Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Motion by Member LeTourneau to authorize both contracts. Member Skaff seconded the <br />motion. <br /> <br />Further Discussion: Chair Riley questioned why we wouldn't find a partnership. Member <br />LeTourneau stated that we need this immediately and it's important enough to authorize the <br />funding. Member Look stated that he thinks the second proposal ($15,500) needs to be <br />authorized immediately, but that the first proposal is on the horizon. City Administrator Ulrich <br />suggested that the EDA fund it up to 50% and allow staff to make contacts. Economic <br />Development Coordinator Sullivan recommended fully funding the $15,500 proposal and to fund <br />half of the $49,500 proposal. Elwyn Tinklenberg pointed out that it is easy to be forgotten ifnot <br />in front of elected officials constantly, and there will be hundreds of requests for funding so our <br />presence is essential. <br /> <br />Amended motion by Member Elvig, seconded by Member Look, to fund the full $15,500 <br />proposal and fund half of the $49,500 proposal with the direction to staff to find the other 50 <br />percent of the $49,500 and make an attempt on the other half of the $15,500 even though all of <br />the $15,500 is being funded by the EDA. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Members Riley, Steffen, LeTourneau, Skaff, Williams, Elvig, and <br />Look. Voting No: None. Absent: None. . <br /> <br />Case #3: <br /> <br />TIF REPORT FINDINGS FOR 167TH COMMERCIAL NODE <br /> <br />Economic Development Coordinator Sullivan presented Case #3. <br /> <br />At the July 2009 meeting, the EDA authorized LHB to conduct TIF analysis for the 167th <br />Avenue Commercial node. The completed report was delivered to the City on December 2, <br />2009. The findings of the report were discussed briefly. The boundary of a redevelopment TIF <br />district could exist, and a Renewal and Renovation District is also an option, but at this time, the <br />only recommendation is to receive and accept the TIF report and identify TIF as a viable <br />redevelopment tool. <br /> <br />Motion by Member Look, seconded by Member Steffen, to accept the TIF report. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Members Riley, Steffen, LeTourneau, Skaff, Williams, Elvig, and <br />Look. Voting No: None. Absent: None. <br /> <br />Case #4: <br /> <br />REVIEW COST ASSOCIATED WITH FUTURE BUSINESS PARK <br /> <br />Economic Development Coordinator Sullivan presented Case #4. <br /> <br />The EDA discussed two potential future industrial park sites; in particular, property north of <br />Highway 10 and property south of Highway 10. Staff worked with the Engineering department <br />to estimate costs involved with providing sewer and water, and there is a significant difference in <br /> <br />Economic Development Authority / December 10,2009 <br />Page 3 of7 <br />