Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />S <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 />RHRA Meeting <br />Minutes — Monday, August 29, 2016 <br />Page 3 <br />not be rela,ted to retail but with caveats that those jobs involve permanent <br />employees with regular hours, high salaries and benefits. <br />Discussion Points for Consensus <br />Minimum Number of Jobs <br />With confirmation by Ms. Kvilvang, President Roe noted statutory <br />requirements for the REDA to have a minimum number of jobs defined was <br />part of the reason for this discussion. <br />Member McGehee suggested the miniinum <br />point, but provided a screening aid for staff ar <br />Ms. Kvilvang advised that staff would <br />those developers clearly hearing the i <br />that priority. <br />In accordance with statutory langu� <br />minimum number at one to leave roc <br />support, noting his desire not to be <br />when considering a development. i <br />purposes besides creation of new <br />redevelopment. <br />Member Wi <br />of past p�ojF <br />Member VV <br />exemptions <br />Member Wi <br />d <br />the decision of s <br />havin,g job creati� <br />she �as �.flexible, <br />dollars collected i <br />fa11 intc <br />that h <br />subsidi <br />hold <br />and <br />was not only a policy <br />al developers. <br />with developers, with <br />-e of the REDA as to <br />�e, Member Etten suggested leaving the <br />n for flexibi�ity for REDA support or no <br />hand�uffed `to simply jobs as;�a priority <br />�einber Etten noted there may be other <br />jobs that were just as important for <br />the REp��A, stated he'was aware of a niimber <br />the exempt area;for job creation. However, <br />� wasn't too interested in seeking those <br />�s_ �i� no solid job creation was involved. <br />3-4= jobs as a minimum on his survey, and <br />ne�hing in that range. <br />ated' she had put ten on her survey, as she seriously took <br />idizing any development with public tax dollar fiinds as <br />�s a goal to justify that subsidy. Member Laliberte stated <br />�t had wanted to start high to protect the value of those <br />r� taxpayers and their subsequent use. <br />Presiclent Roe stated he put one job as a minimum, and now based on tonight's <br />presentation, if the REDA wanted a minimum of 3-4 jobs created, opined he <br />could be open to that preference as well. <br />REDA Attorney Ingrain provided an observation based on her experience with <br />other EDA's and as pointed out by Ms. Kvilvang, state statute ininimum <br />indicated a minimum job creation number of one. Ms. Ingram opined that the <br />REDA would be far more likely to need to deviate from their policy if they set <br />the threshold high versus setting it at one. From a practical standpoint, Ms. <br />Ingram noted each developer would bring forward a specific situation hoping <br />