Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br />48 <br />49 <br />50 <br />51 <br />52 <br />53 <br />54 <br />HRA Special Meeting <br />Minutes — Monday, August 3, 2015 <br />Page 2 <br />"The HRA's role is unique in the City because of the RHRA has the authority and flexibility to <br />focus on projects and issues that neither the City Council nor other Commissions [have the <br />time toj consider [at the same depthJ. The HRHA has the expertise needed to maximize its <br />positive impact on behalf of residents and businesses to malce the City of Roseville an even <br />more attractive place to live, raise a family, and grow a business." <br />By consensus, the revised language was approved. <br />Stratepic Goal 5(�a�es 3 and 4� ��� <br />� <br />Member Wall noted that, during previous discussions, including the last joint � ing with the <br />Ciry Council, the relationship between the HRA and City Council had be "��� discussed, and <br />asked if that relationship was now sufficiently included in strategic goals ��� ' � A. <br />Ms. Raye noted Goal 5, Item C addressed that relationship; and Me ��er Etten t��� �� �� .H also <br />ri <br />addressed that relationship; with Member Wall recognizing the s�ffic �� cy of those � ts <br />in addressing his initial concerns. �. ����� �� �, <br />Strate�ic Goa12 <br />Specific to Goal 2, Item E, Member Etten sought <br />preservation" entailed, opining it seemed vague as t� <br />Based on her recollection, Ms. Raye responded that, <br />receive a high prioriry, it included land trust models <br />significant areas/lands the HRA may want to pursue a� <br />spaces that would reinforce the pocket ; � concf <br />the broader community. � � <br />Member Wall agreed with Member <br />what the term "land <br />vh����� par�acular initiative didn't <br />and s'�"" mbly efforts, including <br />-eservati�Yi approach for open land or <br />�t to ir�vest in or preserve on behalf of <br />;e seemed fuzzy. <br />Member Etten noted that Strategic Goal �� Item C, talked about site assembly, with Strategic <br />Goal 4, Item C addr� and trust and �}��-banking. However, Member Etten opined that <br />Goal 2, Item E his comfort 1�'el for the HRA and their role, if the intent was to <br />�=� <br />buy and prese�e land ��out any specii�ic purpose in mind, and further opined that initiative <br />r. <br />was too lar�. ` d bold t;�c,� ;� <br />�� ......._.h��� <br />Chair Maschka ��`��`��ed that the original discussion and intent was specific to acquiring land in <br />the SE Roseville� �� r ne� existing apartment buildings, where there was currently no open <br />s� "'�� �rks in th�� "'borhood. However, Chair Maschka agreed the language was too <br />��u� ' ���� stioned i��fhe HRA should undertake land acquisition. <br />By consen��� Item 2.E was removed in its entirety, with previous intentions referenced in <br />other Goa1�:::=" <br />�tten noted that Goal 2, Item C seemed to specific in identifying engaging <br />ions and partnerships with other HRA's, but should include other agencies, no <br />ly HRAs. <br />Ms. Raye agreed to revise that language accardingly, and by consensus the body concurred. <br />Strategic Goal 3(pa�es 2 and 3� <br />Member Etten opined Items B and D may be better suited to Strategic Goal 1, especially Item <br />D. While recognizing that rental licensing was a program, Member Etten noted that the <br />ultimate goal was to eliminate blight and unsightly properties. <br />