08-22-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View EDA August 22, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 17 Mr. Inman noted the parcel does not appear in the second resolution but does appear in the Plan and all documents the EDA has received. He stated he would like the action to include the parcel number to avoid confusion. City Attorney Rigg agreed that is the most correct route since it is referenced in the Plan. He stated what is before the EDA does not have that parcel pulled out at this time and the EDA should have a record. Economic Development Coordinator Bachman suggested Section 1 of the resolution be revised to state: “…Minnesota which is underutilized and that the adoption of the proposed Plans, as amended, will help provide employment opportunities…” Commissioner Thomas stated there are only the five parcels and suggested including those PIN numbers rather than excluding the one that is being omitted. Vice-President Stigney stated Staff can determine how to best reflect that amendment. SECOND: /Thomas. Vote on amendment motion: Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road, stated he has reviewed the draft contract and believes this proposal is being piecemealed, not by design, but in actual fact. He stated there are several other issues in the overall contract that the EDA will need to deal with. He stated the original contract had an exclusion for existing jobs that has been stricken from the current contract. He assumed that it is intended that Medtronic will move positions from other facilities to the Mounds View location and wondered if that qualifies as the jobs goal as required under the Economic Development Act. Other issues of concern relate to indemnification for liability; however, studies have found a certain amount of hazardous conditions, and that the contract requires the City to indemnify all comers in the first phase. Mr. McCarty stated he has many other issues and is in fear that the EDA is “digging a hole” and when the end comes the City will not like the results but be hard pressed to retract actions. He stated in his mind, the City should understand every contingency from beginning to end before getting this far. That is what the previous speaker was alluding to and is his concern as well. Commissioner Flaherty read the Purchase Agreement, Section 5.2, Jobs and Wages, which indicates that within two years after the date of issuance of the certificate of completion, the compliance date, that developer shall cause to be created at least 1,500 new full-time equivalent jobs on the development property.