The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda - Mail Packet - 9/10/2019 - Ura Finance Committee Agenda Materials - September 11, 2019Urban Renewal Authority 222 LaPorte Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.416.4349 970.224.6107 – fax fcgov.com AGENDA URA Finance Committee September 11, 2019 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm 1. Minutes July 16, 2019 2. URA Finance and Bond Council Update 3. 2020 URA Budget Format Overview Other Business: URA Finance Committee Agenda Planning Calendar 2019-2020 RVSD 9/4/2019 mnb Location: CIC Room (Agenda Items listed in no particular order) September 11th Meeting Time: 2:00pm URA Finance and Bond Council Update 10min Clay Frickey 2020 URA Budget Format Overview 50min Rachel Rogers October 14th Meeting Time: 2:00pm N. College CAG meeting the URA Finance Committee 10 min Clay Frickey PSD & URA mediation outcomes and IGA Allocations 40 min Josh Birks Brinkmann Term Sheet 10min Josh Birks November 13th Meeting Time: 2:00pm URA Insurance & Purchasing Power 30 min Clay Frickey & Josh Birks 320 East Vine TIF participation 10 min Clay Frickey 2020 URA Budget 20 min Rachel Rogers December 3rd Meeting Time: 2:00pm Watermark Proposal 30 min Clay Frickey & Josh Birks North College Engagement Feedback 30 min Clay Frickey Future Council Finance Committee Topics: • Projected sales tax revenue Spradley-Barr-Mazda • North College Albertsons • North College Engagement Feedback URA 6-MONTH PLANNING CALENDAR September 2019 – February 2020 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 Julie Pignataro Ross Cunniff, Vice Chair Andy Smith Christophe Febvre Kristin Stephens Emily Gorgol Ken Summers Susan Gutowsky Joe Wise Steve Johnson (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: 9/4/2019 4:56 PM 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 URA Legal Contract Review Committee Meeting Info Agenda Item The purpose of this item is to… September 11 Time: 2:00pm Location: CIC URA Finance Committee: Minutes (Consent) Agenda: URA Finance Committee to approve the minutes of the July 16, 2019 meeting URA Finance and Bond Council Update Discussion of URA retaining separate Finance and Bond Council URA Board Retreat Brief recap on URA Board Retreat September 26 Time: 3:00pm Location: CIC URA Board Meeting CANCELED Agenda: URA Board to approve minutes of July 25, 2019 URA Board meeting URA legal Representation Update URA legal representation of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Shreck and associated contract URA Finance and Bond Council Update on URA retaining separate Finance and Bond Council URA IGA with CITY Discussion of potential changes to the URA’s IGA with the City October 14 Time: 2:00pm Location: CIC URA Finance Committee Agenda: URA Finance Committee to approve the minutes of the September 11, 2019 meeting N. College CAG engagement N. College CAG meeting the URA Finance Committee 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 URA Legal Contract Review Committee Meeting Info Agenda Item The purpose of this item is to… PSD and URA mediation outcomes & TIF allocations Discussion of mediation outcomes and TIF allocations to Urban Plan Area at Drake and College Brinkmann Term Sheet Discussion and approval of Brinkmann Term Sheet for Drake and College development October 24 Time: 3:00pm Location: CIC URA Board Meeting Agenda: URA Board to approve the minutes of September 26th URA Board meeting URA and City of Fort Collins IGA Discussion of URA IGA with the City URA Bylaws Discussion of URA Bylaws and potential changes URA 2020 budget Adoption of the URA 2020 Budget PSD and URA mediation outcomes and TIF Allocations Discussion of mediation outcomes and TIF allocations to Urban Renewal Plan Area at Drake and College Recommendation of a Plan Area Recommendation of Drake and College Plan Area URA Board Retreat Follow-up Follow-up of URA Board Retreat 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 URA Legal Contract Review Committee Meeting Info Agenda Item The purpose of this item is to… November 7 Time: 3:00pm Location: CIC URA Board Meeting Agenda: URA Board to approve the minutes of the October 24th URA Board meeting North College TIF Area Discussion of North College plan area objects, URA funding, URA Board retreat alignment and IBE update URA Finance and Bond Council Discussion of URA retaining separate Finance and Bond Council November 13 Time: 2:00pm Location: CIC URA Finance Committee Agenda: Approval of URA Finance Committee minutes from October 14, 2019 meeting URA Insurance Discussion of URA Insurance and Purchasing Power 320 East Vine Discussion of TIF Participation in 320 East Vine expansion 2020 URA Budget Discussion of the 2020 URA Budget December 3 Time: 11:00 am Location: CIC URA Finance Committee Agenda: Approval of URA Finance Committee minutes from November 13, 2019 meeting 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 URA Legal Contract Review Committee Meeting Info Agenda Item The purpose of this item is to… 501 Spaulding Lane Discussion of proposal located at 501 Spaulding Lane December 4 Time: 2:00pm Location: CIC URA Board Meeting Agenda: URA Board to approve the minutes of the November 7th URA Board meeting 320 East Vine Discussion of TIF Participation in 320 East Vine expansion 2020 URA Budget Discussion of the 2020 URA Budget January 9 Time: 3:00pm Location: CIC URA Finance Committee Agenda: Approval of the URA Finance Committee minutes from December 3, 2019 January 23 Time: 3:00pm Location: CIC URA Board Meeting Agenda: Approval of the December 4, 2019 URA Board meeting minutes February 13 Time: 3:00pm Location: CIC URA Finance Committee Agenda: Approval of the January 9, 2020 URA Finance Committee meeting minutes February 27 Time: 3:00pm Location CIC URA Board Meeting Agenda: Approval of the January 23, 2020 URA Board meeting minutes 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 URA Legal Contract Review Committee UNSCHEDULED OR UPCOMING ITEMS Item Purpose of Item King Soopers Project Prospect & College Project (S. Prospect) Prospect South URA Policy Watermark Proposal – 501 Spaulding Discuss possible TIF participation in a private development project Discuss possible TIF participation in a private development project Discussion of URA Policy application at Prospect South Watermark proposal in North College 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 7/16/19 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, Clay Frickey, Mike Beckstead, Rachel Rogers, Victoria Shaw Others: URA Finance Committee Meeting: 7/16/19 Call Meeting to order: 11:01am Item #1: Minutes 5/14/19. Joe; Question on Feeder Supply line item. Shown as 50%, in parenthesis says 46%. Josh we will correct that and make sure we clarify. Then, under debt service, RMI 2. What is RMI 2? Josh; That line item stands for Rocky Mountain Innosphere located at 300 East Vine. Joe; OK. Summers; motioned to approve minutes. Febvre seconded; motion passed unanimously. A. MALL AND MIDTOWN FINANCIAL OVERVIEWS 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 Prospect South URA and Foothills Mall URA. In addition, there has been an update on the North College URA financials for 2019 based on a reevaluation of monies owed for administrative expenses from the other URA funds. 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 plans to update the Board regularly on the financial status of the current three URA’s. We believe this is important for transparency, and to confirm to the Board that staff is closely tracking the finances of the URAs. MIDTOWN – PROSPECT SOUTH URA – FINANCIAL SNAPSHOT Revenue • Total TIF revenue collected through 2019 is $2.9M. • Additional revenue forecasted through 2037 (2036 tax increment) is $11.8M. ⇒ Assumes a 2% property tax increase every other year. • Other revenue (interest, etc.) totals $0.3M for 2014-2037. Expenses Operating • Operating expenses consist of personnel costs (paid to the North College URA annually), goods and services, bank fees and the fee from the County for tax collection (2% of TIF revenue). Reimbursement Agreements • Prospect Station – The Authority agrees to reimburse the Developer for the eligible costs up to $494,000. The first payment is to be half the total amount - $247k was paid to the Developer in 2014. The remaining payments will be over a 21-year period at an amount of $11,762 per year. Debt Service • Loan from General Fund to URA for Capstone project – In 2013, the URA borrowed $5M from the City General Fund for the Capstone project. Payment terms include lower interest rate of 2.68% and 50% TIF to cover interest difference with a loan maturity on December 31, 2037. The TIF payment amount shall not exceed $1,780,000 in total. Through 2018, $354,699 in revenue sharing has been paid on the loan. Debt service payments fluctuate based on the debt service schedule and are between $400-500k per year. • Loan from Water Fund to URA for Prospect Station project - – In 2013, the URA borrowed $247,000 from the City Water Fund for the Prospect Station project. Payment terms include interest rate of 4.5% and loan maturity on December 31, 2037. Debt service payments are $17,459 per year. Restricted Fund Balance • The Restricted Fund Balance equals next year of debt service. FOOTHILLS MALL URA – FINANCIAL SNAPSHOT Revenue • Total revenue collected through 2019 is: o URA Property Tax Increment - $4.5M o Metro District Property Tax Increment - $2.8M o Sales Tax Increment - $1.0M • Additional revenue forecasted through 2039 (2038 tax increment): o URA Property Tax Increment - $41.7M o Metro District Property Tax Increment - $26.6M ⇒ Assumes a 2% property tax increase every other year. o Sales Tax Increment - $3.6M ⇒ Sales Tax Increment is projected to end by 2024 as the Mall debt service is paid off and the increment is no longer needed. • Other revenue (interest, etc.) totals $0.5M for 2014-2037. Expenses Operating • Operating expenses consist of administrative costs contracted at 1.5% of Property Tax TIF paid to the City (paid to the North College URA annually), goods and services, bank fees and the fee from the County for tax collection (2% of Property Tax and Metro District TIF revenue). Developer Project Costs • The Authority agrees to reimburse the Developer the Property Tax TIF, the Metro District TIF, and the Sales Tax TIF (up to 2024), minus 3.5% in fees paid to the City and the County. ATTACHMENTS 1. 2018-2022 Excel File 2. 2018 Word explanation file DISCUSSION Mall and Midtown Financial Overviews Josh; Just the one item on the agenda today, we talked about the new financial reporting at our last meeting. Before you today is an overview of North College presentation and then fine tune for the other districts. This a following through on a budget commitment that we made focused on clearer presentation of finances. This is the format that you will see this fall when we go over the 2020 budget. Rachel will walk us through the sector. Rachel; There is a correction to the North College URA, that is based on the reimbursement from the other URAs. The mall we get a 1.5% admin fee, this reduced the administration reimbursement fee from 600 to about 310, this is why the ending balance is about 10.6 rather than 12.1. We also received direct reimbursement from the bond that the mall issued for a number of the direct costs, so this plus 1.5% that we can collect over 25 years, it really changed the cash projection quite a bit. In North College we are whole because we had sufficient enough cash to make all the catch up payments for operations. Operations in North College will now be balanced out on an annual basis. We have this year to cover but will likely do it as a correction later this year. Midtown south property tax increment is based on the 2018 property tax assessment this is a solid number. The revenue is interest and property tax TIF. Admin charges to North College are estimated based on time we spend. There is reimbursement agreement for Prospect Station that’s our total operating expenses. There are two debt services, one is a capstone payment to the City this is a 5million dollar loan that the URA. There are two components to that loan, one is an interest rate that is lower than would be normally charged with a revenue share component. Then Prospect Station loan paid the reimbursement agreement, part was paid day one the second part will be paid overtime. We are in process of turning this loan over to the private sector. We will probably be bringing this back in the August/September timeline to give the Committee a good idea what this will look like. We are optimistic that we will have a better interest rate than what we already have which should bring down the cost. What will happen is that these two debt services will become one bond payment, but again, you will be instrumental in the terms of this agreement. Once we have more information from the private sector, then we will issue an RFP, and be able to walk you through what we think the terms of this agreement will look like. Ultimately, any financing will have to be approved by the URA Board and City Council, this is to make the committee aware that we are actively engaged in this process. Joe; what is the reasoning for this? Josh; It’s Two-Fold. Mike; The City’s intent was for this to go to the private sector. The City is the initial banker, once we have cash flow to cover the debt the City’s intent is for it to go to private sector. We are trying to close this in 2019 so that the funds will be available for the BFO process in 2022. The idea of the City being the initial banker until the loan/URA can operate on its own. Turning these debts to the private sector will likely be a benefit to the URA and City. Joe; Thank you for this perspective. The administration charge for North College in 2019, is that the total cash out? Rachel; Yes. We are all caught up as of last week. Christophe; You said this has always been the intent of debt but is there anything written about the City using this as an intent? Mike; No, it is more of a spoken agreement. Christophe; This can be easily contested. Josh; It is written in the older lender policy documents between the City, DDA and URA. It indicates there that to the DDA and URA the City is willing to be the seed funder, but it would prefer for it to go to the private sector as soon it made sense. It also indicates in there that it cannot force refinancing for a loan either. Christophe; This helps a lot. It needs to be memorialized. Joe; I think going forward it would be very worth memorializing the intent of the City and URA. Josh; I agree that this is a discussion that needs to be had, it would not hurt the URA moving forward particularly now that the make-up of the board has changed. This will also allow the intent to outlive our time here. Wade; Agreed. I think this was also part of the presentations and as Christophe pointed out these are remnants from our dual roles. Mike; I agree, this really is something that we need to look at where this needs to be memorialized and agreed to. Rachel; We have the ending cash balance and we are positive. We did the same thing here, of restricting the fund balance based on a year’s worth of debt service. If we look at the available fund balance to use, we are anticipating about 4 million to use for other projects in Midtown. Josh; It is the URAs decision on how to use these funds. The Midtown plan does point out larger objectives and staff would like to discuss options with the Board about using these funds for these purposes. In the actual document there are things that need to be achieved other than the exact purposed in that document. I can think of a couple of public improvements to expend these funds on, one being safety improvements by the new charter school. We do not have available cash balance to start investing for a couple of years, but something that we can start resourcing next year for the 2021 budget cycle for this district. Joe; I am assuming for this plan there is no finite list of improvements that these funds can go towards? Josh; Right. In some ways we are entertaining the idea of the Board creating a list of what they want to use any available funds for as opposed to creating a list that maybe gets built over time. Wade; Cap stone is now state, and a parking garage, then there is Spring Creek park. Where exactly is the Southern Boundary? Josh; The boundary is along the northern boundary of Whole Foods so the new Charter School, and the old gas station are all part of the area. We did go a little west of the tracks to pull in what was the old gas on that site. Rachel; Foothills mall is fairly straight forward. There is a metro district increment, and property tax increment. As far as expenses, operating LC charges 2% of the TIF our charge to the City is 1.5%, the funding agreement with the mall is 96.5% of the property and 100% of the sales tax increment this is what is going back to the URA. The admin charge is an on-going admin charge that we take off the top, it was designed to reimburse the overall operations of the URA. Josh; So, you can see the revenue stream and there is a little bit of an ending fund balance Rachel; We are anticipating that their bonds will be covered and that the sales tax increment will end after 2024 based on the sales tax projections. Mike; On the sales tax line, we are about 70% leased in 2018, and the expectation was that we would be 80-90% by the end of 2019. I am curious why is this number is not higher? This number is only going up 160,000. It seems like the the number should be higher. I am confused by the sales tax number and leasing information. Rachel; Their sales tax year is different than ours, these numbers only go through March. This is why the number seems low and you see the jump from 2018 to 2019. Josh; We will double check the cadence of the numbers and work with Victoria to double check. Ross; I would be more in favor of conservative approach on projections, based on current leases verses future. Those Economic conditions can change, there are a number of factors Josh; Absolutely. We are scheduled for a meeting to update on where they are on leasing and finishing that up for the end of this month. Mike; We had originally forecasted that by the end of 2019, the sales tax increment would no longer be needed to fund the debt. As soon as property tax increment, the metro district and PIF generate enough revenue stream to covers the metro district debt service, we give them the sales tax, they then give it back to us in the next year, but it sounds like it should close now in 2024? Ross; So, is this that property tax increment isn’t increasing as fast as we thought? Josh; It’s actually increasing faster than we thought. Sales are lower than we thought but property tax is increasing a lot higher and faster. Overall, we have less sales tax going into the structure because property tax is so high. For the purposes of the URA, the sales tax is always one hundred pledged to someone other than the URA. Sales tax is always given to the TIF, it’s never available for the URA to achieve its mission. Mike mentioned that there are some nuances. For the purposes of the URA this should balance out by the end and if it doesn’t then the money goes back to the other taxing entities. Ross; Is there is a rough estimate of the immediate effects of surrounding properties adjacent to the URA? Josh; I thought that we sent a memo on this, but we can resend it. The quick take away from this is that the background of coming out of the great recession has eclipsed a little bit. Ross; That is part of what I was thinking, but in terms of policy our assumption has always been pledging property tax in one area causes a greater increase in the surrounding area. Josh; We haven’t seen full value yet. The other aspect is that we haven’t yet seen the full effect of the residential coming on, we can certainly update this with this year of next years’ data, and we might be able to discern a greater shift. Joe; To capture the value of the commercial piece of this, look at sales tax increment. That will really show you what the property is truly worth, it tells the tale. Ross; and we would still want to know the tax values in the immediate vicinity. Josh; How about we refresh the previous memo and include sales and property tax. I think it’s been six of seven months or so. Should have it in the next couple of weeks. If this memo looks like it will take longer than that we will certainly communicate that to the Board, but we will try and get it out. Joe; Before we do anything with whatever increment is left in the midtown project. I want to make sure we agree that we will have a full Board discussion on if we use the increment or return it to the taxing entities. If we use it, we need to set priorities as a Board before dollars are appropriated. The first of this discussion is the philosophical discussion based on where the URA has shifted to and are we still in agreement that this stays in place? We need to discuss, are we still in agreement that this stays in plan or do we return it to the taxing entities? Josh; I would be happy to facilitate this, and I think this is the right conversation. Part of that dialog, from staff’s perspective, should be honoring the plan that is in place which did contemplate utilizing some of the unpledged revenue to achieve the objectives. Joe; I’m not opposed but wanted to have this discussion with the full Board. Daren; This really can’t happen without the discussion. I think a viable option for the area is to reuse the funds. We can return the funds; this is a viable option and we can definitely be structured to have these conversations. Josh; Please keep in mind that we may have a project coming onboard that would be using URA funds. They are beginning the process of going through the URA application process. There is a redevelopment proposal for the Chucky Cheese’s that has indicated that it will need support. Rachel; I wanted to ask the committee, does this format work moving forward? Ross; Yes. Can we get the previous year as well? Rachel; Yes, no problem. Ken; In terms of budget, it’s pretty easy to feel confident with these numbers. They are conservative which gives a pretty good idea of what we can actually count on and we know that if it’s different than this it’s going to be better. Rachel; Yes, the revenues are conservative, so I feel confident in those as well along with the projections. Ross; Proposed future project that might have a sales tax increment, is that structured similarly or is that different? Josh; College and Drake is structured as a pledge. There is a cap, as is the case with all pledged revenue, that is based on a 2% growth. It is a straight percentage revenue share that ends when we build all the infrastructure, hit the revenue cap or hit 25 years. Joe; There’s no prioritization like what we see in the Foothills mall. Josh; Correct. It’s the first money out, which reflects the post HB 1348 environment. Mike; So, this doesn’t have a big upfront cost like there was with Summit? Josh; We haven’t completely finalized how we are supporting the individual projects yet. The pledge from the taxing revenues is finalized. We are in conversations with the metro district to fund projects upfront because some improvements are easier to do upfront, such as the intersection. We are looking are creative ways to leverage funding to create an upfront intervention without the City acting as Banker. Joe; Do we have all the IGA’s? Josh; We have everyone but the Health District. The Health District really wanted to make sure that everyone was going to be in before they pledged any of their revenues. Mediation with the Poudre School District is that everyone will have some share but not sure what that will be and if it will be contingent on a backfill. Joe; Northern Water didn’t participate either. Josh; No, they did not but the districts were willing to let that one go. We are doing the mediation with the school district next Tuesday; we do not anticipate an answer until 90 days from that which will be mid-October. We may have more to share next Thursday when we meet as the full Board. Ross; Moving onto other business. We meet next week as the whole Board. Then it looks like we have a project to look at in August 14th and then a new project? Josh; We may have a project in the North College area coming up in August. You may have seen this early in the year when we did an early check in and we felt like at that time we were headed in the right direction. Depending on where we are at in conversations with the developer, we may be the outlines of a potential assistance package by August, if not then early September. Ross; Our URA retreat is 8/22. If there is anything the Finance Committee would like to communicate for this, please reach out to staff or I and let us know. Josh; We are planning on having one more legal contract review committee meeting before the URA Board retreat, we may talk about the committee recommendation at the retreat. Please remember that 8/22 takes the place of our August URA Board meeting. Ross; Adjourned 11:36am RESOLUTION NO. XXX OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY ADOPTING THE 2019 BUDGET FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (the “URA”) was created on January 5, 1982, by City Council's adoption of Resolution 1982-010, which resolution designated the City Council as the URA’s Board of Commissioners (“Board”); and WHEREAS, the URA operates to eliminate blight and prevent the spread of blight within urban renewal areas in accordance with the Colorado Urban Renewal Law, C.R.S. Section 31-25- 101, et seq.; and WHEREAS, the URA currently has three approved urban renewal plan areas that collect tax increment revenues and have annual expenditures, and these are known as the North College District, the Prospect South District, and the Foothills District (collectively, the “Districts”); and WHEREAS, the Board has considered a revised proposed budget for fiscal year 2019 for each of the Districts and it wishes to adopt them as the URA’s fiscal year 2019 revised budget in accordance with the Local Government Budget Law of Colorado, C.R.S. Section 29-1-101, et seq. (the “Budget Law”); and WHEREAS, attached as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein is the URA’s fiscal year 2019 revised budget message for the Districts as required by the Budget Law (the “Budget Message”); and WHEREAS, attached as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein are the North College District’s 2019 revised budget statement showing anticipated revenues and proposed expenditures and its comparative budget statement showing beginning and ending fund balances (jointly, the “North College District Budget”); and WHEREAS, attached as Exhibit “C” and incorporated herein are the Prospect South District’s 2019 revised budget statement showing anticipated revenues and proposed expenditures and its comparative budget statement showing beginning and ending fund balances (jointly, the “Prospect South District Budget”; and WHEREAS, attached as Exhibit “D” and incorporated herein are the Foothills District’s revised 2019 budget statement showing anticipated revenues and proposed expenditures and its comparative budget statement showing beginning and ending fund balances (jointly, the “Foothills District Budget”); and WHEREAS, the Budget Message, the North College District Budget, the Prospect South District Budget, and the Foothills District Budget shall be collectively referred to as the “2019 Revised URA Budget”. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY as follows: Section 1. That the Board hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the 2019 Revised URA Budget is hereby approved and the revenue amounts stated therein are appropriated for expenditure as stated in the 2019 Revised URA Budget. Section 3. That the Chief Financial Officer of the City, ex officio the Financial Officer of the URA, is hereby directed to file a certified copy of the 2019 Revised URA Budget with the office of the Division of Local Government, Department of Local Affairs, State of Colorado as required by the Budget Law. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority this XXX day of October A.D. 2019. ____________________________________ Chair ATTEST: _________________________________ Secretary EXHIBIT A Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (URA) Budget Message Fiscal Year 2019 Revised Budget Budget Features The URA’s 2019 budget is comprised of the budgets for the URA’s current plan areas and associated districts, known as the North College District, the Prospect South District, and the Foothills District. The budget revenues include property and sales tax increment, and interest earned on investments and budget expenses include general operations, project obligations and debt service payments. The URA aims to deliver services which achieve those objectives specified by the individual urban renewal plans for the North College District, Prospect South District and Foothills District. These include: • To facilitate redevelopment and new development by private enterprise through cooperation among developers and public agencies to plan, design, and build needed improvements • To address and remedy conditions in the area that impair or arrest the sound growth of the City • To implement the City’s Comprehensive Plan and its related elements • To redevelop and rehabilitate the plan area in a manner which is compatible with and complementary to unique circumstances in the area • To effectively utilize undeveloped and underdeveloped land • To improve pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular circulation and safety • To ultimately contribute to increased revenues for all taxing entities • To encourage the voluntary rehabilitation of buildings, improvements and conditions • To facilitate the enforcement of the laws and regulations applicable to the plan area • To watch for market and/or project opportunities to eliminate blight, and when such opportunities exist, to act within the financial, legal and political limits of the URA to acquire land, demolish and remove structures, provide relocation benefits, and pursue redevelopment, improvement and rehabilitation projects. Changes from the Adopted 2019 URA Budgets Increases to appropriations are needed for: • Prospect South URA 1) Repayment of operating costs to North College URA reflected in General Operations increase. In 2019, the Prospect URA reimbursed the North College URA for administrative costs through 2018. This requires an increase in appropriation in Fund 801 of $249,117 (from $429,364 to $678,481). • Foothills Mall URA 1) Repayment of operating costs to North College URA reflected in General Operations increase. The City keeps 1.5% of the Property Tax increment for administrative costs. In 2019, the Foothill URA used the funds collected through EXHIBIT A 2018 to reimburse the North College URA for administrative costs. Net increase to appropriation $83,878. 2) Higher than budgeted Property Tax increment, partially offset by lower Sales Tax increment increased the repayment to the developer for debt service. Net increase to appropriation $364,016 (includes increase in Larimer County Fee). Budgetary Basis of Accounting The URA budget and fund financial statements are prepared on the modified accrual basis of accounting. EXHIBIT B Revenue: Tax Increment Collections $1,799,193 $1,978,124 $178,931 Interest on Investments 21,717 25,000 3,283 Total estimated Revenue for the URA $1,820,910 $2,003,124 $182,214 Expenses: Operations General Operations $396,101 ($14,436) ($410,537) Larimer County Fee 62,948 39,562 (23,386) Developer Obligations 183,211 178,575 (4,636) One-Time Stormwater Contribution 300,000 300,000 0 Total Operational Costs $942,260 $503,701 ($438,559) Annual Debt Service Payments 2013 Bond Payment $948,963 $948,963 $0 Rocky Mountain Innosphere 343,743 367,195 23,452 Total Debt Service Payments $1,292,706 $1,316,158 $23,452 2019 Budget Appropriation $2,234,966 $1,819,859 ($415,107) Net Change in Fund Balance ($414,056) $183,265 $597,321 NO APPROPRIATION ACTION NEEDED  The negative amount in General Operations for the 2019 Revised Budget reflects the cumulative repayment of operating expenses from the Prospect South URA and the Foothill URA through 2018. Since the repayments are up-to-date, 2020 and out will reflect one year of expenses. Difference URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY NORTH COLLEGE DISTRICT - FUND 800 2019 BUDGET REVISION Original Budget Revised Budget EXHIBIT C Revenue: Tax Increment Collections $518,118 $604,833 $86,715 Interest on Investments 15,316 10,000 (5,316) Total estimated Revenue for the URA $533,434 $614,833 $81,399 Expenses: Operations General Operations $2,079 $226,139 $224,060 Larimer County Fee 10,751 12,097 1,346 Developer Obligations 11,762 11,762 0 Total Operational Costs $24,592 $249,998 $225,406 Annual Debt Service Payments Capstone $279,811 $279,811 $0 Prospect Station 17,459 17,459 0 Revenue Sharing with City (Capstone) 107,502 131,213 23,711 Total Debt Service Payments $404,772 $428,483 $23,711 2020 Budget Appropriation $429,364 $678,481 $249,117 Net Change in Fund Balance $104,070 ($63,648) ($167,718) NEED TO INCREASE APPROPRIATION FOR 2019 by $249,117  Repayment of operating costs to North College URA reflected in General Operations increase. In 2019, the Prospect URA reimbursed the North College URA for administrative costs through 2018. 2019 BUDGET REVISION Revised Budget Difference URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY PROSPECT SOUTH DISTRICT - FUND 801 Original Budget EXHIBIT D Revenue: Property Tax Increment $2,429,393 $3,172,599 $743,206 Sales Tax Increment Collections 809,798 476,928 (332,870) Interest on Investments 0 5,263 5,263 Total estimated Revenue for the URA $3,239,191 $3,654,790 $415,599 Expenses: Operations Larimer County Fee $64,516 $64,721 $205 Administrative Charges 0 83,878 83,878 Total Operational Costs $64,516 $148,599 $84,083 Annual Debt Service Payments Foothills Metro District Bond $3,174,675 $3,538,486 $363,811 Total Debt Service Payments $3,174,675 $3,538,486 $363,811 2020 Budget Appropriation $3,239,191 $3,687,085 $447,894 Net Change in Fund Balance $0 ($32,295) ($32,295) NEED TO INCREASE APPROPRIATION FOR 2019 by $447,894   Higher than budgeted Property Tax increment, partially offset by lower Sales Tax increment increased the repayment to the developer for debt service. The City keeps 1.5% of the Property Tax increment for administrative costs. In 2019, the Foothill URA used the funds collected through 2018 to reimburse the North College URA for administrative costs. Revised Budget Difference URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY FOOTHILLS DISTRICT - FUND 803 2019 BUDGET REVISION Original Budget 140 City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Annual Financial Report URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY FUND COMBINING BALANCE SHEET DECEMBER 31, 2018 North College Prospect South Foothills Mall Consolidated ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents $ 70,781 $ 39,979 $ 5,817 $ 116,577 Investments 589,949 332,443 49,103 971,495 Receivables Property taxes 1,984,898 609,701 3,174,293 5,768,892 Interest 4,803 3,011 208 8,022 Restricted - cash and cash equivalents 976,014 - - 976,014 Total Assets 3,626,445 985,134 3,229,421 7,841,000 LIABILITIES Accounts payable, accruals, and other 22,896 - - 22,896 Wages payable 4,292 - - 4,292 Advance from other funds 1,782,878 4,720,111 - 6,502,989 Total Liabilities 1,810,066 4,720,111 - 6,530,177 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unavailable revenue - property taxes 1,984,898 609,701 3,174,293 5,768,892 Total Deferred inflows of resources 1,984,898 609,701 3,174,293 5,768,892 FUND BALANCES (DEFICIT) Restricted 976,014 - 55,128 1,031,142 Unassigned (1,144,533) (4,344,678) - (5,489,211) Total Fund Balances (Deficit) (168,519) (4,344,678) 55,128 (4,458,069) Total Liabilities, Deferred Inflows of Resources and Fund Balances (Deficit) $ 3,626,445 $ 985,134 $ 3,229,421 $ 7,841,000 Exhibit E City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 141 URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY FUND COMBINING SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES (DEFICIT) FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 North College Prospect South Foothills Mall Consolidated REVENUES Taxes $ 1,841,552 $ 529,741 $ 3,223,943 $ 5,595,236 Earnings (loss) on investments 44,560 18,833 5,160 68,553 Total Revenues 1,886,112 548,574 3,229,103 5,663,789 EXPENDITURES Current operating Sustainability services 252,212 22,358 3,189,258 3,463,828 Debt service Principal 595,000 - - 595,000 Interest and debt service costs 403,100 259,946 - 663,046 Total Expenditures 1,250,312 282,304 3,189,258 4,721,874 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 635,800 266,270 39,845 941,915 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out (303,000) - - (303,000) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) (303,000) - - (303,000) Net Changes in Fund Balances (Deficit) 332,800 266,270 39,845 638,915 Fund Balances (Deficit)-January 1 (501,319) (4,610,948) 15,283 (5,096,984) Fund Balances (Deficit)-December 31 $ (168,519) $ (4,344,678) $ 55,128 $ (4,458,069) 142 City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Annual Financial Report URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY - NORTH COLLEGE DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES-- ACTUAL AND BUDGET (NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS) FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 Original Final Actual Budget Budget Variance REVENUES Programs Taxes $ 1,841,552 $ 1,491,660 $ 1,491,660 $ 349,892 Earnings (loss) on investments 44,560 10,303 10,303 34,257 Total Revenues 1,886,112 1,501,963 1,501,963 384,149 EXPENDITURES Programs (fund level of budgetary control) Debt & Other Uses 998,100 1,220,108 1,220,108 222,008 Other Purchased Services 5,582 8,883 8,883 3,301 Personnel Costs 140,182 113,053 113,053 (27,129) Purchased Prof & Tech Services 104,995 108,183 179,339 74,344 Purchased Property Services 4 - - (4) Supplies 1,449 1,000 1,000 (449) Transfers 303,000 - 303,000 - Total Expenditures 1,553,312 1,451,227 1,825,383 272,071 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures 332,800 $ 50,736 $ (323,420) $ 656,220 Fund Balances--January 1 (501,319) Fund Balances--December 31 $ (168,519) City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 143 URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY - PROSPECT SOUTH TIF DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES-- ACTUAL AND BUDGET (NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS) FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 Original Final Actual Budget Budget Variance REVENUES Programs Taxes $ 529,741 $ 458,856 $ 458,856 $ 70,885 Earnings (loss) on investments 18,833 15,944 15,944 2,889 Total Revenues 548,574 474,800 474,800 73,774 EXPENDITURES Programs (fund level of budgetary control) Debt & Other Uses 422,235 377,224 377,224 (45,011) Purchased Prof & Tech Services 10,596 11,677 11,677 1,081 Purchased Property Services 11,762 11,762 11,762 - Total Expenditures 444,593 400,663 400,663 (43,930) Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures 103,981 $ 74,137 $ 74,137 $ 29,844 RECONCILIATION TO GAAP BASIS Principal Reduction--Advances 162,289 Total Reconciling Items 162,289 Net Change in Fund Balances 266,270 Fund Balances (Deficit)--January 1 (4,610,948) Fund Balances (Deficit)--December 31 $ (4,344,678) 144 City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Annual Financial Report URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY - FOOTHILLS MALL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES-- ACTUAL AND BUDGET (NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS) FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 Original Final Actual Budget Budget Variance REVENUES Programs Taxes $ 3,223,943 $ 4,220,165 $ 4,220,165 $ (996,222) Earnings (loss) on investments 5,160 - - 5,160 Total Revenues 3,229,103 4,220,165 4,220,165 (991,062) EXPENDITURES Programs Purchased Prof & Tech Services 57,690 14,759 14,759 (42,931) Purchased Property Services 3,131,568 4,191,559 4,191,559 1,059,991 Total Expenditures 3,189,258 4,206,318 4,206,318 1,017,060 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures 39,845 $ 13,847 $ 13,847 $ 25,998 Fund Balances (Deficit)--January 1 15,283 Fund Balances (Deficit)--December 31 $ 55,128 RESOLUTION NO. XXX OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY ADOPTING THE 2020 BUDGET FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (the “URA”) was created on January 5, 1982, by City Council's adoption of Resolution 1982-010, which resolution designated the City Council as the URA’s Board of Commissioners (“Board”); and WHEREAS, the URA operates to eliminate blight and prevent the spread of blight within urban renewal areas in accordance with the Colorado Urban Renewal Law, C.R.S. Section 31-25- 101, et seq.; and WHEREAS, the URA currently has three approved urban renewal plan areas that collect tax increment revenues and have annual expenditures, and these are known as the North College District, the Prospect South District, and the Foothills District (collectively, the “Districts”); and WHEREAS, the Board has considered a proposed budget for fiscal year 2020 for each of the Districts and it wishes to adopt them as the URA’s fiscal year 2020 budget in accordance with the Local Government Budget Law of Colorado, C.R.S. Section 29-1-101, et seq. (the “Budget Law”); and WHEREAS, attached as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein is the URA’s fiscal year 2020 budget message for the Districts as required by the Budget Law (the “Budget Message”); and WHEREAS, attached as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein are the North College District’s 2020 budget statement showing anticipated revenues and proposed expenditures and its comparative budget statement showing beginning and ending fund balances (jointly, the “North College District Budget”); and WHEREAS, attached as Exhibit “C” and incorporated herein are the Prospect South District’s 2020 budget statement showing anticipated revenues and proposed expenditures and its comparative budget statement showing and beginning and ending fund balances (jointly, the “Prospect South District Budget”; and WHEREAS, attached as Exhibit “D” and incorporated herein are the Foothills District’s 2020 budget statement showing anticipated revenues and proposed expenditures and its comparative budget statement showing beginning and ending fund balances (jointly, the “Foothills District Budget”); and WHEREAS, the Budget Message, the North College District Budget, the Prospect South District Budget, and the Foothills District Budget shall be collectively referred to as the “2020 URA Budget”. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE FORT COLLINS URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY as follows: Section 1. That the Board hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the 2020 URA Budget is hereby approved and the revenue amounts stated therein are appropriated for expenditure as stated in the 2020 URA Budget. Section 3. That the Chief Financial Officer of the City, ex officio the Financial Officer of the URA, is hereby directed to file a certified copy of the 2020 URA Budget with the office of the Division of Local Government, Department of Local Affairs, State of Colorado as required by the Budget Law. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority this XXX day of October A.D. 2019. ____________________________________ Chair ATTEST: _________________________________ Secretary EXHIBIT A Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (URA) Budget Message Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Budget Features The URA’s 2020 budget is comprised of the budgets for the URA’s current plan areas and associated districts, known as the North College District, the Prospect South District, and the Foothills District. The budget revenues include property and sales tax increment, and interest earned on investments and budget expenses include general operations, project obligations and debt service payments. The URA aims to deliver services which achieve those objectives specified by the individual urban renewal plans for the North College District, Prospect South District and Foothills District. These include: • To facilitate redevelopment and new development by private enterprise through cooperation among developers and public agencies to plan, design, and build needed improvements • To address and remedy conditions in the area that impair or arrest the sound growth of the City • To implement the City’s Comprehensive Plan and its related elements • To redevelop and rehabilitate the plan area in a manner which is compatible with and complementary to unique circumstances in the area • To effectively utilize undeveloped and underdeveloped land • To improve pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular circulation and safety • To ultimately contribute to increased revenues for all taxing entities • To encourage the voluntary rehabilitation of buildings, improvements and conditions • To facilitate the enforcement of the laws and regulations applicable to the plan area • To watch for market and/or project opportunities to eliminate blight, and when such opportunities exist, to act within the financial, legal and political limits of the URA to acquire land, demolish and remove structures, provide relocation benefits, and pursue redevelopment, improvement and rehabilitation projects. Summary of the Adopted 2020 URA Budgets • North College URA 1) Tax Increment Collections is based on the August 2019 certification of the 2019 property tax that will be collected in 2020. Increment for 2020 collections is up 22% from 2019 collections. 2) The General Operations expense includes the credits for the reimbursement of expenses from the other URAs. 3) The Larimer County Fee is based on Tax Increment Collections and also increased 22%. 4) There are no budgeted capital contributions expected for 2020. EXHIBIT A • Prospect South URA 1) Tax Increment Collections is based on the August 2019 certification of the 2019 property tax that will be collected in 2020. Increment for 2020 collections is up 20% from 2019 collections. 2) The Larimer County Fee is based on Tax Increment Collections and also increased 20%. 3) The Prospect South General Operations expense is an estimate of staff time and other expenses attributable to the URA which will be reimbursed to the North College URA annually. • Foothills Mall URA 1) Property Tax Increment Collections is based on the August 2019 certification of the 2019 property tax that will be collected in 2020. Increment for 2020 collections is up 16% from 2019 collections. 2) Sales Tax Increment Collections are estimated to be 20% higher than 2019 based on increased leasing rates at the Foothills Mall. 3) The City keeps 1.5% of the Property Tax increment for administrative costs which will be reimbursed to the North College URA annually. 4) Higher Property Tax and Sales Tax increments will increase the repayment to the developer for debt service. Budgetary Basis of Accounting The URA budget and fund financial statements are prepared on the modified accrual basis of accounting. EXHIBIT B Revenue: Tax Increment Collections $1,835,177 $2,420,433 $585,256 Interest on Investments 22,662 22,662 0 Total estimated Revenue for the URA $1,857,839 $2,443,095 $585,256 Expenses: Operations General Operations $505,973 $318,493 ($187,480) Larimer County Fee 36,704 48,409 11,705 Developer Obligations 179,354 179,354 0 Total Operational Costs $722,031 $546,256 ($175,775) Annual Debt Service Payments 2013 Bond Payment $944,363 $944,363 $0 Rocky Mountain Innosphere 273,294 367,029 93,735 Total Debt Service Payments $1,217,657 $1,311,392 $93,735 2020 Budget Appropriation $1,939,688 $1,857,648 ($82,040) Net Change in Fund Balance ($81,849) $585,447 $667,296  General Operations expense for the 2020 Revised Budget reflects the operating expenses for the North College URA and the repayment of allocated operating expenses from the Prospect South URA and the Foothill URA for 2019 (one year in arrears), which was not reflected in the original projection. Original Projection Revised Budget Difference URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY NORTH COLLEGE DISTRICT - FUND 800 2020 BUDGET EXHIBIT C Revenue: Tax Increment Collections $528,480 $726,802 $198,322 Interest on Investments 15,982 10,200 (5,782) Total estimated Revenue for the URA $544,462 $737,002 $192,540 Expenses: Operations General Operations $0 $22,744 $22,744 Larimer County Fee 2,142 14,436 12,294 Developer Obligations 11,762 11,762 0 Total Operational Costs $13,904 $48,942 $35,038 Annual Debt Service Payments Capstone $285,408 $285,408 $0 Prospect Station 17,459 17,459 0 Revenue Sharing with City (Capstone) 121,727 137,774 16,047 Total Debt Service Payments $424,594 $440,641 $16,047 2020 Budget Appropriation $438,498 $489,583 $51,085 Net Change in Fund Balance $105,964 $247,419 $141,455  The Prospect South General Operations expense is an estimate of staff time and other expenses attributable to the URA which will be reimbursed to the North College URA annually. This was not in the original projection. Original Projection Revised Budget Difference URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY PROSPECT SOUTH DISTRICT - FUND 801 2020 BUDGET EXHIBIT D Revenue: Property Tax Increment $2,754,740 $3,688,601 $933,861 Sales Tax Increment Collections 822,844 572,313 (250,531) Interest on Investments 0 5,368 5,368 Total estimated Revenue for the URA $3,577,584 $4,266,282 $688,698 Expenses: Operations Larimer County Fee $71,175 $73,772 $2,597 Administrative Charges 0 47,604 47,604 Total Operational Costs $71,175 $121,376 $50,201 Annual Debt Service Payments Foothills Metro District Bond $3,506,409 $4,131,813 $625,404 Total Debt Service Payments $3,506,409 $4,131,813 $625,404 2020 Budget Appropriation $3,577,584 $4,253,189 $675,605 Net Change in Fund Balance $0 $13,093 $13,093   The Foothills General Operations expense is calculated as 1.5% of the Property Tax increment, allotted for administrative costs, which will be reimbursed to the North College URA annually. This was not in the original projection. The 2020 ending fund balance is the result of cumulative interest earnings on balances in the fund. Difference URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY FOOTHILLS DISTRICT - FUND 803 2020 BUDGET Original Projection Revised Budget Revenue: Tax Increment Collections $1,978,124 $2,420,433 $442,309 22% Interest on Investments 25,000 22,662 (2,338) -9% Total estimated Revenue for the URA $2,003,124 $2,443,095 $439,971 Expenses: Operations General Operations ($14,436) $318,493 $332,929 -2306% Larimer County Fee 39,562 48,409 8,847 22% Developer Obligations 178,575 179,354 779 0% One-Time Stormwater Contribution 300,000 0 (300,000) -100% Total Operational Costs $503,701 $546,256 $42,555 Annual Debt Service Payments 2013 Bond Payment $948,963 $944,363 ($4,600) 0% Rocky Mountain Innosphere 367,195 367,029 (166) 0% Total Debt Service Payments $1,316,158 $1,311,392 ($4,766) 2020 Budget Appropriation $1,819,859 $1,857,648 $37,789 Net Change in Fund Balance $183,265 $585,447 $402,182 2019 Revised 2020 Budget Difference URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY NORTH COLLEGE DISTRICT - FUND 800 2019-2020 BUDGET COMPARISON Revenue: Tax Increment Collections $604,833 $726,802 $121,969 20% Interest on Investments 10,000 10,200 200 2% Total estimated Revenue for the URA $614,833 $737,002 $122,169 Expenses: Operations General Operations $226,139 $22,744 ($203,395) -90% Larimer County Fee 12,097 14,436 2,339 19% Developer Obligations 11,762 11,762 0 0% Total Operational Costs $249,998 $48,942 ($201,056) Annual Debt Service Payments Capstone $279,811 $285,408 $5,597 2% Prospect Station 17,459 17,459 0 0% Revenue Sharing with City (Capstone) 131,213 137,774 6,561 5% Total Debt Service Payments $428,483 $440,641 $12,158 2020 Budget Appropriation $678,481 $489,583 ($188,898) Net Change in Fund Balance ($63,648) $247,419 $311,067 2019 Revised 2020 Budget Difference URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY PROSPECT SOUTH DISTRICT - FUND 801 2019-2020 BUDGET COMPARISON Revenue: Property Tax Increment $3,172,599 $3,688,601 $516,002 16% Sales Tax Increment Collections 476,928 572,313 95,385 20% Interest on Investments 5,263 5,368 105 2% Total estimated Revenue for the URA $3,654,790 $4,266,282 $611,492 Expenses: Operations Larimer County Fee $64,721 $73,772 $9,051 14% Administrative Charges 83,878 47,604 (36,274) -43% Total Operational Costs $148,599 $121,376 ($27,223) Annual Debt Service Payments Foothills Metro District Bond $3,538,486 $4,131,813 $593,327 17% Total Debt Service Payments $3,538,486 $4,131,813 $593,327 2020 Budget Appropriation $3,687,085 $4,253,189 $566,104 Net Change in Fund Balance ($32,295) $13,093 $45,388  The 2020 ending fund balance is the result of cumulative interest earnings on balances in the fund. Difference URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY FOOTHILLS DISTRICT - FUND 803 2019-2020 BUDGET COMPARISON 2019 Revised 2020 Budget