CCP 10-30-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - OCTOBER 10, 2006 10 . Councilmember Holden stated she was having a hard time understanding why the City had to take on this responsibility and not the developer. Ms. Barton responded the EQB required that a responsible govemment unit oversee the ADAR process, which in this case was the City of Arden Hills. She stated there was also likely to be a lot of attention paid to this environmental review by various organizations and to ensure that the document was kept beyond reproach, it was bcst to be contracted through the City and not the developer who had a vested interest in how that environmental review came out. Councilmember Holden asked why the City did not take the responsibility to set up the interview process instead of Ryan arranging everything. Ms. Barton responded for making the process go more smoothly, efficient, and economical it made sense to do the interview process for all six firms at once. Council member Grant stated he had the same concerns as Councilmember Holden. He asked how they arrived at the amount. Ms. Barton responded that was the number they submitted with the RFP and there had been no negotiations on the amount. Councilmember Larson indicated he believed staff had been very wise in how they have set this up. He noted thcse documents were very important to the public when approving a new development and staff had recognized the important of having an arms length relationship with the developer. He bclieved this was a smart move on the City's part to do this. . Mayor Aplikowski agreed this safeguardcd the integrity ofthe City. Councilmember Holden requested a memorandum of what the process really was. She asked where they were at. Ms. Wolfe stated as part of getting this consulting teanl in place, they would submit timelines and the steps involved, She stated these timelines and steps would be forwarded to Council. Council member Holden requested the RFP information also. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Mayor Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve a contract with SRF, Inc. for possible future preparation of an AUAR review relating to the Twin Cities AlTny Ammunition Plant sllch awarding of the contract shall be subject to future Council approval and subject to a funding formulary with the developer. Mayor Aplikowski stated she did not like the word "possible". Councilmember Grant suggested removing the word possible and changing to a "future preparation." Councilmember Larson stated he could not support the motion. He stated the condition regarding having an agreement in place that allowed for reimbursement of the City was something that came at the time when the contract was brought fOf\vard for approval. He stated here all they were doing was to authorize staff to go forward and develop a contract for an . ADAR to bc brought back to Council for approval. At that point, the expectation would be that