My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-19-2017 EDA MIN SPEC MTG
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Economic Development Authority
>
EDA Minutes
>
2011 - 2020
>
2017
>
06-19-2017 EDA MIN SPEC MTG
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2017 11:01:33 AM
Creation date
8/24/2017 11:01:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
EDM
date
6/17/2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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
• City of <br /> E1k Meeting of the Elk River <br /> River Economic Development Authority <br /> Held at the Elk River City Hall <br /> Monday,June 19, 2017 <br /> Members Present: President Tveite, Commissioners Provo (5:09 p.m.), Olsen, <br /> Westgaard, Ovall,Wagner, and Blesener <br /> Members Absent: None <br /> Staff Present: Economic Development Director Amanda Othoudt, Economic <br /> Development Specialist Colleen Eddy, and City Clerk Tina Allard <br /> I. Call Meeting to Order <br /> Pursuant to due call and notice thereof,the meeting of the Elk River Economic <br /> Development Authority was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by President Tveite. <br /> 2. Consider 06/19/2017 Agenda <br /> Moved by Commissioner Wagner and seconded by Commissioner Blesener to <br /> approve the June 19,2017, EDA agenda. Motion carried 6-0. <br /> 3.1 TIF Policy Discussion <br /> Ms. Othoudt presented the staff report. She stated the purpose of this work session <br /> is to identify the development goals the Authority considers priority. <br /> Commissioner Provo arrived. <br /> The Commission discussed the following: <br /> • An applicant should be able to review the policy and application and have a <br /> reasonable expectation of whether their project would be approved. <br /> • Better consistency and clarity in verbiage throughout the policy and application. <br /> Example: public purpose language in the two documents. <br /> • Whether criteria should be ranked in order of importance of the Authority's <br /> goals or whether it should matter as long as they are meeting specified criteria in <br /> policy. <br /> • What would be the process in selecting the strongest candidates if there were <br /> multiple applicants? <br /> • Evaluate fee structure and consider an initial or preliminary review process and <br /> fee so applicant can quickly understand how their project ranks. <br /> • ■ The review process and if/where the finance committee, EDA, and Council <br /> should be in the approval process. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.