FINAL PROJECT PLAN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FOR RED ROCK WATER RESERVOIR CITY OF RAPID CITY. Prepared by the

Similar documents
FINAL PROJECT PLAN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT HOMESTEAD. Prepared by the

TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICT PROJECT PLAN

PROJECT PLAN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT #47 SECOND REVISED TOWER ROAD CITY OF RAPID CITY. Prepared by the

TAX INCREMENTAL PROJECT PLAN

TAX INCREMENT PROJECT PLAN

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NUMBER SEVENTY-SEVEN. Between BLACK HILLS POWER, INC. THE CITY OF RAPID CITY, SOUTH DAKOTA

Bonds & TIFs. SDML Finance Officer s School Bonds. Presented by: Tom Grimmond Ray Woody Woodsend Senior Vice President Senior Vice President

TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ACT - OMNIBUS AMENDMENTS Act of Dec. 16, 1992, P.L. 1240, No. 164 Cl. 64 Session of 1992 No

CHAPTER 11-9 TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICTS

Exhibit "B" TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE, NUMBER ONE CITY OF BAYTOWN. July 8, 2015

AGENDA JOINT REVIEW BOARD TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICT NO. 7 PROJECT PLAN AMENDMENT IN ORDER TO SHARE INCREMENT WITH TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICT NO.

Glossary of Property Tax Terms

MEMORANDUM. Mr. George Roberts, Red Table Ventures, LLC Mr. Tambi Katieb, Land Planning Collaborative, Inc.

ORDINANCE NO. ## N.S.

CITY OF ROCK ISLAND ORDINANCE NO. O AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROCK ISLAND, ROCK ISLAND COUNTY, ILLINOIS, ADOPTING TAX INCREMENT ALLOCATION FI

How To Calculate A Property Tax

ANCHORAGE, ALASKA AO No

Proposed Omega Bay TIRZ. City of La Marque Public Hearing January 14, 2019

WHITE OAK PLACE. Brownfield Plan No East Grand River, Tax ID Spartan Ave, Tax ID

Revising a Development Impact Fee Program in South Carolina. Stantec. City Explained, Inc. J.R. Wilbur and Associates, Inc.

360 Act LAWS OF PENNSYLVANIA. No AN ACT

Self-Supported Municipal Improvement districts

ORDINANCE NO. CID-3193

URBAN REVITALIZATION PLAN CITY OF WINDSOR HEIGHTS, IOWA 2WINDSOR HEIGHTS URBAN REVITALIZATION AREA

Municipal Utility District ( MUD )

Project Plan for Creation of Tax Incremental District No. 5 (St. Francis Borgia Site)

Klamath Falls Urban Renewal Feasibility Study

AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO PROJECT PLAN FOR. TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICT NO. 56 (Erie/Jefferson Riverwalk) CITY OF MILWAUKEE

WHEREAS, the proposed budget has been submitted to the Board of Directors of the District for its consideration; and

Related Documents: Guthrie Avenue Business Park Urban Renewal Plan recorded on September 30, 1988, in Book 5958, commencing at Page 44

Tax Increment Reinvestment Zones/ Tax Increment Financing Best Practices for Cities

HACKBERRY HIDDEN COVE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 2 SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN (UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS)

BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN THE VILLAGE MARKETPLACE + LOFTS 147, 159 AND 185 W. MICHIGAN AVENUE

COUNTY DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY

Property Taxes and How They Affect Cities. What is Property Tax? 6/4/2018. Really, All I Care About is... How Much Money Can My City Get?

ORDINANCE NO THE TOWNSHIP BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF LANSING HEREBY ORDAINS:

WHITFIELD COUNTY, GEORGIA TABLE OF CONTENTS Year Ended December 31, 2017

City of Denton, Texas

SURRY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For the Year Ended June 30, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Shafter Community Development Agency Basic Financial Statements For the year ended June 30, 2006

CITY OF PITTSBURG, KANSAS DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY

CITY OF BRUNSWICK, GEORGIA

EAST BOULDER COUNTY WATER DISTRICT FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. December 31, 2008

CITY OF PICO RIVERA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBSIDY REPORT

RESOLUTION NO., 2013

THE CITY OF EDMONTON BYLAW PROPERTY TAX AND SUPPLEMENTARY PROPERTY TAX BYLAW

3 COMMERCIAL PARCELS AVAILABLE ACRES (DIVISIBLE) HASTINGS CROSSROADS Hastings, MN 55033

PROGRAM GUIDELINES WSRLA Page 1 of 6 As of Jan 29, 2015

PUBLIC CHAPTER NO. 426 SENATE BILL NO By Lowe Finney, Herron, Marrero, Tate, Kilby. Substituted for: House Bill No. 2172

ALLEGANY COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY UNIFORM TAX EXEMPTION POLICY AND GUIDELINES

City of Brownsville, Texas, Ordinance No

This chapter is known and may be cited as the "South Carolina Textiles Communities Revitalization Act".

City Hall, 102 Sherman Street, Deadwood, SD

ORDINANCE NO

EXHIBIT 1. Salt Lake City

ACT NUMBER ALABAMA NEW MARKETS DEVELOPMENT ACT

CIi cnlarsonadki. Accountant's Compilation Report

Public Act No

WHEREAS, the proposed budget has been submitted to the Board of Directors of the District for its consideration; and

THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE ROUND ROCK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP

IC Chapter 14. Redevelopment of Areas Needing Redevelopment Generally; Redevelopment Commissions

Assembly Bill No. 5 Committee on Government Affairs

CITY OF WATERLOO TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICT NO. 4 Waterloo, Wisconsin

ORDINANCE NO

STATE TAX COMMISSION 2018 PROPERTY TAX, COLLECTIONS AND EQUALIZATION CALENDAR

How To Calculate A Property Tax

How To Calculate A Property Tax

COUNTY OF CATTARAUGUS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY UNIFORM TAX EXEMPTION POLICY

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA. County Board Agenda Item Meeting of November 18, 2017

ORDINANCE NUMBER 1107

Tax Computation Manual

Village of Orland Park Economic Development

SUBJECT: Property Tax and Equalization Calendar for 2019 STATE TAX COMMISSION 2019 PROPERTY TAX, COLLECTIONS AND EQUALIZATION CALENDAR

COUNTY COUNCIL OF PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MARYLAND 2014 Legislative Session

Washington County Housing and Redevelopment Authority. GROW Fund POLICY AND APPLICATIONS

ORDINANCE NO WHEREAS, on September 14, 2004, the Board of Supervisors (the Board of

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 643

CITY OF MADISON TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICT NO. 32 Madison, Wisconsin

2016 ANNUAL REPORT. Tax Incremental Finance District #8. City of Tomah, WI Project No Drafted: June 23, 2017

During the 1995 legislative session, the exemption for primary residential property was increased

PRELIMINARY DRAFT - SUBJECT TO REVISION

MESA DEL SOL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 1 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Board of Supervisors WAYNE COUNTY

Tax Allocation Districts: How They Work

ORDINANCE NUMBER 1174

UNIFORM TAX EXEMPTION POLICY ONTARIO COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY UNIFORM TAX EXEMPTION POLICY ADOPTED APRIL 25, 2016

Menu of Incentives. Training Incentives. Vocational Training Funding. Pikes Peak Workforce Center Training Dollars

CITY OF DELAVAN TAX INCREMENTAL FINANCING DISTRICT NO.4 Delavan, Wisconsin

OPERATING PLAN FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2016 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 OF THE CITY OF WAUSAU, WISCONSIN

NYS BOARD OF REAL PROPERTY SERVICES

CITY OF WAUSAU TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NUMBER THREE

ORDINANCE NO

CITY OF MIAMI SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN PARK WEST COMM1UNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (A Component Unit of the City of Miami, Florida) Basic Financial Statements

LOMBARD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 44 LOMBARD, ILLINOIS

CITY OF REDDING, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL POLICY

CITY OF BOISE FINANCIAL SYSTEM OVERVIEW

$100,000,000* CITY OF MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN Sewerage System Revenue Bonds Series 2016 S7

VILLAGE OF MARSHALL TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICT NO. 1 Marshall, Wisconsin

CITY COUNCIL SUMMARY REPORT. Agenda No Key Words: Council Compensation Meeting Date: December 9, 2014 PREPARED BY:

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EULESS, TEXAS:

Transcription:

FINAL PROJECT PLAN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FOR RED ROCK WATER RESERVOIR CITY OF RAPID CITY Prepared by the Rapid City Planning Department September 2003

Tax Increment District 43 Project Plan FINAL INTRODUCTION Tax Increment Financing is a method of financing improvements and development in an area which has been determined to be blighted according to the criteria set forth in SDCL 11-9. All this is done without incurring a general obligation for the taxpayers of the entire City. The assessed value of a district is determined by the South Dakota Department of Revenue at the time the district is created by the City Council. This valuation is termed the Tax Increment Base Valuation for the district, or simply the base valuation. As the property taxes for the property are paid, that portion of the taxes paid on the Base Valuation continue to go to those entities, (City, County, School, etc.), which levy property taxes. When in succeeding years, the assessed valuation of the district increases, the total property taxes paid by the owners of property in the district will increase accordingly. That increase in taxable valuation is the increment. When the tax bills are paid, only that portion of the tax bill which results from the Base Valuation, is paid to the taxing entities. The remainder of the tax bill, known as the Tax increment, is deposited in a special fund. It is this plan which determines how these accumulated funds will be used. It should be noted that based on changes in state statue in 1996, an additional tax is levied against all property within the School District s jurisdiction to make up for the School District s share of the increment. Thus, the School District continues to receive tax revenue based on the full valuation of the property within the district. This financing method is invaluable for encouraging growth and development in areas with special development problems, since the amount of funds available for use by the project plan is directly related to the increase in valuation which a given project or development will create. OVERVIEW This plan proposes that a Tax Increment District be created to fund the construction of a water storage facility for the Red Rock Estate and surrounding area. The estimated cost of the improvements is $3,830,000. It is anticipated that the funding for these improvements will be borrowed from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, and will be repaid by the Tax Increment District. PROJECT PLAN SUMMARY This plan establishes the total project costs, as well as the Tax Increment District funded costs. Elements of the Project Plan This Project Plan, as required by SDCL 11-9-13, will address the following elements: 1) Public Works and Other Improvements; 2) Economic Feasibility Study; 3) Project Costs; 2

Tax Increment District 43 Project Plan FINAL 4) Fiscal Impact Statement; and, 5) Financing Method Description. Additionally, the following exhibits are offered: I. General Vicinity map; II. Tax Increment district Boundary Map; III. Map of Existing Zoning; IV. Map of Existing Land Use; and, V. Map of Public and Other Improvements. The Statement of Method for Relocating Displaced Persons, as well as the Statement of Changes Needed in Master Plan, Building Codes and Ordinances do not apply to this Project Plan and have not been included in this document. ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT PLAN 1. PUBLIC WORKS AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS The project plan includes capital costs associated with the construction of a ground water storage facility. 2. ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY Current Valuation Tax Increment District Number Forty Three is proposed for creation in accordance with SDCL 11-9-2 to 11-9-11. A vicinity map as well as a boundary map is attached. As of this date, the assessed valuation for the proposed district is $18,284,260. In accordance with SDCL 11-9-20, certification of the base value will be requested from the South Dakota Department of Revenue following creation and approval of the district by the City Council. ANTICIPATED CERTIFIED BASE VALUATION OF PROPERTY IN TID #43 Expected Increase in Valuation $18,284,260 ESTIMATED FUTURE VALUATION OF PROPOSED DISTRICT Estimated Assessed Value of District $ 18,284,260 Estimated Assessed Value of project ( year 20) $117,699,880 Other Anticipated Increases in Assessed Value $ 0 Estimated Increase in Assessed Value of Land* $ 0 Estimated Total Valuation ( year 20) $135,984,140 *For purposes of this Tax Increment District, the increase in land value is not included in these estimates. Any additional value will pay off the loan earlier than anticipated. 3

Tax Increment District 43 Project Plan FINAL Revenue Estimates from Tax Increments The Plan anticipates 25 semi-annual payments over 13 years; however, because of the uncertainty associated with the development, the plan identifies a 20 year payback schedule. The potential negative short-term impact on the various taxing entities will be offset by the increase in the tax base in future years. 2002 Tax Levies and Percentage of Total Levy Percentage of Taxing Entity Tax Levy Total Levy Rapid City Area School District 10.7729 55.9% Pennington County 5.1463 26.7% City of Rapid City 3.3041 17.2% West Dakota Water District.0350.2% Total Mill Levy 19.2583 100% Anticipated 2002 Residential Owner Occupied Tax Rate: 0.0192583 The estimated tax increment available to pay for project costs in the Plan can be calculated by multiplying the anticipated tax rate by the increment in valuation. This calculation results in the following tax increments, which become available as taxes are paid for the applicable periods. PROJECTED TAX INCREMENT INCOME YEAR PROJECTED TAX ASSESSMENT TAXES INCREMENT INCREMENT DATE PAID IN VALUATION PAYMENT Nov. 2005 $ 0 $ 0 2003 Nov. 2006 $ 8,078,440 $ 77,788 2004 Nov 2007 $ 14,168,520 $ 136,431 2005 Nov 2008 $ 20,258,600 $ 195,073 2006 Nov 2009 $ 26,348,680 $ 253,715 2007 Nov 2010 $ 32,438,760 $ 312,357 2008 Nov 2011 $ 38,528,840 $ 371,000 2009 Nov. 2012 $ 44,618,920 $ 429,642 2010 Nov. 2013 $ 50,709,000 $ 488,284 4

Tax Increment District 43 Project Plan FINAL 2011 Nov. 2014 $ 56,799,080 $ 546,927 2012 Nov. 2015 $ 62,889,160 $ 605,569 2013 Nov. 2016 $ 68,979,240 $ 664,211 2014 Nov. 2017 $ 75,069,320 $ 722,853 2015 Nov. 2018 $ 81,159,400 $ 781,496 2016 Nov. 2019 $ 87,249,480 $ 840,138 2017 Nov. 2020 $ 93,339,560 $ 898,780 2018 Nov. 2021 $ 99,429,640 $ 957,423 2019 Nov. 2022 $105,519,720 $1,016,065 2020 Nov. 2023 $111,609,800 $1,074,707 2021 Nov. 2024 $117,699,800 $1,133,350 2022 TOTAL TAX INCREMENT EXPECTED TO ACCRUE BY 12/31/22: $ 11,505,809 NOTE: Tax increment payments are calculated using 100% of estimated future property valuation and 100% of expected 2002 mill levy. 3. PROJECT COSTS Capital Costs The capital costs of $2,974,900 included in the Project Plan is the construction of a water storage facility which is scheduled for construction in 2004. Financing Costs The financing costs for this Project Plan are dependent on the interest rate obtained. The anticipated interest rate used for these projections is 6%. It is estimated that the financing costs will total $2,678,870.13. If a lower interest rate is obtained, the project costs will be repaid more quickly and the property will be returned to the tax rolls sooner. Professional Service Costs Professional service costs for engineering expenses in the amount of $275,100 have been included in the Project Plan. Relocation Costs No relocation costs are anticipated in this Project Plan, as land is currently vacant. Organizational Costs No organizational costs are anticipated in the Project Plan. Necessary and Convenient Payments Contingency costs in the amount of $580,000 have been included in the Project Plan. 5

Tax Increment District 43 Project Plan FINAL Imputed Administrative Costs All Tax Increment District actions require municipal staff time to prepare and enact. The City shall be reimbursed on October 1, 2008, for its administrative costs in the amount of $2050. However, in no case shall the City be reimbursed less than $1 on October 1, 2008. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS TO BE PAID BY THE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT Capital Costs: Ground reservoir water storage facility $2,974,900.00 Professional Service and Engineering Design: Ground reservoir water storage facility design $ 275,100.00 Financing Costs: Financing interest $2,678,870.13 Professional Fees $ 0 Relocation Costs: $ 0 Organizational Costs: $ 0 Necessary and Convenient Costs: Contingency: $ 580,000.00 TOTAL $6,508,870.13 Imputed Administrative Costs* City of Rapid City $ 2,050 *The imputed administrative costs are interest-free, are not included in the total project costs, and are to be paid from the balance remaining in the TID #43 fund available to the City Finance Officer on October 1, 2008. 4. FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT The impact on taxing entities can be derived from determining the tax increment anticipated during the life of the district. The true impact on taxing entities of the Plan is the increase in valuation of the property within the Tax Increment District. The taxing entities are only foregoing that income during the life of the district and will realize that income as soon as the debt from the project costs in the Plan is retired. The purpose of this Plan is to encourage that increase in valuation. At first glance it may appear that the negative impact on the various entities is notable. But when it is considered that without the use of the Tax Increment Finance proposed in this plan it is very likely that there would be no increase in the taxable value of the property within this district or, at least, any increase would be significantly delayed, the impact can be considered truly positive. 6

Tax Increment District 43 Project Plan FINAL NET IMPACT ON TAXING ENTITIES Year Valuation Schools* County City Water Tax Paid Increase Increment 2005 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 2006 $ 8,078,440 $ 0 $ 20,769 $ 13,379 $ 155 $ 77,788 2007 $14,168,520 $ 0 $ 36,427 $ 23,466 $ 272 $ 136,431 2008 $20,258,600 $ 0 $ 52,084 $ 33,552 $ 390 $ 195,073 2009 $26,348,680 $ 0 $ 67,741 $ 43,638 $ 507 $ 253,715 2010 $32,438,760 $ 0 $ 83,399 $ 53,725 $ 624 $ 312,357 2011 $38,528,840 $ 0 $ 99,057 $ 63,812 $ 742 $ 371,000 2012 $44,618,920 $ 0 $114,714 $ 73,898 $ 859 $ 429,642 2013 $50,709,000 $ 0 $130,371 $ 83,984 $ 976 $ 488,284 2014 $56,799,080 $ 0 $146,029 $ 94,071 $ 1,093 $ 546,927 2015 $62,889,160 $ 0 $161,686 $104,157 $ 1,211 $ 605,569 2016 $68,979,240 $ 0 $177,344 $114,244 $ 1,328 $ 664,211 2017 $75,069,320 $ 0 $193,001 $124,330 $ 1,445 $ 722,853 2018 $81,159,400 $ 0 $208,659 $134,417 $ 1,562 $ 781,496 2019 $87,249,480 $ 0 $224,316 $144,503 $ 1,680 $ 840,138 2020 $93,339,560 $ 0 $238,639 $153,730 $ 1,787 $ 893,780 2021 $99,429,640 $ 0 $255,631 $164,676 $ 1,914 $ 957,423 2022 $105519720 $ 0 $271,289 $174,763 $ 2,032 $1016,065 2023 $111609800 $ 0 $286,946 $184,849 $ 2,149 $1074,707 2024 $117699880 $ 0 $302,604 $194,936 $ 2,266 $1133,350 *Pursuant to South Dakota Codified Law, an additional tax is levied for the School District s portion of the taxes. As a result, there is no financial impact on the School District. 5. FINANCING METHOD The financing method to be used in the funding of the ground water storage facility will come from a loan from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, guaranteed by the Water Rate Users fees and repaid from the Tax Increment District funds. Tax Increment District #32 must be paid before the overlapping Tax Increment District #43 funds may be used to make loan payments. The Tax Increment District #32 is projected to be paid in December 2007. Tax increment payments on Tax Increment District #43 will begin in June 2008. PROJECTED AMORTIZATION RATE TABLE Payment Beginning Capital Int Tax Inc Loan Cumulative No. Date Balance Interest Total Due Payment Payment Total Pay Balance Interest 1 12/01/2003 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 06/01/2004 4,708,700.34 141,261.01 4,849,961.35 141,261.01 0.00 141,261.01 4,708,700.34 141,261.01 3 12/01/2004 4,708,700.34 141,261.01 4,819,961.35 141,261.01 0.00 141,261.01 4,708,700.34 282,522.02 4 06/01/2005 4,708,700.34 141,261.01 4,819,961.35 141,261.01 0.00 141,261.01 4,708,700.34 423,783.03 7

Tax Increment District 43 Project Plan FINAL 5 12/01/2005 4,708,700.34 141,261.01 4,819,961.35 141,261.01 0.00 141,261.01 4,708,700.34 565,044.04 6 06/01/2006 4,708,700.34 141,261.01 4,819,961.35 141,261.01 0.00 141,261.01 4,708,700.34 706,305.05 7 12/01/2006 4,708,700.34 141,261.01 4,819,961.35 141,261.01 0.00 141,261.01 4,708,700.34 847,566.06 8 06/01/2007 4,708,700.34 141,261.01 4,849,961.35 141,261.01 0.00 141,261.01 4,708,700.34 988,827.07 9 12/01/2007 4,708,700.34 141,261.01 4,849,961.35 141,261.01 0.00 141,261.01 4,708,700.34 1,130,088.08 10 06/01/2008 4,708,700.34 141,261.01 4,849,961.35 0.00 195,073.00 195,073.00 4,654,888.35 1,271,349.09 11 12/01/2008 4,654,888.35 139,646.65 4,794,535.00 0.00 195,073.00 195,073.00 4,599,462.00 1,410,995.74 12 06/01/2009 4,599,462.00 137,983.86 4,737,445.86 0.00 253,715.00 253,715.00 4,483,730.86 1,548,979.40 13 12/01/2009 4,483,730.86 134,511.93 4,618,242.79 0.00 253,715.00 253,715.00 4,364,527.79 1,683,491.53 14 06/01/2010 4,364,527.79 130,935.83 4,495,463.62 0.00 312,357.00 312,357.00 4,183,106.62 1,814,427.36 15 12/01/2010 4,183,106.62 125,493.20 4,308,599.82 0.00 312,357.00 312,357.00 3,996,242.82 1,939,920.56 16 06/01/2011 3,996,242.82 119,887.28 4,116,130.10 0.00 371,000.00 371,000.00 3,745,130.10 2,059,807.84 17 12/01/2011 3,745,130.10 112,353.90 3,857,484.01 0.00 371,000.00 371,000.00 3,486,484.01 2,172,161.74 18 06/01/2012 3,486,484.01 104,594.52 3,591,078.53 0.00 429,642.00 429,642.00 3,161,436.53 2,276,756.26 19 12/01/2012 3,161,436.53 94,843.10 3,256,279.62 0.00 429,642.00 429,642.00 2,826,637.62 2,371,599.36 20 06/01/2013 2,826,637.62 84,799.13 2,911,436.75 0.00 488,284.00 488,284.00 2,423,152.75 2,456,398.49 21 12/01/2013 2,423,152.75 72,694.58 2,495,847.33 0.00 488,284.00 488,284.00 2,007,563.33 2,529,093.07 22 06/01/2014 2,007,563.33 60,226.90 2,067,790.23 0.00 546,927.00 546,927.00 1,520,863.23 2,589,319.97 23 12/01/2014 1,520,863.23 45,625.90 1,566,489.13 0.00 546,927.00 546,927.00 1,019,562.13 2,634,945.87 24 06/01/2015 1,019,562.13 30,586.86 1,050,149.00 0.00 605,569.00 605,569.00 444,580.00 2,665,532.73 25 12/01/2015 444,580.00 13,337.40 457,917.40 0.00 457,917.40 457,917.40 0.00 2,678,870.13 26 06/01/2016 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,678,870.13 27 12/01/2016 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,678,870.13 8

FINAL

FINAL

FINAL

FINAL

FINAL

FINAL