Loading...
EDA 1998 11 19CHANHASSEN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 19, 1998 Chairman Boyle called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Gary Boyle, Jim Bohn, Mark Senn, Mark Engel, Steve Berquist, and Nancy Mancino MEMBERS ABSENT: Mike Mason STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Asst. Executive Director and Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Boyle moved, Bohn seconded to approve the Minutes of the Economic Development Authority meeting dated August 13, 1998 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. CONSIDER TIF ASSISTANCE FOR PHASE III~ ENTERTAINMENT PROJECT. Todd Gerhardt presented the staff report on this item. Vernelle Clayton: The project doesn't go away and neither do I. Gary Boyle: It's always nice to have you. Vernelle Clayton: Thank you. Thank you. ! have been commissioned by Bob to work with him on this project and the approval process. Partly ! think in large part to offer my perspective based on what has been happening with the project and relate that to what's happening with it as it goes forward. As you know, as you can see this final phase in it's present form was not what we anticipated when it was originally approved by both the HRA and by the Planning Commission and the Council. The project though, as with all of the best laid plans that we have here in Chanhassen and throughout the metropolitan area and the country has been market driven. You can have all the best plans in the world and all the wonderful ideas. If the market doesn't accept it, it just doesn't happen. What we did before with respect to this particular portion of the project, which consists of what we call the bowling alley building, was attempt to renovate the existing buildings and to do some relatively creative things so that it wouldn't look like the building that you see out there today. We contrived therefore a rather elaborate boardwalk, which did accomplish a couple of things aesthetically as well as the practical application of having a place for people to walk into the building without having to climb up steps for each and every one. Because the present building as you know is about six been above grade at that site so it's a relatively difficult conversion. We also contrived to separate the rather large mass of existing building into what appeared to be individual buildings built at different periods in time. So while Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 that was a nice idea, it was not very, it was not a very good investment. It was an iffy investment. We had trouble attracting any large numbers of people. In fact we had trouble attracting anyone. The folks that finally thought maybe they would give it a try were only those folks who already had had some experience in Chanhassen and it really was a limited market. So while we were still working on that, which obviously took us a great deal of time or we would not be here tonight, along came a new concept in movie going. It's comprised of 16 or more movie theaters. Stadium seating and frankly it' s not just going to a movie. It' s a movie experience. It' s a new thing on the scene. It's just coming to Minnesota. It has arrived in a few communities and in just a couple more years, yeah years, you'll see them all over the metropolitan area. Thus the cinema folks came along and offered to purchase the building because they could see that already they were at, or soon would be at an economic disadvantage if they didn't have the opportunity to compete with this new phenomenom. They looked at the existing building and they decided the prudent way to proceed would be to demo that building and rebuild. Thus you don't see some of the same things that you see. They no longer need the boardwalk. That as I said was contrived, although we all liked it. They looked at having a restaurant, as we had had before. What with the parking concerns and some aesthetic concerns, they have acquiesced to some recommendations by staff that a retail component be included for the reasons I mentioned as well as some other mentioned and other reasons and Ron Krank and others will be addressing that with you more completely in just a moment. So have we created an entertainment complex? Did we intend to create an entertainment complex? Yes we did. It's in an entertainment area already with the Dinner Theater and the hospitality that's already there. Is this an entertainment complex with the 16 screens? Absolutely. Eight screens is as I said going to a movie in Chanhassen. Sixteen screens puts Chanhassen on the map. Then as Todd said, the HRA a few years ago determined that the use of TIF to upgrade this eyesore was warranted. Now the EDA, for you as the EDA the question is, is a 16 screen movie theater a better investment than a bowling alley? That's what we had before. We had a bowling alley and some retail. Now we have 8 additional screens and together a 16 screen movie theater. From my experience and familiarity with the project, the principles involved, their financial capability, all of the above, I can tell you that I firmly believe that a 16 screen movie theater is a better investment for the city of Chanhassen than the bowling alley. Will we miss the bowling alley? Obviously we will. It offered variety. But tonight the decision rests on whether it's an economic advantage. So with that in mind I think that it's time for us to talk about what they are presenting. Give you an opportunity to see what you'd be investing in. Give you an opportunity as I understand we're doing this in reverse order tonight of what we have become used to doing in the past few years. Of showing it to you folks first and then going through the more detailed analysis of with the engineering department, the planning department and so forth. But this gives you an opportunity to present to those folks some of your thoughts and ideas on whether you think it should be tweaked. Whether it's wonderful as it is and all of that. I'll be back to answer questions and to attempt to, as Bob has asked me to do, coordinate some of this tonight but right now I would like to hear from Ron Krank and I'm sure you would too. He's with KKE Architects. Ron Krank: Thank you Vernelle. If we're not on TV, is it okay ifI stand up here so that? Gary Boyle: Please. Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 Ron Krank: Ron Krank, KKE Architects and for those of you wondering where you've seen me recently... Video Update... So what's exciting for me is now to be working with Bob Copeland... but we're Frank Beddor's architects back some years ago, 25 years ago.., and it's interesting that in those days when we were working with the city and trying to relocate, we were also looking at what we could do with this. So it goes way back then and it's nice to come back 20 years later and help you finish it off... Bohn: Did you foresee this? Ron Krank: No way. Two screens maybe but not 16. No way... But our involvement began about six months ago ! guess. It seems like a couple years because we worked so hard at it but when Bob Copeland came to us... Because of all of the number of screens they have, they can have 10 screens playing Titanic if they want as opposed to a smaller series of theaters. Cinemas today are very comfortable.., and they're tall buildings. They're big. They slope back way high. They're much more handicap accessible.., so there's a real strong market here. And those that meet or exceed the market will succeed. Those who don't aren't going to. So we were hired six months ago...visual concept as Bob was thinking about it, ! think was shown to you, was.., and punch into the rest of that where we've got more retail space at the 4 foot high level. When we started looking at the columns everywhere, it's not a real high ceiling space. Kind of uncomfortable to just in terms of outside walking up to the end of the building where.., and but it mainly was structure. You had all these columns to deal with and it just didn't make sense to try to deal with that and take columns out and put beams in straight on through. Look at cutting it off, building exactly what you need in terms of size and see what' s left over. And so we did that. And ! must say the original concept was because they're just in the cinema business that they don't, that's what they do. They really didn't want anything else on the site other than cinema. But staff, who's a very good proponent for, very good advocate, really pushed and plugged at us to provide us with the vision that you have given them and that is that this really meets the entertainment center, you've got to have more than just a cinema. You've got to have activity and a nice facade that.., to the downtown. Has a small shop feel and provides an opportunity for people to eat and have coffee or whatever when they go to the movie. Ice cream and come back out and truly become an entertainment center. So we went through a lot of iterations of plans frankly and what we have now ! think is very exciting and we believe really does meet what the city's expectations are. ! guess we'll start with the site plan. This is north. This is the existing cinema over in this area. This is the Frontier Building and this is Market Boulevard. This is obviously a very, very important site to the community and we understand that. It' s the.., access into the city. Or one of them and so it's important this site line, what you see when you drive by this property, that gives us the opportunity to add screens and double the cinema from 8 to 16 and that's basically that line right there. Gives us a chance to provide a new entry which would be in the center of the cinema so people can go both ways...utilize the ramp and that walkway in front of... playform area as a handicap access to the theater at that fourth level walk in. It allows us now to come in from the outside. Walk into the building at grade... Walk into a corridor and then walk up so that anybody.., carve it out, dig it out, replace the foundation of the existing building, it made a lot of sense for us to do that. And then what we decided was this is a great opportunity because of the tremendous traffic visibility to have this series of small shops. 60 feet deep, and we envision at the corner of the building, at that location with the large, deep sidewalk Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 that's probably 40 feet, an opportunity for some outdoor cafe. A restaurant. It could be coffee shop, bagel, ice cream. Things of that sort so that people can enjoy the sun during the day. See the access. See the activity and not be bothered by cars right in the proximity but a nice outdoor space. And so that will give us a chance with this landscaping plan to do some interesting sidewalk patterns. We're showing plans, some railing detail. A lot of landscaping but then keep that front open for active space. We're not sure frankly if this is a place where people are going to walk and browse and walk back but that's okay because there's so much traffic by here it'd be a great spot for someone going to work. Stop to get coffee or get a bagel on the way to work or come home in the evening. An ice cream drive-up here. Drop off the cleaning. Pick it up. So we're sure there could be a lot of activity here but our thrust would be, especially in this location.., active with food and coffee and ice cream. Things of that sort. Parking lays out really well we think in that this would be obviously the main entrance to the cinema but we're surrounded by parking. There are 565 stalls...well for us in terms of parking for this area is probably 45-50 cars. Maybe 60 necessary and the bulk 500 plus can work for the cinema and the Frontier Building. We look at this in terms of car count and traffic is that we've been told make ourselves a part of the downtown. Make it look like downtown. Small shops. Lot of you know fun.., detail and things happening and a part of downtown, our belief that by having 2800 seats here, that people are going to park over here.., and walk over here and go to bowling and do that. Not necessarily say well, we've got to drive and park over here. That's really down, park a block or two away and take advantage of all the other restaurants and come to the building so we're real comfortable with the car count and I think as you might recall, you had a, the city commissioned a traffic study by Hoisington, Fred Hoisington which we... we're comfortable with that. We would describe the exterior of the building was, the cinema right now. The thought is to get off the marquee so it's not.., not very attractive right now. I think it's plywood and trying to decide what to do with it. That hasn't been resolved yet but what.., exit. Emergency exit out of 2 or 3 screens. But what we would do is paint it, clean it and strengthen it by some additional landscaping and.., that could be used elsewhere in the downtown. The thought is we would add more of those so we get a little more rhythm. A little more detail to that. And then as I indicated, you'd be walking, you'd walk up the steps in this way but more like a handicap access where you come, enter at that point. Then others entering the cinema would have to walk up and what we're seeing is... but we need more height... These screens will stay as they are right now .... but this will be a true, true stadium seating. Higher and a better sight line. So what we did is, the thought is that we would repeat the same kind of striping on...EFIS. It's a stucco. Create a second line or to bring the scale back down to this, the elevation of the building, the adjacent building and then create an archway here that would have a translucent panel of, and there are four of those, sixteen screens... That gives a real interesting scale and arches of course give it character. We're thinking that.., in front of and below each one of those arches so that we're not necessarily pointing that out because there's no reason but what we do then is create the same rhythm and same you know with the railing. Then we've got a base detail of brick which would then touch the... This then begins the small shops and we're thinking that there'd be a small series of, a facade. Each one could have a little more, a little different character. Some would have curves. They'd have peaked roofs. The ends of the building would have a raised sort of tower feature is that there should be some awnings, maybe canvas awnings. Different colors.., and then you've got these, it's just a little bit different.., facade relief work not only as well as vertically. And then Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 what we've done is have...the main building, this facade and then we carried that line across again in the stucco using two different tones of that... Boyle: Thank you...Nancy if you have. Mancino: Go ahead Jim. Berquist: EFIS versus precast now? Ron Krank: Yep. Berquist: And it's, shall I ask the rationale behind it or do I need, from a construction perspective I'd like to. Ron Krank: Now EFIS would be a, EFIS is a stucco system. You can have. Berquist: ! know what it is. We had originally, originally, ! don't mean to cut you short but originally we had talked about using EFIS on the rehab part of the structure and it was decided to go with pre-cast for a few different reasons and now we're back to EFIS. Ron Krank: To answer you question of the past ! can just say... Berquist: Originally when ! first looked at this and ! saw the retail concept to be, ! found myself torn. Walking the retail part of it and debating in my own mind whether or not the retail aspects added to the potential of the center or took away from an economic perspective. You've addressed that somewhat and you've pretty much convinced me that it's a very viable thing to do there, right? Is that what your analysis has concluded? Ron Krank: Yeah. Intuitively we... Berquist: ... an opportunity for our economic advantage to be taken by the structure is enhanced by the retail aspect as opposed to because it detracts from the economic... The original footprint of the building, ! mean ! like the idea of tearing down and starting over but there wasn't anything, unless ! missed it and ! very easily could have. How was the original footprint like? Ron Krank: ! have it in detail.., about four feet... Berquist: Let me think. There was one other thing ! wanted to ask, if! can just find my note. Oh! Height. ! don't have a scale on me. 6 feet inch. Ron Krank: 35 feet. Berquist: 35 feet? Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 Ron Krank: To the top of it. To the top of the structure. That's down about 6 feet I would guess... Berquist: So roughly 30 feet and. Ron Krank: This is 30, it's about 35-36 feet high. Engel: Just slightly below the east entrance? Ron Krank: Yeah. This one is about 20. 20 to 22 feet. 16 frankly addresses... Berquist: I was just trying to envision how massive.., one versus the other. The 35 feet, 29 feet, that's what ! was looking for. Thank you. Boyle: How does that compare to the current building? To the current bowling alley in height? So that's the same height on that? Ron Krank: Yeah, oh yeah. Engel: Three quick questions for you. ! didn't get a chance to write them down. The east entryway. Is there anyway we can maintain the marquee? ! know it's in a subdued version, in a lower caliber version than the main one. Just as an architectural feature rather than taking it off. Leave it and design it down so you don't put a lot of money or emphasis on it and keep it as another entry. That's one question. The other is, can you extend those walls on the existing theater. Not extend them but can you enhance them with matching windows like you've got in the new side. See what ! mean? Yeah, those three massive ones. Can you break them up so that you have archways and matching windows there so that it would kind of carry around the side of the building rather than being just a mass of concrete so to say. That' s the second. And then is there a stair between the raised sidewalk as it drops down to the main entryway. Or is it just going to stay above grade all the way, or the rail cutting it off. Ron Krank: ... for a couple of reasons. We didn't want to confuse people. You're going to come in here, pull the door... Probably more importantly though we felt that we want the attention to detail here. This is the...there's a lot of detail here and why have, ! mean it doesn't do the job anymore. Engel: That's a good question, just sticking with that for a few seconds. Is there an opportunity to keep that entryway and extend the hallway inside of the building that carries you into the main lobby or is that strictly being used for theater space? Ron Krank: It's theater space. Engel: It would be theater space? It would not be able to be a hallway? Ron Krank: No, because...you'd have to go out... Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 Engel: Okay. Good answer. I was curious how, if you did make it an entryway, you'd want to probably extend the hallway out of the main lobby. Ron Krank: With regard.., as well as an aesthetic function.., our thinking is it'd be a little bit... our thought is to make it simple. Get those posts... Your question was the entry or the sidewalk? Engel: Yeah the sidewalk is extending down via steps to the main level or is it cut off there by rail? Ron Krank: Okay...and you're in the main part of the theater. You're in the lobby. Here you walk in. You walk in parallel to this lobby and then you're in at grade. Engel: When you're on the, oh okay. Ron Krank: You're on this level when you walk in the building. So you walk in and then you're in the lobby. Engel: I ask the question because if someone came from the back side and was say handicap accessing it, they'd wheelchair in right at grade onto the main level of the lobby. Ron Krank: Right. Engel: The other option I'm guessing is if people were walking around and didn't go in that door and we were just walking around to say the restaurants on the far side of the building, could they walk down a step and then continue onto your extended sidewalk? Bob Copeland: The steps are there and they will stay there. There are some. Engel: That's what I'm trying to envision in my mind. That's what I was thinking. Just so they're not, they're not at this raised level and they oop. You've got to go in the theater. Step around. You've got to explain to me. I'm a little thick when it comes to visualizing. Okay, that's good for me. Bohn: When you, if you've coming from the back side by the Frontier Building, coming around the theater, and you want to go over to say the coffee shop's on the side, you still stay on a sidewalk without going into the parking lot because you're not walking in this parking lot. Not while you're inside the theater. Ron Krank: Right. That's right. Boyle: Mark. Senn: I assume at this point we're confining ourselves to architecture or design questions and I don't really have any additional ones. Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 Boyle: Nancy, do you have anything regarding architectural? Mancino: No ! really don't because ! am assuming that our purpose here as the EDA is to decide on TIF financing. This will go through the process. It will go to the Planning Commission to really look at the architecture and it will come back to the City Council at that point, am ! correct? Gerhardt: You are correct. Mancino: Okay, so that our review at this point or the question that is to be answered tonight is having to do with the TIF application and that then the staff will do a full report with engineering and parking and all the architectural components will be addressed at that time. Bohn: Will it come back to us? Gerhardt: Well, you're right on everything but you've got to remember that TIF money is money that, you know if you remember we were going to use the TIF to try to get the special architectural statement that we wanted to see in this area. You know that we were going to basically be paying for the facade, the boardwalk, and some of the parking lot improvements. So when we asked for architectural input, is this concept meeting with the themes and the ideas that we had with the first concept. Is this project meeting your expectations of what we had established with the first project. Mancino: First ! have to decide whether ! believe in TIF for this project and then the second one will be if we do do TIF. If we say yes, what are some of those quality architectural things that we'd like to see. Am I... Boyle: ! think that you brought it right to the point, if! can interject here just for a minute. ! think this is really where we're at. At this point. What we have to ask ourself and agree upon tonight ! think is that, is this project special enough, is the use justifiable enough and the quality such that we as a city should consider being a partner in this project. Mancino: Yeah, why is the project in the public interest. ! mean that's the ultimate question. Boyle: Yes. Is this what we want to see in this area? Is, wherever the money be appropriate with the plan so... come to that conclusion tonight as a group. Hopefully know what direction to go. With that, ! know there's some questions probably regarding parking but maybe that's appropriate to bring up at this time. Gerhardt: Well I'll leave it up to the EDA. ! know these are all questions that the Planning Commission and City Council are going to do. ! mean we want a project that is doable and Mr. Copeland, for this project to really be a successful in Chanhassen, he's saying he needs tax increment financing for this project to work. And for us to really do our due diligence, you know we had to look at all the elements that typically a planning commission members look at to answer Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 should this project get TIF. And does it meet our goals and objectives for architectural style. And along with that, if we're going to give TIF, we want to know if there's traffic concerns and parking concerns. And so we put basically a planning report together to you tonight to try to give you some comfort that this project is meeting the city's guidelines. And just to correct a few things in that report. ! asked Sharmin, she did a calculation error in her parking. If she'd come up and kind of explain that to give you a little more comfort on the parking. Sufficient parking in the area. And I'll give you a verbal update on the engineer's report and then I'd also like to open it up to Bob Copeland who sent me a letter today regarding the road access over to Great Plains. And then I'd like to get your reaction to some of those things and then discuss should this project receive TIF or do you want to absorb it more and have a special meeting to discuss it. So Sharmin. A1-Jaff: In regard to the error that Todd was talking about. The ordinance actually requires 1 parking space per 4 seats in a theater. When ! did the calculation ! used 3. So we need 700 rather than the 900 that ! specified in the report. ! spoke earlier today to Fred Hoisington and he confirmed that according to the calculations that were provided by the applicant, there should be sufficient parking. There will be times when they will exceed capacity as far as parking but it's not something on a continuous or a daily basis. Boyle: Do you know what times those, do we anticipate what times those would be? A1-Jaff: In Fred's report he outlined the months of June and December and perhaps in November. Boyle: Any questions of Sharmin at this time? Bohn: I have a question. Does that include if the Frontier Building is used? A1-Jaff: Correct. And assuming that the restaurant, originally when this plan was being worked on conceptually, they were looking at a 6,000 square foot restaurant. Now they eliminated that because it requires additional parking spaces. So with the retail it should work. Boyle: Thank you Sharmin. Gerhardt: Just quickly. Our engineering department had an opportunity to review Benshoof's report. They are in agreement with the traffic study. There is some concern regarding some utilities, of those utilities that are in the area. We feel that that's a correctable situation. And between staff and Mr. Copeland, those issues could be resolved if the project was to go ahead. I did receive a letter, I briefly glanced it. Bob, are you able to kind of discuss this with the EDA? Bob Copeland: Yes, ! think ! can. Gerhardt: And I'll hand out copies to members. Bob Copeland: I'm not sure if all of you have read the report by Benshoof and Associates regarding traffic. The bottom line was that traffic will work out in the area, in the block and so on Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 provided a link was provided to connect Market Boulevard and Great Plains over on the east. And the report stated, well it kind of led me to believe that the only way that that would work is if this connecting link was unimpeded.., or someone backing out from a stall into this pathway. And ! discussed this.., and he and I, well he went over it and he concluded that while it would be best if this connecting link was unimpeded, if it is impeded. If there are traffic stalls that are adjacent to the...that doesn't change the findings that he's come up with that sections would function at satisfactory...to get in and out of the facility. So it's just the clarification really of the report. In terms of the detail on how the connecting link is constructed or whether there are parking stall spaces... Boyle: On the north end Bob where the two roads, is there a current road or ! mean access getting out? Bob Copeland: Here? Boyle: Yeah. Bob Copeland: Yes. This exists now today. Boyle: It exists but it would not exist under this plan? Bob Copeland: It would continue to exist. And there are parking stalls right along here. Boyle: You would not have to go up into the parking lot of the hotel. It comes out. Bob Copeland: The hotel parking lot is kind of off this drawing. It's up in here. You can access the hotel parking lot but the hotel parking lot.., these stalls right along here are stalls associated with the bowling building, not with the hotel. Boyle: Any other questions of Mr. Copeland? Bohn: ...traffic getting to Market Boulevard? Bob Copeland: I'm sorry, what was the question? Bohn: Traffic, can leave there and go over to Market Boulevard. ! mean not Market Boulevard, ! mean Great Plains Boulevard. Bob Copeland: Over here? Bohn: Right. Is that road open too? Bob Copeland: Well in order to provide this connecting link, you would have to go across the Bloomberg property here. And connect up with, there's a road to the south of the existing Dinner Theater parking lot. That road is paved to approximately here on the drawing and then there's Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 unpaved, actually there are about two or three different paths that are not paved right now that, as part of this process we would enter into an agreement with Bloomberg. Have a permanent easement here across this property and then access over to Great Plains. It may start out going just pretty much straight across. But when they develop something here, that would change. Like it'd be to the north or it might be, end up being to the south. Berquist: It's your intent to take care of that and get it all. Bob Copeland: Right, we have to finalize that with Bloomberg. Engel: Can you show the exit over to the west side again then. The entrance from Market. Bob Copeland: Yeah, right here. Pauly Drive. And then the cinema is right down here... Berquist: Question for probably Mr. Benshoofmore than you Bob. I'm curious, we put all these vehicles in there, now we're in December and June, and do we ever get to a point where we create a need for stop lights? Especially as we cross into, doesn't that access the northern access, right there. Doesn't that line up with. Bob Copeland: It does. Berquist: It does. Bob Copeland: Yeah, this lines up with what I had in my mind as the main access to Market Square and this lines up with what ! personally would call sort of a secondary entrance into Market. Berquist: And perhaps this is a permature question but have we, has that ever entered into the thinking process at what point are we going to require a stop light? Audience: ... address that. He had, as part of the analysis examined the volumes at the Market Boulevard/Pauly Boulevard intersection and as it would relate to the levels of traffic needed to warrant a traffic signal.., projected volumes would be below. That's what we found. Berquist: Forever? Audience: Well ! don't know if forever. ! mean our forecasts relate to the period of time within a year or two after some.., what happens ultimately. Berquist: But fully developed as proposed, they would continue to be safe, reasonably safe intersections? Audience: Yes. Boyle: Are there any other questions? Todd, did you have any comments before we... Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 Gerhardt: Yeah, I'm just wondering. This is a lot to absorb in one night. If you would like to go through and look at should the project receive TIF assistance at this time or do you want to sit down and as a group discuss this further. Boyle: ! think what we really should do, for Mr. Copeland's benefit so he has an idea before he leaves tonight as to where we should go with this. If we could, so we can discuss as a group... ask everybody to depart the room for just a little bit we'll do that and make it as quick as we can. Mancino: ! think from a legal. Bob Copeland: Can Jim Benshoofgo? Our traffic consultant. Engel: ! think so. Boyle: ! don't have any further questions. Senn: ! don't think that's an issue. Not tonight at least. ! don't know legally but I'd like to make a motion that we let Steve and Linda come back in and listen. PRESENTATION ON THE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE DOWNTOWN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT. Gerhardt: Mr. Chairman, HRA members. I'm a little disappointed here. Jim had asked that, for this item to be on. ! expanded on it a little bit. Jim had asked that we see kind of a summary of the history of the downtown tax increment district and this past year, '97, Rob Tautges, the city's auditing firm had completed an audit on our downtown tax increment district. That report went back as far as 1976 when the district was created to 1996. So basically 20 years of history went into this report and ! included in your packet and at this time ! would like to introduce Rob Tautges of Tautges-Redpath to give you an overview of his report and the analysis used in determining the numbers and history and methodology presented in that report. After he's completed that, ! would like to talk a little bit about our downtown district. The short falls that that district saw this past year. How we corrected those. How the legislators created a new problem for us in 2004. How we are looking at moving ahead and creating those, or correcting those problems and then just to summarize that we aren't alone in that and I'd like Rob just to touch a little bit on that and give some history on some of his other clients and what he's heard through his grapevine. With that I'd like to introduce Rob Tautges. Rob Tautges: Thanks Todd. One technical correction. That report that you have from '76 to '96 is not an audit...went back and plotted as best we could to...that the auditor wanted to see and there really were some assumptions that went into that as far as... They were all extracted from audited financial statements but you've got to understand that the OSA, the Office of State Auditor in 1995 took over the oversight responsibility for TIF...Department of Revenue. When they did that they changed the reporting rules. So even though cities had been maintaining their accounting systems on a certain basis, now gave you a new format. When the '95 forms were Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 submitted by city staff, there was a letter from OSA asking clarification on a number of issues. So we got involved and worked with city staff to go back and reconstruct transactions as best they could in the state recording format. But if you're being selected for audit, there'd be still another way to... all those estimates and assumptions that were extracted from.., point of clarification for you. ! threw together a few slides just to, so I'd remember to hit everything that I'm supposed to here. Now if! could just get it to work huh. Monitoring financial results is what we're trying to do here. Two parts of what ! just wanted to talk about tonight which Todd talked about is first of all the historical analysis of financial accounting transactions, and that's the book you have. From '76 to '86. The other part is projected balances. We've got to kind of segregate those. One is a historical look back to try to understand where all the dollars came from and how they were used. The other part is to try to control or anticipate what the balances are going to be in this fund. Overall status, as ! mentioned. Accounting transactions were summarized to accommodate that state auditor required report for the downtown District No. 1. We also had them for some other districts as well. But tonight we'll just talk about this one. First of all there is a temporary fix as you're all aware, meaning that deficits are delayed. We were looking at deficits ! believe occurring as early as 2000. With the advance refunding program that occurred in 1998, it avoids cash overdrafts and deficits on a projected basis through the year 2002 is when they first start to appear. After 2002, excuse me. So we still are grasping for a solution for 2003 and 2004. ! believe Todd handed out the most recent schedule which was also the subject of a presentation that we had done this summer, and my's a fax copy. Your's probably isn't yellow but it has all of the projections after the advance refunding. So you can see what dollars we're looking at by year and the first deficit hits in 2003. ! think that was handed out in the materials, was it? Gerhardt: Yes. It's your attachment behind my report. Rob Tautges: Okay. Mancino: Which one, I'm sorry? This one? Rob Tautges: Yep. Mancino: Thank you. Senn: Attachment behind which one? Gerhardt: Right behind my report on the back side of the report. Mancino: On 3. It's labeled number 3. Gerhardt: On the back. Senn: Yeah, here's number 3. Okay. Rob Tautges: Just for your reference. In the bottom left of this, Springsted Inc, 7/27/98. Just so we're dealing with the same one. As ! mentioned on the historical, ! don't need to spend a great Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 deal of time on it but it was prompted by an April 30, 1997 letter from the Office of the State Auditor regarding questions on the 1995 TIF forms. So... (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) PRESENTATION OF THE 1999 BUDGET. Senn: Okay, so the council will have to act on that reallocation basically but you're reallocating these from the EDA to other city funds basically? Gerhardt: Correct. Senn: Okay. And that's approximately $55,000.00. Gerhardt: That will show up during, it should have showed up already in your 701 presentation. You haven't seen 112 yet or 210. You'll see that Monday night. So in my presentation to you, those percentage increases will be reflected in those two budgeted accounts. Now ifI could ask you to go to contractual services. Budgeted we had $140,410. We were over by approximately $36,000.00. $30,000.00 of that 36 goes back to this debt analysis that we were doing. The sheet behind my report today that we just went through. That' s Rob' s time and Springsted' s time in assisting us in putting that analysis together. Look at refunding. And the other approximately $6,000.00 was spent on the Instant Web and Empak on a special assessment appeal for legal costs on that. Approximately 6. So that's. Senn: So we didn't get reimbursed on that? Gerhardt: No. Capital outlay. Capital outlay. Senn: Before you go down. Okay so that's explains basically between '98 why the budget and your re-estimate, okay. What do you need the 124 for in '99? Gerhardt: 124 is for continuation of the debt analysis that Rob talked about. Senn: How much money are we talking about there? Gerhardt: About, I'm guessing somewhere around $20,000.00 for that. You know for ballpark. Senn: And that's where option is going forward you're talk about? Gerhardt: Right. And then also doing the debt analysis on each of the TIF districts. I'll be giving them numbers for their review. Senn: Okay, so that's the $20,000.00. What about the other $104,000.007 Gerhardt: The other 104 is, you've got some utilities in there. It's travel and training in there. Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 Senn: That's the breakdown there? Gerhardt: No, not with me. Senn: Okay. Gerhardt: Do you want to see those breakdowns? Senn: Yeah, I'd like to. See what's included in the $124,000.00. I'm just saying if you don't have it also I'd like to see what's included on the $40,000.00 in capital outlay. Gerhardt: Capital outlay is taxes. That's all it is. Remember we paid the taxes for the land on the other side of the Applebee's and Tires Plus. We're paying taxes on the. Senn: Pauly/Pryzmus. Gerhardt: Pauly/Pryzmus. Senn: That's the whole 40 then? Gerhardt: Yes. And then the old bank building. And then we get reimbursed on the old bank building through the tenant's rents. Senn: Pauly/Pryzmus, old bank building and. Gerhardt: ! think it's highlighted on all of them. On page, if you go into capital outlay after the revenue sheet. We've got Pauly/Pony/Pryzmus, part of the Red-E-Mix and West 79th Street and old bank should be included on that list. Senn: Oh! We're still paying on the Red-E-Mix? Gerhardt: Yeah. We had a discussion last year if we should put it back on the tax rolls or not and we were still looking at potentially the re-use of that property. And do you remember that discussion last year Steve? Berquist: ! remember that discussion relative to the piece of land on Holiday and ! think ! remember it the one relative to the. Senn: But ! mean right now as far Pauly/Pryzmus and the cement place and stuff like that, we really don't have any plans of putting those back on the tax rolls, do we? Gerhardt: They still are on the tax rolls. Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 Senn: That's what I'm just saying. I mean, I'm sorry. We don't have any plans to effectively redevelop them into private use. Gerhardt: ! haven't gotten direction from you yet. There's been discussions to redevelop this site and then I've heard there wasn't. We did our historical district but there was never any conclusion coming from that. Senn: So we should probably get to a decision point on that because it could save us a bunch of money. Gerhardt: Well not really because we paid $40,000.00 and we're paying ourself back. We get it back through the increment because. Senn: So it's all.., coming into the district. Gerhardt: Yes. Berquist: ! remember that part of the conversation. Senn: Well why didn't you say something. Gerhardt: Let's see here. Debt service. That's just the schedule for bonded debt. Senn: And the reduction there I'm assuming is because of the refinancing. Gerhardt: Well it was the last year, refinancing and we were in the final year of a TIF payment ! think to either Byerly's or Target or something in there. We still have to make payments to the Dean Johnson and still have to make payments over to the apartment building. That's all ! have. We can put this on for our 17th meeting. ! can get those clarifications back to Mark. Is there any other direction that you want me to look at in this? Boyle: I'm assuming Mark that you want that done before we bring this to approval? Gerhardt: Yeah, and ! mean basically any action we take is going to really have to go to the Council because most of it's going to effectively involve reallocation to other funds. It's not really cutting expenses. Boyle: What's your deadline? ! mean this has to be done by the end of the year. Gerhardt: ! think we have, what did we say? December, well noon by the 28th but Council's going to meet on the 21st I think is their last meeting. Boyle: So if we meet on the 17th and this goes back, can we feasibly approve this budget then? Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 Gerhardt: There may need to be a modification, well no. We can deal, we can reallocate, we'll find some other place other than 460 to reallocate if the council doesn't want to see those expenditures into the general fund. We'll recommend another source than 460. Senn: A different special fund? Gerhardt: Different special fund than 460. So if we approved our budget on the 17th and the council on the 21st did not want to see 112 increased in personnel services by 10%. They'd rather see it at 5%, then ! have to move 5% of that money someplace else and ! would probably recommend another tax increment district. Boyle: The only basic issue ! see with the current budget as proposed tonight is a break out of the $40,000.00, is that correct? Is that where we're at? We're asking Todd to break out the. Senn: No, main clarification is basically a breakdown of the $124,000.00 in contractual services. That's really it. Gerhardt: That would be... The activity second to the last activity. Senn: Well Gary in another sentence it's kind of silly for us to sit here with five of us being council saying we're going to approve this budget throwing it into the general fund and then turn around in another action and take it out of the general fund and put it someplace else so it'd be kind of nice to get that all figured out in relationship to our overall subject consideration. Boyle: Well it'd be better that council kind of do some of this before it comes back here. Senn: Yeah, well we will. We will because we'll have everything pretty much together before the 17th. Gerhardt: I might get a little direction on Monday night when I make my presentation on 112. They just haven't heard my 112 budget yet. Senn: But you're gone what, you're gone the 21st right? So it was our plan to actually kind of adopt budget and stuff the 14th. Boyle: And once that's done, I mean this is really, this becomes real easy. Senn: And in fact if nobody else cares, which may be the case, I mean you could just Monday night just give me a breakdown of the 124 and then we can figure out from there where we go with this consideration so. Gerhardt: I'll put a sheet together and hand it to Mark but I'll give it to everybody. So you all know where it goes. Economic Development Authority - November 19, 1998 APPROVAL OF BILLS: Berquist: I will move approval of the bills as submitted. Gerhardt: I just have one discussion. There needs to be, there is a coding there again. A coding. There's two items that need to be, that aren't EDA expenditures. Items on the Hoisington- Koegler Group, Chan parking. That should go to the entertainment district expenditure and Frontier Center, 36 and 234. $36.00 for Frontier Center. That should go also to the entertainment center. So if you could exclude those two in your approval. Berquist: I move approval of the bills excluding the Hoisginton-Koegler Group for $234.65 and Kennedy and Graven for $36.00. Engel: Second. Boyle: Discussion. Berquist moved, Engel seconded to approve the bills for the Economic Development Authority excluding the Hoisington-Koegler Group for $234.65 and Kennedy and Graven for $36.00. All voted in favor, except Senn who passed, and the motion carried. EDA PRESENTATION: Boyle: Anybody want to make an EDA presentation? Meeting's adjourned. Chairman Boyle adjourned the meeting. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt Assistant Executive Director Prepared by Nann Opheim