Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — JUNE 10, 2024 2 <br />Please note, they are still significant financial and development agreement items to be worked <br />through regardless of the sports complex. Lastly, the next JDA meeting is slated for July I st, it is <br />still being decided whether or not to hold that meeting, cancel it, or reschedule, watch the City's <br />website for updates on the meeting. <br />Councilmember Monson thanked City Administrator Perrault for all of his efforts with County <br />staff. She explained the JDA has not met recently. She noted there was a $40 million gap in <br />funding for this project for soil correction and mass grading. She indicated this cost is typically <br />assumed by the landowner and developer and this was agreed to by the County in the past. <br />However, now that the County was in a different financial situation, the JDA was seeking other <br />options for covering this expense. She explained the County was uncomfortable with bonding for <br />this expense in the event the development does not move forward. She stated the JDA was <br />seeking solutions to find financing. She indicated a TIF bond that was administered by the City <br />was considered. She reported as the JDA representative, she did not believe this would be a wise <br />decision for the City. She commented that a tax abatement structure was also considered and has <br />not gotten traction given the up -front costs. She indicated alternate financial solutions were still <br />being considered. <br />Councilmember Fabel stated all discussions regarding finances have been held between City and <br />County staff and the JDA has not been a part of the discussions. He explained there has been <br />tremendous increases in infrastructure costs and interest rates have skyrocketed. He reported the <br />County has come up with other objectives for their funding which means the JDA has not seen a <br />manner in which to address the $40 million funding gap. It was his hope that a solution would be <br />brought forward from the County or the developer. Until a solution comes forward, the project <br />was at an impasse. He commented on how in the last year, it was determined some of the soil <br />needs remediation, which would require additional funding. <br />Councilmember Holden asked if the City was overbudget with Ehlers. <br />City Administrator Perrault reported this was the case. <br />Councilmember Holden questioned if staff had any other reports from Ehlers. <br />City Administrator Perrault stated the Council has all reports that have been distributed from <br />Ehlers. <br />Councilmember Holden stated she understood one of the proposals from the County would have <br />the County putting $10 million into infrastructure and the City would put in $10 million. She <br />questioned if the County saw a problem with this given the different sizes of budgets for each <br />entity. <br />City Administrator Perrault explained this was just an idea that was spit balled. He reported the <br />County wanted to have both the developer and the City to have skin in the game to help fill the <br />gap. <br />Councilmember Holden indicated the County has expressed concern with funding the $40 <br />million given the fact the project could stall. She stated this was the same reason the City was <br />asking for utility protection. <br />