Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/13/2004 AGENDA MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TUESDAY, July 13, 2004 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL MAPLEWOOD ROOM 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes a. March 18, 2003 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Communications a. 2004 Annual Tour- Wednesday, August 11, 2004 6. Unfinished Business None 7. New Business a. Tax-Exempt Financing Request - Concordia Arms (2030 Lydia Avenue) 8. Date of Next Meeting 9. Adjoumment DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, MARCH 18, 2003 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM A I. CALLTO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. I1. ROLL CALL Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Tom Connelly Absent Lorraine Fischer Present Joe O'Brien Present Gary Pearson Present Beth Ulrich Absent Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary II1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the HRA minutes for August 13, 2002. Commissioner Pearson had corrections and additions on pages 2, 3, and 4. On page 2, in the seventh paragraph, the sentences in the paragraph should read as follows: Commissioner Pearson said the industry would recommend them to a company called North Country, you have to have 51% of the people in the community agreeing to ~ purchase and appointed appoint a board for their co-op. These organizations would help the residents with information and how to proceed to get the funding. On page 3, in the fourth paragraph, it should read: Commissioner O'Brien said he feels manufactured home park o;v,'~cr.s residents should have protection from being forced to leave their homes as a single-family home r-esi(JeP~ owner has. Also, in the last paragraph, at the bottom of page 3, the third sentence should read: In his park they require people to have a form safety feature code disclosure form filled out by aA homeowner or inspection company prior to a new owner eemiP~ being approved to go in to the park. On page 4, in the fourth paragraph, in the fourth sentence delete the word with. In the seventh paragraph, the last sentence, delete the word of. In the ninth paragraph, in the second line change the word (~e to be. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the minutes with changes. Commissioner O'Brien seconded. Ayes - Fischer, O'Brien, Pearson The motion carried. Housing and Redevelopment Authority Minutes of 03-18-03 -2- IV. APPROVAL OFAGENDA Chairperson Fischer added Hillcrest Village under number 6. Unfinished Business. Commissioner O'Brien moved to approve the agenda with changes. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes - Fischer, O'Brien, Pearson The motion carried. V. COMMUNICATIONS a. Land Trust Information Mr. Roberts said Chairperson Fischer requested staff to find information about land trusts or community trusts for affordable housing. In researching the request, staff found several articles about community land trusts and housing trusts. The articles were included in the HRA packet for further information and reference. VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Hillcrest Village Update Mr. Roberts said staff is in the beginning stage of writing a new section for the TN2 (mixed use) ordinance. The hope is to have the new ordinance written before the moratorium expires in October 2003. Mr. Roberts asked the HRA members if they wanted the Hillcrest Village plan to come before the commission. HRA members agreed that, yes, they would like to review it. Commission members said items they would like to discuss having the business and residence on different floors in one building and the use of accessory buildings or carriage homes. VII. NEW BUSINESS a. Maplewood Larpenteur Avenue Redevelopment Plan (Larpenteur Avenue and Adolphus) Mr. Roberts said the city acquired five single-family houses located on the northwest corner of Larpenteur Avenue and Adolphus Street with the city's Housing Replacement Program funds. The city originally purchased three of these houses after they were flooded during a rainstorm in April 2001. The two adjacent older houses, which were not flooded, were purchased by the city last year in order to combine all five properties to create a more comprehensive development plan. Mr. Roberts said the city is now proposing to rezone and change the comprehensive land use plan for the five city-owned properties (189, 209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue and 1701 Adolphus Street). The city is proposing this change to accommodate the development of up to 11 town house units~in the future. The development of the town house units will require a separate review and is not being considered at this time. Housing and Redevelopment Authority Minutes of 03-18-03 -3- Mr. Roberts said the city's plan is to get a higher density to recover the money the city has invested in this land. There are two staff proposals. Proposal One is double-dwelling residential: Within the (R-2) zoning district, the permitted uses include single and double dwelling units (no multi-unit townhouses). The city's comprehensive plan does not define the maximum density allowed within the (R-2) zoning district. Therefore, the density is limited by the allowable lot size and lot width as defined in the city's zoning code. Mr. Roberts said the second proposal is for Medium Multiple-Dwelling Residential: Within the (R-3) zoning district, the permitted uses include multiple dwellings (including multi-unit townhouses). Within the city's comprehensive plan, the maximum density allowed within the R-3(M) land use is six units per acre. If the five city-owned properties were planned to R-3(M), a maximum of 11 townhouse units could be constructed. The (R-3) zoning district is also less restrictive than the (R- 2) zoning district with no minimum lot size or lot width. Mr. Roberts said staff has drawn two plans in the staff report. The first plan is for six units zoned (R-2) and the second plan is for 11 units. Commissioner Pearson asked staff if the plan for the six units zoned R-2 would fit under the R- 3(M) plan? Mr. Roberts said after checking in the Comprehensive Plan, yes, it would work. Commissioner Pearson said when you read the neighbor's comments they all want to keep single- family homes in this area. Mr. Roberts said staff is trying to find out what the commission feels is the best fit for the area, either the six units or the 11 units. Commissioner Pearson liked the (R-2) plan with six units. He said he would be comfortable with the (R-3) plan as well but no more then 9 units. He feels the eleven units shown on the plan are too high. He feels that if you keep the density down, then the number of residents and vehicles are lower. Then you're able to have less cars and less parking problems. He also likes the six-unit plan because it exits off the side street instead of onto Larpenteur Avenue. He said exiting onto Larpenteur Avenue was a big concern of the neighborhood residents as well. Commissioner O'Brien liked the (R-3) plan with eleven units to make the most use of the land and for the city to recover the most money for the land purchased. He said you could go under the eleven units, but the developer can't go over the eleven units. He said there are some good designs out there. There could be tuck under garages and maybe even have a service road along Larpenteur Avenue so the back yards could face the pond area. Commissioner Fischer liked the (R-3) plan with eleven units also. She said it would be a good fit between commercial properties and the pond and open space in the back yard. Having more units on the site is a way to recover more money the city has invested in the property. Money recovered in this project means more money that could be reinvested in housing in another area of the city. Mr. Roberts said that is a legitimate concern for the HRA to continue the housing reinvestment program. T Housing and Redevelopment Authority -4- Minutes of 03-18-03 Commissioner O'Brien moved to adopt the zoning map change resolution on page 13 of the staff report. This resolution changes the zoning map for five city-owned properties (189,209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue and 1701 Adolphus Street) from single dwelling residential (R-l) to multiple dwelling residential (R-3). The city is making this change because: a. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent if the zoning code of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. b. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. c. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. Commissioner O'Brien moved to adopt the land use plan change resolution on page 14 of the staff report. This resolution changes the comprehensive land use plan map for five city-owned properties (189, 209, 211 and 215 Larpenteur Avenue and 1701 Adolphus Street) from single dwelling residential (R-l) to medium multiple-dwelling residential (R-3M). The city is making this change because: a. The site serves well as a transition between the double-dwelling property to the west and the commercial property to the east. b. The site meets the city's policies for medium multiple-dwelling residential uses since it: (1) Includes a variety of housing types for all types or residents. (2) Supports innovative subdivision and housing design. c. The site meets the city's goals for medium multiple-dwelling residential uses since it: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Provides for orderly development. Protects and strengthens neighborhoods. Preserves significant natural features where practical. Minimizes the land planned for streets. Minimizes conflicts between land uses. Provides a wide variety of housing types. Integrates developments with open space areas, significant natural features. community facilities and Housing and Redevelopment Authority Minutes of 03-18-03 -5- Commissioner Fischer seconded. Ayes- Fischer, O'Brien Nay- Pearson Commissioner Pearson said he voted nay because he feels the density is too high for the area. He feels the city should accommodate the request of the residents who want the use to remain single-family instead of accommodating the developers. Commissioner O'Brien said he voted aye because the amount of money the city has put into this parcel of land the city needs to recover their investment by putting the most units on the property as possible. The city will be taking care of a flooding problem that occurred there and this would increase the housing stock for people wanting to live closer to St. Paul. He thinks there can be design and architectural elements put into this project to make this a desirable location. The motion carried. This item goes to the city council on Mamh 31,2003. Commissioner Joe O'Brien will be the HRA representative at the city council meeting, March 31,2003. b. Van Dyke Village Town House Development (Van Dyke Street, north of County Road B) Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bruce Mogren is proposing to build a 24-unit town house development on the vacant property on the west side of Van Dyke Street, north of County Road B. This development, called Van Dyke Village, would be primarily for workforce housing for Iow and moderate-income families. There would be on-site management to help monitor and run the property. Mr. Roberts said on March 27, 2000, the city council directed city staff and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) to buy from Ramsey County the four tax-forfeited properties on the west side of Van Dyke Street for the development of Iow to moderate or mixed income housing. On June 22, 2000, the council adopted a resolution authorizing the reconveyance and the purchase of the tax-forfeited properties on the west side of Van Dyke Street for the development of Iow to moderate or mixed income housing. City staff, based on this council approved, bought this property from the county for the city. Mr. Roberts said a reason this property went tax-forfeit and has not yet been developed is poor soils. There are areas of poor soils on the property that the builder will have to correct as part of the development of the site. Mr. Roberts said this is an expense that a developer would have to consider when putting a project together for this area. Mr. Mogren, while working with the city and the county on preparing the development proposal, told him that having at least 24 town houses is necessary to make the project financially feasible. Mr. Roberts said many of the neighbors who contacted him expressed concerns about the proposed housing and the residents who would live there. Mr. Mogren is proposing to have 75 percent (18) units within this development for workforce housing, which is for Iow-to-moderate income residents. Housing and Redevelopment Authority Minutes of 03-18-03 -6- Mr. Roberts said to qualify as a resident, Ramsey County sets the income levels based on the household size and their percentage of average median income of the Twin Cities area. For example, a three-person household at the 50 percent median income level has an annual income of about $34,500 per year and a three-person household at the 60 percent income level earns about $41,000 per year. Commissioner Pearson said he has received telephone calls from neighbors complaining about the problems occurring in the neighborhood since Emma's Place has opened. The neighbors have said homeowners have to keep their belongings under lock and key or it gets stolen. They can't leave their garage doors open or things get stolen. They told him the kids that live in the neighborhood are being harassed by the kids at Emma's Place that hang out in the neighborhood. If the kids walk on the trail or around the pond, the kids at Emma's Place harass them. Kids on the bus are being harassed to the point they don't want to ride the bus anymore. He feels if this proposal is built, there will be even more problems for the neighborhood. The neighbors that live there have gone through enough since Emma's Place was built. Commissioner Pearson said he voted against the Van Dyke Village proposal at the planning commission meeting and he is voting against this proposal for the HRA as well. The traffic at Cope Avenue and White Bear Avenue is bad enough. He feels the city has done a disservice to this area and he can't vote for it. He said the police report is totally inaccurate in the staff report and in his opinion it is not a report at all. He feels the city should have received a detailed report of the nature of the complaints occurring in the area from the police department. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if Mr. Mogren has a problem with putting in a sidewalk? Mr. Roberts said no, Mr. Mogren agreed to put in the sidewalk. Commissioner O'Brien said since the city put in the sidewalk on White Bear Avenue underneath Highway 36 he has seen many people use the sidewalk. In the past he has seen people trying to get down White Bear Avenue in the snow with traffic coming and going to Cub and Rainbow, and not having a sidewalk made it very difficult for people. This sidewalk is used often and he thinks it will be just as important to have this sidewalk by Van Dyke Village proposal. In his opinion, the sidewalk was money well spent for the area. The residents will be using the sidewalk to get to the bus stop, to the Goodwill, and to cross White Bear Avenue to Cope Avenue to get to restaurants across the street. He said he thinks people will be using the bus for transportation. This will increase the pedestrian traffic. If the residents will be driving that live in the Van Dyke Village, then that will increase the vehicle traffic in the area. This particular intersection is a hazard with many near miss accidents. There is already a no left turn sign there because of the traffic hazards. Mr. Roberts said there is a bus stop on White Bear Avenue and County Road B by Health Partners that people will probably be using. Commissioner O'Brien said there is also a bus stop in front of the Amoco station on White Bear Avenue so people may be cutting through those commercial properties. Commissioner O'Brien said having 22 or 24 units in this development, in his opinion, does not make that big of a difference. He feels the traffic is already a large problem and the 24 or more cars coming from that development will not make that big of a difference. Housing and Redevelopment Authority Minutes of 03-18-03 -7- Chairperson Fischer said she wonders if the Van Dyke Village development proposal should be penalized because of the bad experience with Emma's Place and the problems that have occurred in the neighborhood. She said years ago, before Emma's Place was built, the neighborhood was in opposition of building town homes in that area, so there is a history of opposition of building in that area of the neighborhood. Commissioner Pearson said he thinks it would be better for the neighborhood to have slab on grade single-family dwellings zoned R-I(S) instead of this proposal. He doesn't think the city is serving the neighborhood with this proposal at all. Maplewood has already exceeded their necessary limit for affordable housing. Mr. Roberts said he did some checking and there would only be enough land to build eight single- family dwellings on R-I(S) sized lots in that area. Because of the cost of the land and the cost to correct the soil conditions, it is not cost effective to build eight homes there. He said this proposal would be more cost effective with the 22 or 24 rental units proposed to be built there. Chairperson Fischer said the city has already exceeded the amount of affordable housing expected by the met council but they are supposed to keep adding to the affordable housing stock. She said she is fine with this proposal just as she voted on this at the planning commission. She felt having the two units over the density would not make much difference. She likes the fact that having the two additional units would allow Mr. Mogren to have the on-site management there. So for that reason, she approves this proposal. Commissioner Pearson said he wants the commission to understand that on-site management is not the same as it is in a manufactured park. In a manufactured park on-site management includes people that are there every day and they enforce the rules. The residents that would live in the Van Dyke Village units for on-site management are getting a break on their rent. They might even go to work every day and not be there in the daytime. So basically they may not be there to make sure rules are enforced. The on-site management personnel will probably not get involved with Emma's Place and the problems that could occur. Chairperson Fischer said the on-site management people may be timelier and call the police department and get the incidents documented. This would immediately take care of some of the problems that keep occurring at Emma's Place. She said Emma Norton's board of governance has been around for a long time and if their board was notified along with a list of documented problems the people that cause these problems may be evicted or a change in management may occur. Commissioner Pearson said he would be interested in knowing what teeth (so to speak) the management at Emma's Place has to correct these problems and get the guilty people moving out. Mr. Roberts said he's aware that one family was evicted from Emma's Place. He said he was not sure if there were still problems occurring there or not. Chairperson Fischer said years ago, the HRA and the HRC were instructed by the city council to call the residents at the apartments on Beebe Road. The reason the committee had to make the telephone calls was because of the history of problems at that location. The committee called the residents to find out how things were going there and if there were any solutions to the problems. Housing and Redevelopment Authority Minutes of 03-18-03 -8- Chairperson Fischer said the committee found out there had been problems but management put a stop to them. The management called the police every time they thought a problem was going to occur or when it was occurring and the police responded immediately. Because this was a Iow- income rental building, the residents found out that if they had any complaints against them they were going to lose their apartment. Soon there were no more problems because the management put a stop to them immediately by contacting the police department. She said sometimes management or a change in management could make a big difference in how buildings are cared for. Many times the history of problems goes with the location for a while but that can be changed. Commissioner O'Brien said he thinks Maplewood needs this price range of housing available. Not everyone can afford a $200,000 home. People need a safe, affordable place to live. He thinks the project will make a large impact on that site. He doesn't think the Van Dyke Village project should be penalized because of the problems that are occurring at Emma's Place. The Board of Directors at Emma Norton's needs to be made aware of the problems and maybe the management needs to be changed in order to fix the problems. Maybe having this facility at Van Dyke Village will help make the problems go away by reporting them to the police department. Getting things documented with the police department will help prove if or if not the problems are arising from the residents at Emma's Place, since the police department said they could not prove that they were. Chairperson Fischer said she received a telephone call from a resident that complained about Emma's Place and wondered if workforce housing was the same type of housing as Emma's Place. She said she explained to the resident the difference between the two. Commissioner O'Brien moved to approve the resolution on page 36 of the staff report. This resolution changes the land use plan from BC (business commercial) and R-3(M) (residential medium density) to R-3(H) (residential high density) for the 3.6-acre site of the Van Dyke Village town house development. The city bases these changes on the following findings: 1. This site is proper for and consistent with the city's goals, objectives and policies for high-density residential land use in the comprehensive plan. This includes: Creating a transitional land use between the existing residential and commercial land uses. bo Being between two collector streets, near an arterial street and would be near shopping and services. 2. This development will minimize any adverse effects on surrounding properties because: The on-site ponding and landscaping will help separate the town houses from the properties to the east and from the town houses to the south. There should be no significant increase in traffic from this development on existing local residential streets. The existing street pattern directs the traffic from the town houses to two nearby collector streets. There should be less traffic from this development than from a commercial development on the same site. Housing and Redevelopment Authority Minutes of 03-18-03 -9- Commissioner O'Brien moved to approve the resolution on page 37 of the staff report. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for a planned use development for the Van Dyke Village town house development on the west side of Van Dyke Street, north of County Road B. The city bases this approval on the findings required by code. (Refer to the resolution for the specific findings.) Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the plans for 24 town houses as approved by the city. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes to the plans. Such changes shall include: a. Revising the grading and site plans to show: (1) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation. (2) All driveways at least 20 feet wide. If the developer wants to have parking on one side of the driveway, then it must be at least 28 feet wide. (3) All parking stalls with a width of at least 9.5 feet and a length of at least 18 feet. (4) Revised storm water pond locations and designs as suggested or required by the watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's design standards. (5) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation including keeping and protecting as many of the trees as possible. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. 3. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall meet all the conditions and changes noted in the engineer's memo dated February 24, 2003. These shall include: ao Include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, trails, sidewalks, tree, retaining walls, driveway and parking lot plans. Include a storm water management plan for the proposal. 4. The design of all ponds and rainwater gardens shall meet Maplewood's design standards and shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. If needed, the developer shall be responsible for getting any off-site pond and drainage easements. 5. The developer or contractor shall: Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. *Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Remove any debris or junk from the site. Housing and Redevelopment Authority Minutes of 03-18-03 -10- 6. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Van Dyke Village PUD shall be: Front-yard setback (from a public street): minimum - 30 feet, maximum - 40 feet Rear-yard setback: 50 feet from any adjacent residential property line Side-yard setback (town houses): minimum - 40 feet from the west property line and 50 feet from the south property line. 7. The developer or builder will pay the city Park Access Charges (PAC fees) for each housing unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit. 8. The developer shall close on the purchase of the property with the city before the city will issue a grading unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit. 9. The property owner shall see that the site is well maintained and properly managed. 10. The city council shall review this permit in one year. Commissioner Fischer seconded. Ayes- Fischer, O'Brien Nays - Pearson Commissioner Pearson said the reason for his nay vote, is that he prefers R-1 (S) for this location and there is far too much density for this proposal. Especially for the northern routes of traffic are not good at all. Based on the existing neighborhood complaints and police reports in the area from Emma's Place residents as well. Commissioner O'Brien said he thinks it would be a good idea to make Van Dyke Street a cul-de- sac instead of a thru street to eliminate traffic congestion, accidents and make things safer. This goes to the city council on April 14, 2003. Commissioner O'Brien asked if there was something that can be done regarding the problems with Emma's Place. Because of the problems at Emma's Place, it is making it difficult for the developer to build another complex on the same street because of actions that are occurring down the street. He said the building is a decent looking facility and a lot of work went into the design of it. The name is being ruined by the social characteristics of what is happening there. Mr. Roberts said maybe the commission wants to make a motion to ask the city council to write a letter to the foundation of Emma Norton's Residence? Chairperson Fischer said she wondered if Emma Norton knew her good name was being tarnished because of the complaints that are being voiced in the neighborhood and to the police department? Commissioner O'Brien made a motion to recommend that the city council consider sending a letter to the Board of Directors at Emma Norton's Residence. This letter would express the concern from the city relating to the complaints from the neighborhood regarding Emma's Place. VIII. IX, Housing and Redevelopment Authority -11- Minutes of 03-18-03 Commissioner O'Brien said the city wants the Board of Directors to know Emma Norton's good name is being tarnished from activities that are occurring at Emma's Place on Van Dyke Street. Commissioner Pearson seconded. DATE OF NEXT MEETING The tentative date of the next HRA meeting is April 8, 2003. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Fischer adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m. Ayes - Fischer, O'Brien, Pearson TO: FROM: SUBJECT: PROJECT: LOCATION: DATE: MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Roberts, Planner Tax-Exempt Revenue Financing Concordia Arms 2030 Lydia Avenue East July 6, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Amherst Wilder Foundation, representing Concordia Arms, is requesting that the city give final approval for up to $7.0 million in tax-exempt revenue note financing. They would use this financing to pay off an existing mortgage and to cover the costs of proposed capital projects to the existing building. Concordia Arms is a 125-unit senior housing apartment building that is located at 2030 Lydia Avenue. (See the maps on pages two through four, the applicant's information on pages five through seven and the letter from Jenny Boulton on pages eight and nine.) The applicant is requesting that the city approve this financing so the bond interest would be tax-exempt. The state and federal governments require local government approval of tax-exempt financing. BACKGROUND On November 24, 2003, the city council gave preliminary approval to a request for up to $7.0 million in tax-exempt financing for Concordia Arms. DISCUSSION This request should meet the city's requirements for tax-exempt financing. Maplewood will not be liable for this financing. The proposed repairs and improvements should make the building much more livable for the residents. RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached resolution starting on page ten. This approves Maplewood giving approval for up to $7.0 million in tax-exempt revenue financing for Concordia Arms at 2030 Lydia Avenue. p/Sec 2N/Concordia Arms tax-exempt fin (2) - 2004.doc Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Location Map Area Map Site Plan Applicant's Project Summary Statement July 6, 2004 letter from Jenny Boulton Financing Approval Resolution T ~ Attachment 1 WHITE B~__AR LAKE GALL AVE.. S~. JOHN'S BLVO. AVE. WOODLYNN AVE. STANDRIOOE ~ KOHLMAN AVE. z AVE. ~E~I AVE. AVE. NORTH SAINT PAUL z -- Knu~H~I Lake COPE AVE. RD. O' 1700' 5400' LOCATION 2 MAP LY D IA AVE Attachment 2 E 2982 2980 SITE 2030 AREA MAP 3 ./ /' Attachment 3 SITE PLAN 4 OC1-SU-~d 14:11 Lbb 51O MUIq~ULUI Attachment 4 SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICES CONCORDIA ARMS REFINANCE PROJECT June 27, 2003 (Updated 9/15103) CONCEPT OF PRO,FECT Supportive Housing and Employment Services will proceed with a 40-year mortgage refinancing on behalf of Concordia Arms, Inc. for a major rehabilitation at Concordia Arms. Many of the projects arc focused on compliance wlth_theAmericans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The rehabilitation also includes several repairs that exceed available replacement reserves, including roof and window replacement, patio concrcle replacement, loading dock replacement, DHW/Boilcr replacement and several smaller projects. PROJECTED TIMELINE Assessment of need, estimates Applications for financing Closing (Projected) January- June 2003 June - October 2003 December 3 !, 2003 COST ESTIMATES Construction Current mortgage payoff Other associated costs 1,567,000 3,900,000 533,000 TOTAL 6,000,000 FINANCING PARTNERS Glaser Financial is serving as the underwriter, andis currently sccking a new mortgage which is guaranteed by United Stat~s Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Piper Jaffrey will be the lender. The c=?;*~l for mortgage will most likely be bom bonds under thc City of Maplewood's Bonding Authority ..... PROJECT TEAM AND W~LDER FOUNDATIONSTAFF ROLES Project/Communication Lead - Pat Teiken . Finance - Yulanda Williams Construction Estimates and Related - Doug Oman Administrative - Jennifer Rawson Architect - Genesis Architecture General Contractor - Currently negotiating with Welsh Consmaction Housing Manager - Jodi Jefferson Collaborating/Consulting - Mary Kay.Palmer Updates to: Dick Goebel, Redeemers Arms Susan Elkins, Redeemers Arms Craig Binger Claudia Dengler Dan Olthoff Supportive Housing Development. Committee.,, Project Folder SAProj~ct ManagemgntXlN PROGRESS\Con¢ordia R¢finane. mg~Coacordia Reft SummaryDOC 10130/2003 - 5 0CT-30-2003 14:11 CBS 516 HUMBOLD1 Concordia Arms Refinancing Projects March 2003 Roof- Tear off and replacement of 20-year-old roof. $475,000 Windows - Removal and complete replacement of all windows, which have become drafty and unmalntainable because replacement parts are unavailable (energy payback is likely). $200,000 I)ITW and Boiler Replacement - Repair and replace portions of the domestic hot water tank-and boilers as-well as burners and controls and main heating boilers. $130,000 ' Common Areas A/C - Replace existing air conditioning units and add additional condensing unks to the existing fi-esh make up air units..$110,000 Office and Storage Needs -Hire a consultant to evaluate current storage and staff space and costs' for needed'modifications. $75,000 Elevators - Modernization and ADA upgrades. $60,000 Phone Entry and Security - Modernization of phone entry system to incorporate electronic card reader access and installation of security cameras with monitors, to upgrade security. $60,000 E-Call System - Replace existing troubled system with a new wireless system to improve monitoring of residents. $40,000 Common Area Furniture - Replace existing common area furniture due to age and needed repairs. New fumiturewould meet the functional needs of the residents. $120,000 2 Patio Concrete - Replacement of concrete due to its age and deterioration. $32,000 0CT-50-~005 14:11 CSS 51~ HUMBOLD! bJi~JY~"~J ~.~ Landscaping -Add additional patio space on the North side of the building adjacent to the parking lot. $35,000 Garage - To replace existing undersized storage shed. This is used to accommodate storage of grounds equipment. $25,000 Receiving Dock Concrete - This is phase 2 of the parking lot replacement that was performed in 2002. $25,000 Lever Handled Lock Sets for Units - To meet current ADA requirement and ease resident use. $30,000 Gazebo - Const~ct an exterior structure just off the existing patio to provide residents with additional outside space for activities. $25,000 Patio Doors - Restructure the doors and add ADA operators for easier access to patio. $15,000 Auto Door Openers (7) - Install ADA automatic door openers to improve access for residents with scooters and wheelchairs. $15,000 Exterior Lighting - Improve security inareas of exterior that are currently underlit. $18,000 Front Entry Door - Restructure front, entry to ease accessibility, and meet current ADA requirements. $30,000 3 A/C Sleeves -Replacement of 135 a/c sleeves which are degrading due to age. $28,000 Washers and Dryers - Replace current equipment due to age and improve energy conservation with updated equipment. $19,000 Total of combined projects $1,567,000 TOTAL P.04 BRIGGS AND MORGAN ....................... Attachment 5 2200 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUH~ING 332 MINNESOTA STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 TELEPHONE (651) 808-6600 FACSIMILE (651) 808-6450 PROFF.~SIONAL ASSOCIATION July 6, 2004 WRITER'S DIILECT DIAL (651) 808-6484 WRITER'S E-MAlL jboulton~briggs.com VIA EMAIL Mr. Ken Roberts City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109-2702 Re: Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota - Housing Revenue Note, Series 2004 (Concordia Arms Project, Inc.) Dear Ken and Board of Commissioners: It is proposed that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "HRA") issue a tax-exempt Note on behalf of Concordia Arms, Inc. (the "Borrower") to refinance and renovate a 125-unit multifamily senior housing development located at 2030 Lydia Avenue East in the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "City"). The Note to be issued by the HRA on behalf of the Borrower would not exceed $6,000,000. State and Federal law allow governmental entities to issue obligations such as the Note and loan the proceeds to nonprofit corporations to finance or refinance capital expenditures. This assistance reduces borrowing costs for nonprofit corporations and enables them to provide their services more cost effectively. To accomplish this purpose, the HRA would enter a Loan Agreement with the Borrower under which the Borrower would agree to pay all principal and interest on the Note. The HRA will assign all of its rights and obligations under the Loan Agreement a local bank (the "Lender") which will purchase the Note and loan the purchase price of the Note directly to the Borrower. The HRA is merely a conduit and the money and obligations flow only between the Lender and the Borrower. The HRA has been asked to designate the Note as Bank Qualified. Consequently, the HRA will have to factor the Note into its $10,000,000 Bank Qualification allowance possibly leaving only $4,000,000 available for other obligations that may be issued by the HRA this year for governmental purposes or other nonprofit borrowers. However, the HRA has indicated that it has no intention of issuing any other bonds this year so this is not a concern. The I-IRA's ability to designate the Note as Bank Qualified is the sole reason that the HRA, rather than the City, has been asked to issue the Note. The City plans to issue bonds this year in an amount which prevents the City from designating the Note, and any other bonds, as Bank Qualified. The HRA, 1664582vl 8 BRIGGS a~n MORGAN July 6, 2004 Page 2 as a separate governmental entity, has its own $10,000,000 Bank Qualification allowance and is able to satisfy the Borrower's request that the Note be designated as Bank Qualified. The Note and the resolutions adopted by the HRA recite that the Note, if and when issued, will not to be payable from or charged upon any of the HRA's or the City's funds, other than the revenues received under the Loan Agreement and pledged to the payment of the Note, and neither the HRA nor the City is subject to any liability on the Note. No holder of the Note will ever have the fight to compel any exercise by the City of its taxing powers to pay any of the principal of the Note or the interest or premium thereon, or to enforce payment of the Note against any property of the HRA or the City except the interests of the HRA in payments to be made by the Borrower under the Loan Agreement. The Note will not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the I-IRA or the City except the interests of the HRA in payments to be made by the Borrower under the Loan Agreement. The Note is not a moral obligation on the part of the State or its political subdivisions, including the City and the HRA, and the Note will not constitute a debt of the City or the HRA within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation. Issuing the Note will not affect the credit rating of the City or the HRA on bonds they issues for municipal purposes. Under Federal and State law in order for the Note to be a tax exempt obligation, it must be issued by a governmental entity. This requires that the City or the HRA hold a public heating and approve issuance of the Note and the execution of related documents. The City held a public heating on November 24, 2003 and gave preliminary approval to the issuance of the Note so it is not necessary for the HRA to hold a heating. The HRA is simply being asked to approve, on July 13, 2004, the issuance of the Note and the execution of related documents. The Borrower has paid the City's required application fee and will be required to pay the City's administrative fee upon the issuance of the Note. If you have any questions please don~ hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, 7enny Bou[ton Jenny Boulton Attachment 6 Extract of Minutes of a Meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota was duly held in the City Hall in the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "City") on Tuesday, July 13, 2004, at 7:00 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: and the following were absent: its adoption: During said meeting introduced the following resolution and moved RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF THE HOUSING REVENUE NOTE, SERIES 2004 AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS RELATING THERETO (CONCORDIA ARMS, INC. PROJECT) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member , and after full discussion thereof and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 1662730vl 10 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF THE HOUSING REVENUE NOTE, SERIES 2004 AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS RELATING THERETO (CONCORDIA ARMS PROJECT, INC.) (a) Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act") confers upon cities the power to issue revenue bonds to finance a program for the purposes of planning, administering, making or purchasing loan.q with respect to one or more multifamily housing developments within their boundaries; (b) The Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "Authority") has received from Concordia Arms, Inc., a br_mnesota nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the "Borrower"), a proposal that the Authority assist in financing a Project hereinafter described through the issuance of a Revenue Note, referred to in this resolution as the "Revenue Note" or "Note", pursuant to the Act; (c) In authorizing the Project, and the issuance of the Note, the Authority's purpose is, and in its judgment the effect thereof will be, to promote the public welfare by providing a multifamily rental housing development within the meaning of the Act, assisting low and moderate income and elderly persons within the Authority to obtain decent, safe and sanitary housing at rentals they can afford and facilitating the development of rental housing opportunities for residents of the Authority; such purpose to be accomplished in the manner and upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Act and in this Resolution; (d) The Project to be financed by the Revenue Note is the refinancing and renovation of a 125-unit multifamily senior housing development (the "Project") located at 2030 Lydia Avenue East in the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "City"). The Project will be owned and operated by the Borrower; (e) The Authority has been advised by representatives of the Borrower that without the aid of municipal financing, and its resulting low borrowing cost, the Project is not economically feasible; (f) No public official of the Authority has either a direct or an indirect financial interest in the Project nor will any public official either directly or indirectly benefit financially from the Project. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "Authority"), as follows: 1662730vl 2 SECTION 1. LEGAL AUTHORIZATION AND FINDINGS. 1.1 Findings. The Authority hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: (a) The Authority is a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota and is authorized under the Act to assist the housing project herein referred to, and to issue and sell the Note, as hereinafter defined, for the purpose, in the manner and upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Act and in this Resolution. (b) Pursuant to a resolution adopted on November 24, 2003, the City has heretofore given its preliminary approval to the issuance of its revenue note in a total principal amount not to exceed $7,000,000 to provide funds to be loaned to the Borrower to finance the Project. (c) As required by the Act and Section 147(0 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") and the Act, the City on November 24, 2003, held a public hearing on the issuance of one or more revenue notes to finance the Project and the adoption of a Housing Program for the Project. (d) The issuance and sale of the Housing Revenue Note, Series 2004 (Concordia Arms, Inc. Project) (the "Note") by the Authority, pursuant to the Act, is in the best interest of the Authority, and the Authority hereby determines to issue the Note and to sell the Note to Premier Bank (the "Lender"), as provided herein. The Authority will loan the proceeds of the Note (the "Loan") to the Borrower in order to finance the Project. (e) Pursuant to a Loan Agreement (the "Loan Agreement") to be entered into between the Authority and the Borrower, the Borrower has agreed to repay the Note in specified amounts and at specified times sufficient to pay in full when due the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Note. In addition, the Loan Agreement contains provisions relating to the maimenance and operation of the Project, indemnification, insurance, and other agreements and covenants which are required or permitted by the Act and which the Authority and the Borrower deem necessary or desirable for the financing of the Project. A draft of the Loan Agreement has been submitted to the Authority. (f) Pursuant to a Pledge Agreement to be entered into between the Authority and the Lender, the Authority has pledged and granted a security interest in all of its rights, title, and interest in the Loan Agreement to the Lender (except for certain rights of indemnification and to reimbursement for certain costs and expenses). A draft of the Pledge Agreement has been submitted to the Authority. (g) Pursuant to a Mortgage, Security Agreement and Fixture Financing Statement (the "Mortgage") to be executed by the Borrower in favor of the Authority and assigned to the Lender pursuant to an Assi,.,m~ment of Mortgage (the "Assignment of Mortgage"), the Borrower has secured payment of amounts due under the Loan Agreement and Note by granting to the Lender a mortgage and security interest in the property described therein. A dra~ of the Mortgage has been submitted to the Authority. 1662730vi 3 12 (h) Pursuant to an Assignment of Leases and Rents (the "Assignment of L&R") to be executed by the Borrower in favor of the Lender, the Borrower has secured payment of amounts due under the Loan Agreement and Note by granting to the Lender a security interest in the leases and rents of the Project as described therein. A draft of the Assignment of L&R has been submitted to the Board of Commissioners. (i) The Note will be a special, limited obligation of the Authority. The Note shall not be payable fi.om or charged upon any funds other than the revenues pledged to the payment thereof, nor shall the Authority be subject to any liability thereon. No holder of the Note shall ever have the fight to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the Authority to pay the Note or the interest thereon, nor to enforce payment thereof against any property of the Authority. The Note shall not constitute a debt of the Authority within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation. (j) It is desirable, feasible and consistent with the objects and purposes of the Act to issue the Note, for financing the costs of the Project. 1.2 Authorization and Ratification of Project. The Authority has heretofore and does hereby authorize the Borrower, in accordance with the provisions of the Act and subject to the terms and conditions imposed by the Lender, to provide for the refinancing and renovation of the Project by such means as shall be available to the Borrower and in the manner determined by the Borrower, and without advertisement for bids as may be required for the construction and acquisition of other municipal facilities; and the Authority hereby ratifies, affirms, and approves all actions heretofore taken by the Borrower consistent with and in anticipation of such authority. SECTION 2. THE NOTE. 2.1 Authorized Amount and Form of Note. The Note issued pursuant to this Resolution shall be in substantially the form submitted to the Authority with such appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as are permitted or required by this Resolution, and in accordance with the further provisions hereo~, and the total aggregate principal amount of the Note that may be outstanding hereunder is expressly limited to $6,000,000, unless a duplicate Note is issued pursuant to Section 2.7. The Note shall bear interest at a rate not to exceed 400 basis points over the initial rate current estimated to be 4.25% per annum, so long as interest on the Note remains exempt fi.om taxation with a greater rate as provided in the Note in the event the interest on the Note becomes taxable. 2.2 The Note. The Note shall be dated as of the date of delivery to the Lender, shall be payable at the times and in the manner, shall bear interest at the rate, and shall be subject to such other terms and conditions as are set forth therein. 2.3 Execution. The Note shall be executed on behalf of the Authority by the signatures of its Chair and Secretary of the Board and shall be sealed with the seal of the Authority; provided that the seal may be intentionally omitted as provided by law. In case any officer whose signature shall appear on the Note shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of the Note, such signature shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if had remained in office until delivery. In the event of the absence or disability of the Chair or 1662730vl 4 13 Secretary, such officers of the Authority as, in the opinion of the Authority Attorney, may act on his or her behalf, shall without further act or authorization of the Board of Commissioners execute and deliver the Note. 2.4 Delivery of Initial Note. Before delivery of the Note there shall be filed with the Lender (except to the extent waived by the Lender) the following items: (1) an executed copy of each of the following documents: (a) the Loan Agreement; (b) the Pledge Agreement; (c) the Mortgage; (d) the Assignment of L&R; (e) the Assignment of Mortgage; (2) an opinion of Counsel for the Borrower as prescribed by the Lender and Bond Counsel; (3) Note; the opinion of Bond Counsel as to the validity and tax exempt status of the (4) a 501(c)(3) determination letter from the Internal Revenue Service evidencing that the Borrower is exempt from income taxation under Section 501(c)(3) of the Code; (5) such other documents and opinions as Bond Counsel may reasonably require for purposes of rendering its opinion required in subsection (3) above or that the Lender may reasonably require for the closing. 2.5 Disposition of Proceeds of the Note. Upon delivery of the Note to Lender, the Lender shall, on behalf of the Authority, disburse the proceeds of the Note for payment of Project Costs in accordance with the terms of the Loan Agreement. 2.6 Registration of Transfer. The Authority will cause to be kept at the office of the Secretary a Note Register for the Note in which, subject to such reasonable regulations as it may prescribe, the Authority shall provide for the registration of transfers of ownership of the Note. The Note shall be initially registered in the name of the Lender and shall be transferable upon the Note Register by the Lender in person or by its agent duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of the Note together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Chair, duly executed by the Lender or its duly authorized agent. The following form of assignment shall be sufficient for said purpose. 1662730vl 5 14 For value received hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Note of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer said Note on the books of said Authority with full power of substitution in the premises. The undersigned certifies that the transfer is made in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.9 of the Resolution authorizing the issuance of the Note. Dated: Registered Owner Upon such transfer, the Chair shall note the date of registration and the name and address of the new holder in the applicable Note Register and in the registration blank appearing on the Note. 2.7 Mutilated, Lost or Destroyed Note. In case any Note issued hereunder shall become mutilated or be destroyed or lost, the Authority shall, if not then prohibited by law, cause to be executed and delivered, a new Note of like outstanding principal amount, number and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of such mutilated Note, or in lieu of and in substitution for such Note destroyed or lost, upon the Lender's paying the reasonable expenses and charges of the Authority in connection therewith, and in the case of a Note destroyed or lost, the filing with the Authority of evidence satisfactory to the Authority with indemnity satisfactory to it. If the mutilated, destroyed or lost Note has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it shall not be necessary to issue a new Note before payment. 2.8 Ownership of Note. The Authority may deem and treat the person in whose name the Note is last registered in the applicable Note Register and by notation on the applicable Note whether or not such Note shall be overdue, as the absolute owner of such Note for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of the Principal Balance, redemption price or interest and for all other purposes whatsoever, and the Authority shall not be affected by any notice to the contrary. 2.9 Limitation on Note Transfers. The Note has been issued without registration under state or other securities laws, pursuant to an exemption for such issuance; and accordingly the Note may not be assigned or transferred in whole or part, nor may a participation interest in the Note be given pursuant to any participation agreement, except (i) in amounts not less than $100,000, (ii) not more than 35 persons each of whom have knowledge and experience in financial business matters and that are capable of evaluating the merits and rules of the investment in the Note and are not purchasing for more than one account or with a view to distributing the Note or their interest therein. Any such sale, assignment or participation shall also be (i) in full good faith compliance with all securities registration, broker, anti-fraud and other provisions of the applicable state and federal laws, (ii) with full and accurate disclosure of all material facts to the prospective purchaser(s) or transferee(s), and (iii) under effective federal and state registration statements (which neither the Authority nor the Borrower shall in any way be obligated to provide) or under exemptions from such registrations. 1662730vl 6 15 2.10 Issuance of New Notes. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.9, the Authority shall, at the request and expense of the Lender, issue new notes, in aggregate outstanding principal amount equal to that of the Note surrendered, and of like tenor except as to number, principal amount, and the amount of the monthly installments payable thereunder, and registered in the name of the Lender or such transferee as may be designated by the Lender. SECTION 3. MISCELLANEOUS. 3.1 Severability. If any provision of this Resolution shall be held or deemed to be or shall, in fact, be inoperative or unenforceable as applied in any particular case in any jurisdiction or jurisdictions or in all jurisdictions or in all cases because it conflicts with any provisions of any constitution or statute or rule or public policy, or for any other reason, such circumstances shall not have the effect of rendering the provision in question inoperative or unenforceable in any other case or circumstance, or of rendering any other provision or provisions herein contained invalid, inoperative, or unenforceable to any extent whatever. The invalidity of any one or more phrases, sentences, clauses or paragraphs in this Resolution contained shall not affect the remaining portions of this Resolution or any part thereof. 3.2 Authentication of Transcript. The officers of the Authority are directed to furnish to Bond Counsel certified copies of this Resolution and all documents referred to herein, and affidavits or certificates as to all other matters that are reasonably necessary to evidence the validity of the Note. All such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall constitute recitals of the Authority as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 3.3 Authorization to Execute Agreements. The forms of the proposed Loan Agreement, the Pledge Agreement, Assignment of L&R, Assignment of Mortgage, and the Mortgage are hereby approved in substantially the form heretofore presented to the Board of Commissioners, together with such additional details therein as may be necessary and appropriate and such modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary and appropriate and approved by Bond Counsel prior to the execution of the documents, and the Chair and Secretary of the Board and authorized to execute the Loan Agreement, the Assignment of Mortgage, and the Pledge Agreement in the name of and on behalf of the Authority and such other documents as Bond Counsel consider appropriate in connection with the issuance of the Note. In the event of the absence or disability of the Chair or Secretary, such officers of the Authority as, in the opinion of the Authority Attorney, may act on his or her beh~, shall without further act or authorization of the Authority do all things and execute all instruments and documents required to be done or executed by such absent or disabled officers. The execution of any instrument by the appropriate officer or officers of the Authority herein authorized shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of such documents in accordance with the terms hereof. 3.4 Qualified Tax Exempt Obligation. In order to qualify the Note as a "qualified tax- exempt obligation" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), the Authority hereby makes the following factual statements and representations; 1662730vl 7 16 (a) the Note is not treated as a "private activity bond" under Section 265(b)(3) of the Code; (b) the Authority hereby designates the Note as a qualified tax-exempt obligation for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code; (c) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than obligations described in clause (ii) of Section 265(b)(3)(C) of the Code) which will be issued by the Authority (and all entities whose obligations will be aggregated with those of the Authority) during the calendar year 2004 will not exceed $10,000,000; and (d) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the Authority during the calendar year 2004 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code. 3.5 Housing Program. The Authority hereby adopts the Housing Program for the Project in accordance with the Act. 1662730vl 8 17 Adopted by the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, this 13t~ day of July, 2004. ATTEST: Chair Secretary 1662730vl 9 18 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY CITY OF MAPLEWOOD I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Secretary of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a full, true and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the Board of Commissioners duly called and held on the date therein indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to a resolution authorizing the issuance of a revenue note. WITNESS my hand this __ day of July, 2004. Secretary 1662730vl T 10 19