The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2004-01-14 EURA MINUTES• ENGLEWOOD URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY January 14, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority was called to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Community Development Conference Room of the Englewood Civic Center. Chairman Woodward presided. Present: Absent: Staff: Bertoluzzi , Bums , Garrett, Weddle , Fish Gallardo, Alternate member Roth (with previous notice); Fish (no previous notice given) Executive Director/Executive Secretary Simpson Senior Planner Graham II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 12 , 2003 Chairman Woodward stated that the Minutes of February 12, 2003 were to be considered for ap- pro val. • Weddle moved: • Bums seconded: The Minutes of February 12 , 2003 be approved as written. AYES: AYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Woodward, Garrett, Weddle None Bertoluzzi, Bums Fish , Roth The moti o n carried. III. EURA BUDGET/FINANCIAL STATUS 2004 General Fund Operating Budget 2004 Debt Service Fund Revenue Report The proposed 2004 General Fund Operating Budget and the 2004 Debt Service Fund budget were presented by Executive Director Simpson. Mr. Simpson stated that the proposed 2004 Op- erating Budget of $4,570 should be adequate for projected expenses of the Authority. He pointed out that $2,500 of this budget is earmarked for auditing fees . Should unexpected ex- penses occur, Mr. Simpson stated he would make an appeal for supplemental funding to the City Council. The projected Debt Service deficit will increase to $43,480,487 by the end of 2004 . H:\GROUP\BOARD S\URA \Minut es\Minute s 2004\E URA 01-14 -04 .doc 1 • • Mr. Simpson then discussed the Revenue Report, and pointed out that both property tax and sales tax revenue increased in 2003 over 2002 revenue collections. The sales tax revenue in 2003 through December is $1,035,578.13; in 2002 the sales tax revenue through December was $942,676.83. Property tax revenues are up from $585,783.82 in 2002 to $998,226.33 in 2003. Much of the property tax increase may be attributed to private ownership of land now developed by Wal-Mart, and by the Alexan apartment development in City Center. This land had previ- ously been part of the Cinderella City development, and the land used for the shopping center parking area was owned by the City of Englewood. Termination of the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district was discussed. Mr. Simpson stated that the latest dates of which he is aware is the sales tax TIF in District l would expire on 12/31/06 , and in District 2 it would expire on 7/31110. The property tax TIF would expire in District l on 9115/07 and in District 2 on 9/15/09. Mr. Simpson stated that he could not address the difference in expiration dates between the sales and property tax TIF in each district. General discussion ensued. Mr. Garrett stated that the bond holders will receive the principal they invested in the bonds back; the y will not realize the interest rate that was offered when the bonds were sold, however. The impact the bond default has had on property values in the TIF districts was discussed. Mr. Garrett noted that even with the bond default, a means to finance the CityCenter development was determined. Mr. Garrett also stated that he was not aware of any projects contemplated that might need TIF financing in the next two years or so -at which time , some of the existing TIF obligations would expire . Mr. Graham noted that there is a third Urban Renewal District in the north Englewood area around General Iron; however, there is no bonded indebtedness in this district, and no revenues are reported for that district. He did point out that the TIF proce ss is in place in the event bonds need to be issued. Mr. Woodward asked if there were further que st ions regarding the EURA 2004 budget. Garrett moved : Bertoluzzi and Bums seconded: The 2004 General Fund and 2004 Debt Service Budget for the EURA be approved as prepared and presented. AYES : NAYS: Bertoluzzi , Bums, Garrett, Weddle, Woodward None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Fish , Roth The motion carried. IV. GENERAL IRON WORKS Status Report Mr. Simpson and Mr. Graham reviewed the Status Report on the General Iron Works site. Own- • ership and control of the south half of the site has reverted to the Barton Brothers, and RTD has H:\GROUP\BOARDS \U RA \Minutes\M inutes 2004\EURA 01-1 ~-04 .doc 2 • • • gained ownership of the north portion of the site where the light rail maintenance facility is being constructed. Initially, RTD had pursued ownership and control of the entire site through eminent domain. The proposal was, once RTD gained control/ownership of the entire site, to sell the south part of the site to the City/Larry Fullerton for development. The valuation hearing was scheduled and rescheduled several times, but never actually held. RTD and Barton Brothers ne- gotiated sale of the north portion of the parcel to RTD, and Barton Brothers regained control of the south portion of the site, negating the condemnation proceedings initiated by RTD. The City, the EURA, and Mr. Fullerton are no longer parties to development efforts of the southern part of the site. Barton Brothers has contacted the Community Development staff, and have expressed interest in redevelopment of the portion they now control. General discussion ensued regarding the site and development possibilities. Mr. Simpson stated that the Winslow family, who also owns a considerable amount of property between Dartmouth A venue and Bates A venue, are also interested in redevelopment of their property and have en- gaged Tim Leonard, a consultant who has worked with the City, to work with them. Both the Winslow family and Barton Brothers are aware of the proposed Bates A venue Light Rail Station , and are also aware of development and zoning restrictions for a TOD district. Possibility of re- zoning the Winslow and Barton properties from the existing industrial classifications to the TOD District was briefly discussed. Mr. Simpson stated that the City could initiate rezoning , but cau- tioned that this may not be the most advisable way to proceed. Discussion regarding construction of the Bates Light Rail station, and the RTD/City financial ability to undertake the project at this time ensued. Also briefly discussed was the issue of City- owned property at approximately C-470 and South Santa Fe that RTD had expressed an interest in. Mr. Burns asked if there is a possibility a private developer might be engaged to build the Bates Avenue Transit Station. Mr. Simpson stated that there have been limited discussions with a couple of developers regarding this issue. Mr. Simpson stated that there are some issues regarding the maintenance facility construction that need to be resolved with RTD -such as compliance with landscaping requirements. When the City, RTD, and Mr. Fullerton were in discussion on development of the parcels -north and south parts of the Barton Brothers ownership , RTD needed an additional 1.5 acres for a "staging area" during the maintenance facility construction pe1iod. At the conclusion of construction, this 1.5 acre parcel was to be transferred to the City, and would be landscaped. With negotiations between RTD and Barton Brothers removing the City from active development involvement on the south part of the site, this 1.5 acre parcel was not transferred back to the Barton Brothers, and landscaping of the maintenance facility does not meet the minimum requirements. Mr. Garrett noted that RTD can contribute a percentage of the cash value of the required landscaping to the City, but the issue is still being discussed. Mr. Simpson stated that the City/EURA contract with Mr. Fullerton was not extended in 2003. Mr. Fullerton may be able to work out a redevelopment agreement with the Winslow family or with Barton Brothers, but the City/EURA is no longer party to any redevelopment agreement. Further brief discussion ensued . H:\GRO UP\BOARDS\URA \Minutes \Minute s 2004\EURA 01-14-04 .doc 3 • • V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Simpson directed the attention of the Authority to a "white paper" regarding proposed legis- lation to prohibit use of condemnation (eminent domain) for urban renewal purposes. This white paper was prepared by Senior Manager Dannemiller and himself. Mr. Simpson stated that there is a lot of concern regarding the restriction of eminent domain powers, and such legislation, if approved, would seriously impact a City or URA to assist in redevelopment efforts. Mr. Simp- son stated that staff will keep the Authority apprised of activity regarding this proposed legisla- tion. Mr. Graham distributed an article from the Denv e r Po st regarding this legislation. VI. LEGAL COUNSEL'S CHOICE Chairman Woodward noted that no legal counsel was present. VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Woodward inquired about the Acoma Street prope1ty. Mr. Simpson stated that other pro- jects came up, and this project was "side-tracked". Mr. Simpson stated that he would try to have some information regarding the Acoma Street site available for the February 11 meeting . He stated that he hopes to get some activity going on the site by mid-summer 2004. Three develop- ment proposals were presented , but they were "le ss than exciting". Mr. Garrett commented that when the City/EURA controls the land , we can wait until a good proposal comes in , and cited the 3400 Elati Street site as an example. Mr. Bertoluzz i po se d questions regarding the 3400 South El a ti Street site -what did the devel- oper pay for the site, and what are property tax revenues expected to be from the development. Mr. Simpson responded that the developer paid $1,250,000 for the site, and that property and sales taxes wi 11 be received from the site. He stated th at he has no es ti mate on property tax reve- nues at this time. Development probably will not be completed on the site until early summer, and the County Assessor will have to assess the property after completion of the project. Mr. Simpson stated that the City is receiving "use tax" revenues from materials used on the site, and will from equipment that will be used in the medical office building. Brief discussion ensued. There being no further business to come before the Authority, the meeting was declared ad- journed. ~vk,d,, L Lit~'{: H:\GROUP\BOARDS\URA\Minutes\Min ute s 2004\EURA 01-14-04 doc 4 • • • ENGLEWOOD URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY BUDGET--GENERAL FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004 2003 2002 2003 Estimated Actual Budget Actual FUND BALANCE - BEGINNING OF YEAR $ 63 ,630 $ 756 $ 761 REVENUES Interes t 1,013 24 Other 5 ,000 5 ,000 To ta l revenues 1,013 5 ,000 5,02 4 EXPENDITURES Full ti me overtime 351 600 70 Soc ia l security 27 5 Genera l office supplies 50 Pos tag e 69 150 88 Photocopies 278 300 19 Ins ide /outside printing 32 1 300 108 Food 177 Aud it ing 2 ,500 2 ,500 2 ,500 Legal services 600 1,800 585 Other profess ional services 59 ,254 1,780 Other expenses 305 Total expenditures 63 ,882 5 ,650 5 ,205 EXCESS REVENUE OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES (62,869) (650) (181) FUND BALANCE - END OF YEAR $ 761 $ 106 $ 580 EURA Budget.xis 2004 GF bud 2004 Budget (As Proposed) $ 580 4 ,500 4,500 100 70 50 50 2,500 1,800 4,570 (70) $ 510 1/7/2004 12 :26 PM • FUND BALANCE (DEFICIT)- BEGINNING OF YEAR REVENUES Property taxes Sales Taxes Interest Total re v enues .XPENDITURES Financial serv ices ENGLEWOOD URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY BUDGET --DEBT SERVICE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004 2003 2002 2003 Estimated Actual Budget Actual $ (36,068,276 ) $ (38 ,672 , 106) $ (38 ,519 ,091 ) 602 ,663 600,000 998 ,226 942 ,677 890 ,000 1,035,578 9 ,306 6 ,000 2 ,889 1,55 4,646 1 ,496 ,000 2,036 ,693 12 , 161 15,000 County Tre asurer's collection fee 6 ,027 6 ,000 9 ,982 Profess ional services 607 Legal services 5,77 1 50,000 Debt Servi ce 3,981 ,502 4 ,300 ,000 4 ,239 ,000 Total expenditures 4 ,005,461 4 ,371 ,000 4 ,249,589 EXCESS REVENUE (UNDER) EXPENDITURES (2,450 ,815) (2 ,875 ,000) (2 ,212 ,896 ) FUND BALANCE (DEFICIT)- END OF YEAR $ (38 ,519 ,091 ) $ (41,547 , 106) $(40 ,731 ,987 ) • EURA Budget.xis 2004 OS bud 2004 Budget (As Proposed) $ (40,731,987) 1,000 ,000 920 ,000 2 ,500 1,922 ,500 15 ,000 6 ,000 50,000 4 ,600,000 4,671,000 (2 ,748 ,500) $ (43,480,487) 1/7/2004 12:26 PM • • • E ng lewoo d U rba n R enewa l Authority 20 02-2003 T ax In crement Revenue Co mparison Re port 2002 2003 Sa les Tax Sales Tax Sales Tax % C h ange 2002-2003 Month Month ly E URA I M onthly E URA II Total YTD Monthly E URA I Mon thly EU R A II Total YTD Monthly YTD J a nuary $ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ --- February ---------- March -5 ,3 10 .22 5,3 10 .22 5,3 10 .22 ----(100 .00)% (100.00)% April -12,0 37 .42 12 ,0 37 .42 17 ,3 47 .64 ----(100 .00)% (100 .00)% May -13 ,927 .30 13,927.30 3 1,274.94 -11 ,895 .99 11 ,895 .99 l l ,895 .9 9 (14.5 9)% (6 1.96)% Ju n e 84 ,01 5 .95 15 ,636.87 99 ,652.82 130 ,927 .7 6 54 ,547 .14 14,5 17.68 69,064 .82 80 ,960 .8 1 (3 0 .70)% (38 .16)% J uly 135 ,4 65.45 16 ,5 38 .02 152,003 .4 7 282,93 1.23 135 ,3 78.18 15 ,349 .92 150 ,728.10 23 1,688 .9 1 (0 .84 )% (18 .1 1)% A u gus t 132,87 1.28 13,929.75 14 6,8 01.0 3 429 ,73 2 .2 6 143,155.13 14 ,041.88 15 7 ,197 .0 1 388,885.92 7 .0 8 % (9 .5 1)% ----·-- September 125,847 .53 16 ,729.96 14 2,577.49 572,309.75 ------13 1,732.4 1 15 ,796 .78 147,529.19 5 36,4 15.11 3 .47 % (6.2 7)% October 11 3,542 .49 14 ,4 17.55 127 ,96 0 .04 700,269.79 14 0 ,771 .24 14 ,296 .83 15 5 ,068 .07 691 ,483 .18 2 l.l9 % (1.26)% Novembe r 132 ,66 1.6 1 (4 2,76 2 .36) 89 ,89 9 .2 5 79 0 ,169.04 162,9 11.5 1 14 ,0 9 1.08 177,002.59 86 8,485 .77 96 .89 % 9 .91 % December 134 ,0 89 .96 18 ,417 .83 152 ,507 .79 94 2,6 76.83 15 1,36 1.06 15 ,73 1.30 167 ,092 .3 6 l ,0 35 ,578 .13 9 .56 % 9 .86 % ----- TOTA L $ 858,494 .27 $ 84,182.56 $ 942,676.83 $ 919,856.67 $ 115 ,721.46 $ 1,035,578.13 Ad ju s t t o A nnua l Re(!ort R evenu e F ig u res: Le ss : 2003 Ye ar January Rec e ipt s -- Plu s: 2004 Janu ary Re c eipt~ Plus : Co unt ~ Coll ec ti o n Fees -8 1.8001.5410 I - Adju s ted To tal Pe r Annual Re po rt $ 94 2,676 .83 $ 1,03 5 ,578 .13 FILE :sales ta x_pptax co mpariso n03.xls COMPARISON RPT -MONTHL Y Sales Ta PRINTED: 117/20 04 12 :29 PM • • • Englewood Urban Ren~wa~uthority 2002-2003 Tax Increment Revenue -·--- Comparison Report -,~----- 2002 2003 Property Tax Property Tax Property Tax % Change 2002-2003 Month Monthly YTD Monthly YTD Monthly YTD January $ (129.50) $ (129 .50) $ 41.41 $ 41.41 (159 .98)% (159 .98)% February 12 ,378 .58 12,249.08 20 ,638 .95 20 ,680 .36 66.73 % 68.83 % March 45,070.85 57,319 .9 3 82 ,869.57 103,549.93 83.87 % 80 .65 % April 142,823.43 200,143.36 209,892 .99 313,442 .92 46.96 % 56.61 % May 66,761.20 266 ,904.56 ------ 232,271.77 545,714 .69 247.91 % 104.46 % June 155 ,025 .01 42 1,929 .57 183 ,616.22 729,330.91 18.44 % 72.86 % July 126 ,535 .89 548,465.46 218 ,195.01 947,525.92 72.44 % 72.76 % August 21,911.87 570,377 .33 14,185.30 961,711.22 (35.26)% 68 .61 % September 5,793.13 576,170.46 11 ,310.73 973,021.95 95 .24 % 68.88 % October 2,256 .93 578,427 .39 4 ,080 .96 977 ,102 .91 80.82 % 68.92 % November 3,149.41 581,576 .80 6 ,046.64 983, 149 .55 91.99 % 69 .05 % December 4 , 180.40 585,757.20 5, 135.89 988,285.44 22.86 % 68.72 % TOTAL $ 585,757.20 $ 988,285.44 Adjust to Annual Re~ort Revenue Figures: Less: 2003 Year January Receipts -(41.41) - Plus: 2004 January Receipts - Plus: County Collection Fees-81.8001.54101 6 ,026 .62 9 ,982 .30 ·-- Adjusted Total Per Annual Report $ 591,783 .82 $ 998,2 26.33 FILE:sales tax_pptax comparison03.xls COMPARISON APT-MONTHLY pptax PRINTED: 117/2004 12:29 PM