4. Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Agreement ProposalsPlanning, Economic &
Community Development Department
P.O. Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59903-1997
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
iheCll�ot'KaIlsRell
Incorporated 1892
Memorandum
July 11, 1995
Larry Gallagher, PECD Director _
Ross Plambeck, Redevelopment Manager f=?
Commercial Rehab Loan Program/KDC Recommendations
248 Third Avenue East
(406) 758-7740
(406) 758-7739 (office fax)
(406) 758-7758 (City Hall fax)
As you will recall, back in 1980, the initial funding for the Commercial Rehab Loan Program was
an economic development grant from HUD through the CDBG program. The federal regulations
required the $100,000 grant for interest subsidy be awarded to a non-profit development
corporation (KDQ and deposited in a bank for leveraging private capital. Norwest Bank took the
risk to participate in a new and unique program that was a first of its kind for HUD, and
administered the program for the last 15 years. In 1988, the City began using Tax Increment
Funds to subsidize interest rates down to 3%. The use of TIF now allows more flexibility in the
program than the original HUD program.
At the KDC Executive Board meeting on July 11, 1995, my memo summarizing the proposals was
discussed by the committee members. Several of the members suggested that the City make the
program available to any of the Kalispell banks that wanted to participate in the program. All of the
banks with officers present at the meeting agreed the program could be offered to Kalispell banks,
allowing the loan applicants to work directly with the bank of their choice. Paul Wachholz,
chairmen of the loan review committee, suggested the program have a rate and loan amount fixed
by the City. He felt different rates and loan amounts established by each bank would cause
confusion with the loan applicants as they tried to put their application together. He felt the
integrity of the program needed to be maintained with a standardized rate for all applicants while
allowing them to work with their own bank.
Paul Wachholz made the motion:
"On behalf of the KDC, recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Commercial
Rehab Loan Program be shared by the Kalispell banks that submitted a proposal per the
July 5, 1995 RFP. The City will maintain a list of participating banks, and given to the
applicants. The interest rate and loan limit to be established by the City Council."
Motion seconded by Gordon Pirrie, and passed unanimously.
Recommendations:
As a way to increase the flexibility of the program by allowing the applicant to apply to the bank of
their choice for the 3% loan, the City should establish the interest subsidy rate, and
enter into an agreement with those Kalispell banks that submitted a proposal. It is
also recommended to maintain the existing $40,000 loan limit per applicant with a 5 year payback
as has been adopted by the Architectural Review Committee for the past several years.
r-Fa
eG;• �[t5sa3
0
Incorporated 1892
Planning, Economic &
Community Development Department
P.O. Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59903-1997
Date: July 10, 1995
To: Larry Gallagher, PECD Director
From: Ross Plambeck, Redevelopment Manager
Subject: Request For Proposals/Commercial Rehab Loan Program
Submittals:
248 Third Avenue East
(406) 758-7740
(406) 758-7739 (office fax)
(406) 758-7758 (City Hall fax)
Eight banks were sent an RFP, sample draft Agreement and a 15 year summary Status Report. Six
Kalispell banks indicated their interest in participating in the Commercial Rehabilitation Loan
Program by submitting a proposal. As the table indicates below, there are a few variations in the
proposals, but overall, they are all quite similar.
PROGRAM
INTEREST
LOAN AMT
NAME OF BANK
AMOUNT
RATE
MAX
TERM
BankWest
$400,000
9.50%
$40,000
5 years
First Interstate Bank
$1,000,000
Prime + .50%
$500 to $50,000
Up to 60 months
Less than 36
months
Prime + 1.0%
(Loan Fee $150)
More than 36
months
First Security Bank
$300,000
9.75%
$25,000
5 years
Glacier Bank
$700,000
At prime as
$200,000
5 years
quoted in Wall
Street Journal
and fixed at time
of closing for the
term of the loan.
Norwest Bank
$400,000
100/0
$40,000
5 years
Valley Bank
$300,000
9.75%
$50,000
5 years
Whitefish Credit Union
NO PROPOSALS
SUBMITTED
Security Federal
DECLINED
OFFER/NO
COMMERCIAL
LOAN OFFICER
Comments on the Proposals:
o The City will commit a fixed amount for one year of $100,000 to the program for
interest subsidy. Two of the banks propose a variable rate tied to prime. While this
approach will not affect the fixed 3% loan rate made to the applicant nor the monthly
payments made, the variable rate will vary the actual Program Amount the bank will
commit as interest rates fluctuate.
o $40,000 is the current maximum loan amount. The proposals vary from $500 to
$200,000. While the program has never had a minimum amount set, most loans are
$5,000 and up. At the other end of the range, a $200,000 maximum would mean only
3 or 4 loans could be made each year.
o First Security Bank's proposal commits $300,000 for principal loan amount. Based
on their quoted interest rate and calculations, the City would expend $58,000 in
interest subsidy. They make a suggestion that the remaining $42,000 be leveraged
with another bank for additional loans.
0 Only one bank, First Interstate, included what the loan processing fee would be to the
applicant. While the RFP didn't ask for those fees, the dollar amount may be an issue
for further discussion. I would imagine the other banks may also charge a fee, and the
amount could be significant to the program's overall success.
It is extremely important that the integrity of the program be maintained. Any revisions
to the program need to continue to achieve such positive results of leveraging capital,
improving the appearance of downtown, extending the functionality of older buildings,
and keeping the employment and tax base healthy in the CBD. The Commercial
Rehabilitation Loan Program is nationally known and award winning for its tremendous
success with a 10 to 1 leveraging ratio and positive acceptance by the merchants and
property owners.
Because the program initially began as a HUD Program for economic development, the
Feds required an agreement with one bank to deposit the grant funds. Because the City
now uses TIF money for the interest subsidy and no initial deposits are made, a greater
amount of flexibility is available to the program. Over the past 15 years, many an
applicant has asked if they could use their own bank for the 3% loan program. As the
table shows, the proposals are all very similar, and maybe, as First Security Bank
suggests, other banks could also participate. A.J. King at Valley Bank also suggested this
approach in a telephone conversation last week.