Agenda Packets - 2005/06/27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council June 20, 2005 Special Meeting Page 13 allowed a referendum petition to be submitted. City Attorney Riggs stated the Ordinance would 1 need to be adopted and residents would have 30-days to submit a referendum petition. 2 3 Mr. Amundsen stated it would be necessary to get 990 signatures for a referendum petition. He 4 noted Mounds View was one of the higher taxed cities in the area and had more TIF than most 5 cities in the state. He stated the City had a real need to improve their income. He stated the 6 Council/EDA needed to decide why they were allowing a private bid instead of competitive 7 bidding. He believed there was already a TIF District on the Sysco property and asked if the City 8 was planning on retiring that District in order to create a new EDA District. City Administrator 9 Ulrich replied there was an existing TIF District on part of the parcel and that District would still 10 exist in part. 11 12 Shelly Eldridge, Ehlers & Associates, stated it had been awhile since she looked at those 13 specifics, but she believed there might be a small portion of the District that would need to be 14 decertified, but the main District would remain in tact. She requested additional time to answer 15 this. 16 17 Mayor Marty stated the Council was not responding or answering questions and the staff was 18 because it was the consensus of the rest of the Council that for this meeting tonight, staff and 19 Ehlers & Associates would answer the questions to get their expertise out. He stated they were 20 aware the Council represented the citizens and they took that responsibility seriously. He stated 21 competitive bidding was a good point. 22 23 Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road, stated he supported the concern about staff answering 24 rather than the Council. He stated because Council was not answering, they were allowing staff 25 to do their job. He stated Ehlers & Associates has been using an abstract value from Ramsey 26 County as their base value. He stated the fact was that the actual number was 9.1, which was 2 27 million higher. He suggested the City pay the one million and tell Medtronic that they would 28 consider their offer. With respect to the 20.5 million for transportation improvements, he stated 29 unless they had that in writing, he did not believe MnDOT would come forward and this should 30 not be used as a carrot for the residents of the City. He noted 25 percent of the City’s tax base 31 was in TIF financing. He stated they needed to think in terms of the future within the residents’ 32 lifetimes and a 25-year TIF was too long. 33 34 Stacie Kvilvang stated the difference in the numbers was that one of the parcels included in the 35 notice was not in the TIF District. She noted one of the parcels would remain exempt, which was 36 the former Sysco property. 37 38 Bob Glazer, 2625 Hillview Road, stated Medtronic was a fine company, but it was one of several 39 fine companies in the area. He stated the City Council was required to hold a public hearing by 40 law for this matter. He asked if Council had a predetermined position on this and he requested 41 Council and not the staff respond to this question. He stated he was afraid of the answer because 42 so much as gone on because the EDA and the Charter Commission has passed this, as well as a 43 lot of legislative pressure. He stated he was disappointed with the TIF financing. He believed 44 the number of jobs Medtronic were proposing was too optimistic. He noted the golf course was 45