Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View EDA August 22, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 18 <br /> <br />Mr. McCarty stated that language does not exclude existing positions and does not prevent them <br />from bringing existing positions in from other facilities. He stated those are the concerns the <br />residents have been talking about and should be addressed. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich asked Mr. Inman to respond to the concern that this project does not <br />meet the job creation goals of the State. <br /> <br />Mr. Inman explained there are no job creation goals of the State but the State requires that you <br />have job creation goals and they were adopted by the public hearing. He further explained that <br />the City can determine if that involves new jobs or existing jobs. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated the indemnification on environmental issue is meant to protect <br />the City during the construction phase. There would be limited liability with the City picking up <br />to $200,000 of environmental clean up costs, if any. <br /> <br />Mr. McCarty referenced Section 116, j., 943, and noted that some criteria expected on the <br />business subsidy that there would be economic gain to the State and job creation. He explained <br />that he is saying the City can, if they wish, require those new jobs promised to the citizens of <br />Mounds View and anyone else attending the public hearing on June 20, 2005. The City can hold <br />them to that promise and if they don’t fulfill then the City can “pull the pin” on this thing. Mr. <br />McCarty stated the deeper you go the more difficult it will be to “turn the train around” should <br />new evidence make it less desirable for this project to go forward as proposed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Thomas stated the responsibility of the State and City is new jobs in Mounds <br />View. Medtronic currently has 90 employees at the shipping facility in Mounds View. She <br />stated anything above that is new jobs to her and that is where she draws the line. <br /> <br />Mr. McCarty asked Commissioner Thomas if she feels that that imported jobs are new jobs. <br />Commissioner Thomas answered in the affirmative. <br /> <br />Mr. McCarty stated the employee may be living in New Brighton and he thinks that is a limited <br />view. <br /> <br />Mr. McCarty asked who guarantees anything above the $200,000 liability limit should a law suit <br />be brought, since the City is the indemnifier. He also asked under what law the City can claim a <br />liability limit of $200,000. He noted the tort liability for governments under statute is $600,000. <br /> <br />City Attorney Riggs explained that this is EDA property that would be transferred and just like <br />any landowner if in the chain of title, they are jointly and severally liable for any type of <br />environmental obligation. He stated this is the case whether by contract or insurance. He <br />advised that the City has taken steps to shift liability and there is also insurance to cover certain <br />percentages. He offered to review the contract terms with Mr. McCarty and the EDA, if desired.