Laserfiche WebLink
City Administrator Norman stated that most of the changes in the redline copy were made <br />making sure that the development agreement was written in the best interest of the City rather <br />than the best interest of the developer and the addition of language pertaining to what the City <br />would consider financing for public improvements. That language explained how those projects <br />could be financed and what the process would be. Mr. Norman presented that language for <br />Council review. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak wanted to make it clear that the document stated that the City may <br />consider financing certain projects, but they were not committing to any financing. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that that was correct. <br /> <br />City Administrator Norman explained that the City is limited as to what they can bring to the <br />project because it is not a redevelopment project. Mr. Norman reviewed what the Ramsey Town <br />Center, LLC had originally proposed for road construction and the City's most recent proposal. <br />He noted that the City has taken the position that they are not responsible for the upgrades <br />required to the County road. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak inquired as to what the response has been from the County on upgrading <br />their roads. <br /> <br />City Administrator Norman replied that there is a meeting scheduled again for next week, but <br />Commissioner Berg has taken the lead on the issue. He noted that staff will keep the County <br />informed as to how the discussions with the County are proceeding. <br /> <br />TIF Specialist Sullivan explained that staff is currently working with a consultant to try and <br />establish benchmarks for the development. At this point they have not come up with a <br />satisfactory benchmark, but they have come up with what will work. The difficulty is that the <br />figure depends on when things will develop. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich explained that the developer feels that the easiest issue to resolve is the <br />street improvements. The most recent discussions have been that the City would issue General <br />Obligation Improvement Bonds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, to finance the <br />street improvements. The bonds would be payable from special assessments and Citywide <br />property tax levies. The City will assess twenty percent of the cost of the streets against <br />benefited properties. The "benefited properties" would be determined in accordance with State <br />law and mutual agreement of the City and the Developer and identified in the development <br />agreement. The development agreement would obligate the developer to prepay the special <br />assessments when a parcel is sold. The developer must deliver a letter of credit in the amount of <br />the special assessments, which letter of credit can be reduced as special assessments are paid or <br />prepaid. The City has deduced the improvements to be included in Phase I and Phase II and <br />those improvements were described in exhibits presented to the Council. The City would not <br />grant abatements in connection with the project. Mr. Goodrich noted that this would be the <br />City's proposal and they did not have an agreement with developer on the issue as of yet. <br /> <br />City Council Work Session/August 12, 2003 <br /> Page 2 of 11 <br /> <br /> <br />