2000-12-12~ r
AGENDA
MOUND HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
DECEMBER 12, 2000
6:30 P.M.
6:30 1. OPEN MEETING
2. APPROVE AGENDA, WITH ANY AMENDMENTS
3. APPROVE BILLS
APPROVE MINUTES: NOVEMBER 28, 2000
5. PUBLIC HEARING: BUSINESS SUBSIDY AGREEMENT WITH
METROPLAINS DEVELOPMENT, WITH ACTION ON
RESOLUTION REGARDING BUSINESS SUBSIDY AGREEMENT
WITH METROPLAINS DEVELOPMENT
6. ADJOURN
r
MOUND HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Indian Knoll Manor
# Check No. VendorlMerchant Amount Comments
1 Daniel Interiors $1,076.00 carpeting
2 Citizen Communications 390.58
3 Brissman-Kennedy 2,822.25 carpet cleaner
4 G E Applances 198.74 appliance repair
5 AT 8~ T Wireless 65.54 phone
6 C. Naber St Assoc 95.00 accountant
7 M E I 147.12 elevator service
8 Glenwood Inglewood 13.42 water
9 BFI 288.46 garbage, recycling
10 J R Optics 339.65 sewer cleaning
11 Rental History Reports 50.00 backround checks
12 Xcel Energy 966.83 electric
13 City of Mound 999.36 sewer/water
14 I O S 104.37 copier lease
15 Reliant Energy 1,621.00
16 AT 8 T Universal 902.46 maintenance supplie
17 Petty Cash 25.40 mist
18 U S Postmaster 68.00
19 True Value 2,264.71 maintenance supplie
20 Budget Lighting 460.98 light bulbs
21 Above Ground 8 Beyond 527.17 tree removal
22 IRS 1,723.90 4th qtr
23 Karol Charon 1,195.25
24 Mel Robeck 965.73
25 Shean Soderberg 55.00 maintenance helper
26 Marland Hildebrandt 565.00 maintenance helper
27 MN Dept of Revenue 273.00 4th Qtr
28 Linda Camp 91.89 sec. dep
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
TOTAL: $18,296.81
TOTAL ACC. PAYABLE
Begining Bank Bal.
Deposits MTD
ENDING BANK BALANCE
$18,296.81
$17,747.61
$7,500.00
$6,950.80
Signature:
AccPay
12108!2000
MTNU ES OF THE MOUND CITY COUNCIL MEETING
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 28.200 7.30 P M
MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown to approve consent agenda.
MOTION carved unanimously.
rnn~~FNTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON
ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
Ronald Motyka, 1545 Bluebird Lane, Mound. My issue and concern is with the postage
free box by the entryway of the Mound City Hall Building. I have been trying to fill a
position on the Park and Open Space Commission for a while. On November 4, 2000, I
received a letter that was dated November 2, 2000, to attend a meeting on Thursday,
November 9, 2000. I was not able to attend that meeting because of business purposes.
wrote a letter to Jim Fackler and to Mayer Meisel explaining why I could not make that
meeting. On November 5, 2000, I placed both letters into the box at the curb (my wife
was present as I put them in). On November 9, 2000, my wife started receiving calls as
to whether I would be at the meeting or not. She said I was out of town and couldn't
make the meeting. On November 11, 2000, I called Mr. Brown to ask if the letters did
appear and they did not. Suddenly they appeared on November 17, 2000. I am not naive
enough to believe that they set out in that box for eight days without someone seeing
them. However, without a stamp on them they were not federally protected postage. So
my only warning to the citizens are if you are going to use that box make sure it is for
something that doesn't require a postage to verify when you in fact paid the bill or sent
your letters or what ever else.
,4 C'TION ON PARK AND OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPOINTMENT
The recommendation from the Parks Commission is to add another Commissioner and
appoint the three (3) applicants listed. This would have to be an Ordinance Amendment
to add another Commissioner to the Board. There are six (6) Commissioners on the
Parks Board including the Liaison. The Ordinance amendment would have to be printed
in the paper. The third person would not be appointed at this time.
MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown, to increase the Park Commission Board to
seven (7) members effective with an Ordinance change.
MOTION carried unanimously.
~.
There is a proposal to the City Council to appoint two (2) new Commissioners. Susan
Taylor will be appointed to begin in December 2000 and Derrick Hentz would be
appointed in January of 2001 to replace Peter Meyer's position.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker, to appoint two (2) Park Commissioners.
Susan Taylor to begin December 2000 and Derrick Hentz to begin January 2001.
MOTION carried unanimously.
a ~TrnN ON SUPPORTING DATA AND SIGNAGE
RF, COMMENDATION PERTAINING TO CLEAN OUTDOOR AIR
City Manager Kandis Hanson displayed a picture of the signage. Basically the signs will
be hunter green and tan with dark lettering.
Council Member Hanus has an issue with the Resolution. It is correct to say that the two
(2) organizations will be paying the cost of all the signs and could we add a Section 4
under the `be it resolved' section of the resolution to state that fact.
Mr. Dean suggested adding to Section 2 "upon receipts of the signs the Park and
Recreation Department will install them at the mentioned parks."
Mayor Meisel questioned the verbiage of the signs. She believed they would read `thank
you for refraining from the use of tobacco' instead of thank you for not using tobacco.
City Manager Kandis Hanson explained staff reviewed several options that were
presented by the committee and staff is recommending the verbiage in the packet.
Carol Weber explained the reason that we suggested this one is that it does have the word
`youth' on it, which is the primary purpose of the whole project. Also, we have `thank
you for not' from some examples we heard from other citizens in the community and
primarily from the Senior Center as they have a no smoking policy in their center. This is
a much more positive attitude, upbeat tone. This is wording that all kinds of all age
groups would understand. Our primary focus is reducing youth tobacco use and part of
that does incorporate adults because of the role model issues.
The previous MOTION was by Weycker, seconded by Brown to pass the Resolution
contingent upon verification of the facts and also that staff will develop appropriate
verbiage for the signs and that friendly amendment was made by Council Member
Ahrens that the sign verbiage be subject to City Council approval. Member's Weycker
and Brown accepted that amendment and that is what passed.
CONDITION OF THE MOTION by Weycker, seconded by Brown, to accept the signs
with the correction of the spelling and reaffirm the cost of the signs is to be born by some
entity other the City of Mound.
Council Member Brown withdrew second.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hansus to reconsider the previously approved
Resolution.
AYES: 3 (Meisel, Hanus, Brown)
NAYS: 1 (Weycker)
MOTION carried.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to keep the Resolution as written including the
new signage as written and upon receipt of the signs, the Parks Department is hereby
direct to install said signs at the appropriate parks.
MOTION carried unanimously.
AC'TlON ONMUELLER/LANSING PROPERTIES' REQUEST FOR
REINSTATEMENT INTO CBD PARKING PROGRAM.
Mr. Mike Mueller representing Mueller-Lansing properties has requested to be included
in the Central Business District (CBD) Parking program retroactive to November 15,
2000. Mr. Mueller reassured the Council of their participation in the program until their
building is removed or the program is terminated.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker, to formally include them back into the CBD
Parking Program retroactive to November 15, 2000.
Mayor Meisel believes this is a very good idea; however, Mueller-Lansing Properties
then must continue with the CBD Parking until removal of their building. Also the
handicapped parking spaces (2) must be reinstated to their previous condition including
the painting.
City Manager Kandis Hanson explained that staff has pointed out that the success of the
program depends on total participation. The formula was based on certain number of
spaces and that it how it is applied across the business community.
Council Member Brown accepted Mayor Meisel's amendment to his MOTION to
include the stipulation that Mueller-Lansing Properties must continue with the CBD
Parking until removal of their building or program termination. Also Mueller-Lansing
Properties is responsible for reinstating the two (2) handicapped parking spaces to their
original state.
~_. _
MOTION carried unanimously.
City Manager Kandis Hanson explained that we have amended forms that would act as
disclosure forms that would accompany this police. The change in these over what you
have seen before tonight is #3. There was not clarity in that the way it was first written
and we believe this further clarifies the intent. The sentence should read `A business
entity in which the person has an ownership interest, either legal or equitable.'
Council Member Hansus made the point that under the Disclosures Item B, he believes
any and all financial interest should be disclosed not `greater than 50%'. Also Item E is a
similar issue. The sentence should read `Real property within the City owned by the
person or in which the person has a beneficial interest.'
MOTION by Meisel, seconded by Brown to make corrections and/or changed as
discussed and to proceed at the December 4, 2000 meeting.
MOTION carried unanimously.
['nwSIDERATION OF WESTONKA SCHOOL DISTRICT CLAIM•
EXF. CUTIVE SESSION.
Mr. Dean explained this is a consideration of a possible settlement offer on the Westonka
School District matter and it is staff's recommendation that the City Council go into
executive session to meet with the legal representative for the City to discuss possible
settlement options.
('OUNCIL RETURNED FROMEXECUTIVE SESSION
Mr. Dean explained there was discussion tenure of a proposed settlement offer of the
claims between the City of Mound and the Westonka School District. As a result of the
Executive Session there is a Resolution before the Council entitled Resolution
Authorizing Reimbursement to Independent School District #277 for certain
expenditures.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to accept the Resolution.
MOTION carried unanimously.
CITYAIANAGFR PL~RFOR~NANCP' F'YAL UATION.• EXECUTIVE
SF, SION
Mayor Meisel explained the reason for the Executive Session was for an evaluation on
our City Manager Kandis Hanson after 7'/i month of employment.
MOTION by Meisel, seconded by Brown, for approval of the performance evaluation
including a 2% salary increase based on the performance evaluation and a continued
commitment the City will go forward with some type of goal setting evaluations. A
commitment from the City that we continue the use of a third party evaluation tool. The
City will front the costs associated with the purchase of a home computer for the City
Manager's use.
MOTION carries unanimously.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker to adjourn City Council Meeting.
Chair Michael adjourned the meeting at 11:15 p.m.
Secretary Sue Schwalbe
Chair Geoff Michael
~..,..
PUBLIC NOTICE
MOUND HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
1. Notice is hereby given that a public hearing on the approval of a business subsidy
agreement with MetroPlains Development LLC will be held before the HRA on Tuesday,
December 12, 2000 at 6:30 o'clock p.m. in the city council chambers at the Mound City Hall
located at 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota.
2. Copies of the proposed business subsidy agreement will be available for public inspection
on and after November 27, 2000, at Mound City Hall during normal business hours, 8:00 A.M. to
4:30 P.M., Monday thou Friday.
Fran C1ar c, City Clerk
Publish in The Laker -November 25, 2000
~_ .
DRAFT
NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED
BY EITHER CITY OR HRA
PROPOSED AGREEMENT
MetroPlains Development LLC. Business Subsidy Agreement.
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of the day of , 2000 by and
between the HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF
MOUND, MINNESOTA, a Minnesota public body corporate and politic, (the "HRA") and
METROPLAINS DEVELOPMENT LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the
"Redeveloper")
BACKGROUND
1 The parties hereto have entered into that certain document entitled Contract for
Private Redevelopment (the "Contract") by which the HRA has agreed to provide certain economic
assistance to the Redeveloper in order to make feasible the redevelopment of land. The rights and
responsibilities of the parties are as described in the Contract.
2 Section 11.8 of the Contract requires that an agreement that complies with the
provisions of the Minnesota Business Subsidy Act, (Minnesota Statutes §§ 116J.993 to 116J.995)
be duly adopted and executed prior to the payment of any economic assistance that constitutes a
business subsidy under the Act. This Agreement is intended to serve that purpose.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual obligations herein, and
in the Contract, the parties do hereby represent, covenant and agree as follows:
Section 1.1. Compliance with Business Subsidy Provisions. The parties agree and
represent to each other as follows: (Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the terms used
in this article shall have the meanings given then in this Agreement, the Contract and in the
Business Subsidy Act.)
(a) The subsidy provided to the Redeveloper pursuant to this Agreement consists of a
Limited Revenue Tax Increment Note in the approxiamte principal amount of $3,000,000.. The
Redevelopment Property is located within the HRA's Tax increment financing district.
(b) The public purposes of the subsidy are to promote redevelopment of downtown
Mound, generate spin-off development and redevelopment in downtown Mound, increase net jobs
in the City and the State, and increase the tax base of the City and the State.
JBD-188368v1
MU 195-9
(c) The goals for the subsidy are to secure construction of the Minimum Improvements
on the Redevelopment Property; to maintain the Minimum Improvements for at least five years as
described in clause (fl below; and to create the jobs and wage levels in accordance with Section 1.2
of this Agreement.
(d) If the goals described in clause (c) above are not met, the Developer must make the
payments to the HRA described in Section 1.3 of this Agreement.
(e) The subsidy is needed because the cost of acquiring the Redevelopment Property at
fair mazket value plus the cost of the Minimum Improvements makes redevelopment of the
Redevelopment Property financially infeasible without public assistance.
(f) The operation of the Minimum Improvements must continue for at least five years
after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion.
(g) The Redeveloper does not have a parent corporation.
(h) The Redeveloper has not received, and does not expect to receive financial
assistance from any other grantor as defined in the Business Subsidy Act in connection with
purchase of the Redevelopment Property or construction of the Minimum Improvements.
Section 1.2. Job and Wa eg Goals. Within two years a$er the earlier of the date of issuance
of the Certificate of Completion or the date a business occupies the Redevelopment Property (the
"Compliance Date"), the Developer shall cause to be created at least one new full-time equivalent
job on the Redevelopment Property, including jobs retained where the loss was imminent and
demonstrable, and shall cause the wages for the _ employee to be no less than 125 % of the
federal minimum wage, exclusive of benefits. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, if
the wage and job goals described in this Section 1.2 are met by the Compliance Date, those goals
are deemed satisfied despite the Redeveloper's continuing obligations under Sections 1.1(f) and 1.4.
The HRA may, after a public hearing, extend the Compliance Date by up to one year, provided that
nothing in this Section 1.2 will be construed to limit the HRA's legislative discretion regarding this
matter. If the Compliance Date is measured from the date of occupancy of a portion of the
Minimum Improvements by a business and the HRA expects other businesses to occupy portions of
the Minimum Improvements, the HRA may assign other Compliance Dates to such other
businesses.
Section 1.3. Remedies. If the Developer fails to meet the goals described in Section 1.1(c),
the Developer shall repay the HRA within one yeaz upon written demand from the HRA a pro rata
share of the amount of the subsidy granted by this Agreement and interest on said amount at the
implicit price deflator as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.50, subd. 2, accrued from the
date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion to the date of payment. For purposes of this
Section 1.3, the amount which the Redeveloper must repay within one year to the HRA, is the
present value of the unpaid balance of the Loan. The term pro rata share means percentages
calculated as follows:
(i) if the failure relates to the number of jobs, the jobs required less the jobs
created, divided by the jobs required;
JBD-188368v 1
MU 195-9
~.... ~ ,
(ii) if the failure relates to wages, the number of jobs required less the number of
jobs that meet the required wages, divided by the number of jobs required;
(iii) if the failure relates to maintenance of the office, service and retail facility in
accordance with Section 1.1(f), 601ess the number of months of operation as
an office, service and retail facility (where any month in which the facility is
in operation for at least 15 days constitutes a month of operation),
commencing on the date of the Certificate of Completion and ending with
the date the facility ceases operation as determined by the HRA, divided by
60; and
(iv) if more than one of clauses (i) through (iii) apply, the sum of the applicable
percentages, not to exceed 100%.
Nothing in this Section 1.3 shall be construed to limit the HRA's remedies under Article IX
hereof. In addition to the remedy described in this Section 1.3 and any other remedy available to the
HRA for failure to meet the goals stated in Section 1.1(c), the Redeveloper agrees and understands
that it may not a receive a business subsidy from the HRA or any grantor as defined in the Business
Subsidy Act for a period of five yeazs from the date of the failure or until the Redeveloper satisfies
its repayment obligation under this Section 1.3, whichever occurs first.
Section 1.4. Reports. The Redeveloper must submit to the HRA a written report regarding
business subsidy goals and results by no later than Mazch 1 of each year, commencing Mazch 1,
2001 and continuing until the later of (i) the date the goals stated Section l . l (c) are met; (ii) 30 days
after expiration of the five-year period described in Section 1.1(f); or (iii) if the goals are not met,
the date the subsidy is repaid in accordance with Section 1.3. The report must comply with Section
116J.994, subdivision 7 of the Business Subsidy Act. The HRA will provide information to the
Redeveloper regarding the required forms. If the Redeveloper fails to timely file any report required
under this Section 1.4, the HRA will mail the Redeveloper a warning within one week after the
required filing date. If, after 14 days of the postmarked date of the warning, the Redeveloper fails to
provide a report, the Redeveloper must pay to the HRA a penalty of $100 for each subsequent day
until the report is filed. The maximum aggregate penalty payable under this Section 1.4 is $1,000.
Section 1.5. Hearin. Payment of the business subsidies is contingent upon approval
following the hearings provided for in the Business Subsidy Act.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands as of the day and year first above
written.
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF MOUND,
MINNESOTA
By:
Its:
JBD-188368v1
MU195-9
~ r
By:
Its: Executive Director
METROPLAINS DEVELOPMENT LLC,
a Minnesota limited liability company
By:
Its President
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss..
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,
by and ,the Chairperson and Executive
Director of The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Mound, Minnesota.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss..
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,
2000, by ,the President of MetroPlains Development LLC, a Minnesota limited
liability company, on behalf of the company.
Notary Public
JBD-188368v1
MU 195-9
,..
~ r
MOUND HRA
RESOLUTION NO.00-
RESOLUTION ADOPTING BUSINESS SUBSIDY AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Mound has
entered into a Contract for Private Redevelopment with MetroPlains Development LLC, calling for
the redevelopment of certain lands within the City of Mound; and
WHEREAS, the Contract calls for the providing of economic assistance by the HRA to the
Redeveloper which meets the definition of "business subsidy" as that term is used in Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 116J.993 through 116J.994 (the "Act"); and
WHEREAS, THE Act requires the adoption of a business subsidy agreement as a
precondition to the making of a business subsidy; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to notice as required by the Act, the HRA has held its public hearing
on the adoption of a business subsidy agreement with the Redeveloper.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Mound that the business subsidy agreement attached hereto as
Exhibit A is hereby adopted.
Dated:
Pat Meisel, Board Chair
Attest:
Kandis M. Hanson, Executive Director
JBD-188397v1
MU 195-9
u
~plTO~
~ ~"" 0)
Y,'titL6011 Ni O~~
~,t,
JUDI'I'1J 1J. DUTCIIER
S"TAPE AUDI"I'OR
STATF. OF MINNESOTA
OFI~ICI: OF `1'lil; SN'AI'L AUDITOR
SUITE 400
525 PARK STREET
SAINT PAUL, MN 55103-2139
Please respond to:
"I'ax Increment Financing Division
505 Spruce Tree Centre
1600 University Ave. W.
St. Pau(, MN 55104
(651) 296-2551 (Voice)
(651) 296-4755 (I'ax)
stateauditor@osa.state.mn.us (E-IVlail)
1-800-627-3529 (Relay Service)
TIF Division Phone: (651) 642-0767
TIF Division Fax: (651) 642-0769
Direct Dial: (651) 642-0837
December 5, 2000
Gino Businaro, City Finance Director
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Rd
Mound, MN 55364-1687
Re: "But For" Test for Westonka School District Parcels Included in City of Mound's
TIF District 1-2
Dear Mr. Businaro:
On July 18, 2000, the Office of the State Auditor (OSA) sent the City of Mound a letter regarding
the Mound City Council's finding that certain parcels owned by the Westonka School District
(Independent School District #277) and included by the city in Tax Increment Financing (TIF)
District 1-2 met the "but for" test. After sending this letter, the OSA received additional information
from the city regarding the city's decision to include this property in the TIF district. The OSA also
contacted the school district for additional information.
Based on this additional information, it appears that the school district was seeking to market the
property to parties who would be willing to purchase and redevelop the property without any TIF
assistance, and the school district was contacted by a number of potential purchasers who were
willing to sign a purchase agreement for the property that did not include a contingency for TIF
assistance. As noted in the OSA's previous correspondence, one of those potential purchasers did,
in fact, enter into a purchase agreement for the property that did not include a contingency for TIF
assistance.'
However, in spite of the apparent interest of the school district in selling and the private sector in
purchasing and redeveloping the school district's property without TIF assistance, it is possible that
I According to a statement from Mark Hanus, Mound City Council Member, dated November
17, 2000, the city council was aware of this purchase agreement at the time it found that TIF
District 1-2, including the school district's property, met the "but for" test.
' ~ Recycled paper with a minimum of
~~~ i~, ,% I S% post-consumer waste ~ An Equal Opportunity Employer
~~
1 1
OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR
Gino Businaro, City Finance Director
December 5, 2000
Page 2
the only party that would have been willing to close on a purchase of the school district's property
at a purchase price acceptable tc> the school district would have been one who was unwilling to close
on the purchase and redevelop the property without receiving TIF assistance. Therefore, the OSA
cannot find that the school district's property clearly did not meet the "but for" test in Minn. Stat.
§ 469.175, subd. 3. 't'his conclusion is based on the limited information the OSA has reviewed to
date. Please be advised that i f the OSA conducts a TIF legal compliance audit of the City of
Mound's TIF districts, the OSl, might find instances of noncompliance that were not apparent based
on the information reviewed to date.
If you have any questions cn- ctnnments about the information in this letter, please call me at (651)
642-0837.
Sincerely,
`hyX.~.... £~C~-- -
William E. Connors, Director
Tax Increment Financing Division
cc: John Dean, City Attorney