My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-06-2009 City Council Minutes
Laserfiche
>
City Council (Permanent)
>
Minutes
>
2009
>
10-06-2009 City Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2014 9:39:09 AM
Creation date
6/19/2014 9:38:54 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council Minutes <br />October 6, 2009 <br />Page 4 of 12 <br />----------------------- - - - - -- <br />public hearing indicating that it was a totally different issue that the request <br />before the Council this evening. <br />Brandon Andersen - 31291 Edgewater Farm Drive - Stated that he <br />was the last business owner to receive TIF from the City which was for a <br />manufacturing project. Opposed to TIF for this project and feels it would <br />put local businesses to a disadvantage. <br />MAYOR ADAMS MOVED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCIL <br />MEMBER NAGEL SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. <br />Mayor Malecha questioned if the easements are addressed in the <br />developer's agreement? The attorney answered that they are addressed <br />in the developer's agreement. <br />Council Member Ryan indicated a concern about whether the "but -for" <br />policy can be met. Council Member Ryan questioned the actual cost to the <br />City with TIF versus using abatement. He indicated that the cost to the <br />City for abatement has a higher impact than using TIF. Council Member <br />Ryan questioned how the interest rate was determined. Council Member <br />Ryan requested a clarification on the definition of public improvements. He <br />�- further questioned whether the City will own the public improvements at <br />the end? Council Member Ryan noted that this is an additional burden on <br />an overtaxed older system. Council Member Ryan had a question on the <br />substandard requirement for tax increment. <br />Council Member Nagel noted that the applicants have been very open to <br />the City during the process. He noted that he is dealing with an ethical <br />concern that has been expressed regarding aiding competition against <br />existing businesses. He indicated that he has been contacted by many <br />people who have indicated a desire for a new grocery store; however, they <br />have not talked about the subsidy issue. Council Member Nagel indicated <br />that his conscience does not allow him to vote in favor of tax abatement <br />subsidy when it is in direct competition of an existing business. <br />Dave Sjoblad indicated that it is the intention of the developer to turn the <br />lift station and sewer over to the City and questioned the approximate <br />cost. Tim Houle indicated that the lift station cost about $100,000. <br />Mayor Adams wanted to be clear that the tax abatement is for demolition, <br />sanitary sewer, lift station and roadway improvements. Mayor Adams <br />requested that the reference to fencing and fencing relocation be removed <br />from the tax abatement documents. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.