HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-29-1996 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA
OCTOBER 29, 1996
7:30 A.M. IJeg
MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL
CONFERENCE ROOM C
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:(�5' P.M.
2. ROLL CALL (Present = P, Absent = A)
/ Carlson ✓ Schmidt
Goff ✓ Welsch
✓ Nelson ose,A1- Terhark
Sjoberg Hankner (EDA Liaison)
Bennett (Staff)
3. APPROVE EDC MINUTES
No Minutes for Approval
4. SPECIAL BUSINESS - Interviews for Highway.10 Corridor Study
✓ 1. SRF Consulting Group - 7:30 - confirmed
Springstead Public Finance Advisors
Towle Real Estate
i"2. Sanders Wacker Wehrman Bergly, Inc - 8:00 confirmed
Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.
Reno ution, Inc.
5. EDC BUSINESS
A. Consideration of Recommendation to EDA for Professional
Services for the Study of Highway 10 Corridor - Section 9
Action: Motion
Second I2.G
Vote ep C?
Comments:
6. Report of Commissioners, Staff and EDA Liaison
7. ADJOURN P.M.
Next Meeting November 21, 1996
i
•
Minutes of the Economic Development Commission
City of Mounds View
• Ramsey County, Minnesota
Special Meeting
October 29, 1996
City of Mounds View, Council Chambers
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 a.m. by Chairperson, Dan Nelson.
2. Roll Call:
Members present were as follows: Cindy Carlson, Rosemary Goff, Dan Nelson, Brian Sjoberg, Ron
Schmidt and Delane Welsch. Member Bev Terhark, EDA Liaison Sue Hankner and Alternate Liaison
Gary Quick were absent. Economic Development Coordinator Cathy Bennett was present.
3. Approval Of Minutes:
No Minutes for Approval
• 4. Special Business
Continue Interview Process for Highway 10, Section 9 Corridor Study
The remaining consulting firms gave a 30-40 minute presentation in response to the RFP that
was approved at the September 26, 1996 regular meeting.
1. SRF Consulting Group teaming with Towle Real Estate and Springstead Financial
Consultants
2. Sanders, Wacker, Wehrman, Bergly, Inc. teaming with Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.
and Resolution, Inc.
After each presentation commissioners asked several questions regarding each companies
background and the proposed scope of work.
5. EDC BUSINESS
A. Consideration of Recommendation to EDA for a Professional Service Firm to Conduct the
Study of Highway 10 Corridor, Section 9.
Commissioners discussed the proposals that were interviewed today and felt that SRF was more
qualified. They noted that SWWB's proposal was difficult to follow but commented on the
consensus building and market analysis expertise of Donn Wriski with Resolution Inc. Another
•
1
concern with SWWB was the lack of Highway corridor background. Most of the work that they
have done were small downtown corridor projects.
• Commissioner Nelson noted that from the proposals presented on October 24th he favored
BRW since they were very familiar with Mounds View and the Corridor but that their proposal
was weak in consensus building. Commissioner Nelson also noted that SRF's proposal was very
easy to understand and he liked the fact that they were open with regards to what was expected
of staff in the process.
Coordinator Bennett felt there are areas of SRF's proposal that are not needed such as
Springstead Financial Analysis since this is the City's consulting firm anyway. In addition,there
are other areas that could be negotiated in price. Coordinator Bennett recommended a price
not to exceed$25,000 would be sufficient for a study of this size. Commissioner Sjoberg
suggested that we even try to reduce the cost closer to $20,000 since most of the cost in based
on time spent by those that have an hourly rate. He noted that this is always negotiable.
Coordinator Bennett noted that she would strive between $20,000 and$25,000 but that we
would not want to recommend a low amount and have to go back to the EDA and request more
funds to complete the project.
Motion/Second: Nelson/Carlson moved to recommend SRF Consulting Group, Inc. to the EDA
and recommend them to allow staff to negotiate and award a contract for the study of Highway
10, Section 9 for an amount not to exceed$25,000 from available tax increment funds.
Motion Carried 6 ayes 0 nays
6. Reports From Chair, Commissioners and Staff:
•
7. Adjournment
There being no further business before the Commission, this meeting of the Economic Development
Commission adjourned at 9:05 a.m.
Respectfully Submitte•,
e 41
11 Economic De - • . ent Coordinator
•
2