Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council November 27, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 14 <br />you walk out of the Groveland building residents would be able to view children on the play <br />structure and putting the tower building in that location would obstruct that view. <br />Ms. Palm indicated that she feels that park fees benefits all residents but she is concerned about <br />location and impact for the parks. She then said that the proposal does meet some conditions but <br />there are outstanding issues and she is not in favor of the proposal and does not think that it <br />belongs in a City park. <br />Council Member Flaherty said that if Park and Recreation said that they would like Council to <br />look at this he would consider it but the opinion he is getting is that this does not need to go <br />further at this time. <br />Council Member Stigney said that because of the questions and issues not resolved he could not <br />support going forward with it. <br />City Administrator Ulrich asked whether there was a vote or an informal recommendation from <br />the Park Commission. <br />Ms. Palm indicated that several were supportive under a variety of conditions including that the <br />building not interfere with future funding, future use of the park, and that the fees go into the <br />park fund. She then said that other conditions were that it would benefit the park by use of <br />lighting or something but not detract from park use now or in the future and the current proposal <br />does not do that. <br />Ms. Palm indicated that five of the Commissioners were supportive under the listed conditions <br />and she voted no that she did not want this use in the parks. <br />City Administrator Ulrich said that Council should consider the recommendation at the next <br />meeting and address it at that time. <br />Staff was directed to have the request come to Council for final consideration. <br />Director Ericson indicated that there was an article in the Star Tribune regarding the City of <br />Rogers and their practice of providing business subsidies to lure business to the City. He then <br />explained that there was a table as part of the article showing Rogers was number one for TIF <br />usage in the state and Mounds View was listed as number three. <br />Director Ericson indicated that Staff was concerned to see Mounds View listed as number three <br />and did some research into the data used for the article. He then said that the data was <br />cumulative data from the Citizen's League and was not current data. He further explained that <br />Mounds View has reduced its percentage of TIF down to 16.18% making Mounds View number <br />28 in the state for TIF usage. <br />Director Ericson indicated that he spoke to the reporter noting that the way the information was <br />presented could confuse the residents but the reporter stated that the information was to highlight <br />