Loading...
05. Ordinance 1243 - Creating an Urban Renewal Plan - Downtown - 2nd Reading'96 06 28 09:46 124065430663 DORSEY & UITNEY Zoe3.0ca ORDINANCE NO. _1243 ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE MODIFICATION OF THE KALISPELL, MONTANA URBAN REN TEWAL PLAN (THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN) TO APPROVE CERTAIN PROJECTS AS URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS BE IT ORDALNED by the City Council (the Council) of the City of Kalispell, Montana (the City), as follows: Section 1. SadSadt& The City by Ordinance No. 933, passed and approved on September 10, 1979, adopted the Kalispell, Montana Downtown Redevelopment Plan (the Plan) as an urban renewal plan for the project area known as the Downtown Redevelopment Area which constitutes the City's Urban Renewal District (the District) pursuant to Montana Code Annotated, Title 7, Chapter 15, Parts 42 and 43, as amended (the Act), which Plan contained a provision for tax increment financing. Pursuant to the Act and, the procedures contained in the Plan, and Resolution No. 4269, adopted June 3, 1996, the City has set forth its intention to issue and sell urban renewal tax increment bonds in an amount sufficient, but not to exceed $12,500,000 (the Bonds) to finance all or a portion of certain urban renewal projects and has undertaken to designate and approve the following urban renewal projects (the Projects), and modify the Plan accordingly, has given notice and conducted public hearings with respect thereto: a. Kalj5pell Cukr Mall. This project consists of the acquisition of real property, the clearance of improvements thereon, construction of certain public utilities and related relocation activities, all to make such property available for expansion of the Kalispell Center Mall. The project is estimated to cost $2,624,693, which will be financed from the proceeds of the Series 1996 Bonds. b_ KDC Site (Kalispell Downes-vn Center) Development. This project consists of the acquisition of certain real property, and related demolition and site worm including public improvements to make the property available for private development for uses consistent with the Plan. The project is estimated to cost $4,000,000, which will be financed from the proceeds of the Series 1996 Bonds. c. Central Sc-,h al project. This project consists of the renovation and rehabilitation of the old Central School building. The building could be used for multi -purpose community and educational facilities, along with offices - 1 - 96 06/28 09:46 %24063430863 DURSEY & IaHII:�TY QoO4.006 and museum space. The total cost of this project is estimated to be $2,5X,000, which will be financed from the proceeds of the Series 1996 Bonds. d. Improvementa to Buildin sg,hQol Distlict #5 This project consists of improvements for School District #5 facilities at Elrod, Linderman and Flathead High School. These projects would benefit the entire community through improvements to the gym and auditorium at Flathead High School, upgrading playground equipment to ADA standards, and sidewalk replacement The project is estimated to cost $670,000, which will be financed from the proceeds of the Series 1996 Bonds. e. Aff`Qrd l�l,i e Housin :�Elimination of Ught. This project is a Private Multi -Family Housing Density Development Incentive Program designed to enable the City to: (1) offer incentives to both existing prop" owners and private developers desiring to purchase substandard dwellings occupying large lots with the Urban Renewal project Area and replace the substandard single family units with higher density affordable multi -family housing; (2) purchase substandard dwellings when they became available and vacant, particularly if the site would accommodate multiple dwelling units, clear the property and resell it to developers willing to build multi -family housing; and (3) to provide the necessary incentives to encourage high density affordable housing redevelopment of sites that may become developable and/or affordable because of fire or other circumstances. The cost of this project is estimated to be $300,000, which will be financed from proceeds of the Series 1996 Bonds. f. Downtgn Parki . This project consists of acquiring land and/or construction of a parking structure on nearby sites (acquisition of the easterly 1/2 of Block 37) to provide additional off-street parking to encourage the highest and best use with greater densities on the Kalispell Development Center site and re -use of Central School in order to encourage the highest and best use in terms of density and tax yield of both Central School and the Kalispell Development Center site. The estimated cost of the project is $800,000, which will be financed from proceeds of the Series 1996 Bonds. g. 3rd Street East/Conrad M4n,i!2n to Hockaday Connection. This project consists of improving the streets and sidewalks continuing the theme of linking Downtown with Depot and Woodland Parks, parking lots, and community cultural resources (i.e., Chamber, Library, City Hall, Hockaday, Conrad Mansion and Central School). Improvements would include replacing heaved sidewalks, providing benches, storm drainage, handicap curb cuts at the corners, antique lights, and potential additional (angle) on - street parking. The cost of the project is estimated to be $90,000, which will be financed from proceeds of the Series 1996 Bonds. -2- ' S6 06/26 09. 37 '&40US430&63 DORSEi: & RHITAEI Z 005 006 h. !C:itv Hall Improvements. This project consists of the conversion of the old motorcycle garage into a space large enough to accommodate regular sized vehicles. The enlarged garage area will allow for multiple uses by the Police Department Other items in this project include repainting the exterior, and constructing a connection between City Hall and the annex. The cost of the project is estimated to be $100,OW, which will be financed from proceeds of the Series 1996 Bonds. i. West Railroad Street. This project consists of the construction of the West Railroad street between 6th Ave W.N. and Sth .Ave W.N. and installation of water, storm drainage and sanitary sewer improvements which will complete the extension of the street to 5th Ave W.N. and provide access to an isolated industrial area prime for redevelopment. The cost of the project is estimated to be $125,000, which will be financed from proceeds of the series 1996 Bonds. j . Mazket_Place III Prn_,,,,i' The project will consist of certain acquisition and demolition activities at the site locaed between Center Street and the railroad right-of-way/ 1st Ave East and 3rd Ave East. The purpose of this project is to encourage existing or future property owners of portions of the site to redevelop the area to its highest and best use. Estimated cost of the project is $275,000, which will be financed from the proceeds of the Series 1996 Bonds. Section 2. F-inding5. The Council hereby finds, with respect to each of the Projects described in Section 1 hereof, as follows: a. a workable and feasible plan exists for making available adequate housing for any persons who may be displaced by the Projects; b. the Plan, as modified to include the Projects, conforms to the comprehensive plan or parts thereof of the City; C. the Plan, as modified to include the Projects, will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City as a whole, for the rehabilitation or redevelopment of the District by private enterprise; d. a sound and adequate financial program exists for the financing of each of the Projects, which program includes the sale and issuance by the City of its urban renewal tax increment bonds in an amount not to exceed the costs of the Projects and other Projects heretofore or hereafter approved by this Council, including administration costs and -3- go 06/28 09; 48 V4065430863 DORSEY & WHITNEY Z006,006 costs of issuance of the bonds, and for the application of available funds in the Development Account in the Tax Inurement Fund of the City, in proportions yet to be determined, for the purpose of financing all or a portion of the costs of the Projects as set forth above; and e. each. of the Projects constitutes an urban renewal project within the meaning of the Act and the Plan. Section 3. The Urban Renewal Projects herein designated and approved may be modified -by -the City Council of -the City of Kalispell if the Council determines by Resolution that an adjustment to a Project or Projects is required in the best interest -of-the City of Kalispell. Section 4. All actions of the City Council heretofore taken with respect to the Projects herein designated, to the extent not inconsistent herewith, are ratified and confirmed. Section 5. -- This Ordinance shall take effect from and aftaL.-30 days of its passage by the City -Council and approval by the Mayor. Section 6. ApVrDyal -af-PrQjects. This Council hereby approves ratifies and confirms modification of the Plan to designate the Projects as urban renewal projects within and under and to be undertaken pursuant to the Plan, and the Projects are hereby approved. All actions of this Council heretofore taken with respect to the Projects, to the extent not inconsistent herewith, are hereby ratified and corfirmed. PASSED, ADOPTED and APPROVED on first reading this 1st day of July, 1996. PASSED, ADOPTED and APPROVED on second reading this — day of -.-,1996, Attest Bv: City Clerk of Council -4- CITY OF KALISPELL' y Mayor 1 Qrdinance 1243-Creating an Urban Renewal Plan- Downtown- 2-d Reading: Several of the members of the Council have spoken to me regarding some reservations about the $12,500,000 proposed bond issue for projects within the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. Comments have ranged from financing none of the projects to elimination of several and a cutback in the size of some. Specific concerns that have been expressed include: A. A desire to return tax values to the taxing districts by 2002 when the initial bond issue is scheduled to be retired. B. A desire to return some of or all of the tax valuation in the downtown increment district to the taxing district as soon as possible. C. A desire to reduce the size and amortization schedule of the proposed $12,500,000 20 year issue. It appears to me there are five potential alternatives to react to some of or part of these concerns, in addition to several different degrees of each alternative. The alternatives are: 1. Action to eliminate the downtown tax increment district by June 30, 1997. Call the outstanding tax increment bonds in January of 1997 and close out the project, including disposition of land. This would permit the existing taxing districts to use the tax valuation created by the district in FY 1998, four years sooner than originally projected. It would have the disadvantage of not encouraging the continued progressive development in the area and give a negative signal to current and potential developers in the downtown area. The opportunity to use increment funds for public improvements, including infrastructure, in the area would be lost. Fa 2. Alternative two would be to proceed with using all of the projects in the Resolution of Intent. The Kalispell Mall has been reduced by $603,000, and the school board is not interested in the $670,000 project that they originally submitted if it delays the return of the increment tax base. The project extends the tax increment program in the downtown area by another 16 years, which is a real concern for many people. A tax return to the existing tax districts could be implemented in 1998. 3. Action to move ahead with the district as originally proposed but limit the amortization schedule to 15 years. This would allow the City to provide maximum assistance to encourage investment in the area and a mechanism to.finance needed public infrastructure and public improvements. It would delay the full return of taxable evaluation to other taxing jurisdictions for an additional 11 years; however, it would increase the ultimate taxable value for all tax districts that includes the downtown district. A significant amount of taxable value could be returned in the year 2002 and some as early as FY 1998. 4. Eliminate the issuance of additional bonds, and use the approximately 9.5 million dollars available between now and 2002 for projects. This would require a reduction of proposed projects to an 8 million dollar level and the use of approximately 1.3 million to pay the interest and principal of the current issue over its projected five year life. This approach would have either the advantage or disadvantage of returning tax value to the taxing districts in accordance with original plans, but no sooner. it would require the reduction of three million dollars in project costs plus the value of any projected land sales that might be lost in this type of project cut. It would also save interest costs of between $4,237,375 and $5,517,670, depending on the amount of bonds that might otherwise be issued - less the costs of temporary financing. 3 5. The issuance of bonds in an amount between $8,000,000 and $9,000,000, with $8,000,000 being used for current project costs for a 15 year period. This would have the major advantage of permitting a return of a portion of the increment dollars to property taxing districts in 1998. Based on projections from Kreg Jones of D. A. Davidson, this approach would allow the City to return $952,570 beginning in 1998 - four years prior to the current time table. Exhibit #1 (at end of memo), which is based on the FY 1996 tax levies, illustrates the percentage of return to each taxing district and the amount each would receive based on a one million dollar distribution. This option would be similar to the one being used in Great Falls and Billings. The Council would still have to cut approximately three million in projects. The bond issue would be in the amount of $9,000,000 to cover necessary reserves and issuance cost. One million dollars of projects would be funded from the 1997 fiscal year budget from funds now earmarked for the pay off of the current bond issue. Three million dollars worth of projects would have to be cut. It appears to me that one, or a combination, of these alternatives could meet a majority but certainly not all the concerns that were identified above. To be sure, no decision should be made until after you have the input at the public hearing; however, due to the ultimate time table of reaching a point where a bond closing can be met no later than September 9, it is almost imperative that you pass an ordinance on First Reading on July 1, 1996 if bonds are to be reissued. On July 15, 1996; the ordinance can be amended to permit you to dwell on the information provided at the hearing for a couple of weeks. It is my suggestion that you review each project and decide to include the project at a specific amount or eliminate them altogether. 4 We will be prepared to amend and rewrite the ordinance at the meeting so it can reflect your best collective judgement on July 1 and, like any other ordinance, it can be amended on July 15 to meet your collective judgement at that time. The ordinance as included in your packets includes the projects and numbers included in the Resolution of Intent. We have a better figure on the Kalispell Mall, which is now $2,624,000, $603,000 less than the figure in the original resolution and the school board has indicated that they do not want the $670,000 project but want to accelerate the schedule for returning valuation to their districts so this $1,223,000 can be the first things cut. EXHIBIT #1 EXAMPLE OF DISTRIBUTION OF $1,000,000 OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS. 1995 % 1 000,000 Tax Levy of total levy distribution COUNTY 0.049105 9.86% $98,589 WEED 0.001417 0.28% $2,845 SHERIFF 0.025000 5.02% $50,193 MOSQUITO 0,000366 0.07% $735 HEALTH 0.004150 0.83% $8,332 subtotal county CITY 0.108000 21.68% $216,834 GEN SCHOO 0.090290 18.13% $181,277 H.S. 0.050890 10.22% $102,173 ELEM. 0.112500 22.59% $225,868 subtotal schools UNIVERSITY 0.006000 1.20% $12,046 STATE AID 0.040000 8.03% $80,309 FVCC 0.010360 2.08% $20,800 TOTAL 0.498078 100.00% $ QMOQ0 $160,694 $509,318