2006 10-16 CC PACKET - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

most of the costs refer to the new building, however there will be other costs relating to the relocation and restoration of the Town Hall. Short stated that agreements are needed. He explained that the Town acquired the site and is prepared to go forward immediately. He noted that discussion began with how the Township's part of the project would occur, and it was initially contemplated that the Town's contribution would be to acquire the site, extend sewer and water to it, and to do some improvements to the land. He reported that the Town Engineer has been directed by the Town Board to prepare a feasibility report to provide sewer and water to the site. Short also explained that the Town has had a Phase 1 and Phase 2 Environment Study done on the property and has performed some site corrections, including removal of contaminated soils and abandonment of a septic tank. He stated that the Township's total costs are estimated at approximately $300,000. He noted that the cost to create the building is estimated at approximately $700,000, or a two-thirds / one-third ratio, which he noted appears to be acceptable to the Town Board. At this point in the meeting, the Gem Lake City Council members also indicated their agreement to this ratio. Magnuson explained that part of the plan is to give the City of Gem Lake more visibility and viability and to go forward in the future. He stated that it is hoped that the building will bean asset to both communities. He stated that there will be a need of acceptance or at least acknowledgment of the Township costs of between $300,000 - $330,000. He stated there is also a need to adjust it to make sure that the costs are fairly distributed, if the building is under budget, so there is consideration if the Township has overpaid. Short noted that if the building is substantially higherthat budgeted, i.e., if the cost of providing office space to the White Bear Lake Conservation District would significantly increase the budget, it would have to be determined what they would pay in rent. Short emphasized that the visibility of a Sheriffs Department substation at this location would be an asset to both communities. Magnuson stated that he reviewed the draft lease agreement and that he has found problematic areas. He noted that one concern is that as the agreement is currently drafted, the lease does not create an asset. He suggested that an agreement should be drafted in a manner that creates an asset for both communities. Magnuson also noted a second concern in that certain city council actions must be performed within the city limits. He stated that the city will have an option to J go back to Tousley Ford to hold public meetings. He stated that the project for Heritage Hall will show their citizens that the City is viable, has a house and lives here. He pointed out that another option would be to redraw the political lines, which can be problematic, and he stated that Gem Lake does not want the Township to lose any property. He stated that the goal is to work together to create a viable asset for both communities, and that they want to see an asset based project. He suggested the possibility of a second Joint Powers Agreement for the ongoing operation and maintenance of the facility. Kelly stated that he understands the need for each community to share equity in the building, and that a JPA can address that. He noted that a lease term of 99 years can be made subject to a renewable term of 99 years. He stated that bonding requirements may require ownership, which will need to be investigated. He stated that an agreement can show that there is real value for each community. He noted that it is clear that it must be done right to protect the tax payers of both communities. He stated that one option to the boundary issue might be to seek special legislation that would allow Gem Lake to have bonding hearings at the new building because they have ownership in it and because it is accessible to their citizens. In response to a question if voting would be an issue, Magnuson stated that he has checked with Ramsey County and that this facility would work because voting can occur within 300 yards of the political boundaries. He noted that the City of Gem Lake could actually have used the Town Hall for voting. Magnuson concluded that elections are not an issue. A question was asked if there would be any benefit to splitting the land and trading off some open space in Gem Lake with the Township to simplify the lease. Short explained that has been discussed and would be conceivable, however the current proposal appears to be the best solution at this time. Magnuson stated that the adjacent property to the south has as much land and its value is roughly equivalent to what the Town paid for this parcel. He stated that the adjacent property is 1.6 acres, as compared to the Township property J which is 1.2 acres, and that it might be simple to run the line at that point, with no net loss. He stated that he did not know if net loss is an issue that needs to be addressed. He stated that giving up land is tentative for any political subdivision. He noted that the project needs to be politically correct if it is to be done at all. Noting the time line, Page 3 of 5