Loading...
CCR1998171AMENDED COMMON COUNCIL - CITY OF MUSKEG0 RESOLUTION #171-98 0 RESOLUTION AS TO DEFINING AND ESTABLISHING POTENTIAL TIF-ELIGIBLE EXPENSES FOR PARKLAND MALL PROPERTY WHEREAS, The City of Muskego desires the revitalization and redevelopment of the Parkland mall property to encourage reinvestment and economic development in the Janesville Road corridor: and WHEREAS, The City of Muskego has identified the Parkland Mall as a site requiring special attention due to the parcel size and location; and WHEREAS, The owners of the Parkland Mall have retained environmental consultants and inspectors who identified significant levels of contamination to the building structure and interior spaces, such that renovation costs far outweigh demolition costs; and WHEREAS, The City of Muskego seeks to invigorate the redevelopment of the Janesville Road corridor at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayers in the City of Muskego; and WHEREAS, Through written transmittal dated July 13, 1998, Parkland Venture LLC, owners of the Parkland Mall, have requested the creation of a Tax Incremental Financing District; and WHEREAS, The State of Wisconsin recognizes that blighted properties are eligible for redevelopment and remediation under Tax Incremental Financing; and WHEREAS, The Finance Committee has recommended that only public improvements be included in a Tax Incremental District Project Plan; and WHEREAS, The Mayor has recommended that certain expenditures be eligible for inclusion in a Tax Incremental District Project Plan, and WHEREAS, It is the Common Council’s desire to create a TIF District which is economically viable. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED That the Common Council of the City of Muskego does hereby concur with the Mayor’s recommendation to outline potential expenses should a Tax Incremental Financing Plan be approved for the property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That this action is being taken for the best interest of the long-term physical health of the citizens of the City of Muskego, and for the long-term welfare and quality of life of all residents and visitors to the City of Muskego. Resolution#171-98 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the City of Muskego acknowledges the following itemized projects and their related costs as potential expenses eligible for inclusion in a Tax Incremental Financing Plan if such a future plan is approved by the Plan Commission, Common Council and Joint Review Board. Such expenses shall be limited to the following: Downtown public space improvements Utility reconstruction and construction in the public right-of-way Stormwater managementlretention Street lighting Curbing, traffic control signals and installation Landscaping in public areas City costs related to administration, planning and legal services BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That it is the present intent of the City of Muskego Common Council to attempt to negotiate a mutually acceptable developer’s agreement with the owners of the Parkland Mall property at the earliest possible date to assure the redevelopment of the site in the best interest of the City. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby authorizes and directs City staff and consultants to initiate the process for the creation of a Tax Incremental District and the development of a TIF project plan consistent with this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That this resolution is only an indication of the City’s present intent and in no manner a binding obligation of the City. DATED THIS DAY OF , 1998 SPONSORED BY: Mayor David L. De Angelis DEFEATED 9/22/98 3 Yes and 4 No This is to certify that this is a true and accurate copy of Resolution #171-98 which was defeated by the Common Council of the City of Muskego. SEP 17 '98 11:5ZfM EHLERS BROOKFIELD P. 2/3 RESOLUTION AS L TIF-ELIGIBLE EXPENSES FOR PARKLAND MALL PROP WHEREAS, the C Janesville Road corridor; and WHEREAS, the C attention due to t WHEREAS, the ownets of the Parkland Mall h tained environmental consultants and Road corridor a and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Common Council of the City of Muskego does hereby concur with the Mayor's recommendation to outline potential expenses should a Tax Incremental Financing Plan be approved for the property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this action is being taken for the best interest of the long-term physical health of the citizens of the City of Muskego, and for the long-term welfare and quality of life of all residents and visitors to the City of Muskego. SEP 17 ‘98 11:52RM EHLERS BROOKFIELD P. 313 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Muskego acknowledges the following itemized projects and their related costs as potential expenses eligible for inclusion in a Tax Incremental Financing Plan if such a future plan is approved by the Plan Commission, Common Council and Joint Review Board. Such expenses shall be limited to the following: Hazardous materials remediation Demolition of existing structure and site restoration Downtown public space improvements Utility reconstruction. and construction in the public rlght-of-way Stomwater management / retention Street lighting Curbing, traffic control signals and installation Landscaping in public areas City costs related to administration, planning and legal services. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that it is the present intent of the City of Muskego Common Council to attempt to negotiate a mutually acceptable developer‘s agreement with the owners of the Parkland Mall property at the earliest possible date to assure the redevelopment of the site in the best interest of the City. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Common Council hereby authorizes and directs City staff and consultants to initiate the process for the creation of a Tax Incremental District and the development of a TIF project plan conslstent with this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution is only an indication of the City’s present intent and in no manner a binding obligation of the Cty. 0 DATED THIS - DAY OF , 1998. SPONSORED BY Mayor David L. DeAngelis SEP 15 '98 16:57FIM EHLERS BROOKFIELD P. 1 Ehlers & Associates, Inc. LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE September 15, 1998 Mayor David DeAngelis City of Muskego W 182 S8200 Racine Avenue P.O. Box 749 Muskego, WI 53150 Dear Mayor: At your request we have reviewed the draft resolution proposed by Mr. Dyer for the Parkland Mall project. We have the following comments: The resolution suggests that "the tax incremental financing laws require approval by the local municipal government prior to September 30, annually." The City can approve a TIF at any time. September 30 is merely the date that determines which year the base value is established. 0 c The resolution suggests that time is of the essence for a number of reasons including "the curent borrowing capacity of the City." The City has a significant amount of general obligation debt capacity and certainly there is no need either to hasten or delay the TIF based on the City's general obligation debt capacity. t The resolution says that "this allows the property owner to immediately begin demolition and redevelopment of the Parkland Mall site" and cites a number of items which would be "eligible for reimbursement to the property owners should a tax incremental financing plan be approved for property." If I am reading this correctly, I believe that the property owner would like to begin demolishing his building immediately and then if a TIF District is created he would be paid back from the TIF project fund. It is my understanding under the TIF law that such an arrangement is not possible. Section 66.46(6)(arn)(3) of the Wisconsin State Statutes states in pari ". . , no expenditure may be made before the date the project plan is approved except for costs directly related to planning the tax increment district." I do not believe demolition of a building is "directly related to the planning of the tax incremental district." There are no costs identified nor are there any limits on the costs. Does this 0 resolution provide for a blank check for these projects? b There are no conditions on the expenditures. Must the City pay for these projects even if the developer never builds his building? Corporate Woods, Suite 225.375 Bishops Way - Brookfield, Wisconsin 530056200 (416) 785-1520 - FAX (414) 785-1810. www.ehlers-inc.com mrrta, Llemhm dthe National -dation of lndcandcrrt hMis Finance Advi.on Affirmative AnianiEqual Onmt'tunirv Emplov6r SEP 15 '98 16:57FIM EHLERS BROOKFIELD P.2 September 15,1998 City of Muskega Page 2 of 2 The projects identified may or may not be eligible to be paid 100% from TIF funds. Section 66.46(2)(f) of the Wisconsin State Statutes clearly states "to the extent the costs benefit the muncipality outside the tax increment district, a proportionate share of the cost is not a project cost." . The resolution refers to "reimbursement to the property owner." Is the property owner privately contracting for these projects (including traffic control signals on Janesville Road)? If not, what is the proposed arrangement? The CQ has no ability unilaterally to create a TIF District nor promise that specific items be included in the project plan. The statutes require a process for approval of a TIF District and project plan. These steps include: rn A public hearing before the Plan Commission rn Specific approval by the Plan Commission rn Approval by the City Council rn Approval by a Joint Review Board consisting of one person appointed by the County, the School District, the City, the Technical College District and a citizen representative appointed by the other four members. The approval process could be denied at any one of these steps. Committing to their list in advance could indeed cause the District to fail to achieve approval by the Plan Commission or the Joint Review Board. Clearly, in my opinion, a TIF could be created for this site and could be a valuable tool to insure a quality development. I do not believe, however, that this resolution Is in the City's best interest to adopt. If you have questions or would like to discuss this further, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, & ASSOCIATES, INC. LL Davi . Anderson, CIPFA Executive Vice President / Director DBA 1 pac /. . ..- DOBox903 W182 S8200 Racine Avenue Muskego. Wl53150 Date: September 11, 1998 From: Mayor David L. De Angelis To: A / m Dn Ir r. David An n (Ehlee & Associates) and Dawn Gunderson Re: Proposed Draft of TIF Resolution/Parkland Mall I. Message: wr a ' nb om n un il ! I1 r~ le of basic questions that need to be answered (1 Is i i le 1 i- (( ((y fifi a creations! - COMMON COUNCIL - CITY OF MUSKEG0 RIESOLUTION # - - 98 DRAFT RESOLUTION AS TO DEFINING AND ESTABLISHING TIF-ELIGIBLE REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES FOR PARKLAND MALL PROPERTY WHEREAS, The State of Wisconsin defines blight as "An area, including a slum area, in which the struchlres. buildings or improvements, which by reason of dilapidation, deterioration, age or obsolescence, inadequate provision for ventilation, light, air, sanitation, or open spaces, high density of population and overcrowding, or the existence of conditions which endanger life or property by fire and other causes, or any combination of these factors is conducive to ill health, transmission of disease, infant mortality, juvenile delinquency. or crime, and is detrimental to the public health. safety, morals or welfare"; and .. WHEREAS, The City of Muskego has been actively pumiq the revitalization and redevelopment of the Parkland Mall prom to encourage reinvestment and economic development in the Janesville Road conidor; and 0 WHEREAS, the City of Muskego has identified the Parkland Mall as a site requing special attention due to the parcel size and location; and WHEREAS, the owners of the Parkland Mall have retained environmental consultants and inspectors who identified significant levels of contamination to the building smcture and interior space% such that renovation costs far outweigh demolition costs; and WHEREAS. the City of Muskego seeks to invigorate the redevelopment of the. Janesville Road comdor at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayers in the City of Muskego; and WHEREAS. Through written transmittal dated July 13,1998. Parkland Venture LLC, owners of the Parkland Mall. have applied for Tax Incremental Financing Plan approval; and WHEREAS, 'The State of Wisconsin recognizes that blighted properties are eligible for redevelopment and remediation under Tax Inmmcntal Financing; and DRAFT WHEREAS. The Tax Lncremental Financing laws require approval by the local municipal govanment prior to September 30 annually; and WHEREAS. The Tax Incremental Financing laws state that only specific activities may be reimbursed ES part of the financing plan, and those activities can only be undertaken after agreement by the local municipality; and WREAS, Time is of the essence in the removal of potential hazardous contamination to a regulated landf~ll; time is of the essence in the restoration of the property to maximum taxable value for repayment of any financing package; time is of the essence in redevelopment and rexitalkation of the downtown mea of the City of Muskego; and time is of the essence in regards to current bonowing capacity of the City and interest rates for long-tmn borrowing projects. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Muskego does hereby concur with the myor's recommendation to outline reimbursable expenses should a Tax 1-ental Financing Plan be approved for the property. This allows the proparty owner to immediately begin demolition and redevelopmmt of the Parkland Mall site. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That this action is being taken for the best interest of the long- term physical health of the citizens of the City of Muskego, and for the long-term welfare and quality of life of all residents and visitors to the City of Muskego. BE IT FUR- RESOLVED, That the City of Muskego acknowledges the following itemized projects and their related costs as expenses eligible for reimbursement to the properCy owns should a Tax Incremental Financing Plan be approved for the property. Such expenses shall include and be limited to the following: Hazardous Materials Remediation Demolition of Existing Structure Relocation Expenses Grading and Building Site Preparation Traffic control signals - Janesville Road Downtown Public Space hprovements Bikeway Access Picnic Area Clock Tower CommercialNrban Park Utility Reconstruction and Construction Collonaded Sidewalk Facade Stormwater ManagementRetmtion Public Access Area Enhancements Orading and Paving of Parking Areas Security and Traffic Lighting Curbing, Traf€ic Control btallation Developer's Deposit Landscaping on and off-site Administration, Planning and Legal Services includes Janesville Road area and Development Site BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the City of Muskego Common Council and the owners of the Parkland Mall property will undeaake adoption of a Tax Incremental Financing Plan at the earliest possible date to assure the redevelopment of the site in the best interest of the City and the property owner. DATED THIS - DAY OF SEPTEMBER. 1998. ORED BY. David L. Debgelis, Mayor DRAFT RUG 24 Ehlers & Associates, Inc. P9 /” f“ $ I ~d~,,~~ LEADERS IN PUBLIC flNANCE y(3 7.’ 8/24/98 Mayor David DeAngelis W182 S8200 Racine Ave. P.O. Box 749 Muskego, WI 53150 Dear Mayor DeAngelis, Attached are the revised TIF revenue projections for the Parkland Mall Projcct assuming the values contained in Henry Elling’s letter of August 19. We would strongly recommend thar your assessor reviews these values once site plan, project layout and other derails are known. Attached are the following: Exhibit one shows that without the Senhy Project the City could afford to spend $2,341,756 on TIF related improvements and be repaid within a fifteen ycar period of time assuming that the base value of the District is $1,221.600 and the increment value is $9,889,500 constructed over two construction scasons. Exhibit two shows that with the Sentry Project the City could pay for $2,791,517 of improvements over a fifteen year period time assuming a base value of $2,060,100 and a increment value of $1 1,791,000. At this point in time, we have not changed the assumption concerning present value (interest rate) as suggested in Mr. Elling’s letter. While a 5.5% rate would be considered high at this point in time, we are making an assumption about the interest rate that would be charged on an unknown amount paid for over an unknown period of time with an unknown security and an unknown dcbt structure, borrowed at an unknown point in time. Secondly, discussion of this issue may be irrelevant if the City’s goal is to pay for projects which would be nccessary to bring this sitc to a “level playing field“ with other commercial sites in the City. If the assumptions are correct, there will be more money generated than would be necessary to fund just the projects presented which would relate directly to bringing this site to a “level playing field.” At this point in time, in addition to the developer going through the normal approval process with the plan commission. there would be nothing to prevenr rhe City and the developer to begin negotiations on an appropriate developer’s agreement. While there are a number of issues which would have to be addressed in this agreement, some of the critical items which would need to be resolved early in the process ax answers to the following questions: 1) Which projects will the City agree to finance with tax increment dollars? As we have discussed, it is OUT understanding thar the City Council intends to pay for projects which would provide “a level playing field“ for the developer. These specific projects and estimated dollar amounts for these Corporate Woods, Suite 225 - 375 Bishops Way - Brookfield, Wisconsin 53005-6200 1414) 785-1520 - FAX 1414) 785-1810 www.ehlen-inc.com Affirmative ActlonlEaual OoDOrlUniN Emolovar RUG 24 ’98 10:31RM EHLERS BROOKFIELD P. 3 projecrs should be identified early in the process. 2) Bow much value will the developer guarantee? For the purposes of these exhibits we have made assumptions as to value of property based on estimates by the developer’s represenrarive. Is the developer willing to guarantee that these values will be the equalized values [hat appear on the tax rolls thoughour the entire life of the TIF District? If not, what value amount would be guaranteed? 3) What type of security would the developer be expected to provide in order to secure their value guarantees? There are a number of mechanisms which havc been used by communities throughout the state to provide for a security of the developer’s pxan~ee. Three concepts are described briefly as follows: Developer Payment. The developcr can agree to pay for a 100% of the improvements and the City can issue a note to repay the developer his cost over a period of time. With this scenario, the developer would have to tinancc all the costs on his own and the City would repay [he developer only if and when TIF revenues become available. Special Assessments. The City could special assess the cost of public improvements against the developer. Under this scenario, the developer is assessed for public improvements and would pay assessments over a period of time on an installment basis on the lax roll just like any ocher property owner in the City benefitting from public improvements. The City could then utilize TIF revenues to offset the developcr’s annual installment paymcnt to the extent TIF revenues are available. If TIF revenues are no[ sufficient. the developer would have to pay the difference between the TTF revenues and the special assessments on an annual basis. This would require a special assessment lein be placed on the property which is strong security for [he City but may interfere with the developer’s ability to obtain other financing. Developer Penalty. The developer could agree to pay a penalty to the extent his values do not meet the values he is guaranteeing. The penalty amount would be the value shortfall times today’s tax ratc on an mnual baqis. e While there are a number of additional items which would have to be considered for a dcveloper’s agreement, the answers to these questions are usually the “make or break” points in the developer’s agreements and these issues should be discussed early on in the process. Please let me know if you have questions or need additional informarion. We’d be happy to provide analysis or attend meetings as you see fit. Sincerely, E SSOCIATES, INC. DhddAnderson, CIPFA Executive Vice President/Direcior QUG 24 '98 10:31FIM EHLERS BROOKFIELD P. 4 Exhibd 1 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 10 9 11 13 12 14 IS 17 16 18 20 19 21 22 23 a Muskego Tax Increment District # 8 Parkland Mall Project Without Senvyproperry I Base Value ... 1.221.600 Inflation Factor 1 .oa%J Canatmcllon Valuadon Rmue Inflation Year Valua Y#fafion Year Year lnmmenl Added hcRmnf Rale TU .hmmerrl Tar 2000 1999 2001 2002 2003 2004 zoos 2006 2007 2008 m PO11 2010 a12 2013 2014 201s 2016 2017 2018 xI1P 2m 2021 2001 2000 PO02 56.6EO 4.9u.750 9,958,996 2001 12216 4944.750 4.956966 a21 115.051 1321 2002 2003 106.694 10.06XOBO 2321 23!.1?4 2003 20w 107.r~f 10,172.R51 2321 239.6i.l 2004 200s 108.m 1oze1.m 2321 as.ae. 236.1t2. 2005 2036 109.027 10391.616 2321 ZOO8 2457 111.026 10302.642 2321 ti3.768 2007 2008 2008 112.136 10.614.778 2009 113258 0 10.728.036 ZLZI 246,369 2009 2311 2010 li4.390 0 10.842.m 2321 2010 Ul.65a 2011 115.W 2011 0 10.957.961 2321 s.4334 2012 2012 116,690 2013 117.057 0 lla074,651 2121 11.192507 2321 2s7.w. as;% 20111 2014 119.035 11,311,542 2014 2015 110225 121.431.76$ 2521 2321 2.52541 Xi,.?% 2016 2018 2016 121.128 w5~.1es 2321 268.160 2017 2018 i23.868 11.7g9.706 1018 23-21 2019 125.107 2019 11.824.813 202J 126.358 23.21 12.051.171 Za21 2020 20221 2022 128.898 2321 12,307,690 2521 lap 2023 13J.lP 12.u7.8n a21 241.169 245998 20i7 1226iz 11,675837 2321 270396. 273.ar.1 216.?iS no.loi ,262.670 2a5.661 ~~ 5.(11zsa zm 1z.m 12.178.m ... ~ToIals 9.UY.500 - resentva value at 5.5% 3,129.131] 15 YMR PV I Prepared by Ewers and Assodares. Inc. Exhiba 2 Muskego Tax Increment District # 8 Parkland Mall Project Whh Smtry property Ense Vnlue 2,060.100 InHalion Factor 1 .OO% 1 Cunsfrudlan Vdu6Uon Revenue klfhrlon Value ValuaUan rear Year IncrUnenl Added lnmrnenl R8k Tax lncrsmenl YMr rnx 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 19 21 23 22 2000 1999 2001 zoos 2002 2005 2004 20% 2007 2000 ZW9 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2019 2018 2020 2021 2000 2001 zoo1 2002 2002 2003 x103 2004 2004 2005 ZOOS MOS 2006 ‘2007 2W7 2008 2W8 2009 2000 2010 2010 201 1 201 1 2012 2012 2012 2014 2013 201d 2015 a15 2016 2016 2017 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020 to20 2021 2022 2021 2022 2023 2018 20.601 66271 126.e-39 127.148 128.419 123.703 131.wo 132,310 133.sU 136,319 134.970 127,683 159.059 1W.W 141355 lUL7J 14.704 146.153 147414 149.091 150581 163.6U8 lQ.00 5.896600 5.916.101 5695,504 llrn.872 12.005.761 12.130.90a 12,259,327 12,389,051 12.65Z.SAl 12520.031 0 12.785975 0 13,0572W 0 12,920.W 0 13.19047 12334.006 11.616.311 13.d76.456 13.304290 13,759.524 14.050.442 14.198.057 1A.547.147 11,197.729 w.w.n16 14.8oJ.~~ 2121 a21 2321 2321 2321 a21 7321 23.21 2321 2321 2321 2221 2321 2321 2321 2321 23.21 1321 2221 2321 2321 2321 a21 .. [Told3 11.791.000 .. . 8,924.6S] 15 EAR PV Prepared by EhlelS end A593daleS. InC. Ma11.123. 08123/98 August 19, 1998 Mayor David DeAngelis City of Muskego W182 S8200 Racine Avenue Muskego, Wisconsin 53 150 Dear Mayor DeAngelis: Thank you for meeting with us on July 30 to review the potential Tax Incremental Finance District (TID) #8 project plan for the Parkland Mall property in Muskego. Our group has been working to provide you with a more up-to-date value estimate for the project, as well as verification on our assumptions for the overall TID pro-forma. I spoke with Dave Anderson earlier today about this issue, and he indicated that revised charts from Ehlers will be coming early next week. Representatives of the Parkland Venture LLC remain in contact with the owners of the adjacent property - the former Sentry building - and an offer to purchase has been given to these owners. Since the final agreements have not been consumated, we have prepared two outlines for use in the economic estimates. Essentially, these estimates come from a 1998 base value of $2,060,100 for the project if it includes the Sentry property. This would change to $1,221,600 if the Sentry property is excluded. As Dave Anderson stated in his July 30 letter, this value will change by January 1, 1999, which will be the actual base value used for the TID. These base values result in a total increment available to the TID of $1 1,791,000 if the Sentry property is included, or $9,889,500 without this land. We have also used a ''frozen" tax rate of $23.21 per 1,000 and lower inflation rates, as noted in Dave Anderson's letter of July 30, 1998. We acknowledge that for purposes of the Project Plan, it is a conservative approach which benefits the City. However, we think that an interest rate of 4.5% more accurately reflects recent borrowings in the Milwaukee metropolitan region for TIF projects. After our discussion, Mr. Anderson indicated that he will re-work his presentation to the City and use these new figures. Other Parkland Ventures representatives have been working toward more detailed information on the site plan, overall project layout, and the other specifics you suggested at the meeting on July 30. These will be presented to the Plan Commission shortly, after we have concluded the discussion on the financial assumptions. Bamboo. \I'irtunsln hlad!son. WiScOnsln Friendship. \\'iscunsin Rhineiander. Wisconsin Galena. Illinois I1 I WARREV STVEC~ BE,~VER DAM. \VI 53316-3031 (!)2Il) 887-4242 - (8001 552-6330 FA\: (920) 887-4250 WED Annms: w.msa-ps corn ~.\plo~,~lPII1~*p~~sw*Yo~wpD e - Page 2 - Mayor David DeAngelis August 19,1998 I will forward a copy of this letter to Dave Anderson at Ehlers so that he can prepare the updated report for the City’s use. Please contact me with any questions or comments. Cordially, MSA Professional Services Henry J. Elling J Land Development Planner cc: Common Council Members Dave Anderson - Ehlers Parkland Ventures LLC 07/14/98 10:41 "414 887 4250 YSA BEAVER DAM G3008/l 11. STATEMENT OF KIND, NUMBER AND LOCATION OF PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE DISTRICT Tox Increment District #- (TID #A of the City of Muskego is created primarily to promote commercial development in the impacted area authorized by Wisconsin Statutes 66.46(4)@)(4), to provide greater employment opportunities, to broaden the property tax base and to relieve the tax burden of residents and homeowners. The creation of TID #- will make the City competitive with other surrounding communities in athactig new taxable property. The City therefore contemplates developing TID #- which shall include environmental remediation and demolition costs, property consolidation. and basic site improvements to meet local ordinance requirements. Any cost directly or indirectly related to achieving this objective is considered a "project cost" and eligible to be paid fiom tax increments of this tax increment district, although not required to be funded by the City even if listed in this Project Plan. llle costs of planning, engineering, design, surveying, legal, financing and other consultant fees, testing, environmental studies, permits necessary for public work, easements, judgements or claims for damages and other expenses are included as project costs. A. B. C. D. E. PROJECTS 1. Environmental studies to determine scope of work. 2. Rehabilitation costs associated with hazardous substances 3. Site preparation, restoration 4. Site development/ Soft costs Imputed administrative costs including, but not limited to, a portion of the salaries of the City Clerk, building inspector, assessor, public works employees, and others directly involved with TID #-. Organization costs including, but not limited to, the fees of the attorney. engineers. planners, surveyors, map maken and other contracted services. Relocation costs in the event any property is acquired for the above projects, includmg the costs of a relocation plan, director, staff, publication, appraisals, title searches and property acquisition costs and relocation benefits as required by Wisconsin Statutes 32.185 through 32.27. Interest, finance fees, bond discounts, bond redemption premiums, bond legal opinions, ratings, capitalized interesf bond insurance and other expenses related to financing. Reimbursement of principal and interest to the City using surplus TD #-revenues in later years to oaet upfiont principal and interest paymmts madc with City funds. m 07/14/98 10:42 "414 861 4250 MSA BEAVER DAM F. Any payments made, at the discretion of the City Common Council, which are found to be necessary or convenient to the creation of TID #- or ~e implementatio1 of the Project Plan. G. That portion of the costs related to the construction or alteration of sewerage treatment plants, water treafment plants or other environmental protection devices, storm or sanitary sewer lines, water lines, or amenities on streets inside or outside by this Project Plan, and if at the time the construction, alteration, rebuilding or expansion begins, there are similar improvements as listed above on the land outside m#- if the c0mtructi04 alteration, rebuilding or expansion is necessitated m#-. 13. Reasonable contingency amounts with respect to all project costs noted above to provide for cases of project costs in any category above being higher than estimated. 111. DETAILED LIST OF PROJECT COSTS A. B. C. D. D. Hazardous Materials RemediatiodDisposal Building Demolition Bank property 25,000 Old Sentry store property I= 50,000 Remainder of Parkland Mall site = 365,748 1 residential parcel - 20,000 - OveraU site preparation and restoration Tenant Relocation Site Development and Soft Costs Tm# Other S 234,252 0 460,748 0 825,000 400,000 100,000 3.730.000 2.405.000 S 5,350,000 %2,805.000 N. l3OUNDARY DESCRIPTION The boundary forTID #- was established using the following criteria: A. B. C. D. The aggregate value of equalized taxable property within the District does not exceed seven (7) percent of the total value of equalized taxable property within the City, nor does the equali.4 value within the District plus value inments of all other districts exceed 5% of the total value of qualized property in the City. Over SO percent of the area desipted as TID #- is blighted, in need of rehabilitation or conservation, or zoned for indusbial use. All lands withinthe TID # are contiguous. The TID includes only whole units of property as are assessed for general tax purposes. I r w I.