HomeMy WebLinkAbout2. Public Hearing to consider economic development assistance for Challenge Printing-Res. No. 6073
#02-
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator ~
Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator .
SUBJECT: Public hearing regarding property tax abatement for Challenge
Printing, Inc. location to and expansion in Shakopee
City Council Resolution No. 60/3 setting public
hearing for tax increment financing for Challenge Printing, Inc.
location to and expansion in Shakopee
MEETING DATE: June 22, 2004
Introduction
While it does not appear that abatement is going to be the recommended course of action,
the City Council is asked to open and then continue the tax abatement public hearing to
June 29th so that that option remains open. In addition, the City Council is asked to set a
public hearing for tax increment financing. The public hearing on tax increment financing
and business subsidy agreement would be a joint hearing of the City Council and
Economic Development Authority.
Background
At the June 1, 2004 meeting City Council set a date for a public hearing on a proposed
property tax abatement for Challenge Printing, Inc. to assist in the company's move to
and expansion in Shakopee.
City and County have not arrived at the necessary common business points in order to
draft a Contract for Private Development for abatement. As you recall, the memo from
June 1st outlined an abatement scenario that showed the maximum amount of abatement
the subject property could generate to be $1.15 million. This would include a fifteen-
year term, abatement of the increase in value when the building is re-assessed after the
sale, abating the increase in value of the new expansion, and including a market value
inflation factor of 3%. As you may recall, Challenge Printing's application request was
for $2 million. The rationale for the City considering the IS-year term and abatement of
the increase in value when the building is re-assessed after the sale is that this project is
an attraction of a new manufacturer to town. In addition the company would be
Challenge CC-EDA 6-22-04 First Draft.doc 1
expanding the facility (see June 1st memo, Exhibit 1), versus an abatement project such as
CetainTeed which involved an already existing Shakopee manufacturer considering
expanSIOn.
Subsequent discussions with County staff have produced other abatement estimates of
just over $347,000, and $72S,000. The $347,000 figure involved the City and County in a
fifteen-year term with both abating only the improvements, not abatement ofthe increase
in value when the building is re-assessed after the sale, and not including a market value
inflation factor of 3%. The $725,000 number is a blending of the two scenarios outlined
above, with a fifteen year term, in which the City alone would abate the increase in value
when the building is re-assessed after the sale, abate the increase in value of the new
expansion, and include a market value inflation factor of 3%, while the County would
hold to abate only the improvements and. not abate the increase in value when the
building is re-assessed after the sale, and not include a market value inflation factor of
3%. County staffis of the opinion that even though the County's business subsidy policy
has flexibility that allows consideration of abating the increase in value of the existing
facility, that would be an unlikely scenario since that approach has not been taken by the
County in previous abatement projects. In addition, a fifteen-year abatement term is also
unlikely to be considered by the County since historically the County has used six years
as term period for tax abatement.
Discussion
Given that the City and County have differing legitimate positions regarding
consideration of tax abatement for this project, the respective staffs have discussed, in
positive terms, using tax increment financing (TIP) as an alternative financing
mechanism to tax abatement for this project. TIP is an economic development tool which
allows for the capture and use of property tax revenues from new development in a
defined geographic area to pay for costs associated with the development._The concept is
very similar to abatement, except that the City/EDA captures the increase tax revenues
that would otherwise be paid to all taxing jurisdictions.
As in tax abatement, the City would enter into a "pay-as-you-go" TIP arrangement with
Challenge (rather than bonding). Challenge would pay for various TIP-eligible costs
initially, and the City would promise to reimburse the. company from tax increment over
time as it is generated. The company (rather than an unrelated bond holder) bears the risk
that the increments will be insufficient to repay the costs incurred.
TIP is more streamlined in that the only public body that holds hearing is the City /
Economic Development Authority. There a few different mechanical requirements in the
TIP law compared to the abatement law. One of the requirements is a 30-day review
period for the County and School District to review the TIP Plan. However, both bodies
will be asked formally to waive that review period to accommodate Challenge's real
estate transaction timeline. According to the estimate by Springsted, Exhibit 2, TIP
would generate approximately $798,000; this figure falls between the $1.1S million
Challenge CC-EDA 6-22-04 First Draft.doc 2
maximum possible abatement estimate presented to Council on June 1 S\ and the $347,000
- $725,000 scenarios the City and County staffs have been discussing, but considerably
less than the $2 million requested by Challenge in its application. The type of TIP district
would be an economic development district, which has a term of 9 years (under the TIP
law, there are also other types of TIP districts with different purposes and longer terms
such as a redevelopment district, soils / contamination conditions district, etc.). The TIP
district proposed for this project is the same type of district previously created by the
City/EDA for the Seagate project.
TIP is more desirable than tax abatement for this project since...
. Its use would save / reserve the City's and County's abatement authority /
capacity for future economic development proj ects.
. The process is more streamlined in view of the fact that all public hearing
requirements are conducted by the City only; approvals and hearings are not
needed from all taxing jurisdictions (county; school district), although under the
TIP law, the county and district have the ability to comment on the creation of a
TIP district if they don't waive that option upon request by the City. Regardless,
the City has tried to work closely with the County and ISD 720 on issues of
economic incentives.
. There is greater funding potential because TIP captures taxes from all taxing
jurisdictions. This permits a shorter period of collection (9 years instead of 15)
which means the increased tax base is available to all taxing jurisdictions earlier
than under the abatement alternative.
. TIP would allow for county participation without the County having to vary from
its tax abatement policies of a six-year term, and limiting tax abatement to
improvements only.
At their June 16th meeting the ED Advisory Committee was briefed by staff on the
possibility that this project may be financed via TIP rather than tax abatement. The
committee agreed that regardless of whether done through abatement or TIP, the
recommendation from EDAC to City Council to move the project forward through the
public hearing process should remain.
All job creation figures previously disclosed by Challenge will remain with the change in
financing from abatement to TIP.
Challenge CC-EDA 6-22-04 First Draft.doc 3
Recommendation
Next steps in moving the TIP process forward is for City Council to set the necessary
public hearing for July 6t\ Steve Bubul, the City's economic development attorney with
Kennedy & Graven will draft the TIP Plan for consideration at that meeting.
City Council is asked to:
1. Continue the tax abatement public hearing to June 29th.;
2. Offer and pass Resolution No. 6()"1~ , setting public hearing for tax
increment financing.for Challenge Printing, Inc. location to and expansion in
Shakopee
Challenge CC-EDA 6-22-04 First Draft.doc 4
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Resolution No. 6073>
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 12 AND A MODIFIED
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MINNESOTA RIVER
V ALLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1
AND CONTINUING THE PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING
GRANTING A PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR CERTAIN
PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee ("City") has previously established its Minnesota River
Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project") pursuant to Minn. Statutes,
Section 469.001 to 469.047 ("HRA Act"); and
WHEREAS, the Project is now administered by the Economic Development Authority for
the City of Shako pee (the "Authority"); and
WHEREAS, the City and Authority have received a request from Challenge Printing, Inc.
("Challenge Printing") to provide certain financial assistance in order to make feasible the
development of a new manufacturing, office and storage facility to be constructed as an expansion
of an existing manufacturing facility in the Project; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was published June 10, 2004 providing notice of a
hearing scheduled for June 22, 2004 regarding granting of a property tax abatement under
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1812 to 469.1815 for certain property in the City of Shakopee
located at 1000 Valley Park Drive (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, the City is now evaluating tax increment financing as an alternative form of
assistance to Challenge Printing, and to that end the City and Authority have determined to consider
a modification of the redevelopment plan ("Project Plan") for the Project and the adoption of a tax
increment financing plan ("TIF Plan") for the proposed TIF District No. 12 (with the same
boundaries as the Property), and to hold a public hearing regarding those actions in accordance with
the HRA Act and TIP Act; and
WHEREAS, the City has also determined to continue the public hearing regarding
abatement with the understanding that on the date of the continued hearing, the City Council will
decide whether to approve the abatement, or to abandon the abatement option and proceed to the
July 6, 2004 public hearing on the proposed TIF Plan.
JAE24947I
SH235-15 1
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED. by the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
that:
1. The public hearing scheduled for today, June 22, 2004 regarding the granting of a
property tax abatement under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1812 to 469.1815 for the Property is
continued to Tuesday, June 29, 2004 at 7:00 p.m.
2. The Authority, and its staff and consultants, are hereby authorized and directed to
cause to be prepared a modification to the Project Plan and a TIP Plan for TIP District No. 12, and
to file a copy of such documents in City Hall.
3. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to prepare a notice for publication in the
City's official newspaper setting a joint public hearing before the City Council and the Authority's
Board of Commissioners on July 6, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers on the Project Plan
and TIP Plan. The notice shall be in substantially the form attached hereto, shall be published in the
newspaper at least 10 but not more than 30 days prior to the public hearing, and shall include a map
of the Project area and the proposed TIP District.
4. The Authority, its staff and consultants are authorized and directed to transmit a
copy of the modified Project Plan and the TIP Plan to the County Board and School Board and
request a waiver from the County Auditor and the Clerk of the School Board of the 30 day notice of
public hearing regarding the adoption of a tax increment financing district required by Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.17S, subd. 2.
5. The Authority, its staff and consultants are directed to take all other actions
necessary to bring the modified Project Plan and the TIP Plan before the City Council at the time of
the public hearing.
Approved by the City Council of the City of Shakopee this 22nd day of June, 2004.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk .
JAE249471
SH235-15 2
Exhibit A
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE is hereby given that the Board of Commissioners of the Economic Development
Authority of the City of Shakopee and the City Council of the City of Shakopee will hold a joint
meeting in the City Hall, 129 Holmes Street, Shakopee, Minnesota at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 6,
2004, to conduct a public hearing on: (1) the modification of the Redevelopment Plan for the
Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No.1 (the "Project") and a Tax
Increment Financing ("TIP") Plan for a proposed economic development district within the Project
("TIP District No 12"), and (2) the business subsidy to be provided under the TIP Plan.
The boundaries of the Project and the proposed TIP District are shown in the map below.
The purpose of the proposed action is to facilitate development of a new manufacturing, office and
storage facility to be constructed as an expansion of an existing manufacturing facility. Details on
the proposal are contained in the modified Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan, a draft copy of which
will be available for public inspection at the Shakopee City Hall during regular business hours.
The assistance to be provided under the TIF plan constitutes a "business subsidy" under
Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J .993 to 116J .995. Information concerning the proposed project,
including a summary of the terms of the business subsidy agreement, will be on file at City Hall on
and after the date of this notice.
Any person wishing to express an opinion on the matters to be considered at the public
hearing will be heard. orally or in writing.
BY ORDER OF THE CIrY COUNCIL.
Dated: [Date of Publication ]
Isl M::Irk McNe11l
City Administrator
City of Shako pee, Minnesota
JAE249471
SH235-15 1
,,.,
. eY/l/blf 1
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Economic Development Advisory Committee
Paul Snook, Economic Development coordinat~
SUBJECT: Recommendation .from Economic Development Advisory
Committee: Challenge Printing location to and expansion in
Shakopee; Application for Business Subsidies (Tax Abatement)
lv.IEETING DATE: June 1, 2004
Introduction
At the meeting of April 28, 2004, the Economic Development Advisory Committee
considered Challenge Printing, Inc.'s Application for Business Subsidies (for tax
abatement), enclosed as Exhibit A, for the company's location to and expansion in
Shakopee, at the former ADC building at 1000 Valley Park Drive in Valley Green
Business Park. The ED Advisory Committee passed a motion to recommend that the City
Council:
. Direct staff to prepare a Contract for Private Development between the City,
Scott County and Challenge Printing (the contract outlines the provisions of
the tax abatement) for consideration at a public hearing on the proposed tax
abatement as mandated by the Minnesota Business Subsidy Law (MS
116J.993 -116J.995)
. Set a date for a public hearing on the proposed tax abatement as mandated by
the Minnesota Business Subsidy Law (MS 116J.993 - 116J.995)
Enclosed as Exhibit B are the minutes of the April; 28, 2004 ED Advisory Committee
meeting.
Representatives from Challenge Printing will be at the June 1 st City Council meeting to
present their request and to field questions from the Council.
challenge cc memo 2.doc
.
-
Background
Challenge Printing Inc. is undergoing a consolidation and relocation plan that will move
the company's operations to Shakopee, to the former ADC Telecommunications building
at 1000 Valley Park Drive. The need for the expansion stems from a growing business
being located in multiple facilities with an inability to expand in any of those facilities.
The cost of relocating the company involves moving large amount of heavy equipment,
selling two buildings, acquiring and renovating new space in Shakopee, terminating
leases and leaseholds, and losing sales and employees. In order to keep up with the
market and grow the business, Challenge needs to relocate to the larger former ADC
facility, expand the facility and acquire additional / new equipment.
The proposed location / expansion is to include approximately 250,000 SF of
manufacturing space, 75,000 SF of office space, and 90,000 SF of warehouse space. Total
estimated expansion cost is just over $3 million. Total estimated fee and permit costs are
$20,000. Estimated new machinery and equipment cost is $9 million. The anticipated
completion of the expansion will be nine months from approvals.
The current number of employees at the existing facilities in Eden Prairie is 380. These
positions will be transferred to the new Shakopee facility. The company estimates that an
additional 80 positions (above those that are moved from the existing facilities), paying,
between $12 per hour ranging up to above $32 per hour, will be created with the
Shakopee expansion. The value of health insurance benefits for the positions is estimated
at between $2,246 and $7,488 per year.
DiscussioIL
The company is requesting local and state participation in the proposed expansion,
namely $2 million in tax abatement participation on the part of the City and County, and
from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), a
$500,000 Minnesota Investment Fund loan ($100,000 of which can be retained by the
City in order to establish an economic development revolving loan fund per DEED
program guidelines), and up to $400,000 in Job Skills Partnership (MNJSP) funding for
workforce training.
This proj ect is in the interest of the City in that it is an attraction and expansion of a new
manufacturing business. The attraction and expansion of Challenge Printing will
contribute to the stability of the local economy since Challenge would be a significant
entity in the basic sector of the local economy (that is, it manufactures and exports goods
to regions beyond Shakopee, bringing new money into the local economy). The proposed
move to and expansion in Shakopee will result in further diversification of the local
I economy and significant expansioIl qfthe employment base.
challenge cc memo 2.doc
.
Staff has reviewed Challenge's Application for Business Subsidies, and :finds that the
project essentially meets the City's goals as outlined in its Business Subsidy Policy,
including:
. The project is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
. The company will enter into a Contract for Private Development with the City and
County that is consistent with statutory requirements, including a commitment to
remain in business at the site for a minimwn of five years after the benefit date
and compliance with the specific job and wage goals established for the project (in
the Contract for Private Development).
. Promoting economic development that will expand the commercial! industrial tax
base for the City;
. Improving the community's economic vitality through the creation, and expansion
of livable wage manufacturing jobs;
. Provide significant economic impact (multiplier effect) within the community;
. Encourage economic and commercial diversity within the community;
. The project is consistent with environmental regulations and does not .create an
environmental hardship for the community.
. Construction of the project will not commence until the City, County and
applicant have entered into a Contract for Private Development.
Tax Abatement / Analvsis
. Springsted, the City's financial advisor, conducted a tax abatement projection,
enclosed as Exhibit C.
. Under the proposal, property taxes abated would be comprised of 1.) The increase in
value of the existing building when the building is reassessed after the sale, estimated
at 2,975,000 (the base estimated market value of the building is $7,375,000), and 2.)
The value ofthe expansion improvements, estimated at $2,621,400.
. The abatement would occur over a fifteen -year period from 2006 - 2020. This is a
longer term than previous abatement projects with CertainTeed and ADC
Telecommunications, which had six year terms. The difference between those
projects and Challenge is that CertainTeed and ADC were expansions of existing
Shakopee businesses, while the Challenge project involves the attraction (and
expansion) of a new business to town.
challenge cc memo-2.doc
.
.
. The City would a~ate a total of $541,641 over the full term, while Scott County
would abate a total of$611,815 over the full tenn. The total abatement from the City
and County would be $1,153,465.
. The cumulative (all abatements) limit for Shakopee and Scott County in anyone year
is 10% of ctllTent levy; both the City and County will be well within their respective
limits in this abatement scenario.
. A $5,596,400 increase in market value for the subject property and the attendant
increase in property taxes attributable to the project (post abatement term).
. Challenge investment activities directly attributable to move / expansion:
Land Acquisition / Building Cost 11,500,000
Site Development / Building Improvements 3,000,000
Professional Services 385,000
Fees & Permits 20,000
Machinery & Equipment 9.000.000
TOTAL $ 23,905,000
. The company cUlTently has 380 employees at three different facilities elsewhere in
the Twin Cities Metropolitan area; these jobs will be retained with the move to /
expansion in Shakopee. In addition to the 380 jobs, the company will be adding
approximately 80 new livable wage jobs (with benefits) in Shakopee upon
completion of the project. The annual wage for most of the positions ranges from
$35,000 - $56,000 (the new jobs estimate is conservative).
. The project will increase the diversity of job opportunities for Shakopee residents,
and add to the well"paying and growing manufacturing job base.
. The location and expansion of Challenge Printing in Shakopee will have a positive
economic multiplier effect. For each manufacturingjob created by Challenge, there
will be an additional number of "support" (non-manufacturing) jobs created in and
around the community. According to the National Association of Manufacturers,
every $1 million in final sales of manufactured products supports 10 jobs in the
manufacturing sector and six jobs in other sectors (such as services, retail,
construction, etc.). This job creation includes some areas outside the city, given that
Shakopee is part of the metropolitan area economy. Upon completion of the move /
expansion, the total employment at the Shakopee plant will be 460 (Note: this is a
conservative estimate by Challenge).
challenge cc memo 2.doc
. Retention of and increase in service and retail businesses (new / additional goods
and services) attributable to the influx of new employees; attendant spending in
Shakopee from resident and non-resident employees.
. Employees moving to Shakopee and their attendant spending (i.e. real estate~ goods
from local merchants, etc).
. The project is compatible with the ED Advisory Committee's, EDA's, and City
Council's goal of facilitating the retention and expansion of high quality economic
development as identified in the Economic Development Strategic Plan, and
diversification ofthe local economy as identified in the City Council Goal Setting
Session in April of 2004.
. The project is compatible with the City's business subsidy criteria/policy in that it
(the project) would increase the tax base, create a significant number of livable wage
jobs, and provide a significant economic impact within the community.
Minnesota Investment Fund
Regarding state participation, l\1N Department of Employment & Economic
Development (DEED) staff is of the preliminary opinion that the Minnesota Investment
Fund (MlF) would be a good fit with Challenge's expansion project. The maximum loan
amount per project is $500,000, and depends upon number of new jobs to be created and
the proposed pay level; the amount also depends upon the current competitive situation
for this . program. :MlF is a grant to the City and a loan to the company. AIt additional
belteflt to tlte City of Usiltg tlte MIF program is tltat it presents the City tlte opportunity
to establish an economic development revolving loan fund. The :first $100,000 of the
MIF program would be paid back to the City for that purpose (to establish an economic
development revolving loan fund).
Staff is assembling and submitting a Pre-Application to DEED for the MIF program.
After approval by DEED of the Pre-Application, a more detailed Part ]I Application, for
which the City must pass a resolution, will be submitted to finalize the process, and to
receive a grant upon approval.
Minnesota Job Skills Partnership
The puxpose of the program is to act as a catalyst between business and education in
developing cooperative training projects that provide training for new jobs or retain
existing jobs. Grants are awarded to educational institutions with businesses as partners.
The maximum available of MJSP funds is $400,000 per grant. Challenge Printing will
likely lose a number of its current employees as a result of the move, which will create a
need to train new employees. The City would'be the coordinating agent in this project;
staff will be working with Challenge, a local technical college, and 1v.fN Department of
challenge cc memo 2.doc
.
.
Employment & Economic Development through the Minnesota Job Skills Partnership to
arrange customized training.
Options
1. Per recommendation of the Economic Development Advisory Committee,
proceed with processing Challenge Printing's application for tax abatement by
1.) Directing staff to prepare a Contract for Private Development between the
City, Scott County and CertainTeed for consideration at a public hearilig on the
proposed tax abatement; and 2.) Set a date of June 22, 2004 for a public hearing
on the proposed tax abatement.
2. Table for additional information
Recommended Action
Offer and pass a motion to 1.) Direct staff to prepare a Contract for Private Development
between the City, Scott County and Challenge printing, Inc. for consideration at a public
hearing on the proposed tax abatement; and 2.) Offer and pass Resolution No. 6062,
setting a date of June 22, 2004 for a public hearing on the proposed tax abatement.
challenge cc memo 2.doc
.: .... ."~ " ~ '. ;' ~ = . " .
.
.' . ..
.
. A
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Application for Business Subsidies
. . . .' . ". '. '.- "
, ' . : I '. I . .' . . . ..'
. .. ' ,
" .' I. ' . " ' , . ,
, . . . I . I . ,
..s ..
"
.. .' . '
. .
COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857
, 129 HoIme~ Stre~t South' Shakopee, MN 55379 " "
:
:
Phone (952) 233-3800 Fax (952) 233-3801
. ....- .,. . , . . .1' . . . .' , .. '
Shakopee subsidy app,doc
:. ~ :" ..... .,..._...:......:.;;~...oi,~:.:...:.-:.J..,:......:.:'.. :.:..;...:.... ":. -i,".. ..,: .
. ., ..... .' "..~.. .,:~. .." . . . ..
.
..... .... .. . . . .
April 13, 2004
The Honorable John Schmitt
and the Shakopee City Councf/
129 Holmes Street South .,
. . . . .: '. Sha'kopee,. MN 55379". .' " , ','
~ I' .'
. '.' '. ..... .'. .... I . ...... . .
. .
Dear Gentlemen,
Challenge Printing Inc. is ready to embark on a new chapter in our
Company's history. The Consolldatlon and Relocation Plan wiflindeed be
the largest and most difficult project that we have ever undertaken. Our
Company Is willing to take the next step and make a commItment to grow
our Company in the community of Shako pee and we need your help.
In this fetter of introduction, I wanted to tell you what Challenge Printing,
Inc. is all about, and why we want to consolidate and move our
, operation,s to the City of Shakopee. '. ..', '. ' . "
, :. "~haf~~n~~ p;~~ting 'b~~a~'~~'oper~ti~~: slXt~en ;ears ago ~ith one ~erso~
and a visIon of what was possIble. We have created a $70 rollIlon
company that is now a leader In the printing business. We currently
provide employment to almost 400 employees with an average wage of
$50,000 per year. Challenge has a long history of incremental growth in
sales volume and employee payroll and has subsequently provided local
businesses with opportunities to grow wIth us. Attached Is a hIstory of
our statistical growth In the areas of Sales, Employees, and Payroll
Dollars.
Challenge would like to consIder the City of Shakopee for our new home
for a number of reasons. Easy access to the southern metro area,
fadlities large enough to handle our operations, room for expansion, and
opportunitIes to tap into a local labor source In El fast growing community.
On the other hand, we are concerned about the dIstance that our
,employees and customers will. have to travel,we know we will 1056 some
percentage of both by'moving "across the river". We are also concerned
about our ability to attract experienced craftsmen to travel to Shakopee.
.. . . . .. . ., ., .. ..-., .. . ..... .'
. . '~ . ."1 .'
,.. .
.
, .,
.
From our first meeting with Mr. Snook, I felt as though Challenge Printing
was a company that was Important to the City of Shakopee. It Is excitIng
to see the potentIal for a mutually beneficial relatIonshIp and It Is
encouragIng to be acknOWledged as an entity that could bring value to
your Community.
We are submitting the attached Application for Business Subsidy for your
review. The cost of relocatIng our Company wlll be quite detrimental to
our net worth and earnings for several years. Moving our large amount of
heavy equipment, selling two buildings, acquiring and renovatIng new
.. :.. . space, terminating leas.es and leaseholds, combined with losing sales and, ' ' ,
. . ' o' :employees will come at a price tag In the $3 tq '$4 mil,llo,n. range fOr ,our. .
000 .
business. With your approval of thIs subsidy, we can be much more
confident in our ability to continue our successes and yours.
Challenge does have a lot to offer to the City of Shakopee and to Scott
County. In the last 5 years, ChaHenge Printing Inc. has added 100 new
jobs to our business and 200 new jobs in the last 10 years. We have
budgeted for an annual payroJl in the amount of $25 Million this year and
expect to grow our employee population by 10% in 2004 alone. The
Company wllf continue to grow and plans to be much closer to 500
employees In another 4 years.
, . . ': We I~ok forWard to' havIng an ppp6rtu'~ity t~ ',me~t with you ~ 'lnd yqUf. .
:
.. " staffs to develop an agreement that could be beneficial to our mutual
Interests.
SIncerely,
Robert J. Lothenbach
Owner & CEO
, :
, . '. .,. "... ,
". , ' . '.,:: ..:......,'......:.-::.. .:.: ..~:' ..:. 0': '0' ., ., .. .
. ..0.0 . " , . .'
, . .0 . .
to... _.. ,-
CHALLENGE PRINTING, INC.
Growth Statistics 1988 to 2004
Sales Volume Employees FayroH .
Annual Change Chan ge Annual Annual Per
Year-end (Thousand $ ) Percent Number Perce nt Wages Employee
-
1988 $696 10 $207,037 $20,704
I
1989 $2,268 225.9% 30 200.0% $727,381 $24,246
\' '1990.'-: ' $3,877 '70.9% 50,' 66:7% , :$1,173,621 $23,472
, . . . , , . .. ' .
to . ,0' :. . ,0 I. " ' ,
1991 $6,657 71.7% 88 76.0% $2,070,481 $23,528
1992 $8,557 28.6% 93 5.7% $2,675,592 $28,770
1993 $13.265 55.0% 185 98.9% $4,927,952 $26,638
1994 $21,942 65.4% 225 21.6% $8,087,293 $35,944
1995 $28,292 28.9% 263 16.9% $9,724,434 . $36,975
1996 $34,326 21.3% . 295 12,2% $11,820,107 $40,068 ,
1997 $3.2,534 " -5.2% ,?82 -4.4% $12,147.862 $43,07f! ,
, " : . '
.' 1. . " . \
," " " '. , $13,96'2,572 $47;331. "
.. 1998 ' ' '$35,962 10.5% " 295' . 4.6%
1999 $40,083 11.5% 301 2.0% $15,330,998 $50,934
2000 $41,569 3.7% 306 1.7% $1~, 737,608 $48,162
2001 $51,840 24.7% 325 6.2% $16,781.663 $51.636
2002 $58,178 12.2% 370 13.8% $19,867,004 $53,695
2003 $68,718 18.1% 406 9.7% $22,291,523 $49,687
Proj.2004 $77,352 12.6% 440 8.4% $25,319,851 $57,545
: ' .
, ' . . .' . .-. . ,
. '._ . '. ..... . ......... .&.. .:.:' .~J....1 ...:.; ~:..:.......:... .'!.:.... .:... :0'.
.. 0.' ... ..:..'
. . .. ....,.. . ....
Section I: General Information
** With tMs applieatioll/please submit afo1'11lallette1' l'eqtlestl.lzg the ass/atallee.
1. Business Name: Challenge Printine: Inc.
2. Address: 7500 Golden Triangle Drive
Eden Prairie.1Y.1N 55344
. ;' '. 3. Contact P~iso1:i: ' Jiin Bayliss' .' '" ~ " .,' . " , '
. .
" fo.O. .'
4. Telephone: (952) 903-4485
5. Fax: (952) 942-0010
6. E-Mail: jbayliss@challene:eprintina-.com
7. Brief Description of the Business / Company: Challenge Printing' is a $70 Million Co.
serving 5 national print seg'1l1ents: Commercial Offset. Point of Purchase. Folding Cartons.
UV' Printine: and Pressure Sensitive Labels.
8. parentGorporationJ,i:f~y; N/A . ". '.',
" 9. Consultant in;~rmation, ifap~iicable: " "
Name: Winthrop & Weinstine. Mr. Norm Jones
Address: 225 South Sixth Street. Suite 3500. Minneapolis. MN' 55402-4629
Telephone: (612) 604-6605 Fax: (612) 604-6905
E-Mail: njones@wintbrop.com
10 Type of Subsidy Requested:D .Tax Abatement: All real propertY taxes generated
in any tax-pa.yable year bv extending the City's and
County's local tax rate against the tax ca.pacity ofthe
Proposed Proiect for a 'Period of fifteen vears.
11 Amount of Subsidy Requested: $2.000.000.
" '
12 Public Purposes of the Subsidy: To provide financial assistance that will- make the
relocation possible for a growing company to ioin the. City of Shako'Oee and Scott
County. The Companv will provide 460 verY well paving iobs to the Community and
wiU substantially increase the taxable base value of the Property. with the 'Olamed
additions and improvements. This relocation will remove unused and vacant
. property from the City throua-h the re-establishment of commercial activity.
Sbakopee subsidy app,doc
. .... ," . ... .... ... 'f..
.
.
13 Location of Proposed Project: 1000 VaIIey Park Drive. Shakopee. MN
14 Legal Description of Project Location:
Lot 1. Block 1. Plat #27154. Valley Park 9th Addition.
11. PropertyIdentification Number(s): 27-154-001-0
. .
\ .' . . ... . .
.'
:. ,... '. . '1 ' .
. . . .
12. Present Ownership of the Site: 1000 Valley Drive. LLC
13. Name / Description of the proposed project (Attach site plan, if available):
Challenge Printing Inc. Relocation and Consolidation Plan
14. Size of the Property 1.285,020 sq. ft.
. . . .
.. . . .' " . . .. '. I ' . , ~
: " 15: Estimated Total Building Square Fo'otage 415,398 ' . sq. ft..
16. Estimated size of the Proposed Facility:
Manufacturing / Assembly / Processing 250.324 sq. ft.
Office 75.074 sq. ft.
.
Research Laboratory 0 sq. ft.
Warehousing 90.000 sq. ft.
Other (please Specify) sq. ft.
TOTAL 415,398 sq. ft.
: .,.. . . . .
..... .........,. "
Shakopee S1zbsidy app.doc
. . . . ..;...:...:':;:'J~:':';7"-:......._...... "0' .....;.. .. '.' 0." . .. .,
, .. .......: . '0' .' ..' ' . . .
-
. ,
17. Estimated Project Costs:
Land Acquisition . Inoluded in Bld2'. Cost
Site Development (Building Addition.) $ 5.350.000
Building Cost $ 11.500.000
. ., . ,Street/.Road Improvements (iIJ.cludeyp~~r costs only). '. $ . ,
, '. ' . ", " ,.' " :." . :., ,',.. .' ',", ". '.'.,. .
, '
, . ' .
Utility Improvements (include your costs only) $
Capital (machinery and equipment) $ 9.000.000
Professional Services (archit., engin.,Iegal, fiscal) $ 385.000
Fees and Pemrits (same as total from below) $ 20.000
Other (please.specitY. " '; '. ) $ '. .
.. , "
f' .... . .. .' ' ,
TOTAL $ 26.255.000
18. Estimated Fee and Permit Costs:
City Permits and Fees $ 20.000
(Grading and Building Permits, Park Dedication Fees, etc.)
Metropolitan Council Fees $
(SAC and WAC Charges)
Other fee or permit costs $
(please Specify )
TOTAL $ 20.000
;
19.. Indicate the proposed start date for construction and estimated date of completion:
~art immediatelv upon approvals. expected completion within 9 months
.. . . ... .. "0 . ' , . .
Shakopee subsidy app.doc
.. ...;.,.:.....0:. ;... 0 . .::... .... 0 '0 .... .
.. . _0.
20. Proposed Financing Source(s):
Equity $ 1.725.500
Bank Loan (Equipment Lease) $ 9.000.000
(Check one): [CJ Tax Increment Financing, OR
o Tax Abatement $ 2.000.000
'. .0. ....
.. .. .0 .0 0
'. :" . .'. ..: Life insuranc'~ Co. Loan : $ . 13..529.500
Other Local Government Assistance $
(please specify )
.
State of Minnesota Assistance $
(please specify )
TOTAL $ 26.255,000
.. 0 .
o .0 .. o.
. 0 0 . .. '. . I .0 .. .... 0
, ': . '21. IftaJdncrement financing is requested;pIease submit a listef eligible project costs (Refer to .
Section V of the Business Subsidy Policy):
22. The City reserves the right to request tax returns and/or other fInancial statements from the
applicant for the years of operation.
23. The City reserves the right to request three bank references from the applicant.
"
o . 0 . to o.
Sh.akopee subsidy app.doc
. . ~.'.. ...... ..... .. ....:. .: ::., . . 1 . , .. ..
.. "
.
- ,
Section II:
Employment, Wage and Benefit Information
A. EMPLOYMENT
1. Does this project involve the relocation of jobs within the State ofMfunesota7
DYes
" . . .. '. , . ".' .
" " . .", .. '. . .'. , . .
" :. " . a. Ii so, provide a ~tatemerit o~why th~ project cannot be completed at its curre~t
.. '.
location / facility: ., .,
Challenge Printing Ino. ourrently operates out of 3 separate buildings totalinll
238.477 sq. feet. Consolidation of our operations is a key inllI'edient in our abiIiur
to continue to control our cost. quality and the timeliness of our services to our
,
customers. Our cUn'ent location does not allow expansion for this pUtpose.
b. Number of full time equivalent (PTE) permanent employee positions at current
" , Minp.eso~.1ocation / facility to be relocated to Shakopee:, ' 380
.. "
.0 0 .. . . '. .. ..
.' . I. .' '.' ' . , "
. .
2. If the project is an expansion of an existing Shakopee facility,. what is the current number
oiFTE permanent employee positions?
3. Estimated Number of FTE permanent employee positions to be created (within 2 years of'
issuance of Certificate of Occupancy) as a result ofthe project 80
4. TOTAL number of current and estimated new FTE pennanent employee positions (No.2
+ No.3 from above) 460
, : ' .
, " ..
Shakopee subsidyapp.doc
, , . ,
-
-
B. WAGES
1. What will be the minimum hourly wage (exclusive of benefits) of the FTE permanent
employee positions created by the proj ect? $ 1 1.00
2. The hourly wage of each new pennanent FTE employee position, with separate bands of
wages, is as folIows~
Total Number of
W~!Ze Levels Per Hour FTE Permanent Emplovee Positions
L~ss Than $12.00 41 .
" , ,', ','
" " . ' ,
, '
'. " $12.00 -16.99 .65
.
$17.00 -21.99 91
$22.00 - 26.99 89
$27.00 -31.99 51
$32.00 and Over 43
C. BEALTHINSURANCE BENEFITS
The' value 'of health in~urarice benefit~ provided by the epiploy~ fl?r 't~e a~ove referenced job'S~'
, separated by bai1ds of wages, is as foIIaws: ,," .' " ' .,,'.,.,. . '. '. "
Wae:e Levels Per Hour Value of Health Insurance Benefits
Less Than $12.00 $ 2.246 1 year
$12.00-16.99 $ 2.714/vear
$17.00 - 21.99 $ 3.649/vear
$22.00 - 26.99 $ 4.586 1 year
$27.00 - 31.99 $ 5.5211 vear
$32.00 and Over $ 7.488/year
, ' . .
"
.. . ., .... .,
Shakopee subsidy app.doc
.,
CITY OF SHAKO PEE, MINNESOTA B
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITEE
REGULAR SESSION
APRIL 28, 2004
Members present: Jeff Jansen, Brae Felber Marshall Walker and Committee Chair
Brian Langdon
Members Absent: John Mauritz
Staff Present: Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator
Others Present: Bob Lothenbach and Jim Bayliss from Challenge Printing, Inc.
Call to Order
EDAC meeting called to order at 6:30 p.m. Wednesday, April 28, 2004 by Committee
Chair Langdon. .
- ApprovalofA~enda
Jansen moved to approve the agenda; seconded by Walker; passed unanimously.
ChaIIen2"e Printin~
Snook provided background on discussions with representatives from Challenge Printing,
!nc regarding relocation and expanding in Shakopee (in the former ADC
Telecommunications "1000 Bui1ding'~. The company submitted an Application for
Business Subsidies for tax abatement for consideration by the Economic Development
Advisory Committee and City Council. Snook said the the EDAC is asked to review the
application and make recommendation to the City Council to enter Contract for Private
Development between the City, Scott County and Challenge Printing for consideration at
a public hearing on the proposed tax abatement, and set a date for a public hearing on the
proposed tax abatement as mandated by the Minnesota Business Subsidy Law.
Bob Lothenbach and Jim Bayliss from Challenge Printing are in attendance at tonight's
meetingto make presentation to and field questions from the EDAC.
Challenge Printing Inc. is undergoing a Consolidation and Relocation Plan that will move
the company's operations to Shakopee, to the former ADC 1000 Building. The need for
the expansion stems from a growing business and the current business being located in,
multiple facilities with an inability to expand in those facilities.
.
The global cost of relocating the Company involves moving much heavy equipment,
selling two buildings, acquiring and renovating new space in Shakopee, tenninating
leases and leaseholds, and losing sales and employees. In order to keep up with the
market and grow the business, Challenge needs to relocate to the larger former ADC
facility, expand the facility and acquire additional / new equipment. The existing former
ADe facility will have to be extensively modified to accommodate Challenges operation.
Snook continued to explain that the proposed location / expansion is to include
approximately 250,000 SF of manufacturing space, 75,000 SF of office space, and 90,000
SF of warehouse space. Total estimated expansion cost is $5.3 million. Total estimated
fee and permit costs are '$20,000. Estimated machinery and equipment ast is $9 million.
The anticipated completion of the expansion will be nine months from approvals.
The current number of employees at the existing facilities in Eden Prairie is 380. These
positions will be transferred to the.newShakopee facility. The company estimates that an
additional 80 positions (above those that are moved from the existing facilities), paying,
between $12 per hour ranging up to above $32 per hour, will be created with the
Shakopee expansion. The value of health insurance benefits for the positions is estimated
at between $2,246 and $7,488 per year.
The company is requesting local and state participation in the proposed expansion,
namely $2 million in tax abatement participation on the part of the City and County, and
Minnesota Investment Fund (MIF) and Job Skills Partnership (MNJSP) funding from the
Minnesota Department ofBmployment and Economic Development (DEED). The
financing is needed in order to defray extraordinary costs associated with facility
expansion and therefore induce the company to expand its operations in Shakopee and
thus preserving and enhancing job and tax base growth for the City, County and State.
Challenge operates existing facilities that cannot accommodate expanded operations.
Without the financing, the facility would likely remain vacant, absent of a job creating
and tax generating business, for the foreseeable future.
Snook pointed out that staff has reviewed Challenge Printing's proposed location and
expansion and corresponding Application for Business Subsidies, and finds that the
project meets the City's goals as outlined in its Business Subsidy Policy, including:
. The project is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
. The company would enter into a Contract for Private Development with the City and
County that is consistent with statutory requirements, including a commitment to
remain in business at the site for a minimum. of five years after the benefit date and
compliance with the specific job and wage goals established for the project (in the
Subsidy Agreement).
. Promoting economic development that will expand the commercial/industrial tax
base for theCityj
.
-
assist employees with moving expenses, real estate location costs, and other related
items.
Langdon mentioned that Challenge Printing seems to have a non-pretentious, hard-
working, blue collar work ethic, which is a good fit with Shakopee.
Jansen asked if there are performance guarantees from the companies that sell Challenge
its printing equipment / machinery. Lothenbach replied that the supplier companies do
provide performance guarantees to Challenge. Lothenbach added that Challenge has a six
month exclusive period from the press suppliers, so Challenge has a leg up on its
. competition.
Jansen moved to have the ED Advisory Committee make recommendation to the City
Council to enter Contract for Private Development between the City, Scott County and
Challenge Printing for consideration at a public hearing on the proposed tax abatement,
and for the City Council to set a date for a public hearing on the proposed tax abatement.
Motion seconded by Walker; passed unanimously.
Other Business
Th~re was no other business
Adjourn
Walker moved to adjourn the meeting; seconded by Felber; passed unanimously; meeting
adjourned at 7:42 p.m.
. Improving the community's economic vitality through the creation and. expansion of
"basic sector" (manufacturing-related) livable wage jobs;
. Provide significant economic impact (multiplier effect) within the community;
. Encourage economic and commercial diversity within the community;
. The project is consistent with environmental regulations and does not create an
environmental hardship for the community.
. Construction of the project will not commence until the City and applicant have
entered into a Contract for Private Development.
Snook added that Challenge still needs to submit the $5,200 application fee and that this
will be paid ifEDAC provides a positive recommendation and the City Council approve
of the abatement. If the EDAC passes its recommendation, staffwill have Springsted, the
City's financial advisors, conduct financial analysis for the proj ect for further
consideration by City Council, and proceed with applications to DEED for l\.1JF and
N1NJSP.
Snook concluded by asking the EDAC to review Challenge Printing's request and
Application for Business Subsidies and provide recommendation to the City Council /
EDA to enter a Contract for Private Development between the City, Scott County and
Challenge Printing, and set a date for a public hearing on the proposed tax abatement.
Jansen asked to verify how many employees would be initially located in Shakopee.
Lothenbach responded that the current employment is closer to 420 than 380 (there has
been an increase since the submission of the application) positions but that some of them
will not transfer because of the move; some employees can't or wont commute to
Shakopee..Those positions will represent a turnover. It is expected that about 40 - 50
employees will not make the transfer. In addition, the employment projections related to
the expansion ,are very conservative.
Langdon asked what type of printing Challenge does. Lothenbach provided background
and responded that Challenge is more successful than many other printing companies
since it is very diversified as to its product mix: and the multiple printing solutions it can
offer its customers. Lothenbach added that with this expansion to Shakopee Challenge
Printing will be the first printer in North America to have an eighty-one inch press.
Langdon asked where Challenges customers I market is. Lothenbach replied that
Challenges customers are U.S. - based, with sales offices nationwide.
Walker asked what the positions are of the employees that will not be transferring.
Lothenbach replied that the majority ofthose jobs are the skilled positions and possibly a
few office positions. Lothenbach added that the company has made a commitment to
I Assumptions Report I C
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Tax Abatement Projection
Challenge Printing Inc. Project
Scenario D City/County Only
Type of Project Tax Abatement
Maximum Duration ofTax Abatement 15 Years
Current Year 06/01/04
First Abatement Year 06/01/06
Final Abatement Year 12/01/20 (15 Years of Abatement)
2003/2004
Base Estimated Market Value $7,375,000
Base Net Tax Capacity (NTC) $146,750
Non-Abated NTC $146,750
Assessment/Collection Year
2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 2007/2008
Base Estimated Market Value $7,375,000 $7,375,000 $7.375,000 $7,375,000
Increase In Estimated Market Value 0 5,596,400 5,985,542 6,386,358
Total Estimated Market Value $7,375,000 $12,971,400 $13.360,542 $13,761.358
Total Net Tax Capacity $0 $258,678 $266,461 $274,477
Local Tax Capacity Rate 95.782% 2003/2004
Fiscal Disparity Deduction 36.077%
City of Shakopee, Minnesota Abate? Yes 32.433%
Scott County Abate? Yes 36.635%
IS 0#720 Abate? No 21.517%
Other Tax Rate 5.197%
Current City Levy 8,340,478 @ 10.000% 834.048 Max Abate - 834,048
Current County Levy 34,951,145 @ 10.000% 3,495.115 Max Abate - 3.495,115
Present Value Date & Rate 06/01/04 @ 6.00%
Bonds Note (Pav-As-You-Gol
Bonds Dated 06/01/04 Note Dated 06/01/04
First Interest Date 02/01/05 Note Rate 6.00%
Underwriters Discount 1.50% Note Amount $645,600
Notes
Abate the increase in value (estimate $2,975,000) when the building is re-assesed after the sale
Abate the Increase in value (estimate $2,621 ,400) of the new expansion
Include a market value inflation factor of 3%
Abate City and County share of taxes
Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 5/27/2004 at 1 :25 P1Ii1} Challenge Project City-County 5-27-04.xlsAssumptions
I Projected Tax Abatement Report I
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Tax Abatement Projection
Challenge Printing Inc. Project
Scenario 0 City/County Only
1hls Pro ect
Less: Less: Retained Times: Statutory Less: Max/mum Maximum Maximum
Annuat Total Non-Abated Fiscal Captured Tax Tax C'Teed & Adjusted Tax Tax Tax Total
Period Net Tax NetTax Dlsp.@ NelTax Capacity Annual Abatement Dean's Lake Abatement Abatement Abatement Abatement Tax
Ending Capacity Capacity 36.0773% Capacity Rate Total Tax Clly Max Prolecls City Max City County School Distrlct Abatement
1) 2) (3 4 (5) 6 7 8) (9 10 11 12) 13) 14
2004 12/31/04 146.750 146,750 0 0 95,782% 0 834.048 0 834,048 0 0 0 0
2005 12/31/05 146,750 146,750 0 0 95.782% 0 859.069 0 859.069 0 0 0 0
2006 12/31106 258,678 146,750 40,381 71,547 95,782% 66,529 884,841 61,592 823,249 23,205 26,211 0 49.416
2007 12/31/07 266,461 146.750 43.188 76.523 95.782% 73.295 911.387 70,268 841,119 24.819 28.034 0 52.653
2008 12/31/08 274,477 146,750 46.081 81,646 95.782% 78,202 938,728 108,668 830,060 26.480 29.911 0 56.391
2009 12/31/09 282.734 146.750 49,059 86.925 95.782% 83,258 966,890 116,456 850,434 28.192 31,845 0 60,037
2010 12/31/10 291.238 146,750 52,128 92,360 95.782% 88,465 995,897 119.079 876,818 29,955 33,836 0 63.792
2011 12/31/11 299.998 146.750 66,288 97.960 95.782% 93.828 1.025.774 116,551 909,222 31,771 35,888 0 67,659
2012 12/31/12 309.021 146,750 58.543 103.728 95,782% 99.352 1.056,547 120.053 936,494 33.f!42 38.001 0 71,643
2013 12/31/13 318,314 146.750 61.696 109.668 95,782% 105,042 1,088,243 123.660 964.583 35.569 40,177 0 75.745
2014 12/31/14 327,886 146,750 65,349 115,787 95,782% 110.903 1,120.890 127,376 993,514 37,553 42.418 0 79,972
2015 12/31/15 337.745 146,750 68.906 122,089 95.782% 116,939 1.154,517 131,203 1,023.314 39.597 44,727 0 84,324
2016 12/31/16 347,900 146.750 72.569 128.581 95.782% 123.157 1,189,153 135.145 1,054.008 41.703 47,105 0 88,808
2017 12/31/17 358,359 146,750 76,343 135,266 95,782% 129,561 1.224.827 139.205 1,085,623 43,871 49.555 0 93.425
2018 12/31/18 369.132 146.750 60,230 142,152 95.782% 136,156 1.261,572 143,366 1,118,186 46,104 52,077 0 98,182
2019 12/31/19 380,229 146,750 84.233 149,246 95.782% 142.951 1,299.419 147,694 1.151,726 48,405 54,676 0 103,081
2020 12/31120 391.658 146,750 68.356 156,552 95.782% 149.949 1.338,402 152.130 1.186,272 50.775 57,353 0 108,127
$1.599,587 $18,150,204 $1.812.467 $16,337,737 $541,641 $611,815 $0 $1.153,456
~.\. .0"-- ..
l 'a
'l.
t>l
.",
Prepared by: Springsted Incorporeted (printed on 5/27/2004 a11:25 PM) TA Challenge Project CIty-County 5-27-04."ls
I I Erh/h/t 2
Assumptions Report -
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Tax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. x
Challenge Printing Project
Scenario A
Type of Tax Increment Financing District Economic Development
Maximum Duration of TIF District 8 years from 1st increment
Projected Certification Request Date 07/01/04
Decertification Date 12/31/14 (9 Years of Increment)
2004/2005
Base Estimated Market Value $7,375,000
Original Net Tax Capacity $146,750
AssessmenUCollection Year
2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 2007/2008
Base Estimated Market Value $7,375,000 $7,375,000 $7,375,000 $7,375,000
Increase in Estimated Market Value 0 5,621,400 5,934,050 6,333,300
Total Estimated Market Value $7,375,000 $12,996,400 $13,309,050 $13,708,300
Total Net Tax Capacity $146,750 $258,428 $266,181 $274,166
City of Shakopee 32.433%
Scott County 36.635%
ISD #720 21.517%
Other 5.197%
Local Tax Capacity Rate 95.782% 2003/2004
Fiscal Disparities Contribution From TIF District 36.0770%
Administrative Retainage Percent (maximum = 10%) 5.00%
Pooling Percent 0.00%
Bonds Note (Pav-As-You-Go)
Bonds Dated NA Note Dated 07/01/04
Bond Issue @ 0.00% (NIC) $0 Note Rate 6.00%
Eligible Project Costs $0 Note Amount $449,800
Present ValueDate & Rate 07/01/04 6.00%
Notes
Assume $3M Increase in Value on Existing Facility, for Pay 06
Assume New Expansion = $2,621,400 MV
Assume 3% Net Tax Capacitv Inflator Over Term of District
Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 6/18/2004 at 10:52 AM) Tax Increment Financing -6-17-04.xlsAssumptions
I Projected Tax Increment Report I
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Tax Increment Financing (Economic Development) District No. x
Challenge Printing Project
Scenario A
Less: Less: Retained Times: Less: Less:
Annual Total Original Fiscal Captured Tax Annual State Aud. Admin. Annual
Period Net Tax Net Tax Disp.@ Net Tax Capacity Gross Tax Deduction Retainage Net
Ending Capacity * Capacity 36.0770% Capacity Rate Increment 0.360% 5.00% Revenue
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
12/31/04 146,750 146,750 0 0 95.782% 0 0 0 0
12/31/05 146,750 146,750 0 0 95.782% 0 0 0 0
12/31/06 258,428 146,750 40,290 71,388 95.782% 68,377 246 3,407 64,724
12/31/07 266,181 146,750 43,087 76,344 95.782% 73,124 263 3,643 69,218
12/31/08 274,166 146,750 45,968 81,448 95.782% 78,013 281 3,887 73,845
12/31/09 282,391 146,750 48,935 86,706 95.782% 83,049 299 4,138 78,612
12/31/10 290,863 146,750 51,992 92,121 95.782% 88,235 318 4,396 83,521
12/31/11 299,589 146,750 55,140 97,699 95.782% 93,578 337 4,662 88,579
12/31/12 308,577 146,750 58,382 103,445 95.782% 99,081 357 4,936 93,788
12/31/13 317,834 146,750 61,722 109,362 95.782% 104,749 377 5,219 99,153
12/31/14 327,369 146,750 65,162 115,457 95.782% 110,587 398 5,509 104,680
12/31/15 0 0 0 0 95.782% 0 0 0 0
$798,793 $2,876 $39,797 $756,120
* Net Tax Capacity Inflated 3% Annually
Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 6/18/2004 at 10:52 AM) Tax Increment Financing -6-17-04.xls