JOINT FINANCE COMMITTEE PACKET 09-16-2020
Meeting
of the
Joint Finance
Committee
AGENDA
Wednesday, September 16, 2020
3:00 p.m.
Elk River City Hall
Upper Town Conference Room
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2. CONSIDER AGENDA
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Considered to be routine and noncontroversial by the Economic Development Finance Committee and will be approved by one
motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Committee member, staff member, or citizen so requests, in
which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered under the regular agenda.
3.1 June 30, 2020, Meeting Minutes
3.2 Revolving Loan Fund Balance Report
4. GENERAL BUSINESS
4.1 Shoot Steel TIF Application
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS
6. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting Protocol
No sidebar discussions
No interruptions
State your concern
Ensure you understand
Don’t take things personally
Adhere to time limits
Come prepared
Ensure all are heard
Meeting of the Elk River Joint Finance Committee
Held at Elk River City Hall
Held Via Zoom Meeting
Tuesday, June 30, 2020
Members Present: Dan Tveite, Ryan Hardin, Nate Ovall, Rhonda Magnussen, Charlie Blesener,
Larry Toth, and Michelle Eder
Members Absent: Chad Vitzthum
Staff Present: Amanda Othoudt, Economic Development and Colleen Eddy, Economic
Development Specialist
Others Present: None
1. Call Meeting to Order
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Joint Finance
Committee was called to order by Dan Tveite at 7:34 a.m.
2. Consider Agenda
Motion by Toth and seconded by Eder to approve the June 30, 2020, Joint Finance
Committee agenda.
Motion carried 7-0.
3. Consent Agenda
Motion by Blesener and seconded by Eder to approve the June 15, 2020 Joint Finance
Committee meeting minutes with the following change:
Charlie Blesener attended the May 26, 2020 meeting.
Motion carried 7-0.
4.1 COVID-19 Small Business Emergency Microloan Applications
Ms. Othoudt presented the staff report and explained the application and microloan criteria.
The commission discussed the following application:
1. Pinnacle Foods, LP dba Perkins Elk River
a. Requested $5,000 Property Tax Relief
b. President Tveite asked if this was one of the incomplete applications from last
month. Ms. Othoudt said yes and Commissioner Toth asked if the application
was for tax relief, of which Ms. Othoudt stated yes.
c. Motion by Ovall and seconded by Magnussen to approve Pinnacle Foods, LP dba
Perkins Elk River $5,000 Property Tax Relief application. Motion carried 7-0.
5.1 Announcements
Ms. Othoudt notified the committee that there is an at large vacancy on the committee and
to send Ms. Othoudt any recommendations.
6. Adjournment
There being no further business, Mr. Tveite adjourned the meeting at 7:43 a.m.
Minutes prepared by Colleen Eddy.
_____________________
Tina Allard
City Clerk
___________________
Amanda Othoudt
Economic Development Director
ELK RIVER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MICRO LOANS
Current Current 8/13/20
Loan Loan Interest Term Monthly Principal
Borrower Date Amount Rate (Months)Payment Outstanding Current
Die Concepts 6/3/2016 $185,200 2.00%60 $936.90 $153,802.10 N Making payment 8/13/20
Heritage Millwork 12/22/2016 $100,000 3.00%60 $965.61 $67,631.70 Y
Ralphies#1 9/10/2013 $74,999 3.00%120 $724.20 $25,093.46 Y
Ralphies#2 8/28/2018 $19,175 3.00%60 $343.65 $12,162.01 Y
TOTAL MICRO LOANS $258,689.27 Micro Loan Fund 240
Distinctive Iron 10/1/2019 $126,000 2.03%60 $1,050.07 184,095.51$ Y
Scott Morrell LLC 8/6/2015 $200,000 2.00%60 $1,011.77 157,925.93 Y 5-Year Balloon is up
Orluck 7/17/2018 $200,000 3.00%84 $2,642.66 147,070.25 Y
$489,091.69 DEED Jobs Incentive Loan Fund 242
COVID-19 Small Business Emergency Loans
Current 8/13/20
Loan Loan Interest Term 6-month Monthly Principal Forgivable
Date Amount Rate (Months)Deferment Payment Outstanding
Chow Mixed Grill and BBQ 7/6/2020 $20,000.00 0%60 1/1/2021 166.67 $20,000.00 $5,000.00
Daddy-O's Café, Inc.7/6/2020 $5,000.00 0%60 1/1/2021 41.67 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
Inspire Studio, LLC 7/6/2020 $20,000.00 0%60 1/1/2021 166.67 $20,000.00 $0.00
Pinnacle Foods, LP 7/6/2020 $5,000.00 0%60 1/1/2021 41.67 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
Pyramid Fitness Group 7/6/2020 $20,000.00 0%60 1/1/2021 166.67 $20,000.00 $5,000.00
Snap Fitness 8/3/2020 $20,000.00 0%60 2/1/2022 166.67 $20,000.00 $0.00
Elk River Country Club 8/3/2020 $5,000.00 0%60 2/1/2020 41.67 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
Eagles Club 8/3/2020 $2,374.00 0%60 2/1/2020 19.78 $2,374.00 $2,374.00
$97,374.00 $27,374.00
Fund Cash Balances 08/13/20:
Micro Loan Fund - 240 $804,887.39
State DEED Jobs Incentive - 242 $135,731.14
The Elk River Vision
A welcoming community with revolutionary and spirited resourcefulness, exceptional
service, and community engagement that encourages and inspires prosperity
Request for Action
To
Joint Finance Committee
Item Number
4.1
Agenda Section
General Business
Meeting Date
September 16, 2020
Prepared by
Amanda Othoudt, EDD
Item Description
Shoot Steel TIF Application and Financial Review
Reviewed by
Mikaela Huot, Baker Tilly
Reviewed by
Cal Portner, City Administrator
Action Requested
Review application and provide a recommendation to the Economic Development Authority to establish
Tax Increment Financing District No. 26.
Background/Discussion
Shoot Steel is Shoot Steel, Inc. manufactures AR500 and AR550 steel targets, target stands, and other
valuable range equipment. They are currently operating out of their Ramsey, MN facility.
At their August 17, 2020, meeting, the EDA approved a purchase agreement from Shoot Steel contingent
on the EDA holding a public hearing on September 21, 2020, and making the requisite findings required by
Minnesota Statutes Section 469.105, subdivision 2 that the sale and conveyance of the property to the buyer
are in the best interests of the city and the transaction furthers the EDA’s general plan of economic
development. Shoot Steel also indicated their intentions to apply for incentives through the EDA.
The purchase agreement proposes the purchase of a 4.34-acre lot at the asking price of $2.00 per square
foot, or market rate, for a total of $378,100.
Shoot Steel, Inc. is proposing to relocate 7 FT and 1 PT employees from their Ramsey location. They plan
to hire 6-7FT employees over the next two years. The positions will pay a minimum of $18 per hour
depending on skill level.
Shoot Steel, Inc is requesting up to $400,000 in financial assistance from the city in the form of Tax
Increment Financing to construct their new facility. The maximum term for an Economic Development
district is 8 years after receipt of first increment, for a total of 9 years. The developer is proposing a pay-as-
you-go method for eligible costs as reimbursement from the city to construct their new facility.
This project is estimated to generate $269,050 in total gross tax increment over 9 years, the maximum term
for an Economic Development District. The total net amount available for this project is $241,274 or 90
percent, with the city retaining 10 percent for administrative expenses over the term of the district. The
present value of the increment generated considering a 4% interest rate is $192,196. There is a remaining
financing gap of $210,000 in which the developer must fill from a combination of equity or other funding
sources.
N:\Departments\Community Development\Economic Development\EDA\Administrative\Agenda\Joint Finance Committee Agenda
Packets\2020\09162020 Special Meeting\4.1 sr Shoot Steel TIF Application Review.docx
The developer’s proposed financial package for the Shoot Steel project includes long-term, private
financing of $1,259,050 from Village Bank, $1,036,000 in SBA financing, $200,000 from a private investor
and $98,258 in equity from the owner, for a total estimated project budget of $2,993,308.
Policy Review
Staff completed a review of the application in accordance of the city’s Tax Increment Financing Policy
adopted on December 4, 2017.
Based on the Estimated Market Value of the project as calculated by Sherburne County, the project’s
EMV is approximately $1,349,100 or $67 per square foot.
Public Purpose
The project must achieve one or more of the following public purpose statements:
1. Demonstrate long-term benefits to the community.
2. Retain local jobs and/or increase the number and diversity of jobs that offer stable
employment and/or attractive wages and benefits through:
Diversification of the local economy
Significant addition of permanent, high-wage, full-time jobs
Addition of jobs attractive to those unemployed or underemployed
3. Significantly increases the city’s commercial and industrial tax base.
4. Demonstrates the ability to encourage unsubsidized private development through “spin
off” development.
5. Facilitates the development process and achieves development on sites that would not
develop “but for” the use of TIF.
6. Removes blight and/or encourages redevelopment of commercial and industrial areas
resulting in high quality redevelopment and private reinvestment.
7. Offsets redevelopment costs (i.e. contaminated site cleanup) over and above the costs
normally incurred in development.
8. Aids the implementation of the Mississippi Connections Plan.
The proposed project meets public purpose objective #1, #2, and #3.
TIF District Term
According to the city’s policy adopted by Council on December 14, 2017, TIF Districts shall be limited to
the minimum term necessary to meet the project needs. Only projects exceeding the objectives identified
in the policy will be considered to exceed the maximum term allowed. The maximum term allowed for an
economic development district is 8 years after receipt of the first increment, for a total of 9 years.
The applicant has requested the maximum term allowed for an economic development district.
Policy Considerations
1. Each Project is required to meet the but for test to determine the need for and level of assistance.
Baker Tilly completed a but for analysis and determined without TIF assistance the project
would not proceed.
2. Developers receiving TIF assistance shall provide a minimum of ten percent cash equity
investment in the project. TIF is not to be used to supplement cash equity.
N:\Departments\Community Development\Economic Development\EDA\Administrative\Agenda\Joint Finance Committee Agenda
Packets\2020\09162020 Special Meeting\4.1 sr Shoot Steel TIF Application Review.docx
The developer indicated Owner Cash Equity in the Shoot Steel project of $298,258,
equivalent to 9.96% percent equity in the project. Which is slightly less then our minimum
requirement for equity investment.
3. TIF will not be used in circumstances where land and property price is of fair market value.
The developer paid fair market value for the EDA property.
4. The developer shall demonstrate a market demand for the proposed project. TIF shall not be
used to support purely speculative projects.
The developer is proposing to relocate from their Ramsey location.
5. The developer shall adequately demonstrate, to the city’s sole satisfaction, an ability to complete
the proposed project base don past development experience, general reputation, and credit
history, amount other factors, including size and scope of the proposed project.
The city and the developer will enter into a development agreement outlining conditions
and expectations of the proposed project.
6. For the purposes of underwriting the proposal, the developer shall provide any requested market,
financial, environmental, or other data requested by the city or its consultants.
The developer provided all requested materials as part of the application.
Mikaela Huot from Baker Tilly Municipal Advisors will present the but for analysis.
7. The City of Elk River shall only use TIF to encourage economic growth and development within
the city limits.
The project is located within the city limits of Elk River.
Financial Impact
Per the city policy, the total estimated gross increment available over 9 years for economic development is
$269,050. The developer could receive 90 percent of the gross increment over 15 years of $241,274, or a
present value of $192,196.
Attachments
Shoot Steel TIF Application and Supporting Materials
Baker Tilly analysis and supporting documents dated September 11, 2020
Memo – Draft for Review
To: Members of the Joint Finance Committee
Amanda Othoudt, Economic Development Director
From: Mikaela Huot, Director
Date: September 11, 2020
Subject:
Application for Tax Increment Financing Assistance related to proposed
establishment of Tax Increment Financing Economic Development (TIF)
District No. 26 Financial Analysis and But-For Review
Background
The City of Elk River received an application from Shoot Steel, INC, the applicant, for financial assistance
through Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to assist with financing a portion of the extraordinary development costs
related to the construction of a new 20,000 square foot warehousing facility. The applicant is proposing the
acquisition of City-owned property located at 17565 Tyler St NW in the City of Elk River for business location
and expansion of its existing company operations. The applicant’s company is currently leasing approximately
10,000 square feet of space in a neighbouring city and has reached capacity. Due to current capacity
concerns, the company has been limited in opportunities for product growth and future development. As a
result, it is looking for land that will facilitate existing business needs, as well as allowing for potential additional
future expansion. The proposed property for this project has been identified as an ideal location for the
company to relocate and meet current demands, as well as allow for future anticipated growth plans, subject to
a feasible financing plan. The applicant’s original budget for the project did not account for the level of
acquisition and site development costs that are required for construction on the identified proposed site. The
increased costs related to acquisition, site development and potential winter construction have created a
financial gap of approximately $400,000.
The project is expected to locate 7 full time and 1 part time position to the City of Elk River. The applicant is
anticipating hiring an additional 6-7 new employees over the next two years at a minimum wage of $18/hour
and would meet the City’s business subsidy policy provisions.
Baker Tilly has been retained by the City to review the application for financial assistance. The purpose of this
memorandum is to provide a summary of Baker Tilly’s review of the development project costs and sources of
funds, and operating pro forma as provided by the applicant to assist the City with making a determination if the
project as proposed would be unlikely to proceed “but-for” the requested Tax Increment Financing (TIF)
assistance, and to determine the appropriate amount, if any, of public assistance. Prior to establishing a tax
increment financing district, there are findings that need to be made by the City that include: 1) determination
that the project qualifies as a TIF district and 2) determination that the project as proposed would not proceed
without public assistance (meeting the “but-for” test. When reviewing requests for financial assistance it is
important to understand how the level of financial assistance would impact the ability of the project to proceed
as proposed and maximize new value created on the current project site.
Applicant Request for Assistance
The applicant’s application for financial assistance includes an approximate $2.993 million project that would be
funded by an estimated $1.259 million first mortgage from Village Bank, $298,258 of equity from both a private
investor ($200,000) and owner cash ($98,258), and a $1.036M SBA loan, leaving a $400,000 gap. The
applicant has asked for tax increment financing assistance to close the financial gap. The extraordinary
acquisition and site development costs that cannot be supported solely by the project alone may justify the
need for public financial assistance. The assistance would allow the project to proceed as proposed and to
provide appropriate upfront funding and to meet minimum debt coverage requirements. The applicant has
indicated in the application that the receipt of City financial assistance is necessary for the project to proceed
based on current financing limitations.
The sources and uses of funds from the applicant’s financial materials is illustrated in the table below.
Sources Amount Uses Amount
First Mortgage $1,259,050 Acquisition $378,100
TIF Mortgage * $400,000 Site Development $513,377
Private Investor $200,000 Construction $1,926,944
Owner Cash Equity $98,258 Architectural and Engineering
fees
$61,365
SBA Loan $1,036,000 Contingencies $113,522
Total $2,993,308 Total $2,993,308
* financed as pay as you go for reimbursement of certain costs
Qualifications
Providing financial assistance through tax increment financing would require the City to proceed with the
establishment of a Tax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District. Tax increment financing is a tool
the City may consider using to support financial assistance for the project, subject to meeting the but-for test
and need for public financial participation. The definition of an economic development district is included as an
attachment to this memo. A public hearing date of October 5 has been established for the City Council to
consider taking action on establishment of the Tax Increment Financing District. The Economic Development
Authority of the City of Elk River will review the request and tax increment financing documents at its
September 21 meeting.
Project Financing
There are generally two ways in which assistance can be provided for most projects, either upfront or on a pay-
as-you-go basis. With upfront financing, the City would finance a portion of the applicant’s initial project costs
through the issuance of bonds or as an internal loan. Future tax increment would be collected by the City and
used to pay debt service on the bonds or repayment of the internal loan. With pay-as-you-go financing, the
applicant would finance all project costs upfront and would be reimbursed over time for a portion of those costs
as revenues are available.
Pay-as-you-go-financing is generally more acceptable than upfront financing for the City because it shifts the
risk for repayment to the applicant. If tax increment revenues are less than originally projected, the applicant
receives less and therefore bears the risk of not being reimbursed the full amount of their financing. However,
in some cases pay as you go financing may not be financially feasible. With bonds, the City would still need to
make debt service payments and would have to use other sources to fill any shortfall of tax increment revenues.
With internal financing, the City reimburses the loan with future revenue collections and may risk not repaying
itself in full if tax increment revenues are not sufficient. The project financing would be pay-as-you-go for
reimbursement of eligible costs.
Tax Increment Revenue Assumptions
The County Assessor provided a taxable value estimate for the project. To estimate the amount of available
TIF revenues generated by the proposed project, certain assumptions were made based on the value of the
project, construction schedule, and anticipated financing terms.
• Total existing value of $378,100
o Parcel ID: 75-757-0205
o Base value as of Jan. 1, 2020
o Original net tax capacity (ONTC) of $6,812
o Assuming classification as commercial-industrial (C-I)
C-I classification rate is 1.5% first $150,000 value and 2% value above $150,000
• Estimated total market value upon completion
o 20,000 square foot warehouse facility
$67 per square foot (approximate)
$1,349,100
• Incremental value based on difference between existing and new land/building value
• Construction commences in 2020 and is completed in 2021
o Project values 100% complete for assess 2022 and taxes payable 2023
• First increment collected in 2022
• Net present value (discount) rate of 4%
• 3% annual market value inflation
Tax Increment Revenue Estimates
Revenue Estimates
Estimated annual available increment (first year) $22,739
Total gross tax increment $268,083
City retainage (10%) $26,809
Net amount available for development (90%) $241,274
Total estimated present value (4%) $192,196
Estimated Applicant Principal TIF Note $190,000
Estimated interest payments at 4% $41,880
Total payments $239,556
Estimated surplus ($241,274 - $239,556) $1,718
The level of tax increment revenues projected for this project are less than what the applicant has requested.
As a result, the applicant will be required to obtain additional funding from other sources, presumably equity
and/or equity, low-interest loans or forgivable loans/grants to fill the remaining gap.
Applicant Pro forma Analysis including But-For
Upon approval of a TIF district and project, the City must make several findings, including the “but for” test: that
the proposed development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within
the reasonably foreseeable future. The applicant has stated that but for the provision of tax increment
financing, the project as proposed would not occur. In the application for financial assistance and supporting
materials, including the but-for statement, the applicant provided sources and uses of funds illustrating an
approximate $400,000 gap due to increased costs of the project relating to acquisition, site development and
stormwater ponding, and winter construction. The applicant provided a letter from its lender indicating the
estimated amount of financing available is 50% of total project costs. Based on total original cost estimates of
$2.5 million, this would equate to approximately $1.259 million of potential lending. Remaining funding sources
include SBA loan and equity. Ability to obtain an increased level of funding through one or more of the other
funding sources would be subject to financial feasibility and availability of annual revenues to support
repayment, as well as willingness of the lender to provide additional funding.
Based on the applicant’s stated position relative to the need for tax increment financing assistance, the City
could make its “but for” finding and provide tax increment assistance. We recommend, however, that the City
review the provided assumptions to consider if the project meets the but-for test and, if so, what an appropriate
level and type of TIF assistance may be based on the information submitted by the applicant. Following
thorough evaluation of the project as provided allows the City to be prepared to make an informed “but-for”
decision based on the likelihood of the project needing assistance, as well as the appropriate level of
assistance. As stated previously, the applicant’s request for financial assistance of $400,000 is more than the
projected available tax increment revenues generated by the project ($190,000). As a result, any level of
financial assistance provided would be less than what has been requested.
To complete the but-for analysis, we reviewed the applicant’s provided sources and uses of funds and
operating proforma and constructed similar ten-year project proformas, showing a result if the applicant
received the assistance as pay-as-you-go (reimbursement for TIF eligible costs) and showing a result if the
applicant did not receive assistance. Our analysis of the proformas included a review of the development
budget, projected operating revenues and expenditures, and the project’s capacity to support annual debt
service payments. The purpose of evaluating the operating proformas is to understand the potential cash flow
performance and projected rates of return of the project over a 10-year period to assist with making the
determination that 1) tax increment assistance is necessary and 2) an appropriate level of assistance will be
provided.
An additional measure of project need and financial feasibility is the Debt Coverage Ratio (DCR), which is a
calculation detailing the ratio by which operating income exceeds the debt-service payments for the project. If
the DCR is greater than 1.0 it indicates the project has operating income that is greater than the debt-service
payment by some margin; conversely if the DCR is less than 1.0 it indicates the project is incapable of meeting
its debt-service payment and would need to seek additional revenue sources in order to pay its debt. Typical
lending standards will require a DCR of greater than 1.0 as a measure of cushion in the event actual revenues
and expenses are different than projected. The applicant’s operating proforma without tax increment
assistance includes a 1.15x DCR, which is the minimum level generally required for this type of project.
Altering the level of financing through tax increment financing assistance is expected to increase the
performance of the project, resulting in approximately 1.28x DCR with assistance.
To understand viability of the project and need for public assistance, we provided a sensitivity analysis to the
proformas with adjustments made to the upfront funding sources. The applicant provided a ‘with’ and ‘without’
scenario based on a $400,000 gap. The ‘with assistance’ scenario assumes receipt of the entire $400,000 of
requested assistance and would provide additional annual cash flow and higher return on equity (18.86%).
With no assistance, the annual cash flow and returns are reduced to a level the applicant has deemed
infeasible for the project to proceed (8.06%-9.07%). In addition to reduced returns, the annual revenues may
not be sufficient to support the level of debt necessary for the project to proceed. The applicant is also limited
in the level of debt financing and equity investment it can receive based on project performance. A modified
level of assistance based on availability of revenues and need for assistance is estimated to provide more
reasonable annual cash flow and returns on equity (12.78%).
The amount of financing available for the project is typically based on net operating income, which is lease
revenues less operating expenses. The annual cash flow is based on assumptions relative to lease revenues,
operating expenses and debt repayment. The applicant provided terms of the lease revenues that includes 5-
year term at $17,000 per month. Rent is adjusted equal to the real estate taxes to be paid during the calendar
year. Moyer Properties, LLC will lease the building to Shoot Steel, Inc for occupancy. Debt repayment is based
on payments to be made to both Village Bank as first mortgage lender and SBA loan with remaining cash flow
available as returns to the equity investor(s).
The City’s current TIF policy provides parameters regarding maximum amount of assistance that could be
provided and minimum cash equity contributions. The policy guidelines and statutory limitations for the term an
economic development is 8 years after receipt of first increment. The policy guidelines also include a
requirement that owner cash equity is a minimum of 10%. The current sources of funds include approximately
9.96% of investor and cash equity. A reduction in the amount of tax increment assistance based on availability
of revenues is expected to result in the increase of both lender and equity requirements.
Conclusion
The applicant has requested financial assistance related to construction of the new project and relocation of the
business from existing small leased space to owner-occupied space in the City of Elk River. Due to estimated
costs for land acquisition, site improvements and storm water ponding, the project is expected to experience an
estimated $400,000 cost overrun prior to construction commencing. The applicant’s primary lender, Village
Bank, has provided a financing proposal for a loan amount of $1,259,050 based on approximately 50% of total
original project costs. Terms of the loan are 4.05% interest rate, fixed for 7 years then adjusting and fixing
every 5 years. Terms of the SBA loan include 25-year repayment at 2.75% interest rate. Remaining funding
sources include investor equity and owner cash. The project includes the transition to a new location and also
from lease to ownership for the company and owner. The company has been operating at a reduced capacity in
the existing location and would have the opportunity to expand post-relocation. Tax increment financing
revenues would provide an additional cash flow source during the early years of the project to allow for
business growth and development and fulfilment of increased employment goals.
Tax increment financing is a tool that can assist with covering a portion of the additional eligible costs
associated with the project. The level of financial assistance the applicant has requested is less than what is
expected to be available and based on financial analysis appears to be more in alignment with what the project
would need for financial support. Since terms of the assistance include pay-as-you-go as reimbursement for
certain costs, the applicant will be responsible for obtaining all upfront funding sources and using cash flow from
the project and any tax increment revenues to repay obligations. Total estimated tax increment revenues that
could be available for this project are approximately $190,000. Should the City choose to provide tax increment
assistance, the applicant will need to find an additional $210,000 from other funding sources to fill the remaining
gap. Aligning the level of assistance to the availability of projected revenues provides a method of closing a
portion of the financial gap and allows the public participation for the project to remain at a reasonable level,
while still providing a means for allowing the project to proceed as proposed.
Thank you for the opportunity to be of assistance to the City of Elk River. Please contact me at 651.368.2533
or Mikaela.huot@bakertily.com with any questions or comments.
Definition of Economic Development Tax Increment Financing District
Economic development district means a type of tax increment financing district which consists of any project, or
portions of a project, which the authority finds to be in the public interest because:
1. it will discourage commerce, industry, or manufacturing from moving their operations to another
state or municipality;
2. it will result in increased employment in the state;
3. it will result in preservation and enhancement of the tax base of the state; or
4. it satisfies the requirements of a workforce housing project under section 469.176, subdivision 4c,
paragraph (d).
MN Statutes 469.176, Subd. 4c.
Revenue derived from tax increment from an economic development district may not be used to provide
improvements, loans, subsidies, grants, interest rate subsidies, or assistance in any form to developments
consisting of buildings and ancillary facilities, if more than 15 percent of the buildings and facilities (determined
on the basis of square footage) are used for a purpose other than:
1. the manufacturing or production of tangible personal property, including processing resulting in
the change in condition of the property;
2. warehousing, storage, and distribution of tangible personal property, excluding retail sales;
3. research and development related to the activities listed in clause (1) or (2);
4. telemarketing if that activity is the exclusive use of the property;
5. tourism facilities;
6. space necessary for and related to the activities listed in clauses (1) to (5); or
7. a workforce housing project that satisfies the requirements listed below.
A project qualifies as a workforce housing project under this subdivision if:
(1) increments from the district are used exclusively to assist in the acquisition of property; construction of
improvements; and provision of loans or subsidies, grants, interest rate subsidies, public infrastructure, and
related financing costs for rental housing developments in the municipality;
(2) the governing body of the municipality made the findings for the project required by section 469.175,
subdivision 3, paragraph (f); and
(3) the governing bodies of the county and the school district, following receipt, review, and discussion of
the materials required by section 469.175, subdivision 2, for the tax increment financing district, have each
approved the tax increment financing plan, by resolution.
The maximum term of an economic development district is eight years after receipt of first increment for a total
collection term of 9 years.
Projected Tax Increment Report
City of Elk River, Minnesota
Tax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. 26
Shoot Steel, INC
Draft TIF Plan Exhibits
Less:Retained Times:Less:Less:P.V.
Annual Total Total Original Captured Tax Annual State Aud.Subtotal Admin.Annual Annual
Period Estimated Net Tax Net Tax Net Tax Capacity Gross Tax Deduction Net Tax Retainage Net Net Rev. To
Ending Market Value (1)Capacity (2)Capacity (3)Capacity Rate (4)Increment 0.360%Increment 10.00%Revenue 02/01/21
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)4.00%
12/31/20 378,100 6,812 6,812 0 130.571%0 0 0 0 0 0
12/31/21 378,100 6,812 6,812 0 130.571%0 0 0 0 0 0
12/31/22 1,349,100 26,232 6,812 19,420 130.571%25,357 91 25,266 2,527 22,739 21,300
12/31/23 1,389,573 27,041 6,812 20,229 130.571%26,415 95 26,320 2,632 23,688 21,336
12/31/24 1,431,260 27,875 6,812 21,063 130.571%27,502 99 27,403 2,740 24,663 21,359
12/31/25 1,474,198 28,734 6,812 21,922 130.571%28,624 103 28,521 2,852 25,669 21,376
12/31/26 1,518,424 29,618 6,812 22,806 130.571%29,779 107 29,672 2,967 26,705 21,383
12/31/27 1,563,977 30,530 6,812 23,718 130.571%30,968 111 30,857 3,086 27,771 21,381
12/31/28 1,610,896 31,468 6,812 24,656 130.571%32,194 116 32,078 3,208 28,870 21,373
12/31/29 1,659,223 32,434 6,812 25,622 130.571%33,456 120 33,336 3,334 30,002 21,356
12/31/30 1,709,000 33,430 6,812 26,618 130.571%34,755 125 34,630 3,463 31,167 21,332
$269,050 $967 $268,083 $26,809 $241,274 $192,196
(1) value based on estimate provided by City for the anticipated construction of new businesses and possible existing business expansions
(2) tax capacity based on commercial-industrial class rate of 1.50% for first $150,000 of value and 2% for value above $150,000
(3) original net tax capacity will be based on existing land and building values and commercial-industrial class rate for payable 2021
(4) combined local tax capacity rate of City of Elk River, ISD 728 and Sherburne County for payable 2020
City of Elk River, Minnesota
Tax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. 26
Shoot Steel, INC
Draft TIF Plan Exhibits
Note Date:02/01/21
Note Rate:4.00%
Amount:$190,000
Semi-Annual Loan
Net Capitalized Balance
Date Principal Interest P & I Revenue Interest Outstanding
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)
190,000.00
02/01/21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 190,000.00
08/01/21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,800.00 193,800.00
02/01/22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,876.00 197,676.00
08/01/22 7,415.98 3,953.52 11,369.50 11,369.50 0.00 190,260.02
02/01/23 7,564.30 3,805.20 11,369.50 11,369.50 0.00 182,695.72
08/01/23 8,190.09 3,653.91 11,844.00 11,844.00 0.00 174,505.63
02/01/24 8,353.89 3,490.11 11,844.00 11,844.00 0.00 166,151.74
08/01/24 9,008.47 3,323.03 12,331.50 12,331.50 0.00 157,143.27
02/01/25 9,188.63 3,142.87 12,331.50 12,331.50 0.00 147,954.64
08/01/25 9,875.41 2,959.09 12,834.50 12,834.50 0.00 138,079.23
02/01/26 10,072.92 2,761.58 12,834.50 12,834.50 0.00 128,006.31
08/01/26 10,792.37 2,560.13 13,352.50 13,352.50 0.00 117,213.94
02/01/27 11,008.22 2,344.28 13,352.50 13,352.50 0.00 106,205.72
08/01/27 11,761.39 2,124.11 13,885.50 13,885.50 0.00 94,444.33
02/01/28 11,996.61 1,888.89 13,885.50 13,885.50 0.00 82,447.72
08/01/28 12,786.05 1,648.95 14,435.00 14,435.00 0.00 69,661.67
02/01/29 13,041.77 1,393.23 14,435.00 14,435.00 0.00 56,619.90
08/01/29 13,868.60 1,132.40 15,001.00 15,001.00 0.00 42,751.30
02/01/30 14,145.97 855.03 15,001.00 15,001.00 0.00 28,605.33
08/01/30 15,011.39 572.11 15,583.50 15,583.50 0.00 13,593.94
02/01/31 13,593.94 271.88 13,865.82 13,865.82 0.00 0.00
08/01/31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
02/01/32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
08/01/32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
02/01/33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
08/01/33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
02/01/34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
08/01/34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
02/01/35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
08/01/35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
02/01/36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
$197,676 $41,880.32 $239,556.32 $239,556.32 $7,676.00
Surplus Tax Increment 1,717.68
Total Net Revenue $241,274.00