My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-10-23-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2023
>
07-10-23-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/6/2023 2:58:11 PM
Creation date
7/6/2023 2:57:49 PM
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.
/
49
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 – JUNE 26, 2023 3 <br /> <br />Mayor Grant commented on how the cost for infrastructure has increased from $61 million to <br />$89 million. He requested further information on how almost $30 million was added. <br /> <br />City Administrator Perrault indicated inflation and labor supply has led to the price increases. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant stated City costs have risen to just over $11 million from $8.2 million. He <br />requested staff break down these expenses further. <br /> <br />City Administrator Perrault explained the water tower would cost roughly $7 million and the <br />remaining portion would be for City utilities along the spine road. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant commented he heard the JDA Advisory Committee is planning to complete its <br />work by September. He asked if this was correct. <br /> <br />City Administrator Perrault stated the JDA Advisory Committee was hoping to have a meeting <br />in September to talk through density scenarios and updated financial implications which would set <br />the stage for a term sheet by the end of the year. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant noted he received an email that had 20 to 30 questions from a resident who would <br />like answers. He indicated he read through these questions and they seemed legitimate. He stated <br />this resident would like answers to these questions and he asked that the City respond to this <br />email. <br /> <br />Councilmember Fabel explained it was his understanding this email was suggesting those <br />questions were appropriate for a public discussion. He did not disagree with this. He indicated <br />there were not answers for some of those questions. He stated the current status of the project was <br />in the same state it has been since 2016. He explained interest rates, inflation, changing lifestyles, <br />and COVID have all happened since that time. He believed it would be appropriate to address <br />these questions once more answers were available. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant indicated things have changed since the JDA was now back in session and there are <br />advisory committees. He noted the JDA has been meeting now for six months and there were <br />answers to some of the questions. <br /> <br />Councilmember Fabel commented there were a series of topics that could be addressed at a <br />public session. He explained it will make much more sense when more information as available, <br />given the fact there was a gap of inactivity for five years, which has seen a great deal of damage. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant stated he disagreed with these statements and he believed the City should answer <br />the questions. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden explained there were two separate emails that the Council may be <br />discussing at this point in time. <br /> <br />Councilmember Monson reported there were a lot of questions that were asked early in the year. <br />She noted the JDA does not have all of the answers yet. She explained the JDA was trying to get <br />up to speed in order to understand the market conditions and increased costs. She commented the
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.