HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-10-17_AgendaHousing & Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Roseville
Meeting Agenda
Tuesday, October 17, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
Roseville City Hall, Council C hambers, 2660 Civic Center Drive
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes: - Minutes of Regular HRA Meeting on September 19, 2006,
meeting
4. Announcements, Agenda Adjustments, Correspondence, and Comments
5. Community/Citizen Comments – comments from the public on items that are not
otherwise on the agenda
6. Consent Agenda
a. Approval of transfer of funds for financial and staff fee per approved contracts with
the City of Roseville for October 2006. (HF0041)
b. Acceptance of 3 rd Quarter 2006 Report (HF0041)
c. Acceptance of Executive Director Fees & Legal Fees for 3 rd Quarter 2006 (HF0041)
7. Public Hearing:
a. Public Hearing Regarding HRA Citiz en Advisory Group Recommendations
on Rental Housing in Roseville (HF36)
8. Action Items:
a. Consider Request for Funding from C entral Community Housing Trust for the
Renovation of Har Mar Apartments and Recommendation for a Housing Tax
Increment District for the Project (HF0039)
b. Recommendation Regarding the Est ablishment of a Housing Improvement
Area for Westwood Village I. (HF0052)
9. Information Reports & Other Business (Verbal Reports by Staff and Board
Members):
a. Discuss Options for Reimbursement of Fees Associated with the Review of Funding
Options for Private and Non-Profit Housing Projects. (HF0041)
b. Update on “Imagine Roseville 2025” Visioning Process
c. Board & Staff Reports
10. Adjournment
Next Regular Meeting: November 21, 2006 , City Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m.
1
Housing & Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Roseville
Draft Minutes
Tuesday, September 19, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
1. Call to Order
Chair Majerus called the regular meeting for September 19, 2006 of the Housing &
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Roseville to order at 7:00 p.m. in Roseville City
Hall, Council Chambers.
2. Roll Call:
Present: Bill Majerus, Jeanne Kelsey, Joe Scheunemann, Dean Maschka, Jen Jackson
Millasovich
Absent: Jill Bean, Susan Elkins
Staff Present: Executive Director Cathy Bennett
Others Present: John Stark, CD Director & Jamie Radell, Economic Development
Coordinator.
3. Approval of Minutes:
Motion : Member Maschka moved, seconded by Member Millasovich, to approve the minutes for
August 15, 2006 meeting.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Motion carried
4. Announcements, Agenda Adjustment s, Correspondence, and Comments
Chair Majerus wanted to announces that both Jill Bean and Joe Scheunemann terms are expiring.
Chair Majerus read the resolutions of appreciati on for both Joe and Jill and thanked them for their
volunteer service to Roseville residents.
5. Community/Citizen Comments
None
6. Consent Agenda:
a. Approval of transfer of funds for financia l and staff fee per approved contracts with
the City of Roseville for September 2006. (HF0041)
Motion: Member Maschka moved, seconded by Member Kelsey , to approve the consent agenda
as presented.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
2
Motion carried.
7. Public Hearing
None
8. Action Items:
a. Consider Acceptance of Citizen Advisory Group Recommendation on Rental
Housing & Call Public Hearing for Public Comment for October 17, 2006 at 7:00
p.m. (HF0036)
Chair Majerus thanked the members of the CAG for their time and energy in looking at the issues
and bringing forth recommendations.
Executive Director Bennett made a presentation re garding the work of the Citizen Advisory
Group and recommendation associated with rental housing in Roseville for the HRA’s
consideration.
Member Kelsey noted that the group originally came together with differing views and by the end
of the process were together with c onsensus on all the issues presented.
Chair Majerus asked noted all of the CAG member s and thanked them for taking their valuable
time to be part of coming to consensus on the issues. There will be an opportunity for public
comment on the recommendations at the next HRA meeting and then the HRA will forward the
CAG’s work to the City Council for final implementation.
Motion : Motion : Member Maschka moved, seconded by Member Millasovich, to accept the
Citizen Advisory Group recommendations on re ntal housing in Roseville and Call a Public
Hearing for comment for October 17, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
b. Consideration of Approval of Revised Cont ract for Executive Director Services for
4 th qtr 2006 (HF0041)
Chair Majerus noted that a request from BCS, Inc was presented to him for review that included
an hourly rate increase for the services of the Executive Director. Chair Majerus noted the
Finance Subcommittee met to review the request and recommends that the contract for services
be revised for the 4 th quarter of 2006 with reconsideration of an annual for 2007 in December.
Motion : Member Millasovich moved, seconded by Member Maschka, to approve a revised
contract for Executive Director Services for 4 th quarter 2006 with hourly rate increase to $85 per
hour m
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
3
9. Information, Reports and Other Business
a. Discuss Central Community Housing Trust’s Request for Public
Funding Assistance for Har Ma r Apartments Renovation (HF0039)
Executive Director Bennett provided a brief summary of the project and update on the process of
review of information.
Chair Majerus suggested that the Chair and Memb er Maschka meet as a subcommittee to review
the detailed financial information on the project prio r to the next meeting. This will help the HRA
to better represent the group with the details.
b. Update on Process for Establishment of a Housing Improvement Area for
Westwood Village I
Executive Director Bennett presented a copy of the pe tition of the owners requesting that a public
hearing be held to consider the establishment of the Housing Improvement Area for Westwood
Village I.
Maschka asked if this process had a sunset provision by the legislature. (Yes – 2009)
Maschka noted that this seems to be a great c oncept that can help to provide a method for
financing large multi-family renovations.
Kelsey would like to see ideas regarding how the HRA’s will costs its costs to evaluate such
methods of financing at the next HRA meeting
Chair asked that this item be on the next HR A meeting agenda for discussion by the HRA.
c. Update on Roseville Vision 2025 Process
Chair Majerus noted that the subcommittees co ntinue to work through the vision process
with updates to the steering committee periodically.
d. Board & Staff Reports
None
10. Adjourn at 7:40 p.m.
RHRA_ Consent for financial and admin services (10-17-06) - Page 1 of 1
REQUEST FOR HRA ACTION
Date: 10-17-06
Item No: 6.a.
Staff Approval: Agenda Section:
CB Consent Items Item Description: Approval of Financial a nd Staff service fee transfer of funds for
October 2006 (HF0041)
1.0 Requested Action
Approve, by consent, the transfer of funds from th e HRA funds to City of Roseville for financial
and support staffing service per contract requirements for October 2006.
2.0 Background
2.1 The Contract for Financial Services is for a total of $3,275.50 or 5% of the HRA total
administrative Budget for 2006 of $65,510. The fee is prorated monthly with a transfer
of funds after approval by the HRA. The tota l monthly fee is $273. The fee is transferred
from the HRA Fund to the General Fund of the City.
2.2 The Contract for the Administrative Support Staff is for a total of $2,292.85 or 3.5% of
the HRA total administrative Budget for 2006 of $65,510. The fee is prorated monthly
with a transfer of funds after approval by the HRA. The total monthly fee is $191. The
fee is transferred from the HRA Fund to the appropriate City department.
3.0 Staff Recommended Action
Staff is recommending the approval, by consent, of the transfer of funds for financial services in
the amount of $273 and support staff services in the amount of $191 for October 2006 per
contract with the City of Roseville for HRA activities.
In addition, the HRA Executive Director can answer additional questions the HRA Board may
have regarding the contract for city services and outside private contracts.
Prepared by: Cathy Bennett (651-792-7015)
RHRA_ Consent for 3 rd quarter reports (10-17-06) - Page 1 of 1
REQUEST FOR HRA ACTION
Date: 10-17-06
Item No: 6.b.
Staff Approval: Agenda Section:
CB Consent Items Item Description: Acceptance of 2006 3 rd quarter staff report & HRA Annual Report
(HF0041)
1.0 Requested Action
Approve, by consent, the acceptance of the 2006 3 rd quarter staff report and HRA Report of
activity.
2.0 Background
2.1 The 3 rd quarter report of Executive Director time spent on HRA and housing activities is
attached for review.
2.2 Also, staff has prepared the 3 rd quarter report of activity for the Housing Resource
Center.
3.0 Staff Recommended Action
Staff is recommending the approval, by consent, for the acceptance the 2006 3 rd quarter reports
Attached: Executive Director & HRC 3 rd quarter reports
Prepared by: Cathy Bennett (651-792-7015)
Roseville HRA Executive Director Quarterly Report
July-September 2006
Executive Director 3 rd Quarter Highlights:
A significant amount of time (36 hours) in the third quarter of 2006 was spent on coordination and
attendance at the Citizen Advisory Group meetings. In addition, staff provided support for the
review of Housing Improvement Area for West wood Village (3.25 hours) and HarMar renovation
financing (12.25 hours). In addition, 51 hours was spent on the HRA meetings and meeting
preparation (report preparation, research, phone calls, attending meetings). The HRA Executive
prepared of two Housing Links, reviewed one Housing Redesign Application, discussed the Senior
Housing Regeneration Program requirements and provided background and information, including
attendance at one meeting, to the Vision 2025 group. There are three homes purchased under the
SHRP program. One is currently for sale and two have not been renovated yet. The home &
garden fair planning officially began in September with the hiring of Patti Sullivan. The first mailing
to last years exhibitors was sent and applications are currently being accepted.
Staff facilitated 2 loan satisfactions from the Roseville loan pool. The activity of the Housing
Resource Center is summarized in the attached quarterly report.
Hourly Summary:
Contracted Hours This Qtr.Hours Total Hours
Hours
Remaining
Hours for 2006 July-Sep Average Per
Qtr
YTD total
Exe. Director 693 102.5 173 372.75 (54%) 320.25
- Housing Programs (51.5) 0 0 0 0
- HRA Activity (51) 0 0 0 0
Home & Garden Fair
(2.25)
100 2.25 25 72.25 (72%) 27.75
793 104.75 198 445 (56%) 348
Housing Resource Center Report
Summary – 3 rd Quarter 2006 Report
Housing Resource Center Quarterl y Summary ...........................................................1
Total Residents Served by HRC by Quarte r 2001-2 006 .............................................2
Total Technical Visits by HRC by Quarte r 2001–200 6 .............................................2
Roseville Revolving Loan Program Activity by Quar ter 2001–2006.........................3
Roseville Family Loan Progr am Activity by Quarter 2006.........................................3
Summary of the Housing Reso urce Center (HRC) Services:
A fundamental goal of the Roseville Housing Program is to encourage
homeowners and managers to maintain a nd upgrade their housing. Also, the HRA
provides additional programs to encourag e families to stay and grow in the
community. The services of the HRC si nce 2000 have assisted 2,623 residential
property owners which have resulted in over $4.05 million in additional private
investment in Roseville homes througho ut the community. Many of these loan
dollars were leveraged with ot her bank or owner funding.
As of the 3 rd quarter of 2006, participation in the HRC continues to increase with
395 residents served with 663 different serv ices. The technical visits remains a
positive assistance to residents with 190 home visits as of the 3 rd quarter of 2006
compared to 176 as of the 3 rd quarter of 2005.
The HRA launched a new loan program geared toward families which provides up
to $35,000 for families with incomes of 120% of median income or less. Three
loans were issued in the 2 nd qtr. of 2006 for a total of $54,895 in loan funds.
2660 Civic Center Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
Phone: 651-792-7015 • Fax: 651-792-7070
http://www.cityofroseville click on Housing & Redevelopment Authority
Email: HRA@ci.roseville.mn.us
Ci
t
y
o
f
R
o
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
-
2
0
0
6
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
10
-
O
c
t
-
0
6
MO
N
T
H
RE
S
I
D
E
N
T
S
RE
V
O
L
V
I
N
G
L
O
A
N
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
O
T
H
E
R
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
S
T
e
c
h
.
Y
E
A
R
T
O
D
A
T
E
T
O
T
A
L
S
T
o
t
a
l
SE
R
V
E
D
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
# L
o
a
n
s
A
p
p
l
i
c
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
# o
f
As
s
i
s
t
.
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
C
i
t
y
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
Project Costs Tech.
No
.
L
o
a
n
A
m
o
u
n
t
C
o
s
t
s
Ap
p
r
.
R
e
c
A
m
o
u
n
t
T
y
p
e
Ap
p
r
.
R
e
c
s
v
s
No
.
S
e
r
v
e
d
L
o
a
n
s
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
City Loans Assist.
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
2
7
$
2
0
,
0
0
0
$
2
1
,
0
4
7
2
0
$
0
0
0
5
9
2
2
2
7
$
2
0
,
0
0
0
5
9
$
2
1
,
0
4
7
2
2
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
2
7
$
0
$
0
0
1
$
0
0
0
5
6
2
2
5
4
$
2
0
,
0
0
0
1
1
5
$
2
1
,
0
4
7
4
4
Ma
r
c
h
3
9
$
0
$
0
0
3
$
0
0
0
7
8
2
3
9
3
$
2
0
,
0
0
0
1
9
3
$
2
1
,
0
4
7
6
7
Ap
r
i
l
3
0
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
1
9
,
2
4
0
1
0
$
0
0
0
5
1
1
6
1
2
3
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
2
4
4
$
4
0
,
2
8
7
8
3
Ma
y
8
5
$
0
$
0
0
0
$
0
0
0
1
0
8
2
0
2
0
8
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
3
5
2
$
4
0
,
2
8
7
1
0
3
Ju
n
e
5
2
$
5
5
,
5
1
2
$
9
9
,
4
9
8
3
4
$
5
4
,
8
9
5
F
a
m
i
l
y
l
o
a
n
2
3
9
6
2
3
2
6
0
$
8
5
,
5
1
2
4
4
8
$
1
3
9
,
7
8
5
1
2
6
Ju
l
y
5
4
$
6
5
,
2
9
5
$
8
7
,
2
8
7
4
3
$
0
0
0
8
5
2
1
3
1
4
$
1
5
0
,
8
0
7
5
3
3
$
2
2
7
,
0
7
2
1
4
7
Au
g
u
s
t
4
7
$
3
3
,
1
1
7
$
3
5
,
9
6
6
3
5
$
0
0
2
8
0
1
8
3
6
1
$
1
8
3
,
9
2
4
6
1
3
$
2
6
3
,
0
3
8
1
6
5
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
3
4
$
5
7
,
7
6
9
$
1
0
9
,
6
1
1
4
3
$
2
5
,
0
0
0
M
H
F
A
1
1
7
3
2
5
3
9
5
$
2
4
1
,
6
9
3
6
8
6
$
3
7
2
,
6
4
9
1
9
0
Oc
t
o
b
e
r
39
5
$
2
4
1
,
6
9
3
6
8
6
$
3
7
2
,
6
4
9
1
9
0
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
39
5
$
2
4
1
,
6
9
3
6
8
6
$
3
7
2
,
6
4
9
1
9
0
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
39
5
$
2
4
1
,
6
9
3
6
8
6
$
3
7
2
,
6
4
9
1
9
0
TO
T
A
L
3
9
5
$
2
4
1
,
6
9
3
$
3
7
2
,
6
4
9
1
7
1
9
$
7
9
,
8
9
5
3
6
6
8
6
1
9
0
3
9
5
$
2
4
1
,
6
9
3
6
8
6
$
3
7
2
,
6
4
9
1
9
0
Ci
t
y
o
f
R
o
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
-
2
0
0
5
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
9-
J
a
n
-
0
6
MO
N
T
H
RE
S
I
D
E
N
T
S
RE
V
O
L
V
I
N
G
L
O
A
N
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
O
T
H
E
R
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
S
T
e
c
h
.
Y
E
A
R
T
O
D
A
T
E
T
O
T
A
L
S
T
o
t
a
l
SE
R
V
E
D
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
# L
o
a
n
s
A
p
p
l
i
c
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
# o
f
As
s
i
s
t
.
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
C
i
t
y
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
Project Costs Tech.
No
.
L
o
a
n
A
m
o
u
n
t
C
o
s
t
s
Ap
p
r
.
R
e
c
A
m
o
u
n
t
T
y
p
e
Ap
p
r
.
R
e
c
s
v
s
No
.
S
e
r
v
e
d
L
o
a
n
s
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
City Loans Assist.
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
2
2
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
1
0
,
7
7
5
1
0
$
0
0
2
4
4
1
5
2
2
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
4
4
$
1
0
,
7
7
5
1
5
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
3
2
$
0
$
0
0
1
$
0
0
0
5
9
2
1
5
4
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
1
0
3
$
1
0
,
7
7
5
3
6
Ma
r
c
h
2
9
$
0
$
0
0
1
$
0
0
0
5
4
2
0
8
3
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
1
5
7
$
1
0
,
7
7
5
5
6
Ap
r
i
l
2
0
$
0
$
0
0
0
$
0
0
2
3
6
1
3
1
0
3
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
1
9
3
$
1
0
,
7
7
5
6
9
Ma
y
2
0
$
0
$
0
0
0
$
2
5
,
0
0
0
M
H
F
A
1
1
4
2
1
8
1
2
3
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
2
3
5
$
1
0
,
7
7
5
8
7
Ju
n
e
4
6
$
0
$
0
0
0
$
2
5
,
0
0
0
M
H
F
A
1
1
6
0
1
9
1
6
9
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
2
9
5
$
1
0
,
7
7
5
1
0
6
Ju
l
y
3
5
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
2
3
,
1
7
0
1
2
$
2
5
,
0
0
0
M
H
F
A
1
1
6
0
1
1
2
0
4
$
2
0
,
0
0
0
3
5
5
$
3
3
,
9
4
5
1
1
7
Au
g
u
s
t
4
8
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
3
9
,
2
9
4
1
0
$
2
5
,
0
0
0
M
H
F
A
1
1
7
2
2
0
2
5
2
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
4
2
7
$
7
3
,
2
3
9
1
3
7
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
9
0
$
1
3
,
4
4
9
$
1
3
,
4
4
9
2
3
$
4
0
,
0
0
0
M
H
F
A
/
R
C
2
0
1
5
2
3
9
3
4
2
$
4
3
,
4
4
9
5
7
9
$
8
6
,
6
8
8
1
7
6
Oc
t
o
b
e
r
4
1
$
0
$
0
0
7
$
0
0
1
8
7
2
3
3
8
3
$
4
3
,
4
4
9
6
6
6
$
8
6
,
6
8
8
1
9
9
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
$
1
3
,
0
2
9
$
1
3
,
0
2
9
2
1
$
2
5
,
0
0
0
M
H
F
A
1
1
5
6
2
0
4
0
9
$
5
6
,
4
7
8
7
2
2
$
9
9
,
7
1
7
2
1
9
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
$
0
$
0
0
2
$
0
0
0
4
5
1
5
4
3
4
$
5
6
,
4
7
8
7
6
7
$
9
9
,
7
1
7
2
3
4
TO
T
A
L
4
3
4
$
5
6
,
4
7
8
$
9
9
,
7
1
7
7
1
7
$
1
6
5
,
0
0
0
7
1
0
7
6
7
2
3
4
4
3
4
$
5
6
,
4
7
8
7
6
7
$
9
9
,
7
1
7
2
3
4
Ci
t
y
o
f
R
o
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
-
2
0
0
4
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
7-
J
a
n
-
0
4
MO
N
T
H
RE
S
I
D
E
N
T
S
RE
V
O
L
V
I
N
G
L
O
A
N
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
O
T
H
E
R
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
S
T
e
c
h
.
Y
E
A
R
T
O
D
A
T
E
T
O
T
A
L
S
T
o
t
a
l
SE
R
V
E
D
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
# L
o
a
n
s
A
p
p
l
i
c
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
# o
f
As
s
i
s
t
.
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
C
i
t
y
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
Project Costs Tech.
No
.
L
o
a
n
A
m
o
u
n
t
C
o
s
t
s
Ap
p
r
.
R
e
c
A
m
o
u
n
t
T
y
p
e
Ap
p
r
.
R
e
c
s
v
s
No
.
S
e
r
v
e
d
L
o
a
n
s
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
City Loans Assist.
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
2
3
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
1
5
,
9
7
1
1
0
$
1
5
,
0
0
0
R
C
D
L
1
0
5
5
1
5
2
3
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
5
5
$
1
5
,
9
7
1
1
5
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
3
0
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
1
6
,
8
6
3
1
1
$
0
0
1
5
3
1
7
5
3
$
2
0
,
0
0
0
1
0
8
$
3
2
,
8
3
4
3
2
Ma
r
c
h
4
5
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
3
5
,
0
0
0
1
2
$
5
0
,
0
0
0
M
H
F
A
2
1
8
1
2
5
9
8
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
1
8
9
$
6
7
,
8
3
4
5
7
Ap
r
i
l
4
6
$
2
3
,
7
6
9
$
2
3
,
7
6
9
3
2
$
0
0
1
7
8
2
3
1
4
4
$
5
3
,
7
6
9
2
6
7
$
9
1
,
6
0
3
8
0
Ma
y
2
5
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
1
0
,
6
5
3
1
2
$
0
0
0
6
5
2
9
1
6
9
$
6
3
,
7
6
9
3
3
2
$
1
0
2
,
2
5
6
1
0
9
Ju
n
e
3
9
$
1
4
,
6
0
0
$
2
1
,
6
1
4
2
5
$
7
,
0
0
0
M
H
F
A
1
1
9
2
3
3
2
0
8
$
7
8
,
3
6
9
4
2
4
$
1
2
3
,
8
7
0
1
4
2
Ju
l
y
2
3
$
7
,
9
6
0
$
7
,
9
6
0
1
1
$
0
0
1
5
5
2
1
2
3
1
$
8
6
,
3
2
9
4
7
9
$
1
3
1
,
8
3
0
1
6
3
Au
g
u
s
t
6
1
$
4
0
,
0
0
0
$
7
3
,
8
0
3
4
2
$
1
4
,
6
0
0
M
H
F
A
1
3
1
0
5
2
7
2
9
2
$
1
2
6
,
3
2
9
5
8
4
$
2
0
5
,
6
3
3
1
9
0
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
2
$
0
$
0
0
0
$
0
0
0
4
2
1
6
3
1
4
$
1
2
6
,
3
2
9
6
2
6
$
2
0
5
,
6
3
3
2
0
6
Oc
t
o
b
e
r
2
9
$
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
1
4
,
0
8
5
1
2
$
0
0
0
6
8
2
3
3
4
3
$
1
3
6
,
3
2
9
6
9
4
$
2
1
9
,
7
1
8
2
2
9
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
3
3
$
9
,
1
4
7
$
9
,
1
4
7
1
0
$
0
0
0
6
5
2
7
3
7
6
$
1
4
5
,
4
7
6
7
5
9
$
2
2
8
,
8
6
5
2
5
6
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
1
9
$
1
7
,
6
7
5
$
2
1
,
7
1
3
2
1
$
1
5
,
0
0
0
R
C
D
L
1
0
4
1
1
8
3
9
5
$
1
6
3
,
1
5
1
8
0
0
$
2
5
0
,
5
7
8
2
7
4
Q:
\
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
S
t
a
f
f
\
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
2
0
0
6
\
H
R
C
2
0
0
6
q
u
a
r
t
e
r
r
e
p
o
r
t
s
.
x
l
s
Q:
\
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
S
t
a
f
f
\
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
2
0
0
5
\
H
R
C
2
0
0
5
q
u
a
r
t
e
r
r
e
p
o
r
t
s
.
x
l
s
Q:
\
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
S
t
a
f
f
\
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
2
0
0
4
\
H
R
C
2
0
0
4
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
p
o
r
t
.
x
l
s
2
10.17.06Roseville HRA
In the third quarter of 2006, the HousingResource Center served 137 residents with a total of amount of
resident served at 395. The marketing of the serv ices through the Housing Link and direct mail campaign has helped to continue a positive level of residents served in the 3 rd quarter of 2006.
City of Roseville
Roseville Residents Served by the Housing Resource Center
2006 3rd Quarter Report
10
67 78 77 98 83 93
102
167
110
74 73
128
106
135
80
73
259
110
86
173 96
54
25
93
81
92
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Year
# of Residents
Qtr 4
Qtr 3
Qtr 2
Qtr 1
254 268
2000 20012002
320
2003
557
2004
397
2005
434
2006
395
10.17.06Roseville HRA
The HousingResource Center Construction Manager held 64 on-site visits and consultations to Roseville residents providing technical advice on renovation projects in the 3 rd quarter of 2006 with a total overall visits for 2006 of 190 or an average of 19 visits per month. The City has access to the equivalent service of one additional building inspector with the construction manager services.
City of Roseville
Te chnical Visits by the HousingResource Center
2006 3rd Quarter Report
22 38 57 56 67
59
50
103
67
61
64
64
46
64
49
68
32
50 85
53
40
62
9
70 51
58
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Year
# of residents
Qtr 4
Qtr 3
Qtr 2
Qtr 1
105
252
2002
180
210
2000 2001 2003
274
2004
234
2005
190
2006
3
10.17.06Roseville HRA
There were 11 city loans issued in the 3 rd quarter of 2006 which is more than any other quarter in any other year since the program has been available. A total of $156,181 and generated total project costs of $232,864. This bring a total of 17 loans issued in 2006. There was one state loan issued in the 3 rd quarter for $25,000.
City of Roseville
Roseville Revolving Loan Program
2006 3rd Quarter Report
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
dollars 2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
10.17.06Roseville HRA
The HRA created a new family ownership loan program in 2006 specifically targeted to middle income residents with children. Two loans were issued in June for a total loan amount of $54,895. No additional loans were issued in the 3 rd quarter of 2006
City of Roseville
Roseville Revolving Loan Program
2006 2nd Quarter Report
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
dollars
2006
$54 ,895
Program Started in 2006, first loan
issued in June
RHRA_ Consent for fees (10-17-06) - Page 1 of 1
REQUEST FOR HRA ACTION
Date: 10-17-06
Item No: 6.c.
Staff Approval: Agenda Section:
CB Consent Items Item Description: Accept Professional Fees for July -September 2006 (HF0041)
1.0 Requested Action
Accept, by consent, the professional fees to Ba rsness Consulting for executive director services
and legal services to Krass Monroe provided from July– September 2006 per contract
requirements.
2.0 Legal Fees
2.1 A contract between the HRA and the law fi rm of Krass Monroe was approved for 2006.
The contract is reviewed and approved annually.
2.2 The Contract for Legal Services is on an hourly basis for time spent on HRA business.
The fee for service provided from July-September 2006 is a total of $8,258.81 per the
attached invoices and are broken down as follows:
Review of Har Mar Financing Request – $6,990.05 charged against multi-family
program
Review of HIA for Westwood Village I – $1,268.75 charged against multi-family
program
3.0 Executive Director Fees
3.1 A contract between the HRA and Barsness Cons ulting Services for HRA Executive Director
services was approved for 2006. The contract is reviewed and approved on an annual basis.
3.2 The Contract for Executive Director Services is on an hourly basis for time spent on
HRA business. The fee for service provided from July –September of 2006 is a total of
$8,060 per the attached invoices and are broken down as follows:
General HRA Executive Director Activities - $7,913.79 charged to general
administration
Roseville Home & Garden Fair Administration – $146.25 charged against home &
garden fair revenues
4.0 Staff Recommended Action
Staff is recommending the approval, by consent, of the payment of legal fees in the amount of
$8,258.81 and executive director fees in the amount of $8,060 for services provided from July –
September 2006.
Attached: invoices Prepared by: Cathy Bennett (651-792-7015)
Invoice
DATE
9/19/2006
INVOICE #
425
BILL TO
City of Roseville
Attn: Don Munson
2660 Civic Center Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
Total
24438 Imperial Ct., Forest Lake, MN 55025 - (651) 408-1032 - fax (651) 408-1033
DESCRIPTION QUANTITY RATE AMOUNT
16-Aug-06 0.75 CAG draft recommendations
17-Aug 1.25 Budget report for Council
18-Aug-06 1.75 Budget present ation for Council
21-Aug-06 4 CAG Meeting preparat ion & attend meeting
4.5 Budget presentati on prep and Council Mtg
22-Aug-06 0.25 HSA meeting prepara tion
23-Aug-06 3.25 CAG Mtg Recc with Attorney/RHRA General
24-Aug-06 1.75 HRA minutes
25-Aug-06 0.5 complete HRA minutes & distri bute
0.75 Rental pro gram recommendation and ordinance
modification
28-Aug-06 0.75 HRA general
1.25 revise CAG recommendation & distri bute
31-Aug-06 0.5 RHRA calls/e mails
0.5 HIA /Har Mar Apts phone call Krass Monroe
5-Sep-06 0.75 RHRA calls/email s
5-Sep-06 0.75 Housing Link Draft
6-Sep-06 0.25 Housing Link Draft
0.25 home & garden schedule revised
0.75 Preparation for Vision 2025 meeting
7-Sep-06 1.25 Preparati on for Vision 2025 meeting
0.25 HRA bills, m ail information & review mail
3.25 attend Vision 2025 meeting
8-Sep-06 0.25 forward material s to vision 2025 committee
0.25 distribute ho using link to printer
11-Sep-06 0.25 distri bute HRA agenda
2 attend HCI meeting on rental ho using & CAG recc
12-Sep-06 0.5 CCHT review process with KM
0.25 HRA general
0.25 Rental registration draft o rdinance rev iew w ith attorney
13-Sep-06 1.75 meeting reports
0.25 CCHT discussions
14-Sep-06 3.5 meeting reports
39.75 65.00 2,583.75
Page 1
Invoice
DATE
9/19/2006
INVOICE #
425
BILL TO
City of Roseville
Attn: Don Munson
2660 Civic Center Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
Total
24438 Imperial Ct., Forest Lake, MN 55025 - (651) 408-1032 - fax (651) 408-1033
DESCRIPTION QUANTITY RATE AMOUNT
1 HIA meeting with city
15-Sep 0.25 notices on meeting sent
Page 2
Invoice
DATE
9/19/2006
INVOICE #
425
BILL TO
City of Roseville
Attn: Don Munson
2660 Civic Center Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
Total
24438 Imperial Ct., Forest Lake, MN 55025 - (651) 408-1032 - fax (651) 408-1033
DESCRIPTION QUANTITY RATE AMOUNT
7-Sep 0.75 review procedures with Patti Sullivan
14-Sep-06 1.5 home & garden meeting
2.25 65.00 146.25
Page 3
$2,730.00
RHRA_ CAG recommendations Hearing (10-17-06) - Page 1 of 2
REQUEST FOR HRA ACTION
Date: 10-17-06
Item No: 7.a.
Staff Approval: Agenda Section:
CB Public Hearing Item Description: Public Hearing Re garding HRA Citizen Advisory Group
Recommendations on Rental Housing in Roseville (HF0036)
1.0 Requested Action:
1.1 Open public hearing to gain public comment regarding the recommendations on rental
housing prepared by the HRA Citizen Advisory Group.
1.2 Upon closure of the public hearing and after RHRA discussion, by motion, adopt and
approve, with RHRA revisions or additions , the Citizen Advisory Group
recommendations on rental housing in Roseville and forward to the Roseville City
Council for consideration of final adoption.
1.3 Adoption by the City Council would include, at a minimum, the following policy and
ordinance changes.
a. Revision to the court citation process
b. Revision to the annual fee resolution
c. Adoption of a rental housing registration ordinance
d. Concurrence with the HRA to include budget resources for
implementation of the CAG recommendations in the 2007 Budget
and provided in the 2007 HRA levy request. Currently, in the 2007
budget, the HRA has included $50,000 for rental housing
implementation, $2,000 for additional marketing and $100,000 for
abatement costs associated with dilapidated single family housing.
2.0 Background:
2.1 The HRA established the Citizen Advisory Group in May 2006 with the specific purpose
of reviewing the draft rental licensing ordinan ce, to study issues associated with rental
properties, and to make recommendations to the RHRA on how it might address areas of
concern.
2.2 The 14-member Citizen Advisory Group held 6 two-hour meetings throughout the
summer. The group reviewed data, heard from codes, building, police and fire staff as
well as reviewed other ordinances and their effectiveness. Over the course of their
meetings, the group agreed that the following are key issues regarding rental housing and
housing codes in general.
RHRA_ CAG recommendations Hearing (10-17-06) - Page 2 of 2
2660 Civic Center Drive, Roseville, MN 55113
651-792-7015
Citizen Advisory Group on Rental Housing
Draft Recommendations
August 21, 2006
The Roseville HRA Citizen Advisory Gr oup on Rental Housing held 6 – 2 hour
meetings. They understood that their charge was to review the draft rental licensing
ordinance, to study issues associated with rental properties, and to make
recommendations to the RHRA on how it might address areas of concern.
The Citizen Advisory Group consisted of 14 members with diverse backgrounds and
experiences with rental housing in Ro seville. The members are as follows.
Category CAG Member
Single Family Rental Property Owner - Non-resident Jim Olson
Duplex, Triplex of Fourplex Owner - resident Cory Schmitt
Residents living next to rental property in Roseville –
single family & multi-family
Kevin Kelly
Ron Bartz
Resident at large Annette Phillips
Warren Anderson
Multi-Family Property Manager Michelle Bonine
Sue Hackett.
Northwestern College representative Mr. Paul Bradley
Northwestern College's Associate Dean of
Student Development
HRA Member Joe Scheunemann or Jeanne Kelsey (team
approach)
Planning Commission Member Dan Roe
Human Rights Commission Member Bob Venters
Multi-Family Housing Association Member Angie Fleming
The group reviewed data, heard from codes, building, police and fire staff as well as
reviewed other ordinances and their effectiven ess, particularly the Burnsville Ordinance.
Over the course of their meetings, the group agreed that the follo wing were key issues
regarding rental housing and housing codes in general.
Lack of accurate data on rental properties
Staff lack of authority to enter properties suspected of overcrowding
Protracted process for resolving complaints
Too many cars and lack of adequate parking
Implementation of the new Pr operty Maintenance Ordinance
Based upon the knowledge and observation re garding existing codes and issues
associated with rental housing, the Citi zen Advisory Group is bringing forth the
following recommendation for the Roseville HRA and City Council.
Recommendation #1 — Strengthen the administrative tic ket tool attached to existing
ordinances by: a) creating and escalating fi ne structure and b) working with Ramsey
County tax collection to add unpaid admini strative tickets as an assessment on the
property tax.
Discussion items:
This will address enforcement of property maintenance violations.
This would not address issues of overc rowding, parking, and interior problems.
Recommendation #2 — City Council take action to a llow code enforcement staff to
initiate a court citation process without a public hearing by the C ity Council, with the
understanding that there would be safeguards in place to prevent abuse of the process.
Discussion item:
This might still seem to complaining citizens like a long time for response, because
there is a 30-day notice period before the City initiates action against the violator.
However, staff experience is that once e xplained, citizens seem to understand and
accept this restriction.
Recommendation #3 — The City implement a mandatory Rental Registration Program.
The program would contain the following characteristics:
a. It will apply to property ow ners who rent buildings w ith 4 units or less. (This
includes: fourplexes, triplexes, dupl exes, and single-family houses.)
b. The program applies to propert y owners who have unrelated boarders where the
intention is that people share costs for re nt and other expenses, such as college
students sharing a 4 bedroom house even if the house is owned by one student or
his/her parent. Single family houses where people are temporary boarders within
the same living unit as th e owner are not included.
c. The registration form will include:
i. Name
ii. Address of property owner
iii. Name and address of local contact if property owner lives out-of-state all
or part of the time
iv. Number of bedrooms (to be cross-refe renced against prope rty tax records)
v. Number of baths (to be cross-refere nced against property tax records)
d. Registration is required when the program is initiated or with change in
ownership.
e. The registration fee will be nominal. (approximately $25)
f. Fees generated from initial implementation will be used to inform property
owners and promote the program, create a da tabase that is compatible with other
databases used for reporting, data entr y, creating an on-lin e registration and
payment page on the City’s website
g. A statement and checkbox to indicate that the registrant agrees to cooperate with
code enforcement inspectors based upon a credible, written complaint in
accordance with current laws that allow la ndlords and codes staff to enter a rental
property upon 24-hour notice or in the event of an emergency.
Recommendation #4 — Suspend further action on the current draft rental licensing
ordinance for two (2) years. This will allow one (1) year for implementation of the rental
registration program and the Property Mainte nance Code and other recommendations and
have at least one full year of accurate data collection. At that time, there should be
adequate data and experience with existing tools to assess the need for a more detailed
rental licensing program where inspection is required or to address other issues as
needed.
Recommendation #5 — Establish an institutional relationship with Northwestern
College and any other interested colleges to create an educationa l program for students
and parents and to develop a process for work ing with the college(s) on complaints that
may involve students.
Recommendation #6 —Allocate RHRA resources to cr eate a comprehensive education
program associated with rental property and c ity codes. The program would address such
topics as the Property Maintenance Code, landl ord and tenant rights and responsibilities,
rental occupancy limits, and resources availabl e to both property owners and renters etc.
The program and materials would be modified to address a range of audiences including
realtors, colleges and college students, citi zens, all property owners, etc. The program
should also include development of an official City pamphlet on the Rental Registration
Program, pertinent codes and regulations, and la ndlords and tenants re sponsibilities. An
investigation should be made in to the feasibility of adding to real estate sale closing
document checkbox indicating that the buyer has received and read the City information
regarding existing maintenance c odes and rental registration.
Recommendation #7 — The RHRA should create a line item in its budget for a
revolving abatement fund that could be used by the City to make emergency repairs that
would be billed to the property owner or certified on the property taxes.
Recommendation #8 — The Planning Commission or another appropriate body should
take up issues related to parking becaus e these are largely zoning matters and are
complex and citywide in nature and outside the scope of this Committee.
Discussion Item:
The RHRA should consider cost-sharing the expense of computer software and data
entry so data about parking complaints could be rolled into the review of the
proposed rental registration program in two years.
Recommendation #9 —The HRA and Committee expect clear and accurate performance
data at the end of the 2-year period. To do so, the Community Development Department
might need resources and/or internal administ rative policies that improve data collection
and analysis across departmental lines.
Conclusion:
Members of the Citizen Advisory Group have expressed their support for the
recommendations. The members are thankful for the respect of each member of the
group throughout the process and appreciate a ll the city staff and citizens who offered
comment and support to the Committee during its work.
Many members felt that the process was very positive and had changed original positions
and attitudes that they held at the firs t meeting. The CAG appreciated that multiple
perspectives were engaged in genuine a nd respectful dialogue and that by working
together they had been able to come to a place of understand and compromise that met
everyone’s needs. Everyone agreed it had been a respectful and rewa rding experience and
made them proud of the City and how the process had been designed and carried out.
Cathy Bennett
T hanks Dan for the Rental property information.
A s a live-in owner of a duplex in Rose ville, I am absolute ly opposed to any
government intervention in my business property. Of the three city options
you have mentioned herein, the first se ems that it might be a reasonable
approach to the problem if indeed there is a problem at all. I attended the
first meeting with the HRA in which I requested specific numbers and cases
which had been reported to the city or the city was aware of. To this date
that I am aware of or have seen any documentation of any offenses much less
those of small rental properties which I maintain are not problem properties
in Roseville. I believe that the city al ready has or can create an ordinance
that would adequately address problems that might crop up with a few rental
properties without introducing any inspections that would infringe on
peoples rights to privacy in their ho mes, rental or otherwise. I believe
that renters have sufficient rights with the State and county to address
problems or deficiencies that arise in their properties and any intrusion of
the city into these homes is unwarrant ed and abusive of their privacy. I
especially want to emphasize that the small rental properties and especially
those in which the owner lives are not the problem properties and should not
be included in any city legislation of any kind. I am also opposed to any
fees that might be imposed on any rental property since that only raises the
cost of such rental properties and ulti mately ads to the cost of the rental
units and to the rent to those seeking to find reasonably priced rental
property. In the absence of any numbers or facts from the city it is hard to
j ustify any action a g ainst all rental properties when only a few mi g ht pose
a problem and can be addressed indivi dually. In short I believe that the
city already has ways to address properties that are in shabby or bad
disrepair or which have obvious parking problems of too many cars. That
seems to be the gist of the complaints that I have heard. I would like to
see the documentation of comp laints that the city has received to be able to
j ud g e the need for any such le g islation.
Dick Houck
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Roe" <daniel.roe@att.net>
T o: "RIF" <roseville-issues@forums.e-democracy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 6:34 PM
Subject: [RIF] Citizen Group Re ntal Housing Recommendations
>
> Recently, the Roseville Housing & Rede velopment Authority (HRA) convened a
> group of citizens and stakeholders to discuss low-density residential
> rental property issues and make re commendations as to possible policy
> changes to address those issues.
>
> This stemmed from neighborhood meetings that the HRA held around the city
> in the last couple of years, wher e residents expressed concerns about
> rental homes in their neighborhoods.
>
> Initially, the HRA proposed a program to license and inspect such
> properties (4-plex and smaller), but, due to resistance largely from
From: Dick Houck [dick@houckads.com]Sent: Wed 9/27/2006 11:35 AM
To: Dan Roe; RIF
Cc:
Subject: Re: [RIF] Citizen Group Rental Housing Recommendations
A ttachments:
Pa g e 1of 3
10/9/2006 htt p s://mail.metro-inet.us/exchan g e/Cath y .Bennett/Inbox/Re:%20 [RIF]%20Citizen%20G r ...
Cathy Bennett
You replied on 9/28/2006 8:26 AM.
Cathy,
Can you send me the names and phone numbers for the HRA members and
also for all the members who sat on that Rental Housing recommendation
committee? Also, I would like the dates the meetings were held, any meeting
minutes taken, and the names of every staff member that attended any
meeting, and the specific meeting dates that they had attended. Also I
would like an itemization of all materials distribu ted to committee members.
Based upon that list, I may ask for copies of certain documents.
T hanks,
John M. Kysylyczyn
3083 Victoria Street, Roseville, MN 55113
E-mail: johnk@usfamily.net
Home office: (651) 484-1384
Cell: (651) 398-5337
K Solutions LLC, owner
Mayor of Roseville, MN 2000-2004
www.Kysylyczyn.com
From: John M. Kysylyczyn [johnk@usfamily.net]Sent: Wed 9/27/2006 6:10 PM
To: Cathy Bennett
Cc:
Subject: information request
A ttachments:
Pa g e 1of 1
10/9/2006 htt p s://mail.metro-inet.us/exchan g e/Cath y .Bennett/Inbox/information%20re q uest.EML?C...
Cathy Bennett
You replied on 10/2/2006 1:20 PM.
Please forward this email to the citizen advisory group (CAG) for inclusion in public comments. Thank you.
To the Citizen Advisory Group:
We are Roseville residents that have resided in the same home for 17 years and enjoy our neighborhood and the community of
Roseville. We own our home and have made numerous im provements to the property and yard over the years.
Two months ago, the home next door was sold and the new owner is currently residing on the property and renting to two or possi ble
three people. (We can not determine for sure). Three people appear to be students.
The change in home ownership and move to rental housing has affected the quality of our neighborhood in several ways:
There are at least four cars in a driveway that was original ly built for one or two cars. The home has a single attached garage and consequently can only accomodate one car. Consequently, the cars are shuffled around every ev ening depending on who is leaving
first in the morning.
The new residents arrive home late in the evening between 9 p.m. and 12 midnight. Each time someone comes home there are at
least two car door slams. Consequently, it is not unusual to hear 8 car door slams between 9 p.m. and midnight disturbing our sleep.
The renters frequently have friends and family over to the home wh ich causes more issues with car traffic late at night. The sa me
holds true for the early morning hours as pe ople are leaving the home at different times.
Unfortunately, the homes were originally built with bedrooms from one property abutting the driveway of the other property. Thi s is
not a major problem with a family with two cars. However, the dynamics change tremendously when the residence has renters.
We strongly support a rental registrati on program in Roseville to enable the ci ty to keep track of the rental property.
We strongly support educatio n of rental property owners to ensure that they are aware of city ordinances.
A t the present time, homes are being purchased and renters are mo ving in with little communicati on with the city. The new home
owners frequently do not educate themselves on the nature of city ordinances and are frequently out of compliance on a number o f
issues including location of trash containe r, parking restrictions at night, parking restrictions following snow fall , licensi ng of dogs etc.
There is no process at the present time to educate and socialize new home owners to the ordinance s in the city of Roseville.
I would recommend that licensed rental properties be educated on t he essential city ordinances to ensure that our community
continues to promote safe, decent and appropriate housing.
The city of Roseville needs to be more proactive about the licens ing and monitoring rental property to ensure that Roseville re mains
a community where families continue to reside and thrive.
Thank you.
Eva and Steve Zorn
zorn@usfamily.net
6516390366
--- USFamily.Net - $8.25/mo! -- Highspeed - $19.99/mo! ---
From: Zorns [zorn@usfamily.net]Sent: Mon 10/2/2006 12:40 PM
To: Cathy Bennett
Cc:
Subject: Rental Housing Recommendations
A ttachments:
Pa g e 1of 1
10/9/2006 htt p s://mail.metro-inet.us/exchan g e/Cath y .Bennett/Inbox/Rental%20Housin g %20Recomm...
Cathy Bennett
Bill Majerus
For review by the Citien Ad visory Group-Rental Housing
The property next door to me at 4 59 South McCarrons is a "poster child" for
why the City of Roseville needs an ordinance or ordinances for point of sale
inspections and point of rental inspecti ons to preserve the housing stock in
Roseville (note copies of corres pondence that follow this note). I have asked
the City Council a number of times, mo st recently in disc ussions with Craig
Klausing by phone and about a year ago when the Roseville City Council had a
forum at the National Guard Armory to elicit citizen comments to initiate
such an ordinance which coul d, and should in my view, be funded by fees
levied against homeowners and property owners that cover the expenses of
program management.
The recommendations outlined in the Roseville HRA HousingLink publication
look promising. I encourage the Roseville HRA to act as soon as possible on
these recommendations and to do so aggr essively (either we have rules or we
don't!).
I would add a provision that some so rt of fire prevention protection
inspection also be made to insure public safety.
Since most homebuyers seek the advice of a paid inspection by a professional
in their purchase contract as a contingency clause why can't this information
be used by the City of Ro seville to at least partially cover costs?
I hope to be able to attend the public hearing on Oct 17th.
Regards,
Diane Hilden
President, Lake McCarrons Neighborhood Association
466 Bayview Drive, Roseville
651-488-3678
dianehilden@comcast.net
From: Diane Hilden [dianehilden@comcast.net]Sent: Mon 10/2/2006 10:08 PM
To: Cathy Bennett
Cc:
Subject: Rental Housing Recommendations/Citizen Advisory Group
A ttachments:
Pa g e 1of 5
10/9/2006 file://C:\DOCUME~1\cath y \LOCALS~1\Tem p \W2XEDY1J.htm
Cathy Bennett
>>> roger hess jr <rogerhessjr@aol.com> 9/29/2006 8:48 AM >>>
i don't think overcrowding of homes is a major cause of deaths in the united states. and, guess what, every
person in the world will die at some time. no matter ho w much government tries to control every aspect of our
lives, we will still die some da y. instead of worrying about overcrowded housing, the people pushing for rental
housing licensing in roseville should first post government agents in grocery stores and restaurants to check
each person's wei g ht and control what they can purchase, since heart disease is a much g reater cause of death
than overcrowding of housing. maybe government agents should be tracking each of us every day to see how
much exercise we get.
i'll bet more people die falling in ba throoms in the united states each ye ar than die from overcrowding in
housing. so, following the rental licens ing people's logic, we should ban ba throoms in houses or at least have
inspection of homes and licensing of homes with bathrooms so that the city can track any problems that occur
in bathrooms.
all of this just points out how silly this whole rental housing license program is. the people proposing it are
looking for a solution to a problem that does not exist. if there was a real problem they could give us solid
statistics.
finally, the whole HRA is just a big scam for the city to be able to raise taxes wi thout having to raise the
general levy. actions speak louder than words. the city ha s shifted some or all of the salaries of long-time city
employees to the HRA and a ma j or portion of the HRA levy in 2006 wa s used as a slush fund for pet pro j ects of
certain members of the city council. there was no reas on to have the HRA levy funds for a rental licensing
program until they knew one would come into existence. the HRA knew they would face fierce opposition to
such a pro g ram, so they knew it would never g o into effect in 2006. the proper way to have handled this would
have been to explore the program in 2006 and if it was ok'd by the council, then levy for the program in 2007
and implement it in 2007. as usual "true in taxation" is fa r from the truth in roseville. the HRA told us last fall
how they were going to spend our tax money, but that is not how they spent it. HRA funds spent on the rosevil
le visioning process should have been spent only on the housing component of the visioning process, not on
other parts.
roger hess jr
More info: http://forums.e -democracy.org/Roseville/contacts/rogerhessjr
- - - - - - - - - - -
T his topic's messa g es may be viewed at:
http://forums.e -democracy.org/topic/102989
For digest or to update bio options (must log-in):
http://forums.e -democracy.org/Roseville/groups/roseville -issues/
E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e -democracy.org/rules
- - - - - - - - - - -
From: Cathy Bennett Sent: Mon 10/9/2006 7:40 PM
To: Cathy Bennett
Cc:
Subject: FW: [RIF] Citizen Group Rental Housing Recommendations
A ttachments:
Pa g e 1of 1
10/9/2006 htt p s://mail.metro-inet.us/exchan g e/Cath y .Bennett/Inbox/FW:%20[RIF]%20Citizen%20G r ...
Cathy Bennett
You forwarded this message on 7/20/2006 4:17 PM.
I live around the corner from a rent al property in Roseville; student
rental. While we haven't had a prob lem with noise, we've been very
concerned about the number of cars parked in front (6-9), the lack of
interest in the yard and garden, and the not-so-gradual deterioration of
the property. I would like to know, first of all, what kind of
regulations are in place to keep su ch properties from bringing down
housing values (and marketability) in the neighborhood, and just when and
how they'll be enforced. Th ank you, Merry Jo Stroot
From: edmjstroot@mcleodusa.net [edmjstroot@mcleodusa.net]Sent: Thu 7/20/2006 4:15 PM
To: Cathy Bennett
Cc:
Subject: rental property regulations
A ttachments:
Pa g e 1of 1
10/11/2006 htt p s://mail.metro-inet.us/exchan g e/Cath y .Bennett/Inbox/rental%20 p ro p ert y %20re g ulatio...
Page 1
Community Development Department
2660 Civic Center Drive Roseville, Mn. 55113
651-792-7071 fax: 651-792-7070
Memo
To: Neal Beets, City Manger
From: Dennis Welsch, Community Development Director
Don Munson, Codes Coordinator
Date: 09/19/05
Re: Ramsey County Co urt Citation Issuance Process
As per the Mayor’s request, here is the comparison of the City’s Land Use Code
Administration process for handlin g land use violations which resu lt in a court citation being
issued – which are less than 2% of all cases.
A. Previous Process - as per City Code Section 407.06 (Prior to 200 2 change in
Council Policy and the Attorney Contract and Co uncil Policy)
1. Notice of violation to pr operty owner giving 14 da ys to correct violation.
2. Second notice of violation to property owner giving an other 14 days to correct
violation. Also a warning is included that failure to comply could result in an
Administrative Ticket ($100).
3. An Administrative Ticket ($100) is issued wi th a note stating that if the violation is
corrected within 7 days the ticket will be cancelled.
4. Codes Coordinator attempts to contact the pr operty owner and re solve the issue.
5. Codes Coordinator discusses the violation with both the Community Development
Director and the City Attorney. If the CDD and the CA agree a citation is appropriate,
and would be the most effective measure to take, a Ramsey Count y Court citation is
written (by the Codes Coordina tor) and mailed to the violat or. Copies are also mailed
to the prosecuting attorney and Ramsey County Court.
Page 2
B. Current Process – Per 407.06 (As per new Ci ty Policy in #6 of Prosecution
Contact of November 18, 2002 –attach ed). The underlined information is the
change created by the new policy.
1. Notice of violation to pr operty owner giving 14 da ys to correct violation.
2. Second notice of violation to property owner giving an other 14 days to correct
violation. Also a warning is included that failure to comply could result in an
Administrative Ticket ($100).
3. An Administrative Ticket ($100) is issued wi th a note stating that if the violation is
corrected within 7 days the ticket will be cancelled.
4. Codes Coordinator attempts to contact the pr operty owner and re solve the issue.
5. Codes Coordinator discusses the violation with both the Community Development
Director and the City Attorney. Both the CDD and the CA must agree a citation is
appropriate, and would be the most effective route to proceed with.
6. The Codes Coordinator writes up a notice to the violator stating that the City’s
intention is to issue a Rams ey County Court Citation. The no tice states that unless the
property owner corrects the viol ation within 30 days (30 days must be given to comply
with notificatio n requirements) the City Council will discuss the matter at a specified
date (set to occur after the 30 day notice requirement). Because this notification will be
part of the Council discussi on, it must be a detailed re port of all previous facts
involving the case (very time c onsuming). The notification is mailed by regular mail,
sent by certified mail and pos ted on the property in-order to comply with notification
requirements.
7. An RCA is written to be pr esented to Administration fo r potential placement on the
Agenda on a specified date (sometimes the ag enda for that meeting date is full, the
date must be changed and the notif ication process must begin afresh).
8. A week before the C ouncil Meeting an insp ection is conduc ted of the property and of
the violation. Most often th e situation has changed in so me significant way. The case
is often reevaluated at this point. The report must be re-written to explain the new
conditions and the RCA mu st be rewritten to refl ect the new conditions.
9. The day of the Council meeting the site is inspected again to see if conditions have
changed and if new information must be presen ted to Council.
10. Staff must be availabl e at the Council Meeti ng to answer questions.
11. If Council agrees that a Ramsey County Court Citati on is appropriate, a Ramsey
County Court Citation is wr itten (by the Codes Coordi nator) and mailed to the
violator. Copies are also mailed to the prosecuting atto rney and Ramsey County Court.
\\metro-inet.us\Roseville\CommDev\Inspections _Permits\Permits\Complaints\City Code Viol ation Information\Citation Process(09190 5).doc
CCHT Request for Funding Recommendation- Page 1 of 4
REQUEST FOR HRA ACTION
Date: 10-17-06
Item No: 8.a.
Director Approval: Agenda Section:
CB Action Item Description: Consider Request for Funding from Central Community Housing Trust for
the Renovation of Har Mar Apartments and Recommendation for a
Housing Tax Increment District for the Project (HF0039)
1.0 Background
1.1 Over the past several months HRA attorney and staff have reviewed and analyzed the
request for funding from Central Community H ousing Trust (CCHT) fo r the renovation and
redevelopment of Har Mar Apartments lo cated at 2225-2265 Snelling Avenue N. In
addition, at the September HRA meeting a subc ommittee of the HRA, which included Chair
Majerus and Dean Maschka, was established to review in more detail the financing for the
project and need for funding.
1.2 The Har Mar Apartments are in need of major renovation and repair. The 40 year old
complex has been experiencing deferred maintenan ce over the years. However, this property
serves a great need for affordable apartment liv ing in the community. Currently the site is
50% vacant which indicates, even with its afford able rents, its condition is not conducive to
a quality living environment.
1.3 CCHT has purchased the 120-unit Har Mar Apartments. In the first phase of the project
to begin in 2007, CCHT plans to renovate the existing units and create 30 two bedroom
units within the existing buildings. This would result in a 17 unit reduction to a total of
103 existing units on the site. As part of a future phase (2008-09), CCHT plans to build
50 units of new housing on the site that would provide 40 two bedroom units and 10 three
bedroom units. This concept will provide a total mixed-income rental housing complex
with affordable workforce units targeting people earning modest wages as well as those
households earning higher wages. CCHT’s goal is to keep the units affordable.
1.4 CCHT is requesting a multitude of public financing components as summarized below:
Funder Rehab Status New
MHFA – tax credits $6,956,000October 2006 $7,181,916
Other MHFA $0Next Year $300,000
HRA Grant $350,000Requested 0
Tax Increment Financing $0Requested $600.000
Ramsey County $550,000Approved $53,776
Metropolitan Council $0Next Year $300,000
MN Green Communities $130,000Approved $0
Corporations/Foundations/Other$23,760Pending $21,032
CCHT Request for Funding Recommendation- Page 2 of 4
2.0 Project Financing Review and Summary
2.1 The HRA Staff and Board subcommittee have review detailed financial information
which is summarized as follows. The project was reviewed individually for each phase
as well as collectively. The more detailed financial information is attached.
a. The Sources (revenues) against the Uses (expenses) is summarized as follows:
Costs: Rehab New
Acquisition $4,374,000 $1,102,000
Construction $5,193,071 $6,978,425
Contingency (5%) $411,046 $277,137
Environmental $63,000 $6,000
Soft Costs $2,501,407 $2,201,471
Total $12,542,524 $10,565,033
Per Unit Cost $121,772 $211,301
Revenues:
Mortgage $4,498,855 $2,108,309
Equity $33,909 $0
Public Sources $8,009,760 $8,456,724
Total $12,542,524 $10,565,033
HRA/TIF %
of Public Sources
4.4% 7.1%
b. The per unit cost on the project is a significant i nvestment in the property. Due to its current
condition, site factors, years of deferred maintena nce, acquisition cost and need to convert units
from one to two bedrooms there is a $121,772 per unit cost to renovate the units. The new
construction cost per unit is over $200,000 which is a factor of the rising costs of materials.
c. The amount of CCHT’s mortgage is a factor of how much public funding they can receive as well
as the amount of property taxes, rents and interest ra tes. If the values per unit are lower, they will
pay a lower tax and can increase their mortgage. On the flip side, if the per unit valuation is
higher, they will pay higher tax and their mortgage ability will decrease. This works the same
with regards to the amount of funding they can recei ve. Currently they are estimating the value of
the renovated units between $70,000 - $80,000 and the new between $90,000-$100,000 per unit
which seem reasonable in this market.
d. CCHT is a non-profit housing developer. This does not mean that they do not collect a developer
fee. The developer fee is necessary to sustai n their business and ensure the longevity of the
company. In addition, the company makes a long-term commitment to their properties. They
provide a substantial amount of care and oversi ght not only of the physical component of the
property but also the social components. They pr ovide on-site services that are not provided in
other typical apartment complexes.
e. The request for HRA funds is needed for the renovati on of the project. It is upfront assistance that
may or may not be recovered. However, a devel opment agreement can be structured so that if
revenues exceed what is expected and/or if costs are reduced, the HRA could recapture some of its
investment.
f. The TIF assistance is needed to support the new de velopment. However, if the new development
does not proceed (either due to market factors or land use decisions) then the tax increment can be
CCHT Request for Funding Recommendation- Page 3 of 4
collected to reimburse the HRA for its initial investment and allow them to reinvest the recaptured
funds for other projects. Even if the new de velopment proceeds and the value increases higher
than projected, the additional increment can be coll ected to reimburse the HRA funds. All of these
factors would be negotiated in a development agreement with CCHT.
3.0 Policy Decisions – Should the HRA support pub lic funding for the project and what is
the public purpose?
3.1 One of the key goals in the Roseville HRA Housing Plan is to:
a. “Preserve existing housing and develop new hous ing in partnership with federal, state
and regional agencies and non-profit community groups and businesses.”
i. This project not only preserves but it also enhances one of the City’s high priority
dilapidated multi-family complexes. With a complete renovation in partnership with
a well respected non-profit housing group, th e property will provide a quality living
environment for some of the lower incom es residents of the community. Affordable
rental housing serves resident that work in lower paying jobs in the community such
as retail and service jobs.
ii. In addition, the project will increase the tax base by over $6.8 million.
iii. The City’s financial participation is 4.4% (rehab) and 7% (new) of the total public
assistance being requested through other stat e, county and regional agencies. Those
sources may be committing as much as 64% (rehab) and 80% (new) in public
assistance. This is a partnership between many public and private entities.
iv. The new affordable housing units will he lp in meeting the Metropolitan Council’s
goals for providing affordable housing. Roseville has not seen the construction of
any new affordable housing for over 12 years. In addition, one of the key purposes
of an HRA is to ensure that there is an adequate and safe supply of affordable
housing in the City.
3.2 Further under the implementation strategies the HRA goals concerning multi family housing under
section 4.1 states:
a. Work with rental property owners to encourag e continuous improvements that contribute to a
quality living environment of its tenants and the sustainability of mixed-use neighborhoods.
i. The Har Mar property is in dire need of improvements and the renovation and
redevelopment proposed will significantly improve the living environment of its
current and future tenants.
b. Develop an Apartment Improvement Program that provides an innovative funding program
to rental property owners to make necessary improvements to aging complexes. Reserve the
Local Development Corporation and other CDBG based funds for the support of the
program. I dentified as a high priority by the HRA.
i. Of the total $350,000 needed for the project, $250,000 would be provided from the
HRA’s restricted funds that are a product of Local Development Corporation and
CDBG dollars.
CCHT Request for Funding Recommendation- Page 4 of 4
4.0 Suggested HRA Action
4.1 The HRA Executive Director recommends the a pproval of funding for the project in the
amount requested that will include $350,000 fo r the rehab and $600,000 in Tax Increment
Financing. These findings are based upon:
a. Financial review and determination that the project does have a funding gap that
supports CCHT’s request for public assistance.
b. The project achieves the HRA goals, outlined in their housing plan, and summarized in
section 3.0 of this report.
c. The amount of upfront assistance may be able to be recaptured by future tax increment on
the project.
d. The project would meet all of the requirements for establishment of a housing tax increment
district as it will serve those with incomes well below 80% of median incomes.
e. The renovation and redevelopment will add an estimated $6.8 million in market value.
f. The project will serve resident who work in the community.
4.2 Therefore, based upon the findings for support outlined in Section 4.1, staff recommends that the
RHRA approve the attached resolution that set fo rth the preliminary approval for HRA funds in the
amount of $350,000 and recommendation for the City Council to consider preliminary approval for
the financing program that would include $600,000 in tax increment financing and to call a public
hearing to establish a tax increment financing district.
a. As noted in the resolution, to accomm odate CCHT’s renovation and redevelopment
schedule, the tax increment district must be approved prior to the issuing of any building
permits for the project. CCHT plans to begin the renovation as soon as possible in the
Spring of 2007. Therefore, we are targeting April of 2007 for the establishment of the
district. The first part of that process is to set a public hearing to consider establishment of a
district.
b. Also mentioned in the resolution is the method to facilitate the TIF district. There are two
options.
i. The City creates the district and pledges th e revenues to the HRA for its program or
ii. The City authorizes the establishment of and HRA district.
Greg D. Johnson
gjohnson@krassmonroe.com
Direct 952.885.5994
James R. Casserly
jcasserly@krassmonroe.com
Direct 952.885.1296
MEMORANDUM
To: Roseville Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Attn: Cathy Bennett
From: Greg D. Johnson, CPA, Senior Public Finance Analyst
James R. Casserly, Esq.
Date: October 3, 2006
Re: Review of Pro Forma
Our File No.11637-7
We have reviewed the pro formas provided by CCHT for the Har Mar Apartments site
redevelopment. The current proposal is to rehab the existing apartment buildings and combine
some of the one bedroom units into two bedroom units. The completed rehabilitation will have
73 one bedroom and 30 two bedroom units. CCHT also proposes to build a new 50-unit
apartment building. Separate pro forma were provided for each development.
Rehab of Existing Apartment Buildings
CCHT is requesting financial assistance from the City of Roseville for rehabbing the
current buildings. Ultimately, the level of City assistance being requested is the
difference between total project expenses less what CCHT is able to raise from other
sources. There are $12.54 million in costs for acquisition, rehab construction, relocation,
developer fee, developer overhead, financing fees and other pre-development costs.
Currently identified revenue sources of $12.19 million include tax credits, first mortgage,
Ramsey County, MN Green Communities and corporations. The difference is the
$350,000 requested from the City/HRA.
The requested level of assistance could be decreased (or increased) based on a number
of factors we are currently reviewing. We are assuming an average market value of
72,900 for the 103 units. If the assessed value were lower, this would have the impact of
reducing real estate taxes. This leads to an increase in the net operating income of the
project and allows CCHT to obtain a higher first mortgage on the property. If all the
other funding sources came through at the level anticipated and property taxes were
lower than projected by CCHT, it is possible that City assistance could be reduced for
the rehab.
CCHT does not disagree with this analysis but does have other concerns that require
City assistance. They do not have full commitment on all their other funds, and some
may not come through. CCHT also suggests that other public entities providing
assistance want local money in the project. Other factors that impact their need for
assistance are interest rates and rising construction costs.
Construction of New Apartment Building
The level of assistance requested for the new apartment building is determined in the
same way as the existing apartment project. There are new construction costs,
developer fee, developer overhead and pre-de velopment costs totaling $10.57 million.
Currently identified revenue sources of $9.97 million include tax credits, first mortgage,
Ramsey County, Met Council, MHFA funding and corporations. The difference of
$600,000 is being requested from the City in the form of tax increment assistance.
As with the existing apartment project, the impact of lower market values could lower the
property taxes and subsequently lower the requested amount of assistance. Without a
significant change in the assumptions, the new apartment development will require some
City assistance.
Conclusion
A better understanding of the costs and issues discussed above will help determine the
appropriate level of assistance. We would like further information on how the tax
increment is to be used in the project since TIF does not easily generate up front dollars
for current expenses. This is a very exciting project and we look forward to helping make
this work for CCHT and the City. Please call if you have any questions.
G:\WPDATA\R\ROSEVILLE HRA 116 37\04\COR\BENNETT GDJ 3.DOC
Redevelopment of the Har Mar Apartments Site
General Site Information
Estimated Land Square Footage235,224Units in Rehabilitation Phase103
Existing Buildings - Footprint27,630Units in New Construction Phase50
New Building - Foot Print20,000Total Housing Units when complete153
Land Coverage Ratio20.25%Total Acres5.25
Existing Housing Units120
Housing Units
Unit DetailRehabilitationNew ConstructionTotal
One BR6 6
Rent Level $400
One BR30 30
Rent Level $635
One BR37 37
Rent Level $750
Two BR1820 38
Rent Level $800$800
Two BR1220 32
Rent Level $950$970
Three BR 6 6
Rent Level $950
Three BR 4 4
Rent Level $1,050
*Affordability calculated based on 1.5 persons per each bedroom within a unit. Income and wages based on full time worker.
Estimated Project CostsRehabilitation New ConstructionTotal Amoun t
Purchase/Acquisition/Real Estate:
Hard Construction:
Construction Contingency
Environmental - (investigation, remediation, etc)
Fees (Architect, Engineering, Legal, Financing, Title, Consultants,Etc.)
Other Soft Costs (ConstInterest, Holding, Marketing, Taxes, Etc.)
Initial Operating & Replacement Reserves
Total
Per Unit Costs
Proposed Sources (Estimated)Rehabilitation New Construction
Estimated Mortgage Amount
Developer Equity/Deferred Dev Fees$33,909$33,909
Tax Credit Equity
City of Roseville
Tax Increment Financing
HRA Funds
Ramsey County
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency
Metropolitan Council
MN Green Communities
Corporations/Businesses
Foundations/Other
Total Proposed Sources
Gap or Surplus
$14.16
$19.63
$11.78
$4.25
$7.08
$8.50
$8.50
$10.20
$9.81
$23.55
These units would be affordable for families
earning no more than:
$16.99
$17.00
$20.39
$35,350
Annual Hourly Wage 1 Hourly Wage
$8.50 $17,670
$29,450
$35,340
$4,374,000
$42,420
$40,825
$48,990
$1,102,000$5,476,000
$5,193,071$6,978,425$12,171,496
$411,046$277,137$688,183
$63,000$6,000$69,000
$1,764,407$1,868,471$3,632,878
$381,000$133,000$514,000
$356,000$200,000$556,000
$12,542,524$10,565,033$23,107,557
$121,772$211,301
Total Amount Per Unit
$222
$4,498,855$2,108,309$6,607,165$43,184
$6,956,000$7,181,916$14,137,916$92,405
$0$600,000$600,000$3,922
$350,000$0$350,000$2,288
$550,000$53,776$603,776$3,946
$0$300,000$300,000$1,961
$0$300,000$300,000$1,961
$130,000$0$130,000$850
$23,760$11,032$34,792$227
$23,107,558$151,030
$0$10,000$10,000$65
$12,542,524$10,565,034
$0$0
Page 1
CITY OF ROSEVILLE HR A
HAR MAR APARTMENTS - TAX INCREMENT ANALYSI S
A SSUMPTIONS
EXISTING
RENTAL A REA OF PARCE L 2006 EMV / PAY 200 7
ORIGINAL MARKET VALUE S PIN #OWNERUNITS(Acres)(Sq. Feet)LandBuildingTotal
2225-2265 Snelling Ave N09-29-23-44-0001CCHT 120 5.40 235,224 x2,265,1002,984,9005,250,000 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals1205.40235,2242,265,100 $ 2,984,900 $ 5,250,000 $
9.63per sq. ft.43,750
TOTAL ORIGINAL TAX CAPACIT Y Per Uni t
TypeUnits OMV Class Rate OTC39,962
Rehab - Class 4d 103 4,662,752@0.75%=34,971
New - Class 4d 40 469,799@0.75%=3,523
New - Market Rate 10 117,450@1.25%1,468 ------------------------------------------------------
1535,250,00039,962
REHAB
Construction Started2007
Construction Completed2008
Estimated Market Value1BR2009 73 units @ 70,000 per unit =5,110,000
2BR 30 units @ 80,000 per unit =2,400,0007,510,000
Estimated Tax Capacity200973units @525per unit =38,325
30units @600per unit =18,00056,325
Estimated Property Taxes201073units @618per unit =45,085
30units @706per unit =21,17566,260
Estimated Tax Increment201073units @195per unit =14,251
30units @195per unit 5,85720,107
NE W
Construction Started2008
Construction Completed2009
Estimated Market Value2BR2010 40 units @ 90,000 per unit =3,600,000
3BR 10 units @ 100,000 per unit =1,000,0004,600,000
Estimated Tax Capacity201040units @675per unit =27,000
10units @1,250per unit =12,50039,500
Estimated Property Taxes201140units @794per unit =31,762
10units @1,355per unit =13,54845,310
Estimated Tax Increment201140units @650per unit =25,995
10units @650per unit 6,49932,493
TOTAL
Estimated Market Value153units @79,150per unit =12,110,000
Estimated Tax Capacity153units @626per unit =95,825
Estimated Property Taxes153units @729per unit =111,570
Estimated Tax Increment153units @344per unit =52,601
LOCAL TAX RAT E
FOR PROPERTY TAX CALCULATION 0.94501 x tax capacity
MARKET VALUE REFERENDUM TAX RAT E 0.17353%x market value
ADMIN FEES 10.00%
STATE AUDITOR FE E 0.360%
INFLATIO N (after 2 yrs of full value)2.50%
PRESENT VALUE RAT E 6/1/20086.50%
COVERAGE 120.00%
NEW
REHABNE W MARKET
SUMMARYCLASS 4DCLASS 4DRATETOTAL
Acres4.001.120.285.40
Sq. Ft.174,24048,78712,197235,224
Units10340101530
Coverage (units per acre)25.835.735.728.3
Original Market Value4,662,752469,799117,4505,250,0000
Original Tax Capacity34,9713,5231,46839,9620
New Market Value7,510,0003,600,0001,000,00012,110,0000
New Tax Capacity56,32527,00012,50095,8250
Total Property Taxes66,26031,76213,548111,5700
Property Taxes as a % of Mkt Valu0.88%0.88%1.35%0.92%
Captured Tax Capacity21,35423,47711,03255,863
Tax Increment - Annual20,10722,10610,38852,6010
% of Total38.2%42.0%19.7%100.0%
Tax Increment- 25 yrs (w/inflation)750,067824,607387,4921,962,1670
Avail. TI - Present Value-90%261,977288,011135,340685,328
Available TI - Rev Bond176,617194,16891,242462,027
Available TI - Rev Note85,36093,84344,098223,301
Har Mar Apartments 2.xlsPrepared by Krass Monroe, P.A.10/13/2006
Page 2 CITY OF ROSEVILLE HR A
HAR MAR APARTMENTS - TAX INCREMENT ANALYSIS
CASH FLOW AND PRESENT VALUE
<---------------ANNUAL -------------> <---------------------------------- SEMI - ANNUAL ------------------------------------------->
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)
OriginalEstimatedCapturedEst. T.I.Less:AvailableCumulative<------ Present Value ------>
TaxTaxTax(d) xAdminTaxAvail. TaxSemi AnnualCumulative
DateCapacityCapacityCapacity 0.94501 FeesIncrementIncrementBalanceBalance
(see assumptions)(c) - (b)- St. Aud. Fe e (e) x(e) - (f)Total of (g)P.V. of (g)Total of (i)
2.50 %Inflation (prev. year)0.360 %10.00 %6.50 %06/01/08
06/01/0639,96239,962000000
12/01/0639,96239,962000000
06/01/0739,96239,9620000000
12/01/0739,96239,9620000000
06/01/0839,96239,9620000000
12/01/0839,96239,9620000000
106/01/0939,96256,3250000000
12/01/0939,96256,3250000000
206/01/1039,96295,82516,3637,7047706,9336,9336,1016,101
12/01/1039,96295,82516,3637,7047706,93313,8675,90912,009
306/01/1139,96295,82555,86326,3002,63023,67037,53719,53731,547
12/01/1139,96295,82555,86326,3002,63023,67061,20718,92250,469
406/01/1239,96298,22155,86326,3002,63023,67084,87818,32768,796
12/01/1239,96298,22155,86326,3002,63023,670108,54817,75086,546
506/01/1339,962100,67658,25827,4282,74324,685133,23317,928104,474
12/01/1339,962100,67658,25827,4282,74324,685157,91917,364121,838
606/01/1439,962103,19360,71428,5842,85825,726183,64517,526139,364
12/01/1439,962103,19360,71428,5842,85825,726209,37116,975156,339
706/01/1539,962105,77363,23129,7692,97726,792236,16317,122173,461
12/01/1539,962105,77363,23129,7692,97726,792262,95616,583190,044
806/01/1639,962108,41765,81130,9843,09827,886290,84116,716206,760
12/01/1639,962108,41765,81130,9843,09827,886318,72716,190222,950
906/01/1739,962111,12868,45532,2293,22329,006347,73316,310239,260
12/01/1739,962111,12868,45532,2293,22329,006376,73815,797255,057
1006/01/1839,962113,90671,16533,5053,35030,154406,89315,906270,963
12/01/1839,962113,90671,16533,5053,35030,154437,04715,405286,368
1106/01/1939,962116,75373,94434,8133,48131,332468,37915,502301,870
12/01/1939,962116,75373,94434,8133,48131,332499,71115,015316,885
1206/01/2039,962119,67276,79136,1543,61532,538532,24915,102331,987
12/01/2039,962119,67276,79136,1543,61532,538564,78714,627346,613
1306/01/2139,962122,66479,71037,5283,75333,775598,56214,705361,318
12/01/2139,962122,66479,71037,5283,75333,775632,33714,242375,560
1406/01/2239,962125,73182,70238,9363,89435,043667,38014,311389,871
12/01/2239,962125,73182,70238,9363,89435,043702,42313,861403,732
1506/01/2339,962128,87485,76840,3804,03836,342738,76513,922417,654
12/01/2339,962128,87485,76840,3804,03836,342775,10713,484431,138
1606/01/2439,962132,09688,91241,8604,18637,674812,78113,538444,676
12/01/2439,962132,09688,91241,8604,18637,674850,45513,112457,788
1706/01/2539,962135,39892,13443,3774,33839,039889,49413,159470,948
12/01/2539,962135,39892,13443,3774,33839,039928,53312,745483,693
1806/01/2639,962138,78395,43644,9324,49340,438968,97212,787496,479
12/01/2639,962138,78395,43644,9324,49340,4381,009,41012,384508,863
1906/01/2739,962142,25398,82146,5254,65341,8731,051,28312,420521,283
12/01/2739,962142,25398,82146,5254,65341,8731,093,15612,029533,312
2006/01/2839,962145,809102,29148,1594,81643,3431,136,49912,059545,371
12/01/2839,962145,809102,29148,1594,81643,3431,179,84111,680557,050
2106/01/2939,962149,454105,84749,8334,98344,8501,224,69111,705568,756
12/01/2939,962149,454105,84749,8334,98344,8501,269,54111,337580,092
2206/01/3039,962153,191109,49251,5495,15546,3941,315,93511,358591,450
12/01/3039,962153,191109,49251,5495,15546,3941,362,33011,001602,451
2306/01/3139,962157,020113,22853,3085,33147,9781,410,30711,018613,469
12/01/3139,962157,020113,22853,3085,33147,9781,458,28510,671624,140
2406/01/3239,962160,946117,05855,1115,51149,6001,507,88510,685634,824
12/01/3239,962160,946117,05855,1115,51149,6001,557,48510,348645,173
2506/01/3339,962164,970120,98456,9605,69651,2641,608,74910,359655,531
12/01/3339,962164,970120,98456,9605,69651,2641,660,01310,033665,564
2606/01/3439,962169,094125,00758,8545,88552,9691,712,98110,040675,604
12/01/3439,962169,094125,00758,8545,88552,9691,765,9509,724685,328
1,962,167196,2171,765,9501,765,950685,328685,328
Har Mar Apartments 2.xlsPrepared by Krass Monroe, P.A.10/13/2006
Page 3
(a)
Date
06/01/06
12/01/06
06/01/07
12/01/07
06/01/08
12/01/08
106/01/09
12/01/09
206/01/10
12/01/10
306/01/11
12/01/11
406/01/12
12/01/12
506/01/13
12/01/13
606/01/14
12/01/14
706/01/15
12/01/15
806/01/16
12/01/16
906/01/17
12/01/17
1006/01/18
12/01/18
1106/01/19
12/01/19
1206/01/20
12/01/20
1306/01/21
12/01/21
1406/01/22
12/01/22
1506/01/23
12/01/23
1606/01/24
12/01/24
1706/01/25
12/01/25
1806/01/26
12/01/26
1906/01/27
12/01/27
2006/01/28
12/01/28
2106/01/29
12/01/29
2206/01/30
12/01/30
2306/01/31
12/01/31
2406/01/32
12/01/32
2506/01/33
12/01/33
2606/01/34
12/01/34
CITY OF ROSEVILLE HR A
HAR MAR APARTMENTS - TAX INCREMENT ANALYSIS
REVENUE BONSD/REVENUE NOTES
(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)(k)
EstimatedEstimatedTax Incr.<------ Present Value ------>RemainingLessTax Incr.<------ Present Value ------>
Tax Incr.Taxfor BondsSemi AnnualCumulativeTax Incr.AdminforSemi AnnualCumulative
for Rev.IncrementCoverageBalanceBalanceAfter RevFeesRevenueBalanceBalance
Bonds 0.00 %(c) /P.V. of (d)Total of (e)BondsNoteP.V. of (i)Total of (j)
100.00 %Inflation120.00 %6.50 %06/01/08(b) - (d)10.00 %(g) - (h)6.50 %06/01/08
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
7,7047,7046,4205,6495,6491,284(770)514452452
7,7047,7046,4205,47111,1201,284(770)514438890
26,30026,30021,91718,09029,2104,383(2,630)1,7531,4472,337
26,30026,30021,91717,52146,7314,383(2,630)1,7531,4023,738
26,30026,30021,91716,96963,7004,383(2,630)1,7531,3585,096
26,30026,30021,91716,43580,1354,383(2,630)1,7531,3156,411
27,42826,30021,91715,91896,0525,511(2,743)2,7682,0118,421
27,42826,30021,91715,417111,4695,511(2,743)2,7681,94710,369
28,58426,30021,91714,931126,4016,667(2,858)3,8092,59512,964
28,58426,30021,91714,461140,8626,667(2,858)3,8092,51315,477
29,76926,30021,91714,006154,8687,852(2,977)4,8753,11618,593
29,76926,30021,91713,565168,4337,852(2,977)4,8753,01821,610
30,98426,30021,91713,138181,5729,067(3,098)5,9693,57825,188
30,98426,30021,91712,725194,2979,067(3,098)5,9693,46528,653
32,22926,30021,91712,324206,62110,312(3,223)7,0893,98632,639
32,22926,30021,91711,936218,55710,312(3,223)7,0893,86136,500
33,50526,30021,91711,561230,11811,588(3,350)8,2374,34540,845
33,50526,30021,91711,197241,31411,588(3,350)8,2374,20845,053
34,81326,30021,91710,844252,15912,896(3,481)9,4154,65849,712
34,81326,30021,91710,503262,66212,896(3,481)9,4154,51254,223
36,15426,30021,91710,172272,83414,237(3,615)10,6214,93059,153
36,15426,30021,9179,852282,68614,237(3,615)10,6214,77463,927
37,52826,30021,9179,542292,22815,611(3,753)11,8585,16369,090
37,52826,30021,9179,242301,47015,611(3,753)11,8585,00074,090
38,93626,30021,9178,951310,42017,019(3,894)13,1265,36079,451
38,93626,30021,9178,669319,08917,019(3,894)13,1265,19284,642
40,38026,30021,9178,396327,48618,463(4,038)14,4255,52690,168
40,38026,30021,9178,132335,61718,463(4,038)14,4255,35295,521
41,86026,30021,9177,876343,49319,943(4,186)15,7575,662101,183
41,86026,30021,9177,628351,12119,943(4,186)15,7575,484106,667
43,37726,30021,9177,388358,50921,460(4,338)17,1225,772112,438
43,37726,30021,9177,155365,66421,460(4,338)17,1225,590118,028
44,93226,30021,9176,930372,59523,015(4,493)18,5215,856123,885
44,93226,30021,9176,712379,30623,015(4,493)18,5215,672129,557
46,52526,30021,9176,501385,80724,608(4,653)19,9565,919135,476
46,52526,30021,9176,296392,10324,608(4,653)19,9565,733141,209
48,15926,30021,9176,098398,20126,242(4,816)21,4265,961147,170
48,15926,30021,9175,906404,10726,242(4,816)21,4265,774152,943
49,83326,30021,9175,720409,82727,916(4,983)22,9335,985158,929
49,83326,30021,9175,540415,36727,916(4,983)22,9335,797164,725
51,54926,30021,9175,366420,73329,632(5,155)24,4775,992170,718
51,54926,30021,9175,197425,92929,632(5,155)24,4775,804176,521
53,30826,30021,9175,033430,96331,391(5,331)26,0615,985182,506
53,30826,30021,9174,875435,83731,391(5,331)26,0615,796188,302
55,11126,30021,9174,721440,55833,194(5,511)27,6835,963194,266
55,11126,30021,9174,573445,13133,194(5,511)27,6835,776200,042
56,96026,30021,9174,429449,56035,043(5,696)29,3475,930205,972
56,96026,30021,9174,289453,84935,043(5,696)29,3475,743211,715
58,85426,30021,9174,154458,00336,937(5,885)31,0525,886217,601
58,85426,30021,9174,024462,02736,937(5,885)31,0525,700223,301
1,962,1671,277,8271,064,856 462,027 462,027897,311(196,217)701,094 223,301 223,301
Har Mar Apartments 2.xlsPrepared by Krass Monroe, P.A.10/13/2006
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. __________________
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING PR ELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR THE
FINANCING PROGRAM TO ASSIST CENTRAL COMMUNITY HOUSING
TRUST WITH THE REHABILITATION OF THE HAR MAR APARTMENTS
AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF NE W AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS; AND
REQUESTING CITY COUNCIL PREL IMINARY APPROVAL FOR THE
FINANCING PROGRAM AND THE CALLI NG OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO
ESTABLISH A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Co mmissioners (the “Co mmissioners”) of the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for t he City of Roseville (t he "Authority") as
follows:
Section 1. Recitals .
1.01 The Authority’s housing goals incl ude the promotion and development of
affordable housing and are enumerated more spec ifically in the Authority’s Housing and
Redevelopment Plan.
1.02 Central Community Housing Trus t (“CCHT”) has as its mission the
rehabilitation, development and m anagement of affordable housing.
Section 2. Findings.
2.01. CCHT has purchased the apartm ents at 2225 through 2265 Snelling Avenue
North known as the Har Mar Apartments (references will be made to the “Har Mar
Apartments” and the “Har Mar Site”).
2.02. There are currently 120 existing apartment unit s. CCHT is planning to
rehabilitate the apartments to 73 one-bedroom and 30 two-bedroom units for a total of 103
rehabilitated apartment units (the “Rehabilitation”).
2.03. The Rehabilitation will be financed by CCHT providing equity through deferred
development fees, contributions from corpor ations and businesses, a grant from the
Minnesota Green Communities, tax credit equi ty, a mortgage and a grant from Ramsey
County. With these revenue sources the pr oject is still not f easible without a $350,000
contribution or investm ent by the Authority.
2.04. From community development blo ck grant repayments and its levy, the
Authority has the resources to provide $350,000 to fund the gap.
2.05. If possible, the Authority would like to recover some of its investment in the
Har Mar Apartment project so that it may assist future projects.
2.06. CCHT is intending to construct 40 two-bedroom units and 10 three-bedroom
units for a total of 50 new rental units on the Har Mar Site (“New Construction”).
2.07. The New Construction would commenc e in the spring of 2008 approximately
one year after the Rehabilitat ion. The New Construction would be financed with a
mortgage, tax credit equity, Ramsey Count y grant, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency
grant, Metropolitan Council grant, corporations/businesses and foundati ons. The revenues
generated by those sources are not sufficient to allow the New Construction to proceed.
2.08. CCHT has a gap of approximatel y $600,000 in the sources needed for the
New Construction and has requested that the Aut hority and the City of Roseville (the “City”)
to establish a tax increment financing district to generate the revenues necessary to allow
the New Construction to proceed.
2.09. The increased market value result ing from the Rehabilitation and the New
Construction should be sufficient to generate the approximately $600,000 which is the
amount needed to fund the gap to allow the New Construction to proceed.
2.10. To generate the necessary tax incr ement, a single tax increment financing
housing district must be established by April 2007 which is prior to the time that any
building permits would be issued for the Rehabilitation.
2.11. As with the Rehabilitat ion, the Authority will cons ider any opportunity to
recover its investment in the New Construc tion so that the Aut hority may continue to
develop and facilitate its programs and plans.
Section 3. Authorization .
3.01 The Authority hereby approves on a preliminary basis the general financing
concept outlined in Section 2 of this Resolution. The Executive Director and the Chairman
of the Authority (the “Officers”) are herby authorized to continue to negotiate with CCHT
and to prepare for the Authority’s considerat ion and approval a redev elopment contract
detailing the terms and conditions for the Aut hority’s assistance in both the Rehabilitation
and the New Construction.
3.02. The Officers are hereby directed to tr ansmit this Resolution to the City and to
seek the City’s approval of t he financing concept. The Officers are further directed to
review with the City the option of creating the ta x increment financing hous ing district either
as a City district, in which the revenues are pledged to the HRA for it s program, or as an
HRA district and to request the City to call for a public hearing on the es tablishment of a tax
increment financing housing district.
Adopted by the Board of the Aut hority this ______ day of ________________, 2006.
Bill Majerus, Chairman
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Cathy Capone Bennett, Executive Director
G:\WPDATA\R\ROSEVILLE HRA 11637\04\DOCS\RES FOR APPROVAL OF FINANCING.DOC
HIA Recommendation (10-17-06) - Page 1 of 5
REQUEST FOR HRA ACTION
Date: 10-17-06
Item No: 8.b.
Staff Approval: Agenda Section:
CB Action Item Description: Recommendation for Establishment of Housing Improvement Area
for Westwood Village I (HF0052)
1.0 Background
1.1 The HRA staff has been working with the Westwood Village Town Home Association
regarding establishment of a Housing Improvement Area (HIA) as a method to assist in
the financing of major exterior improvements needed to the 47-unit town home complex.
1.2 A HIA is a tool available to local units of government provided by MN Statute 429A.11 –
429A.21. The HIA can be created to help fund improvements to common areas within
housing areas that can not otherwise be economically feasible through private financing.
The HIA works similar to a public assessment process with the payback on the cost of the
improvements, plus interest and administration costs, which are added to the taxes of the
owners within the identified area over a period of years.
1.3 Sue Shea, association representative from the Westwood Village I, spoke to the HRA in
August to provide a summary of their needed improvements and inability to finance those
improvements with the association’s existing reserves. Several questions were raised and
answered at the HRA meeting as follows:
Question – How have the other Westwood Village complexes (II, III) been able to
finance their improvements and Westwood Village I can not?
1. Answer by Westwood Village Association Representative - Each Westwood Village
complex has been separate entities since their inception. The only connection/commonality is
the complex names; Westwood 1, 2, or 3 (named by the contractor for the order they were
built). In all fairness it’s not comparing appl es to apples. That’s like asking how Burger
Barn and Burger King could pay for something; but, Burger Hut could not. They are separate
businesses, run differently, and have different issues and financial situations. Westwood
Village I does not know how the others did their financing. Maybe they had a larger reserve
fund making financing less of an issue. Material prices, interest rates and transportation cost
have all risen since the others did their complexes too. In addition, single-board, cedar siding
was a big selling point for the original builder; owners were told when a board goes bad they
could just pop it off and replace it. Since 1969 wh en the complex was built, previous owners
believed what the contractor promised a nd never budgeted for full siding replacement.
Today’s owners are faced with attempting a ma jor restoration without any funds reserved for
this purpose. Preliminary estimates indicate this project will run about $1.2 million dollars
for 47 units. The monthly payments from c onventional/shorter term financing would be
hefty; causing an extreme hardship on most owners. In addition, it is virtually impossible to
the “association” to borrow these funds with normal financing methods.
HIA Recommendation (10-17-06) - Page 2 of 5
Question – Can the fee be split between each unit?
Answer - Each Westwood Village I unit has its ow n property address and PIN number which the
total fee would be evenly split between each unit owner and applied to their taxes as a special
assessment.
Question – How will the City and/or HRA finance the up-front costs of the project?
Consideration - The program is basically a pass-through financing mechanism with virtually no-
risk to the City or taxpayers. The City could loan the HRA funds to finance the program. In
turn, the HRA can designate that the funds be a pplied to the property within the HIA which are
paid back through assessments over a period of year s. There can be an agreement between the
HRA and City to payback the loan with inter est based upon the semi-annual collection of the fee
from the taxes. The City finance staff is worki ng to evaluate the best mechanism to finance the
program in partnership with the HRA.
2.0 Process: Housing Improvement Area
2.1 On September 12, 2006 a petition of the owners within Westwood Village I was received by
Roseville City staff. (attached) The petition includes 39 signatures. Per the statutory
requirements, the area must include 25% of th e owners within the proposed HIA to sign the
petition before it can be considered by the C ity. With 47 total units, Westwood Village I
have been able to collect signatures from 83% of the owners. The petition specifically
requests that the City set a public hearing to consider the adoption of an ordinance
establishment a housing improvement area. Ordinances can only be adopted by the City
Council .
2.2 The following is the proposed process in response to the petition.
a. October 9, 2006 Council Meeting – Completed
i. Accept the petition as adequate in that the required numbers of signatures (at
least 25%) have been obtained.
ii. Set a public hearing to consider establishment of a Housing Improvement
Area (Map attached) consisting of pa rcels encompassing Westwood Village I
for November 13, 2006.
b. November 13, 2006 Council Meeting –
i. Hold public hearing
ii. Consider adoption of an ordinance establishing the HIA
iii. Consider designating the HRA as the implementing entity for the HIA.
2.3 What happens after an adequate petition is filed?
a. The petition is presented to the City Council who determines whether it contains
all the required elements under the law and whether it contains at least the
minimum number of required signatures. If the petition is found to be adequate
and is accepted by the City Council a date for a public hearing is set. – October
9 th meeting.
HIA Recommendation (10-17-06) - Page 3 of 5
b. Prior to the public hearing, the City staff prepares a preliminary listing of the
improvements proposed to be made. This list will require City employees to view
and inspect the property and discuss the problems with owners and/or members of
the association.
c. At the hearing, staff will present its findings and owners will have an opportunity
to present relevant testimony and issues related to the proposed area. The hearing
is intended to assist the City Council in determining the proper boundaries of the
area, the extent of the necessary improvements, and that there are no other
available financing methods.
d. If the City Council makes the required findings of need, it will adopt an ordinance
establishing a Housing Improvement Area and will designate the Housing &
Redevelopment Authority (“HRA”) as the implementing entity. The ordinance
will, among other things, designate the area, establish the improvements to be
made, and determine the basis for the imposition of the fees. Fees may be based
on the tax capacity of each unit, the square footage of each unit or some other
method as determined by the City Council such as per unit basis. Under the State
law, the ordinance takes effect 45 days after adoption. The ordinance must be
adopted within six months of the close of the public hearing.
e. After the ordinance is adopted, the HRA staff will work with the association to
determine through estimates, bids, and similar methods the costs of the
improvements.
f. Once the costs have been determined to the extent possible a second public
hearing is held by the HRA at which time the owners may discuss the proposed
fees in general, or they may question the fee proposed to be imposed against their
individual unit. Within six months of the closing of this public hearing, the HRA
will adopt a resolution imposing the fee. This fee may not exceed the amount
stated in the hearing notice, but it may be less. The fees to be imposed are to be
at a rate, term or amount sufficient to produce revenues required to make the
improvements. The resolution takes effect 45 days after it is adopted. The fees
will include an administrative charge and will be collected along with property
taxes for the number of years established in the resolution. The fee may,
however, be prepaid in full to avoid the payment of interest.
3.0 Does Establishment of a Housing Impr ovement Area for large Multi-Family
Renovation Meet the RHRA’s Housing Plan Goals & Objectives?
3.1 One of the key goals in the Roseville HRA Housing Plan is to:
a. “Preserve existing housing and develop new hous ing in partnership with federal, state
and regional agencies and non-profit community groups and businesses.”
HIA Recommendation (10-17-06) - Page 4 of 5
3.2 Further, section 4.7 of the housing plan specifically re fers to the creation of HIA as a tool to achieve
the City’s housing goals:
a. “Evaluate the establishment of Housing Improvement Districts to address ownership multi-
family improvements – (Town home and Condo). Work with the town homes and
condominiums in Roseville that were built in the 1970’s and are aging.” Identified as a high
priority of the HRA.
b. With over 1,700 units, many of which were c onstructed over 30 years ago, these are one of
the most affordable housing types in the co mmunity. The findings of the Roseville HRA’s
multi-family study indicate that those older units include a majority of people over the age of
55. Many of these town home/condo associations have not set aside adequate home owners
association dues to cover the escalating construc tion costs over the years. Therefore, the
funding of large association improvements are either delayed or increases the monthly
payment to a level that many seniors or lower income individuals can not afford.
c. The City and HRA can provide a financing mechanism through a housing service district to
help spread the costs of improvements over a longer period of time at lower interest rates.
This method is similar to a special assessment procedure. Housing Improvement Districts
initiated by the HRA at the request of a town home/condo association requires up front
capital which would be paid back, w ith interest over a 15-20 year term.
3.3 The MN State Legislature created this program for the purposes of assisting older complexes to
finance major improvements so that there would be less of a financial burden on the residents. When
these older complexes were constructed, they were not required to collect adequate reserves for future
capital improvements. Nor did they anticipate properl y the need to collect additional funds for larger
project improvements. Newer town home complexes have learned from the past and organizing legal
documents require that a certain percentage of reserves be held in anticipation of large capital
improvements. Older complexes are still trying to catch up. Part of the process for a HIA requires
that a financial plan be completed by the association so that future fund balan ces will be available for
large capital projects.
3.4 What may occur if a HIA is not created for Westwood Village I?
a. Improvements will not be completed and there will be further deterioration to the
complex and the neighborhood.
b. If the complex is force to privately finan ce owners who can not finance may be forced
to sell
4.0 Suggested HRA Action:
4.1 By motion , support the establishment of a Housing Improvement Area for
Westwood Village I which achieves the housing goals in the HRA Housing Plan as
outlined in sections 3.1 and 3.2 of this report and contingent upon the following
public purpose requirements being achieved.
4.1.1 There are inadequate association reserves to pay for the improvements
4.1.2 The complex includes a majority of th e owners (51%) with incomes at or
below 120% of median income.
4.1.3 The improvements are a necessary and a required maintenance item that if
not completed will begin to deteriorate the livability of the units.
HIA Recommendation (10-17-06) - Page 5 of 5
4.2 By motion , recommend to the City Council that if an ordinance is adopted creating a
Housing Improvement Area, that they designate the HRA to administer the program
only if they are provided with the adequate resources, through an internal loan, to
finance a the improvements.
Prepared by: Cathy Bennett (792-7015)
Attachments: Map, HIA Summary
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
A
r
e
a
#
1
DI
S
C
L
A
I
M
E
R
:
T
h
i
s
m
a
p
i
s
n
e
i
t
h
e
r
a
l
e
g
a
l
l
y
r
e
c
o
r
d
e
d
m
a
p
n
o
r
a
s
u
r
v
e
y
a
n
d
i
s
n
o
t
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
t
o
b
e
u
s
e
d
a
s
o
n
e
.
T
h
i
s
m
a
p
i
s
a
c
o
m
p
i
l
at
i
o
n
o
f
r
e
c
o
r
d
s
,
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
d
a
t
a
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
i
n
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
c
i
t
y
,
c
o
u
n
t
y
,
s
t
a
t
e
a
n
d
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
a
r
e
a
s
h
o
w
n
,
a
n
d
i
s
t
o
b
e
u
s
e
d
fo
r
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
o
n
l
y
.
SO
U
R
C
E
S
:
C
i
t
y
o
f
R
o
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
a
n
d
R
a
m
s
e
y
C
o
u
n
t
y
(
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
7
,
2
0
0
6
)
,
T
h
e
L
a
w
r
e
n
c
e
G
r
o
u
p
;
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
7
,
2
0
0
6
f
o
r
C
i
t
y
o
f
R
o
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
d
a
ta
,
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
7
,
2
0
0
6
f
o
r
C
o
u
n
t
y
p
a
r
c
e
l
a
n
d
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
r
e
c
o
r
d
s
d
a
t
a
,
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
0
6
Discussion of Fee Policy - Page 1 of 2
Request for HRA Discussion
Date: 10-17-06
Item No: 9.a.
Director Approval: Agenda Section:
CB Discussion
Item Description: Discuss Options for Reim bursement of Fees Associated with the
Review of Funding Options for Private and Non-Profit Housing
Projects. (HF0041)
1.1 The HRA requested discussion regarding methods to secure reimbursement of fees
associated with the review of funding reque sts associated from private and non-profit
housing projects. The following provides a fr amework for that discussion as well as
some possible options to review in the future.
1.0 Issue:
2.1 In the last year, the HRA has been in the process of reviewing two projects that are
requesting the HRA’s participation and support to promote and facilitate housing
renovation for large multi-family complexes. The support and facilitation of this type of
renovation is a key goal of the HRA as part of their Housing Plan. Both issues require
the review of state legislative powers as well as financial analysis that is beyond the
scope of staff. This has generated outside legal fees from the HRA attorney’s office
Krass Monroe.
2.2 The analysis and review of the projects is with no guarantee that the projects will be
approved in the future. Therefore, there is a risk that those fees may become part of the
cost of doing business. However, if the projects were approved, the HRA would be able
to recover all of their costs associated with the front end review of the projects.
2.3 There currently is no HRA policy to recover preliminary costs for doing business
evaluation of projects.
2.0 Possible Options:
3.1 Each community deals with these preliminary costs differently based upon their specific
goals and strategies to promote housing renovation and redevelopment. If a community
wants to be a partner and promote housing renovation and redevelopment, there is a cost
of business to get that project to move forward. However, if a community wants to be a
reviewer and facilitator in processing requests, than all up front costs should be borne by
the requester. The HRA needs to consider what they want their role in the process to
be and should consider what their goal and mission is.
Discussion of Fee Policy - Page 2 of 2
3.2 A review or survey of how other HRA’s or development agencies handle up front costs
can be collected. Staff can talk about some of the methods they have seen in dealing with
this situation.
3.3 Based upon that data, the HRA can review and understand the best method and policy
regarding current and future projects. However, discussion should focus around the
HRA’s core mission and goals first before a policy is prepared and distributed.
Prepared by: Cathy Bennett (651-792-7015)
HRA Meeting
10-17-06
Item 9.b.
The following was provided as a summary and status of the Vision 2025 process for your
information.
1
St
e
e
r
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
Up
d
a
t
e
t
o
t
h
e
P
u
b
l
i
c
11
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
0
6
Vi
s
i
o
n
i
n
g
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
Co
u
n
c
i
l
l
a
u
n
c
h
e
d
i
n
M
a
y
In
c
l
u
s
i
v
e
,
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
t
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
St
e
e
r
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
a
p
p
o
i
n
t
e
d
t
o
o
v
e
r
s
e
e
“I
m
a
g
i
n
e
R
o
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
2
0
2
5
”
Co
n
t
e
n
t
s
t
u
d
i
e
s
l
e
d
b
y
S
u
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
Fi
n
i
s
h
e
d
b
y
e
n
d
o
f
2
0
0
6
St
e
e
r
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
Ap
p
o
i
n
t
e
d
b
y
C
o
u
n
c
il
t
o
g
u
i
d
e
a
n
d
ov
e
r
s
e
e
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
:
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
s
p
o
s
t
e
d
,
o
p
e
n
An
n
B
e
r
r
y
,
St
e
v
e
B
u
r
w
e
l
l
,
Li
s
a
E
d
s
t
r
o
m
,
Ka
r
l
K
e
e
l
,
Bi
l
l
M
a
j
e
r
u
s
,
Ji
m
M
u
l
d
e
r
,
Ma
r
k
T
r
a
y
n
o
r
Br
a
i
n
s
t
o
r
m
i
n
g
S
e
s
s
i
o
n
s
Pu
r
p
o
s
e
:
I
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
k
e
y
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
i
s
s
u
e
s
;
re
c
r
u
i
t
S
u
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
s
e
s
s
i
o
n
s
i
n
l
a
t
e
J
u
n
e
Sp
e
c
i
a
l
s
e
s
s
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
e
x
t
e
r
n
a
l
a
n
d
un
d
e
r
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
s
t
a
k
eh
o
l
d
e
r
s
(
o
n
g
o
i
n
g
)
Re
s
u
l
t
s
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
e
d
an
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
t
o
Su
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
2
Su
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
I
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
a
n
d
e
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
l
i
f
e
a
n
d
c
i
v
i
c
e
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Li
f
e
-
c
y
c
l
e
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
,
e
du
c
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
h
e
a
l
t
h
Op
e
n
s
p
a
c
e
a
n
d
r
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
Pu
b
l
i
c
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
a
n
d
s
a
f
e
t
y
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
St
e
e
r
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
Ex
p
e
c
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
S
u
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
Th
e
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
o
f
I
m
a
g
i
n
e
Ro
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
2
0
2
5
i
s
t
o
cr
e
a
t
e
a
r
i
c
h
a
n
d
r
o
b
u
s
t
v
i
s
i
o
n
f
o
r
Ro
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
’
s
f
u
t
u
r
e
.
E
a
c
h
S
u
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
w
i
l
l
ne
e
d
t
o
t
h
i
n
k
b
i
g
a
n
d
lo
n
g
t
e
r
m
r
a
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
de
v
e
l
o
p
d
e
t
a
i
l
e
d
p
l
a
n
s
o
r
a
l
i
s
t
o
f
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
…
.
Yo
u
w
i
l
l
n
e
e
d
t
o
b
r
i
n
g
f
o
r
t
h
t
h
o
u
g
h
t
f
u
l
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
v
a
l
u
e
s
a
n
d
f
a
rs
i
g
h
t
e
d
g
o
a
l
s
t
h
a
t
ca
n
b
e
w
o
v
e
n
i
n
t
o
a
v
i
s
i
o
n
t
o
s
e
r
v
e
Ro
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
w
e
l
l
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
2
0
2
5
.
To
d
o
t
h
i
s
,
y
o
u
m
u
s
t
:
Be
g
o
o
d
s
t
e
w
a
r
d
s
o
f
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
,
re
m
e
m
b
e
r
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
y
o
u
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
t
h
e
di
v
e
r
s
e
a
r
r
a
y
o
f
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
v
o
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
pe
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
t
h
a
t
R
o
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
h
a
s
t
o
o
f
f
e
r
–
no
t
j
u
s
t
y
o
u
r
o
w
n
o
p
i
n
i
o
n
s
Li
s
t
e
n
c
a
r
e
f
u
l
l
y
t
o
w
h
a
t
e
a
c
h
p
e
r
s
o
n
h
a
s
t
o
sa
y
…
3
Ac
t
i
v
e
l
y
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
e
wh
a
t
y
o
u
a
r
e
d
o
i
n
g
an
d
h
o
w
o
t
h
e
r
s
c
a
n
b
e
h
e
a
r
d
As
a
g
r
o
u
p
,
s
t
r
i
v
e
fo
r
c
o
n
s
e
n
s
u
s
a
n
d
up
h
o
l
d
t
h
e
“
n
o
r
m
s
”
y
o
u
c
r
e
a
t
e
Fo
l
l
o
w
t
h
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
ru
l
e
s
t
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
t
h
a
t
a
l
l
w
o
r
k
i
s
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
t
an
d
i
n
c
l
u
s
i
v
e
Ha
v
e
f
u
n
!
Su
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
S
t
u
d
i
e
s
Mo
s
t
m
e
e
t
e
v
e
r
y
t
w
o
w
e
e
k
s
a
n
d
a
r
e
ho
s
t
i
n
g
t
w
o
p
u
b
l
i
c
i
n
p
u
t
s
e
s
s
i
o
n
s
Th
r
e
e
j
o
i
n
t
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
s
w
i
t
h
S
t
e
e
r
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
Wr
e
s
t
l
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
c
o
m
p
l
e
x
t
o
p
i
c
s
o
f
f
e
r
e
d
b
y
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
o
n
g
o
i
n
g
br
a
i
n
s
t
o
r
m
i
n
g
s
e
s
s
i
o
n
s
,
L
i
s
t
e
n
i
n
g
Se
s
s
i
o
n
s
,
R
o
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
I
s
s
u
e
s
F
o
r
u
m
,
a
n
d
ot
h
e
r
i
n
p
u
t
s
Ro
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
I
s
s
u
e
s
F
o
r
u
m
On
l
i
n
e
,
e
-
m
a
i
l
b
a
s
e
d
,
i
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
f
o
r
u
m
o
p
e
n
t
o
a
l
l
;
n
o
w
1
3
5
!
Op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
t
o
e
-
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
R
o
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
i
s
s
u
e
s
Sa
m
p
l
e
t
o
p
i
c
s
:
Sc
h
o
o
l
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
d
u
m
Bi
k
e
t
r
a
i
l
s
,
g
a
p
s
i
n
n
e
t
w
o
r
k
,
s
a
f
e
t
y
Tw
i
n
L
a
k
e
s
c
o
u
r
t
r
u
l
i
n
g
Im
a
g
i
n
e
R
o
s
e
v
i
l
l
e
2
0
2
5
a
n
n
o
u
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
He
a
r
i
n
g
U
n
d
e
r
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
Vo
i
c
e
s
Fa
m
i
l
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
y
o
u
n
g
c
h
il
d
r
e
n
,
n
e
w
c
o
m
e
r
s
,
no
n
-
n
a
t
i
v
e
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
s
p
e
a
k
e
r
s
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
p
e
o
p
l
e
(
2
)
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
i
n
g
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
,
m
a
j
o
r
in
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
p
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
Yo
u
t
h
(
3
)
Co
n
t
e
n
t
f
e
d
i
n
t
o
S
u
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
t
u
d
i
e
s
4
Up
c
o
m
i
n
g
Se
p
t
2
1
j
o
i
n
t
s
e
s
s
i
o
n
t
o
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
t
e
v
a
l
u
e
s
,
ex
p
l
o
r
e
s
a
m
p
l
e
g
o
al
s
a
n
d
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
Se
c
o
n
d
r
o
u
n
d
o
f
L
i
s
t
e
n
i
n
g
S
e
s
s
i
o
n
s
Wo
r
k
s
h
o
p
s
w
i
t
h
S
C
i
n
O
c
t
/
N
o
v
;
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
b
y
N
o
v
/
D
e
c
Su
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
t
o
s
t
r
u
g
g
l
e
t
o
ke
e
p
a
2
0
-
y
e
a
r
f
o
c
u
s
w
h
i
l
e
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
le
g
i
t
i
m
a
t
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
Th
a
n
k
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
t
o
s
e
r
v
e
!
Qu
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
?
SC
M
e
m
b
e
r
s
A
n
n
B
e
r
r
y
,
S
t
e
v
e
B
u
r
w
e
l
l
,
Li
s
a
E
d
s
t
r
o
m
,
K
a
r
l
K
e
e
l
,
B
i
l
l
M
a
j
e
r
u
s
,
Ji
m
M
u
l
d
e
r
,
M
a
r
k
T
r
a
y
n
o
r
Co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
A
n
n
e
C
a
r
r
o
l
l
o
f
C
a
r
r
o
l
l
,
F
r
a
n
c
k
&
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
AGENDA
Joint Steering Committee/Subcommittee Workshop
21 September 2006, Roseville Maintenance Ce nter, Birch Rooms, 5:30-9:00 p.m.
1. Dinner and Community Values
• Welcome and introductions
• Dinner with Council and depart ment heads/representatives
• Group exercise to articu late community values
< BREAK – thanks to C ouncil members and staff for joining us! >
2. Workshop introduction:
• Review agenda and upco ming work (see below)
• Discuss stages of group development (handout)
3. Subcommittee short presentations; re flections and brief discussion
4. Setting goals and strategies
• Overview (handout)
• Group practice: Sample goals and strategies
<BREAK to divide in to Subcommittees >
5. Setting goals and stra tegies, continued
• Subcommittee practice: Draft goals and strategies (handouts)
• Report out
6. Q&A / Adjourn
____________________________________________________________________________________
Upcoming Activities
• Sept/Oct: Subcommittees invite community input on dr aft goals and strategies at Listening
Sessions
• Oct: Subcommittees finalize dr aft goals and recommendations
• Oct: Steering Committee updates Counc il and public at Council meeting
• Late Oct or early Nov: Steering Committee host s workshop with Subco mmittee co-chairs (or
designees) to consolidate and refine goals and strategies, and draft vi sion within context of
community values and mission
• Nov: Steering Committee hosts 1-2 workshops with Council and staff to continue work on
draft goals, strategies, and vi sion within context of commun ity values and mission (1-2
workshops)
• Late Nov: Steering Committee finalizes recommendations and pr esents to Council
• Dec/Jan: Thank you celebration for Subcomm ittees, Steering Committee, staff, and Council