HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.A. Annexation & Future Land Use Planning General Business 11. A.
StiAKOI'i E
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director
DATE: 01/20/2015
SUBJECT: Annexation & Future Land Use Planning (B)
Action Sought
The City Council is asked to consider seeking a revised orderly annexation
agreement with Jackson Township and taking steps to plan for the future
development of land south of Highway 169 and west of Marystown Rd.
Background
Under Minnesota law there are two basic approaches to annexing land into
municipalities from unincorporated (township) areas. One approach involves the
municipality actively annexing property that abuts it. Under Minnesota law this is
known as "annexation by ordinance." (See Minn.Stat. 414.033 ANNEXATION BY
ORDINANCE) The second approach provides for "orderly annexation" under an
agreement between one or more townships and one or more municipalities. (See
Minn.Stat. 414.035 ORDERLY ANNEXATION IN DESIGNATED
UNINCORPORATED AREAS.)
Annexation by Ordinance:
Minn.Stat. 414.033 sets forth four conditions under which land may be annexed by
ordinance (and without an OAA). These conditions are:
1. The land is owned by the municipality;
2. The land is completely surrounded by land within the municipal limits;
3. The land abuts the municipality and the area to be annexed is 120 acres or
less, and the area to be annexed is not presently served by public wastewater
facilities or public wastewater facilities are not otherwise available, and the
municipality receives a petition for annexation from all the property owners of
the land.
4. The land has been approved by a preliminary plat or final plat for subdivision
to provide residential lots that average 21,780 square feet or less in area and
the land is located within two miles of the municipal limits.
The annexation by ordinance process requires that a public hearing be held and that
the affected township board receive notice of the proposed annexation by certified
mail.
Annexation by OAA:
Orderly Annexation involves a joint agreement between the city(ies) and
township(s). By law an Orderly Annexation Agreement must address a) the
jurisdiction for annexation, b) the process by which notice is served for an
annexation, c) planning for the identified annexation area, and d) tax timing and
obligations.
Within the context of Orderly Annexation, there are two general approaches. The
first (and the one incorporated in the Shakopee/Jackson Township OAA) provides
that property will generally only be annexed on the petition of a property owner.
The second approach identifies the staging of areas to be annexed.
There are a number of advantages to an OAA that expressly addresses the staging
and timing of annexations under the OAA. These include the following;
•The approach provides predictability to both the township and property
owners in the township as to when annexation is likely to take place;
•The predictability and planning may, in fact, have a positive effect on property
values for property owners in the township who may be interested in selling
their land for development; and
•Provides a good basis for the City to plan needed roadway and other
infrastructure investments.
• Staging can result in logical groups of parcels being annexed at the same time,
rather than a patchwork of individual parcels being annexed at the request of
individual land owners.
In the context of the Metropolitan Council's "Thrive MSP 2040" regional plan
these approaches are treated differently. Where an OAA does identify staging areas
and timelines for annexation, the Metropolitan Council treats the area as a future
urban development area. By contrast, in the case of OAAs like Shakopee/Jackson
Township, the Metropolitan Council treats the township area as a permanent rural
area.
It may be beneficial to the township property owners, township and the city to
adopt the staging approach in a new or modified OAA. For property owners, it may
ultimately mean that when they wish to sell their properties they will be more
valuable in the marketplace. For the township, it may affect the taxes that would be
mitigated under a specific annexation. Finally, for the city itself, a staged OAA
would have a significant impact on regional planning for infrastructure in the
identified annexation area, as well as positively impact the ability of the city to plan
for and open up new areas for residential, commercial, and industrial development.
Current OAA between the City of Shakopee and Jackson Township:
The City's current OAA with Jackson Township was signed in the third quarter of
2002. (A copy is attached.) While the OAA is fairly complex there were two basic
principles underlying the agreement. The first was that annexation would take
place on a largely voluntary basis; i.e. when a property owner petitions for their
land to be annexed into Shakopee. The second is that, in the event the City initiates
annexation or by its annexation activity has surrounded properties, it must follow a
very specific process for the annexation (See Sec. 2.9.). The requirements include:
•The City may initiate annexation of no more than 250 acres annually.
•In the event that property has been essentially surrounded by the City, the
Township can request that the isolated property be annexed.
•The Township shall be reimbursed by the City for tax revenues lost due to
annexation, generally for a period of two-years.
In 2014 Ehlers, on behalf of Jackson Township and with the assistance of Scott
County staff completed a fiscal analysis to determine if there is a "tipping point"
financially with additional annexations. In short, the analysis concluded there is not
such a tipping point. A copy of that report is attached for the Council's information.
Land Supply and Master Land Use Planning:
Staff has developed the attached map that shows the existing land within the City
that is available for new residential, commercial, and industrial development. For
the last few years there have been relatively few residential plats, and thus the lot
supply has been very limited (i.e.. one year or less of supply). On the industrial
side, the City has had a great deal of success in securing new projects in the last 2-3
years, and that has resulted in a more limited supply of land for new projects into
the future.
The properties that were annexed from Jackson Township that are west of CR 15
provide the largest opportunity for new development. However, they have remained
vacant since being annexed years ago. Staff is recommending that the City hire a
consultant to complete a master plan for these areas to a) provide a more up-to-date
and market based vision for land in this area, b) serve as a basis for more specific
planning for the extension of sewer, water, roads, and other utilities, c) and serve as
a basis for further discussion between the City and Township officials regarding
annexation.
The reasons for seeking consultant assistance with this study, rather than simply
relying on City staff are that a) consultants typically also do work with developers,
and thus may have a better understanding of the current forces at work in the
market, and b) can bring engineering expertise to the study that will ultimately be
helpful as the City makes investments in infrastructure expansion. Staff has been in
communication with two consulting firms about this kind of study, and it appears
that the costs can range from about $40,000 to $70,000. It appears that such studies
can take from 3 to 6 months to complete. The study can, of course, be undertaken
concurrently with the annexation agreement discussions. Based on previous
experience, the annexation discussions might actually take longer.
Temporary Moratorium
If the City Council decides to move forward with the master land use study, staff
also recommends adoption of an interim ordinance establishing a one year
moratorium on development in the identified area. If the study is completed sooner
than one year, the City Council would be able to lift the moratorium sooner.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council:
a) Direct its Jackson Township Liaisons (Mayor Tabke and Councilor Lehman) and
staff to initiate discussions with the Jackson Township Board with the goal of
developing a revised or new Orderly Annexation Agreement that takes a staged
approach to annexation;
b) Direct staff to prepare and issue a Request for Proposals for the development of a
master land use/concept plan for western Shakopee and adjacent township lands, and
c) Direct staff to prepare an interim ordinance for a moratorium on development in
the areas under study and place it on the agenda for adoption at the February 3,
2015 City Council meeting. (It should be noted that there are no current and
pending land use applications regarding any of the properties under discussion.)
Budget Impact
Of the recommended actions the only one with a direct budgetary impact would be
the master planning project, which is estimated to cost between $40,000 and
$70,000.
Relationship to Vision
These items relate to Goal B: Positively manage the challenges and opportunities
presented by growth, development and change.
Requested Action
If the Council concurs, it is asked to:
a) Direct its Jackson Township Liaisons (Mayor Tabke and Councilor Lehman) and
staff to initiate discussions with the Jackson Township Board with the goal of
developing a revised or new Orderly Annexation Agreement that takes a staged
approach to annexation;
b) Direct staff to prepare and issue a Request for Proposals for the development of a
master land use/concept plan for western Shakopee and adjacent township lands, and
c) Direct staff to prepare an interim ordinance for a moratorium on development in
the areas under study and place it on the agenda for adoption at the February 3,
2015 City Council meeting.
Attachments: Current OAA with Jackson Township
Map of Available Land
Annexation Graphic
Jackson Townships Annexation Analysis
Proposed Master Planning Area
,L767
JOINT RESOLUTION FOR ORDERLY ANNEXATION BETWEEN
THE TOWN OF JACKSON & THE CiTY OF SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee (hereinafter referred to as the "City") and the Township of
Jackson (hereinafter referred to as the"Township"), both located entirely within Scott County in
the State of Minnesota, desire to accommodate growth in the most orderly fashion, and have
agreed that there Is a clear need for cooperative future planning for the land governed by the
two jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee and the Township of Jackson have established a committee
to develop a joint orderly annexation agreement which has extensively discussed, studied, and
evaluated, pertinent issues regarding annexation and planning; and
WHEREAS, the Township Board and City Council have expressed their desire to encourage
future development of land near the City so as to promote the development of municipal
services and urban growth as much as is practical, while encouraging the retention of land In
agricultural use and increasing the longevity of existing rural residential lifestyles; and
WHEREAS,the City of Shakopee and the Township of Jackson are independent local
governing authorities who represent the interests of the geographic areas and their constituents;
and
WHEREAS, it is desired and expressly understood that decisions of said governing authorities,
irrespective of an agreement on a process for orderly annexation, will continue to be made by
each respective authority; and
WHEREAS, a joint orderly annexation agreement is beneficial to both parties from the
standpoint of orderly planning and orderly transition of government within the area proposed to
be annexed, and provides the guidelines under which such annexation shall take place.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, in consideration of the mutual terms and conditions
that follow, the City and Township enter into this Joint Resolution for Orderly Annexation and
that the property herein described may be annexed in the future by the City, and at the time
annexation is proposed, it shall occur, or may be applied for, subject to the following terms and
conditions;
Section i-Administration
1. Minnesota Municipal Board Jurisdiction. Upon approval by the Township Board and the
City Council, this Joint Resolution shall confer jurisdiction upon the Minnesota Municipal
Board, or its designated successor(hereinafter referred to as the "Municipal Board") so
as to accomplish said orderly annexations in accordance with the terms of this Joint
Resolution. This function is currently the responsibility the Office of Strategic and Long
Range Planning, Municipal Boundary Adjustments.
2. Review and Comment by the Municipal Board. The Township and City mutually agree
and state that this Joint Resolution and Agreement sets forth all the conditions for
7/22/2002
Page 1 of 9
• %'1)1 09' 9-1:1-'
it
annexation and that no consideration by the Municipal Board is necessary for individual
annexations which occur in accordance with this agreement. The Board may review and
comment, but shall,within thirty(30) days, order the annexation in accordance with the
terms of this Joint Resolution.
3. No Alteration of Boundaries. The Township and City mutually agree and state that no
alterations by the Municipal Board of the stated boundaries of the area designated for
orderly annexation is appropriate.
4. Authorization. The applicable legislative bodies of the Township and City, as well as the
Executive Director of the Municipal Board, are hereby authorized to carry the terms of
this Joint Resolution into effect.
5. Severability and Repealer. A determination that a provision of this Joint Resolution is
unlawful or unenforceable shall not effect the validity or enforceability of the other
provisions herein.
6. Geographic Limitation for Annexation. All of the land in the Township is subject to
orderly annexation in accordance with this agreement under and pursuant to State
Statute, subject to the provisions contained herein.
7, State Statute. The terms and conditions of this agreement are created as an addition or
complement to the requirements for annexation required by law. The language
contained herein shall in no way be deemed to circumvent or reduce requirements
established by law. If changes to State Statute are enacted during the duration of this
agreement that are more restrictive or otherwise negate the provisions herein,the State
Statute shall rule.
8, Effective Date/Applicability. This Joint Resolution shall be effective upon adoption by the
• legislative bodies of the Township and City and acceptance by the Municipal Board.
This agreement shall be applicable for any annexation petition filed or initiated while the
agreement is in effect, Should this agreement be terminated following the filing of a
petition for annexation, but prior to final action on that annexation by the City, the
provisions of this agreement shall be binding unless otherwise modified by a joint
resolution of both the Township and the City.
9. Annexation by Ordinance. Annexation shall be accomplished according to the terms of
this Joint Resolution and Minn. Stat. § 414.033, subd. 2.
10. Duration of Agreement. This Agreement shall be in force and binding from the effective
date as identified herein, and shall continue to remain in effect until the Township and
City replace or renew this Agreement with an amended joint agreement and resolution
for orderly annexation.
11. Mediation/Arbitration. if a dispute of the terms or conditions of this agreement arises,
the Town and City hereby agree to enter into mediation to attempt to resolve this
dispute. Mediation services shall be provided by a state agency or other third party
representative agreed to by both the Township and the City. If mediation is
unsuccessful, the Township and City hereby agree to enter into binding arbitration to
resolve disputes under this agreement. Mediation and arbitration shall be conducted in
accordance with state statutes.
7/22/2002 Page 2 of 9
12. Amendment and Pre-mature Termination. Both parties reserve the right to initiate an
amendment or revision to this Agreement at any time. However, once in effect, any
amendment or revision to this Agreement shall require a joint resolution approved by
both the Township and the City, as well as acceptance by the Municipal Board. Both
parties reserve the right to initiate the pre-mature termination of this Agreement.
However, termination of this Agreement shall require a joint resolution approved by both
the Township and the City. This Agreement shall terminate immediately upon approval
of both legislative bodies and acceptance by the Municipal Board.
13. Planning and Land Use Control Authority. The Township and City mutually agree and
state that a Joint Board, which shall be known as the Jackson/Shakopee Joint Orderly
Annexation Board, will be established between the Township, City, and Scott County
pursuant to Minn. Stat. §414.0325 concurrently with this Agreement. Upon the
Municipal Board's Order for Annexation, the land use and planning authority of the
annexed territory shall rest with the City.
14. City Development Standards. The Township and City mutually agree and state that there
is an Inherent financial benefit to utilize City development standards within orderly
annexation areas that will readily allow for the future extension of public utilities.
Furthermore, the Township and the City agree to work with Scott County government to
create, support, and develop standards that minimize the amount of infrastructure, and
potential assessment costs, associated with annexation.
15. Joint Notification. Upon receiving or initiating a Petition for annexation,the City shall
send a copy of the petition, resolution, proposed plans, and other relevant information to
the Township. This provision shall be considered in concert with, and not necessarily in
addition to, any required or existing notification procedure maintained by the City or
required by State Statute. `!
16.Joint Planning Meetings. The Township and City mutually agree and state that they will
conduct a minimum of two (2)joint planning meetings in each calendar year. The
purpose of these meetings is for general communication, specifically, to discuss
potential amendments to this Agreement, to discuss specific development proposals or
annexation petitions, obtain feedback on planning studies/capital improvement projects,
or any other related topics. Times for meetings shall be determined jointly by the
Township and City. To initiate a meeting, the legislative body of either the Township or
City shall direct a written request to the legislative body of the other party. At a
minimum, one elected official of each legislative body shall be required to attend the
meeting.
Section II-Initiation of Annexation, Petition
1. Requirements of Section. In addition to any requirements identified by state statute, all
petitions for annexation, or initiation of annexation, shall occur in accordance with the
provisions identified by this section. Where state statute allows for a petition to be filed
or initiated not in conformance with this section of the Agreement, the legislative body of
the City hereby agrees that favorable action will not occur on said petition without the
prior or concurrent amendment of this Agreement in accordance with the provisions
identified herein.
7!22/2002 Page 3 of 9
2. Property Owner Initiated Adjacency Requirements The following standards shall be
used to determine adjacency when a property owner, or combination of multiple property
owners with contiguous property, initiates annexation of property: A property, or
combination of contiguous properties, shall be considered adjacent to the City when fifty
(50) linear feet or more of the subject annexation area boundary is shared with the
boundary of the City,
3. City initiated Annexation Adjacency Requirements The following standards shall be
used to determine adjacency when the City initiates annexation of property:
a) Undeveloped property- Fifty(50) percent contiguous shall be defined as at least
fifty(50) percent of the boundary of the subject property, or combination of
contiguous properties, is adjacent to the City and/or Township limits.
b) Developed property- Completely surrounded shall be defined as one hundred
(100) percent of the boundary of the subject property, or combination of
contiguous properties, is adjacent to the City and/or Township limits.
c) Township Limit- For the purposes of this document, the Township limit shall be
defined as those portions of the outer boundary of the Township, not adjacent to
the City, adjacent to other Townships, or jurisdictional boundaries.
4. Property Owner Petition. Any landowner, or combination of multiple landowners, with
property adjacent to the municipal boundary of the City, may petition the City to annex
their property in accordance with this Agreement.
5. Subdivision Definition. For the purposes of this agreement, a subdivision is defined as
one or more lots platted through the provisions identified within the Scott County
Subdivision Control Ordinance, as from time to time amended, For those lots that pre-
date the Subdivision Control Ordinance, a subdivision shall be considered one or more
parcels of land established by lot and block number descriptions rather than a metes and
bounds property description.
6, Existing Subdivision Petition. A simple majority of land owners within a subdivision
based on the total number of lots, when the subdivision boundary is contiguous to the
municipal boundary of the City, may petition the City to annex the entire subdivision in
accordance with this agreement. In addition, residential developments platted under the
Urban Expansion Reserve provisions of the County Zoning Ordinance may be petitioned
in their entirety by the owner;or owners, of a simple majority of the total property of the
subdivision, including the outlot(s) reserved for future development. A petition to annex
a residential subdivision which developed under the Urban Expansion Reserve Zoning
provisions of the County Zoning Ordinance may not be considered valid unless it
includes all the gross property of the subdivision, including developed/platted lots,
outlot(s), and any public or commonly owned property as applicable, Any existing
subdivision petitioning for annexation in accordance with this provision shall be
considered a petition of.all the representative property owners for the purpose of this
agreement. The separate provisions identified when the City initiates annexation shall
not apply.
7/2212002 Page 4 of 9
7. Initiation of Annexation by City for Undeveloped Property. The City may at anytime,
without a petition of the property owners, annex undeveloped property, or multiple
properties, within,the Township which are at least fifty (50) percent surrounded by the
municipal boundary of the City, based on the perimeter of the entire area to be annexed.
For the purposes of this Agreement, whether or not a property is developed shall be
determined at the time of initiation of the annexation, based on existing conditions or
approved and recorded plans, whichever is more restrictive. A property shall be
considered developed if it meets one of the following criteria:
a) Residential subdivisions/lots with a gross density greater than one (1) dwelling
unit for every five (5) acres of land based on either the number of dwelling units
or lots, whichever is greater. Residential developments platted under the Urban
Expansion Reserve Zoning provisions of the County Zoning Ordinance shall
include the outlot(s) reserved for future development as part of the calculation of
gross density,where applicable.
b) Non-residential development with 1,000 square feet of principal and/or accessory
building coverage per acre or greater.
For the purposes of this Agreement, a dwelling unit shall be defined as a residential
building or portion thereof intended for occupancy by one(1) or more persons with
facilities for living, sleeping, cooking, eating, and restrooms. Motels, hotels, rooming
houses, nursing homes, manufactured home parks, campgrounds, and similar
facilities shall be considered commercial and not residential, Tents, seasonal cabins,
motor homes,travel trailers, and other similar temporary or moveable facilities shall
not be considered a dwelling unit.
Land which is tax exempt, publicly owned, utilized for utility or transportation
purposes, or other similar property shall be considered undeveloped.
8. Initiation of Annexation by City for Developed Property. The City may at any time,
without a petition of the property owners, annex developed property or multiple adjacent
properties within the Township completely surrounded by the municipal boundary of the
City, subject to the following additional conditions:
a) Certified Notice of Intent to Annex-The City shall provide a minimum of one (1)
year notice by certified mail to each property owner within a developed area prior
to initiating annexation. This certified notice shall also be sent to the Township.
This notice shall be considered additional to any requirements established by
state statute. The notice shall include the following information:
1. Improvements—all proposed improvements with an estimated installation
date and approximate assessment cost(if applicable).
2, Benefits—the major proposed services/benefits that are planned to occur
simultaneously with annexation, Benefits suitable for notification shall be
at the discretion of the City, but are intended to include, but not be limited
to, police and fire services, street maintenance, and park system benefits.
3. Tax Rates—the existing City tax rate compared to the existing Township
tax rate. The notice shall also include the estimated date when the new
7/22/2002 Page 5 of 9
tax rate would take effect and first be payable to the City. Although an
individual analysis of each property Is not required, at least one
representative example shall be provided that illustrates a typical before
and after effect between City and Township taxes identified in dollars per
year. The purpose of this provision is to provide general information to
property owners within a proposed annexation area.
4. Timeline for Annexation,—the anticipated schedule for future notice,
public hearing dates, and the ultimate effective date of annexation.
Although individual dates and times need not be identified, the purpose of
this provision is to make residents aware of the general chronology of
annexation in accordance with statute and the provisions of this
Agreement.
b) Public Meeting Required—The City shall conduct a public informational meeting
on the proposed annexation plans within ninety(90) days of the certified notice.
The date,time, location, and purpose of this meeting shall be identified as part of
the certified notice of annexation. The purpose of this meeting is to provide
general information to the public and solicit public input on required Infrastructure
improvements.
c) Effective Date of Annexation—City approval of the Resolution for annexation
shall not be submitted to the Municipal Board earlier than one (1) year from the
date of approval of the Resolution. The effective date of annexation shall be the
date of Municipal Board approval.
d) Assessment Period,- The pay back time on assessments for improvements
associated with annexation shall be for a period not to exceed ten (10)years.
Individual property owners may request the City to consider increasing the
payback time on assessments to a maximum period of twenty(20) years,
however,the consideration shall be guided as follows:
1. Property Owner Initiated Annexafion Approval of any requested
extension is solely in the discretion of the City.
2. City initiated Annexation—Although the City has the right to review and
approve assessment payback times, the burden shall be on the City to
identify valid reasons why an assessment should not be extended at the
request of an individual property owner. To be considered valid,
assessment extension requests shall be made prior to or as part of the
hearing process required for annexation. Any dispute to this provision
shall be governed by the Mediation/Arbitration provision of this
agreement.
ej Public Water and Sewer Service- To reduce pre-mature assessment costs to
developed property, public water and sanitary sewer need only be provided to
developed areas where there is either an existing or eminent health concern
identified by the City, or where the extension of services is part of the
implementation of the City's long range utility plans. At any time, property
owners may also petition the City for the extension of services. At that time, the
City shall prepare a plan/concept outlining how, when, and at what cost services
7/22/2002 Page 6 of 9
the prepared plan/concept
might be provided. The City shall allow for input on th p p p p
prior to proceeding with implementing the request and assessing the cost to
individual property owners. The intent of this provision is to allow property
owners to evaluate the cost/benefit of services where other health concerns or
the implementation of long range plans does not exist.
f) Township Requested Improvements- The Township, on behalf of the proposed
annexation area, may request that specific improvements be installed to address
a specific problem and/or deficiency. To be considered by the City, the Township
shall notify the City of any requested improvements prior to or as part of the first
public hearing, as required by state statute. Any request made after that time
shall not have standing and may be considered solely at the discretion of the
City. If no agreement can be reached regarding the need for the requested
improvements within the annexation area, the annexation may not proceed until
the disputed installation of improvements is resolved in accordance with the
Mediation/Arbitration portion of this Agreement.
Section lil—Municipal Reimbursement
1. Municipal Reimbursement. It is generally recognized that the fiscal planning for any
government entity occurs in the calendar year prior to the actual expenditures.
Whereas, the annexation of property could pose a hardship on the Township having
planned for a certain income that is no longer available upon annexation. To address
this potential hardship, the Township and City mutually agree and state that, pursuant to
state statute, a reimbursement from the City to the Township shall occur for the taxes
collected on land annexed into the City. Reimbursement shall occur as identified herein.
Any and all of the applicable property taxes collected In the area designated for Orderly
Annexation shall remain the property of the Township. Excepting required
reimbursement, upon annexation, any and all property taxes collected from the annexed
properties shall be the property of the City. Reimbursement from the City to the
Township shall occur as follows;
a) Rate/Amount—The City shall reimburse the Township by substantially equal
cash payments for a period of(2)years. The amount of the reimbursement shall
be based on the assessed value of the annexed property as of January 2 of the
year the parcel is annexed. The year the property is annexed shall be
determined by the date of Municipal Board approval.
b) Reimbursement Schedule—The City shall reimburse the Township with the
amount of funds as determined herein. Cash installment payments to the
Township shall be made to the Township sixty (60) days from the date the semi-
annual
tax settlement is received by the City for the proportional amount of taxes
that would have been due the Township without annexation. Installment
payments shall be made until the required amount of funds is paid in full. The
City may at any time choose to reimburse the Township in full and forego all or
the remainder of installment payments.
2. Tax Exempt Property. Where a property is annexed that is publicly owned or is currently
exempt from local property taxes, the exemption shall be maintained and no
reimbursement shall be required from the City to the Township.
7/22/2002 Page 7 of 9
I
t
)
k
I
3, Bonded Improvements. The Township may bond for capital expenditures in accordance 1
with applicable state statutes. However, the Township shall be solely responsible for t
bearing the costs associated with paying back the bond unless a previous agreement is
reached between the Township and the City.
i
Section IV — Miscellaneous Conditions.
t
1. Annual Area Limits. Within any given calendar year, the City shall be limited to a
maximum area it may annex without property owner petitions. The City shall be limited I
to a maximum City-initiated annexation area of two hundred and fifty (250)acres per R
calendar year of developed and undeveloped property combined. For the purposes of
this agreement, publicly owned property, or property currently exempt from local
property taxes, shall not apply or count toward the maximum area limitation. i
2. Township Requested Annexation. Over time, it is likely that pockets or islands of the
Township will be created due to annexation. At which time, the Township may r
determine that it is either a financial burden or undesirable to provide service to specific t
properties. To alleviate the effects of continual annexation and the creation of pockets 1.
and islands, the Township may at anytime require the City to annex properties that are t
completely surrounded by the City, as defined within this Agreement. Annexation 1
requested by the Township is subject to the following:
a) The Township shall notify the City of this request by certified mail Identifying all
properties requested to be annexed.
b) The City shall have a period of one(1)year from the date of notification to initiate
the annexation of the properties associated with the request.
c) No reimbursement shall be required from the City to the Township for Township
requested annexation of property.
d) There shall be no size or area limitation placed on Township requested
annexation initiated by the City.
3, Exemption for Court Ordered Extension of Services. The Township and City recognize
that a situation may come to exist that a judicial decision may be made that requires the I-
City to extend water, sewer, or other municipal service to a portion of the Township. If a
legally binding court order exists with no possibility of further disruption on appeal, and
the contract for the extension of services has been completed, the annexation of that
property may be initiated by the City in accordance with the Township requested
annexation provisions of this Agreement in the preceding section, rather than the more {
stringent City initiated provisions. In cases where the order is relative to only a portion of
a residential subdivision, the annexation may include the entire subdivision to facilitate
the extension of services, at the discretion of the City, i
4. Road Maintenance. If land is annexed into the City whereby ownership extends to the
centerline of a Township road, the City shall assume maintenance of said road. r
Page 8 or 9
7/22/2002 r
JACKSON TOWNSHIP
Approved this Azz Leclay of 2a6". , 20 6)A.
By: ,rte ,�, • 91' ; Attested to:
Norbert Theis, Chair Rose Menke, Clerk
Jackson Township
Dated: at> a Dated: 9 .o o,
Approved as to Form: By:
Ade,
James A. Terw.do, ackson Township Attorney
Dated: # 7 2 b' z
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Approved this > — day of r �,.. , 20 o r), by the City of Shakopee.
By: Attested to:
�'"�� � �
William P. Mars, Mayor Mark McNeill, City Administrator
City of Shakopee
Dated: �
-- d vZ Dated: � /6-)t
By: %:-c0 ,'1,t itt . By:
Ju-iiith S. Cox, City Clerk r e, Cit of akopee Attorney
Citof Shakopee James J. Tho .•
Dated: -2 -b Dated: '` '0
ff
7/22/2002 Page 9 of 9
� � w
>
Ct 1 z
O
A
e
rn
.1.- 1111/%., ♦`��..r�,
/ ' '- ''''..,,,, K1 _ PPP,f I --1'' led W"s\ ':.''-'> -1-- ,
F
: \
1 A�,r.f►�W�yr i\,3�� .
■�,r
e a�aI
%p r_is t ♦ r
ma
v T.'', 'cl a a J , l • " ;� x1 I(44`A marc !':I ! ff f trT o
/17 ollif
Mk!
1'€f 7
�II11I na
I
1 1 N "I)ill
.. ,,,
0
'0! :9
O O p E s ` O •l' � c` ■1�
�
4101!
r( „,,1,,,...,, i IV int '
'►IWO. , a, T115...,,,, „„„,
.1 ° .. „,rililli„,A174 e
a A
• _it'Q,) Ar
I 1—ime \•:',7 ''''':,).1:-.:4
, ,„,,,,„,,
,,,,,,,„-
im-- ,„., „i„,,,
1 „ ,• ,,,,, & .,
IN 14111r '' I lib- t 11!„ \ r i 4.--.
n 1
-fin I;� ,,i _/---, ,,,,, I
• !ISO. ,' 111 f'
iv
.
�� �il� ���r1 9 II .W.. litim, ii
r p °
s, , .mss,.., _
�� .I arm',
r`1 "Orkilo I, illrf- 1 EIII,• + +fff�tlJJ
tee %� xrn„„..pro•
/ 'Nl=r I:, -:rS 1 -. t ;i:1/ ,,4 e`I s../ 4�,xr �L G _—__— 5( pØV \a , __itr q k1717T '�} B , ■�n•t° �tfifl111I ' : '. m I iA � . l
J /����Ii1,f',�
t
if
�11 ® �� 1'E pffiln r.y t liter f f. ��nnr'
k� g
�' f �,1 i1 1 r � gllli ►.A�n \ 7.77.------
Il uer � o-Ali ��t r� _ _ � � � f
Eini
arm pn r nIV .qn ... ,le +q 1 4, w YYY �,
li ,;�to J ti o f 11 L r ,r> 1 , 4c s/,,, 4 t �
i � i .,� e(}. �i � Vi s
L 1` k�` FIJI 11111 „ ®1 •Ui� i3 � S5 «a�. �7� �� << `1 ' ■
t�4S��c1�'�1�,r��t�- � ml nn �-. xyR� f Lo ► a 1 a � . ..' ,��' �� �� �7 / � �
Q TVA,”
.� 11-II I �I-iT, ....I' �'y!Ft,„,..,,,,„lb \��.�`3 • e „ ■ —v p i�f�F $ t P:� i�E ffil ' ►►ii R_[ 1 r 1ti1e_ac i "t :„ . w.r,M �� t".,. �►��/
it sp ° � 141,R44,-1 _ �
n
t'1` � t A, 1'I i t1 v., +° c 3 ',,,,,td
II4.I��•�� 1111
,
4 4i �l , i O it p.1,4==� re X7
_ ��-I'A_f it#\: : t \\\ 1 4 ' 4=--"q1-1"uw 4 mmy, nn VI IF_R mill `yam{
''y= '' �T
�-t -'1 jtV�9�A'7 flu Yf 1 r4 f�" � �* ■ u �
412r 5'194 t�l� r ..i. 'P �_ <.. .����I�'�-1 swum
-,6% lit, ,.1, ,-v ,,,,.,,„1.::::::,;,' II ii • 16:511mi
rl{mod 1p i ®®, ■
I Mil
AtiliL ,... ........ ,
,o)
ir ;:.11
"s.grli 1 wig
ibit . 41, 1,Ni %.4,,q4klimil
.....1mi 11,,, A.
47,
\''' "1" 11141114X. rids
Mi,... it, 16, p• 4-04
tiA
— Q al c
-O 4D 1 ca
I— ate- C E j
� U 'E co L
Q VI C
_a al -a al f° a)
-o C Q C ca
c N 1— w- u +J
'E E >- O + @ n
L a"' a1 vl +J
a) C > — ra C O
✓ O _0 O
co O 4-
- (I) L
aJ a-+ al > a CU CC
C C
ela
+� al C
RS • Q m ra
tn * * * * *
Z
0
Z Q
O Z c
Q >
Z • >
Q
W J
Z -1 c
Q
0 4Z
I-
I— — 0 a
W
_ Cu
U v
Q CU
O ...,7,c_
cc a
a ON
,-I-
.+7, N
al
0_ +
0
LA
0 L L O
U •
L Li-)
+-+ 0 C
>, N Ol
_a %-I c I
-o c c-I
al
U 'C n
Z >,
C N tuD
Q O al =
Z U Q
L
goy Z $
Li 4 >` U m,
O _a t -0
al ++ al
Z
a) c + 0
O
L-
0 _0 CI
0 U ca 0
X▪ C C C ca
W CO fa (a
2 J J J d
Z
— Q • • • •
_, ® in
li,
,,,,
Memo
To: Jackson Township Board of Supervisors
From: Bruce Kimmel, Senior Financial Advisor
Date: March 4, 2014
Subject: Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis
Ehlers & Associates has been engaged through the Scott County Planning Department
to assist Jackson Township in evaluating how potential future annexations of Town
parcels into the City of Shakopee may affect the Town's future property tax collections
and overall finances. The Town's objective with this analysis is to gauge the annexation
"tipping point" at which the Town may determine it is no longer financially feasible to
operate as its own unit of local government.
In preparing this fiscal impact analysis, Ehlers:
• Collected Town historical tax levy, tax rate, and operating budget information;
• Collected comparable data for the City of Shakopee and Louisville Township;
• Met with the Town Board to understand its specific annexation concerns;
• Reviewed the Town's existing Orderly Annexation Agreement (OAA) with
Shakopee, which specifies that the City shall reimburse the Town for 2 years of
property taxes lost due to the annexation of Town parcels into the City;
• Met with Shakopee City Staff to discuss Town areas from which it could envision
receiving annexation requests over the next 5-10 years; and
• Worked with Scott County to develop a set of 5 annexation "target areas" with
which to evaluate the potential fiscal impact of future annexation.
Annexation Target Areas
Target Area A includes 199 acres (13 parcels) in the southeast corner of the Township
that are proposed as the site of a new high school in the Shakopee School District. If
the anticipated levy referendum passes this year, annexation could occur as early as
next year. Accordingly, in the cashflow analysis discussed in the next-to-last section of
this report, we assume the Town would lose Target Area A's tax base in 2015.
Target Area B includes 226 acres (7 parcels) in the southeast quadrant of US Highway
169 and County Road 69 that are viewed as a logical area for commercial development.
Although it is impossible to predict when annexation into Shakopee would occur, we
assume the loss of Target Area B in 2016.
www.ehlers-inc,com
all E H L E R S Minnesota phone 651-697-8500 3060 Centre Pointe Drive
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Offices also in Wisconsin and Illinois fax 651-697-8555 Roseville,MN 55113-1122
toll free 800-552-1171
Jackson Township, Minnesota
Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis
March 4, 2014
Page 2
Target Area C includes 256 acres (15 parcels) in the southwest quadrant of US
Highway 169 and County Road 69 that also are viewed as a logical area for commercial
development. For this analysis, we have assumed annexation would occur in 2018.
Target Area D includes 497 acres (15 parcels) on the southernmost edge of the
Township that are viewed as an attractive area for single-family housing development.
We have assumed 2019 as a potential annexation date for this area.
Target Area E includes 439 acres (25 parcels) on the western edge of the Township,
along US Highway 169 that are viewed as a likely area for commercial redevelopment.
We have assumed annexation in 2020, although this may be aggressive given the
existing uses and redevelopment challenges present in the area.
With the exception of Target Area E, all other areas are largely agricultural in current
use. We believe that real estate developers are most likely to target "greenfields" such
as Target Areas A— D for annexation and development, versus already occupied areas
of the Town, due mainly to the lower costs of parcel acquisition and site preparation.
It is critical to note than even though the target areas comprise more than 1,600 acres,
the total tax capacity of the 75 parcels equals just 26.4% of the Town's existing tax base
because of the low tax values on most agricultural and green acres-designated parcels,
as compared to residential and commercial-industrial property.
Fiscal Impact Analysis
Scott County provided Ehlers with parcel identification numbers, acreages, and owner
names for the 75 parcels in the 5 target areas. Ehlers then used this data to look up
taxable market values, net tax capacities, and Town taxes levied against each of these
parcels in Taxes Payable 2013 (Pay 2013).
Taxable %of Total Net Tax %of Gross Town Levy
Area Description Parcels Acres Value Town TMV Capacity Town NTC Dollars
A New High School 13 199 4,421,700 3.9% 40,016 3.4% 4,885
B SE Quadrant 7 226 3,493,600 3.1% 14,352 1.2% 1,752
C SW Quadrant 15 256 5,838,100 5.2% 41,979 3.6% 5,124
D South Residential 15 497 7,496,500 6.7% 36,092 3.1% 4,406
E River Valley 25 439 16,384,800 14.6% 175,439 15.1% 21,415
Totals 75 1,616 37,634,700 33.4% 307,878 26.4% 37,581
For Pay 2013, the Town's net tax capacity (NTC) was $1,164,107 and its NTC-based
tax levy (not including Fiscal Disparities adjustments) was $142,908. The 5 target areas
comprise 26.4% of the Town's net tax capacity and generated $37,581 of its levy dollars
last year. Target Areas A, C, and D each contribute between 3 and 4% of the Town's
tax base, whereas Area B makes up 1.2% and Area E contributes 15.1%.
Jackson Township, Minnesota
Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis
March 4, 2014
Page 3
Net Tax Capacity-Based Levies and Fiscal Disparities
Estimating the fiscal impact of an annexation-driven reduction in in the Town's tax base
is complicated by the fact that the Town's annual levy is generated from two distinct
sources: (a) the Town's net tax capacity (NTC) after its contribution of commercial tax
base to the Fiscal Disparities (FD) pool, and (2) its FD cash distribution.
The Town's core 2013 property tax levy of$142,098 was spread against its taxable
NTC of$1,164,107, resulting in a local NTC rate of 12.207%. The Town's 2013 FD
distribution of$34,252, by contrast, was derived from a complex formula that considers
the Town's market value per capita relative to the rest of the metropolitan area, its tax
rate relative to immediately surrounding communities, and the trend line of each.
As shown in the chart below, the Town is a "net recipient" of Fiscal Disparities tax base,
in that it contributed $232,772 in tax capacity but received $259,253 in distributed tax
capacity. Distributed tax capacity is largely meaningless, however, because the FD
formula does not use this "returned" tax capacity in deciding annual distributions.
In essence, Fiscal Disparities is a black box that generates a FD distribution amount for
each net recipient community. For Pay 2013, the County started with the Town's total
levy of$176,350, subtracted the $34,252 FD distribution to arrive at the $142,098 net
levy, and then spread that net levy against the Town's $1,164,107 net tax capacity to
calculate the 12.207% NTC rate that was levied on all taxable property last year.
Gross Tax Capacity 1,396,879
less FD Contribution (232,772) NTC Rate NTC Levy
Taxable Net Tax Capacity 1,164,107 times 12.207% 142,098
plus FD Distribution 259,253 34,252
Adjusted Taxable NTC 1,423,360 176,350
Looking ahead to possible annexations, we can illustrate how the loss of tax base in a
given Target Area may affect the Town's levy and/or tax rate. With the data available,
however, it is impossible to predict how that same annexation will affect the Town's
Fiscal Disparities distribution. For this reason, we will simply assume a reduction in the
Town's FD distribution in proportion to the loss of tax capacity.
Example — Target Area A: Target Area A contains 3.4% of the Town's taxable NTC.
Assuming the Town's tax rate stays at 12.207% after annexation, the core levy would
drop by roughly $4,900 and the FD distribution would drop by an estimated $1,200, for a
total impact of$6,100. In comparison, the loss of Target Area B would have just 1/3 the
fiscal impact (1.2% of tax base), whereas the annexation of Target Area E would have
more than 4 times the effect (15.1% of tax base).
Jackson Township, Minnesota
Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis
March 4, 2014
Page 4
Example—All Target Areas: If all 5 Target Areas (26.4% of tax base) were annexed at
once and the Town kept its tax rate at 12.207%, the core levy would drop by $37,600
and the FD distribution would drop by $9,000, for a total reduction of$46,600 per year.
Potential Fiscal Responses to Annexations
The Township's existing OAA with the City of Shakopee calls for the City to compensate
the Town for property taxes lost to annexation for 2 years following the parcel transfer.
After that point, the Town's 5 main options would be to:
1.Reduce the annual levy in proportion to the lost tax base, and use fund balances
to make up for the levy funding gap.
2.Levy the same total property tax amount over the reduced tax base. All other
things being equal, this approach would result in an increased net tax capacity
rate and a higher tax burden for the remaining Township property owners.
3.Reduce annual expenditures by the amount of lost property taxes. While some
expenses may be linked directly to areas lost to annexation (e.g. road repairs),
general administration and many other Town expenses are "fixed costs" that will
not drop automatically with a reduction in Town acreage and parcels.
4.Some combination of the above tactics. The Town may find itself revisiting these
options, individually or in combination, after each future annexation.
5.Deorganize the Township and annex all remaining parcels to Louisville Township
and/or the City of Shakopee. In this scenario, the Town would transfer its
assets (e.g. property, equipment, investments) to the acquiring jurisdiction(s).
Note: The following discussion of Options 1 and 2 analyzes the fiscal impact of each
approach in isolation, for Target Area A and then for all Target Areas. For simplicity, we
do not account in this section for annexations phased over time (e.g. 2015 — 2020), or
for OAA payments from the City of Shakopee. These latter two considerations are
added to the cashflow analysis detailed in the next-to-last section of this report.
1. Use Fund Balance: The Town's 2012 and Estimated 2013 fund balances are:
Fund Balances Year-End Projected
2012 2013
General Fund 39,547 10,000
General Savings 334,644 400,000
Road & Bridge Fund 138,804 140,000
Park Fund 6,126 5,000
Town Hall Fund (2,302) (1,000)
Total Fund Balances 516,820 554,000
Jackson Township, Minnesota
Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis
March 4, 2014
Page 5
The Town's 2013 budget for all funds totaled $212,700. A conservative benchmark for
fund balances, especially for smaller communities, is to maintain reserves equal to 1
year of expenditures. The Town has an estimated 2013 fund balance of$554,000.
Target Area A: We tested the 1 year rule of thumb assuming the Town budget would
grow by an average of 5% annually and its fund balance investments would return 1%
annually. With the Target Area A loss of$6,100 as calculated on Page 3, the Town
could cover its levy gap with fund balance for 20 years before reserves dropped below
the 1 year benchmark, and even then it would have roughly $540,000 remaining.
All Target Areas: With the Total Area loss of$46,600, the Town could cover its levy gap
for 6 years before its fund balance dropped below the 1 year benchmark.
2. Raise Tax Rate: The next option is for the Town to increase its tax rate to cover
the levy gap. To be conservative, we froze the Town's remaining tax base — that is, we
assume no future development or value inflation to offset the lost tax base. (Option 1
also assumes a frozen tax base but that does not factor directly into our calculation of
fund balance impacts.) We also assume that property tax classification rates do not
change from their current levels.
Target Area A:With a frozen tax base and no OAA payment assumed, the Town would
need to raise its NTC rate from 12.207% to 12.746% to generate the needed $6,100.
All Target Areas: To generate the lost $46,600, the Town would need to raise its NTC
rate from 12.207% to 17.654%. By means of comparison, the City of Shakopee's and
Louisville Township's 2013 rates were 41.996% and 4.896%, respectively.
3. Reduce Annual Expenditures: The Town's 2012 and 2013 budgets are:
Receipts Actual 2012 Projected 2013
General Fund Current NTC/FD Taxes 125,625 99,972
General Fund All Other Sources 13,563 8,350
Total General Fund Receipts 139,188 108,322
Road & Bridge Fund Current NTC/FD Taxes 57,091 76,378
Road& Bridge Fund All Other Sources 30,956 9,000
Total Road & Bridge Fund Receipts 88,047 85,378
Park Fund Fees 3,000 500
Town Hall Fund Rent 20,496 18,000
Savings Fund Interest Earnings 219 500
Total Revenue 250,950 212,700
Current Taxes & Fiscal Disparities 182,716 176,350
Jackson Township, Minnesota
Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis
March 4, 2014
Page 6
Expenses
General 48,925 58,950
Road & Bridge 47,591 51,700
Fire Protection 48,540 65,000
Parks 10,451 13,000
Town Hall 15,965 24,050
Total Expense 171,472 212,700
Looking at the budget line-items that make up each of the above expense categories, it
appears that the majority of the Town's annual costs would not decrease notably as the
Town's area and population declines with annexation. General Fund is comprised of
essential overhead. Road & Bridge costs would likely drop with fewer lane miles to
plow and repair, but higher fuel and asphalt costs could easily eat up savings from
annexation, especially in an already modest budget. Fire Protection costs would also
likely decrease with the loss of residents and tax base, but we have not reviewed the
Standby Fee contract to estimate precise changes.
And finally, Parks and Town Hall costs are unlikely to change significantly no matter
how small the Town becomes. For these reasons, we do not expect the Town will find
reducing annual expenses to be as potent a fiscal response to annexation as using fund
balances (Option 1) and/or raising the tax rate (Option 2).
Cashflow Analysis of Options 1 and 2
Finally, to provide a multi-year perspective on the estimated fiscal impact of annexation,
we ran Response Options 1 (use fund balance) and 2 (raise tax rate) as cashflows
assuming Target Areas A through E are annexed one at a time in 2015 through 2020,
as noted in the Area descriptions on pages 1 and 2.
Both scenarios assume that 2014 has the same budget, tax rate, and fund balance as
2013. As with the simplified impact calculation above, Scenario 1 assumes the Town
holds its tax rate at 12.207%, earns 1% annually on its fund balances, and increases its
operating budget 5% annually. With these inputs, we estimate a decrease in the
Town's total fund balance from $554,000 in 2014 to $476,063 in 2022. Even so, the
reserves in 2022 are projected to equal 1.5 years of Town operating expenses.
Scenario 2 assumes a frozen tax base with no future growth to offset tax base lost to
annexation. Here, we estimate the Town's NTC rate would increase from 12.207% in
2014 to 15.153% in 2021 due to the loss of Target Areas A through D — an average
annual increase of 3.4% over 7 years. In 2022, however, the end of OAA payments for
the annexation of Area E would push the NTC rate to 17.654%. Nevertheless, a rate
increase from 12.207% to 17.654% over 8 years may be less significant that it appears,
due to economic inflation and the fact that the Town has a low tax impact currently.
Jackson Township, Minnesota
Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis
March 4, 2014
Page 7
Scenario 1: Use Fund Balance
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Current Total NTC 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107
less Area A - (40,016) (40,016) (40,016) (40,016) (40,016) (40,016) (40,016) (40,016)
less Area B - - (14,352) (14,352) (14,352) (14,352) (14,352) (14,352) (14,352)
less Area C - - - - (41,979) (41,979) (41,979) (41,979) (41,979)
less Area D - - - - - (36,092) (36,092) (36,092) (36,092)
less Area E - - - - - - (175,439) (175,439) (175,439)
Total TNTC 1,164,107 1,124,091 1,109,739 1,109,739 1,067,760 1,031,668 856,229 856,229 856,229
times NTC Rate 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207%
Core NTC Levy 142,098 137,213 135,462 135,462 130,337 125,932 104,517 104,517 104,517
Levy Gap - (4,885) (6,636) (6,636) (11,761) (16,166) (37,581) (37,581) (37,581)
Reduction in FD
Distrib. - (1,177) (1,600) (1,600) (2,835) (3,897) (9,059) (9,059) (9,059)
plus OAA-Area A - 4,885 4,885 - - - - - -
plus OAA-Area B - - 1,752 1,752 - - - - -
plus OAA-Area C - - - - 5,124 5,124 - - -
plus OAA-Area D - - - - - 4,406 4,406 - -
plus OAA-Area E - - - - - - 21,415 21,415 -
Net Gap with OAA - (1,177) (1,600) (6,484) (9,471) (10,533) (20,820) (25,225) (46,640)
Est. Surplus after
Net Gap 554,000 558,363 562,347 561,486 557,629 552,672 537,379 517,528 476,063
Est. Budget-5%
Inflation 212,700 223,335 234,502 246,227 258,538 271,465 285,038 299,290 314,255
Surplus/ Budget
Ratio 260% 250% 240% 228% 216% 204% 189% 173% 151%
Jackson Township, Minnesota
Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis
March 4, 2014
Page 8
Scenario 2: Raise Tax Rate
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Current Total NTC 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107 1,164,107
less Area A - (40,016) (40,016) (40,016) (40,016) (40,016) (40,016) (40,016) (40,016)
less Area B - - (14,352) (14,352) (14,352) (14,352) (14,352) (14,352) (14,352)
less Area C - - - - (41,979) (41,979) (41,979) (41,979) (41,979)
less Area D - - - - - (36,092) (36,092) (36,092) (36,092)
less Area E - - - - - - (175,439) (175,439) (175,439)
Total TNTC 1,164,107 1,124,091 1,109,739 1,109,739 1,067,760 1,031,668 856,229 856,229 856,229
times NTC Rate 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207% 12.207%
Core NTC Levy 142,098 137,213 135,462 135,462 130,337 125,932 104,517 104,517 104,517
Levy Gap - (4,885) (6,636) (6,636) (11,761) (16,166) (37,581) (37,581) (37,581)
Reduction in FD
Distrib. - (1,177) (1,600) (1,600) (2,835) (3,897) (9,059) (9,059) (9,059)
plus OAA-Area A - 4,885 4,885 - - - - - -
plus OAA-Area B - - 1,752 1,752 - - - - -
plus OAA-Area C - - - - 5,124 5,124 - - -
plus OAA-Area D - - - - - 4,406 4,406 - -
plus OAA-Area E - - - - - - 21,415 21,415 -
Net Gap with OAA - (1,177) (1,600) (6,484) (9,471) (10,533) (20,820) (25,225) (46,640)
Adjusted NTC Rate 12.207% 12.311% 12.351% 12.791% 13.094% 13.228% 14.638% 15.153% 17.654%
Net Gap with New
NTC Rate - - - - - - - - -
Jackson Township, Minnesota
Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis
March 4, 2014
Page 9
Final Observations
Jackson Township is in a unique situation in that it has a relatively modest operating
budget, a low existing tax rate, and very strong fund balances. This combination gives
the Township with several practical options for managing the fiscal impact of potential
annexations without experiencing near-term or even medium-term financial distress.
If the Township wishes to remain autonomous, our analysis indicates that no anticipated
annexation scenario would present the financial "tipping point"at which it is no longer
financially feasible for the Town to operate as its own unit of local government.
Nevertheless, there are several practical considerations that may lead the Town to a
different conclusion in spite of ongoing financial viability. Major annexations would
mean more scattered parcels and Township roads, lower populations, and less demand
for the essential services the Town currently provides. Even with adequate financial
capacity, the Town could face an existential question if its need to provide grassroots
representation and community service is diminished beyond a certain level.
Please contact me at (651) 697-8572 or bkimmel @ehlers-inc.com with any questions
about this report and the supporting financials. Thank you for the opportunity to be of
assistance to Jackson Township.
Attachments:
• Map and Parcel Data for Target Areas A — E
i
a a .
a is Abr�n�
p . 15 NnU1NVSV3Hd • yap •
u1 ✓R ST a ,Ti • '0- n O n
S
° a ti G z Z 3 i ` MAPLE TFt : o S ,:
K ;33'5 ..' z o 3 J oy a. vv , o `m a ,�
• .O F O �F bW. �Z o
QAV !gvO���r J 15.NIZVa VVS O 15 NIZVaV '1bN pEP' v a
n ,
'^ N�AF1 la - �'.
I.N.-,,,,,,vs ' 4. a S P Q O 7y - ] S c ';
i! z - c, s.is a3lllW w } w 9y _o SRO° ,2 /
P N P
C pp ' S LS 11IMS _ in y & 00 `6,y O 9G� Z @:�::
•S 1S 13SWVa I W O.,. ' Q2- J 3 $k.Pf� o.m kl
!:.,; HOUSE ST w Q s c i y c
O S1S A3l9IS - > ;
• r _ r, 5 Oa lltlNSSaVW `'� S Oa IiVHOSaVW ,S
w S is NOi03"1 A r
S
•.� MARSCµPt .. Ij!ai$ . -. O ci v �e4P
g N"1 N33a0a3R;7-.. Y ., •.. O b
•O - .., O v
W G 6 VIEWO ? 2 Nl 2/C1 3015�,iiLNrtOJ w c O•Q° • c n a' - 2.�O O 1 o v v v H
,u > S • w - - O Y
. .. w S 15 a Od• o v >... - C o W. k o,p�a"i
LL SJ.SV10NV0 : a YONVO NA .6 �-. z W .Qp. cf a �0'm,
t#. fNN - 0 .9 W� v u c W 'L w 2. ,, m� 9 0 <.
4 n .m. a M EW0 , it a ., r< ,�v JQ y?
r s b l- 40 mai o
c O
.X4 71; S1S,13NaVW W ° .� - y,6 °d•
\'---,;;;:, w - - - ¢ .. w �NIW 1S H3aVNONti ,P'�v t,
+x '7a.^w`' .E - , Q w d 61 oa 00 6L Oa OA' ,," —m------:. 6L Oa'OO D 0`w`o
$ � O
. a T S i Q � � .. z W r�,��+ w� 7 hE� � nY'w o 0`"
SO MERV 1lL S N $ Y Q 'iN . Rk..*l
M ai O y;'s '''''*',1'.'C'''.7 a r'::::.,,
'j LEW;SST - s_ EIO HNIl- eR .. l m;7;.l
T
2 4 NOt MES"'T S 3 - co •lg A3N1i H.. W' i ." v`c
o -- o ,, DoT
G P a: S1 S S'15 OOOMIV a Q r a. ,> 1I
' ATW00° O .- T} Y ' f t3•'c '' '' @ :+�` o •'
• 'Q S 15 ail l(ld AV a3d30N S& AV a3d3O 4 ' » I ` F N m in
ry 4 z' ,- p -Q c7 �l HSpr fi , _.
EE•.�. PIERCE S(S ''S 1S ✓a1d 2 w NA' .e,. „ Np■O. • 4A' k " .
• ti "3 N: :.:;41.110116. `a k a ,- _1 t i.- ' ,�
tip a
r„ °
i+ .s..- $ S 1S SWVOb ON NMOISAlb o yg �sl'�,s�Y+ «,... 1VNtCT%FtV$tl -.I y9 z _ $,,.^ °,-'i ,.
f/
c S NOSa3333r x s, ¢ N €r i > t
�, slsNOSIOVW „.: 4 Q `
�s 4:::4/6'.:'.--'.' v
o� .s153Od OW do 2 2 + co I ...
o� b
w V, ', N ,S 1S NOSNSVF 3 — §hxxnnasrx
V- ' c SS N3afl9 NVA Ali 5,'
,�'' ; �, IS NOSIaatlH '. z _ y
r _
.. .. R � • s is a3'IAl .. °
r
D•y
:c
,1 -•''' ...,—-... '.,. ''' :::: ,'...1.
y
0';''''''' ' ! -01
•
Y
W
,:
* (B r=
cl
1
I k�"
*S
XN' NOS W3a
bo NOS W� 'k
O
� aO 1V1a°W3W NOSNHOf Y ,I .
k 4.
ti
ate' r.
,
yg
T
.:.. y,...yx: 3,gc-�' . •j;. �' `' . . .?s, r�`— �(,� � ,r yY"�-w�rxC�ie 'f` ..
7 a,
2 <"W
\((d)
-nr� s § T
''`I* ! '
l
^ r
'4 r1
Fri
t. A 4,
�C m U O »,
O >C
'^ Q m U o W m 'U E E O c "-. F+`-'�. 7„4:,--..;;77"2,".W,....,;,'"--;',1i:. .
W I ( U Cl) 4) 4J tU 7 7 O 0 (0 p tip✓ .`` 9,r'O, y�,,A y! .�:N .•$finr,......-,,i Q Q Q < Q = 0 0 a o C:.::z, - ...,I L i ._.,.. ,
0 C E al013 M
•
Y. 1. r .�. .a ! :_ `.�
,f--:.i 7 \ it MC" 1
,:{`. „�. .. ny, Vj1 q• .'x,ao-:' •YO }rtrM,•'sf$'F 1�,� �, n ,r•• *: • _
'�� IK �;,tiR3[ t 0,41 I 11..-;'-`;',..,,S , •j ;-%.. r.. rtas Ster'�' F1;? -- t ! t•
'•v.0.... - Sias ',n ":�;, •
yl i ;rip• � 1 - (-� ! `r,i.. •,>5ti Ae,1 a4' 'c.�• i�1 1p.51 NR P• ��SRy.�� '�'�t r
•. -- ,. ,R 1• f y,M • :s
; •( -.{. i.r ` iM / ' tar M` $ . '';r/~•: �. ,7e.'_ `:y:at.x•l e',1 . i � � Y i _ ' i crp "• ` AA -,a 1:9,x;-71't-.,., '5 T' .r.,'" _ { : 1 t . ij S gT v Y� A ^ I1 • � ie. fa-'••
� ' +s�� y _ f ry � L�pp'ii wif / f i � r 94►f (t ->.. � .w ., . iYib' r - a.r . l.•Af n" , ,.ww • .1 K?� -q ~ _ c.7 14 ° .rP"7 e yFYI +t' +i , . l . " t I „4i ��/. '., _ •i,........< a v� +' E : . k n 5..-‘• L c ? � S „ rr� T i• •-,.., r ..,r :-
•x wR � ra' �,al, wil
•rip
i �{qr Ir � ''',.•,, y ! �p k� y•Via',.: a r.,s, r , r?!{Lii. -'�°,a •� iP YR:Sg3�R=Y 4 •^ r: i'
r
4 •,1 "R Chi .�•►f�.1I. t {, .: " if+'.q i, ' i1 , N
:r.. �E "'Mt• ���El t�G1.:_l'� , i➢31 r3G rye st rl�y'ttt '�':�)A 'R mil , ` s 1i� I
, -'• Yt�Y Fti • r R�.IY!.c.�, �j N_• '.i'('�'re+.._ - ip� ,v�7' L ¢ ;_.•J' ' ';r "7 u ,.;,. -A ii Ja.; ,• c:f :p j f4,•.• '••R ! r i r • .:1 '��� +w ;, I s -ay P!F,-,tl_•
(r r +� ur. F;;t ".• ' �: s C =r:. e v �a` Y ;., `�1 }. �: a+ i[:� f O
�— • ... r. A,• o� r s .# �. rM a' rri7i: � , .'sj'a'"" . ° . ° O•,p& • �r't t. V. ....-..—• •'•R r • _ �,. • '-,. �k Z3,1 q i t Al 11• I RI��4• i _,
*k,, -:SS> #tL~7', ,, ..,r••x j / r u w a "'h �! .�� i R: �.-'c' r, O•
10,,,,11.::, S'IT _ ,el`F�r• .•.Ir y !/. f t r hn� r 7. r .AIrtT�:s, 1 v lt'Iit r A ,Jr y�dml '4....$11.-:_ _
•}'.. - _ ' ap J' _� + P Y\ x 7 Lf .. c i A : �5R f �� 4: 1 f"y1 t.J ` O•ri ! ` `^/. yy 4 `- .1. I , :�..r ri'•'1"iFt,. .`o, _ °' 1 atki' f :� 3 • aY / C , V)
�Z' ♦?_p VW"; r..s a ss n C y.- p*wr•r .e�ts to 1 .,a !A.
.r� t '`' •'t 't"' !j, ^N•'1:r-•. F�'�" , irei '. r",, '" i Ltr. I,, „ ,;•�
f r-�. 7.•"N:. 0... 'R�`' w-.nn asps• r.w we, •rte' / ' i a --wl •3E.'r ♦ .(-,N{. t ':�,-�.*•.* &:
►-�. ... .„,.....4,....1� }d'.:b &-�'I"� �S '°. I' Mi•• 1 r '�� r M,w '. 3 ,.tri � y.
"rry r '\k ' G*; Ftd�e# wilt.. ;:i a R �'' aG r n '°x JS ..e° et " '
.'' ` .:-1?4ti _ ..N�' sYer Gy, f� i tY �. '. ww„a .. j , -__- •,pR-� 7i't � ,re av,y
�';� .�.,.. .....�... _ ,per �L
,i ” 'A �w �;: ,w.tq �'r'„�; '�rcY.:rfl A y �;:i. I.-1■ E1�.�1 r”0'3 �•i �t ti . ws •� F• '-. .,..- i IfO!,_ t rrvjp,L"',' _ vt �<. +' sp•1" rT Si•
'•.‘.A......:......-
kZm -,v-.^ • '�4,•.rT ,-.1 'rT ;q.... ,• �' , •i 3 4 e 1� �.[. `.T :SS R`„ ,�_ _•'XPr '.`t s '�'t 1• � . ar'l�' /,�, :� B'. .+,..���'"' • -;,: i;j' ft7 I, t";L't i - .*.- I Y t r •; ei' •*"9Fw i'v�risAl:;.�p 1,4 ("' '4/ �'• '.,q.: .Ck ++ -^y�.' ,r r'• : ',AM,�,.'d..r,- "• '' �� t "e'er�' � ';+s. o.:
.r w Ia 9� •n`+
i..._,..„, +r:i%• * .: M:R ?a� � ! tryC' wt.a• o, yas.-,�.�rly'� a A°t+�x" iF e.. dir4;.
�t ..s. r1 a '`v '.@•, '' ! ! .r '61'2'''''' ' ,4 -11.4'1...-1- .rs r <q' -pr,r ..?,!.•07...1
:_./ ,y.6-y r- :-• ' :`."i r g.!-. '•.,� .I ' I�l.t...; /t. .i;f • R. ='1E°s` L ...h, a r• ,•'�i' M '.�"'Y Jit t y-- Fib
a
CI
1,2-,,i,.• `•'~`I,+w "k '=N;a f ........,•,.• !T`^ .c..c 6 ,r{1a, `a'`wt".»'''• { ,1j''''`i ;r te'' `'' "17. ....
r. ,..-'iCI: L_:.efi'` `"f5r'Ir.JJM .,...v.....-
' - • ee' ,de• {,,,,.• a L,IiLMM. .•• i.aL,afYiWr..
1 a5 i• .4 d ,, a
+ �-;_ •',"�• w� •om i I a� �/fi,- ,0 -•
.• 1...., ' .:8t', 1 [
•�, i � 4• a � N �,' .....'wMCttir r •. -� ^ .i ,.�t3nif� •""-, -YaRx�,c , •
-..=. '7" ' :.d C` W. ' ,4, . 1
.
„Apo., .. ,...:0,,A,...
- F•`
.ef.
I `,§' ' .,. s r t•s... �wn.__ ... .w.p F ew, ♦ G5 tii%i2.. MC.ai:=O�ra. . , .°
g •y -J•.,-si P'« "rv � .,N ' • ••
, r-, ...
rf 3,iMr y ra`^s , .:gym : • � .... Cit
cc ,r. n
,, , .. ,
. , ..„.
r
411111
•:ikNJ":MrPP, ci'.,ds,e: Y; i..'
'...'s• t .. s. .. .. e•
L.
R rw•ew... .•� 1
•?iYt,Szr2i:W �Fn:i'.'A7[i;i.'�t!.•'!:�_ ct ,� = _,_. ...: �C :;67
{ '•
� ' l f
; : :/ I'035.113V,"-Vie-a his �iRa r:' r • IMI
T °-$ �� '' ;, _ •
•
Cillit
: ti- ` .99:i9;!��R�,, :.-4-,...,:r.'.,.•
•a_~ f - d �le.•n+" ., s ..,.n_-1s' r '`� 'i•:.iC • Y a :..ri d 1 „ � {:.•--
. ': i :':. .:• i .... ,. K s
Cit
f
- .l x-•' yr V h __ - 1 s y •, • ,fi ,'.v-.•„r ..
I
W
s-•4.
•
l.99 ,a' p. r i• Y yµ� ., y ii�w• CA. • if
a
•
•
•
.4. `- y. YYA r
L.
.Y
#� �.' . •st 4'a�, BfY, - K a ��lb,' r•1 1 �•e...,Y.� ♦�,,,__.e HIV
■'a_ '21'x”'A •j• t •4i'.1 3 N Y r--,� r4"� -4 _.'-'. , �• •
='-.*..� t s. ae- t
}
7y '�` .{n a: .ff -�\,,4 M, t f �'W.lt.'W t.•:154. .� ..f^ "+# �r�N .I• '
E"
&,'� �s<` ''jY� - •• ' 4 _• ow:x'* ti --=4,r `#" • ..d 5 s� , la•- 'L {;•
,x•• wF' ,rbj?i rS,T• ,k'rq,�• �JA+, ,•$:4 "�"y; ` '` :N IS' 'fit^ ,^nU ,R i - silly,•
! r ° i•r, w Vii �a a t«' ` ‘1 Iai!n3c r ■
c0.•- .�izs� il' 1;t, R • ' r \,
1 , ,• t? F f,• ti. i' : '%i.-- _ •} k► ...m.,} {.-,,,•.'fit-,— s- I _;.,. g
1°' ' '••1''''•4-'1, '131..**.••_!*••••• .S
1.4." .:„, , .,•!J •\: + �I.+•rr• ..,• "'i ...,9�,�ir:::a,4"a«r3►itA�.ti„ .. - _ 'r- 7,^' :fir•,.: -•`r„'N'"""`., .-.; a
} 4,..„ D
•
!•4 ` 0i •ta'h +_-, c a- -Y •„ ' , `'"'y k=.. may' '4. s• '1 'o U o
i �� Jr'. �:�.'..*' 1. ,� y.3�x•°. Y;q.. 'a e4•. i _ q,'.".r �. 1 L 7 R
r te' --14.6::••,-,Y -,., ' a , `�.• 1'. 'j. l Ia i✓ - t' ,;. O. V 0,
. "r.i ti.:.4- i •e i�.S . ,t.•: �,„-.'}+ 01;`,.. :,4.., ` i(!,'., �t e s._ 4�t Frn�..: �4's �_ "
M'i r,e 0,, ' m • • d •!•'ray * .'1H, c iw 4,-• K .14� .0.' F 0'.7 y. ', .e s. 7+-' '0••h- 't,:, ,,r .-A....7. ,, •;(c '*'•' • .alt ,+.:`w ,4, r...-r f.4;;,,........,:....1 .�:�,. .p•v<a, ••F+•i yC;•'-aa.
° 1 ' �,y cs' *r off' a
.." fi t'7ii ,', '. e + -.•-,.- 't a "" .\ °y f ^ *-"114 4 1,a•
� !
1 • 8° rJf •y .. - � '-i�.. `:•,.,. ..•1t,, '.N�.�w'�M,�. ��•a : W
�N\ 711: r rX.,,,r• �. .: r- r•. ': r ~i. O
•
S
1
�
.+:' ,
r
...:•� ..,
+ y
1
Jackson Township,Minnesota
Annexation Parcels
2013 2013 Town
PID ACRES Taxpayer Area TMV NTC Portion
69240020 1.10 ISD 720 A 174,800.00 1,748.00 213.37
69240030 3.08 ISD 720 A 220,400.00 2,204.00 269.03
69240040 34.07 1SD 720 A 409,800.00 4,098.00 500.23
69240050 36.66 DOHERTY BEVERLY RAE A 584,500.00 3,707.00 452.50
69240060 9.65 ANDERSON JACK A&VENETTA M A 267,600.00 1,747.00 213.25
69240070 14.96 ANDERSON JACK A&VENETTA M A 157,900.00 790.00 96.43
69240080 9.40 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO A 305,800.00 2,954.00 360.58
69240090 35.49 ISD 720 A 628,000.00 6,280.00 766.58
69240091 2.92 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO A 278,400.00 2,784.00 339.83
69240092 9.93 FARMER WILLIAM&CHARLOTTE A 325,700.00 3,174.00 387.44
69240100 1.49 MARECK GERALD F&DIANE D A 263,200.00 2,496.00 304.68 TMV NTC Portion
69240130 20.11 ADAMS PATRICK J A 416,800.00 4,168.00 508.77 %of Town 3.9% 3.4% 2.8%
69240140 20.01 ADAMS JAN THATCHER A 388,800.00 3,866.00 471.91 Subtotal 4,421,700 40,016 4,885
69140100 80.73 R&1 BREEGGEMANN PARTNERSHIP B 959,800.00 2,196.00 268.06
69140120 29.82 BAUER II FAMILY LLLP B 360,000.00 787.00 96.07
69140130 8.95 MELCHIOR THOMAS E&SUSAN M B 314,000.00 3,050.00 372.30
69140140 0.39 JACKSON,TOWNSHIP OF B 2,200.00 - -
69140160 1.00 BREEGGEMANN LAWRENCE J B 208,000.00 1,895.00 231.31 TMV NTC Portion
69140170 0.92 WEBER FRANK W&CHERYL L B 204,500.00 1,857.00 226.68 %of Town 3.1% 1.2% 1.0%
69140150 103.71 R&1 BREEGGEMANN PARTNERSHIP B 1,445,100.00 4,567.00 557.48 Subtotal 3,493,600 14,352 1,752
69150011 237 WECKMAN FAMILY PROPERTIES C 2,800.00 68.00 8.30
69150031 90.61 LATOUR FARMS L P C 1,204,400.00 2,538.00 309.81
69150120 15.61 MJOLSNES ALAN D&BETTY C 150,000.00 1,875.00 228.88
69150130 13.00 MARSHALL PETER 1 C 503,800.00 3,715.00 453.48
69150140 3.60 BREEGGEMANN DENNIS C 280,500.00 2,685.00 327.75
69150150 9.08 LINK STEVEN J&LINK IRREVOCAB C 577,000.00 5,963.00 727.88
69150151 11.12 CUPPY TIMOTHY C&DONNA L C 475,900.00 4,759.00 580.91
69150152 11.63 BITTNER NORMAN E C 68,600.00 686.00 83.73
69150153 3.26 BITTNER NORMAN E C 247,500.00 2,387.00 291.37
69150154 9.66 THEIS GLENN A C 441,700.00 4,417.00 539.16
69150200 1.33 DOERR ROLAND C 228,800.00 2,122.00 259.02
69150210 1.02 BREEGGEMANN DANIEL&LORAINE M C 188,200.00 1,679.00 204.94
69150260 3.94 WERMERSKIRCHEN MARK&MARITA C 290,900.00 2,798.00 341.54 TMV NTC Portion
69150270 55.88 THEIS ROGERJ&PHYLLIS E C 888,800.00 3,395.00 414.42 %of Town 5.2% 3.6% 2.9%
69150340 24.10 SEVERSON KERMIT W&JANE&KER C 289,200.00 2,892.00 353.01 Subtotal 5,838,100 41,979 5,124
60270010 9.25 DEVORAK DOUGLAS!&BONNIE J D 255,500.00 2,413.00 294.54
69230010 75.60 BAUER LEROYJ D 1,136,400.00 3,889.00 474.71
69230020 19.26 PLEKKENPOL ROGER C&VICKIE D 526,400.00 3,323.00 405.63
69230031 15.94 BAUER II FAMILY LLLP D 192,000.00 456.00 55.67
69230040 9.24 BROWN WILLIAM L&JULIE A D 267,700.00 2,546.00 310.78
69230050 19.49 BROWN DAVID G D 219,000.00 1,049.00 128.05
69230060 14.47 BROWN DAVID G D 169,500.00 810.00 98.87
69230080 55.62 LATOUR FARMS L P D 684,000.00 2,806.00 342.52
69230090 67.44 LUERS WILLIAM M&JEAN M LUERS D 972,700.00 3,243.00 395.86
69230100 10.82 PLEKKENPOL HARRIET D 338,100.00 3,313.00 404.40
69230110 60.92 BROWN DAVID G D 750,900.00 3,414.00 416.74 497
69230111 1.01 GURUSINGHE TILAK&MANIK D 113,800.00 1,138.00 138.91
69230112 7.19 SCOTT COUNTY&TAXATION DEPT D 145,800.00 423.00 51.63 TMV NTC Portion
69230120 78.92 JOHN G O'LOUGHLIN REVOCABLE TR D 1,100,100.00 5,781.00 705.66 %of Town 6.7% 3.1% 2.5%
69230030 51.62 BAUER II FAMILY LLLP D 624,600.00 1,488.00 181.64 Subtotal 7,496,500 36,092 4,406
69100210 80.88 WELLENS FARM LIMITED PARTNERSH E 778,300.00 3,753.00 458.11
69100090 19.72 VANTASSEL RICHARD B E 221,600.00 865.00 105.59
69100160 26.10 AMERICAN DREAM FINANCIAL LLC E 1,253,900.00 15,674.00 1,913.27
69100170 15.15 AMERICAN DREAM FINANCIAL LLC E 707,600.00 8,845.00 1,079.67
69100171 7.01 ECSY LTD PARTNERSHIP E 310,100.00 3,876.00 473.13
69100180 54.12 ECSY LTD PARTNERSHIP E 1,113,900.00 13,480.00 1,645.45
69100190 5.73 AMERICAN DREAM FINANCIAL LLC E 521,500.00 6,519.00 795.75
69110030 0.33 CENTERPOINT ENERGY RESOURCE E 49,700.00 499.00 60.91
69110060 0.94 PAULY WILLIAM C&GLADYS E E 202,400.00 1,834.00 223.87
69110070 1.00 LOGGERS WALTER&ALETTA C&LO E 162,000.00 1,393.00 170.04
69110080 0.59 STATE OF MINN DEPT OF TRANSP& E 15,300.00 - -
69110090 0.77 STATE OF MINN DEPT OF TRANSP& E 4,600.00 - -
69110100 0.66 SHEELER TROY D&NANCY A E 183,500.00 1,628.00 198.72
69110110 0.84 RODNEY&JOYCE CLEMENS TRUST E 192,300.00 1,724.00 210.44
69110140 11.81 WHEELER LUMBER LLC E 520,600.00 5,945.00 725.68
69110141 15.25 CONTECH CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS E 1,825,000.00 21,995.00 2,684.84
69110150 0.46 WHEELER LUMBER LLC E 10,500.00 129.00 15.74
69150030 4.92 MOM'S REAL ESTATE LLC E 435,000.00 4,891.00 597.02
69150040 25.85 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO&PRO E 3,705,200.00 45,593.00 5,565.36
69150010 127.38 WECKMAN FAMILY PROPERTIES E 1,595,800.00 7,966.00 972.39
60370030 10.19 BJORNBERG VERNON&JEANNE M E 405,000.00 4,051.00 494.46
60390010 11.95 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL II,LLC E 415,000.00 4,151.00 506.67
60370010 14.36 RIVER VALLEY INDUSTRIAL LLC E 1,515,000.00 17,489.00 2,134.81 TMV NTC Portion
69100220 1.49 JACKSON,TOWNSHIP OF E - - - %of Town 14.6% 15.1% 12.1%
60400010 1.16 MELVIN 1&PATRICIA A SWANSON E 241,000.00 3,139.00 383.21 Subtotal 16,384,800 175,439 21,415
Totals 1,616.08 37,634,700.00 307,878.00 37,581.44 37,634,700 307,878 37,581
Jackson Township Totals 112,592,300.00 1,164,107.00 176,305.00
Annexation Areas 1-5%of Totals 33.4% 26.4% 21.3%