they are realistic and
\vill meet the projject's break-even point.
1~:. An evaluation will also be made of the experience and capacity of the business
owners to mange the bllsllless to achieve the projections. "1'he applicant must
identify those elements, if any. that pose the greatest risks contributil7g to the
project's lack of financial feasibility.
F. An evaluation of the owner-"s return on invesUllent, to ensure that the owner is
receiving neither too lar~~e nor too small return on the applicants investment. '1"he
amount, type and terms of the assistance Gom the F>vu7d may be adj usted to allow the
owner a reasonable return on his/her investment given industry rates of return for
that investment, local conditions, and the risk of the: project.
Ci, Fund proceeds will be disbursed oll a pro rata basis with other fiuldin~ sources.
These proceeds must not be placed at ~~reater 1-isk than non-federal i~unds.
VII. Public Senetit
The Fund will rnlly be used if the project can demonst--ate that it complies with the City's business
subsidy criteria.
VIII. Wade Requirements
Any recipient of a loan from the Fund must pay each employee total compensation, including
benefits not mandated by law, that on an annualized basis is equal to at least 110% of the federal
poverty level fo-- a family of four.
•
n.lr-zzaola~l
MN190-IOl
4
_~ ~ .:
IX. Other RecLuirements
°1-lae Fund ~~ ill be managed in compliance with all applicable lam-. includin+~ but 1101 111111tLd t0 the
followin~~:
1. Coni7ict of interest statutes set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 471.87-.88
~. 1311S1I1CSS Sllbsldy Act Set 101•tll 111 Mlnlll:sota Statutes, Sections 1 1 G,i.993-.995
3. First Solu-ce Agreement statute set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Sections ?68.66
4. Construction surety statute set. forth in Minnesota Statutes. Sections 29U.97U~
_5. Pre~~ailing wage statute set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 1 16.1.871
6. Data Practices Act set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 1 i
Nothing shall prevent the City fl•on~ applying any other restrictions it deems appropriate in
its sole discretion.
X. Application Procedures
Any person desiring to apply for a loan from the Fund should contact . After enstu-in+~
that all necessary information has been received and, if appropriate meeting with the applicant to
d1SCllss t11C prOll-:Ct, the will forward the applicationmaterials to the City Council for
its consideration and decision.
•
~.)c~-~z.u))a~) ~
MM90-101 F._ ~
r '.
.J
CDA Agenda - 12/lb/02
~~ S. Consideration of 2003 FDA membershi a ointments.
A. Reference and back round:
As the City C'oulicil at its first meeting in January will make its annual appointment of
GominlSSioners alld CoI1sU]tallts, the COllncll Wlll app0117t tW0 COIT1I1715s1011eCS t0 the IJt)A
fora 6-year term. These commissioners whose terms expire December 2002 are Kela
Maus and Clint Herbst. The City Council will appoilit a Council member to replace
outgoing Council mernber Clint 1 lerbst. Is 1{eIi Maus willing to be considered for
appointment to the 1-i;UA fora. six year term or Decelnbcr 2008'? No action I'equired by
the EDA,.just a willingness by Maus.
The 1:DA would like to express our appreciation to Clint Herbst for both serving as a
Council Incmber and an EDA co11il~~issioner. Best of luck, (;lint and thanks.
f;DA membership and terms:
Darrin Lahr
barb Scliwientek
13111 Dctneulcs
Roger Carlson, Council
Ron Hoglund
Council
12/200
12/2001
12/2005
12/2000
1.2/2007
12/2008
] 2/2008
EUA Agenda - 12/1 G/02
9. Exe cutive Director's Report
a) Downtown Rcdevelopn7ent - It is i-77portant for the LDA to be informed on the
progress the IRA has with developers for potential redevelopmcl7t of Blocks S1
and _52. "1'17e 1 1 `'', I lnet with hied Katter, Steve .1ohl7son's representatlvc, I~u~ his
project. Ile received two fresl7 copies of the IRA's Preliminary Devcloplncnt
Agreement. I expect the copies executed and the $5,()00 deposit within the next
couple of days. Tl7e time fran7e outlined for "I'ih'; exectliiol7 ('ol7iract for Pl"ivate
Rcdevelopn7ent by January 22, 2003, and issuance of a demo permit by 1^ebruary
28, 2003, for Phase I (IiRA lot and corner lot). Phase 1 a three story office
building with underground parking. That's pretty cxcitil7g!
A secon(i developer, Pat Sawat~ke, has presented preliminary plans l~)r
redevelopn7ent of his parcel (salon) and the adjoil7ing noI•t17 parcel contingent
upon a purchase agreen7cnt. Retail space #irst floor ~:u7d secol7d and third floor
market rate rc17ia1 units and underground parking.
l~he HRA will concentrate on assistance with tl7e public parking a17d
in7provements, working with the City Plalu7cr Col7sultant relative to projected
parking needs, existing need, and 60`% rule.
b) Attacl7n7ent A - a copy of the request and tl7e check from the Chan7ber Ivor $1,500
(cash pl'i~es) for the Broadway Bucks event. The 1;DA authorized up to $5,000
as a one time contribution for advel•tisemcl7ts and/or event which would benefit all
the businesses in the cflective Broadway area. The event was held Noven7bel• 1'7-
23 and was coordinated by Chal7lber President Susie Wojchouski. l'hanks, Susie.
I have not recelVCd a17y Il1VO1CCS for tl7c ads In the Sl70ppe1' al7d ~bel"IJUI"nc
I'1'lbllne.
c) Attachments B. - C"opy of invoice fron7 Lenny Kirscht f'or preparation of State
gral7t application for I1MC: al7d invoice from attorneys for copy oi~ITCC riled on
I'CDC machinery and equipment.
d) Production Stamping - Constructiot7 in spring.
c) Merry Christmas and a. Happy New Year. Ollie
1-19-02 15:15 MONTI CHAMBER ID=7632952705 P611/01
:~
.~' Nricaxc.a
BERof
ER
Monticello
Chamber of Cornrnerce
205 Pine Street, P.O. Box 192, Monticello, MN 55362
Phone (763) 295-2700; Fax (763) 295-2705
Website: ~cw monticel~rhamber.com
L-mail: infoC~monticellochamber.com
November l9, 2002
Economic Development Authority
505 Walnut St.,
Monticello, N1N. 55342
,~ ~rickER
'' ~ ERCE
`Atlu~mew`r ~'
Attn_ ~l]ie Karopchak
Could you please issue a check to the Monticello Chamber of Commerce in the a~.ount
of $1500.00 to he deposited. into the Monticello Money Account. The ~ 1500 will; cover
the "Money Prizes" given away in the Broadway Promotion on Monday, November,2~5~'.
Thank you.
Susie Wojchouski
Chamber President
v" `"
S o-o ~ b
~~
~~
~~
~~ ~~~
oK.
~ ~~.~ ~
G~ , ` e~
~.,~ c
~ ~~~-
~c~,doa_
•
CITY OF MONTICELLO
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
505 WALNUT STREET • SUITE 1
MONTICELLO, MN 55362 NO.
ti+c~rrraceLio 763-295-2711
PATE CHECK NO.
11-20--2002 7098$
One Thousand Five Hundred & no/100 Dollars
PAY TO
THE
ORDER Monticello Chamber of Commerce
°~ 205 Pine St
PO Box 192
Monticello MN 55362
5-1884
910
70988
MAFiOUETTE BANK - MONTICELLO • I?O. 80X 729
MONTICE4L0, MINNESOTA 55382 • (763) 295.2952
AMOUNT
$1500.00
11'07098811' x:09 LO i6647~: 760 001 711'
250.46501.4399
DMFR--Broadway Canst.
$1500.00
•
CITY OF MONTICELLO • MONTICELLO. MN 55362
qtt w 1~ U
:,~~
~ ~
1~rs a la~.a a~
Of Elk River
Main Office: 729 Main Street Elk River, MN 55330-1595 612/441-22g0
October 7, 2QQ2
Ms. Ollie Koropchak
Director of Economic Development
City of Monticello
SQS Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
RE: Ultra Machining Company
MN tnvestrrtent Fund Application
~NVO1<CE
Preparation of application materials, including the application
forms package, public hearing materials, follow-up activities
and materials, and information for State of Minnesota
Department of Trade and Economic Development
TOTAL AMOUNT NOW DUE
~~~~~~
i ~ ~ ~,1
~', QCY 9 202 ~ ~', ~
~,~
01~ ~ e . ~ d • a '~...
$ 4,200.00
Please make Checks Payable to First National Bank of Elk River and send ta:
First National Bank
Attn: Leonard P. Kirscht
l.4><l.5 .Ifa,mes Road
Rogers, MN 553"4
Firanches in: Anoka, Elk River, Hassan, Monticel]o, and Zimmerman
www.lnatb~7nker.com. E Mail ~ fnberCa31.natbanker.com