My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-26-07 Minutes for Approval
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
02-26-07-R
>
02-26-07 Minutes for Approval
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/2/2024 12:46:20 AM
Creation date
9/22/2022 10:20:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 12, 2007 6 <br /> Councilmember Grant stated if he were the developer he would want significant TIF. He asked • <br /> who would provide the rigors of the "but/for" test. Mr. Bubul responded it would be the City, <br /> City staff, and the consultants. <br /> Councilmember Grant noted under item J, on Page 6, he asked if the City wanted to send <br /> something of a legal nature which they do not want to make public, he asked if they had to <br /> provide a copy to CRR, which would then become a public document. He asked if there was an <br /> issue with this. Mr. Bubul responded he did not see this as an issue. He indicated they needed a <br /> free-flow of communication between the parties. <br /> Mayor Harpstead suggested instead of an actual document, would they consider taking a <br /> summary. He noted if this was under attorney/client privilege they would want it not included. <br /> Mr. Bubul responded they would look at this. <br /> Councilmember Holmes suggested they strike (1) on page 6 because it was vague. Mr. Bubul <br /> agreed. <br /> Councilmember Holden stated the prioritizing concerned her. She respect to 4a on page 5, how <br /> would they make City staff available for consultation. Mr. Bubul responded this was a general <br /> statement they were negotiating in good faith and as a practical matter this was not usually be a <br /> problem. He noted they would be paying the additional costs, as well as any additional staff. <br /> Councilmember Holmes recommended they add the language "reasonable". Mr. Bubul • <br /> responded they could add that wording. <br /> Councilmember Holmes asked if they should add the OTP and the Memorandum of <br /> Understanding under section 5 on Page 7. She asked on the two business days, they could add in <br /> unaccrued reimbursable costs also. Mr. Bubul responded they could add those recommendations. <br /> Council Holden asked under 5(b) if there were any City staff costs reimbursed from May 2005 <br /> until now. She stated if the City was not being reimbursed, this is not in the best interest of the <br /> City. Ms. Wolfe responded that this has not been discussed yet. <br /> Ms. Barton noted on the spreadsheet of reimbursable costs, the City time would be added to <br /> Exhibit C. <br /> Councilmember Grant noted there were a number of bench handouts requested by Council and <br /> in the past Council has had a freestanding policy that they would not be basing their decisions on <br /> bench handouts. He stated that being the case, he believed they needed additional time to look at <br /> all of the information. Mayor Harpstead suggested they finish the review of the document, <br /> register questions, and requested this be brought back to Council in the future. <br /> Councilmember Grant asked if the term "master developer" had any legal significance. Mr. <br /> Bubul responded it did not and it just meant this was the developer they were dealing with on the <br /> entire TCAAP site. He indicated however if Council was uncomfortable with this wording, it • <br /> could be changed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.