The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1989-08-12 VTR Memorandum r�Hy- i i -a THU 1 •: 0 9 V - irFR I• P _ 0 1 VOTO, TAUTGES, REDPATH & CO., LTD. Ajjq CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Birch Lake Professional Building a 1310 E Hw 96 • White Bear take, MN 55110 • Fax (612) 4265004 • Phone (612) 426 -3263 MEMORANDUM ROBERT I voto, ( :PA ROBERT G. TAUTGES, CPA T0: Mark Vierling ►AMESs,REDPAT14.CFA Dan Wl la on D. KENNETH GEORGE, CPA nnvwD 1. MOO, CPA FROM: Bob Voto DATE: May 12, 1989 RE: OAK PARK HEIGHTS - TIP ST. CROIX MALL APPLICATION The St. Croix Mall TIF Application includes a pro3ect proforma for "acquisition /construction coats" summarized as follows: ACQUISITION PRICE $3,600 CONSTRUCTION COSTS: i U se Utl► °Hard Casts 5,000,000 'Soft costa 500, Not Authorized for Release *Construction interest 700,000 Total $9,800,000 The $3.6 million acquistion price is based upon parcels being purchased by "Watson" from "Swager" under two Separate Contract For Deed Agreements both dated December 28, 1980. One such agreement (C /D 02) covers the following parcels - all of which are not included in the Mall TIE' Project. 3:"MV -- Per County Parcel - Current Use Assessor 81k 1 /Lot 3 - Vacant Lot Q South West Corner of Mall $ 121.600 Hlk 2 /Lots 7, 8 & 9 - strip Mall a North East Corner of Mall 660,400 Total $ 782,000 Acquisition Price $1,005,000 Factor 1. 29 MEMBERS OF AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS a PRIVATE COMPANIES PRACTICE SECTION MINNESOTA SOCIETY Of CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS MUNICIPAL FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION • MINNESOTA ASSOC OF SCHOOL, BUSINESS OFFICIALS MAY- 1 1- 0 9 T H U 10 09 V Y R • P 0 2 Mark Vierling Dan Wilson May 12, 1989 Page 2 The other agreement (C/O #1) covers several parcels. some of these parcels are included in the Mall TIC' project and others are not. The total acquisition pricey for these parcels includes an unconditional amount of $4.995 million plus a conditional amount of $1.2 million up to $1.5 million. The conditional amount represents Tax Increment Financing proceeds (at a discounted present value based upon a 10 3/4% interest factor). A► comparison of the above acquisition prices with the Washington County Assessor's values is as follows: Amount Factor °FMV - Per County Assessor $4,504,000 �,�" DISCUSSION nod -•�� °Acquisition price I nterna l Use OMY °Unconditi,onal Amount $4,995,000 1.11 Not Authorized for Release *Total A mount. *Minimum ( +$1.2 million) $6,195,000 1.38 *Maximum ( +$1.5 million) $6,495, 1.44 If you compare the above factors with the same factor for the smaller strip mall, (see page 1) it becomes difficult to justify any need for Tax Increment Assistance for the proposed project. The "unconditional" acquistion price appears to value the mall at a lesser factor than the smaller strip mall., (i.e. a factor of 1.11 vs. 1.29). If the mall is in need of renovation (as stated by the developer), this factor should result in a lowered purchase price, The unconditional, amount Teflects this situation as we would expect. The higher amount (additional $1.2 million) does not appear justified. We should probably amend the City's stated policy to make it clear that the City will not allow the use of two separate values as was done in this application. The City's "Statement of Interest" calls for the use of Tax Increment as a tool for the planning and implementation of project activities. As such, Tax Increment Assistance is intended to help finance new construction and new tax base. This project specifically directs such assistance to a prior owner of an existing facility as stated in this underlying Contract For need Agreement. In addition, this application is inconsistent as to project value vs. tax value as stated herein. MAY— 1 1 —P9 THU 10 1 0 VYR � P - 0? Marls V' Dan Wilson May 12, 1989 Page 3 The attached Exhibit A presents an overall summary of all parcels included in the St. Croix Mall PUD subdivision and the St. Croix Mall, PUD - second addition subdivision. Use this Exhibit as a "road map" to illustrate ownership and pre- sent use of the various parcels included. The Last three columns indicate the parcels being purchased by Watson and the parcels included in this TIE Project. The attached Exhibit 8 ,presents an allocation of the $4.995 million and $6.195 million (i.e. $4.995 + $1.200) purchase price among the various parcels being purchased. This allocation is based upon the relative values per the Washington County Assessor's Office. The last four columns (Exhibit E) summarize only those parcels which are included in this TIF Project. It is ,interesting to note the last column on Exhibit B. This is the value used by Watson (Publicorp) to compute the level of incremental taxes to be made available. This value ($3,516,200) closely approximates the Washington County value of $3,480,900 for those parcel$ included in the TIP Project. This comparison points out an Inconsistency in the Application as to the actual "base value" (for tax increment purposes) of this property. Is the base value $3.5 million or is the base value $4.8 million's The Publi= p computations use a base value of $3,516,200 and a completed pro- ject value of $6,616,200 The difference between these values will generate annual incremental taxes of $156,740 per year (based upon the Publicorp computations). This is the level or amount of TIF Assistance being requested. However, it the base value is really $4,787,252 (i.e, a pro - rata portion of the $6.195 acquistion pri ce)7 then, the available incremental taxes would be much less. This is illustrated as follows: DISCUSSION DRAFT °Value of Completed Project Internal Use Only ( Per Application) $6,616,200 Ndh ftfiz8d for Release °$ase Value: *Per Application (3,516,200) ° Per Purchase Agreement (4,787,252) °Incremental Value $3,100,000 $1,828,948 °Incremental Annual Takes $ 156,740 $ 92,474 The above comparisons (coupled with the stipulation that the tax increment pro- ceeds are to be paid to the prior owner), should be considered a major incon- sistency to this proposed project. I —P9 THU 1•: 1 0 V_rFR P - 04 Mark Vierling Dan Wilson May 12, 1989 Page 4 Further elaboration on inconsistency is warranted. The application specifies a total project cost of $9.8 million (see page one of this memo.) However, the total project value for pxojeQted real estate taxes is only $6,616 (see abo- ve) or 68% of the $9.8 million. The two values should be approximately equal. If the total project cost is $9.8 million; why is the project value for real estate tax purposes only $6.6 million? we discussed the above concept when we were developing the City's policy state- ment for TIF Financing. We concluded that one value should be used for both purposes. However, I cannot locate this concept in the final draft of the Development Plan. It may have been omitted from the final draft. If so, this should be corrected. If a $9.8 million value of completed project value is used rather than the $6.6 million, the incremental taxes would total $311,620 per year instead of the $156,740 per year as stated in the application. At this level, the requested $1.2 million of TIF assistance (on a present value basis) would be achieved with 6 1/2 years of incremental tax payments rather than the 15 1/2 years as shown in the application# Note that the 6 1/2 years fits the policy as established by the City Council (see the attached Exhibit C and D.) My present value numbers are somewhat different from those proposed by Publicorp. I have not determined the reason for these differences. However, these differences do not change the situation relating to the inconsistency of the application. This inconsistency is becoming all too common with the TIF Financing Assistance Application. The developer is apparently using inflated "financing values" for total project costs of $9.8 million and reduced "property tax values" for the requested level of assistance. Such an inconsistency cannot be allowed. If the final project is worth $9.8 million, it should be valued and taxed as such. At this value, the incremental taxes would be $311,620 per year and allow the City to provide the requested TIF assistance over a 6 1/2 year period. This would amount to 12 1/4% of the total project. If, however, the total final pro- ject is only $6.6 million; the TIF assistance should be limited accordingly. Upon further analysis of the data, other inconsistencies become evident The developer acquisition /construction costs summary includes a $700,000 item for construction period interest. Basd upon "hard" construction costs of $5.0 million plust "soft" Construction costs of $500,000 and a 10 3/4% interest fac- tor, this represents 13% or approximately twenty -eight months of capitalized construction interest. This seems to be excessive in the extreme. I would have expected ane year or less, computed as follows: °Total Costs $5,500,000 ° Intexesir Rate x 10.75 DISCUSSION DRAFT OTotal 591,250 Internal Use Only °Average Use x .25 Not Authors - Zed for Release ° construction Interest $ 147,$00 MAY- 1 1 -89 THU 1* 1 1 V • P _ 0S Mark Vierling Dan Wilson May 12, 1989 Page 5 The vne- quarter factor for average use is based upon a concept that the money will be paid, out ratably over the construction period of six months. The above construction interest should carry the financing costs of this project to a December, 1989 completion date. If the project is completed in 1989, it will be on the tax rolls at January, 1990 and pay full real estate taxes in 1991 as shown on the Pulicorp schedules. However, the Piablicorp schedules (Exhibit C and D) use a 1989 date for deter- mining the present value of the tax increment flows. This is also inconsistent. The 1989 interest factor is computed in the construction interest. It should not be computed a second time in the present value computation. I have prepared Exhibits E and F to restate the tax increment present value corm potations starting with a 1990 (instead of a 1989) date. As you can see, this factor shortens the time period (for achieving the $1.2 million present value) by approximately one year. DISCUSSION DRAFT 10tem8l Use Only Not Author' ed for Release MALL489A.}Q.S PLAT DATA ST_ CRODL MALL P_ U_ D_ [7Llf1BIT A ST- CROM MALL P_ U_ D_ -2ND- ADUMON 1908185 ASSESSE" VALUE PROPERlY SWAGERIWATSOTI TEE R TAX PAYER II1IB8 111189 TAX PRESENT USE CM #1 CID #2 T L F. `z ST. C1�TDf ILL 1' U Q_ OWNER mx 11 LOTS ST. CRO[KTALLEYBAW SAME 4 49FXSN 21,909.76 BANK BLDG - BLK11 LOTS DUENOW FOODS, INC. SAME 119.181 128.50a 3-OW20 RESTAURANT —FRED Ck4CNE T BL K it LOT6 CITY OF 0_ P_ FL K - MART CORP_ 1.661.100 1.861.100 90.7 K -14ART S TORE- )R BIX It L077 R P_ BROOKS SAME 2?&100 297300 11749-24 OFRCE BLDGL BLK 11 L078 GREEDE114i DS- COMFORT VFW CLUB 3 i1O 365s(1D0 1k30&45 BL B" 11 LOTS SY. CROIX LTD- SM1E %7 U24 44 BORfiIL]NG BLDG- B"11 LOT11 SWAGER BRADS` WATRON CENTERS INC, 7.= 7.= 392.9[3 MALL AC,CESS@GD WEST OAR � RIX 11 L.OT12 SWAGER BIB MG WATSON CENTERS FHC 16,9191 1$9<f0 950154 id SA MALL AOCES '�O_WESTCORNEER BLi11 t + ��t1 � i#T47 ST CRADIC1kfLTifA9li11+� ES 14k$40148,400 U17.94 GAR i7lASR L3L.Dfi 4,3 .& 795. ��JE7IOiV DRA 4 DT_1QD N 398 24 Internal se Only Not Authorized for Release ST_ CROIX !MALL P. U D_ 1LMMON BL K 11 LOT 1 SWAGER EROS INC SAME 19 0 i9,m USTM VACANT LAN - WEST CORNER BLK U LOT 2 SWAGER BMS = SAME 40.200 41l 2813 2.107.52 VACANT LAND O_ WEST CORKER BLK 11 LOT 3 aSWAGI R BIOS ING SAME 121.600 121.680 077.18 VACANT LANDCPSO_ WESTCORNER f 181.600 161.00 8.281 -38 MK 21 LOT f OAK PARK UEY & SWAGER WATSON CENTERS Li4k= 1,16#,600 5547 &90 PARMG I MALL. EXPANSM f MX21LOT 2 OAK PARK M CO WATSON CENTERS W- 7,5&t78D IJW4,M 78.77&10 Mm NIAL.L MX21 LOT 3 OAK PARKDEV & SNAGM WATSON CENTERS 641, 43%SGO 471.180 21,342.3D MALL I MALLE)WAMON BLK 21 LOT 4 SWARM WM NO WATSON CENTERS INQ 26, 0 28500 1,330.10 MALL I MAL.L£XPANSM N MA 21 LOT 5 OAK PARK DEV _ CO WATSON CENTERS 1Iir- 150-W 1655,0m 7.313 -68 MALL-THEATER BLK21LOT 6 OAK PARK DEV CO_ WATSON (ENTERS WC. 790" 897,IIw 3EI KALL-K-MART EXPRNSION � . i BLK21LOT 7 SEER Btu 1RC SAME 114,M 114.M 5;M511 STRIP MALL @NO -EAST # • OLK 2I LOT 8 OAK PARK DEV_ C.D. SAME 29&= 29018013 14151L04 STW MALL O)ND EAST CORNER � BL K21 21 LOST 9 OAK PARR DEV. CO_ SAME 254,700 254 IZM 68 MW WALL 01NOL EAST CORNER � *� } BL K21 LOT 10 OAK PAW DEV- co- WATEON CENTERS INC. 140.30L3 189.300 L} W.10 PALOE G-SEHIND KIT IE 5.009;DDD 5.138.200 2421029.46 I 5.190 -680 5-319.813 f1 251.311.44 J � 4,3T5.I�M 4504,5 C1 DEED #1- 121Z81RE- $4,995.L11I0 +31.200.Q00. TIFPT4rJCEED5 782J= 782.0013 C 1 DEED # 2 -12 U00509 TOTAL I Pate 1 r MALL4898.34.5 m PLAT DATA ST- 4HOD1 MALL P U_ LL B B ST CROIX MALL P U_ D- 2HD_ ADDITION CID #i T_ L F 0 ASSESSED VALUE '%"TO CID III CID 91 ASSESS_ SWAGMI WATSON FEE UNNER TAX PAYED 111188 1111$9 TOTAL ALLOC A OC MI(T 4. ,110a 6.195099 #PAC_ ST- CROIX MALL P- U• 1)_ BI K If LOTS ST. CPAW VALLEY a" SAVE 451,5UD 43Ua,.500 SLK11 LOTS DLIEK(YW FOODS. I11C. SAME 11MG8 124WO %x It LOT6 CITY OF O_ P_ FL K -MA€{T CORP. 1,8€11.100 1_861,100 SLK TI L OT7 FU P` BROOKS SAME 278,1OD 297.3BD TA_K1ILOT8 GREEDER44INDS- COMFORT VFW CLIP 355,9N 365M0 Sm i I LOTS ST_ CROIX LTD_ SAME 957.209 1.924.100 BLK 11 LOT11 SWAGER BROS_ R4r— WATSON CENTERS INC_ 7.604 7,8M 0-173?% ELM 10.727 BLK11 LOT12 SWAGER. 8RO& LNC_ WATSON CENTERS WO 16.900 18.500 Q4196% 2Q„958 25.993 . BLK11 LOT17 ST. CROIX GMWASFIINC SAME 140.400 140.400 C34fi,Si DISG SS��N D RAFT +.21171 1111 111 intemai Use O NY Not uthvfized for Release ST. C RO1K MALL P- U- D.:-2ND- A0D1T101i BLK II LIDT 1 SWAGER RFM m SAME 19,899 1S,99D BL.K1ILOT2 SWWAR BROS ING SAME 442114 44200 HLKI(LOT3 SWAGER BROS ING SAME 12100 121 181.901 181)w OLK21LOT 1 OM PARK DEV &SWAGER WATSON CENTERS ING- 1,140.100 1,T61,600 M7675% 1,2 1.RRUW 1.161.6m 1 URF.Sm 1.161,560 SIX 21 LOT 2 OAK PARK DEV. LSD_ WATSON CENTERS Rrl 1,6 1.1K7D11 36.734+1A 1.834,882 2.275. 1) 700 1,03$882 Z27U% I.W WO r BIX 2 /LOT 3 OAIL PARK Off & SWACR. WATSON CENTERS INC— 43B.6 471_100 10.45$4% 322.399 647,8W 471,100 527-399 647,90D 01,100 BLK 2 f LOT 4 IMAGER 11RG3 M WA'iSON CENTERS 26.600 28,E €1.6327,6 31.M 391.116 2$509 31.503 39_1S8 28,504 N BLK2 f LOT 5 OAK PARK LTV. GU_ WATSON RENT Wr— 159,300 165in0 3-66M 18M7 225,.923 165,900 182,907 224 t 165fLI BLK2ILOT S OAK PARK OLY_ CO_ WATSDUCE1TIERS M. mma 897.690 17.9'2 ?% 1185,540 T_110ms .. 13LK 21 LC1T 7 SWAGER BRW RIC SAME 114LSM 114900 . BLK 21 LOT 8 OA{ PAW DEV. COQ_ SAME 290,899 M8011 MR 2) LOT 9 OAK PARK DEV_ CO- SAW 254,790 254791 6L.K2ILOT 10 OAK PARK DEV- CO_ WAT'SENI CENTERS 140.309 198.3.10 42025% 269,913 26 0" 5.009LWD 5.13820D T 6.19 4 5- 319.8011 im.0893% 4.9995,4470 kiss-= 3.48990.1 135 4 3,516200 W I I r Page i 3` MAY- 1 1 -a 1 J THU 19: 1:3 k'TR • P . 0S MALL489 s.XLS CITY OF OAK PARK hEIfi. HTS Q0 - 1181T 0 T. I. F. PROPOSAL - -ST. CROIX HALL (BASED UPON PROJECT VALUE OF $6.6 MIL.) (WTH A 1989 P. V. STARTING DATE) P. A. Y. G. PAYMENT YEAR 0. T. 0 N. T. 0, 0. T. 0. T. 0. R. T. I. A Q YEAR 1989 176,245 176,245 0 49266 0 1969 1988 176,245 175,245 0 0,9266 0 internal Use Only 1989 1990 176.245 176,245 0 0.9266 0 11990 1990 176,245 176,245 0 0.9768 0 Not Authorized for RelQasc 11990 1991 176,245 345.401 155,1156 0.9266 78,370 77.370 59,940 59,940 1991 1991 176.245 345.401 169,156 0.9266 78,370 77,370 $6,956 116,896 1991 1992 176.245 345,401 169,156 0.9266 76,370 77,370 54,121 171,017 1992 1992 176.745 345,401 169,156 0.9266 78,370 77,370 51,426 222,445 1992 1993 175,245 345.401 169,156 0.9266 78.370 77.370 46.868 271,313 1993 1993 176,245 345,401 169.156 0,9268 78,370 77,370 46.436 317,749 1993 1994 176,245 345,401 169,156 0.9266 78,370 77.370 44,125 361,874 1994 1994 176.245 345,4001 169,156 0.9266 78,370 77,370 41,929 403.803 1994 1995 176.245 359,217 182,972 0.9266 84,771 83,771 43,138 446.941 1995 1995 176,245 359.217 182.972 0.9266 64,771 83,771 40.991 487.932 1995 1996 176,245 373.586 1194341 0.9266 91.428 90,428 42,040 $29,978 1996 1996 176,245 373.586 197,341 0.9266 91.428 90,426 39,953 569,931 1996 1987 176.245 368,529 212,284 0.9268 98,351 97,351 40,871 610.802 1997 1997 176,245 388,528 212,284 0.9266 98.351 97,351 38,637 649,539 1997 1996 176,245 404,070 227.825 0.9266 105,551 104.551 39.634 689,273 1998 1998 176,245 404,070 227,825 0.9266 105,551 104,551 37,661 726,934 1998 1999 176,245 420,233 243.968 0.9266 113,040 112,040 38.350 765,284 1999 1989 176,245 420.233 243,988 0.9266 113,040 112.040 36,441 801,725 1999 2000 175245 437,042 260,797 0.9266 120,827 119,827 37,034 838,759 2000 2000 176,245 437,042 260,797 09266 120,827 119,827 35.191 673,950 2000 2001 176,245 454.524 278,279 0.9266 125.927 127,927 35,700 909,650 2001 2001 176.245 454,624 278,279 0.9266 128,927 127,927 33,923 943.573 2001 2002 176,245 472,705 296.460 0.9266 137,350 136.350 34,357 577,930 2002 2002 176,245 472,705 296,460 0.9266 137.350 136,350 32,647 1.010.577 2002 2003 175,245 491,613 315,368 0.9266 146,110 145,110 $3,015 1,043,592 2003 2003 176.245 491,613 315.368 0.9266 146,110 145,110 31.372 1,074,964 2003 2004 176,245 511,278 335,033 0.9266 155,221 154,221 311,682 1,106,646 2004 2004 176.245 511.278 335,033 0.9266 153.221 154,221 30,105 1,136,751 2004 2005 176,245 531.729 355,484 0.9266 164,696 163,696 30,305 1,167,116 2005 2005 176,245 531.729 355,484 0.9266 16114,696 163,696 28.853 1,195,959 2005 2006 176,245 5552,998 376.753 0.9266 174,550 178.550 29,069 1,226,037 2006 2006 176.245 552,998 375,753 0.9266 174550 173,550 27,621 1,752,658 2006 2007 176,245 575,118 398,873 0.9256 184,728 183,798 27,796 1.260454 2007 2007 176,245 575,118 390,873 0.9268 184,79$ 1$3.795 26,413 1,306,867 2007 2008 176,245 5913,123 421.876 0.9266 195.456 194,456 26,553 1.333.420 2008 2008 176,245 59B,123 421,878 0.9266 195.456 194,456 25.232 1.358.652 7006 Page 1 MAY - 1 1 -e THLI 1 *: 1 4 %-' FR • F_ 0S- MAL L489C.XLS (QTY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS EXHIBIT Q T. I. F. PROPOSAL CAOIX MALL (BASED UPON PROJEOT VALUE OF $9.8 MIL) (WfTI A 1999 P, V. STARTING DATE) P. A. Y. O. PAYMENT YEAR Q. T. C. N. T. C. C. T. C. T. C. R. T.1. A qj YEAR 1989 176,245 176,245 0 0.9266 0 U I c" S 10 1 � f 1989 1969 176,245 176,245 0 0.9266 0 int erna l Use o nly 1985 1990 178.245 178.245 8 0.92691 0 1990 1990 176,245 176,245 0 0.9266 0 Not Authorized for Relgase 1990 1991 176,245 512,550 336,305 0.9255 155,810 154,810 119,933 119,933 1551 1991 176,245 512,550 336,305 0.8255 155,810 154,810 113,964 233,687 1991 1992 176,245 512.550 336,305 0.9266 155,810 154,810 108,292 342.189 1992 1992 176.245 512,550 336,305 0.9266 155,810 154,810 162,902 445,091 1982 1993 176.245 512,550 336,305 0.9268 155,810 154,810 97,780 542,871 1993 1993 176,245 512,550 336,305 0.9266 155,810 1 54,810 92,914 635.785 1993 1394 176,245 512,550 $36,305 0.9266 155,810 154,810 88,269 72074 1994 1994 176,245 512,550 336,305 0,9266 155,810 154,810 83,895 807,969 1994 1995 176,245 533,052 356.807 0.9266 165,309 164,309 64,611 692.580 1995 1995 170,245 533.052 356,807 0.9266 155,309 164,309 60,400 972,980 1995 1996 176,245 554,374 378,129 0.9266 175,167 174,187 80,991 1,053,971 1996 1996 176,245 554.374 $78,129 0.9268 175,187 174,187 76.960 1,130,931 1995 1997 176,245 576,549 400.304 0.9266 185,461 154,461 77,443 1.208.374 1997 198r 176,245 575,549 400,304 0.9265 186,461 184,461 73,569 1,281,963 1957 1998 175.245 599,611 423.366 0.9266 198.145 195,145 73,976 1.355.938 1998 1998 176,2455 599,611 423,366 0.9266 195,145 195,145 70,294 1,426,233 1998 1999 176,245 623,596 447,350 0.9266 207,257 205.257 70,599 1,496,832 1999 1999 176,245 623,5595 447 0.9266 207,257 206,257 67,085 1.563,917 1999 2000 176,245 648,539 472,294 0.9266 213.614 217,814 67,318 1.631.235 2000 2000 176.246 648,539 472.294 0.9266 218,814 217,6'14 83,968 1,695,203 2000 2001 176,245 674481 498,236 0.9288 230.833 229,533 64,138 1.759.341 2001 2001 176,245 674.481 498,236 0.9266 230,833 229.833 60,946 1,820,267 2001 2002 176,245 701,460 525,215 0.9266 243,332 242,332 61,062 1,881.349 2002 2002 176,245 701,460 525,215 0,9266 243.332 242332 58,023 1.939,372 2002 2003 179,245 729,518 553,273 0.9256 251031 255,331 56,092 1,997,464 2003 2003 176,245 729,518 553.273 0.9266 256,331 255,331 56,201 2,052,865 2003 2004 176,245 758,599 682,454 0.9266 269,651 268,851 55.231 2,107,896 2004 2004 176,245 758,699 582,454 0,9266 269,851 268,851 52,482 2,160,375 2004 2005 176.245 789.047 61202 0.8256 283,911 782.911 52,478 2.212.856 2005 2005 176,245 789,047 612,902 0.9266 253,811 282,911 49,666 2,262,722 2005 2006 176.245 820.609 644,364 0.9266 298,534 297,534 49,833 2,312,555 2006 2006 176,245 824.609 644,364 0.9266 298,534 297,634 47,353 2,358 908 2006 2007 176,245 853.433 677,188 0.9266 313,741 312,741 47.296 2.407,204 2007 2007 176,246 653,433 677,186 0.9266 313,741 312,741 44.942 2.452,146 2007 2008 176,245 887,570 711,325 0.9266 329,557 328.557 44,865 2,497,011 2008 2008 176,24*S 887,570 711,325 0.9266 329,557 328,557 42,632 2,539.643 2008 page 2 MHIf' ; 1 1 -S9 THLl 19: 1 4 VTR • P_ 10 MALL489D.XLS CITY OF OAK PARK HEI+GKVS EXHIBIT E T. 1. F PROPOSAL--ST. CROIX MALL (BASED UPON PROJECT VALUE OF f6 -6 MIL.) (WIT1.1 A 1990 P. Y. STAKnNQ DATE) P. A. Y. G. PAYMENT YEAR 4. T. 0 N. T. C. C. T. C. T. C. R. T.1. AM kcnl&&10 fff9ttf. YEAR 1989 176,245 176,245 0 0.9266 0 1989 1989 176,245 176,245 0 0.9766 0 Internal Use Only 1989 7990 176,245 176.245 0 0.9266 6 Not Authorized for Release 1990 1991 175,245 345.401 169,156 0.9266 78,370 77,370 66,383 66,383 1991 1961 176,245 345,401 169,156 0.9266 78,370 77,370 63,079 129,462 1991 1992 176,245 345,401 169,156 0.9266 78,370 77,370 59,940 189,402 1992 1992 176,245 345,401 189,156 0.9266 78,370 77.370 56.956 246,356 1992 1993 176.245 345.401 169,156 0.9266 78,370 77,970 54,121 300,479 1935 1993 170,245 345,401 189,156 0.9266 78,370 77,370 51,428 351,907 1993 1994 176,245 345,401 169,156 0.9266 78,370 77,370 48,868 400,775 1994 1994 176,245 345,401 169,156 0.9266 78,370 77.370 46.436 447.211 1984 19851 175,245 359,217 182,972 0.9266 84,771 83,771 47,775 494,986 1995 1995 176.245 359,217 162'972 0.9266 54,771 83,771 45,397 540.363 1995 1996 776,245 373,586 197,341 0.9266 91.426 90,428 45.566 586,949 1996 1995 176,245 373,586 197,341 0.9265 91,426 90,428 44,248 631,197 1996 1997 176,245 368,529 212,284 0.9266 98,351 97,351 45,265 676,462 1997 1997 176,245 388,529 212,284 0.9266 98.351 97.351 43,012 719,474 1997 1998 176,245 404.070 227,625 0.9266 105,551 104,551 43,894 753,368 1998 1996 176,215 404.070 227,625 0.9266 105,551 104,52 41,709 805,077 1998 1999 176,245 420,233 243.988 0.9266 113,040 112,040 421472 847,549 1999 1999 176,245 420,233 243,988 0.9266 113,040 112,040 40,359 887,908 1999 Z400 175,24 437,042 260,797 0.9266 120.827 119.827 41.015 928,923 2000 2000 176.245 437,042 260,797 0.9255 120,827 115,827 38,974 967,897 2000 2001 176,245 45 5 4,524 276,279 0.9266 128,927 127,927 39.538 1,007,435 2081 2001 176,245 45024 278,279 0.9266 128,927 127.927 37,570 1,045,005 2001 2002 176,245 472,705 296.460 0.8260 137,350 136,350 38.050 1,083.055 2002 2002 176,245 472,705 296,460 0.9266 137,350 136,350 36.157 1.119.212 2002 2003 176.245 401,513 315,368 0.9265 146,110 1 45,110 36,564 1,155,776 2003 2003 176.245 491.613 315,368 0.9266 146.110 145.110 34.744 1,130.520 2003 2004 176,245 511.278 335.033 0.9256 1551.221 154.221 35.088 1,225.6108 2064 2004 176.245 511.278 335.033 0,9266 155,221 154,221 33.342 1.258,950 2004 2005 175.245 531,729 355,484 0.9266 164,696 163,698 33,629 1,292.579 200 2005 176.245 531,729 355,484 0.8266 164,696 163,696 31,955 1.324,534 2005 2005 776,745 552,998 376,753 0.9266 17+550 173.550 32,192 1,355,725 2006 2006 176,245 552,998 376.753 0.8266 174,6 173,550 30,590 1,387,316 2006 3007 176,245 575,118 398,873 0.9265 134,798 183,798 30.754 1,418,100 2007 2007 176.245 575,118 398,873 0.9266 184,793 183,798 29,252 1,447,352 2007 2008 176,245 598.123 421,878 0.9266 195,456 194,456 29,405 1,476.760 2008 2008 175,245 598,123 421,878 0.9266 195,456 194,456 27,944 1.504.704 2008 Pa 1 jj r-1 F4 Y - 1 1 -:3 THLl 110: 1 S - r FR F' 1 1 e MA 489D.XLS CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS EX1iISIT 1" T. 1. F. PROPOSAL - -ST. CROIX MALL (BASED UPON PROJECT VALUE OF $3.8 MIL) (WITH A 1990 P. V. STARTING DATE) P. A. Y. G. PAYMENT YEAR 0. T. 0 N. T. C. C. T. C. T. 0. R. T. I. AMT. P. V. A M1.,. YEAR 1969 176.245 176,245 0 0.9266 0 D I o u b b l o (v Do 1982 1989 175,245 176.245 0 0.9266 0 1909 1990 176,246 178,245 0 0.9266 0 �� C1Y��y 1990 1990 176,245 176,245 0 0.9266 0 Nqj�uthorized for Rebea5e 19900 1991 176.245 512,660 336,305 0.9266 155,810 132.626 132,826 1991 1991 176,245 512,550 335.305 0.0266 155,810 154,814 126,215 259,041 1991 1992 176,245 612,550 335.305 0.9266 155,510 154.810 119,933 378,974 1992 1992 176.245 512.550 $36,305 0.9266 155,810 154,810 113,964 492.938 1692 1993 176,245 512,550 338,305 0.9266 1533,010 154810 108.292 601.230 1993 1993 175.245 512,550 336,305 0.9266 155.810 154.810 102,902 764,132 1993 1994 176,245 512.550 336,305 0.9266 155,810 154,810 97,780 801.912 1954 1994 176.245 512,550 336.305 0.9266 155.810 154.810 92,914 894,826 1994 1995 176.245 533,052 356,807 0.9266 166.399 164,309 93,707 906,533 1995 1995 176,245 533,052 356,807 0.9266 165,309 164,309 69,043 1.077,576 1995 1996 176,245 554.374 378,129 0.92651 175,187 174,187 89.698 1,167,274 1996 1996 176,245 554.374 378,129 9.9256 175.187 174.1 85.233 1,262,507 1996 1997 176,245 576.549 400,304 0.9266 185.461 184,461 65.768 1,338,275 1997 1997 175,245 576,549 400,304 0.9266 185,461 164,451 81,499 4.419.774 1997 1998 176,245 593,611 423,366 0,8266 196,145 195,145 61,929 1.501. 1998 1998 176,245 599,611 423.366 0,9266 196.145 195,145 77,851 1.579.554 1998 1999 175,246 623,595 447.350 0.92661 207,257 206,257 78.189 1,6157.743 1999 1999 176,245 623,595 447,350 0.9266 207,257 206,257 74.297 1,737,040 1999 2000 176.245 648,539 472.294 0.9266 218.614 217,614 74.555 1.606,595 2000 20100 176,245 646,539 472,294 0.9266 218,814 217,814 70,844 1,877,439 2000 2001 176.245 674,481 498.238 0.9266 230,839 229,833 71.033 1,948,472 2001 2001 176,245 574,481 498,236 0,9265 230,833 229,833 67.497 2,015 ,969 2001 2002 176245 701,460 525,215 0.9266 243,332 242,332 67,626 2.083.596 2002 2002 176.245 701,460 575,215 0.9266 243,332 242,332 64,260 2,147,855 2002 2003 176,245 729,518 553.273 0.9266 256,331 255,331 64.337 2,212,192 2003 2003 178,245 729,518 553,273 0.9266 256,331 255.931 61,135 2,273,327 2003 2004 176,245 758,699 582,454 0.9266 269,851 268,851 61,168 2.934495 2004 2004 176,245 758,699 582,454 0.9266 269,851 268.851 58,124 2.392,619 2004 2005 178.245 789,047 612,802 0.9266 283.911 282,911 58,120 2,450,739 2005 2005 176.245 789,047 612,802 0.9266 283,911 282.911 55,227 2.5115,966 2005 2006 176,245 820,609 644.364 0.9266 298,534 297,534 55,191 2,561.157 2006 2006 176,245 820,609 64364 0.9255 298,534 297,534 57,444 2.613,601 2006 2007 176,245 853,433 677,188 0.9266 313,741 312,741 52,380 2,665,981 2007 2007 176,245 853.433 677,188 0.9266 313,741 $12,741 49,773 2,715,754 2007 2008 176,245 887,570 711,325 0.9266 329,557 328,557 49,688 2.765.442 2008 2008 176,24 887,5570 711,325 0.9266 329,557 328,557 47',215 2.812,657 2008 Page 2 u I —e- THIJ 10 00 VTR . P _ 0 1 VOTO, TAUTGES, REDPATH & CO., L TD. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS tt Birch Lake Professional Building +'1390 E. Hwy, 96 • White Bear Lake, MN $5990 + Phone 426.3263 � FAX #(612) 426-5004 RoaeRT I. voi0, �A TRANSMITTAL. UTTER ROM PA T ,CPA LAMES S. REDPnTli, CPA 0, ItENNETM GEORGE, CPA Date: s/ r/AI Time: /49.4f Q^vQ1. f Company: AA W- A -5-0a. G ,vs�• - ATTN: L r /rc.sa.✓ FAX Number -f -�. Sending a total of /A pages (including this cover page). If you do not receive all pages, or are experiencing other problems in transmissions, please call Sally at (61 426 - 3263 or ask for the undersigned. COMMENTS: 000000000000000P 000000000 SPECIFIC CLIENT AUTHORIZATION TO TRANSMIT THIS CONFI DENTIAL DATA TO THEIR FAX MACHINE: Authorized by Client: Date: Telephone Number: - Time: Verified by VTR: Date: Time: Memo: Lang Distance Charge: $ MEMBERS OF AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS t PRIVATE COMPANIES PRACTICE SECTION MINNESOTA SOCIETY OF C €RTIFI €D PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS COVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICSRS ASSOCIATION 9 MINNESOTA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL. BUSINESS OFFICIALS