Loading...
HRA Agenda 02-14-1996AGENDA MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, February 14, 1996 - 70) P.M. City Hall ` MEMBERS: Chairperson Al Larson, Vice Chairperson Brad Barger. Everette Ellison. Tom St. Hilaire, and Roger Carlson. STAFF: 011ie Koropchak, Executive Director Jeff O'Neill, City Assistance Administrator HRA ATTORNEY: Steve Bubul GUESTS: John Komerek, Developer. Rich Carlson, Real Estate Agent Informational Meeting with Planning Consultants (80) P.M.) I . CALL TO ORDER. 2. CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE JANUARY 10, 1996 AND JANUARY 24. 1996 HRA MINUTES AND THE JANUARY 24, 1996 JOINT HRA, PLANNING AND PARKS COMMISSION MINUTES. 3. CONSIDERATION TO HEAR A PRESENTATION BY JOHN KOMERAK RELATING TO THE PROPOSED PRAIRIE WEST PLUS DEVELOPMENT AND PRELIMINARY CONCEPT APPROVAL FOR TIF ASSISTANCE. 4. CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCESSINGS TO ACQUIRE CERTAIN REAL ESTATE WITHOUT QUICK -TAKE, AND CONSIDERATION TO AUTHORIZE AN APPRAISAL OF SAID PROPERTY. 5. CONSIDERATION OF AN UPDATE OR ACCEPTANCE OF THE OFFER OF THE PURCHASE OPTION RELATING TO BLOCK 64. 6. CONSIDERATION TO AUTHORIZE ELHERS AND ASSOCIATIiS (PUBLICORP) TO COMPLETE A CITY-WIDE TAX INCREMENT PRO FORMA. 7. 901 P.M. CONSIDERATION OF AN INFORMAIIONAI. MEETING WITH PLANNING CONSULTANTS - RESPONSE TO RFP. 9. OTHER BUSINESS: a) Acceptance of monthly HRA bills. b) $111,(NN) Loan Balance, Pay -As -You -Go Payment and Letter, and TIF Guarantce Letters. 9. AJOURNMENT. MINUTES HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, January 10, 1996 - 7:00 p.m., City Hall MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Al Larson, Vice Chairperson Brad Barger, Everette Ellison, Tom St. Hilaire, and Roger Carlson. STAFF PRESENT: Jeff O'Neill and 011ie Koropchak. HRA ATTORNEY: Steve Bubul. PUBLIC: Planning Commissioners Jon Bogart, Rich Carlson, and Dick Martie. Parks Commissioners Bruce Thielen. Steve Andrews, Earl Smith, Fran Fair, and Larry Nolan. CALL TO ORDER, Chairperson Larson called the HRA meeting to order at 7:10 p.m CONSInFRAMN TO APPROVE THE DFCFMRER 6. 1995 F Al Laron noted a correction to the minutes on page 4, paragraph 3, deleting the sentence: (Larson suggested the Kjellberg building be a future agenda item for consideration.) St. Hilaire noted two corrections on page 5, paragraph 3, amending (Al Larson made a motion authorizing the HRA to hire a planner with expertise ......)o (Al Larson made a motion to begin the interviewing process of consultants with expertise ......) And amending (Plan/study defined within the northerly/southerly......) to (The plan/ study to determine the northerly/southerly........) Tom St. Hilaire made a motion to approve the amended HRA minutes of December 6, 1995, as so noted. Roger Carlson seconded the motion and with no further corrections or additions, the amended minutes were approved on a 5-0 vote. PUBLIC COMMENT: Bruce Thielen, spokesperson for Parks Commission, indicated Park Commissioners were present to encourage HRA members to consider acquiring the riverfront property (Block 64) for possible extension of West Bridge Park. Chairperson Larson suggested as elected officials, perhaps, the City Council should be approached by the Parks Commission for considerntion to acquire the property for park dedication. Additionally, Larson indicated the HRA's interest lies in blighted/substandard property for redevelopment. Page 1 Barger said upon final adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Update, after consideration of the HRA to approve the draft copy of the RFP for consulting services, and upon completion of the proposed study/plan; the HRA would consider acquisition of Block 64. Thereafter, together, acting as a city, improvement strategies would be defined. Park Commissioners saw the acquisition of Block 64 as an opportunity and felt it would be a shame to let the opportunity slip through the city's fingers with the focus of the Comprehensive Plan Update on riverfront development. O'Neill briefly reviewed the objectives of the RFP which would be considered later by the HRA. Tom St. Hilaire noted that projects on the table between the school, churches, and city totaled nearly $RO million in expenditures and not $I of revenue is proposed. And he noted all projects were worthwhile projects. Rich Carlson of the Planning Commission stated that the downtown concepts presented by Steve Grittman showed the riverfrom to remain as public not private. Even the 1986 Comprehensive Plan identified riverfrom development. Representing the seller, Carlson had seen Block 64 as an opportunity and worthy of further investigation by City Hall therefore city staff was approached. Asked if Block 64 was blighted property, the Planning Commissioner responded "no"but the properties surrounding Block 64 were blighted. St. Hilaire recalled the early downtown concepts and viewed the concepts as a sales pitch for a community center. Additionally, St. Hilaire felt the role of the HRA is to facilitate redevelopment much the same as with the Mississippi Shores project. He did not see the role of the HRA as owner or as a developer. Additionally, he commented the proposed RFP includes completion of a market feasibility analysis which must he free of any pre -conceived ideas. Chairperson Larson agreed with the role of the HRA as a facilitator. John Bogart of the Planning Commission felt the downtown was changing and the focus on downtown redevelopment was toward a bedroom community with the river as its asset. O'Neill felt if Block 64 was restored and the garage replaced, the purchase value would be out -of -reach and an opportunity would be lost. Again. HRA members suggested the elected officials consider acquisition of the riverfront property as the HRA has already identified a blighted property for condemnation with a cash balance in the TIF Surplus Fund of approximately S250.(")-E3(K),(K)I. HRA Attorney Bubul informed members that the riverfront property lies within the Redevelopment Project No. I boundaries and the Minnesota Statutes are quite broad and allow the City Council to request the HRA to consider purchase of the property, at least, in part of the taxpayers. However, it then becomes an HRA policy and "timing" appears to be the question. Page 2 HRA MINUTES JANUARY 10, 1996 Earl Smith acknowledged and agreed with the HRA's concern of proposed expenditures with no proposed revenues; however. Smith also felt the HRA should consider the intangible. The intangible, a vision that the acquisition of Block 64 would result in the greatest benefit to his children and grandchildren, not himself. Barger suggested a purchase agreement, $5,000, one year option to purchase. Bubul suggested a right of first refusal. St. Hilaire cautioned members with limited TIF resources is the need to evaluate the best use of the funds. The HRA has earmarked a blighted property for condemnation, approved a SI0,000 loan, and allocated dollars for consideration to interview consultants with expertise in the area of riverfront/downtown redevelopment. It appeared to Attorney Bubul that individuals had the same goal: Acquisition of Block 64 for either private or public redevelopment; however, timing remained the issue. He suggested two options: One, the Council be requested to consider acquisition or second, the HRA otter the sellers an option agreement to purchase. Rich Carlson informed members that in eleven years of real estate, private property has not sold for less than the appraised value. St. Hilaire reaffirmed his position that the property was worth 550.000 to 555,000 minus demolition. Roger Carlson agreed with Attorney Bubul to consider acquisition of Block 64. Ellison and Barger agreed on a purchase option. 55,000 down, for one year. Rich Carlson responded as the seller's representative, he could not recommend the seller accept the purchase option. Brad Barger made a motion offering an option to acquire Lots 1, 2. 3.4. & 5 of Blk 64 & No 40 ft of Vac River St, City of Monticello under the following terms: An option to acquire the property for a price of 5163,000 (the appraised value). which may be exercised within six months after the date of an option agreement. The HRA would pay the amount of $2,500 upon execution of an option agreement, which amount would be applied to the purchase price. If the HRA elects not to exercise the option within the terms of the agreement, the sellers retain the $2,500option fee. Al Larson seconded the motion and with no further discussion, the motion passed on a 4-1 vote. Yeas: Barger. Larson. Ellison, & Carlson. Nay: St. Hilaire. St. Hiliare opposed the amount of the purchase price. Purchase Option to be drafted by Attorney Bubul oiler acceptance of the HRA offer by the seller. Page 3 HRA MINUTES JANUARY IU. 1996 CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION MODIFYING CENTRAL MONTICELL.O REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO, I: MODIFYING TI DISTRICT NOS. 1-1 THROUGH 1-18: AND APPROVING THE CENTRAL MONTICELID REnFVFI,0PMENT PLAN AND TIF PLANS RELATING THERETO. Koropchak informed the HRA members that the proposed modification allows the HRA the flexibility to acquire the described parcels identified within the Plan by address and parcel number. The existing Plan does not allow the [IRA to acquire parcels located outside the TIF Districts but within the Redevelopment Project No. boundaries. The five parcels identified in the proposed modification were parcels previously discussed by HRA members for future consideration to acquire or condemn. After Council adoption of the proposed modification, the HRA can proceed with the condemnation of the 1400 West Broadway parcel. Tom St. Hilaire requested the deletion of two parcels: 225 Front Street and llt9 West Broadway. Additionally, he asked why all five parcels were identified as a single modification to the plan rather than independently as needed? Attorney Bubul responded as a matter of cost efficiency for publication notices and modification preparation. Discussion led to the recommendation to amend the fourth paragraph. Page 1-16. of the proposed Central Monticello Redevelopment Plan from (The HRA intends to acquire the following .... )to (The IIRA may acquire the following.....) Due to an emergency, Brad Barger left the HRA meeting at 9:45 p.m. At Larson made a motion to adopt the resolution modifying Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I: modifying TI District Nos. 1-1 through 1-19; and approving the Central Monticello Redevelopment Plan and l'IF Plans relating thereto, including the recommended amendment. Everette Ellison seconded the motion and with no further discussion, the motion passed on a 3-1 vote. Yeas: Larson, Ellison, and Carlson. Nay: St. Hilaire. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW FOR FOLLOW-UP THE RFOULS7' FOR PROPOSAL RELATING TO THE PREPARATION OF A STUDY AND PLAN FOR 'f11F SPECIFIC AREA PROPOSED FOR RIVERFRONTT/ WNTOWN REDEVE -OPM'N'I'. After the December h motion by the IIRA authorizing to begin the interviewing process of consultants. O'Neill received references of experts in the area of riverfront/downtown redevelopment from Theresa Washburn, Bubul, and the MN I.caque of Cities. Copies of RFPs were received from various communities. With assistance from Rusty Fifield, Ehlers & Associates: copies of other RFPs: and Page 4 HRA MINUTES JANUARY 10. 1996 modifications by Al Larson; the draft copy was prepared for HRA members to review. The RFP includes the elements of the grassroots/community driven approach and outlines four components. Theresa Washburn has no problem working with a planner consultant; however, she felt disbursal of the RFP was a little premature and suggested waiting until after the January 20 Visioning Workshop. This may prompt a lose of interest in the grassroots approach. The revitalization approach preserves the useful life of buildings and not tearing buildings down. Tom St. lliWre questioned whether the RFP made economic sense or does the RFP give staff support for the Comprehensive Plan Update'? Does the feasibility analysis also quantify the economic benefits of a shopping center. gambling casino. etc'? Tom St. Hilaire made a motion to delete all references within the RFP relating to a community center as he viewed this as very. very subjective. The motion died for a lack of a second. Tom St. Hilaire made a motion to table any action relating to the acceptance of the RFP as so drafted until Commissioner Barger returned to the meeting. The motion died for a lack of a second. St. Hilaire said he was opposed to the draft copy of the RFP because it was very subjective. not objective. The consensus of HRA members was to revise certain elements of the RFP and review the revised RFP for acceptance following the Joint Meeting of the HRA. Planning. and Parks Commissions on January 24. St. Hilaire and Barger will be out- of-town for the January 20th workshop. 5. CONSIDERATION TO ESTABLISH HRA GOALS FOR 1996. 'fabled. 6. O'I'H 'R BUSINESS: a) The HRA members ok'd payment of monthly bills from the Times, Publicorp, and Kennedy & Graven. b) Consideration of a request by John Komerak relating to the development of West Prairie and redevelopment of parcels to the west. IIRA members requested Komerak make a presentation to the HRA at their February meeting. C) Other - Due to the fact the HRA can not create a TIF District for a 2(X)0X1 sq A warehouse/distribution center at either the Monticello Commerce Center or the Monticell Business Center sites because of the green acres Page 5 HRA MINUTES JANUARY 10, 1996 limitation, the HRA recommended the Council consider the request for assistance. Other - 'Ihe HRA members accepted Brad Larson's satisfaction of the blocked easement as it relates to non-maintanence agreement between the owners. The H\RAA meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. 011ie Koropchak, Executive Director Page 6 MINUTES MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, January 24, 1996 City Hall Following Joint Meeting between the HRA and Parks and Planning Commissions MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Al Larson. Vice Chairperson Brad Barger, Everette Ellison. Tom St. Hilaire, and Roger Carlson. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: 011ie Koropchak. Chairperson Larson continued the HRA meeting after completion of the business portion of the joint meeting. r1• . r • . u • ; ; r r. .• ,y t ; Chairperson Larson informed HRA members of some revisions to the RFP since the January 10 HRA meeting and after submittal of some written recommendations. A portion of Provision 3, The Project, was deleted and replaced to reflect the list of ideas for private and public activities which were created by citizens at a recent visioning workshop. It is planned that the terms of the contract will be negotiated between the HRA and the consultant with the idea of phased -in check -points to allow assessment of the study and its results and its relationship to the terns of the contract. The date for submittal of the RFP will be changed from February 15 to March 4. Tom Sl. Hilaire made a motion to approve the RFP as so discussed. Brad Barger seconded the motion and without further discussion the motion passed unanimously. Because Commissioners Barger and St. Hilaire are scheduled to he out-of•town, the regular February HRA of February 7 was rescheduled to February 14. The RFP will be mailed out on Friday. January 26, to approximately 14 firms. The firms were recommendations from Steve Bubul, Theresa Washburn, and MN League of Cities. Additional cities were added to the list to call for consultant references: Stillwater. Northfield. St. Cloud, and Red Wing. The group established an informational meeting between the consultants and the HRA for 800p.m..the eve of the regular HRA meeting. Page I 111 7 � Yl�l! 111 •!�11 � 1 SII ( � (�IIIT.`ll .� 1 1 1I 111 1 1 1 II 11 .1. HRA members mentioned numerous names as possible candidates for consideration as an HRA representative to the MCP. Individuals: Jeff' Erickson, Sandy Foster, Blonigan family, Dan Frie, Jean or John Michaelis, Rose Mary Dahl, Tom Pogotchnik, Carol Edwards, Kevin Doty, Hoglund family, and HRA commissioners. According to Attomey Bubul, a conflict of interest occurs when an HRA member is the appointee. A conflict prevails when an item requires discussion and calls for action (a vote) to enter into a contract which is between the HRA and the MCP such as the EI0,000 loan or perhaps Tax Increment Financing. HRA members considered a possible alternative: An HRA commissioner be appointed and agree to abstain from voting on such items. After much discussion, HRA members felt the value of Al Larson as a member of the Board of Directors far out -weighted the very remote chance of any potential conflict of interest. Members agreed Mr. Larson has been a key individual in the initial efforts and the driving force behind the grassroots approach for downtown/rivetfront development. Therefore, it made logical sense to appoint Al Larson to the Board of Directors. Brad Barger made a motion to appoint Mr. Larson as the HRA representative to the MCP Board of Directors for a period not - to -exceed one year, at which time, the HRA will review the appointment. The motion included requesting Mr. Larson to refrain from discussions and abstain from voting on any items of potential conflict of interest. Everette Ellison seconded the motion and with no further discussion the motion passed on a 4-1 vote. Yeas: Barger, Ellison, St. Hilaire, and Carlson. Absention: Larson. 4. OTHER BUSINESS. Ellison reported he would be out-of-town February I I through March 16. The HRA meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. 011ie Koropchak, Executive Director t y Page 2 HRA AGENDA FEBRUARY 14, 1996 As you will recall the Prairie West and surrounding areas have appeared on previous HRA agendas. It was per the HRA's request to invite John Komerak to give a presentation on the proposed Prairie West Plus development. Mr. Komerak is requesting a preliminary concept approval for TIF assistance. Be mindful any preliminary concept approval should be subject to: 1. Compliance of the TIF Policies I. Final plat approval 2. No legislative changes to TIF 3. Upon execution of the preliminary TIF Agreement. A Redevelopment District needs to be established 60 days prior to the issuance of a building permit on the three parcels within the proposed TIF District. It may be most appropriate for the developer to negotiate and purchase the three parcels for TIF reimbursement to avoid HRA relocation costs. As per Mark Ruff's calculations based assumptions, the project is estimated to raise approximately S160,000of tax increment over 20 years at an interest rate of 9.5%. It appears increment is available to assist the developer. The HACA Penalty for a Redevelopment District is 7.5%of the 10% Administration. therefore, it appears the local match (HRA to City) could be within and through the project of proposed eminent domain on the Katzmarek property. After Komernk's presentation and upon discussion, the HRA should review the proposed project for compliance of The TIF Policies. If the HRA finds the project has merit, you may wish to grant approval of TIF use subject to certain conditions and not specify a dollar amount of assistance or at best use dollar range. Below are the estimated market values of the parcels for Taxes Payable 1995 155-51NH1343115 Ilanawall $94,71N1 ISi-5(NH1334111 Banyai $541, V) 155-5(N)-033402 State of MN $ 3,9(x1 Page I HRA AGENDA FEBRUARY 14, 1996 Enclosed are TIF projections from Publicorp and maps outlining the proposed Redevelopmen, District and the proposed development. Page 2 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY City of Monticello TAX INCREMENT FINANCING POLICY Program Purpose: The Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority will utilize Tax Increment Financing to support the community's long-term economic and housing goals. Policy Considerations: The HRA will analyze and evaluate Tax Increment Financing proposals based upon the following policy considerations. Each project shall be measured against these considerations and the project's value shall be determined, based upon meeting these considerations. 1. The project shall be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. The project shall demonstrate long-term economic and/or housing benefits to the community. 3. The project shall create and/or retain employment for Monticello residents. 4. The project shall increase moderate priced housing options for area residents. 5. The project shall facilitate the redevelopment or elimination of "substandard" or "blighted" areas as determined by the HRA. 6. The project shall facilitate the "clean-up" of environmentally unsound property. 7. The project shall provide additionalpublic funding for public improvements including utilities and/or park development which would not otherwise be available. 9. The project shall be deemed to promote additional desired "spin-off" development. 9. The project shall demonstrate "community involvement" including demonstrated degrees of the various factors: a) Local residency of the company's owners and employees, or b) Local residency of the 'contractors involved in the project, or c) Membership in local business organizations, or d) Other similar factors. 4 ti FEB e9 '96 05:0tPM ENJ RS ti ASSOCIATES P.2/5 10 aNd A8800ft lEAalaa IN PeallC r1aAe01 February 9, 19% TO: 011ie Kompehak, City of Monticello FR: Marls Ruff RS: RcdevelopmauDiurietPotentiel Atfachod is a preliminary analysis of the potential increnent for 12 of the 30 units of housing which could be included in a redevelopment tax increment district Three parcels mea the crd= for inclusion is a todevelopmeut district including the BauyaL Hanaww% and the smaller of the two City/Stam owned palads. These three parcels would patentialiy include thea fotapiec buildings with each unit valuedat approximately $120,000 forma purposes. We anticipate that the units would produce $32,000 per year In increment when fully buil. At an ince est rate of 8.5%. we project that the increment could raise approximately $160.000 based upon 20 years of payments. Please contact me with any questions or aamnents. O"IMS 01113I11/APOUL ON AND CROOKFULLD. x11 am MorwW cwft . 00 South tlevera sow. Matnespoue. MN 0S102d100 T61804 M 612.2394M1 . PAX 612.1304M se 10 FEB 09 '96 05:01PM EH—ERS & ASSOCIATES P.3/5 0 0794'94 Mend k HRA, 12 Dws" Una m a Raw 011trta P.p. 1 T.I.F. CAJH r ww ASSIR>'ii a IONS mILM10n Rata: 0.0000% Irlt.reat Rat.: 8 SOD% To.Emansim Row 1.118730 Pay 95 Fiscal DlaperiDes Rote. 0.00% BASE VALLEINFORMATION Pay 96 vak,a Parcel 0155-e0S034305 105,000 Parcel 9155.500-033401 58.500 Pastel 0156-500-033402 3.800 Total Orfprul Markm Value 157 300 Class Rata. Hor0ateoa > $72.000 2.0000% Pay 96 Ho Lead <$71D00 1.0000% Pay 96 Ong.W Toa Capacty: 1,673 Pay 96 PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION Typo at Tn. I=olwit Distal. Redevelopment Type of Devebprnem. Homostand Total Type o1 Taal Taa Market Us0 T.491 C47ocuty Value Poyopb 1 Unit of o d•Plw 1,896 1,880 120,000 Aaddxx,ol Urw (11) 20,859 16,480 1.320,000 0 0 9 22.755 20.160 1.440,000 1998 to 2001 Asavnng four urate Ouit per year utr000r a. '. ev ow.pw—,In Kill 02/00% FEB 09 '96 05:01PT1 EK -ERS & ASSOCIATES t44M411101+RA 12 01+4b;g Uno m • Rbd4 * v m D-, R►+a71u4 P.4 5 P.V 2 Sam -Annual NPV Paym416 1 TAY 1NrRFMEYFCACI2 FLOW To Incramanl Oslo I 049. PMPW Cap6n40 S tY-Annual AOmMstratW 'ERIOD To Ta. To Cr . To i9a Vn cpeKltv Caa lt7 C6Qam _ IM7am4nt •10.00% 0.0 i.673 1,673 0 0 0 1 0.0 1,673 1,673 0 0 0 0.0 1,873 1,673 0 0 0 00 1,873 1.673 0 0 0 0.5 1673 8.393 8.720 3,793 (379) 1.0 1,673 8.393 6.720 3,793 (379) 1.3 1,673 15.113 13440 7.585 (759) 2.0 1.673 15.113 13440 7,585 (759) 2.5 1,673 21.833 20,160 11,773 (1,;381 3 0 1.613 21.833 20.160 11,378 11.138) 3 5 1.673 23.513 21,540 12,326 (1.233) 4,0 1.873 23.513 21,840 17.326 (1233) 4.5 473 2],51] 21.840 12.326 (1.233) 50 1673 23.513 21,a40 12,126 1+.233) 3.5 1,673 23.513 21,840 72.]26 (1,2331 6.0 +,677 23.513 21.840 12.325 (1,273) 1 65 1,673 21.513 21.840 12,3% (1,233) 7.0 1.873 23.513 21.840 12, 326 IT233) 75 1,673 23,513 21,840 12.116 11,233) 6 0 1,673 23,513 71,640 12,326 (1.233) 85 1673 23.513 21,840 12,326 (12]31 9.0 1,673 23,513 21,840 12.326 (1,233) 95 1673 23,513 21,6A0 12,776 (1.2331 100 1.673 23,313 21.640 12.326 (1,133) 105 1.573 21513 21,840 12.726 (;,233) 110 1,67] 27,313 21.640 12,776 11,733) n 5 1,673 23,513 21,840 12.)26 11.2331 120 1.673 23,513 71,640 12,326 (1,2]31 12 5 1,673 23,513 21,840 12.328 (1,233) 130 1.673 23.513 211 640 17,328 (1233) 113 5 1,673 2).513 71,640 12 326 (1,7331 14.0 1673 73.613 21,840 12.326 (1,233) 114 4 1,873 23.513 21,840 12,326 (1,233) 150 1,67] 23.511 21.640 17,776 (1.177) 155 1,673 2).513 71,8.0 112, 326 (1.233) 160 1,673 23.513 21.840 12.376 (1,233) Io 5 1,671 23.517 21,840 17.326 (7,233) 170 1.573 27513 71,640 1),376 17.5 1,673 23,613 21,640 17.726 11,7331 160 1,673 23.513 21,8.0 12316 (1,733) 1a 5 1 673 23.513 21.840 12,326 11,733) 190 1,67) 23.0/3 21,840 12.326 (1,23]) 19.5 1,677 23 .6 13 21,640 12.72a17,733) 200 1673 21513 71.6.0 12,326 (1,773) 20 5 1.673 23.513 21.640 12,378 11,7)3) 210 1.673 23,571 21,040 12,326 (1]33) 215 1.07) 23.61] 21,640 ;2,326 (t 2111 220 1,673 ?3,513 71.640 12326 (1.733) 225 1.73 23,513 21,840 112,276 (7.233) 23 0 1 67] 2),51] 71 840 112 )70 11.733) 2)5 1,677 23,51) 71.640 17.326 24.0 t 67] 77,613 21 140 1},726 (11.7]]) 24 S 1,673 21.013 71,840 12 326 (1,233) 250 1,671 73.513 21,840 171);f (y7]]) •_ Tout. 581,647 (sal fl,l P7o.W11 V.Iuoa 193 101 gL31D), R►+a71u4 P.4 5 P.V 2 Sam -Annual NPV Paym416 1 Net To To Incramanl Oslo I IOpglttmt 8.50% M15, v;, 0 0 D841 19% 0 0 02-01 1997 0 0 08-01 1997 0 0 02-01 7996 3413 2,772 06-01 1998 3.413 5.431 02-01 1999 6,627 10,532 08-01 1999 6.627 15.425 02.01 2000 10.240 22.466 08-01 2000 10.240 29,219 02-01 2001 11,093 36,238 08.01 2001 11.09] 42,970 02-01 2002 11,093 49427 D8-01 2002 11,093 55,62, 02-01 2003 11.093 61563 06-01 2003 1109367.2,33 024) 2004 ;1.003 72.730 06-01 2004 11,093 77.974 02-01 2005 11,093 63.005 06-01 2005 11,093 67,830 02-01 2006 11,093 92.459 06-01 2006 1;,093 96,899 02-01 2007 11.093 101,156 08-0; 2007 11.093 105.243 02-01 2008 11,09] ;09,102 08-0t I006 11,097 712.921 02-01 2009 11,093 116.327 08-0; 2009 11,093 119,965 01.01 2010 11.093 123.303 06-0; 2010 I1,003 126.466 02-01 2011 11.09] 129.530 U8-01 2011 +,,093 '32.467 02-01 2012 11.003 135.270 08-01 2012 t 1,097 U7.970 02-01 2013 11003 140.655 08-01 2013 11.093 143.034 02-01 2014 11.097 143.412 08.01 2014 +1.097 147 693 02-01 2015 ;1,003 149682 OS-Ot 2015 11.093 ;51.981 02- t 201 : 11,093 153.994 Oa -01 2016 11,D03 155,925 02-0t 2017 11,093 157,776 08-01 2017 11.007 ISO S35 01.01 2018 11,091 161,260 09-01 2016 +1.093 162.805 02-01 2019 11.003 164.463 08.01 2010 11,093 185,065 02 01 2020 I 11.093 167.411 0" 1 2020 11083 168,798 02-0; 2071 ;1,09] 170,123 06-01 20212 11.0►3 171,397 02-01 2022 11 093 172.610 06-01 7027 11 9 7 SIM" - 173.70; MTI. -01 R4a4w3 e; 61 ..lp t maw RR2 0 D ©� * !t V -. .tat • 8f.7f 9fnf 'O w leo\ i v >� k -CR cccs� 033403 � ae Utle we a,!"'1� �''• j ��o SANDY 4,0 !jTy 2lS.9t ti. -'aS 39 OED 919 033400 o• , to •� b �Ljv� lt.i 4 ` 0 5 i •� do *f ♦ V� li c:• P. SiE =71F 77 & zc�CCPT73 0927195 Mcr*ccao /iPA. ,:uat,Mng a ne[­wpmcm C,s:= Page' OPT:ON 1 parcel ImpfovWnenis percent w Size Of Farms N"W. Ol .N -n - w ParcalName PL-# Numa Scuare Feet Sm.are Feet Co Sorge Gccu5lea 8,.Wcs SrOmee Bleos. a055-5100.]3.305 12.000 3.818 31.92% 12000 1 amai 155.5001033401 Rs;-two ".8O7 7.026 15.66; ".867 2 2' late of MN ;55.500,133402 10.990 5.000 .5.91% 10890 Of MN 155.51000.73400 66,211 10.000 15100% 66.211 -IKa=amc< 155-SCC.C33403 90.605 16.000 77.66111 90.605 2 .� TOwrutama 1 155-0nJo1o77 iTONrnrloma 14.935 2200 14.73% 14.335 2 155-071001077 ITOwnnome 3 155-07-0010'1 14.935 14.935 Townnpme 4 i55 -072 -am?,- 935 -0 Twmnome 5 15572-00,071 14,335 j Townhoma 6155-07-0010?' 14,935 Townnpma7 155-07240I0r '4.935 (Total Souare FOaeee329.117 239.508 4 Parc «a Cpwsung Of 7277% 80.00% Of oleos ougntm 101 Olstna " Occtrered OPTION 2 psT uliv,,Wo m Penmm of Stas pf Pamela Mulles to Numbw of NUM Pwcvl Nurow $inure Feer Sc Lan Feet Ca.eroq_0 OOauoice Bulerns Stamae Bleas. ll:arcs HaruMre3 155-50G,1Ss306 12.000 3.818 31.82% 12,000 1 Barrym 155.600-033401 ",867 7.023 1183% ".887 2 2i late of MN 153 500ZU402 10.890 2.800 18.37% 10.490 late of MN 151600 A-00 68,211 20.000 30.21% 66,211 Katzmam Y, 155d00dI3403 90,605 18,000 17,66% 90,605 2 "Cum $¢+M FOUsee 2.74 773 224,573 S s 'pameu Lawmrq of 100.00% 80.0% of *cps plpnlso �Of Olstna are O=uciea "�-- MT 100.01 Prepamo vy EnrnNPutmcm :n RR t rm HRA AGENDA FEBRUARY 14.1996 1903511.111 Itll 1 al 11 fl ! 1 ..T. ADOPT RESOLUTION At the October 4, 1995, meeting, the HRA approved a motion to move forward with condemnation and relocation of a blighted property for redevelopment, as Mr. Katzmarek was not interested in meeting with the HRA Chair and Executive Director to negotiate a purchase. The modification of the Central Monticello Redevelopment Plan and Project No. I which allows the HRA the right to acquire the Katzmarek property was approved by the City Council on January 22 following the public hearing. Therefore, in order to move forward with eminent domain processings, the HRA is requested to consider adoption of the enclosed resolution. DATA: PID# 155-500.033403 located at 1400 Broadway West, Robert J. Katzmarek. Estimated Market Value, Payable 1995, S43,3IN1. Parcel sq R, 90,(15 or 2.09 acres along Otter Creek. Improvement sq R, 16,IKN1. In previous IIRA discussions, it was my understanding the [IRA was not interested in the quick -take option as the option presents no recourse and the HRA has no need for immediate ownership. 'nc process of eminent domain without quick -take is something of the like I. Adoption of resolution, certified copy to Corrine Thomson, Attorney at Kennedy & Graven, who specializes in eminent domain. 2. Title work. 3. File petition with District Coun. 4. Serve petition against property owner and notice recorded against property. 5. Three commissioners appointed. 6. Public Hearing before District Court for public purpose (right to take property). Not generally contested. 7. Commissioners, 'Thomson, and owner view property. R. Public Hearing with 'testimony. Page I HRA AGENDA FEBRUARY 14, 1996 9. Three commissioners select "Damage Award". 10. Right of Appeal - 40 days. This process generally runs not -less -than four months and not -greater -than nine months. The HRA purpose of the eminent domain is the removal of blight for redevelopment of public green space. If acquired and after demolition, the HRA may wish to dedicate the parcel to the City for maintanance and liability reasons. RELOCATION COSTS Remember, if the HRA acquires the property, the HRA by law must offer and assist with relocation costs which may be determined by a specialized consultant. Thomson suggests this to begin at the time the petition is filed. 1 will attempt to collect some fee estimates for discussion. APPRAISAL. It is recommended by Attomey Bubul that the HRA obtain an appraisal of the property. The HRA appraisal for Block 64 was completed by of Clarence Eull, R.E. Field & Associates, Cedar, MN, for an amount of $2500) Additionally, Attorney Bubul has a recommendation of an appraiser and locally, Rod Dragsten, is an appraiser. I don't know it this is a conflict of interest as o Planning Commissioner. DEMOLITION COSTS lastly, as a reminder, the HRA will incurr costs associated with the demolition and restoration of the property. B. Alternative Actions, RESOLUTION 1. A motion to adopt a resolution authorizing eminent domain processings to acquire certain real properly. 2. A motion to deny adoption of the resolution. 3. A motion to table any action. C Page 2 HRA AGENDA FEBRUARY 14, 1996 A motion authorizing a certain appraiser to obtain an appraisal of the certain ply. 2. A motion to deny authorizing an appraisal. A motion to table any action. As the HRA has previously authorized to move forward on acquiring the property, recommendation for both is Altemative No. 1. D. S1111JmIIino Data. Copy of the resolution for adoption and cover letter from Attorney TTtomson. Page FEB 09 '96 13:26 KENNEDY 8 GRAVEN F 3/4 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS TO ACQUIRE CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHEREAS, the Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") is a housing and redevelopment development authority duly constituted and organized under law, with all of the powers enurnerated in Minnesota Statutes, Section% 469.001 to 469.047 (the "Act"). and WHEREAS, the Authority is authorized to develop and carry out redevelopment plats and redevelopment projects, as those terms are respectively defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.002, subdivisions 16 and 14; and WHEREAS, the Authority adopted a redevelopment plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") in an area in the City of Monticello identified as Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project Area") in November, 1982; and WHEREAS, changes in the public and private improvements proposed to be constructed within the Project Area occurred and necessitated adopting subsequent modifications to the Redevelopment Plan which were approved by the Authority and adopted by the City Council of the City of Monticello in the respective years of 1983, 1984. 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991. 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996; and WHEREAS, the Plan, as modified, contemplates the acquisition of certain real property (the "Propeny") which is located in the Project Area and which is more particularly described below in this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Monticello Housing and Redevelop- ment Authority as follows: 1. It is necessary to acquire the Property as described below in this resolution in order for the Authority to carry out the purposes of the Plan, as modified, and the Act. 2. Acquisition of the Property by eminent domain, in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 117, is deemed to be necessary and for a public purpose and is hereby authorized. 3. The Authority's attorney and staff are authorized and directed to acquire fee simple absolute title to the Property, by negotiation and purchase or by commencing eminent domain proceedings pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 117. 4. 'rho Property to be acquired is described as follows: C-1 u0115 W01, S-. FEB 09 '% 13:26 KENt EDY 8 GRAVEN A tract of land in Lot B of the South Half of Section 3, Township 121, Range 25 described as follows: Begin at the intersection of the southerly line of Trunk Highway No. 152 and the north line of said Lot B; thence southeasterly along the said southerly line of Trunk Highway 152 a distance of 315 feet: thence deflect right 90° for a distance of 205.7 feu to the north line Great Northern railway right of way; thence Northwestely along said railway right of way, a distance of 534.9 feet: thetta Easterly to the point of beginning, containing 2.08 acres more or less. PID 155-5110-033403 Property Address: 1400 West Broadway P. 4/4 Adopted by the Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority this _ day of February, 1996. President ATTEST: Executive Director GAP 100i]{ 1011 Yi-4 FEB 09 '% 13:25 KEMCDY & GRRvEti P 214 KENNEDY d& GRAVEN C'q�QTDItiD C—L M{ a Tbu 4 470 t'Imbm/ [:Rola. Mmp," Mlann SS4M Jnr J. Twor ROWI �. Al+w 1611) 137.9100 Lw V3 K w[Mmm ftt 1m. b.nc Bona watJJo 2..LL H. L'"T F..W4 (613) 117.9310 10. Y. Y.- 1wu a Drw.. D.v,o L (:awt c4 �Iq�aI�U D.M14 J. G-i.. ; 0.m). Ko.w. ,s Wtb C"no 4 Lwm bt"I"T C. CA.{ JOHR r. tm.v n µ'Rn FRS DIRECT UtAL 902M L D.vm.or R—T J. U.— 337-9217 wcttnw-To. 11. 1.w Room ; � BY FAX AND NAIL C"mTM P - February 9, 1996 Olive Koropchak Economic Development Director City of Monticello P.O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362-9245 RE: Acquisition of Katzmarek Property Dear Ms. Koropchak: At Steve Bubul's request, 1 prepared the enclosed resolution for consideration by the HRA board at Its February 14 meeting. I will need a certified copy of the approved and signed resolution, if it is adopted. If the HRA approves the resolution, you and I will need to discuss the following issues: 1. Title information. Before commencing the condemnation proceeding, we need to ascertain the status of title to the property. This can be done by obtaining a commitment for title insurance (and later purchasing a title policy), by updating the exiating abstract to the property (if the owner will make it available), or by obtaining a new or stub abstract of title. Generally, we find that the owner will not provide the abstract and In such cases we recommend purchasing a title policy. 2. Relocation. If the IIRA acquires the property, it will be responsible for prov(dia relocation assistance and benefits to the person (a) displaced by the acquisition. The HRA will need to retain the services of a relocation consultant to assist in this process. 3. Apprcuror. The HRA will also need to retain the services of a quallflod appraiser, preferrably one who holds a designation of M.A.I. or S. R. E. A. and whose professional reputation is well regarded in the Monticello area. Pleaso call mo If you have any questions concerning the process. After adoption of the resolution, pleaso contact me to discuss the above Issues. Sincerely, Corrine H. Thomson Encloiuro cc: Steve Bubul (w/onc) HRA AGENDA FEBRUARY 14, 1996 At the January 10 HRA meeting, a motion was approved offering an option to acquire Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 of Blk 64 & No R of Vac River St, City of Monticello. Under the following terms: An option to acquire the property for a price of $163,000 (the appraised value), which may be exercised within six months after the date of an option agreement. The HRA would pay the amount of $2,500 upon execution of an option agreement, which amount would be applied to the purchase price. If the HRA elects not to exercise the option within the terms of the agreement, the sellers retain the $2,500 option fee. Thereafter, the enclosed written offer was prepared and submitted to Rich Carlson, the seller's agent. On Wednesday morning, February 7. Rich Carlson stopped by the office of the H RA and informed the Executive Director that on Monday, February 5, the sellers had executed an option with an increase in the option fee from $2.5(X) to S5.(XM). On Tuesday morning, the sellers left a message with the agent to "hold off". Unable to meet with the sellers during the day, Carlson became aware of the 3:311 p.m. house fire at 225 Front Stmt while attending the Planning Commission meeting that evening. During our conversation Wednesday morning, the agent assumed the sellers would need housing and the agent was on his way to meet with the sellers. The agent suggested a purchase price of the rTraiscd value Icss the insured value. This is an update and at this time, no option offer has been received at the HRA office, However, the agent did request to be on the HRA agenda and believe may present an offer at the HRA meeting. The HRA option offer of January 12 is enclosed as supporting data. Page 1 MONT10EL1.0 250 East Broadway P. O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362.9245 Phone: (612) 295.2711 Metro: (612) 333.5739 Fax: (612) 295.4404 TO: Richard and Marian Carlson (Owners) Rich Carlson (Real Estate Agent) January 12, 1990 FROM: Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota SUBJECT: Legal Description: Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 of Blk 64 & No 40 Ill of Vac River St, City of Monticello. At the January 10, 1996 HRA meeting, a motion was approved to offer an option to acquire the above-described property under the following terms. The IIRA would have an option to acquire the property for a price of E163,(MNI (the appraised value), which may be exercised within six months after the date of the option agreement. The HRA would pay the amount of E2,5(Ml upon execution of an option agreement, which amount would be applied to the purchase price. If the HRA elects not to exercise the option within the terms of the agreement, the Owners retain the E2,5(Moption fee. Please respond in writing to the HRA by Wednesday, February 7, 1996 if these general terms are acceptable. If so, our attorney will draft an option agreement incorporating these terms and other customary terms and conditions. If you have any questions, please call me at 295-2711. Housing and Redevelopment Authority 011ie Koropchak, Executive Director PO Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362 HRA AGENDA FEBRUARY 14, 1996 N1 1 \ y1:111 1 111 `M. : 1 1 , J 11 I As recommended early by Attorney Bubul and Mark Ruff of Publicorp, they recommend the HRA and City update the cash flow for each district to determine their potential surpluses and to outline what are eligible expenditures for each district given its type and the year in which it was established. Enclosed is a letter from Mark addressing the issue. It is my understanding that Mark has talked with Rick Wolfsteller who is in favor of the idea. The HRA may wish to consider the completion of a Tt pro forma due to past legislative changes and as a guide for development of the HRA workplan. The workplan is an implementation of the Comprehensive Plan Update, yet to be adopted, and an implementation of the proposed Downtown/Riverfront Study. Mark estimated the cost for the first -nm of the pro forma at a figure of not -to - exceed $2,500. Other questions relying to the pro forma can be directed to Attorney Bubul. B. Alternative Action, 1. A motion authorizing Elhers and Associates (Publicorp) to complete a city- wide TI pro forma. 2. A motion denying authorization. 3. A motion to table any action. C. Recommendation - Alternative No. I. D, S=grtina Data- Copy a aCopy of Mark's letter. C Page I H Men and ASSOddMft LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE January 10, 19% TO: 011ie Koropchak, City of Monticello FR: Mark Ruff RE: City -Wide Tax Increment Pro fora The recent budget modification for the HRA's tax increment financing districts did raise a few issues relating to the allowable use of tax increment funds given changes in state legislation during the last 10 years. For example, tax increment produced from an economic development district established in 1988 can have 100%of the increment pooled outside of the district and can be used for land acquisition for retail, office or other uses. A tax increment district established in 1994 can only pool 25% outside of its boundaries and cannot assist non -manufacturing or warehousing projects. A pro forma would project total tax increment estimated to be received by the HRA over the next 10 to 15 years and the eligible uses of these finds. In addition, a city-wide pro forma would demonstrate the projected state aid losses from post -1990 districts and would allow for sensitivity analysis of the effect of changes instate property tax class rates and future local tax rates in the future. The pro forma, once in place, could be annually updated by the City on its computer system. Many of our clients have found the city-wide pro forma to be a valuable tool in planning for futurr projects and evaluating risk in pledging tax increment to development and redevelopment projects. Please contact me with any questions or comments. OFFICES IN MWNUPOUS, MN ANO BROOKFIELD, WI 2950 Norwest Conley . 90 South Seventh Shoot. M nneapoUL MN 5UO2.41DO Tolephone 612.939.5291. FAX 912.379.0954 HRA AGENDA FEBRUARY 14.1996 �g 8:00 P.M. Consideration of an informational meeting with planning consultants . sponse to to PRF. — Enclosed is a list of the planning consultant firms who received an RFP from the HRA. At this time. we do not know who will be attending the HRA informational meeting of February 14. Page 1 RPF- mailed 1/26196 10. Hyatt Palma 1. Dahlgren, Shardlow & Uban Doyle Hyatt 300 1st Ave North 0210 1600 Prince St Mpla MN 66401 Suite 110 Alexandria VA 22314 2. Sanders, Wacker, Wehrman, Bergly Bill Sanders 366 East Kellogg Blvd 11. Ehlers & Assoc. St Paul MN 66101 Rusty Fifield 2960 Norwest Center 3. Herb Baldwin Landscape 90 S 7th Street Architects Mpls MN 66402 4196 West 186th St Jordan, MN 66362 12. BRW Thresher Square 4. Close Landscape Architecture 700 3rd St S Bob Close Mpls MN 66416 610 Northwestern Building 276 East 4th Street 13. Ernst Associates St Paul MN 66101 122 West 6th Street Chaska MN 68316 6. Kurt Mayer 3636 Vadnais Center Drive 14. Northwest Associated Consultants, St Paul, MN 66110 Inc. 6776 Wayzata Blvd 6. Camiros Suite 666 Joyce Levine St Louis Park MN 66416 6647 Grand Ave S Mpls MN 66419 16. Duane Thorbeck Thorbeck Architects 7. Barton Ashman (Red Wing) 1409 Willow St III 3rd Ave S 0360 Suite 0600 Mpls MN 66401 Mpls MN 66403 S. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. Barry J. Warner One Carlson Parkway North Suite 160 Mpls MN 66477.4443 9. Hoisington Koeglor aroup, Inc. Micheal Schroeder 7300 Metro Blvd Suite 626 Edina MN 55439 1) City of Monticello The Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), City of Monticello (City), and the Monticello Community Partners (MCP) are requesting proposals from qualified firms or a combination of firms for the development of a design, traffic, market, and financial plan for redevelopment or revitalization of the traditional downtown and nearby riverfront area (study area). The final plan must stem from community involvement and reflect, to the extent possible, the desires of the public. A community-based process is as important as the product. The parties are seeking qualified consulting firms that have had experience in preparing revitalization studies and developing strategic plans for implementation of study recommendations. The submission deadline for proposals is 4 p.m., March 4, 1896, to be submitted to the address specified below. The project is expected to be completed within ail menthe of the award of the contract. CITY OF MONTICELLO ATTN: JEFF O'NEILL ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR 260 EAST BROADWAY PO BOX 1147 MONTICELLO, MN 66362 THE9IIlDraET The Monticello HRA has allocated sufficient funds to pay for this project. It is the intent of the parties to have the HRA enter into a contract for services with the selected firm. The City Council, Planning Commission, Parks Commission, MCP, other civic organizations, and citizens at large will contribute toward development of a plan by providing input. Staff support will be provided by the City. The project involves four basic components. They include: Physical design of the downtowntriverfiont area (study area) and other adjacent areas defined by the study as affecting the vitality of the study area. 2. A market analysis of the study area. nowNrowta.FJP. craft Page 1 3. The project should identify and shape the proper mix of activities and land uses (elements) using ideas listed by citizens in a recent visioning workshop as a guide. 4. Specific recommendations for financing and implementing the plan. 1. Physical design of the study area. This project should assess and analyze the historic and existing conditions of the study area as well as a design for future improvements. This section should include but not be limited to: a. A land use plan for the study area and a land use plan for adjacent areas identified by the firm as affecting the vitality of the study area. b. Existing public amenities and infrastructure and recommendations for improvements (including public parking and access to the study area). This is to also include traffic impacts and recommendations for transportation system changes both in and out of the study area, which could include identifying a plan for relieving traffic on CSAH 75 (Broadway). C. Existing parcel, easement, pathway, and road configurations and recommendations for replatting to improve commercial viability and to improve utilization of the river&ont as an asset. d. Historical significance. e. Existing uses of buildings and specific recommendations for buildings to be removed or rehabilitated. f. Development of design criteria for private and public structures, including buildings, facades, and signage. g. Recommendations for enforcement of design criteria. h. Recommendations should include designs and preliminary estimates of costs. i. Describe how the plan is in conflict or harmony with the comprehensive plan for the City. nowNrOWN.M. 146W Pago 2 2. Markpt. analynMark A of tht, area. The project should include the following: a. Identification of existing and future economic opportunities and threats to the traditional downtown area. b. An analysis of the existing and potential public, commercial, residential, industrial, and recreational/tourism users in the area. C. Potential for methods to encourage restoration or improved maintenance of housing stock within and adjacent to the study area. d. Specific recommendations regarding recruitment of commercial and recreational users to the study area. e. Plans for reuse of existing vacant or underutilized buildings within the study area. f. The market analysis should include local business survey information. Y. am i a. The project should determine which elements are a necessary part of a development plan for the study area given economic factors and the desires of the community (see attached Overview of Visioning Workshop). b. The project should identity the variety and optimum location(s) of selected elements necessary to support study area development goals and meet community desires. a. Financing: 1. A discussion of available financing options. 2. Recommendations as to responsible parties for financing. 3. A financial feasibility analysis. b. Implementation of the Plan: The implementation portion of the plan should focus on the implementation of any and all recommendations identified in the plan and the identification of organizations that would be primarily nowarroWN.RFP. 140196 Page 3 responsible for each project. This portion of the plan should be a specific, step-by-step action plan that identifies future actions and activities. The plan should be divided into phases with recommended start and finish dates and methods of accountability for each phase. It is important to have quantifiable measures to indicate the success of each phase of the plan. The consultant must identify these methods of accountability in the plan. The plan shall be a blueprint for the steps and projects that need implementation for a systematic revitalization of the traditional downtown area. FILIAL PRODUCT The consultant shall prepare and submit 50 copies of the final plan and shall schedule a final presentation to the community at a public meeting, which shall include professional visual aids summarizing the findings and recommendations. THE CITY Monticello is a city of 8,000 people located on the Mississippi River and on Interstate 94 approximately 30 miles northwest of the Minneapolia/St. Paul Metro area and 25 miles southeast of St. Cloud, MN. The population within a radius of b miles is approximately 13,000. Founded in the 1850'8, Monticello was incorporated in 1868. Since 1972, the city has experienced significant growth which has accelerated since 1992. The city population is currently growing at a rate of about 4% per year. MONTL-ANNIN ./DOWNTOWN In 1995, the City began the process of updating the comprehensive plan for the city. The plan identified downtown and riverfiront redevelopment as a priority for the community. Subsequent to the identification of this community issue, a team is emerging to address redevelopment issues. Following are team members, activities to date, and the role each plays. The Planning Commission and City Council, through development of the comprehensive plan, have identified downtown/riverhont redevelopment as an important issue. There is a community consensus that action needs to be taken to utilize the riverfront setting to enhance the vitality of the downtown area. The City Council has provided staff support for the activities of the HRA and the activities of the MPC. nowxrouay.W. v2619e Page 4 The HRA has followed up on comprehensive planning efforts by conducting two well -attended community workshops focusing on the downtown area with the guidance of consultant Theresa Washburn. The workshop spawned the recent establishment of Monticello Community Partners, which includes Promotion, Design, and Economic Restructuring subcommittees. The HRA is providing support to the MPC by loaning funds sufficient to hire Washburn to help organize and develop the MPC organization. The HRA will play the lead role in preparation of the development plan with major input from the MPC and City Commisssions. The HRA has earmarked funds sufficient to finance the redevelopment plan activities proposed in this document and will be involved in funding appropriate redevelopment activity as identified in the plan. The MPC is a private, non-profit organization with functions similar to a 'Mainstreet' organization. Membership on the board of directors of the MPC includes three citizens *at large' and a representative from the the Merchants, Chamber of Commerce, City Council, Parks Commission, and HRA. The MPC organization also includes Economic Restructuring and Design subcomittees. Please see the attached organizational chart for more detail on how the community is organized. FORM I PROPOSAL Your proposal should include the following: 1. Information demonstrating your understanding and perspective regarding the goals of the project, assumptions underlying the project, and problems you anticipate in completing the project. 2. A proposed approach to the project. The approach shall include how your firm intends to communicate with the partners and how you propose to involve local business people, property owners, and other citizens. 3. Specialized experience in the type of work required. Please include names and telephone numbers of clients we may call about these projects. 4. Resumes for professional staff members who will be assigned to this project with synopses of their particular responsibilities for this project. 5. An estimated schedule for completing the project with a graphic illustration of major tasks. 6. A schedule of fees including a not -to -exceed fee for this project. DowNTOWNAM 14WW Page 6 A selection committee made up of the HRA and MPC will review all proposals and will invite a limited number of firma to Monticello for a personal presentation and interview. Final selection will be made by the Committee. Cost of preparing proposals and being involved in personal presentations will be borne entirely by your firm. Ten copies of your proposal should be submitted by 4 p.m., March 4, 1996, to the following address: CITY OF MON710ELLO ATTN: JEFF OWEILL 260 EAST BROADWAY PO BOX 1147 MONTICELLO, MN 66362 A Proposers Meeting will be held at 8 p.m., February 14, 1996, at city hall. Membership from the HRA and MCP will be present to answer proposer questions about the RFP and to answer questions about the city in general. The intent of the meeting is to provide common information regarding the project to all proposers. Attachments: Overview of Visioning Workshop (� Organization Chart DowNTOVVNJWP. L126M Page 6 N - KENNEDY at GRAVEN a:u.ed 200 South Sbmh SUM Sulo 470 Kw**00e, MN 55402 (612) II7.9300 January 12, 1996 City of Monticello PO Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362-9245 MN190-00041: Redevelopment - General Invoice # 7580 Through December 31, 1995 For All Legal Services As Follows: 12/06/95 SJB Attend HRA mectingg 3.25 403.00 12/07/95 SJB Phone call with O. Koropchak re downtown 0.30 37.20 redevelopment issues 12/12195 SJB Phone call with B. Koropchak re TIF modification 0.30 37.20 12/19/95 SJB Phone call with M. Ruff re TIF modifications 0.20 24.80 Total Services: f 502.20 Attorney Summary Stephen Bubul 4.05 Q 124.00(hr 502.20 Open credit application f 212.90 Total Services And Disbursements: f 289.30 'w��rprubat�r ►� r �m4t». d11w d drnnl0 tti pt adcJam" Odom 0090 It"W ^ KENNEDY ex GRAVEN ChaureCom°sub zao sore ck MW S40 vo q rww�moaa r,N ss�o2 l (612) 337.9300 January 12, 19% City of Monticello PO Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362.9245 MN1904W51: TIF Modification Invoice 117583 Through December 31,1995 For All Ji qd Services As Follows: 12/20195 SJB Revise TIF modification documents 12/28/95 SJB Review TIF modification documents; phone call with M. Ruff 12/29/95 SJB Draft counsel resolution; phone call with O. Koropchak re same Total Services: Attorney Summary Stephen Bubul 1.20 Q 124.00/hr Total Services And Disbursements: 1*dW%atlrparera11NW 1 �. soar». ais d award Y'.. n10 oana rd 111r � pa d1 0.20 24.80 0.50 62.00 0.50 62.00 $ 148.80 1 148.80 S 148.80 KENNEDY 8t GRAVEN Chawed 200 South Sbah Sum Sulu 470 P� NN 55402 (612) 377-9300 January 12, 1996 City of Monticello PO Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362-9245 MN190-00031: Tapper Redevelopment Invoice # 7579 Through December 31, 1995 For All Legal Services As Follows: 12/15/95 DJG Prepare amendment to generate contract 0.60 60.00 12/22/95 DJG Draft amendment to contract 1.90 190.00 12/22195 SJB Review Tappers amendment; intraoffice 0.50 62.00 conference with D. Greensweig re same 12/28/95 DJG Redo Tapper amendment 0.20 20.00 Total Services: S 332.00 Attorney Summary Daniel J Greensweig 2.70 100.00/hr 270.00 Stephen Bubul 0.50 124.00/ttr 62.00 For All Disbursements As Follows: 12/22/95 Postage 0.00 12/2g/95 Postage 0.00 Total Disbursements: S 0.00 Total Services And Disbursements: $ 332.00 1rftw oM PONW01t (, a ao wiL drla a daland •)M 1rdacrd ald OWW"" al l 1tt1WOw KENNEDY at GRAVEN aurured 200 SaM Sbah Saes, Supe 470 b@meadb, MN 55402 (612)337-9300 January 12, 1996 City of Monticello PO Box 1147 n Monticello, MN 55362-9245 MN 190-00045: Fay - Mar TIF Project Invoice # 7366 Through Dcccmbcr 31, 1995 For All Legal Services As Follows: 12/04/95 DJG Research mechanic's lien re FCY-MCR 1.30 130.00 Total Services: $ 130.00 Attorney Summary Daniel J Greensweig 1.30@ 100.00/hr 130.00 Total Services And Disbursements: $ 130.00 'dwtwdwF is rd hr a NWOURLddoor , old t4�1d w0 aonw Orr ro E 61 d GYn�rr February 6, 1996 Ms. 011ie Koropchak City of Monticello 250 East Broadway P.O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362 PUBLIC RESOURCE I GROUP, INC. 11 Btcsiness Development & Finance Special= STATEMENT Consulting Services --December 16, 1995 through January 15, 1996 1-2-% LPK--Follow-up Talon Engineering regarding financing proposal/outline �Q NET CHARGEABLE HOURS: .50 Net Chargeable Hours ® $90/Hour .5 45.00 TOTAL AMOUNT PAST DUE: 5112.50 TOTAL AMOUNT NOW DUE S157,50 CURRENT OVER 30 OVER OVER 90 $43.00 $112.50 TERMS: NET DUE UPON RECEIPT, 1.33% PER MONTH SERVICE CHARGE ON PAST DUE ACCOUNTS 4205 Lancaster Lone North ♦ Suite 1100 ♦ Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 ♦ (612) SS47979 • (612) 5540221 Fax r MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 510,000 INTEREST-FREE LOAN, UNSECURED, ONE-YEAR PAYBACK Approved December 6,1995 LOAN BALANCE, December 7, 1995 PROPOSED EXPENDITURES: Visioning Workshop One day, January 20, 1996) Workplan Workshop One day, February 24, 1996) Visit of Choice One day, April, May, or June) $ 700.00 + accommodations $ 700.00 + accommodations $ 500.00 + accommodations Resource Team Visit $5,000.00 + accommodations Three days. August or September) Year-end/Directional Planning (One day. Nov, Dec, or Jan) $ 7(X).(X) + accommodations $10,0000) TOTAL PROPOSED EXPENDITURES $7,600.00+ accommodations Visioning Workshop, January 20, 1996 Theresa Washbum $ 700.(X) Monticello -KFC $ 226.20 Maus Foods $ 102.90 SUBTOTAL $1,029.10 LOAN BALANCE, January 31, 1996 $ X,9711.9() TAX INCREMENT FINANCING LOAN 1.12 AROPLAX FINANCIAL REPORT December 31, 1995 Payback began in May, 1993 for 9 years endinn in November, 2001. Semi-annual principal and interest payments total $2369.30 for the year. LOAN TOTALS Principal Interest TOTAL EEHENUES Principal Payback Interest Payback TOTAL REVENUES TOTAL EXPENDITURES ORIGINAL $15,000.00 X6,323.59 $21,323.59 FUND BALANCE FOR TIF 1-12 AROPLAX TIF12.WKI: 01MOSS EAIII REMAINING $3,883.24 $11,116.76 r224.66 X3`098.93 7,107.90 $14,215.69 $3,683.24 $3,224.66 $7,107.90 Itwx% are avallebla only for p Mc Impmvemerne $0.00 $7,107.90 TAX MCREMENT FINANCING LOAN 1.14 SUBURBAN FINANCIAL REPORT December 31, 1995 Payback began in May, 1993 for 8 years ending in May, 2000. Semi-annual principal and interest payments total $3522.52 for the year. LOAN TOTALS Principal Interest TOTAL REMUES Principal Payback Interest Payback TOTAL REVENUES TOTAL EXPENDITURES ORIGINAL $19,575.00 $8,843.82 $28,418.82 FUND BALANCE FOR TIF 1.14 SUBURBAN TIF14.WK1: 01118!89 PAID REMAINING $6,480.21 $13,094.79 $4,087.35 X2,756.47 $10,587.56 $15,851.26 $6,480.21 $4,087.35 $10,587.56 'Nnds are avaHM syr tar pub8c Improvements $0.00 $10,567.56 XXqTXXLW January 12. 1996 250 East Broadway P. O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362-9245 Phone: (612) 295-2711 Metro: (612) 333.5739 Fax: (612) 295.4404 Stephen P. Birkeland, Jr. Custom Canopy, Inc. 219 Dundas Road Monticello. MN 55362 RE: 1995 TIF Payment Dear Mr. Birkeland, Jr. At the December 6. 1995, HRA meeting, the commissioners executed the Certificate of Completion relating to the Private Redevelopment Contract dated April 12, 1993, between the Birkelands and the HRA. Based upon a final inspection by the City Building Official on December 5, 1995, the HRA requirements of December 7, 1994, were satisfied. The Certificate will be recorded at the proper office for the recordation of deeds. Secondly, the HRA has received the tax increment payments for 1995 from Wright County. Per the Private Redevelopment Contract, the HRA is prepared to issue a check to the Birkelands in the amount of E7,426.59when the City of Monticello has received payment in the amount of $2,426.59from the Birkelands. The 1995 annual TIF payment of $7,426.59 was based on the one-year delay for completion of the improvements. Contract completion date was December 31, 1993. Per the Contract, the redeveloper agreed to maintain the improvements within the local, state, and federal laws and reguladons. During the final inspection, the Building Official noted vehicles are parked outside the screen -fenced area which is a violation of the outdoor storage ordinance. Please contact the City Zoning Administrator relating to the Mr. Birkeland. Jr. January 12, 1996 Page 2 necessary process to comply with the City Ordinance. The HRA will again review the improvements for compliance of the local ordinance prior to disbursement of the 1996 TIF payment. If you should have any questions, please call me at 295-2711. Sincerely, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO <d) o C+9 011ie Koropchak �1 Executive Director cc: Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator Gary Anderson, Building Official/Zoning Administrator i TIF File e1 250 East Broadway P. O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362.9245 Phone: (612) 295-2711 Metro: (612) 333-5739 Fax: (612) 295-4404 Mr. Pete Abelson Northern States Power Company 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, MN 55401 RE: TAX INCREMENT GUARANTEE NOTICE Dear Mr. Abelson: Per the Private Redevelopment Contract dated September 6, 1989, between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota, and Northern States Power Company (the "Redeveloper"). ARTICLE VI, Section 6.1. Tax Increment Guarantee, the Redeveloper agreed to a Tax Increment Guarantee. "Beginning in calendar year 1991, in the event that the Tax Increment generated by the Tax Increment District in any year until the Maturity Date is less than $6,913,the Authority shall provide notice to the Redeveloper of such fact and the amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment......" Below is a notice of the amotmt of Tu Increment collected by the Administrator of the City of Monticello from the Auditor of the County of Wright, beginning calendar year 1991 through calendar year 1995 for the property described as: Lot 4, Block 3 OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK according to the recorded plat thereof, Wright County, Minnesota. Except the east 215.72 feet thereof subject to easements of record. I L M2 Im 1294 11L $7,173.41 $6,673.06 56,277.95 $4.532.12 $4,314.31 Mr. Abelson January 31, 1996 Page 2 The cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment through calendar year 1995 is $5,854.56. At the September 6, 1995, meeting of the Authority, the commissioners authorized that the Redeveloper be notified of the cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment with the following explanation: This is a deficiency notice and the amount is = due and payable. In order to allow for 4ustments in the amount of Tax Increment generated over the fife of the District, the Authority will provide an arcual notice of such fact and the cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment until the Maturity Date of the Tax Increment District. Upon the Maturity Date and Thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice, the Redeveloper shall be liable for and shall pay to the Authority the cumulative amount of the deficiency. If you should have any questions, please call me at 295-2711. Sincerely, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 011ie Koropchak Executive Director cc: Darrin Lahr, NSP St. Cloud Rick Wolfsteller, Administrator File 250 Eau Broadway P. O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362.9245 Phone: (612) 295-2711 Metro: (612) 333-5739 Fax: (612) 295-4404 Jerald J. and Mary E. Schoen Aroplaa Corporation 200 Chelsea Road Monticello, MN 55432 RE: TAX INCREMENT GUARANTEE NOTICE Dear Jerry and Mary: Per the Private Redevelopment Contract dated August, 3, 1992, between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") in and for the City of Monticello. Mimesota, and Jerald J. and Mary E. Schoen (the "Redeveloper"), ARTICLE VI, Tax Increment, Section 6.1. Tax Increment Guarantee, the Redeveloper agreed to a Tax Increment Guarantee. "Beginning in calendar year 1994, in the event that the Tax Increment generated by the Tax Increment District in any year until the Maturity Date is or will be less than $21,500,the Authority shall provide notice to the Redeveloper of such fan and the amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment......" Below is a notice of the amount of Tax Increment collected by the Administrator of the City of Monticello from the Auditor of the County of Wright, beginning calendar year 1994 through calendar year 1995 for the property described as: Lot 3, Block 2, OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK, except for tract described in Book 290 of Deeds, page 894, City of Monticello. County of Wright. 1224 1445 $19,523.24 $20.908,21 Jerald J. and Mary E. Schoen January 31, 1996 Page 2 The cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment through calendar year 1995 is E2,568.55. At the September 6, 1995, meeting of the Authority, the commissioners authorized that the Redeveloper be notified of the cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment with the following explanation: This is a deficiency notice and the amount is = due and payable. In order to allow for adjustments in the amount of Tax Increment generated over the life of the District, the Authority will provide an annual notice of such fact and the cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment until the Maturity Date of the Tax Increment District. Upon the Maturity Date and Thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice, the Redeveloper shall be liable for and shall pay to the Authority the cumulative amount of the deficiency. If you should have any questions, please call me at 295-2711. Sincerely, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELIA, MINNESOTA 011ie KoropchaE Executive Director cc: Rick Wolfsteller, Administrator File 14 250 East Broadway P. O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362-9145 Phone: (612) 295-2711 Metro: (612) 333-5739 Fax: (612) 295-4404 William R and Barbara R. Tapper Tapper's, Inc. 212 Chelsea Road Monticello, MN 55432 RE: TAX INCREMENT GUARANTEE NOTICE Dear Bill and Barb: Per the Private Redevelopment Contract dated July 13, 1990, between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota, and William R. and Barbara R. Tapper (the "Redeveloper"), ARTICLE VI, Tax Increment, Section 6.1. Tax Increment r-l-rantee, the Redeveloper agreed to a Tax Increment Guarantee. "Beginning in calendar year 1992, in the event that the Tax Increment generated by the Tax Increment District in any year until the Maturity Date is or will be less than $26,000, the Authority shall provide notice to the Redeveloper of such fact and the amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment......" Below is a notice of the amount of Tax Increment caUected by the Administrator of the City of Monticello from the Auditor of the County of Wright, beginning calendar year 1992 through calendar year 1995 for the property described as: Lot 4, Block 2, OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK according to the recorded plat thereof, Wright County, Minnesota. 14.12 1943 Im 1445 525,628.14 $25,322.52 $24,196.48 $24,288.18 William R. and Barbara R. Tapper January 31, 1996 Page 2 The cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment through calendar year 1995 is $4,564.68. At the September 6, 1995, meeting of the Authority, the commissioners authorized that the Redeveloper be notified of the cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment with the following explanation: 71his is a deficiency notice and the amount is = due and payable. In order to allow for adjustments in the amount of Tax Increment generated over the life of the District, the Authority will provide an annual notice of such fact and the cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment until the Maturity Date of the Tax Increment District. Upon the Maturity Date and Thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice, the Redevetoper shall be liable for and shall pay to the Authority the cumulative amount of the deficiency. If you should have any questions, please call me at 295-2711. Sincerely, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MDQNMTA 011ie Koropchak Executive Director cc: Rick Wolfsteller, Administrator File 250 East Broadway P. O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362.9245 Phone: (612) 295-2711 Metro: (612) 333-5739 Fax: (612) 295-4404 Mr. T comas Moore Remmele Engineering, Inc. 10 Old Highway 8 SW New Brighton, MN 55112 RE: TAX INCREMENT GUARANTEE NOTICE 11i�Tjul�uC!1iP41 Per the Private Redevelopment Contract dated July 16, 1990, between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") in and for the City of Monticello. Minnesota. and Remmele Engineering, Inc. (the "Redeveloper"), ARTICLE VI, Tax Increment, Section 6.1. Tax Increment Guarantee, the Redeveloper agreed to a Tax Increment Guarantee. "Beginning in calendar year 1992, in the event that the Tax Increment generated by the Tax Increment District in any year until the Maturity Date is or will be less than 532,000, the Authority shall provide notice to the Redeveloper of such fact and the amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment......" Below is a notice of the amount of Tax Increment collected by the Administrator, of the City of Monticello fYom the Auditor of the County of Wright, beginning calendar year 1992 through calendar year 1995 for the property described as: Lot I, Block 1, Remmele Addition, City of Monticello. au 1993 1599 1445 $27.859.92 E27,322.52 $33,965.28 E34,085.24 y Mr. Moore January 31, 1996 Page 2 The cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment through calendar year 1995 is $8,817.56. At the September 6, 1995, meeting of the Authority, the commissioners authorized that the Redeveloper be notified of the cumulative amoum of the deficiency in Tax Increment with the following explanation: This is a deficiency notice and the amount is tllit due and payable. In order to allow for adjustments in the amount of Tax Increment generated over the life of the District, the Authority will provide an annual notice of such fact and the cumulative amount of the deficiency in Tax Increment until the Maturity Date of the Tax Increment District. Upon the Maturity Date and Thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice, the Redeveloper shall be liable for and shall pay to the Authority the cumulative amount of the deficiency. If you should have any questions, please call me at 295-2711. Sincerely, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 011ie Koropchak Executive Director cc: Kent Paul, Plant 20, Monticello Rick Wolfsteller, Administrator File Thoma W. Newcow Brian F. I.eooud+ L " Won Spe=r. Jr.+ Mic6al R. O'Brien lawrence A. Wilford' Edward W. Oak Grover c. Sayre. m+ Tbomas W. Newcorrc 111• Brian F. KidreB loon A. Gcske Michelle McQrnnie Cotton LEONARD, OTRIEN WILFORD, SPENCER & GALE Attorneys At Law A Professional Association Bao Norwest Center 100 Sowh Fifth Street 35 East Fifth Street Suite 1200 Saint Paul, Minrimm 55101 Minneapolis. Minneson 55402 Telephone (612) 227-9505 Telephone (612) 332-1030 Fax (612) 297.6641 Fait (612) 332-2740 Reply to: Minneapolis February 12, 1996 Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota 250 East Broadway P.O. Box 1147 Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Attn: Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator Trmodty M. Walsh J..0J. Deuhs, Jr. Karen A. Cbamcrhk Thomas C. Anon" John T. Keay Eric D. Cook Kri. A. 7 .At. &..W in Wicaatia -Cer W Ra Froprnr Sp¢Wm (M - Sew Ba Anorrar ) Re: Contract for Private Redevelopment by and among Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota, The City of Monticello, Minnesota and Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. Dear Mr. Wolfsteller: Please be advised that Wedum/PHM Affordable Housing, Inc. has recently received its 501(c)(3) exemption status from the IRS. Accordingly, we are in the process of transferring the Mississippi Shores Project from Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. to Wedum/PHM Affordable Housing, Inc. Enclosed for your review and approval please find a draft of Assignment and Assumption of Contracts. The Redevelopment Contract calls for approval from the Redevelopment Authority of this contract prior to the transfer. Please review the enclosed and call me at your earliest convenient opportunity with any questions or comments you may have to the enclosed draft Assignment and Assumption Agreement. Very truly yours, LEONARD, O'BRIEN WILFORD, SPENCER & GALE By 04Ir/Y Grover C. Sayre, III 3CSlljd Enclosure cc: Mr. Mark Meyer 21.541-1 FOR VALUE RECEIVED. the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, PRESBYTERIAN HOMES HOUSING AND ASSWEI) LIVING, INC., a Minnesota non-profit corporation (hereinafter called 'Assignor"), hereby grants, assigns and transfers to WFDUM/PHM AFFORDABLE HOUSING, INC., a Minnesota non-profit corporation (hereinafter called "Assignee,' which term shall be construed to include its successors and assigns), all right, title, interest and claim of Assignor in and to the following: All contracts with third parties entered into in connection with or relating to the operation, maintenance, service, supply, furnishing or management of the property (the 'Premises') located at 1013 Hart Boulevard, Monticello, Minnesota 55362, or any part thereof, together with those contracts specifically described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the *Contracts"). Assignor hereby represents and warrants that except for the Contracts, there are no other contracts pertaining to the Premises and that there exists no default under the Contracts on the part of any party to the Contracts. Assignor further represents and warrants that (i) a full, true and correct copy of each of the Contracts (as modified, changed or amended) being assigned has been delivered to Assignee and none of the Contracts has been further modified, changed or amended by Assignor except in writing attached to the copy of any such Contract delivered to Assignee, (ii) each of the Contracts is in full force and effect and is legally binding upon all of the parties to the Contract, and (iii) no party to any of the Contracts has a claim, defense, offset or counterclaim against Assignor arising from or related to the terms, conditions and covenants contained in any of the Contracts. Assignee, by acceptance of this Assignment and by execution hereof, hereby assumes the obligations of Assignor under the Contracts and agrees to abide by and perform the terms thereof. EXECUTED the _ day of February, 1996. PRESBYTERIAN HOMES HOUSING AND ASSISTBD LIVING, INC. (A Minnesota Non -Profit Corporation) By: Its: nM.1 WEDUM/PHM AFFORDABLE HOUSING. INC. (A Minnesota Non -Profit Corporation) By: Its: ca 1. Loan Agreement dated as of July 1, 1995 between City of Monticello, Minnesota and Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. 2. Bond Purchase Agreement dated July 20, 1995 by and between City of Monticello, Minnesota and Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted living, Inc. 3. Disbursing Agreement dated July 1, 1995 by and among Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc., First Trust National Association, and Wright Title Guarantee Co. 4. Contract for Private Redevelopment dated July 1, 1995 by and among Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota, The City of Monticello, and Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. 5. Extended Low -Income Housing Commitment Agreement dated July 1, 1995 by and between Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota and Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. 6. Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Contractor dated July 12, 1995 by and between Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. and Construction Analysis and Management. Inc. 7. Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect dated October 4, 1994 by and between Monticello Senior Housing Alliance, Inc. and BRW Elness Architects, Inc. g. Management Agreement dated July 20, 1995 by and between Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. and Presbyterian Homes Management and Services, Inc. 9. Continuing Disclosure Agreement dated July 1, 1995 by and among First Trust National Association, Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc., Presbyterian Homes of Minnesota, Inc., Presbyterian Homes Foundation, Presbyterian Homes Management and Services, Inc., Johanna Shores, Inc., and Presbyterian Homes Care Centers, Inc. 10. Promissory Note in the amount of Seventy -Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00) dated July 20, 1995 from Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. to Monticello -Big Lake Community Hospital District. 11. Marketing Agreement dated June 21, 1995 by and between Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. and Senior Innovations.