HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Mail Packet - 5/14/2019 - Urban Renewal Authority Finance Committee Agenda Materials - May 14, 2019Urban Renewal Authority
222 LaPorte Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.416.2231
970.224.6107 – fax
fcgov.com
AGENDA
URA Finance Committee
May 14, 2019
11:00 am -12:00 pm
1. Minutes March 19, 2019
2. North College Financial Overview
Other Business:
Urban Renewal Authority
222 LaPorte Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80521
970.416.4349
970.224.6107 - fax
fcgov.com
URA Finance Committee Meeting Minutes
3/19/19
11am -12pm
CIC Room – City Hall
URA Committee Attendees: Darin Atteberry, Ross Cunniff, Ken Summers, Joe
Wise, Christophe Febvre
Staff: Darin Atteberry, Jeff Mihelich, Jacqueline Kozak-
Thiel, Josh Birks, Jennifer Baker, Mike Beckstead
Others: Carolynne White, BHFS
URA Finance Committee Meeting: 3/19/19
Call Meeting to order: 11:05am
Item #1: Minutes 1/08/18, 2/27/18, 2/11/19. Febvre motioned, Ross seconded- motion passed
unanimously. Next URA Finance Committee April 18, 2019, 10am-11am.
A. COLLEGE AND DRAKE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN UPDATE – TAX
ALLOCATION AGREEMENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (the
"Authority") Finance Committee (the "Committee") an update on the incremental property tax
allocation discussions taking place with the impacted tax entities. Authority staff has been
engaging with the entities through the Plan Area Review Committee (the "PRC") and
individually for the past several months. These discussions are beginning to come to a head and
staff would like to report on the current status.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does the Committee have any questions about the allocations of incremental tax revenue
to support of the College and Drake Urban Renewal Plan?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The City of Fort Collins (the “City”) is considering the adoption of a new Urban Renewal Plan,
at the intersection of College Avenue and Drake Road, (the “Plan”) to direct the activities of the
Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (the “Authority”), pursuant to the Colorado Urban
Renewal Law, C.R.S. §31-25-101 et seq.
The Plan enables the use of Tax Increment Financing (“TIF”) as a tool to stimulate and leverage
both public and private sector development, including redevelopment, to help remedy adverse
conditions and prevent the spread of further deterioration. The Plan effort originated in response
to two proposals for private development in the area. While these two projects are anticipated to
occur in the near term, additional development and redevelopment may occur incrementally over
the life of the Plan.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The City of Fort Collins (the “City”) is considering the adoption of a new Urban Renewal Plan,
at the intersection of College Avenue and Drake Road, (the “Plan”) to direct the activities of the
Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (the “Authority”), pursuant to the Colorado Urban
Renewal Law, C.R.S. §31-25-101 et seq.
The Plan enables the use of Tax Increment Financing (“TIF”) as a tool to stimulate and leverage
both public and private sector development, including redevelopment, to help remedy adverse
conditions and prevent the spread of further deterioration. The Plan effort originated in response
to two proposals for private development in the area. While these two projects are anticipated to
occur in the near term, additional development and redevelopment may occur incrementally over
the life of the Plan.
Intergovernmental Agreement - Allocations
The Larimer County Tax Increment Financing Study Group (the “TIF Study Group”)
recommended that a Plan Area Review Committee (the “PRC”) be convened to prepare and
review a Fiscal Impact Model (the “FIM”) and Project Evaluation Criteria (the “Evaluation
Criteria”) for any proposed plan. Authority staff first convened the PRC on October 16, 2018.
The PRC continued to meet over the next several months for a total of eight (8) meetings
culminating in a final meeting on February 26, 2019. Authority staff anticipates reconvening the
PRC after the formation of the Plan to debrief the process and sequence of negotiation.
The PRC finalized the FIM and Evaluation Criteria which was presented to the negotiation teams
of each tax entity in January of 2019. These materials along with a matrix of proposed public
improvements has formed the basis for negotiations. In addition, a draft Intergovernmental
Agreement (“IGA”) was circulated to each entity. The draft IGAs were consistent across all
entities except for a few minor differences related to the circumstances of each entity. The
objective of Authority staff is to continue to ensure continuity amongst the IGAs. The IGAs
include several provisions that deal with the allocation of incremental property taxes anticipated
within the proposed Plan. The provisions include:
Increment Duration – Urban renewal law limits the duration that incremental property
tax revenue in a plan may be used to achieve plan objectives to 25 years.
• Increment Allocation – The IGAs specify the amount of incremental property tax
revenue that the Authority will transfer to the impacted entity each year to offset financial
impacts of serving the proposed development in the Plan. These numbers generally come
from the FIM.
• Increment Cap – Authority staff has agreed to include a dollar cap on incremental
property tax revenue to be collected from each impacted taxing entity. This cap will
account for historic property appreciation. The cap will be limited to 2.0 percent growth
over the 25-year period. If revenue grows faster than this rate then both parties will retain
that growth based on the allocation amount annually; however, at no time will the URA
retain more than the cap amount. Thus higher growth equals faster collection for the
URA.
• Improvement Exhibit – Authority staff has agreed to limit the use of incremental
property tax revenue to fund a specific exhibit listing proposed public and private
improvements. The actual cost of these improvements may inflate over time consistent
with the Boulder-Denver Engineering News Record rate of increase. This is a typical
third-party source of construction cost used in the industry for this purpose.
• No Precedent – Authority staff has agreed to include a clause that indicating the IGAs
related to the proposed Plan do not set precedent for future IGAs between the entity and
the Authority.
• Annual Report – Authority staff has agreed to provide and annual report on the total
incremental revenue collected, the amount retained against the proposed revenue cap, and
the status of constructing the various public improvements listed in the IGA exhibit.
Specific terms of the agreements, as currently reflected in the IGAs are summarized in Table 1
below.
Table 1
Current IGA Assumptions and Inputs
Taxing Entity / Revenue Source
Mills /
Rate
Assumptions
Annual
Increment to
Entity
Annual
Increment to
URA
URA Increment
Revenue CAP
City of Fort Collins / Property Tax 9.797 100% of Increment Committed $ - $ 88,501 $ 2,835,000
City of Fort Collins / General Fund Sales Tax 1 2.25% 50% of Net New Increment Committed $ 316,713 $ 316,713 $ 10,144,000
City of Fort Collins / Dedicated Sales Tax 1.60% No Increment Committed $ 338,393 $ - $ -
$ 655,105 $ 405,214 $ 12,979,000
Larimer County / Property Tax 2 21.653 60% of Increment Committed $ 78,241 $ 117,361 $ 3,759,000
Foothillls Gateway / Property Tax 0.750 No Increment Committed $ 6,775 $ - $ -
Health District / Property Tax 2.167 66% of Increment Committed $ 6,656 $ 12,920 $ 414,000
Library District / Property Tax 3.000 66% of Increment Committed $ 9,214 $ 17,886 $ 573,000
Poudre School District / Property Tax 52.630 20.25 Mills of Increment Committed $ 292,504 $ 182,928 $ 5,859,000
Northern Water / Property Tax 1.000 No Increment Committed $ 9,033 $ - $ -
Larimer County Pest Control District / Property Tax 0.142 No Increment Committed $ 1,283 $ - $ -
$ 403,706 $ 331,095 $ 10,605,000
$ 1,058,811 $ 736,309 $ 23,584,000
1 Excludes Sales at the Existing King Soopers being relocated
2 Excludes 0.7500 Mills dedicated to Foothills Gateway
Subtotal / City of Fort Collins
Subtotal / All Other Entities
Total
Status of Negotiations:
Authority Staff has engaged with the impacted tax entities through the Plan Area Review
Committee (the “PRC”) and individually, below is a short summary of the status with each:
Larimer County – Authority and County staff have met several times to discuss the
allocation and the Commissioners have reviewed the proposal. Staff is finalizing terms
with the County and anticipates the IGA will be considered by the Commissioners prior
to the March 28th
Authority Board meeting. (NOTE: these conversations have also
included the Foothills Gateway and Larimer County Pest Control Districts);
Poudre School District (PSD) – Authority and PSD staff have met five times – starting in
October and most recently on February 26, 2019 – to discuss the terms of an IGA. PSD
staff continue to indicate a single point is at issue before the PSD Board of Education can
review the rest of the terms. The PSD BOE discussed the item at the March 12, 2019
meeting – at this time their positions has not changed.
Poudre River Library District – Authority and Library staff have met to discuss the
terms of an allocation agreement. Authority staff presented the current terms to the Board
on March 11, 2019 to generally favorable response. Drafts of the IGA are being
exchanged and will hopefully be ready for consideration in early April by the Library
Board.
Northern Larimer County Health District – Authority and Health District staff have met
to discuss the terms of an IGA several times. The Health District staff have kept their
Board up-to-date on the discussions. A revised version of the IGA will be presented in
hopes that the Health District Board can consider it at their April 9th
, 2019 meeting.
Northern Water Conservation District – Authority staff remains in contact with
Northern staff; however, no direct meetings have occurred – Northern has made their
position relative to allocation clear
SCHEDULE UPDATE
At the time of printing this report, Authority staff continues to plan to present the proposed
College and Drake Urban Renewal Plan to the City Council on April 16, 2019. This is subject to
change based on recent information shared by PSD staff. A detailed update on the schedule will
be provided at the Committee meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Staff Presentation
DISCUSSION
College & Drake Urban Renewal Plan Update – Tax Allocation Agreements
Josh; Allocation Agreement Updated, today will be a quick update.
1. Questions about the process?
2. How the allocation conversation and associated IGAs are going?
Conversations thus far have been set around the Duration, Allocation, Revenue Cap & Specific
Improvements. ENR Inflation rate of 2% has been built into the expenses. Not all of the
improvements will be built on day one. IGAs proposed do not set a precedent in any way shape
or form and there will be an annual reporting requirement that will include revenue collected,
how much went to entities, revenue cap and how far along we are in the list of improvements.
In terms of agreements, we had a great conversation yesterday with the City on its commitment
and the cooperation agreement. This includes, 100% of city’s property tax increment, with the
2% cap, this represents about 2.8 million in total revenue. 50% of the net new increment with the
general fund rate of 2.25% is about 300K annually and about 10million total across the 25 years.
Total City commitment of about 13 million into the plan area.
Timeline:
Larimer County- 60% of increment, excluding Foothills Gateway and Pest Control portions.
120K flows into the plan area every year, total just under 4million in total cap.
Health District & Library District follow a similar pattern
Poudre School District- We made an offer to leave out mill levy override, bond mills, gets us to
27 total mills left – split that 75% going to URA, 25% going to school district.
NCWCD- They have been very clear they are not willing to split their 1 mill with the URA and
would require a different approach, other than what we have been doing, to do such. We do not
have an IGA proposed with NCWCD.
When we combine this altogether, we get to 24 million in total revenue, assuming the 2% Cap
and that the school district is in at 20mills – this is still subject to change. We have had
conversations with Larimer County, we are very close and should have an IGA this week. We
similarly have calls out to Library and Health District to see if they want to continue to move
forward despite the delay. We anticipate that they are still willing to move forward.
Originally, we were planning on presenting the Urban Renewal Plan to Council on April 16th
but
that wasn’t going to allow for the other entities to first approve their IGAs and then have the
URA approve. We are not trying to have the other taxing approve their IGAs at their next
meeting so that we can bring them to the URA Board on April 24th
. This will give the URA
Board a chance to consider all of the IGAs that are ready at that point. We will then hold off on
formally adopting the Plan Area until all of the IGAs are approved. As staff we talked at length
about what the best approach would be, we thought the approach of delaying the plan and
moving forward with the IGAs that we have reached agreement with best. Once all of the IGAs
are approved then the Plan Area will be formally adopted. This is all in the memo sent to the
Board.
Troxell; Thank you.
Summers; When does the 25 years begins?
Josh & Carolynne; This begins when City Council authorizes the plan.
Summers; in terms of revenue, how does that work?
Josh; Revenue doesn’t start flowing right away. From a property tax perspective, you won’t see a
significant amount of increment for a few years. Construction must be completed, then it takes a
couple of cycles of property assessment for us to see the revenue.
Carolynne; Typically, this delay is 3-5 years. In a 25-year plan area, you typically only have
increment for 20-21 years.
Summers; I appreciate the reference to timelines. What about construction completion? 2021?
Josh; Brinkman is anticipating construction as soon as possible after the plan is adopted. It’s
likely that they won’t start until early next year, then roughly 15-18months of construction.
Kings is roughly on the same timeline. The private projects are likely to be complete in
2021.Then increment is delayed a little bit from there. It depends on how we go about funding
our list of improvements as to when improvements will be constructed. Some may be
constructed as part of the private project others will be later on.
Summers; Property assessments are done on what years?
Carolynne; Property assessments are done every other year, typically odd number years.
However, new construction triggers change in evaluation, but it depends on when and how it
happened to trigger a new evaluation. Typically, if improvements are done Aug-Dec then this
isn’t accounted for in until the following year. There is a great deal of variability, but the model
takes into account that the revenues are not flowing in years 1, 2, and 3.
Josh; Let me confirm that. I want to make sure we have that level of nuance accounted for.
Carolynne; Certainly, from a bond analysis this is true.
Josh; Yes.
Carolynne; In terms of net proceeds we can get from that revenue stream you would factor into
account that you won’t actually have revenue the first couple of years.
Febvre; Authority is authorized to collect up to $23million. So far as a group we’ve discussed
13million? But at some later date can the same group authorize more expenditures?
Josh; with the IGAs, we are writing them with a list of items authorized by the IGAs with an
ENR standard rate of inflation. The only way we can add things to it, is for each taxing entity
and the URA to agree to it. We stop collecting once the list is complete.
Febvre; What happens to the difference of the two dollars?
Josh; It goes back to the taxing entity.
Carolynne; IGAs are written so that we are only authorized to spend tax increment on an agreed
upon list of improvements. Once this is complete, the plan is terminated, and increment goes
back to entities. Once the list of improvements is complete, we could go back to the taxing
entities and ask for authorization to keep the revenue and spend it on other improvements, but
this is only possible if everyone agrees.
Febvre; Can you collect more revenue than you spend?
Carolynne; The stature allows you to do that but with the way our agreement is written, we really
can’t do that.
Carolynne; At the end, if we have money left that we are not authorized to keep, we have to pay
it back to the taxing bodies.
Febvre; Is there anything we can creatively do for the City to meet the school backfill?
Josh; I put that to CFC yesterday and the direction I got was that there was no desire to undertake
that at this time.
Febvre; I haven’t approached this on our side either, but I wonder if there is anything we can do,
at this point it sounds like there is not.
Josh; We know that the amount each taxing entity allocates cannot go beyond the Cap amount,
this narrows the risk. However, I think every entity is at clear place of understanding their
maximum risk.
Troxell; When will we have a definitive response from PSD?
Febre; We have one.
Carolynne; We have put forward our last best and final offer to the PSD as well and are looking
to discuss legal options with the URA Board next week.
Josh; We are looking at an executive session next week to discuss where we are in the
negotiation process and sequencing of events to forward based on Board direction.
Febre; The overall plan schedule will be delayed from what it sounds like?
Josh; Yes
Carolynne; There will be some delay, depending on what path the Board chooses, will dictate on
what the delay will be.
Febvre; To be clear, I will not be there next week. I will read carefully through the minutes, look
to my colleagues on the Board and stay informed with the outcomes of this meeting the best that
I can.
Josh; Originally, we had City Council scheduled to consider adoption the plan area on April 16th
.
Staff did not feel like it made sense at this time to adopt the plan on April 16th
, because it forced
us to leave out unresolved issues. There was no way we would have issues resolved by April
16th
, this is why we delayed adoption of the Plan Area.
Carolynne; We could not see any option to where we could be ready for April 16th
.
Wise; Narrowing the list of improvements has really helped out special districts move forward.
The special districts have a much higher comfort level making an agreement based on the work
from staff, PRC and Finance Committee, all of their work is very appreciated.
Adjourned: 3/19. 11:29am
URA 6-MONTH PLANNING CALENDAR
May 2019 – November 2019
CALENDAR SUBJECT TO FREQUENT CHANGES
Email URA Staff for up-to-date information: URABoardInfo@fcgov.com
“The mission of the Urban Renewal Authority is to remedy blight, using Tax Increment Financing, to leverage private
capital investment, and stimulate sustainable development and public improvement projects.”
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS:
Wade Troxell, Chair Susan Gutowsky
Ross Cunniff, Vice Chair Andy Smith
Julie Pignataro Kristin Stephens
Christophe Febvre Ken Summers
Steve Johnson Joe Wise
Emily Gorgol
(Items are listed in no particular order)
URA Board Meeting
Selection Committee
Planning & Zoning Board
Plan Area Review Committee
URA Finance Committee
City Council Meeting
Public Open House
City Council Finance Committee
Legal Contract Review Committee
Created: 5/9/2019 11:35 AM
URA Board Meeting Selection Committee Planning and Zoning Board
Plan Area Review Committee URA Finance Committee City Council Meeting
Public Open House City Council Finance Committee
Meeting Info Agenda Item The purpose of this item is to…
May 14
Time:
11:00am
Location: CIC
URA Finance Committee Agenda: North College Financial Overview
May 22
Time: 4:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Legal Contract Review
Committee
Agenda: Review Attorney Contract with URA
June 12
Time: 1:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Finance Committee Agenda: TBD
June 27
Time: 8am-
12pm
Location:
Innosphere
URA Board Meeting URA Board Half Day Retreat: Strategic Planning Session
Strategic Planning Session Set URA Board Goals & Visions for 2019-2020
July 16
Time:
11:00am
Location:
TBD
URA Finance Committee Agenda: TBD
July 25
Time: 3:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Board Meeting Agenda: TBD
URA Board Meeting Selection Committee Planning and Zoning Board
Plan Area Review Committee URA Finance Committee City Council Meeting
Public Open House City Council Finance Committee
Meeting Info Agenda Item The purpose of this item is to…
501 Spaulding- Watermark Discuss possible TIF participation in a private development project
August 14
Time: 1:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Finance Committee Agenda: TBD
August 22
Time: 3:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Board Meeting Agenda: TBD
September 11
Time: 2:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Finance Committee Agenda: TBD
September 26
Time: 3:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Board Meeting Agenda: TBD
October 14
Time: 2:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Finance Committee Agenda: TBD
October 24
Time: 3:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Board Meeting Agenda: TBD
URA Board Meeting Selection Committee Planning and Zoning Board
Plan Area Review Committee URA Finance Committee City Council Meeting
Public Open House City Council Finance Committee
Meeting Info Agenda Item The purpose of this item is to…
November 7
Time: 3:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Board Meeting Agenda: TBD
November 13
Time: 3:00pm
Location: CIC
URA Finance Committee Agenda: TBD
UNSCHEDULED OR UPCOMING ITEMS
Item Purpose of Item
URA Budget Review/Approval
Prospect & College Project (S. Prospect)
King Soopers Project
501 Spaulding
Revise the budget process and provide new management reporting
Discuss possible TIF participation in a private development project Discuss possible
TIF participation in a private development project
Discuss possible TIF participation in private development project
URA Finance Committee
Agenda Planning Calendar 2019-2020
RVSD 5/9/2019 mnb
Location: CIC Room
(Agenda Items listed in no particular order)
May 14th Meeting Time: 11:00am
North College Financial Overview 60 min R. Rogers
June 12th
Meeting Time: 1:00pm
TBD 60 min J. Birks
July
16th
Meeting Time: 11:00am
TBD 60 min J. Birks
Future Council Finance Committee Topics:
• Projected sales tax revenue Spradley-Barr-Mazda
• 2020 URA Budget format
• N. College CAG meeting with URA Finance Board
• URA IGA Allocation
URA FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Staff: Josh Birks
Rachel Rogers
Date: May 14, 2019
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
North College Financial Overview
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (the
"Authority") Finance Committee (the "Committee") an update on the financial status,
commitments and revenue of the North College URA.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does the Committee have any questions about the information presented?
2. Does the Committee feel the Board will need additional information about the
information presented?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Staff plan to update the Board regularly on the financial status of the current three URA’s,
starting with the North College URA. We believe this is important for transparency, and to
confirm to the Board that staff is closely tracking the finances of the URAs.
ATTACHMENTS
2018-2022 Excel file
2018-2022 Word explanation file
North College URA
Financial Overview
Revenue
• Total TIF revenue collected through 2019 is $13.1M.
• Additional revenue forecasted through 2030 (2029 tax increment) is $24.0M.
⇒ Assumes a 2% property tax increase every other year.
• Other revenue (interest, etc.) totals $0.5M for 2014-2029.
Expenses
Operating
• Operating expenses consist of personnel costs, good and services, bank fees and
the fee from the County for tax collection (2% of TIF revenue).
• The North College URA has been paying for personnel costs, good and services,
and bank fees for the Midtown and Mall URAs due to limited cash flow for those
URAs. The North College URA will be reimbursed by the other URAs and those
dollars are included in the analysis.
Reimbursement Agreements
• Hickory Commons – The Authority shall pay to the Developer fifty percent (50%) of
the Tax Increment that was generated from the Property and paid for the previous
calendar year up to maximum eligible costs of $136,072. There has been no
increment generated to-date, so no payments have been made. In addition, the
Authority will pay $1,361 to the developer if/when the developer delivers the Energy
Star Certification to the Authority, which must be within two years of the date that a
Certificate of Occupancy for the Buildings has been issued by the City to the
Developer.
• Lyric – The Authority shall pay to the Developer fifty percent (50%) of the Tax
Increment that was generated from the Property and paid for the previous calendar
year up to maximum eligible costs of $252,650. The first $43,650 in revenue goes
back to the City for ROW repay obligation.
• Feeders Supply – The Authority shall pay to the Developer fifty percent (46%) of the
Tax Increment that was generated from the Property and paid for the previous
calendar year up to maximum eligible costs of $72,472. In addition, the Authority will
pay $1,584 to the developer if/when the developer delivers the Energy Star
Certification to the Authority, which must be within two years of the date that a
Certificate of Occupancy for the Buildings has been issued by the City to the
Developer.
• Aspen Heights – The Authority shall pay to the Developer fifty percent (50%) of the
Tax Increment that was generated from the Property and paid for the previous
calendar year up to maximum eligible costs of $894,287. This property was sold on
12/13/2016, and as per section 2.9 of the Redevelopment Agreement, developer
was required to get approval from the URA for the sale. This condition was not met,
therefor no payments will be made on this agreement.
Capital
• Whitewater Park - In 2018, the URA contributed $300k to this project (ordinance
2018-058).
• North College Drainage Improvement District, Phase 1- In 2019, the URA budgeted
a contribution of $300k to this Stormwater project to complete the preliminary
stormwater project. This project is located at North Mason Street (Alpine Street to
Hickory Street), along with Alpine Street, Pinon Street and Hemlock Street (Mason
Street to North College Avenue). This was part of the 2019-2020 BFO process.
Debt Service
• Loan from General Fund to URA for RMI2 – RMI2 repaid part of the loan to the URA,
while the URA “forgave” the remainder of the loan. The URA is paying the
remaining debt service to the General Fund for that loan with a principal amount of
$2,035,211. Debt service is due through 2024.
• In 2013, the URA consolidated and refinanced its outstanding debt with the General
Fund and the Stormwater Fund. Total debt is $11.085M, with final debt service
payment made in 2029. The URA is required to keep a year’s debt service in the
restricted fund balance.
Actual
(Unaudited) Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Revenue
Property Tax Increment 1,841,552 1,978,124 2,037,468 2,037,468 2,098,592
Interest on Balances 37,116 21,717 22,662 20,000 19,000
Total Revenue (Cash Inflow) $1,878,668 $1,999,841 $2,060,130 $2,057,468 $2,117,592
Expense
Operating 229,311 395,143 405,749 412,999 421,617
Reimbursement Agreements 4,817 21,398 21,832 21,832 22,492
Sub-total Operating 234,128 416,541 427,581 434,831 444,109
Capital Project Contributions
Whitewater Park 300,000
Stormwater (west side of College) 300,000
Sub-total Capital 300,000 300,000 0 0 0
Debt Service
URA payment to City (RMI) 359,503 367,195 367,029 375,021 374,841
Principal 252,333 266,692 273,360 288,567 295,781
Interest 107,170 100,503 93,669 86,454 79,060
URA payment on outside debt 946,813 948,963 944,363 948,963 947,363
Principal 595,000 615,000 635,000 665,000 690,000
Interest 351,813 333,963 309,363 283,963 257,363
Sub-total Debt Service 1,306,316 1,316,158 1,311,392 1,323,984 1,322,204
Total Cash Outflow $1,840,444 $2,032,699 $1,738,972 $1,758,814 $1,766,312
Net Change in Cash 38,225 (32,858) 321,157 298,653 351,280
Prior year ending cash position 1,372,680 1,410,905 1,378,047 1,699,204 1,997,858
Ending Cash $1,410,905 $1,378,047 $1,699,204 $1,997,858 $2,349,137
Owed from other URA Funds 600,000 692,520 892,198 1,097,425 1,306,756
Restricted Fund Balance (948,963) (944,363) (948,963) (947,363) (944,763)
Available Fund Balance $1,061,942 $1,126,204 $1,642,440 $2,147,920 $2,711,131
Projected Ending Balance 2030 $12,356,398
this includes operating payback from other URAs
Oustanding Debt Balances
URA to City (RMI2) 1,782,878 1,516,186 1,242,826 954,259 658,478
URA to bondholders 8,265,000 7,650,000 7,015,000 6,350,000 5,660,000
Total 10,047,878 9,166,186 8,257,826 7,304,259 6,318,478
In 2023 the cash balance is larger than the total remaining debt owed.
Assumptions:
- 2% growth in property tax TIF every other year.
- URA ceases operation 12/20/2029.
- 2029 property tax TIF will be received in 2030.
- No repayment to Aspen Heights.
North College URA