Anderson Redevelopment Commission

MINUTES ANDERSON REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION June 7, 2016 MINUTES PUBLIC MEETING Mr. Royer moved to approve the May 5 and May 4:30 p.m. 24, 2016, minutes as corrected. Mr. Collette ED Conference Room #1 seconded. Motion passed unanimously; 5 yes, 0 120 East 8th Street no. Anderson, IN 46016 FINANCIALS MEMBERS PRESENT Mrs. Scott moved to approve the financial reports Kevin Sulc, President as submitted. Mr. Puckett seconded. Motion Joe Royer, Vice President passed unanimously; 5 yes, 0 no. Justin Puckett, Secretary Michael Collette, Member INVOICES Carolyn Scott, Member After discussion, Mr. Royer moved to approve the invoices as submitted. Mr. Collette seconded. STAFF PRESENT Motion passed unanimously; 5 yes, 0 no. Ann Marie Bauer, Attorney Greg Winkler, Director BUSINESS Michael Frischkorn, Deputy Director April Phillips, Financial Specialist Resolution #ARC 10-16 A Resolution of the City Gary McKinney, Environmental/Brownfield of Anderson, Indiana Redevelopment Specialist Commission Approving an Option Agreement Karen Pettigrew, Small Business Specialist for Certain Real Estate Located in Scatterfield Park West OTHERS PRESENT Mrs. Bauer explained the resolution was tabled Tom Seal, F.C. Tucker last month due to the Commission having an Mike Spyers, City Engineer issue with the length of time that the option would Doug Whitham, City Controller be open. This is for the lot north of the property Joanne Collette, JobSource purchased for the Italpollina facility. The Ken da la Bastide, Herald-Bulletin resolution is the same; however, the attached Jennifer Culp, Anderson City Council option agreement is for a period of five years Abel Tello, Fiesta Bar and Restaurant from the end of April. Jarrod Hall, O.W. Krohn & Associates Antony Bibbs, Anderson City Council Mrs. Scott moved to approve Resolution ARC10- Michelle Davis, City Controller’s Office 16. Mr. Collette seconded. Motion passed Tom Pittman, Barnes and Thornburg unanimously; 5 yes, 0 no. Rebecca Crumes, Anderson City Council Request for Property: 26th & Monroe Streets ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF Mr. Tello explained he has been in the QUORUM community for over 20 years and owns the La Mr. Sulc called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. Charreada restaurant. He purchased the former and declared a quorum with five (5) members Birdhouse bar. He is wanting to acquire the present. parking lot near his building so in the future he can have a banquet hall also. Mr. Sulc stated the Commission owns the parking lot and Mr. Tello is requesting to acquire the Mr. Pittman stated a vote and having the vote property. reflected in the minutes was legal. The funds must be kept in a Nestle designated fund; Mr. Winkler requested the Commission be however, they can be used anywhere in the mindful that this is a border property to the area Consolidated Area. It is interchangeable. being redeveloped. Purdue Parkway will be completed soon, and this property is in close A discussion was held on the bond requirements, proximity. The property is outside the how much money to retain in the fund, and where Community Revitalization Enhancement District to move the funds. (CRED), but it acts as a buffer between Scatterfield West and the neighborhood. This Mr. Sulc wanted to make sure that moving the may be an acceptable buffer and function well, funds into fund #7240 would allow the funds to be but he is asking the Commission to be mindful. used in the consolidated district. A discussion was held. Mr. Pittman answered yes because the Consolidated Area includes both the Mrs. Bauer stated the Commission has already Consolidated TIF district and Nestle TIF district. gone through the RFP process on the former General Motor’s properties, so the next step is to A discussion was held on the remaining bond make an offer and begin a negotiation process. proceeds in Fund #7240. Mr. Sulc suggested Mr. Tello submit a formal Mr. Pittman suggested the motion be to move offer to purchase the property and then meet with $3,500,000 less the $191,142.32. Mrs. Bauer and Mr. Puckett for negotiations. When a decision is reached, this can be brought Mr. Collette moved to transfer $3,500,000 less to the Commission for formal action. the $191,142.32 from #7245 to #7240. Mr. Royer seconded. Motion passed unanimously; 5 yes, 0 Request to Move Funds of $3,500,000 from no. Nestle Taxable TIF Capital Fund to TIF Levy Mr. Sulc stated the next several business items Request to Use Funds from TIF Debt Reserve were discussed at the last meeting. All of these Mr. Sulc explained this was the same issue with are being recommended by staff. The Nestle Org #4400. The balance is $2,381,388.76, but it bond requires a debt reserve set aside. The has more funds than needed. balance in the account is $7,454,510.77. In order to have a healthy TIF cash balance transferring Mr. Winkler suggested transferring approximately some of the funds is being suggested. Legally $200,000. more than the $3,500,000 can be transferred, but staff’s recommendation is to remain conservative. Mr. Witham stated more funds may be taken out to cover the 2004A bond pay off, if the Mr. Winkler stated the legal requirement is Commission approves it. approximately $1,050,000. He is suggesting retaining three payments in the account. Mr. Sulc asked if the Commission could make a Mr. Hall presented the members a payment motion authorizing the Controller to do what is schedule of the bonds. He gave an explanation best. of the bond payments and requirements. The minimum required is approximately $2,000,000. Mr. Whitham suggested moving the funds except He recommended $3,060,000 be retained. for the required amount of the remaining bonds. Mr. Sulc asked if a resolution was necessary or Mr. Sulc asked what account the funds would be just a vote to authorize the Controller to move the transferred to. funds. Anderson Redevelopment Commission: June 7, 2016 Page 2 Mr. Pittman stated the funds should be Resolution ARC13-16 Request to Make Two transferred into Org #7240. Principal Bond Payments on Kroger Bond Mr. Sulc stated the main difference between this Mr. Whitham suggested transferring all of the the and the other request is that this is not paying off excess funds the bond, it is just paying it down. This is because the funds available to make payments Mr. Royer moved to transfer the excessive funds are limited. from Org #4400 to #7240 as determined by the City Controller. Mr. Puckett seconded. Motion Mr. Whitham explained the Kroger TIF is its own passed unanimously; 5 yes, 0 no. area. There is sufficient funds to meet current debt service requirement and retire the two Resolution ARC12-16 Request to Payoff 2004A payments which will reduce interest charges Bond significantly. This is a taxable TIF so it carries a Mr. Sulc explained this is a request to pay off the higher interest rate at 6 percent. bond in order to save on the interest. The members received copies of the resolution for Mr. Royer moved to adopt ARC13-16. Mr. review. Collette seconded. Motion passed unanimously; 5 yes, 0 no. Mrs. Bauer stated the resolution basically says that for these reasons we can and for these Discussion and Possible Action on Authorizing reasons we intend to pay off the bond in its the Issuance of Tax Increment Revenue Bonds entirety and authorize the treasurer, which is the for the Purpose of Providing Funds to Pay for Controller, and the officers of the Commission to Redevelopment Projects and Incidental execute any and all documents required to do so. Expenses Mr. Sulc explained this was discussed at previous meetings. There are current projects Mr. Royer asked where this would be paid from. and expenses with Scatterfield West for $3,200,000 and NTN for approximately Mrs. Bauer stated the TIF Levy. $10,000,000 between now and October. Part of the cash flow solution was transferring funds and Mr. Hall stated it would be paid from the Bond paying off bonds to save interest, but this still and Interest fund, the TIF Debt Reserve, and leaves a shortfall if the Commission intends on approximately $930,000 from the TIF Levy. keeping a #4,000,000 to $5,000,000 balance. One of the variables that he does not know is Mr. Winkler stated the logic behind this is that the how much the June property tax draw will be. interest rate on the bond is 5.5 percent. A new Staff has requested a bond in the amount of bond issue would be for a lower interest rate. $7,000,000. He is willing to discuss, but he would From a money management standpoint it makes rather wait to find out the spring draw before good sense to do this. He would suggest not to voting on it. pay off the bond until the spring tax draw is received. Mr. Royer asked about the time frame from approval to cash in hand. Mr. Sulc asked if there was any issue with approving this. Mrs. Bauer answered that it was about 90 days. Mr. Winkler answered no. Mr. Royer stated if bills are coming due in October and it takes three months to get cash, Mr. Royer moved to adopt Resolution ARC12-16. then the time frame is pressed. Mrs. Scott seconded. Motion passed unanimously; 5 yes, 0 no. Mr. Winkler believed that was accurate. His concern is if a bond is approved, it would then have to go to the City Council for approval. In Anderson Redevelopment Commission: June 7, 2016 Page 3 order to have funds in hand by October, then this Mr. Sulc also believed the public hearing should needs be heard at the July City Council meeting. be held prior to the City Council meeting. Mr. Pittman stated most of the time the Remove Specific Parcels from TIF District Redevelopment Plan must be amended; Mr. Sulc stated this was just a beginning point to however, all the projects to be funded are already discuss and understand adjusting the TIF districts in the plan. Since this will not be an economic to benefit the tax increment. Mr. Pittman sent development bond, this will not have to go before information to the Commission regarding this via the Economic Development Commission. Action email. This may need to be discussed over must be taken by the City Council and the several meetings. Redevelopment Commission. Mr. Pittman gave a brief overview on why to Mr. Sulc asked if there would have to be public remove specific parcels from the TIF district due hearing. to the concept in the statute regarding “restoring the base” and the parcels dragging down the Mr. Pittman answered yes. incremental assessed valuation. Mr. Winkler asked when it would need to be held. Mr. Sulc suggested that before the Commission consider this an analysis should be done to see if Mr. Pittman stated it could take place before or there is a situation where parcels were actually after the City Council. being a drag on the TIF district. Mr. Winkler’s goal was to have this heard by the Ms. Crumes asked how many TIF districts there City Council in July. were and what areas were priorities. She needs the Commission to tell her if they were going to Mr. Sulc stated they could request a resolution be be more equitable in distributing the TIF districts. drawn up to be heard at the next meeting. Is the City at its cap for districts? Can more Mr. Pittman suggested a not to exceed figure in districts be added? Is the future money coming in the bond resolution. from the TIF districts already spent? People want to know what is on the table for TIF in their area. Mr. Royer asked if this could be heard at the July There are businesses all over Anderson that do meeting and still make the July City Council not even know about TIF. How is the meeting. Commission going to be more equitable in the distribution? Mrs. Bauer answered yes, the public hearing could be held at the July 5, 2016, Commission Mr. Sulc stated some of the questions will be meeting. She will work with Mr. Pittman to answered under the Strategic Plan item. prepare a resolution. Mrs. Bauer gave a brief explanation on the Mr. Winkler asked for permission to talk with City number of TIF districts established and their Council members regarding the proposed bond. geographic location within the City. A map of the TIF Districts is on the City website. The Commission gave their consent. Ms. Crumes asked if there could be more TIF Ms. Crumes suggested having the public hearing districts established. prior to the City Council meeting. Mr. Winkler answered yes, but the City Council Mrs. Bauer stated she would put together a time would have to approve them. schedule and forward it to the Commission and City Council. Mrs. Bauer briefly explained the TIF increment and what is allowed by statue. Anderson Redevelopment Commission: June 7, 2016 Page 4 Ms. Crumes asked if the Edgewood Plaza area was being removed from the district. Mr. Sulc asked if this was to go to the Board of Public Works. Mr. Sulc stated there were no properties identified at this time for removal. Mr. Spyers answered yes, it was signed today. Ms. Crumes stated the Commission must have Mr. Royer asked if the Commission was being something in mind or they would not be asked to approve the design or the entire project. discussing it. Mr. Spyers answered just the design for $38,000. Mrs. Bauer stated that was not true. The Commission doesn’t even know if there are Mr. Royer moved to approve the contract with properties that fit the description. Curry & Associates for $38,000. Mr. Puckett seconded. Motion passed unanimously; 5 yes, 0 Mr. Sulc stated this is a new concept that was no. made possible by the State legislature so the Commission is going to consider it. He recommended a committee to analyze this. He 2016-2017 Strategic Plan appointed himself, Mr. Winkler, Mrs. Bauer, Mr. Mr. Sulc stated this has been discussed Whitham, and Mr. Collette to a subcommittee and previously. The submitted Statement of the requested Mr. Pittman’s assistance. Commission on Strategic Priorities was the result Contract: Curry & Associates for NTN Booster of subcommittee meetings and various Pump discussions with the Commission members, Mr. Mr. Spyers explained that CHA took a look at the Winkler, and Mayor Broderick. The Strategic Park Road water tower for a booster pump for the Plan was read. It stated “After deliberation, and NTN project. The pressure could be provided, but based on selected language from Indiana Code, not the volume of water that was needed for NTN attached hereto as Exhibit A, the City of and Nestle. The Fairview tower off 29th Street is Anderson Redevelopment Commission hereby a good fit to provide the pressure and volume. states the following priorities for the 2016 and Curry & Associates has reduced their contract fro 2017 calendar years. Continued discussion in m $52,000 for design to $38,000 and removed upcoming Commission meetings with City the inspection portion of the contract. The Water Administration, as well as potential community Department will be doing the inspections. This is partners, is desired for each, in order to a design-build to fast track the project. The determine the goal of the redevelopment in each estimated cost is $625,000 for the booster pump area. 1. Redevelopment of the Nichol-Raible station. The original cost was estimated at Area; 2. Clean up and redevelopment of $500,000. brownfields; 3. Continued improvements to downtown Anderson Guiding Principles. The Mr. Sulc asked if this cost was in the original Commission further states that projects should estimate of $4,200,000 for the entire water/waste create jobs for citizens of Anderson, increase water project. taxes to the Anderson Community School Corporation, spur community collaboration, spur Mr. Spyers stated the actual cost may be a little the real estate market in a manner which higher. increases taxes, beautify the City for the existing community and incoming employees and their Mr. Sulc asked if this will increase the $4,200,000 families, and provide needed infrastructure. In project estimate. order to assure that the Commission may respond positively to unanticipated opportunities Mr. Winkler answered no, he did not believe so. to further redevelopment in the above stated With the amount of $4,200,000 for water/waste areas of priority, the Commission anticipates the water and the $4,500,000 for the electric utility need to maintain a year-end balance in non- portion, it should all be okay. committed funds. This Commission will strive to Anderson Redevelopment Commission: June 7, 2016 Page 5 maintain such non-committed funds at a level of The Commission requested a fee schedule between $4 million and $5 million. The before accepting the Engagement Letter. Commission will not refuse to consider or support projects which are not consistent with its stated Mrs. Bauer stated that when she asks for the priorities, but will not compromise its ability to rate, they are going to ask for what. What is she achieve its priorities by allocating excessive specifically asking for? For example she drafts resources to other opportunities.” the resolutions, but she has Barnes & Thornburg review it. Mrs. Scott appreciated Priority #1. It has been Mr. Sulc asked for a fee schedule for the most something the Commission has worked towards, frequent issues and uses and general legal but she does not know how to implement it. advice. Mr. Sulc stated right now the Commission cannot UPDATES give an answer. This still needs to be addressed. EPA: GM Properties Ms. Crumes asked what the geographic Mr. McKinney stated the bids were accepted, but boundary for downtown was. the bids were too high so the project will be re- bid. The new bids will be turned in on July 1, Mr. Winkler believed it was roughly Brown- 2016. Delaware Street to the west, 5th Street to the north, 15th Street to the south, and the river to the Greater Edgewood Plaza Redevelopment east. Depending on who you talk to this could Mr. Winkler stated there are on-going vary by a couple of blocks either direction. conversations with Speedway. There is some interest from a developer for the former A brief discussion was held. Edgewood Plaza property, but it is premature at this time to discuss. Mrs. Scott moved to approve the Statement of the Commission on Strategic Priorities as Mr. McKinney stated the remediation project on submitted. Mr. Collette seconded. Motion passed the former Baxter Pest Control property will begin unanimously; 5 yes, 0 no. on June 27, 2016. Barnes & Thornburg Engagement Letter Purdue/Flagship Makers Space Facility (P3) Mrs. Bauer explained that historically bond Mr. Winkler stated the project is about two weeks counsel has been the Commission’s counsel in behind schedule. It should be completed in terms of appropriate use of TIF such as what was November. discussed early. The engagement letter is for this type of service. It is an overarching kind of thing Scatterfield West Redevelopment that also includes bond counsel. When Barnes & Mr. Spyers explained Madison County approved Thornburg previously submitted their the revised drainage plan. The storm and Engagement Letters they were for specific work sanitary sewers are pretty much completed. They on specific bonds. This is to cover additional are currently working on the water lines. work as financial and legal advisors to the Commission’s legal counsel. Mr. Winkler also Italpollina talks with them from time to time. Mr. Spyers stated Italpollina has submitted plans to his office, the Builder Commissioner’s Office Mr. Sulc mentioned the Commission has seen and to the State. They have requested permits these before. The concept is typical. The and are currently doing site work. engagement letter does not give a specific hourly rate. This is also typical, but he is wanting the Sirmax Railroad Spur information this time. Mrs. Phillips stated she expected the funds by the end of the month. Anderson Redevelopment Commission: June 7, 2016 Page 6 NTN Mr. Spyers stated the sewer has been installed to Layton Road. They are turning the corner and heading towards the NTN property. They will be putting two crews on next week to get this finished up and then begin on the water lines. The temporary electric has been installed. Parking Garage Mr. Sulc stated that nobody form the Board of Works was in attendance to give a report. This is to remain on the agenda for another month. He has requested a report on the parking garage. Mr. Eicks promised at the last meeting to get the report. He will prompt one more time. MISCELLANEOUS Wigwam Mrs. Scott asked for an update on the Wigwam project at the next meeting. 67th Street Mr. Spyers stated INDOT has changed some of their procedures. It used to be that the City could submit for the utility costs, but now it has to be paid prior to submission and then get reimbursed. He is waiting on an invoice from Municipal Light and Power in the amount of $112,000. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 6:32 p.m. Anderson Redevelopment Commission: June 7, 2016 Page 7