My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2007_0820
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2007
>
CC_Minutes_2007_0820
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2009 2:53:21 PM
Creation date
9/12/2007 10:47:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/20/2007
Meeting Type
Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mayor, Council Members and City Manager <br />August 20, 2007 <br />Page 3 <br />which needs to be discussed and addressed. In particular, we would recommend that the <br />Council, if it wishes to pursue the agreement, consider a PUD approval that includes a <br />condition that staff and the College negotiate an acceptable PILOT agreement to be brought <br />back to the Council for review and approval. <br />We are aware that the City of Woodbury has over the last several years "imposed" <br />PILOT agreements on non-taxable entities as part of land use approval processes. It appears in <br />late 2006, Woodbury imposed a PILOT agreement on Globe College as part of the <br />development of the school in the Tamarack Village development. Earlier this year, it also <br />appears Woodbury imposed a PILOT agreement on a senior care center in the context of a land <br />use approval process. <br />Falcon Heights also appears to have had a PILOT agreement with TIES for a period of <br />time. TIES is atax-exempt entity that purchased land in the Falcon Heights a number of years <br />ago. However, recent minutes of the Falcon Heights City Council suggest that TIES <br />unilaterally determined not to continue with the agreement, suggesting is was more of a good <br />neighbor agreement, rather than a contractual one. <br />In short, and in summary, we believe the City has at least a legitimate rationale for <br />suggesting to Northwestern College that they must sit down with the City and endeavor to <br />reach agreement on the terms of a PILOT. As stated above, we recommend that such a <br />condition be stated generically as a condition of PUD approval. If an agreement is reached as a <br />result of discussions between staff and the College, it will be brought back to the Council for <br />approval. If not, that fact will also be brought back to the Council, and we will be in a better <br />position at that time to determine whether our authority and power under state law would give <br />use the ability to impose such an agreement on the College. <br />We will continue to work with staff on this issue, and provide updates as we gain more <br />information. <br />Regards, <br />Jay T. Squires <br />JTS/cg <br />cc: Thomas Paschke, Community Development <br />~'~~.,~:~r;~,,: mom- V~G.~ isI-w35-zs~~r <br />~~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.