|
City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota
<br />Legacy Project
<br />April 30, 2008
<br />Page 4
<br />Scenario 3
<br />Scenario 3 is what Springsted and staff agrees is the most reasonable scenario utilizing all the same assumptions as
<br />in Scenario 1 with one exception:
<br />• Show how much of the interfund loans can be repaid assuming 6% interest rate
<br />• Utilizes the maximum term of the TIF District which is 26 years of collection
<br />o The bond issue and other financings were constructed around 17 years of tax increment
<br />collections, although the TIF Plan did not mandate that the district be decertified early. This
<br />scenario uses an additional nine years of tax increment, as is allowed by state law.
<br />Collect
<br />Year
<br />(1)
<br />2006
<br />2007
<br />2008
<br />2009
<br />2010
<br />2011
<br />2012
<br />2013
<br />2014
<br />2015
<br />2016
<br />2017
<br />2018
<br />2019
<br />2020
<br />2021
<br />2022
<br />2023
<br />2024
<br />2025
<br />2026
<br />2027
<br />2028
<br />2029
<br />2030
<br />2031
<br />2032
<br />Pooled MSA
<br />TIF Funds
<br />1-10
<br />(3) (4)
<br />GO TIF TIF TIF
<br />TIF Interfund Interfund Developer
<br />Bonds Loan Loan Note
<br />$4.215M $950K $556K $1.0M
<br />(6) (7) (8) (9)
<br />0
<br />39,865 50,000 92,298 0 0 0
<br />37,336 245,500 334,526 0 0 0
<br />37,336 245,500 337,926 0 0 0
<br />37,336 245,500 370,926 0 0 0
<br />37,336 245,500 412,326 0 0 0
<br />O 245,500 421,726 0 0 0
<br />O 245,500 470,326 0 0 0
<br />O 245,500 471,526 0 0 0
<br />O 245,500 r 477,126 0 0 0
<br />O 245,500 5, 481,926 0 0 0
<br />0 0 255,926 0 0 0
<br />O 0 258,326 0 0 0
<br />O 0 265,326 0 0 0
<br />O 0 271,726 0 0 0
<br />O 0 r r 277,526 0 0 0
<br />O 0 r 287,481 0 0 0
<br />O 0 291,550 0 0 0
<br />O 0 32+ 37 0 320,737 0 0
<br />O 0 a s 0 327,609 0 0
<br />O 0 0 334,618 0 0
<br />O 0 0 341,767 0 0
<br />O 0 •° rgo 0 349,059 0 0
<br />O 0 0 356,497 0 0
<br />O 0 ;e, p,« r s. 0 364,084 0 0
<br />O 0i. om 0 371,822 0 0
<br />O 0 „));."ts.: 0 375,781 0 0
<br />Annual
<br />Surplus
<br />(Deficit)
<br />(12)
<br />3,198
<br />24,968
<br />21,568
<br />(11,432)
<br />(52,832)
<br />(97,578)
<br />(85,401)
<br />(24,607)
<br />33,025
<br />33,975
<br />20,340
<br />23,921
<br />23,023
<br />22,847
<br />23,395
<br />19,915
<br />22,450
<br />0
<br />0
<br />0
<br />0
<br />0
<br />0
<br />0
<br />0
<br />0
<br />189,209 2,259,500 5,778,496 3,141,976 0 0 as.� 775
<br />This table results in the same deficits as in Scenario 1 (years 2010 - 2014), which wou d proposed to be covered by
<br />future tax increments. This scenario shows that additional increment could be used to repay $3,141,975 on the
<br />$950k interfund loan.
<br />Regarding the interfund loans, we ran them both out through the end of the term of the TIF District using an
<br />assumption of a 6% interest rate from 1/1/09 forward. We capitalized the interest annually, meaning each year's
<br />accrued interest is added to the principal amount of the note prior to calculating the following year's interest. This
<br />mechanism maximizes the payout on the interfund loan. In the table above even after $3,141,976 is paid on the
<br />$950k interfund loan, there is still $868,000 owed.
<br />There are multiple methods to calculating interfund loans, and it is important as we examine the scenario 3 table to
<br />note that no matter how the loan is calculated, there is not more than $3,141,976 in tax increment available, using the
<br />assumptions for scenario 3, to pay on the interfund loan. We could reduce the total payoff by compounding simple
<br />
|