Loading...
EDA Agenda 01-14-2009AGENDA CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, January 14, 2009 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room - 505 Walnut Street, Monticello, MN Commissioners: President Bill Demeules, Vice President Dan Frie, Treasurer Bill Tapper, Bill Fair, Bob Viering, and Council members Staff: EDA Executive Director Megan Barnett 1. Call to Order 2. Approve Minutes: December 10, 2008 3. Consideration of additional agenda items 4. Approval of the EDA Invoices 5. Neighborhood Stabilization Program 6. Request to utilize funds from the Transformation Loan Program 7. Redevelopment ideas for recently purchased property located at 413 4t'' Street W 8. Establish preliminary 2009 Objectives 9. Proposed Sub-Committee Policy 10. Presentation by Rusty Fifield, Northland Securities 11. Annual Review of the Economic Development section of the Comprehensive Plan (Section handed out a meeting for full review at the February meeting) 12. Report of committees: Higher Education Committee, Marketing, Housing, Fiber Optics 13. Report of the Executive Director General IEDC Update Business Retention Business Initiative Housing Initiatives Informational handouts Future Agenda items 14. Adj ourrunent. MINUTES CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, December 10, 2008 6:OOpm 1. Call to Order: Chairman Demeules called the meeting to order and declared a quorum at 6:OOpm. Roll Call: The following Commissioners were present: Chair Bill Demeules Vice President Dan Frie Treasurer Bill Tapper Commissioner Bill Fair Commissioner Bob Viering Council Member Mayer Also present Executive Director Megan Barnett 2. Approve minutes: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MAYER SECONDED BY TAPPER TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 12, 2008 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. 6-0 3. Consideration of additional agenda items: Commissioner Tapper added reviewing language in the Tax Increment Financing Business Subsidy Criteria. 4. Approval of the EDA Invoices: Commissioner Tapper questioned the invoice from Lamar. Executive Director reviewed Lamar made a mistake in billing. Staff was able to negotiate the billboard staying up additional month without charge. Council Member Meyer questioned whether the amount the City is paying to publish an ad in the Business Journal is worth the value. Commissioner Frie stated the feedback received by site selectors is positive and is a resource they read often. Barnett supported such statement and indicated it is important to continue to include marketing ads on a consistent regular basis in order to be most effective. Commissioner Tapper questioned a WSB invoice. Barnett stated there are still a few outstanding documents and work that will need to be completed in order to close out the project. The EDA will receive invoices from WSB for the stated projects in the future. Mayer requested that the City Engineer include a summary statement for each WSB invoice. Barnett stated that she has worked through a procedure with the City Engineer to detail each invoice for EDA review. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VIERING SECONDED BY FAIR TO APPROVE EDA INVOICES. MOTION CARRIED. 6-0 5. Public Hearing and approval to amend EDA Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund (GMEF) Business Subsidy Criteria. Barnett stated she completed a review of the Greater Monticello Enterprises Fund (GMEF) Business Subsidy Criteria. Staff simply reformatted the document at this time. Executive Director noted contact was made with DEED to verify how the Small Cities Economic Development Set Aside criteria is to be administered within Monticello's GMEF criteria. A representative from DEED stated the additional criteria under Small Cities loan has not been redistributed and therefore the City is required to maintain the additional criteria at this time. Commissioner Tapper reviewed the different "funds" within the GMEF. A portion of the money derived from liquor store revenue and a portion from a grant that was awarded to Twin Cities Die Casting. Tapper reiterated that the assumption is that money obtained from the small cities loan funds must be redistributed differently than money originally obtained as part of the start up funds. Tapper stated he is recommending two documents be created in order to clearly separate how each fund can be distributed. Executive Barnett stated additional research needed to be completed in order to determine if creating two separate loan criteria was appropriate. Discussion ensued regarding how the GMEF criteria should be handled. Commissioner Tapper stated he would like to see the money tied by the Small Cities criteria re-distributed sooner rather than later in order to ultimately get the funds back into the general GMEF. Chair Demeules cautioned separating the two fund balances due to the fact the GMEF criteria allows the combination of both the general GMEF and the Small Cities balance to be combined when factoring in how much can be loaned out at one time. Commissioner Frie stated he would like the document to be simplified in order to be easier to read and implement. Staff stated additional research needed to be completed to MOTION BY TAPPER TO TABLE THE ITEM AND DIRECT STAFF TO COMPLETE ADDITIONAL RESEARCH SECONDED BY FAIR. MOTION CARRIED. 6-0 The Commission appointed Tapper and Demeules to meet with staff to further revise the GMEF document. The Authority closed the Public Hearing. 6. Proposed Marketing Budget: Barnett reviewed the staff report. Discussion ensued regarding the cities website and the monticelloland.com website. Commissioner Frie stated he was interested in seeing the City list the industrial park land with a commercial broker. Commissioner Tapper stated if it is the desire to include printed ads in the Business Journal it should be more frequent than not. Frequent consistent exposure would seem appropriate. Commissioner Viering asked if a $20,000 budget is adequate. Director Barnett stated the approved 2009 budget does not allow for any additional marketing funds. Mayer stated staff and the EDA should get involved in the budget process in May in order to provide the City Council with enough time and information prior to approving a preliminary budget for the following year. MOTION BY BILL TAPPER SECONDED BY VIERING TO APPROVE THE 2009 MARKETING BUDGET LEAVING THE DETAILS TO THE DISCRESION OF THE MARKEITNG COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. 6-0. 7. Reassignment of Developers Agreement for Prairie West: MOTION BY TAPPER SECONDED BY VIERING TO REASSIGN THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT FOR PRIAIRE Wl3ST TO LINDA A SMITH. MOTIONED CARRIED. 6-0 Commissioner Viering stated the City should not be responsible for the cost associated with processing the revised Developers Agreement. 8. Elect Officers for 2009: Will be completed in April of 2009. 9. Report of Committees: Updates were provided in the Executive Director Report 10. Report of the Executive Director: Barnett reviewed the opportunity the City has to obtain funds from the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) to address the foreclosure situation in Monticello. The grant application is time intensive, detailed, and will require the City to obtain a partnership with an organization that has administered wants like Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). Barnett reviewed statics obtained through in field inspections and Sheriff data as to where a majority of foreclosures are occurring. She further stated the grant application submitted to the state would include three main components: 1. Down payment assistance 2. Acquisition and rehabilitation 3. Purchase for demolition. Staff is recommending the City partner with Central Minnesota Housing Partnership in order to complete the application. Additional Item: Commissioner Tapper stated he is concerned with the language in the Tax Increment Financing Business Subsidy document section 4.03C. Tapper stated he felt the existing language was confusing and proposed revised language. Mayer stated staff .should research if legal believes the proposed language is applicable and acceptable and report back to the EDA. Councilmember Mayer stated this was his last meeting and extended congratulations to Executive Director Barnett. He further stated in a short time he has witnesses a lot of growth and enthusiasm from Director Barnett. Chair Demeules extended his thanks to Wayne Mayer for all of his efforts and time while serving on the EDA. MOTION BY FAIR SECONDED BY MAYER TO ADJORN THE MEETING. Meeting adjourned at 7:15pm. President Executive Director 4. Approval of EDA Invoices. Ehlers: Invoice for a portion of the TIF Records Retention project. Edwin Chadwick: Contract for deed payment in the amount of $139,857.56, split into two payments of $69,928.78, made to Edwin Chadwick and J Bowers. MN Abstract Title: Purchase of property located at 413 4~' Street. Monticello Times: Public Hearing for revisions to the Business Subsidy Criteria. WSB: See detail on individual invoices. x x x 0 `~ ~ ~ ~ , C ~ ~ 4 4 [=7 f[n ro G- ~ ° . ~ ~ q t~ r ~ V 171700000 ~T~HHH~HR~ nn OOw nno 0 0~ ~~ C ~ c~ y'~.~ ~D ^ ,, r H H I-3 ~.3 H H CrJ c=7 C37 tT~ tr1 ?~ Z Z O H H £ z ~ ~-3 z y ~ t" cn R+ ; -Q s W 0 0 ~7 ~7 X7 ~7 ,~7 ta z ;U ;U C+7 rro SU O rt+ x7 I a c p -d z nnnnno '~1'T1tA '~J'~1x H~ U~" N ~ + . y ~ Y~~x7;U 'i9~n OO OO t=7tn lTJ ~ ,0 , 7c H 7C7C7C ~%h r ~'U~ a° ~ ~ x ~ <i~ C „ HO [C on .a ~ -- . .. < ~„ ~ u7~roroG]H t~ t~1 ~ 1n S~ x7 t~ t~ dr7n m en t7tJH t~7 t=7 n Hn ~- r o >CX~ ICOZ~ [i7Crf [=]t=77C H ro ,~- .~ ~. t , ~~ HHCW 4t=1- I I en C C ~ nrokHoa H 0717 I I Hro dd I l r Hror ;Uz 1=7 n n 3 z 0~7 rc c~rz x z a~n o ro H n • ~ ~• ~ c~ 1zn~~UHixH n ~ [~7z ~ L=1Z CC ~Ubi • ~ $ p ~' H3~ .ro L17H 1=JH ~H y 71' A OG~- H~ yro x ~ ~ ~ v~ r _.__ - -_- _._ ~_~_ ___ ----_ __ - F ~ ~ m r cn m N ~n PD N N N H t0 ~O o ~0 ~D o ~ t0 l0 O\ W W W H ~P 10 l0 O 10 l0 O ~P I N N ~P iA O1W WONW NNO NNO H I W W lOmW01 Q1JmH mm0 mm0 01 W W U100000U70 JJO JJO N I H H 00000000 mmo mmo to . * * * * * * Crororororororo CC7O CC7E7. - 3. _~.. _ 'i] C17 x7 ~ 'A ,'> 15Z7 r'U Sti7 Lz1 L17 CTJ L=7 C+7 LTJ H * . [ 7.0000000 7. byl>y 'ZiQ7al to * ~~7~~7~n~~ HH HH n d o o ~ • x7mmtn1nmincn z7mm ~cncn ro * .. H x7xl;~K7;UxJro ;n x7 x7 x7 ~ * ~ O HCCCCCCC HCC HCC O * H O O O '~7 * '~ F] { F I I ~ I I Hro H H H 127 * * ~ yy ~ z z W ''ntllt=1[+Y[17[rJlT1 C t'H CHH t p ~ * OzZZZ z7-i I 7i I I H * • zc~c~c~c~c~c~ on o0 0 Uj H H H H H H I•j t H r•] z Hzzzzzz HO HH .~ ~ r l~l~ml~~m ~~ ~~ oa~xx7xx7z~ to m 1VMHHHHH nz nn l=7 mzzzzzz z z7~ z M G~ G'~ G'l G] G'~ Gl r [ty ,ro Lr1 C+7 z~7~7~7~7~~ x1~ ~x n N N N N N N N N N N N N HHHHrrH HH Hr H wwwwwww ww ww w mmolmmmm mrn mrn m W W W W W W W W W W W W ' . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O WWWWWWW 01T 0101 W .. - 000000o I-+o HH H ' N W W W W W W W W W W 10 0/000000 00 00 10 O NHrHHHH Hr•~ HH r ~ O mmmmmmm mm mm w ~ ~ NNNNNNN 1 1 P P P P P V1 UI W W lJl tJ1 W W W m ~ ~ ~ i ~ V V 1D 10 01010101 01 W W P P ~ V7 \Y HHF-~F-~HHH ~ NN ~ ~ WW W -~ • • • f O 01 Q1 ~P ~P ~P ~P• ~P O O W NNmmm07m VJmmmO)O) 00 mm ~ m W J - TI ~/ U1 V1101O lD 1010 W 1 ~ J J N N N N N ro ro N O O O O O O N WWWWW - ` UI mOmmO / - ~_1 ~~ Y i • p , l / ^ rororororororo roro roro ro ~ 10101n ~ 1n 1010 101e 10 ~ co ~ JJJJJJJ JJ JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O ~ l11 lJi .P ~P ~P iA ~P N N N N N HHmmmmm ~a~a ~a,a m ~ ~w~nwNHO rn1n wN m p O~ e m Q r ~1- • O r3 ~~ ~~,~ Ehlers & Associates, fnc. ~~~" Leaders in Public Finance 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, MN 55'1 (651)697-85 Financial Advisory Services Invoice Monticello Economic Development Authority 505 Walnut Avenue, Suite 1 ' Monticello, MN 55362-8822 Invoice #: Invoice Date: 338331 November 10, 2008 Project TIF Record Organization 2008 Assist the City in evaluating its current TIF records and organizing files in keeping with "best prac#ices" checklist. Date Worked ~ Description of Services Hours Amount 10=31-2008 ED Attended Meeting: meeting with staff 2.25 416.25 .. -,: ; --- ; , ,~-~ 2.25 5416.25 _., '' 't, ,'~. ~t ' ;~ ~~ Amount Due This Invoice $416.25 tl ~U 13.~~3~~.3141 "'_ Q O Kwtt (Detach at perForatton and return lower portion to Ehlers 8 Assocletes, Inc.} "'~ «fz~ /~ Monticello Economic Development Authority, MN invoice #: 338331 Invoice Date: November 10, 2008 Amount Due This Invoice 5416.25 Please remit payment to: Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Attn: Accounts Receivable Due Upon Receipt 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, MN 55113 _ _ CITY OF MONITCELLO - C4D -OTTER CREEK, LLC 12/22/2004 ORIGINAL PRINCIPAL: $ 2,185,221.97 INTEREST RATE: 6% PRINCIPAL PAYMENT BALANCE PAYMENTS: PRINCIPAL INTEREST AMOUNT: REMAINING: 12/2005 $ 100,000.00 $ 131,113.32 $ 231,113.32 $ 2,085;221.97 8/23/2006 $ 1,220,929.36 $ 48,970.97 $ 1,2&9,900.33 $ 864,292.61. $ 764,292.61 12%200'7 . ' ..~$ y . ~,~:b~1 a 45,8~f.56 $ ~4~,857.56 . $ 664,292.61 1212008 $ 100,000.00 $ 39,857.56 $ 139,857.56 $ 564,292.61 12/2009 $ 564,292.61 $ 33,857.56 $ 598,15D.17 $ - ' Interesf is calculated assuming 365 days (December 22). OK TO PAY? T`k~`~ Code: _,_,_.. tni~at: ~~ c7~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~s c, ~ ~j OtterCreek C4D Payment Schedule.xls J. Edwin Chadwick, LLC 11430 Zion Circle Bloomington, MN 5437 Bill To City of Monticello SOS Walnut Street Suite I OI Monticello, MN 55362-8831 Quantity one half of payment one half of annual interest Description Rate Amount J so,ooo.oo ~o,ooo.oo 19,928.78 19,928.78 i John E Chadwick, Chief Manager Office (952) 853-2473 Fax 1-8C,G-734-3G21 Cell Phone: (612} 9G5-9730 E-mail: johnchadwickC~chadwickland.com i J. EDWIN CHADWICK, LLC 11430 Zion Circle Bloomington, Minnesota 55437 y.- » t~ Land & Farms ~'~'~(~~ ~ ~~ ~' ~ ~~~/~ ~ +~'l 1 ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ y --_ _ __ __ ___ _ __ n ~ , I ...~. ,~ 9 ~ . _~ Thank you for the business. Total Invoice Date Invoice # 10/29/2008 3. P.O. No. Terms Project $69,928.78 Printed: 1/9/2009 Dalton Ave. & Westerly Rd Extension CP 2006-15C Submittal Summary of Work Completed Final Summary of Outstanding Work No.* Payment? (I/PV #) (Yes/No) I 25 Pay request/final qty's review No Punch list and warranty work * WSB and Associates is managing this project for the City of Monticello, including managing the submittal of all pay vouchers for the prime contractor. If "I" precedes the submittal number it means that WSB has submitted an invoice for their services to manage the project. If "PV" precedes the submittal number it means that WSB has submitted a pay voucher to the City for the general contractor after checking to make sure the quantities agree with the construction observer's quantities. . ®t • ^ WSB Infrastructure 1 Engineering 1 Planning 1 Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South & Associates, Inc. SUlte 300 City of Monticello October 16, 2008 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Attn: Tom Kelly Project No: 01627 -570 7e1: 763-54t-48oo 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Invoice No: 25 Fax: 763-541-t7o0 Monticello, MN 55362-8831 _ ~' ~K T4 PAYS rly Road Extension (Dalton Court) 1.13 ~,` 30 ~ . 3a 3d Dal ve , , C 2006-15C ~d~~: Pr sio ices from Se tember 1 2008 to Se tember 30 2008 t ~illtlc'~~: Phase 3 Construction . • Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Project Management/Coordination Sisson, Shibani 9/10/08_ .50 121.00 60.50 review contractor request for extra payment Sisson, Shibani 9/16/08 1.00 121.00 121.00 review final quantities Sisson, Shibani 9/17/08 1.00 121.00 121.00 discuss curb/pavement items with contractor Sisson, Shibani 9/23/08 .50 121.00 60.50 emails to contractor summarizing final quantities/remaining work Totals 3.00 363.00 363.00 Total Labor Field Services Billing Construction Observation 0.5 Hours @ 96.00 48.00 Total Field Services 48.00 48.00 Total this Phase $411.00 Total this Invoice $411.00 te D t i ~~~~~ a ~~~ ~°°'' a o ngs Bill Current Prior Total Labor 363.00 86,281.25 86,644.25 Consultant 0.00 3,104.19 3,104.19. Expense 0.00 617.64 617.64 Field Services 48.00 50,897.00 50,945.00 Totals 411.00 140,900.08 141,311.08 Minneapolis 1St Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer Project 01627-570 MONT -Dalton Ave and Westerly Road Invoice 25 Exte Comments: Approved by: Reviewed by: Bret Weiss Project Manager: Shibani Bisson Page 2 WSB &Associares, Inc. Infrastructure 1 Engineering 1 Planning 1 Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 ' City of Monticello November 18, 2008 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Attn: Tom Kelly Project No: 01627-570 Tel: 763-541-4800 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Invoice No: 26 Fax: 763-541-1700 Monticello, MN 55362-8831 ~ 1 ~" ~) ~~~ ~i Y~ Dalton Ave & Westerly Road Extension (Dalton Court) CP# 2006-15C Professional Services from October 1, 2008 to October 31 2008 a.13 . y.(,3o 1..30 ~ o „_~~--SG Phase 3 Construction Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount Project Management/Coordination Bisson, Shibani 10/7/08 .50 121.00 60.50 field visit Pay Voucher Bisson, Shibani 10/29/08 .50 121.00 60.50 finalize numbers with contractor Buckley, Susan 10/28/08 .25 62.00 15.50 Process draft PV #6 for SKB review. Buckley, Susan 10/30/08 .25 62.00 15.50 Fnl PV #6 Itr to CTY. Call Hackman re s ign. Sign for SKB and mail to CTY. Totals 1.50 152.00 Total Labor 152.00 Total this Phase $152.00 Total this Invoice $152.00 Billi n s to Date 9 Current Prior Total Labor 152.00 86,644.25 86,796.25 Consultant 0.00 3,104.19 3,104.19 Expense 0.00 617.64 617.64 Field Services 0.00 50,945.00 50,945.00 Totals 152.00 141,311.08 141,463.08 Minneapolis! St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer Project 01627-570 MONT -Dalton Ave and Westerly Road Invoice 26 Exte Comments: Approved by: ~ Reviewed by: Project Manager: Bret Weiss Shibani Bisson - '~ ,z ~~ j Page 2 Printed: 1 /9/2009 Otter Creek Industrial Campus, Pre-Plat & Final Grading Plan CP 2006-18C Submittal Summary of Work Completed Final Summary of Outstanding Work No.* Payment? (UPV #1 (Yes/No) I 38 Prepare City Council agenda No Warranty work and project close- item and as-built grading plan out * WSB and Associates is managing this project for the City of Monticello, including managing the submittal of all pay vouchers for the prime contractor. If "I" precedes the submittal number it means that WSB has submitted an invoice for their services to manage the project. If "PV" precedes the submittal number it means that WSB has submitted a pay voucher to the City for the general contractor after checking to make sure the quantities agree with the construction observer's quantities. & Associates, Inc. Infrastructure 1 Engineering 1 Planning 1 Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 City of Monticello October 16, 2008 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Attn: Tom Kelly Project No: 01488-920 Tel: 763-541-4800 ,505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Invoice No: 38 Fax: 763-541'-1700 Monticello, MN 55362-8831 Z13, ~{~;01.30 $a Otter Creek Industrial Campus /Preliminary Plat /Final Grading Plan CP# 2006-18C Professional Services from September 1, 2008 to September 30.2008 Phase 3 Construction Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount . General Buckley, Susan 9/10/08 .50 62.00 31.00 -. - - -.- - - .. Fnl PV #4 and final. Prep Itr to CTR. Fax to CTR per SKB. Project Management/Coordination - Bisson, Shibani 9/15/08 .50 121.00 60.50 prepare agenda item Bisson, Shibani 9/17/08 1.00 121.00 121.00 prepare agenda item/review as-built grading plan Bisson, Shibani 9/18/08 .50 121.00 60.50 finalize agenda item Bisson, Shibani 9/23/08 .50 121.00 60.50 coordinate final as-built survey Ische, Steven 9/29/08 .50 126.00 63.00 survey coordination Ische, Steven 9/30/08 .50 126.00 63.00 ---- survey coordination ~ Pay Voucher Bisson, Shibani 9/15/08 .50 121.00 60.50 Buckley; Susan 9/17/08 .25 62.00 15.50 Prep LTR VO 4 FNL CTY for SKB review a nd sign. Buckley, Susan 9/18/08 .50 62.00 31.00 Review/edit final payment agenda item. Fnl supporting data and prep PDF file. As-builts __ -Jewell,- Merlin_ _ __ ._ _ _ _9/18/08_... ....3.00 _.. 112.00 _ _----- 336.00 ---- Totals 8.25 . 902.50 Total Labor 902.50 Field Services Billing 3-Person Survey Crew 8.0 Hours @ 167.00 1,336.00 Total Field Services 1,336.00 Minneapolis 1St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer Total this Phase 1,336.00 $2,238.50 Project 01488-920 MONT -Otter Creek Industrial Campus Invoice 38 Total this Invoice Billings to Date Labor Consultant Expense Field Services Totals Comments: Current Prior Total 902.50 101,680.25 102,582.75 0.00 4,450.00 4,450.00 0.00 450.00 450.00 1,336.00 14,020.50 15,356.50 2,238.50 120,600.75 122,839.25 $2,238.50 s;: ~,.r~a~ ~a . . Approved by: V~-~- ~t /~- VW~ Reviewed by: Bret Weiss Project Manager: Shibani Sisson Page 2 ~~~ I~ & Associates, Inc. Infrastructure 1 Engineering ~ Planning 1 Construction City of Monticello Attn: Tom Kelly 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362-8831 October 16, 2008 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Project No: 01488-920 TeI:763-541-4800 Invoice No: 38 Fax:763-541-1700 _., 2«. ~~;o x.30 50 OK TQ PA . Otter Creek Industrial Campus /Preliminary Plat /Final Grading Plan CP# 2006-18C ~ COde: Professional Services from September 1 2008 to September 30, 2008 Phase 3 Construction ~6~ia ~ .. Professional Personnel Hours Rate Amount General Buckley, Susan 9/10/08 .50 62.00 31.00 - - - . - Fnl PV #4 and final. Prep Itr to CTR. Fa x to CTR per SKB. Project Management/Coordination - Bisson, Shibani 9/15/08 .50 121.00 60.50 prepare agenda item Sisson, Shibani 9/17/08 1.00 121.00 121.00 prepare agenda item/review as-built grading plan Bisson, Shibani 9/18/08 .50 121.00 60.50 finalize agenda item Bisson, Shibani 9/23/08 .50 121.00 60.50 coordinate final as-built survey Ische, Steven 9/29/08 .50 126.00 63.00 survey coordination Ische, Steven 9/30/08 .50 126.00 63.00 survey coordination Pay Voucher Sisson, Shibani 9/15108 .50 121.00 60.50 Buckley, Susan 9/17/08 .25 62.00 15.50 Prep LTR VO 4 FNL CTY for SKB review and sign. Buckley, Susan 9/18/08 .50 62.00 31.00 Review/edit final payment agenda item . Fnl supporting data and prep PDF file. As-builts Jewell, Merlin 9/18/08 3.00 112.00 336.00 _ Totals 8.25 902.50 Total Labor 902.50 Fietd Services Billing 3-Person Survey Crew 8.0 Hours @ 167.00 1,336.00 Total Field Services 1,336.00 1,336.00 Total this Phase $2,238.50 Minneapolis t St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer c .. ~ ., Project 01488-920 MONT -Otter Creek Industrial Campus Invoice 38 Total this Invoice Billings to Date Labor Consultant Expense Field Services Totals Comments: Current Prior Total 902.50 101,680.25 102,582.75 0.00 4,450.00 4,450.00 0.00 450.00 450.00 1,336.00 14,020.50 15,356.50 2,238.50 120,600.75 122,839.25 $2,238.50 ~ f,1 , r .. ~ ~ t r.:,{ Approved by: V~i~ ~( ~ Vim"' Reviewed by: Bret Weiss Project Manager:. Shibani Bisson Page 2 x x x r ,~ o ~ ° H z z x o dd m~ ° ~~ ~ t~" t~" ~ U[i n R+ w l~n O yy~ H[rJ y ZZ A tz9C C~rJ H5~ O ~~n vi° ~ xn ro y [CrJC7~ nH L7 yR+ tro x~U~i yc~n ro ~H r yy~ ~ ~ ror ~ CroH H z ~~ COn ~ y ;v n c,• r y k ~~ w y 3 o x H a ,a ,a ~ ~ ~ w N H H I--' w O Ul lp 01 ,p w ~,~ Ol H N H O lD ,p ,p : O N J O U'1 lJi ~7 .A .p w l0 O O O ~p ,p ,p $ ~' ~' * * * ~ ~ -~ * ~ * [ maw ~ * ~ ~,. x~~ r ~ o x * ~ o occ o ~' * . n c~ ro ~' f . z z ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~ r ~ ~ H y .oL P %~ ~ n C os H H /O L] G~ H ~ ~ ~..• 1 ~ ~ °z ~, -ice N N N N V HH r H w w w i, ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ P rnrn m ~ w w w ~ ~.' 00 o O H H r ~., ww w 0 o to ww r 00 0 =it H H H H a a ,A ,A ~~ m W W N ~ Ul U'I O W H r m n - U1 '® m m ~ t. N N ~p ° J J O (!J (Il l71 ~7 ~~ o z e 5 0 0 ~ ~ .~ N N ~ e ~~ ~ roro ro ro 00 0 0 N N N N (V ~ v V7 V1 Ul N ~~ O O O .O ~ O O O O ~ ; . N tJi N N dP ~ m ~ J O ~p m H '~ ~, CITY OF 1VIONTICELLO VOUCHER Check No.: Vendor No.: ^ Recurring ^ Manual a ^ Needs CC Approval Pay by: ® Disb. Ck. Batch ~ ~ ~?-, i 0. ." _~_~I Statement/ Invoice No: DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENSE Acct. No. Amount Description Project Code ~~ i TT ~ s W-1c~.tl - ,,,,, ,~, u ,K ~,,~ ~~V.Z~~ ~RU ` r l~t~t~ °~'" 1 o} p~o.4aw ~T. . r -.-1 ~ .. r ~ -' t 7.l i.. J lr ~ 1~ i 1~ Si~'1 1 .1 1~~1•~, A i 11 ~9 ~' _ g( it s;: (! 4....:......r..,.:..... ,::....,, ...~,V...:.,.,.w... r..... ~ , ~: r., ~4.t~ .. -~ ~., m..~ ~~ %r wa¢. ~`j~~~og voucher.xis Ma 109 EDE (95: Faxi Advert 0.00 0.00 ~ 0.00 I 0.00 MONTICELLO TIMES (952) 392-6890 !'1 .. ,8ill~n PonoU ~~ 6dled'AccoupY 10/2008 UNAPPLIED AMOUNTS ARE INCLUDED IN TOTAL AM ,. L 1, OUNTDUE ' ~ 'k vertLser IttfDRila[~Dfl ~~•'~ ~ - ~ . 1um6er 7 ' AdvaYt~SgAClioni7Nunaber ; 2 AdvertlseriGifen[sName ' 133 I 133 (CITY OF MONTICELLO x H H '+7 h57 x 7k G r N d CrJ tf] C '~ ~ ~~ r 3 ~R~ L~J O H ~ ~ C1 G] m ~ U) r ~ O '~J ~n n~ a~ O ~-+ xz r d~ ~ m ~ ro ~ -- z o H h7 z ~r N H N O J N O a H n ro 0 m H O z r m c H n N N W Ul O N W N ~F W M~ F' N N W In N ro 0 w w 0 0 0 N ~• o ~ a^s• y ^ • • • O •J P 9~ ry~ x o ~ ~ n H H H H H H H \cn H H H H H H H O ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ~n e~ ~ m m m ~ ~ 5 C x ~k x ~ x 3k x 3~ x ~k x'. ~t x ~ 4 CrJ N n r N r N r N r N r N r 01 r Ul dd z 00 LrJ LTJ O~ Ci] LTJ .A C17 LTJ N L=J LTJ O LTJ tt] ~O LTJ L~7 LTJ LTJ LTJ d d O Cx7 C:n Cx1 C~ Cx7 C~ ~ Cx1 ~ h7 ~7O ycn ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ y[n ~ ~m ~ ycn stn ~ mx1 H r r r r r r r n ~ n u~ \m H \rr m \m d \~ ro \m ~ \~ ~ ~~ O r ~ z H O E O H O E O ~ O ~-+ O H O z H H N ro • y ~~ L1 cn H z ~~ G] w bJ ,~7y G1 w z H :U~' G1 m H x1~ L1 to m w :U~ ~ w z d x1~ G1 m VJ H ~ ro H t=i • H ~C Cn U] CrJ fn ~ ~ r'n V] H (n ~ to ,ro b H w y ~o n zoo z ago z zo H ~o ~ zoo ~o ~ ro o •~ m ern H ~n - ~n ~n ~ can ~ ~n n mn n ~ z wr n~ H n~ ~ rn ~ n~ rn H n~ ~ n~ H o ~ ~ OH ~C OH OH trJ OH ~ OH ro OH OH H C z~z a~z n ~z d ~z ~ zz ro z~z ~rz o ~ rn d do ~ do ~ do ~ do H do do z r ~ H ~ z ~ c m H m ~ m ro ~ ro H ro ~ ro ro w ro ro u, ro H CO n H b7 'rJ H W O H b7 H d7 O H Cd H b7 \r ~ \C \r ro \r \r rTl \r \r HH U] HH HH ~ HH HH LTJ HH HH m H m m H m m w m m H H H H H H H H H H H H H m m m rn rn m rn m m m m m m o o o o o o o o o o o o o OO[ J J J v J J J J J v J J J Z rn v ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H H ~ H ~ ~ H H ~F n ~n m to cn m m w * n n ~ n n n n n n * o ~ ~ ro ro ro ro ro ro ro * ~ ~C~ a * z ~ m w w w w m m ~ ~ dm H H H H H H H ~F O * rn Zi zi z 7-~ z z z d C ~ C ~ C ~ C b7 t " t " t " ~ ~ w w m m m m ro H t 7 tai tai [~7 [T] c~1 [~1 H m C C C ~ H H H H ~ n n n n n n n ro r -- N N N N N N N "s] 'TJ H H H H H H H C rop w w w w w w w a ~ z ~ ~d a~ ro Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul ~ rt N N N N H O O ,~ \~ Ql iA N O 10 Ol Ul n b n w w w w w w w O H H H H H H H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~o ~o io ~ ~o ~o H H H H H H H H n .a .a ,p ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~o ~o ~o w ~ ~o ~ ~ N N N N N N N H N N N N N N N ~ iA ~A .A ~P ~P .P ~P W W W W W W W H W W W W W W W m m m m m m m Ul U1 U1 Ul Ul U7 U1 0 iA ~P ~P ~A ~ ~A iP H H H H H H H H n tfi G1 C ui 0 ro zn O iH ~ CH ok m • O '7 ~7n7 ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro in k 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z m m m m m m m H % w w w w w w w d G]H (rJ H 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r n 0 0 0 0 0 0 o H ts] 0 0 0 0 0 0 o z r ~o m ~t m in ~ w ~ O x o n H ~ \m H H H H H 7~ H O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LTJ ~ ti] C~J LrJ tz7 C17 H C c \ n x W x ~ `.~", ~ x ~ x ~ x ~ ~ z Cif N n C ~ C w C w C W C N C" N C7 d Z o 0 CT] CrJ C+7 CrJ w LsJ ti7 H LTJ LTJ o LTJ ti] ~O CrJ LrJ m tiJ d d o cz I c~ I c~ c~ cap cz o ~ ~w ~m H ym I ~'cn ~ ~w I yu~ ~ I [ n ~ ~ ~ ~ err ~ ~m ro ~u+ C z+ n u+ ro sr d H r x~ z H O ~ O ro O O 3 O ~ O ~ H H Nro ~~ \ x~ [~ x~ 3 ~~ x ~~ O ~~ ~ H ro •• ~ G1~ H G1rn x1 G]m G7cn ro ~~ z Ito z ~ Ht~J rk cn z m - m n m to H [n ~ ro H o~ :n 0 H :h 0 m ;n 0 ~ O ~ O :~7 0 n ro O •• b0 ern t~ can can ~n ~n ro ~n n H ~ z wr n- ~ n- x n- n- n- o n- y o ~ ~ OH n OH p OH OH OH ;U OH IC C ~z a~z r zz z~z zz n z~z ~ do ~ do d do do do x do d r U1 UJ H Ul V] CA (A H H b7 H b7 m H bJ H b7 H b7 H U7 n \r \r \r \r \r \r ~ H H H H H H H H H H H H Cn o~ m m m w m H H H H H H H H H H H N H H rn m m m m m m m m m m rn ~ m 0 0 o o o o o o o o ~ o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ m m rn m m rn m rn m m m m m H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • H H H H H H ~F n . ~ ~ ~ to ~ ~ ~ ~ m C • ro ro ro ro ~ ro ro * z k]" ~ o ~ o ~ * H N o ~ o ~ o ~ o * ~a z r c o • H H H H H H ~ ~O ~ ~~ r r r r r r ~~ m m ~ m m m ro H Cx] Cz] Cx7 C17 CI] CrJ H N CT H H H H H H ~"G n n n n n n ro r -- N N N N N N "+7 '+7 H H H H H H ~ ro7 w w w w w w Za ~ m m m m m rn tr b Ul Ul Ut U1 Ul Ul •~ fT W W W W N N ~ \~ ,p W H O lD 07 n b w w w w w w H H H H H H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~o ~o ~o ~o H H H r H H H n .a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N H N N N N N N ~ ~A ~A IP iA .A ~P W W W W W W ~--~ W W W W W W Z. i W O] CO OJ O~ 07 , C U'1 U1 Ul U1 Ul U1 O ~A iA ~P ~A .A ~P H H H H H H H ~ G1 C to 0 ro ~n Q I H ~ CH ok m • O ny ~7 K7 ro ro ro ro ro ro \ ~ ro 3 0 0 0 0 0 o ro0 m m m ~ W ~ t"'I ~ 7+ W W W W W W G mF ] H 0 0 0 0 0 o C n O O O O O O H [TJ H H H H H H `Zi C" 0 0 0 0 0 0 [~7 H C Ul ~P W N H O OJ O x oy n H H H H ~ i ~U H H H H O z x ~ x Xt x Xt x 7k z lTJ N n d r w r w r w r w t7d z o0 O ~ CrJ LTJ In LiJ d d o G C~ C~ ~ C~ ~ ~ ytn ~ I ycn ~ ~ ym \ d ~ ~ I ~ 0 ~~ H rn R+ ~ R+ x7 R'' x R'+ r t ' ~ z, H O ~ O r O r O ~ H H Nro ~~ r x~ ~ z~ x x~ Z ro~ ••~ p w ~ po [ po H Goo ~ ro H~ ~ v i i m a~ 0 ~ x7 0 ;v :v 0 3 x10 ~ ro O •• m tin ~n ~ ~n ~ ern x x z wr rn H n~ ~ n~ ~ n- x o ~~ OH z pH x1 OH OH C z~z I zz xz e ~z ~ ~ do n o o r y e o d ~ d b ~ H ~ ^C ^G d --~ --G C H bJ trl H [D cn H ~ H CO [~] ~r ~r ~r ~r h-'H NH HH HH H N N N N H N W H H H H H H H H l0 Q~ 0~ O~ Ol O~ Ol 01 O~ W O O O O O O O O pp J J J J J J J J J '/-~ ui m rn m m m m m m y * 3 ~ 3 3 ~ ~ 'TJ H H H H %• n w m m m ~ n n n n n ~ o ~ b * mn ro ro ~ K H % ~ x x ~ o o o o o ~ ~a z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~~ r m m cn w >~ ~ d cD • ~ m ~ ~ >~ ~ • ° ° ° ~°, z z z z C C ~ C ~ t " d • LTJ H m m m ~ roH ts] LTJ CTJ Ci] H [n ~ ~ ~ ~ C C C C -~ Cr' H H H H ,'y'~ n n n n ro C -- N N N N ~ 'rJ r H H N C rop w w w w z rp, d z~ ~d ~ b ~, n w w w w ~ ~-- w ~ m in n ro • n w w w w p I-' N H H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~o ~o H H H r H n ~ ~ m ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N H N N N N ~ ~P ~A iP ~A W W W W H W W W W W O O O U1 Ul Ul Ul p ~P ~A iA IA H ~ H H H n c~ r to ~A 0 ro xn p I H ~ CH o .~ m • O n7 ~7'T1 ro ro ro ro ~ ~ ro 3 0 0 0 o ro0 H ~z w w w w d GBH [>'J H O O O O r n O O O O H LTJ H H H H z r 0 0 0 o CrJ Hr ~ w ~ m X00 y' '- "= Ehlers & Associates, Inc. ~~,~~~ Leaders in Public Finance 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, MN 55113 (651`) E,g7=.85fl0 v, _,. ~.:_ Financial Advisory Services Invoice Monticello Economic Development Authority 505 Walnut Avenue, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362-8822 Project: TIF Record Organization 2008 ~~ _ ~ ~E. .,. -, .S u . _ , 5 f ~% r, „: I n n 4 ~._ _. . ~,, .~w~ Invoice #: 338541 Invoice Date: December 10, 2008 Assist the City in evaluating its current TIF records and organizing files in keeping with "best practices" checklist. Date Worked ~ Description of Services Hours Amount 10-31-2008 BKi Attended Meeting: Kick off meeting at city hall 1.75 323.75 10-31-2008 BKi Attended Meeting: Follow-up meeting at city 1.25 231.25 11-05-2008 ED Attended Meeting: Document project meeting with staff 1.50 277.50 11-06-2008 BKi Attended Meeting: Workflow meeting at Ehlers .75 138.75 11-06-2008 SAL TIF District Research 1.00 165.00 11-12-2008 ED Prepared: District 1-22-document project-review documents 3.00 555.00 and organize books. 11-19-2008 ED Prepared: District 1-21-document project-review files and 2.50 462.50 organize books. 11-24-2008 ED Prepared: District 1-20-document project-review files and 1.50 277.50 organize books. 11-24-2008 ED Prepared: District 1-19-document project-review files and 2.00 370.00 organize books. 11-24-2008 BKi Prepared: Review TIF 1-22 files .50 92.50 15.75 $2,893.75 -~ ~..~?a---- ~ Amount Due This '--. ~ ~ , ~ $2,893.75 ~ The following information was presented to the City Council at their Monday, January 12, 2009 meeting 5. Consideration to enter into a contract between Monticello, Central MN Housing Partnership, and the City of Otsego to obtain funds to establish a Neighborhood Stabilization Program in Monticello (MB) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Monticello also has an opportunity to obtain grant monies through the MN Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) to help facilitate a community wide Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) to address the on-set of foreclosures. MHFA completed a comprehensive study of zip codes in the State to determine where the greatest need to address foreclosures exists. Monticello has been identified as one of the communities with a high concentration of foreclosed homes. Based on the number of Sheriff's sales from 2007 through the 2"d quarter of 2008, Wright County is ranked sixth in the state for highest concentration of foreclosures. As a result, MHFA allocated approximately $523,923 non-competitive dollars to Monticello through the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). It should be noted, while the dollars have been tagged as "non-competitive" dollars, the City will be required to complete an extensive grant application and will be required to partner with anon-profit agency to complete the application and administer funding transactions. NSP dollars are being allocated through Community Development Block Grant guidelines, which require extensive reporting and follow up. Staff met with Bill Reinke, from Central Minnesota Housing Partnership, Inc. (CMHP) to discuss establishing a partnership. CMHP is anon-project organization that has extensive experience in writing grants and administering Community Development Block Grants (CDBG). They have experience in Monticello administering CDBG projects. These projects include; Drakes Court (the purchase of property and construction of single family housing), rehabilitation and administering of Riverpark View, Cedar Crest, and Monti-Haven, to name just a few. Attached is a contract the City Council is being asked to approve to formally enter into a partnership agreement between Monticello and Central Minnesota Housing Partnership. The contract states CMHP is responsible for completing the NSP application and administering the funds in coordination with the direction of the City and in accordance with MHFA regulations. The agreement also includes language identifying a partnership with the City of Otsego. Otsego shares a small portion of the zip code held by Monticello. Otsego is requesting to utilize 10% of the funds allocated to the 55362 zip code. They intend to rehabilitate a dilapidated foreclosed home. Staff is of the opinion that the request is reasonable; especially due to the fact that the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency specifically stated that communities sharing zip codes will be required to form partnerships in order to be awarded any funding. There will be no immediate impact on the City's budget, except City staff time. If the grant is awarded, 8.7% of the grant is eligible to be used for administrative costs, which will include CMHP's application processing and administering fees. In the event the City is not successfully awarded the NSP grant, staff did apply for reimbursement from Greater Minnesota Housing Fund to cover the $4,844.50 dollars CMHP will incur to complete the Neighborhood Stabilization Plan (NSP) application. Greater Minnesota Housing Fund made it clear Cities will be awarded funds to cover any application processing fees. Based on the criteria established by MHFA, City Staff and CMHP have put together a preliminary outline of how the grant could be utilized in Monticello (see attached): 1. Assist buyer in purchasing a home that needs minor improvements: $15,000 per buyer 2. Assist buyer in purchasing a home that needs major improvements: $30,000 per buyer 3. Provide down payment assistance to encourage purchasing of homes that are currently vacant: up to $30,000 per buyer 4. Purchase and/or demolition of foreclosed/vacant home: $100,000 *** This proposed program is intended for Owner/Occupied buyers (no rental). CMHP is well aware and versed in only processing buyers that intended to own the purchased home. The above outline provides the potential for approximately 14 homes within the community to be impacted. While it is not required to identify exact homes (due to the fact that this is a moving target), the City is required to identify what neighborhoods will be targeted to stabilize. In reviewing Sheriff sales -data and completing field inspections, it appears Sunset Ponds, Featherstone, and Hunters Crossing neighborhoods have the highest concentration of foreclosed and vacant homes. However, these neighborhoods do not exhibit the most blighted homes. This leads to the idea of working with local lenders and residents to provide down payment assistance programs to help facilitate purchasing power for these homes. The "core" City and homes within west Monticello lends to a higher concentration of older homes that need to be purchased along with some rehabilitation. These homes would fall in the purchasing and improvement category. Staff is of the opinion that a home within the core city could either be purchased and/or demolished, or an existing dilapidated residence owned by the City could be demolished. MHFA has included a few challenging stipulations in the allocation of NSP funds. Cities must allocate at least 25% of the funds to individuals and families with incomes at or below 50% of area median income. In Monticello, this equates to approximately a family of four with a household income around $40,450 would qualify for a base house price between $100,000 to $150,000. However, with this said, the base house price could increase if the buyer was able to obtain down payment assistance. Additional stipulations include any purchasing of land must be at a 10% discount, housing must be the end user (i.e. a commercial building can be demolished but replaced with housing), percent of funding must benefit households at or below 120% AMI, and funds must be allocated within 18 months and completely expended within 4 years. B, ALTERNATIVE ACTION: 1. Motion to approve entering into a contract between Monticello and Central Minnesota Housing Partnership to complete the NSP application, submit application to MHFA, and administer funds upon being awarded an NSP grant. 2. Motion to deny entering into an agreement with Central Minnesota Housing Partnership. 3. Motion to table action for further action. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The state has a very aggressive schedule to expend these dollars. If the City were to receive all $523,923 dollars, these funds will be required to be allocated within 18 months to a specific resident or household and completely expended within four years. The state realizes this is an aggressive schedule and therefore will be looking favorably on grant applications that have included partnerships between Cities and non-profit organizations. The Central Minnesota Housing Partnership specializes in administering community block funds and will serve as a backbone to achieve the goals of the NSP Action Plan, resulting in the state ranking Monticello as a top candidate to receive the non-competitive funds. In partnership with CMHP, the City will need to complete the NSP Application by January 28, 2009. The EDA and City Council will also be required to adopt a Monticello Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) by the first part of February. Staff is diligently working, in cooperation with CMHP, on drafting an acceptable local NSP plan to bring to the City in February. Staff is recommending proceeding with entering into an agreement between Central Minnesota Housing Partnership (CMHP), the City of Monticello and the City of Otsego. D. EXHIBITS: a. Scenario planning spreadsheet b. Neighborhood Stabilization Program Map c. Contract Agreement between Central Monticello, and City of Otsego Minnesota Housing Partnership, City of EDA: 1.14.09 6. Request by Marv Phillips to utilize Transformation Loan funds to improve a rental house. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Mary Phillips owns the property located at 324 W Broadway. Mrs. Phillips has owned the property for the past four years as a rental property. Mrs. Phillips stated to staff the same renters have lived in the property since she has been in ownership. The house is older and in need of major improvements. The Building Official conducted a field inspection and determined close to $28,100 of improvements need to be completed (see attached Condition Report). Major improvements such as; shingle repair/replacement, siding remove/replace, remove/replace windows, electrical upgrades, etc. The Transformation Loan outlines criteria to determine if a loan request should be granted: 1. Located within the target area a. Property is located within the core city boundaries 2. Target Value less than $175,000 a. Wright County building/property assed value equals $120,900 3. Purpose is to encourage redevelopment of structurally substandard homes, encouraging home owner-occupancy, encouraging investment into the core city, and increasing housing market value a. While improvements to the subject home will encourage increasing value and aesthetics of an ever declining substandard home, the property is not fostering owner-occupied residency 4. Improvement costs must be $30,000 or more i. Improvement costs are estimated at $28, 000 Below is an example of approximately how much loan dollars could be distributed in the event the EDA determines the loan request is viable: 28,100 improvement costs x 25% $7,025 eligible loan dollars B. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: 1. Motion to direct staff to continue to work with Mary Phillip's to proceed with applying for a Transformation Loan. 2. Motion to direct staff to decline working with Mary Phillip's due to the fact the request does not meet the purpose and criteria established in the Transformation Loan. 3. Motion to table action and direct staff to gather additional information. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Due to the fact the Economic Development Director is new to the City; staff is requesting the EDA provide clear direction regarding whether or not the request by Mary Phillips meets the criteria and intent outlined in the Transformation Loan. The two areas staff is questioning relates to the fact the property is rental and the guidelines clearly state the purpose of disbursing this loan is to encourage owner-occupied property. Also, staff would like to solicit input as to how hard line the EDA feels the minimum $30,000 dollar improvement costs should be followed. Staff also is concerned with the status of the Transformation Loan balance. Staff understands the Transformation Loan has been funded through TIF district 1-22. Northland Securities is in the process of completing a TIF analysis, however the project will not be completed until the beginning of February. Until the TIF analysis project is complete, staff is hesitant to distribute any funds from any TIF district. EDA: 1.14.09 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Phone: (763) 271-3208 Economic Development Director Fax: (763) 295-4404 E-mail: oflie.koroychak(tici.monitcello.mn.us i MONTICELLO Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello TRANSFORMATION HOME LOAN PRE-REMODELING CONDITION REPORT The Pre-Modeling Condition Report is a summary of an assessment conducted by the Monticello Building Department. The assessment for the purpose of satisfying the "structurally substandard" requirements as defined by Tax Increment Financing Law, 469.174. The structure was assessed for its physical elements as it relates to structural soundness (size, type, and age of building) or deficiencies in basic building and energy codes such as but not limited to essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior walls. PROPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION: w PROPERTY LEGAL Lot Block Subdivision DESCRIPTION: PROPERTY OWNER NAME: ~ ~ ~ $ APPLICANT NAME (If different from above): Address: City: State: Zip Code: Primary Contact Name: E-Mail Address: Day Phone No.: FAX No.: s 9y.~~tr '~,'t A `uhf N* q"T"t '~ - :~µµ~ ~ 1fA~ '~$~ ' r, x IRQ vv+ YJ k f d )~ ~~~Cah ~ ` ~r .. , .. , , ~w ~ y v ~it^ s~ # . '. X Said. property meets the requirein ents of fhe Tai Incre ent Flna~c~i~ ~~ L~ 9174` ~9~,~ ~ ~ Sifaf~: ~' 'YG y ~i`J x..~ 4~ .t.r3,r~-i, B 1 7 . ~' '~ ~ ~ V*L' S~ [4 ELF{ e5 ~. ~ vC7 t ~' Y LW- ~ ,4 c !i4 ri~'~f~ ' ~r to r , i i f v '~fl ,.~~ Gi~_74 1 s J ~' ., y ip ~; 8 t _.. wY x ~~r~ a ~~o ,' Estimated Market al ~ e ~~. a r, .~ < ~ ~,` , . ;, ~ k x~t . ~rt~+l ~ ~4 ~ R 4. . , ,rA.' ,k 1 ~'a ~' _ ). CRITERIA/BUILDING CODE ASPECTS EVALUATED: Site Conditions Estimated Value to Upgrade to Present Building Code Standards $ 5'OD. 00 ^ Positive Site Drainage ^ Exterior Landings at Doors ''// ® Deck Guardrails awAFLDOR fI9-MD~GS~9~VD l/GyLl.~000,Sj~1~e/pL6S. ^ Slabs & Walks Foundation Conditions Estimated Yalue to Upgrade to Present Building Code Standards $ o~~~a, ~(~ ~ Foundation ~WA~C Cp7lfr,F.~~/~ RSOlJE GRRDE ^ Damp proofing/Water proofing ~ Ext. Foundation Insulation R-10 ^ Foundation Drainage System ^ Poly Under All Floor Slabs Plumbing System Estimated value to Upgrade to Present Building Code Standards $ 540.OIJ ^ Plumbing Vents, Backflow Preventers (Laundry Sink, Exc. Spigots) Page 1 of 3 Hot Water HeatingSystem /~.Alr~~ySlG/~7 SE~[/X~da ^ Gas Piping & Gas Valves Installed, Accessible, and Labeled at Manifold & Appliances ^ Sump Pump, Electrical Outlet, Clear Water Discharge Piping to Exterior of House Heating Systecn/HVAC Estimated value to Upgrade to Present Building Code Standards $ SOo.OG ^ Supplies & Returns ^ Gas Vents - (1" clear for class B) ^ Bath Fans ^ Whole House Ventilation System ~ RANGE~{ovdS C ~) .Building Structure Estimated Value to Upgrade to Present Building Code Standards $ a3,ooa.d~ ^ Plates -Treated Bottom; Split Plates Sheathing ^ Floor Systems, Joists & Trusses ^ Foundation Drainage & Sump Pail ^ Stair Rise & Run (W/in 3/8" & 8" / 9") ^ Stair Headroom (6' - 8") ^ Under Stair Enclosure -''/z" Drywall Min. ^ "Hurricane Straps" /Rafter & Truss Anchors D ~ •Egress Windows & Wells w/ Ladder if Over 4' D. IG6/~000-~~6/~GdZG ^ Fire Door n to Garage Siding & Caulking IQG/n01rlr/~iQ~IQGOLG ~ SY/syGGf,.f' /QE /ILGf/G ~iQd/I.FGf Energy Conservation Estimated Value to U grade to Present Building Code Standards ^ Exterior Air/Wind Wash Barrier ^ Interior Air BarrierNapor Retarder ^ Foundation Wall Insulation R-~ ^ Exterior Wall Insulation R-19 ^ Rim Joist Insulation R-10 ^ Exposed Under Floor Insulation 1'Al ~9?y~G ,7NSUG~~TlMI Electrical System Estimated Yalue to Upgrade to Present Building Code Standards ~ ,[/DU.00 ^ Smoke Detectors (Bedrms, Halts, Bsmt, Vaults) aw~4 F~da~, ~60~L~s1~6/~jj,C ~' GFI Circuits ^ Arc Fault Circuits ^ Service Amperage - 100Amp Min. Electrical Panel ^ Stair Illumination - ALLEgress Windows TOTAL ESTIMATED VALUE TO UPGRADE TO PRESENT BUILDING CODE $~UI ~~ © D OTHER CRITERIA CONSIDERED: Page 2 of 3 r INSPECTOR SIGNATURE: DATE: Page 3 of 3 ~ i ~ % ~~ CITY OF MONTICELLO OBSERVATION NOTICE ~r~~~ - ~~ MONTICELLO DATE TIME Scheduled '~ Completed ! O y PERMIT #: G PC-RiX~l1 > ~ ADDRESS: ~~ ES> ~~u/~ Y OWNER: i~~,c y ~~~ t~z~s ~~a - Sl ~x1 CONTRACTOR: ^ Footings ^ Mechanical Rough-In ^ Mechanical Final ^ Foundation -Forms & Rebar ^ Framing ^ Plumbing Final ^ Foundation - Backfill ^ Insulation/Energy Conserv. ^ Site Drainage ^ Basement Under Floor Slab ^ Drywall ^ Building Final ^ Plumbing Rough-In ~ OTHER: /yQi4 ~D~N ~yS~ i~C7?O~/ COMMENTS: ~~ ~s~~~ 1s¢~~oo~ ~e r~ rs .9~v6~ aeD ~, ~r ~_.,a ~~ r c !C rr /~ifd~ ~LE~T/d1l.~G ~~~c~'C //GX~CJ ~~/.J~l-C~c~~O• ~~ ~a!/L` ~ ~~ INSPEC ION SULTS: REASONS: INSPECTOR: ~~ ^ APPROVED -PROCEED ^ WORK NOT READY ^ UNABLE TO INSPECT ^ NO PERMIT ISSUED ^ CORRECT WORK -PROCEED ^ CORRECTIONS INCOMPLETE CORRECT WORK -CALL FOR ^ UNABLE TO ACCESS INSPECTION ^ STOP WORK ORDER -SEE ABOVE ^ DO NOT OCCUPY Please call (763) 295 - 3060 for next inspection - 24 hours in advance. 7. Redevelopment ideas for recently purchased property located at 413 W 4th Street. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The EDA authorized the purchase of the property located at 413 4th Street. City staff attended the closing on December 19, 2008. Staff is under the impression the property was purchased in order to facilitate redevelopment. The Public Works Director completed an inspection of the property. Public Works Director Pashke relayed to staff the poor condition the house is in. The building would require extensive improvement costs to bring the house into building code compliance. Simply stated, the house should really be demolished and appropriate redevelopment occur. The City may have the opportunity to utilize State money if Monticello is a successful recipient of the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) grant. The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) will announce grant recipients sometime in February. There is a little grey area as to whether or not grant money can be expended on properties the City obtained prior to being award the NSP grant. Also, if NSP dollars were used to demolish the house, a certain price point of housing would have to be constructed in order to meet HUD's Average Median Income threshold. The property is zoned P-Z, Performance Zone. This zoning allows for a mix of residential (most likely higher density typically developed in an R-3 zone) and commercial/retail. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: 1. The only action being request is to provide staff with direction as to what the EDA's vision is for the subject property. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not have a specific recommendation at this time, however would like to solicit any comments or input as to how the property should be redeveloped in the future. This will lend to further research completed by staff regarding budget impacts and required processes. EDA: 1.14.09 Property Full Display, Single Family Residential, MLS #: 3538843 F 413 W 4th Street, Monticello, MN 55362 Status; Active List Price: $55,000 More photos are available for this property. rs Add to Watched Items Total Bed/Bath: 2/ 2 Garage: 2 Year Built: 1900 MLS Area: 341 - Wright County (Except Buffalo) Style: (SF) One 1/2 Stories Const Status: Previously Owned Foundation Size: 880 AbvGrdFinSgFt: 1,209 BeiGrdFinSgFt: No Total Fin SgFt: 1,209 Acres: 0.370 Lot Size: 99 x 165 List Date: 05/0612008 Received By MLS: 05/06/2008 Original List Price: $55,000 'S., Mi<roeDdC' Ma' pPoint' 39� �! 413 W 4th 3treE Monticello ..{ f 75 0 o�. 2' @200,5 MlcrosaftNNal!h�Q�ao4 r doiele atlas, Inc. Map Page: 31 Map Coord: D2 Directions: Hwy 25 to W 4th Steet to home (Click icon for Virtual Earth Map) TAX INFORMATION Property ID; 155010029020 Tax Year: 2007 Tax Amt: $942 Assess Bal: $ Tax w/assess: $942 Assess Pend: Unknown Homestead: No Days On Market: 15 CDOM History General Property Information Legal Description: Lengthy, call listing agent County: Wright Postal City: Monticello School District: 882 - Monticello, 763-271-0300 Complex/Dev/Sub: Common Wall: No Road Frontage: City Zoning: Residential -Single Accessibility: None Remarks Agent Remarks: BANK OWNED -SOLD AS IS CONDITION -NO WARRANTIES -AGENTS TO VERIFY ALL INFORMATION Public Remarks: As is sale. Nice lot with mature trees. Build your own equity. Structure Information Room Level Dimen Other Rooms Level Dimen Heat: Baseboard, Hot Water Living Rm Main 12x13 Fuel: Natural Gas Dining Rm Main 1Dx12 Air Cond: None Family Rm Main 8x12 Water: City Water - Connected Kitchen Main 11x11 Bathrooms Sewer: City Sewer - Connected Bedroom 1 Upper 12x13 Total: 2 3/4: 0 1/4: 0 Garage: 2 Bedroom 2 Upper 9x12 Full; 1 1/2: 1 Oth Prkg: Bedroom 3 Pool: Bedroom 4 Bath Description: Dining Room Desc: Family Room Char: Fireplaces: 0 Appliances: Basement: Exterior: Roof: Amenities -Unit: Parking Char: 112 Master, Main Floor Full Bath Main Level Fireplace Characteristics: Partial Metal/Vinyl Asphalt Shingles Detached Garage Financial Cooperating Broker Compensation Buyer Broker Comp: 2.7000 % Sub -Agent Comp: 0 % Facilitator Comp: 2.7000 Variable Rate: N List Type: Exclusive Right To Sell Sellers Terms: Cash, Conventional, DVA, FHA Owner is an Agent?: No Contact Information Listing Agent: Walter J Coudron 763-286-1998 Appointments: 763-295-3456 Listing Office: Edina Realty, Inc. Office Phone: 763-295-3456 MLS #: 3538843 Address: 413 W 4th Street, Monticello, MN 55362 WRIG - Wright County Full Tax Display PID#: 155010029020 Plat Property Type: Residential Tax Year: 2007 Property Information for 413 4th St W, Monticello, MN 55362 Subdivision (Addn): ORIGINAL PLAT Lot/Block: 002/029 Postal City: Parcel Size: School District: 882 - Monticello Acres: 0.38 County Prop Type: 201 Year Built: 1900 Homestead Code: Homestead Legal Description: Sect -11 Twp -121 Range -025 Original Plat Lot -002 Block -029 Lot 3 &Lot 2 Ex Nwly 33Ft Thof Sd Nwly 33Ft Of Lt2 Des As Th Prt Of Lt2 Ly Nwly Of Ln Drwn Par To Nwly Ln Of Lt2 &33Ft Sely Of Sd Nwly Ln Of Lt2 Blk29 Owner/Taxpayer Information Owner Name, Address: Petrus Zandviiet, 413 4th St W, Monticello, MN, 55362 Taxpayer Name, Address: Petrus Zandviiet, 413 4th St W, Monticello, MN, 55362 Market Values/Taxes/Subrecord Market Values Taxes Subrecord Status Land: $44,700 Base Tax: $803.34 Watershed: Building: $71,400 Assessment Amount: $138.66 Delinquent Status: Total: $116,100 Tax w/Assessment: $94200 Green Acres/G.A. SgFt: 0.00 Click Here to check for Tax and Valuation Histor Sales Information Most Recent Sale: Sale Date: 10-18-2005 Sale Price: $149,000 Sale Code: W - Warranty Deed Click Here to check forpossible additional Sale History Property Maps from REsearch MN: Click Here to open PLAT Man Click Here to open GIS Map Detailed Dwelling Characteristics Gross Bldg Sq Ft: Building Style; 1-1/2 Story Total Beds/Baths: 2J1.50 Livable SgFt: 708 Number of Stories: Famlly/Living Rm: / First Floor Sq Ft: Building Shape: Dining/Other Rm: / Second Floor SgFt: Building Condition: Kitchen; Basement SgFt: Building Construction: D- Wood Fireplaces: Garage SgFt: Garage Type/Capacity: / Heat: Electric Deck/Patio Sq Ft; Roof Type/Cover: Gable/ Air: Window Porch SgFt: Exterior Walls: vinyl Total Rooms: 0 Pool (Y/N)/SgFt: Interior Walls: Lot Zoning: R Foundation Size: Lot Size: n.....« C'k-rimy Level Level Level Room 6smt 1 2 3 Room Bsmt 1 2 3 Room Bsmt 1 2 3 Bedrooms: Baths Full: Kitchen: Family Rm: Baths 3/4: Fireplace: Living Room: Baths 1/2: Other Room: Information is Believed to be Reliable But Not Guaranteed 51b -e- T1 9. Sub -committee Policy: Background: It staff's understanding that the following committees currently exist: Marketing, Higher Education, and Housing. To date the Marketing and Higher Education committee's have met on a fairly regular basis. It appears that the Housing Committee has not meet since April of 2008. In order to get a better handle on the committees, staff is proposing to adopt the attached sub- committee policy. The policy is intended to generally formalize a few sub -committee's existence and scope. Alternate Actions: 1. Motion to approve the Sub -Committee Policy. 2. Motion to deny the Sub -Committee Policy. 3. Table action on the proposed Sub -Committee Policy. Supporting Data: 1. Proposed Sub -Committee Policy Staff Recommendation: It would seem appropriate to provide some guidance as to the existence and functionality of a few committees that have been formed from members serving on the IEDC and EDA. It is difficult for staff to address appointment of members to committees, frequency of meetings, and scope of work, when guidelines have not been established. The attached propose Sub -Committee Policy is not trying to cover all aspect of a committee's structure and functions. The policy is simply trying to set a frame work of organization while allowing flexibility. Staff is recommending that the Housing Committee dissolve at this point. It would seem quite appropriate that since the EDA acts as the HRA, the EDA as a whole should handle housing issues and topics directly. It should be noted that several realtors, bankers, title companies, and staff have formed a working group to address the foreclosure issue. Partnerships and desired objectives will be formed from this group and will offer any insight directly to the EDA. The IEDC met on January 6, 2009 and approved the attached Sub -Committee policy. EDA 1.14.09 Sub -Committee Policy Purpose: The City of Monticello contains the Economic Development Authority (EDA) and the Industrial and Economic Development Committee (IEDC). Within these two organizations, several sub- committees have been created. The purpose of this policy is to provide guidance and attempt to formalize the tasks, committee members, and purpose of each sub -committee. Marketing Committee: Purpose: The marketing committee is charged with effectively and efficiently marketing City owned land. Marketing efforts shall strive to result in development of businesses that will create additional jobs, increase tax base, and provide an overall enhancement to Monticello's economic vitality. The Marketing Committee will work in coordination with the broader City of Monticello marketing strategies. Members: Committee members shall consist of at least two representatives serving on the IEDC and two representatives serving on the EDA. Membership shall be limited to a maximum of five members. It is strongly encouraged that the IEDC Chair and EDA President serve on the Marketing Committee. City Staff will serve as a City liaison. Terms: Committee members shall serve at least a two year term. Committee members shall be appointed at the end of the year (December) upon term expiration. Meetings: At a minimum the committee will meet once a quarter. Higher Education Committee: Purpose: The Higher Education Committee established a vision statement "To promote higher education to better develop our economy, community, and people" and a mission statement "The Higher Education Committee will listen to and meet the needs of our stakeholders, adapt to the changing environment, and strengthen the bonds between our economy and its people. We will create learning opportunities by building partnerships and be right sized." Members: Membership should consist of between six to eight voting members. Membership representation should attempt to be obtained from the local hospital, local school district, surrounding educational facilities, at least two members from the business community, and one member from the EDA and one member from the IEDC. The committee may also find it appropriate to appoint a member at large or request student representation. City Staff will serve as a City liaison. Members shall serve a two year term. Vacancies shall be filled by the recommendation of the committee and ratified by the City Council. Officers: The committee shall elect a chairperson who will serve a two year term. Appointment of the chairperson shall be determined in December of each year for the following year. Meetings: The Higher Education Committee shall hold a monthly meeting as long as it is determined by the committee that there is a need. At a minimum the committee will hold a quarterly meeting. 8. Establish 2009 Objectives: Background: The IEDC and the EDA are holding a joint meeting on Tuesday, January 20, 2009. The purpose of the meeting is to review each group's general purpose and governing powers; along with establishing objectives for 2009. In an effort to be most effective at the joint meeting and also to facilitate apro-active work plan for 2009, the EDA should outline a few objectives and/or goals for 2009. As a point of reference from the past year, included in the packet is a copy of the 2008 Action Plan established by the EDA. The IEDC put together an outline of objectives for 2009 at their January meeting. Land Use: 1. Review current Economic Development section within the Comprehensive Plan 2. Review current inventory of City owned industrial land and determine if efforts should begin to obtain additional industrial land for future 3. Review current zoning practices Transportation: 1. Review benefit/location of third I-94 interchange 2. Mass transit potential 3. How can we begin to alleviate Highway 25 traffic 4. Look at planning for an additional River crossing 5. Review efforts to expand I-94 expansion Business Retention/Communication: 1. Business Survey 2. Further define purpose/platform of joint IEDC/EDA events 3. Continue to assist City staff in the IEDC section of the Monticello Business Insider Supporting Data: 1. 2008 Action Plan 2. Economic Development section of the Comprehensive Plan Recommendation: Included in the packet is a copy of the Economic Development section of the Comprehensive Plan. The EDA will be asked to look at this section in great detail at the February meeting. The Planning Commission is required to review the Comprehensive Plan on a yearly basis and desire input from the EDA. The Authority will need to determine if the overall content is still the direction the City should proceed, or if a major amendment should be initiated. As a note, the annual review is not meant as a grammar or word smiting exercise. The purpose of the exercise is meant as a checks and balance process. The EDA may desire to take the following information into consideration when formulating preliminary objectives and action items for 2009: 1. The Higher Education Committee will be completing a survey and needs assessment of the community to determine what the educational gaps are in Monticello 2. Is it the desire of the EDA to begin looking at where the next City owned industrial park should be located 3. Due to economic conditions, should the EDA be putting forward efforts to market and solicit grant and low interest loan opportunities to local businesses 4. Business retention/communication efforts 5. Tax abatement 6. Market study's Staff will write an action plan for 2009 once input and direction has been obtained from the EDA. EDA 1.14.09 CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2008 ACTION PLAN The Action Plan is prepared to serve as an implementation plan to achieve the objectives within the Economic Development Chapter of the 2008 Monticello Comprehensive Plan. The Action Plan is prepared as a short and long term plan with the intent to assess, annually, the development strategies completed and/or need for modification. The Economic Development Chapter identifies the Land Use as PLACES TO WORK. THE TWO OBJECTIVES OF PLACES TO WORK: ATTRACTING JOBS AND EXPANDING THE TAX BASE. The four development strategies suggested in the Comprehensive Plan: • Use Comprehensive Plan to provide adequate locations for future job-producing development (Preserve sufficient land for Places to Work over the next twenty-five years) • Adhere to the Comprehensive Plan to encourage stable business setting and promote investment and expansion of facilities • Coordinate utility planning and manage other development to ensure that expansion areas are capable of supporting new development in a timely manner. • Evaluate the need and feasibility of additional city-owned business parks as a means attracting the desired business. ALL FOUR OF THESE STRATEGIES RELATE TO IDENTIFYING A LOCATION(S) FOR FUTURE PLACES TO WORK. ATTRACTING JOBS: For new business development. 1. Identify and rank the types of jobs desired for purpose of prioritizing locations. A. Bioscience, technology, research and development, corporate headquarters, business office, wholesale showrooms, and related uses. B. Other general industrial development in the areas of manufacturing, processing, warehousing, distribution, and related businesses. C. Non-industrial businesses that provide necessary support to the underlying development objectives of this land. Examples of supporting land uses include lodging, office supplies, and repair services. 2. Identify wage levels desired for new businesses. A. Emphasis on jobs at higher wage levels that allow more people to live and work in Monticello. B. Promote wage levels that provide incomes needed to purchase decent housing, support local businesses and support local government services. HOW DO WE ACCOMPLISH? WHAT WOULD IMPROVE MONTICELLO'S SUCCESS AT ATTRACTING JOBS AT HIGHER WAGE LEVEL? 1. Access to education. (Both K-12 and higher education) 2. Availability, reliability, and affordability of utilities * Fiber optics bandwidth (Internet) * Electricity * Gas * Telephone/cable * Municipal utilities 3. Availability ofmove-up housing. 4. Regional Commercial Center. Regional Health Care Center. 5. Natural green spaces and recreational opportunities. EXPANDING THE TAX BASE. 1. Identify adequate locations for future new business development (type of job). A. Assess existing land availability. B. Identify locations available to attract identified jobs and businesses. 2. Assess each location for identified type of job and business: A. Accessibility of transportation route. B. Capability and feasibility for development of infrastructure (water, sanitary sewer, storm water, and roads.) C. Compatibility with the Natural Resources Inventory (NRI). Natural amenities such as wetlands, green space, etc. D Capability and feasibility to develop infrastructure or amenities to meet technology needs of the future. E. Identify soil conditions. 3. Promote investment and encourage stable business setting: A. Research availability (willingness to sell) of identified locations. B. Develop site criteria to match locations to protect investment of business and city according to type of job and business. C. Evaluate the feasibility of city-owned or privately-owned business parks. D. Promote and research grants for development of business parks. E. If city-owned business park, identify sources of funds for purchase of locations. WHY WOULD A BUSINESS LOCATE IN MONTICELLO? WILL THE BUSINESS LOOSE ITS EMPLOYMENT BASE? WHY WOULD AN EMPLOYEE WANT TO LIVE IN MONTICELLO? AFFORDABLE? DOES THE COMMUNITY HAVE AN ATTRACTIVE APPEAL? WHY WOULD A BUSINESS DRIVE ANOTHER 15 MILES OUTSIDE THE RING-ROAD (Highway 101)? Ideally, the Comprehensive Plan does not have an Economic Develop- ment chapter. The Land Use Plan would be sufficient to channel market forces to meet the development objectives of the community. In reality, certain development needs cannot be met without public intervention. The Economic Development chapter of the Plan focuses on the aspects of Monticello's future that require particular attention and action by the City. These actions include: - Attracting jobs - Expanding the tax base - Enhancing the economic vitality of Downtown - Facilitating redevelopment Attracting Jobs The creation and retention of jobs is one of the most important objec- tives for Monticello. Jobs, particularly jobs with income levels capable of supporting a family, are key to achieving many elements of Monticello's vision for the future. - Jobs attract residents to the community. Jobs will pay a critical role in creating the type of "move up" housing sought by the City. - Jobs provide the income needed to support local business and govern- ment services. - Retention of businesses promote community stability by keeping jobs and residents in Monticello The Community Context chapter of the Comprehensive Plan contains a section on Employment. This section contains data about employment in Monticello and of its residents. Among the key findings in this section are: - Monticello has been a net importer of employment -there are more jobs in Monticello than workers living in the community. According to the 2000 Census, 5,111 people reported working in Monticello while 4,262 Monticello residents were part of the civilian labor force. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Economic Development ~ 4-1 - The job base in Monticello is made up of a wide range of small to medium sized employers. In 2007, Only five employers report more than 100 employ- ees,Monticello Public Schools, Xcel Energy, Cargill Kitchen Solutions, Monticello-Big Lal<e Hospital, and Ultra Machining Company (according to listing of major employers from Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development). - Workers for Monticello businesses come primar- ily from Monticello and the surrounding region. Over 80% of people working in Monticello lived in Monticello, adjacent townships, Big Lake, or other places in Wright and Sherburne counties (2000 Census). - The 2000 Census found that only 26% of people working Monticello also lived in the city. - 69% of working Monticello residents held jobs in other places (2000 Census). More than one-third worked in Hennepin County. - The 2000 Census reported a mean travel time to work of 26 minutes. 45% of Monticello workers indicated travel time to work of 30 minutes or more. In 2007, St. Cloud State University conducted an as- sessment of establishing a bioscience park in Mon- ticello. The results of this study provide important insights on future job growth. The study identified a series "strengths" for attracting bioscience firms to Monticello: - Land availability (compared to Metro Area). - Access to major highways (I-94, U.S. 10 and STH 25). - Regional growth of employment base. - Development of local fiber optic system. - Proximity to universities. - Overall location. - Expansive park system. - Monticello Community Center. Many of these factors would also apply to attracting other types of businesses. The St. Cloud State study also made note of several weaknesses in attracting these business to the com- munity. The list included: - Lacl< of hotels and lodging. - No defined plan. - Small community. - Low tax base. The recommendations of this Study apply to efforts to establishing a bioscience park and to overall develop- ment of Places to Worlc - Site Location -Need to have site that are suitable and attractive to potential businesses available and ready for development. - Funding -Funding is essential to provide sites and for incentives to attract and retain the appropriate businesses. Local, state and private funding sources should be explored. - Tax treatment -The City gains important tools from special tax zones that have been made avail- able at state and federal level. - Partnerships -Attracting jobs to Monticello re- quires partnerships with other stakeholders. Expanding the Tax Base A traditional objective of local economic development planning is the expansion of the property tax base. Under the current system of local government finance, property taxes are the largest source of city revenue. For this reason, it is an important aspect of economic development planning in Monticello. Understanding the Property Tax System Effective strategies to promote the growth of the tax base require a clear understanding of the property tax system. Property Valuation There are three forms of property valuation. The foun- dation of the property tax system is Estimated Market Value. This amount is the value of a parcel of property as set by the County Assessor. In some circumstances, the State Legislature limits the amount of Estimated 4-2 ~ Economic Development City of Monticello Market Value that can be used for taxation. These adjustments result in the Taxable Market Value. The value used to calculate property taxes is Tax Capacity. Tax Capacity Value is a percentage of Taxable Market Value. The percentage factors are set by the State Legislature and vary by class of property. Figure 4-1: Changes in Tax Capacity Value -Commercial/Industrial aso,ooo aoo,ooo 350,000 300,000 i. 250,000 a ~ 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 to 2007 Changes in the Tax System Traditional economic development theory seeks commercial and in- dustrial development as a means of building tax base. Historically, the system supported this approach. A dollar of estimated market value of commercial-industrial property carried a higher tax capacity value than residential property. Over the past twelve years, tax "reforms" by the State Legislature have changed this situation. The chart in Figure 4-1 shows how legislative changes have reduced the tax base created by commercial-industrial development. This chart is based on the tax capacity value for $3,000,000 of Taxable Market Value. The legislative changes in the rates used to set tax capacity mean that this property produced 56% less tax base in 2007 than in 1997. This trend takes on additional meaning when compared to other classi- fications of property. Figure 4-2 compares the tax capacity value for the primary forms of development in Monticello. The valuations in this chart are based on assumptions about the density of development and estimated market value of new development. Changes in these assumptions will alter the results. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Economic Development ~ 4-3 Figure 4-2: Tax Capacity Comparison 300,000 250,000 200,000 v A D ~,~~, 150,000 a u x r 100,000 50,000 0 Industrial Retail Office Single Townhome Apt In t i 9ff1CR ~ Townhome Acres 10 10 10 10 10 10 Coverage 30% 30% 30% 3 6 12 Development (SF or Units) 130,680 130,680 130,680 30 60 120 EMV per SF or Unit 65 80 100 400,000 250,000 150,000 EMV 8,494,200 10,454,400 13,068,000 12,000,000 15,000,000 18,000,000 Tax Capacity 169,134 208,338 260,610 120,000 150,000 225,000 Figure 4-3: Tax Capacity Comparison All Other T. 5° Energy 39% 4-4 ~ Economic Development City of Monticello This chart clearly illustrates the current reality for eco- nomic development strategies. All forms of develop- ment contribute tax base to the community. It is risky placing too much weight on one type of development for tax base growth. In addition, cities do not control the critical elements of the tax system. Changes in the system lead to unanticipated results at the local level. Tax base growth has implications that are unique to Monticello. The chart in Figure 4-3 shows the distribu- tion oftaxable (Tax Capacity) value in Monticello. Xcel Energy creates almost 40% of the City's tax base. While it has provided a unique asset for the community, it is essential that the tax base become more diversified. Enhancing Downtown Maintaining a successful Downtown is an important element of the economic development plan for Mon- ticello. Downtown is a 1<ey business district providing goods, services and jobs for the community. Down- town is unlike any other business district because of its unique role in Monticello's identity and heritage. The Land Use chapter describes plans, policies and strategies related to Downtown Monticello. Downtown is part of the Economic Development chapter because of the likelihood that city actions and investments will be needed to achieve community objectives for Down- town. This intervention may include: - Public improvements to provide services or to enhance the Downtown environment. - Provision of adequate parking supply. - Acquisition of land. - Preparation of sites for development. - Removal of other physical and economic barriers to achieve community objectives. These actions may require the use of tax increment financing, tax abatement or other finance tools avail- able to the City. Facilitating Redevelopment The Comprehensive Plan seeks to create a place where land use plans, policies and controls work together with private investment to properly maintain all properties in Monticello. It is recognized that this approach may not succeed in all locations. Despite the best plans and intentions, properties may become physically deterio- ratedand/oreconomically inviable. In such places, city intervention may be need to facilitate redevelopment and prevent the spread of blight. This intervention may include: - Acquisition of land. - Preparation of sites for development. - Remediation of polluted land. - Construction or reconstruction of public improve- ments. - Provision of adequate parking supply. - Removal of other physical and economic barriers to achieve community objectives. These actions may require the use of tax increment financing, tax abatement or other finance tools avail- able to the City. Development Strategies The following strategies will be used to implement the Comprehensive Plan in the area of Economic Develop- ment: 1. The City must use the Comprehensive Plan to pro- vide adequate locations for future job-producing development (Places to Work). 2. The City should adhere to the Comprehensive Plan to encourage stable business setting and promote investment and expansion of facilities. 3. The City should coordinate utility planning and manage other development to ensure that expan- sion areas are capable of supporting new develop- ment in a timely manner. 4. the City should evaluate the need and feasibility of additional city-owned business parks as a means attracting the desired businesses. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Economic Development ~ 4-5 5. The City should establish a plan to evaluate the feasibility of implementing the recommendation of the St. Cloud State study and if feasible to take necessary action to attract bioscience businesses to Monticello. 6. The City will continue to work with existing busi- nesses to maintain an excellent business environ- ment, retain jobs and facilitate expansions. 7. The City will work with the Monticello-Big Lalce Hospital to ensure the retention and to promote the expansion of health care services in Monticello. 8. The City will use the Comprehensive Plan to main- tainand enhance the quality of life in Monticello as a tool for attracting businesses and jobs. 4-6 ~ Economic Development City of Monticello 13. Report from Executive Director. General: Bertram Chain of Lakes: The City completed the purchase of the first phase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property on Tuesday, December 30, 2009. The City and the County are now owners of approximately 300 acres. A task force will be formed and begin working on strategic planning for the obtained property and overall Bertram Chain of Lakes property. Z. Otter Creek Crossing: Staff was asked to solicit insight from the IEDC and EDA regarding purchasing a 13 acre piece of property from Chadwick located immediately south of Monticello Business Center (See attached map). As a point of reference, the City has approximately 30.5 acres of developable property remaining within the business park. The City also has approximately 34 acres under contract for deed located immediately adjacent to said industrial park. Specific pricing for the 13 acre parcel has not been discussed. Staff is interested in obtaining feedback regarding whether or not the City_should begin discussions regarding purchasing the property at a fair and reasonable market price. IEDC: Attached is the IEDC December agenda. Business Retention: The Business Newsletter will be distributed to the business community the week of January 11, 2009 Business Initiative: The direct marketing piece is complete. Staff will begin direct mailing and distributing to applicable businesses the week of January 11, 2009 Housing Initiatives: Information was included as part of a staff report. Informational Handouts: Recent ads and news article published by Monticello included. Future Agenda Items: The next EDA meeting will be Wednesday, February 11, 2009. Upcoming agenda topics (not necessary on the next agenda) will include: 1.Revisions to the GMEF criteria. 2. Consideration to review Development Agreement /Private Contact administrative costs and fees/deposits (discussion after TIF analysis is completed). Joint EDA/IEDC is Tuesday, January 20, 2009 at 7:OOam. AGENDA MONTICELLO INDUSTRIAL & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Tuesday, January 6, 2009 7:00 a.m., Boom Island Room IEDC Mission Statement: To increase the tax base and the number of liveable wage-level jobs in Monticello by promoting industrial and economic growth and working to maintain a desirable business environment. MEMBERS: Chair Lynne Dahl-Fleming, Vice Chair Don Roberts, Bill Tapper, Dick Van Allen, Don Roberts, Dan Olson, Don Tomann, Zona Gutzwiller, Patrick Thompson, Rich Harris, Wayne Elam, and Marshall Smith, Charlotte Gabler, Elaine DeWenter. 1. Call to Order 2. Vote to approve the December 2, 2008 IEDC minutes 3. Economic Development Director Update 4. Reports: a. City Update b. Fiber Optic c. Chamber 5. Approve Elaine DeWenter as a new member of the IEDC 6. Sub-Committee Policy 7. IEDC Planning Groups a. Establishing of Objectives for 2009 8. Adjournment. (8:30am) IEDC 1.6.09 3. Economic Development Director Updates: a. General: 1. Bertram Chain of Lakes: The City completed the purchase of the first phase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property on Tuesday, December 30, 2009. The City and the County are now owners of approximately 300 acres. A task force will be formed and begin working on strategic planning for the obtained property and overall Bertram Chain of Lakes property. 2. Otter Creek Crossing: Staff was asked to solicit the IEDC's opinion regarding purchasing a 13 acre piece of property from Chadwick located immediately south of Monticello Business Center (See attached map). As a point of reference, the City has approximately 30.5 acres of developable property remaining within the business park. The City also has approximately 34 acres under contract for deed located immediately adjacent to said industrial park. Specific pricing for the 13 acre parcel has not been discussed. Staff is interested in obtaining feedback re ag rdin~ whether or not the City should begin discussions re ag rding purchasing the Qroperty at a fair and reasonable market price. b. EDA: The EDA is currently working on revising the Greater Monticello Enterprises Fund Guidelines. This is a revolving loan fund specifically set up to help the local business community with the purchase of equipment or real property. The guidelines are a little difficult to understand and therefore the EDA directed staff to look at the document in conjunction with two members from the EDA. A proposed revised document will be presented to the EDA at their January meeting. c. Planning Commission (See attached agenda): The Planning Commission and City Council will be holding a joint meeting on January 6, 2009 at Spm to discuss the proposed new sign ordinance. It should be noted that the Government Affairs group received a presentation from Steve Grittman, from NAC, regarding the proposed changes. The discussion was beneficial and comments are being brought forwarded to the Planning Commission and City Council. The Planning Commission will also be completing an annual review of the 2008 Monticello Comprehensive Plan. The Land Use planning group should review the Economic Development section of the Comprehensive Plan. This group should begin to evaluate on a broad scope if the Cit~progressin~ according to the statements included in the Comprehensive Plan or if it is believed the City should move in a different direction. It should be noted that an annual review of the Comprehensive Plan is not meant to review grammar statements, but rather to reflect if the City, overall, is compiling with the Comprehensive Plan. Furthermore, an annual review ist the time to determine if the statements included in the plan accurately reflect the City direction should be moving or if a major Comprehensive Plan Amendment should be considered. d. Committees: Marketing Committee: The new marketing post card is finally complete and will be printed the first of the year. The marketing piece will be distributed to identified target groups and contacts to hopefully result in additional interest in Monticello. The marketing committee will meet hopefully later in January and discuss the opportunity to list City owned land with a commercial broker. 2. Higher Education Committee: nothing new to report. e. Business Communications: 1. Business Newsletter: See attached copy. Distribution will occur within the first two weeks in January. 2. Related newsletters/articles: None are included. f. Future Meeting Dates: 1. Next Meeting: Tuesday, February 3, 2009 2. Joint IEDC/EDA meeting: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 at 7:OOam ,7rs9-x msaz u9 NOSY I'S6'w )326.16 NpJ~3'16'E --xC - 685.1 ~ E en x - sx x o u p-.~^ . I f p Z i. scc. ,o ~ ~ _ _ _ _ ,~' _ 3~ - k~- _ _ a. ,' -. ,; - „ , , ~ " s ^ - " / ~q~ ,. _ : ~ ~' ~ a n I 9 9euEi w y I ~~ ' ~ I ryeo ?5'167 75 03 , l I 5 ,~ ~~ ~ g . i V/ - .9.9r - maxim„ „~.. _ I ~ / / sxnoax-x _ J " I c m // F9'~/ u Ig I I , Vi r„ I ~ // / !~/ - Sao fib: I ~ ,yl/ ~. ~ ~~ ~ ~l L ~ xs ~ x // • ;,~ I / / it ' / / ,~ I it- zis~ ~// ~/ N / ~. CB'x ; SOOY9"OH"E I / Y °v ~ 3C ...~ : '.~, 82.9.,92 .99 .! S _.. .-..._ ._.... _ - _-._ ~ _ 1.9J \ T / ~/ ~• L ~ ~~ I r ~ /// /'/ ~ mR ,. //ro~/ I ~ ~ m // / x ~ 4~ CF ~~/'\ lea-v w / f / I ' ".,a ~v ° / "°L° // >e>.! fay '~$ro~c~ ~ g A / w\~N'// 8- ,/ sarza•rs• ~ ~~,o,y i' ~ m // / to ~ !, A 6~.`P ~ jc `, ~ / ,,t _ X44 tia 6.. /~ \\ ~ ~m ~ .' /'~ ~ _,-- .~°"ice °, PR' ~'~'~f, v~J\ ~~ / / ~~ yr f~ J ,c• ~ ~ "~^a -_ ~/ .,, /~ g ~p9~,,I9~ 4,a i ~;\ v'.y d~/3°,~~-us. uuE ~ ~ o ~• _ / ~yrne 99au '~. ~ v S(o3y,)~,ucmcEnzi ~ ~ ~ N ' /' ~ Yrx /-j ~/ /T\ i ~,TP.~9 s B9 s~98s.~. lamAlsl ":LI 1. ~/ ~/ I uuo Mre•r°juusl .%/: /' ~ i~.4~~i~t, ' , ,pp / xOO'IO"16'w (MEAS~ /~ ~ ~~ ____~ I~ a ~.' / / e~~1 j ____{igr MM7]IS'Y (OECD) , k'Nb ~~ iu ti ~ p' / ~/ O 3y~ 8 • Y/ ~ O`y'~j ~~$.a ~°a ~~~~wm I_ ~ poi' ~ ~/ .~ -`~~ ~ / / 1 / ~U~o Obi ~;~r~~4'k,p+ ~/ /~/~~4P ~ ,uV 3~// /.. ). ~~ /`•, y j={~5~ lu}Q. 'r.( I " J~"~ ~ /y~d/x~'//tid,. }y~iF~'~ / 1 /-/ - / 2 ~md ^t ~'YC ~~; I `A''J$,o1B. //j/L/ z~ ,=V ~ // / \/`%` "~, 8d ~'~~'~ 'Y-r~"~-'~' ,~\9 / ' ~ / ERR ~S`', ~- '+~ \ Yr s Pte' )~ "~ ~" ~ _ -+ ~ ' ,.. .. it i p / .c~ O / ~ / `":s' o ~~" r{~\\ `~~~r \ /~',~ ~ /~ /'~.c\ Y 3eoa a ems ^_ s o m OGjz~ ~~M Z~ 1.~.; I ~ ~ ~ ~ cs c 3 a ~ ° r ~ux ~ % Z 8 \ v. ~~ ~ / -~ x ~~ ~ 3 ~ 8 ~\ nap A'~ 'kes.Z / ~ ~o s x x ~° 3 3 1 `s9''0~' z X 8 4 y- g _y CI) ~ "C~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ y ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ o v ~ ~,~ G ~ ~ ~. ^ .~+ ~ •~ V ~'" , ~+.! ~ _~ W v ~ ~ ~ ~ w v a Q ~ v ~ ~ > ~ ~ rO, ^^ ,, W S••~ V +`~J' i--i Q ~ ~-~+ U ~ X H ~, ~ 0 v v G c" v ~ ~ L ~-.1 .~.~ O _ (~ c v O d y M "" •"" ~ ~ ~" N •O ..ur ~~ c M ~ .~ -.: _~~~ dG ~ a~~~ o G •v i. ~ a, „Q; O •~ ~ R ~ y L ^ ~ GJ w° ° ~~ w ~ c ~ Q. C ~ ~ c W `.. a ~1 ~ V ~ v •.~-. c 0 d ~~ ~! ~~' Vi -~ y ~t ;~ ~ ~ o "~? .J~~r n'rot~iu he nri; tool el'fnrt hrhind acity- Twiilc lihcroptic nClwork in Mun- ticelln xtartrd in Niav 30(15 by indi- vidual citii.cus :uul business Iradcrs driven by lire belief that conllul over its conununity's tcchnulogv tinurc is a key ingrcdicnt hr ceunomic prus- pcritp. Today. Ihe City continues lu push funvard with that sane drive. to serve. the canunnic. development opportunities which are present when a nwnicipality takes Ihe initia- tive u, serve the cnntnnmity in ,t new way involving technology as inli'r structure. The original goal of the. cr.+nvnuniry-owned and locally uper- atcc! liher project was ut improve local economic dcvelopmonl uppnr- hntitics by offering something that would dil7crcntialc the City nl Mon- ticello from ncighhoring comnwni- tics.'1'cchnology is playing a key fac- lur in haw businesses grow. Technol- ogy adv:ma:d infrasuucturc of a fihrr optic. network in the city limits could crcatean anractiveantcnity I'nr Ihe. city and become. a considcruion liar whV hosincsscs, and pWemially residents, would locate here. Thr city's Pibcr Optic. Tack Force rccummcndcd to City Council that a rc;l'crcndum qucetion he put to the vutors un September I8. 2(107. Tlt© Momiccllo city residents scot a loud nussagc to the City Council with a 74%~appruvul. `fhe utnuante of Ihe rel'ercndurn rctlected pcetplcs desire I'ix a locally operated tclecornnumicaliuns com- pany that was curtununity owned. where the citi;rens have lupin on service levels and upcruions. With FiherNet Monticcsllo, change was un its way. In ortJer to complete tfic libcr network it was dctennincd that no taxpayer numcy should be user( and instead, revenue. bonds wuulil (insure. the. projtct. In order to obtain investor linancm for Ihr. prrject Ihe. city lirsf had In resenrch tnd study the featsthihty nl the project. This required :ut ttn;tlysrs of the soundness ol'tht f~ihcrtiel. Monlici~l- lu business plan hci~ro financing could be securul. A Pat.cibtltly Study was developed Ii> determine fiber needs :md associated community nppcxtwtilics; assess the. henelits and risks of investing in at fiber network and provide preliminau'y oral pmjcc- lions ascocianed with Ihe. option, that. would be rcconunended. 7 he results of Ihe. study pnwided a viable and sound husinrs pL•ot that could he presatled to the. bond holder FihcrNct's city-wide IOIt~r', liher optic network woulU be availahlc to every home and businccs iiuirlc. the ciq limits. TPtc pntjcct would he linancod with rcvunuc bonds which arc w he paid back by revenues ecn- crucd from those. faking Iclepltonc. cahleTV ant.( interne( services with- ow apledge of city taxes. On May 21 sl [he City of Monticello obtained conuniuncnls Irom private investors to purchase revenue honris su('licicnl. In finance the estahlishntent of a city trwnctd and oporatcd lelccodununiua- tinns uliliry t.:allcd "FihcrNcl Mi,mi- cello". On May 22nd fhe City Coun- cil was prcparod to ntc^.ct In vou: on aunitorizing sale of the laonrls. Less than 4t{ hums prior to that intenUcd voi.c TpS Telecom thruuglt its su~- sidiury. Hridgcwata "T'clc:phonc. sorvod a lawsuit against [he f.;ity claiming that Minnrsow ware laws do nra Brant. the. right w use, revemte bonds for eswblishmenl of a telccommunicatiim.e systcnt, despite express language in the slaat[e allow- ing revenue hoods m be. issued I'or revenue based "utilities and puhlic cunvenicnccs". The city was cunfidcm Ihat it was well within tts (Dent rights to use rev- enuc bonilS of build a municipal noI- wurk and Ih:tl it would prevail ~euinst the soli. anti the City Council votcxl unanimously irr 'vigorously oppose Ore lawsuit. 'fhe revenue. bonds in Ihe amenntt of `f25,h Million dollars were sold w private. investors this sununcr however the TDti law- suit nradc. Lhc proceeds from the bends unavailable by I'rccring the gooney in sit escrow actxtum at a crit- ical time when construction was ready w begin. The City Council voted ur stove fonv:vd with an I 1 mile fiber loop project in orc'ler tct prn1ecl. the project from increased costs that would inevitably arise if constntc.lion continued to he delayed. Court Hearing dates occurred dur- ing the sunnner months of .tune, July and Auuus[. Un L7ctnber 8, Wright County District Court issuer( its rul- ing disrnissin~ the lawsuit rnt IhC merits. In his rulinc, Judae lonadtan .lasprr cuncaudcd Ihut "ihc City has cxpras:. awhorlty" ut "issue bonds to 11mi1 the. FTTP project us an 'other puhlic. cunvcnience:' A4innesola Sl:ne 9tanne allowed TDS to lilt an Aplx al wirltin 30 days (tom the date of the .lodge's Noticc.'I'DS dccidecf to continue cite lawsuit whoa ii nltttl its Nolicc to Appeal on duty 29 ol'thut time porter( tot Nnvembor b. Clnrcntly. construction of the cily'e lihcr loop project continces muJ will canoe<•.t intpurtantamuttcr- cial, in<'Justrial and civic 1':tuilities thereby allowing business users to have atlc~ss to high-speed lihcr c,rpucs for dear only scrvicos via I (H)`yo fiber optics. LC is emticipatcd to he srrvicin~ the (easiness communi- ty by the nest quarter of 201)LJ. Con- struction ui' the smaller liher loop allowed for the liher backbone ur he hudl and linishcd this year w that suvlcc can begin fur conuncrcinl users for data only (Interne0 over thr ctuiy winter ntumhs.'fhis will allow for the major infrtstrucutrc of Ihr lihcr network ur he complaed by the end of Dcccntbcr 2008, prior w the fall scale project to resiclcntial areas which will I'idlow once the lawsuit. is resolved and the revenue bonds arc. released from escrow. T'hc oily has nnl abandoned the lid( scale project scrvin, every home and business in the City of Monticello. This network will provide (tall high delinitican't'V, telephone services (LAN line, VfJll'. cellular) and ultra high speed Inter- net bath upload and downluaU. The lawsuit served by TICS Telecom has delayed lho full project for dtis year. FiberNet Monticcio remains c~m- mitted to these original economic goals as the driving force hrhind building Iechnology as inl'rastruc•- urrc: the ability Io bring new httsiness and indusirv 10 Montiecllo with bel- icr paying jobs, cumpetitivr. pricing lug residcntial and business tclc- phanc, httemet and cable TV suet a ehuico for services. A conununity- uwncd t.cleuutnmmtic:ations upora- tinn wish a IlHlr%-lihcroptic network which makes Iocttl du:isiuns that hencilt the comrnunity can he con- suaered an :tsvct as wolf as un amcni- ly which hucincss :tnU resident.. ouuld dctermhtc us a key ftu:tur fur locating in the. City ul' Nlumiccilu. For mare in/in~maliorr ri.eil Nun mcrG- .cile.' wrn~n~.hllxrtitclloFihrr.curn _ _ _ -To~ei~rixD),ve(~.7n.the Community Profile section, tonta(f _ _ - _ '_ - '~dy-I(Qdy~~Ci~_~~'1-405~78J_~=lkodyfek~rejounals.~om - _ - :Jeff JphnsoG • ~$3-405 778D!jjohnsonc~rejournals,rom. Monticello builds community-awned fiber optic netWOf'lIC qS 111'Ft~pStructure