02-25-19-SWS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—JANUARY 16, 2019 2 JDA requested the County provide information as to the specifics of what they are looking for, but the County Commissioners did not attend that meeting. Councilmember Holden asked if there were any outstanding issues between the Developer and the County. City Administrator Perrault stated that because the weekly Wednesday afternoon meetings between the County, City and Developer no longer occur, the City was not aware what the outstanding issues remain. City Attorney Joel Jamnik stated that Alatus, the Master Developer, submitted a redline document that the County has not responded to. He also said that unless the parties have been working behind the scenes, that major document that is expected to be executed by the JDA, the County, and the Master Developer remains unfinished. A discussion ensued about density, affordable housing, and City financing as items previously negotiated between the City and the County. A discussion ensued regarding the County's request for "more" and the City's request for an explanation as to what constitutes "more". Councilmember Holmes stated she believed that the City did not want to engage in mediation, and the strongest reason is because the City has an agreement that has been in place for several years. She questioned how the City could be sure the County would follow any new agreement even if the City agrees to mediation and a new agreement is reached. She also commented that mediation is non-binding. Councilmember McClung stated he did not believe the City could agree to mediation when it does not know what is being mediated. Further discussion ensued about mediation. Councilmember Holmes suggested that the language be added to the City's draft response stating that contrary to the County's assertion in the November 6 letter, the City does not view this project as an inconvenience rather than a benefit. The City Council agreed to include this language in its response letter and a discussion ensued regarding the City's response to Ramsey County. City Attorney Jamnik indicated that the City's response letter also requests that the negotiating team that previously met on Wednesday afternoons be reestablished and that the County representatives also show up at the JDA meetings with specific responses and requests. He stated the City's response rejects mediation as premature but requests the County come back to the table to negotiate per the pervious framework. Councilmember Scott stated he did not feel comfortable that an impasse has been described because the City has been willing to negotiate and has shown up for those negotiations.