My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
04/01/2004 EDAC Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Economic Development Advisory Committee
>
Minutes
>
2004
>
04/01/2004 EDAC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/5/2022 3:40:35 PM
Creation date
5/27/2015 9:10:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EDAC
EDAC Document Type
EDAC Minutes
Meeting Date
04/01/2004
EDAC Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
APPROVED <br /> <br />CITY OF LINO LAKES <br />ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT <br />ADVISORY COMMITTEE <br />MINUTES <br /> <br />DATE: Thursday, April 1, 2004 <br />MEMBERS <br />PRESENT: K. Hansmann, H. Juni, T. Vacha, J. Schwartz, H. Karth, S. Rymer, <br />J. Helgemoe, F. Chase <br />MEMBERS <br />ABSENT: D. Gorowsky <br />OTHERS <br />PRESENT: M. Divine, M. Grochala, G. Heitke <br /> <br />GENERAL/MINUTES <br />Minutes of March 4, 2004 were approved. <br /> <br />EDAC FIVE YEAR PLAN REVIEW <br />Mr. Juni asked why there was a terminology change from tax revenue to tax capacity. <br />Ms. Divine stated the tax capacity is the amount of taxes generated from the county tax <br />rolls. (Explanation: the tax capacity is the value x the tax rate, while the tax revenue is the <br />tax capacity x the tax capacity rate. Since the tax capacity rate varies from year to year <br />and school district to school district, it is simpler to use the basic tax capacity.) <br /> <br />Ms. Divine said she updated the inventory to give members a review of new <br />development. Mr. Juni asked if it was helpful to list all the uses in multi-tenant buildings. <br />He questioned whom the five-year plan is for. Ms. Divine said after a major update the <br />plan has been brought to the council. It is a way to reinforce long range goals. EDAC <br />took the plan, which included some policy recommendations, to the council a few years <br />ago. The one-year plan is a more changeable document. <br /> <br />Mr. Chase moved to approve the updated five-year plan. Mr. Rymer seconded the <br />motion. Motion passed unanimously. During discussion of the motion, Mr. Rymer <br />asked if the city should be trying to work closely with the state legislature on economic <br />development issues. Mr. Juni stated the committee has never been proactive that way. <br />Mr. Chase said the city has been proactive in going after opportunities. Mr. Juni stated if <br />the city becomes aware of issues that need attention, this committee should be notified <br />and can participate in lobbying efforts. Mr. Karth stated an effort should made to clean up <br />the entrances to the city, it hasn’t been accomplished. Enforcement of problem areas is <br />needed. Mr. Chase stated EDAC has promoted redevelopment when the opportunity <br />arises. Ms. Divine stated the Comprehensive Plan promotes relocating industrial uses on <br />Lake Drive to the business parks. Mr. Grochala stated there are a lot of redevelopment <br />opportunities. But the city must be committed to using the tools available, such as TIF. <br />EDAC’s role can be identifying the sites recommending a strategy for going about it, and <br /> 1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.