CC_Minutes_2005_0131 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council Regular Meeting - 01/31/05 Minutes - Page 37 Councilmember Ihlan presented her proposed motion, following Lakes and her review of the history of the motion's intent; Council Consideration of resistance for an outside review; and her compromise for City other Consultant Attorney review of Twin Lakes expenditures for consultant fees. Issues Councilmember Ihlan reviewed language of existing City policies; Tax Increment Financing (TIF) policies; the Memorandum of Understanding between the developer and the City; various resolutions; and the Contract for Exclusive Negotiation in place; and her concern that Councilmembers could be held personally liable for expending public monies for private development. Ihlan moved, Kough seconded, that IT BE RESOLVED that the City Attorney is directed to review consulting expenditures in connection with the Twin Lakes Redevelopment to determine what consulting expenditures have been made by the City for the benefit of the development team; and what consulting expenditures the development team is obligated to pay on the City's behalf under the various applicable agreements between the development team and the City, from the June 16, 2003 Memorandum of Understanding through the date of this resolution. Further RESOLVED that no further consulting expenditures in connection with the Rottlund Twin Lakes development shall be authorized or paid by the City until Rottlund and/or other members of the development team pays or reimburses the City in full for: 1) all development consulting expenditures made by the City for the development team's benefit; and 2) all development consulting expenditures Rottlund or other members of the development team are required to pay on the City's behalf under the various agreements. Councilmember Schroeder spoke in opposition to the motion; opining his understanding of costs approved for future reimbursement. Mayor Klausing spoke in opposition to the motion; opining that Councilmember's interpretation of who benefited from drafted agreements was the very policy issue being debated; and that on the majority vote of the Council, it was apparent that the majority felt expenditures were appropriate as outlined.