Loading...
HRA Agenda 07-11-1990AGENDA MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, July 11, 1990 - 7:00 PM City Hall MEMBERS: Chairperson Al Larson, Ben Smith, Lovell Schrupp, Everette Ellison, and Tom St. Hiliaire. STAFF: Rick Wolfateller, Jeff O'Neill, and 011ie Koropchak. 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. APPROVAL OF THE MAY 2, 1990 HRA MINUTES. 3. CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO MODIFY THE TAR INCREMENT FINANCE PLAN RELATING TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCE DISTRICT N0. 1-9 ( WILLIAM AND BARBARA TAPPER). 4. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW LEGISLATION RULING ON TIF AND ITS IMPACT TO THE CITY OF MONTICELLO. 5. CONSIDERATION OF A PROJECT UPDATE: TAPPER'S REMMELE ENGINEERING MARTIE'S FARM SERVICE THE LINCOLN COMPANIES 6. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE HVA AND BUS. INC. 7. OTHER BUSINESS. B. ADJOURNMENT. MINUTES MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, May 2, 1990 - 7:00 PM City Hall MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Al Larson, Ben Smith, and Everette Ellison. MEMBERS ABSENT: Lovell Schrupp and Tom St. Hilaire. STAFF PRESENT: 011ie Roropchak. STAFF ABSENT: Rick Wolfsteller and Jeff O'Neill. 1. CALL TO ORDER. Chairperson Al Larson called the HRA meeting to order at 7:07 PM. 2. CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE MARCH 7. 1990 HRA MINUTES AND THE APRIL 6, 1990 HRA MINUTES. Everette Ellison made a motion to approve the March 7, 1990 and April 6, 1990 HRA minutes, seconded by Ben Smith, and with no comments or corrections, the minutes stand approved as written. e 3. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW, ADJUST, AND APPROVE THE 1990 HRA GOALS. By agreement of the HRA members present, the decision was to table this item until full membership is present. 4. CONSIDERATION OF AN ESTABLISHED DATE FOR THE ALL CITY GOVERNMENTAL UNITS MEETING. Roropchak informed the HRA members of the scheduled date for the all city governmental units meeting to be held in the Piro Hall, on Monday. June 4. 1990 at 7:00 PM. 5. CONSIDERATION OF AN UPDATE OF NEWLY ESTABLISHED TIF DISTRICTS. Russell and Sharon Martin - the Development Agreement was executed and the closing held between the Martin's and the HRA on April 25, 1990. Tapper Inc. - negotiations with Tapper's Attorney Jeff LeCleur are in progress, however, closing is not expected until possibly Juno 1, 1990. Tom Hayes has the necessary GMEF documents prepared for the EDA and final approval by the SHA Board is expected soon. �- HRA Minutes - 5/2/90 f Page 2 5. CONTINUED. Remmele Engineering - Attorney Larry Griffith has obtained option agreement signatures from all parties involved with acquisition of land for the project. Earliest closing would be May 18, 1990 because of needed bankrupty court release from Arizonia on Boyle's property. Final plat request and vacation of Fallon Avenue, drainage and utility easeme s hag been approved by the City Council. The HRA viewed building plane submitted to the City Building Inspector. The Lincoln Companies - the HRA viewed the building plans for the R -Hart project as submitted to the City Building Inspector. All TIP Districts 1-9, 1-10, 1-11, and City District 1-1 will be certified as of April 30, 1990 at the County Auditor's Office. 6. OTHER BUSINESS. The HRA briefly discussed the Tire Service Company who is interested in purchase of the Larson Manufacturing Company. Larson's philosophy is from decentralization to centralization. 7. ADJOURNMENT. Everette Ellison made a motion to adjourn the HRA meeting, seconded by Ben Smith, the HRA meeting adjourned at 7:55PM. %U , K" r�,,9.9- 011ie Roropchak HRA Executive Director v HRA AGENDA 7/11/90 Page 1 3. CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO MODIFY THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCE PLAN RELATING TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCE DISTRICT NO. 1-9 (WILLIAM AND BARBARA TAPPER). A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND. Initiately the financial proposal developed by Business Development Services, Inc. (BDS) included two financial options: first option, the use of a Small Business Development Loan (SBDL), Tax Increment Finance (TIF), and the Central Minnesota Initiative Fund (CHIP); snd the second option, included the use of a Small Business Administration Loan (SBA), a bank, TIF, and the CMIF. Upon research, the project did not meet the CHIP guideline, the project developer must reside in Wright County or the designed funding region, therefore, the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund became a part of the financial proposal. Documentation and financials were prepared and submitted to the SBDL Board which denied the project funding, thereafter, SBA funding was substituted at $358,750; Wright County State Bank, $358,7501 GMEF, $100,000; and TIF, $77,500. At the EDA meeting held"%pril, the EDA was informed by Bob Heck of BDS, Inc. that the GMEF terms did not meet the SBA requirement of, any subordinated debt must have a maturity equal to or greater than the 504 debenture. The SBA loan term is 20 years, EDA loan term is five year maturity amortized up to 30 years. Upon the recommandation of Mr. Heck, the EDA elected to balloon at 7 years to meet the SBA requirement. Actually, this discrepancy to a $L2,000 gap. SBA denied this recommendation. BDS. Inc. recommended transferring TI funds from other districts to meat the $19,onn gap, they^_bye, the increased TTF fu -1b could reduce the first mortgage on the bank loan by $12,000. However, upon the advise of Bob Dicks, Attorney for Holmes b Gravens, the now TIF law for modification of T LF Plans (increase in budget and increase in bond indebtedness) does not apply to TIF Districts certified prior to May 1, 1990. TIF District NO. 1-9 was certified by the County Auditor on April 30, 1990. Based upon that legal opinion and based on the knowledge that District No. 1-9's tax increment is sufficient to cover the additional $12,000 gap, city staff recommends modification of the TIF Plan relating to TIF District No. 1-9. The developers, the bank. SBA, and Tom Hayes agreed with TIF increase and agree with staff recommendation to reduce the level of assistance from the Granter Monticello Enterprise Fund from $100,000 to $88,000. This meats SBA requirements and allows a greater remaining balance in the city's revolving loan fund, and reduces the city's loan amount which to a third position loan. HRA AGENDA 7/11/90 j Page 2 3. CONTINUED. A. continued. The 30 day period for the county, school district, and hospital district to make comment starts July 9. If the HRA approves the resolution to modify the TIP Plan which requests Council to set a public hearing date for the modification. Council would set the public hearing date on July 23, giving two weeks time for newspaper notice, with the public hearing held on August 13. The Tapper's closing and development agreement execution can be completed prior to Council's approval of the modification because the development agreement states if the modification of the finance plan is denied by Council, the $12,000 gap can be transferred from other TIF districts. The $12,000 gap is not requested from the developer because it defeats the requested needed funds purpose and it would reduce the company's working capital. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS. 1. Approve the resolution modifying the TIF Plan relating to TIF District No. 1-9. (William and Barbara Tapper). 2. Deny approval of the resolution. C. RECOMMENDATION. Staff recommends alternative action number 1 for reasons stated in the reference and background supplement. D. SUPPORTING DATA. Copy of the TIF budget prior to modification. Copy of the proposed budget for modification. Copy of the HRA resolution to be approved. 17 Tax Increment Pinancinq District No. 1-8 (As adopted January 23, 1989) BUDGET Land Acquisition $21,200.00 Improvements 1.800.00 Subtotal $23,000.00 Administration 500.00 Professional Services 3,500.00 Capitalised Interest 7,000.00 $34,000.00 Tax Increment Financinq District No. 1-9 '\we ear 3 (As adopted February 26, 1990) BUDGET Land Acquisition 77,500.00 Subtotal 77,500.00 Administration 15,000.00 Professional Services 5,000.00 Capitalised Interest 24,500.00 Discount 3.000.00 $125,000.00 Tax increment Pinancino District No. 1-10 (As adopted April 9, 1990) BUDGET PHASE I PRASE II Land Acquisition $120,000 0 On -Site Utilities/Grading/ 65,000 0 Landscaping Public Improvements 0 $ 55,000 Soils Corrections 0 0 Subtotal $185,000 $ 55,000 Contingency 0 0 Administration •15,000 10,000 Professional Services 10.000 5.000 Subtotal $710,000 $ 70,000 Capitalised Interest 47,000 14,000 Discount 3.000 1.000 $260,000 $ 85,000 It to anticipated that Phase I will proceed at the commencement f of the project and Phase II will proceed as additional increment becomes available through future development. I-28 v MODIFIED BUDGET: Land Acquisition $74,000 Site Improvements: 15,500 Landscaping Curbing Grading Administration Fees 14,000 (10x) Professional Services 6,900 Capitalized Interest 26,600 (24 Mos) Discount 3,000 $140,000 Expected $140,000 bond issuance at 9.252 interest over 8 years Debt Service of $25,767 MODIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: EMV of $750,000 (27,000 sq ft) $650,000 (25,000 sq ft) Estimated Annual TI $27,457.50 25,000 (Annual Taxes) Guarantee TI $26,000 23,500 Letter of Credit $23.500 23,500 $74,000 given at time building in 302 complete $77,500 $15,500 given at time building is 902 complete (not mentioned) If modification not approved funds aro available from other districts MODIFIED FINANCIAL PROPOSAL: Wright County State Bank $358,750 $358,750 SBA 358,750 358,750 Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund 88,000 100,000 TIF 89,500 77,500 C �a 01/16/89 22:11 6127869034 BUSIIESS DEVELOPMENT SEPVI-MS PAGE 02 Commissioner introduced the following resolution, the reading of which was dispensed with by unanimous consent, and moved its adoptions HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA ABSOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE MODIFICATION, BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THP. CITY OF MONTICBLLO, OF THE REDBVBL0PHENT PLAN RELATING TO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1, THE MODIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS RELATING TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS NOS. 1-1 THROUGH 1-11 AND THE MODIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN RELATING TO TAX IMCRFJMNT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-9, ALL LOCATED WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1. BE IT RESOLVED by the Commissioners (the *Commissioners") of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the *Authority") in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the •CILi*). as followsi Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. It has been proposed that the Authority modify, by increased project costs, Redevelopment Project No. 1, pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesotato te8, Sections 469.001 to 469.007, Inclusive, as amended. It s been further proposed that the Authority modify, by increased project costa, the Tax Increment Financing Plans relating to Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 1-1 through 1-11 and modify, by increased project costs, Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-9 and approve the Tax Increment Financing Plans relating thereto, all located within Redevelopment Project No. 1, pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.179, inclusive, as amended. 01/16/89 22: 11 6127869034 BL6VESS DEVELOF$01T SEPVNES PAGE 03 1.02. The Authority has investigated the facts and has caused to be prepared a proposed Modified Redevelopment Plan (the "Modified Redevelopment Plan') for Redevelopment Project No. 1, defining more precisely the increased project coats to be made to Redevelopment Project No. 1, the proposed Modified Tax Increment Financing Plane for Tax Increment Pinancing Districts Nos. 1-1 through 1-11 and the proposed modified Tax Increment Financing Plan (the 'Tax Increment Financing Plan*) for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-9 (collectively referred to as the •Plana*). 1.03. The Authority and the City have performed all actions required by lav to be performed prior to the modification of Redevelopment Project No. 1, the modification of Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 1-1 through 1-11 and the modification of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-9 and the approval of the Plane relating thereto. 1.04. The Authority hereby determines that it is necessary and in the best interest of the City at this time to modify Redevelopment Project No. 1, to modify Tax Increment Financing Districts Noe. 1-1 through 1-11 and to modify Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-9 and approve the Plane relating thereto, and to request that the City Council (the 'Council") hold a public hearing relating to the above -stated matters. Section 2. Approval of the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Prosect No. 1. 2.01. Subject to the finding, determination, and approval of the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 by the City Council of the City, the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 is hereby approved by the Commissioners of the Authority. The increased project costs shall be described in the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 approved in Section 4 hereof. Section 3. Approval of the Tax Incrent Pinancina Plans for Tax Increment Pinancina Districto No. 1-lmthrouah 1-11. 3.01. Subject to the finding, determination, and approval of the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Dietricts Has. 1-1 through 1-11 and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-9 by the Council of the City, the Tax Increment Pinancing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Was. 1-1 through 1-11 are hereby approved by the Commissioners of the Authority. -2- 01/16/89 22:11 6127869034 BUSIIFSS LEVELLFIEUT SERVIUXS aa;E 04 Section 4. AoDroval of the Resoective Plane. 4.01. The plans presented to the Authority on this date, are hereby approved by the Authority and shall be forwarded to the Council with the request that the Council hold a public hearing relating to the adoption of the Plans for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and Tax increment Pinancing Districts Mos. 1-1 through 1-11. Section S. Pilin of Plans. 6.01. The Authority shall cause the Plans, all as approved, to be filed with the Minnesota Department of Revenue. Dated July 11, 1990 Attests Executive Director L (BEAU I -]- Chairmen F, HRA AGENDA 7/11/90 4. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW LEGISLATION RULING OF TIF AND ITS IMPACT TO THE CITY OF MONTICELLO. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND. This is a brief summary from the June 27 TIF Seminar on 1990 Legislative changes. A. Reduction of LGA/MAGA Payments: "Reduces city Local Government Aid (LGA) and Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (RACA) payments to offset a portion of the increased school aid payments resulting from the use of tax increment financing (TIP)." This does not apply to the City of Monticello as we receive no state aid because of the nuclear plant. However, school districts receive no additonol funding and for most city will be a lose of available tax increment for project use and the state budget will be replenished. B. REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS RENEWAL AND RENOVATION DISTRICTS. Under previous law one sat of circumstances which permitted `o the creation of a redevelopment district as if the property was 702 "build up," if 202 of the buildings were "structurally substandard," and if an additional 302 of the buildings were "obsolete." Those circumstances now only permit the creation of a "renewal and renovation" district of duration 15 years from date of receipt of the first increment. What definition of "structurally substandard?" It is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with building code requirements which apply to new buildings or could be brought into such compliance at a cost of loss that 152 of the cost of a new building of the same size and type on the site. One must determine "reasonable available evidence" such as the size, type, and age of the builidng; the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs{ or other similtar evidence. Inspections and written documentation would be prudent in most Casa. C. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS. Economic District requesting certification after April 30, 1990 y cannot use increment to aid devalopmonts if 102 or more of the square footage of the hutlidngs and facilities are to be used for a purpose other than manufacturing or the production of HRA AGENDA 7/11/90 4. CONTINUED. C. continued. tangible perosnal property; warehousing, storage, or the distribution of property (excluding retail sales); research and development or telemarketing if an exclusive use; or tourism facilities located outside of the metropolitan area. If within five years of establishment of the district, nonqualifying facilities are constructed the developer of the nonqualiffed property must pay to the authority 902 of the "benefit" resulting from the improvements. For city with a population of 5,000 or less, there is a 5,000 sq ft cumulative exception for commerical and/or retail facilities. In one or more developments. Findings: Project increases state employment (not municipality) Project preserve and enhance the tax base of the state (not municiapal Project would discourage movement to another state or municipality D. HOUSING DISTRICTS. The percentage available for other than low and moderate income housing 1s reduced to 202 for new districts. D. POOLING RESTRICTIONS. This limits the ability of the authority to expend tax increment from a district for activities outside the district but within the project area. 152 of the increment must be spent on activities in the district. 252 of the increment of a district may be pooled. Activities do not include administrative expensive but do include engineering, architechural, and similar cost of improvements. Which means the amount available for pooling is apparently really 252 less such administrative costs. E. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. Administrative expenses groans expenditures of an authority other than for land, physical development of real property in district, relocation benefits, or amount to pay interest on, fund a reserve for. or sell at a discount bonds. Administrative expenses also explicitly Include foes for bond counsel, fiscal consultants and planning or economic development consultants. Increment may noT bo used to pay administrative expenses for a project exceeding 102 of the total TI expenditures authorized by the plan or the total TI expenditures for the project, whichever is loss. HRA AGENDA 7/11/90 4. CONTINUED. F. COUNTY COSTS. Counties now have the ability to charge the cost of road improvements to all types of districts under certain circumstances, but not if the particular road improvements were already scheduled for construction within 5 years under the county's captital improvements plan or other formally adopted county plan. G. ENFORCEMENT. The new enforcement provisions will apply to all TIF districts (old and new) and will be effective for violations occurring after December 31, 1990. The State Auditor retains the responsiblity for financial and compliance auditing of the use of TIF, the Commissioner of Revenue will enforce the provisions of the Act. In addition, the owner of any taxable property located in the city, school district, or county may bring suit for equitable relief or for damages arising out of a failure of the municipality or an authority to comply with the Act. However, loser must pay the costs of the prevailing party, this should stop frivolous suits. 41 H. ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS. Assessment agreements can now be entered into whether or not the authority takes title to the property involved and a development agreement is necessary under Law. Because of potential environmental clean-up cost concerns, it may generally be desirable for the authority to remain outside the chain of title. HRA AGENDA 7/11/90 6. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE HRA AND BDS. INC. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND. The first contract between BDS. Inc and the HRA was executed in April of 19% thereafter the contract was revised. The contract copy enclosed in your agenda package is from October, 1989. Also, enclosed are copies of payments made to date in 1990 for services conducted by BDS, Inc. Please review for discussion at our meeting. 'r f6ud� K., t Sesvkos W. AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC. and the CITY OF MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY This Agreement made and entered into on the 4th day of October, 1989, by and between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Monticello, a Minnesota Municipality, (hereinafter referred to as "HRA"), and Business Development Services, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (hereinafter referred to as "BDS"). va WHEREAS, the City of Monticello believes that communities are dynamic in the sense that they are constantly changing; and WHEREAS, the City of Monticello believes that the economy of its community is shaped by its active economic development programl and WHEREAS, the City has initiated Its economic development program through its Housing and Redevelopment Authority and utilizes Tax Increment Financing as a key component of its economic development program; and WHEREAS, BDS seeks to assist the continued growth of the City of Monticello to provide economic development services and technical, professional assistance for Its Housing and Redevelopment Authority and its Tax Increment Financing program. SM SpOMMl O N WN 0 SLM Ml • M001100Ug MU HIM 0 ROM 611tlM4131 NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE MUTUAL PROMISES AND CONSIDERATIONS CONTAINED HEREIN, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES A. BDS will provide ongoing consultation services as requested, to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City of Monticello to assist these agencies in the appropriate design of the economic development program. B. BDS will provide marketing assistance on behalf of the City to identified prospects on a case-by-case basis. Those services would not be reimbursed. At City's I option BDS will be reimbursed on an hourly or fixed fee basis. C. BDS will provide preliminary financial review, analysis and recommendations for the structuring of specific TIF development proposals. D. BDS will assist City staff and/or its designate in negotiating specific provisions of the development and assessment agreements associated with the City's TIF projects. E. BDS will assist in maintaining communications between City staff members and project developers utilizing the (� City's TIF assistance. -2- F. BDS will assist in the collection of the required IL technical and financial data, draft modified TIF plans and coordinate the dissemination of the plans and related materials to other public agencies and will review and confirm data with the City's bond counsel and fiscal consultant. G. BDS will assist in the preparation of materials for public hearings and the presentation of the appropriate information with the City and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. H. BDS will monitor and assist in the collection of developer repayments, letters of credit and/or securities as required. 1. Other duties related to the City's economic development program and TIF programs as directed by the City and/or Housing and Redevelopment Authority. II. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES A. The City agrees to payment for services as described In Section I, as follows: 1. Marketing Assistance. BDS will provide marketing assistance to the City of Monticello's prospects at / no charge through the preparation of proposal information. face a prospect has reached the stage -3- where a letter of intent is to be mailed or a prospect has requested a meeting, the City at its discretion agrees to hire BDS at its standard fee of $73 per hour, or on a negotiated fee schedule. 2. Establishment of Tax Increment Financing Projects. At the City's determination, BDS will be utilized to assist in the design and preparation of TIF documents for the community's major projects. Fees for these services are as follows: a. For completion of data preparation, processing and certification of newly established or amended Tax Increment Financing District - $3,830.00. b. For the completion of related development and assessment agreements - $870.00. c. The City and BDS recognize that the development of tax increment financing projects will be conducted on a contingency basis. City payment for services shall include all variable staff time and expenses associated with each project. 3. Consultation for TIF projects. The City will, at its discretion, seek to complete the data and structuring for the community's smaller and projects. On this basis. BDS will be retained on an hourly fee of $73.00 to support the -4- process and to complete the appropriate documentation. B. BDS also agrees to provide an overall accounting of hours expended and fees that have been generated through this contract. It shall be BDS' and the HRA's intent to provide an overall hourly average rate, con- sistent with BDS staff fee schedule. 111. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS A. The City and BDS reserve the right to terminate this Agreement upon 60 days written notice. B. Each party to this Agreement binds himself and his partners, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns to the other party of this Agreement and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns of such other party, in respect to all covenants of this agreement. Except as above, neither party shall assign, sublet, or transfer his interest in this agreement without the written consent of the other. Nothing herein shall be construed as creating any personal liability on the part of any officer or agent of any public body which may be party hereto, nor shall it be construed as giving any rights or benefits hereunder to anyone other than the parties to this Agreement. -3- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BUS SS DEVf1EIOPMENT ERVICES INC. BY '/g - U0. —U�t ITS Patrick W. Pelstring, President ATTCs;21 W ITS I Mary A. Czech, Vice President .6- TAPPER PAYMENTS TO BDS, INC. IN 1990 FROM HRA ACCOUNT 3/31/90 YEAR 1989 2/22/90 $1,792.50 TAPPER 2/22/90 $2,874.50 3/31/90 1,743.75 4/30/90 4,700.00 5/23/90 1,478.75 $10,797.00 REMMELE 2/22/90 476.25 3/31/90 1,091.25 4/30/90 4,700.00 5/23/90 37.50 $6,305.00 FROM CITY ACCOUNT R -MART 4/30/90 $4,700.00 TOTAL $23,594.50 IN