My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
01.19.16 EDA Packet
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
EDA
>
EDA Agenda/Packets
>
2016 EDA Packets
>
01.19.16 EDA Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/7/2018 3:56:25 PM
Creation date
12/7/2018 2:56:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
1/19/2016
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Commission Name
EDA
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
III. Stakeholder Input <br />Please identify who you want included in the stakeholder input steps of the planning process. <br />Your list could be a specific name(s) or a reference to a group or association. <br />• Commercial real estate community <br />■ Greater MSP <br />• All levels of local government (schools and watershed districts too) <br />• Variety of market rate and affordable housing developers <br />■ Sample of individuals that work in the county but do not live in the county <br />• Communities of color, disabled, and low income population <br />• Two members of city staff and the Mayor <br />• Sample of elected officials <br />• County Board and staff <br />• City staff <br />Economic Development Authorities <br />Local business associations <br />Chamber of Commerce <br />IV. Tools <br />Please identify up to three current tools you are using to support or augment your economic <br />development efforts? <br />• Greater MSP (leads and promotion) <br />• HRA levy <br />• Local income housing tax credit program and Minnesota Housing programs <br />• Met Council LCDA program for land acquisition and pollution clean-up resources <br />• TIF (redevelopment and housing) <br />• Tax abatement <br />• Woodbury Growth fund (revolving low interest loan) <br />• SEED fund <br />• Fast track process and one stop shop <br />• Shovel ready business park <br />• Acquisition of property <br />V. Distinctiveness <br />Please identify one or two considerations that you believe are unique or distinct to Washington <br />County that can be a positive asset to economic development within the county. <br />• Accessibility and location with easy access to MSP, airport and Wisconsin <br />• Land costs (may be higher), but tax environment is competitive <br />■ Human capital and workforce <br />• Positive relationship with the county — trust level is in place to accomplish projects <br />• Significant natural areas for recreation and tourism <br />■ Significant land supply within distinct communities <br />• Rural and urban character <br />o Fast growing cities <br />VI. Best Practices <br />Please identify one or two economic development best practices that our process should identify <br />and possibly explore. <br />• Level of investment and involvement with Greater MSP <br />16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.