08-12-24-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—AUGUST 12, 2024 5 July 23 JDA meeting in order to learn more about this project. He stated he understood this was a difficult project that would involve financial risk. He supported the City Council further discussing the financial risk. Councilmember Fabel hoped that if residents were to watch the July 23 JDA meeting, they would listen closely to the context of the comments that were being made. He explained he made the comment the City had given into the County's requests. He reported the context was that the County was implying the City would be the banker for this development. He made it clear that the City of Arden Hills would not be the banker for this project, given the fact the property was owned by the County. He stated the City had made significant investment in this project by committing to the County's density. He indicated this was the reason he ran for office. He reported he had worked towards an agreement in 2023 to have 500 more housing units within TCAAP. He reported there was a potential for increased costs to the City for police and fire. He stated the idea that there was anything secret was simply ridiculous and have little to do with what was actually going on. He commented on the terms that were agreed upon in 2023 to move this project forward, noting the JDA has been committed to move this project forward. He discussed how project costs had increased dramatically due to the five year impasse that occurred when the City refused to compromise with the County previously. He stated interest rates and construction costs have since skyrocketed. He indicated the JDA discussed the potential use of bonds for the infrastructure work, noting these bonds could then be paid back through land sales. He stated these considerations were on the table for the County and the developer to work through. He explained as the terms are worked through this information will be brought back to the City Council for consideration. He noted TIF requests and other details will have to be addressed at a future time. Councilmember Holden explained she had listened very carefully to the JDA meeting and noted she asked her questions because she needed additional information. She understood Councilmember Fabel had stated the City was not a bank but she had also heard a lot of push back from the County. She indicated the City waited for 19 months for the County to come forward with a response, but this never occurred. She believed it was interesting that Councilmember Fabel stated he had negotiated the 1,960 housing units, when this number was brought forward by the developer. She indicated the previous term sheet was 22% affordable. She explained the previous JDA and City Council had vetted their numbers and were accountable. She stated the City had compromised and now supported the 1,960 housing units. She commented she could speak for hours about how the County had not come forward, no matter what the City had offered. She indicated it was curious how the developer came up with the number of units, being 1,960 and this just happens to be the same number the County came up with. Councilmember Holden reported the JDA had a subcommittee (JDA Advisory Committee) and she understood no one was allowed to attend these meetings. She explained she had questions regarding what was agreed to at these meetings. She stated this development would impact peoples lives and she was extremely concerned with how the City of Arden Hills would be adversely impacted. She stated she would continue to ask questions based on the concerns she had for the City. Mayor Grant stated with a compromise, there was generally a give and a take. He stated he wanted to better understand what was the City's take in the compromise with the County. Lastly, he learned at the JDA meeting that the County would not bond for the funding gap.