02-25-19-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 25, 2019 4 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 9. NEW BUSINESS A. Ramsey County Mediation Request Response City Administrator Perrault stated the City of Arden Hills received a request for mediation on the TCAAP project from Ramsey County in a letter dated February 8, 2019. The letter requested a formal response from the City Council by February 26, 2019. This agenda item is to allow the Council to publicly comment on the request and provide a formal response to the County. Councilmember Holmes recommended the Council not pursue mediation with the County at this time. She explained the City had an agreement with the County that has been in place since 2016 and this agreement was reaffirmed at a JDA meeting in September of 2018. She indicated she did not understand why this agreement needed to be changed. She stated the terms of the proposed mediation was not clearly set forth by the County but rather was extremely vague. This was a concern to her. She commented in order to make changes to density or the current plans in place, this would take a great deal of time and resources for the City to complete. For the reasons stated, she did not support the City pursuing mediation with the County. Councilmember Scott stated prior to 2017 he was not a member of the City Council. However, he noted he had attended a large number of JDA and planning meetings. He explained he was confused why the City was suddenly at an impasse. He reported the agreed to density of 1,460 units was supported by the County. He indicated the City fees were also a compromised and agreed to number by both parties. He stated it was his opinion the City has been diligent in attending meetings and delivering the agreements on time. He explained he was curious as to why the City was being described as an unwilling partner. He stated it was his view the City had followed through with its part and now the County wanted to change the terms of the agreement. He supported the City not entering into mediation until the basis of the impasse was better understood. Councilmember Holden agreed with these statements. She encouraged the public to view the February 20 JDA meeting on the City's website. She reported City representatives talked a great deal about the responsibility to the City and what it means if TCAAP details were changed at this point in time. She feared how the TCAAP project would be funded if things were to significantly change or how the development would proceed if the economy were to take a dive. She commented on the expenditures the City would have to incur to maintain TCAAP roads, sidewalks and parks. She was of the opinion the County had not negotiated in good faith up to this point. She feared this would continue if mediation were pursued. Councilmember McClung commented the County wears two hats and he argued that the County was not wearing either of these hats well. He explained the County was a governmental entity, similar to Arden Hills, and they were also a landowner for the Rice Creek Commons/TCAAP site. He feared the County was falling down on both of their responsibilities. He reported the County has asked for and demanded transparency from the City. He indicated when the County was not