Laserfiche WebLink
Chairperson Steffen asked this is just one of the tools they would use to analyze a subsidy and is <br />not the only one. Development Services Manager Gladhill stated a lot of housing assistance <br />programs out there with proximity to transit will score very high and as soon as Ramsey's rail <br />station opened up they started to see requests for housing assistance quite frequently. He stated <br />they needed a tool to try to gauge success amongst each other. <br />Member Burandt asked what the unanticipated project costs were. Econ. Dev. Mgr/Assistant <br />City Administrator Brama stated there are two major items PSD has outlined as unanticipated <br />project costs. He stated the first was the increase in project costs over the past year has been <br />significant so they have identified that as part of the reason for the gap in their Proforma and <br />second is the amount of fill they have had to provide on the site. They have imported a <br />significant amount of fill that was not anticipated for the project. He believed they were at an <br />unanticipated cost much larger than $500,000 however that is what they need to move the project <br />forward. <br />Ms. Stacy Kvilvang, Ehlers, stated it is hard to compare each project to another because they are <br />apples and orange and are meeting different goals. <br />Ms. Kvilvang gave a brief overview of her memo to the EDA. She stated their recommendation <br />is if the City chooses to move forward that it be a pay as you go TIF assistance and will be paid <br />off in four years. With pay as you go, they have to construct the project and pay the taxes and as <br />they pay the taxes they will get a portion of that rebated over a four year period back to them. <br />Chairperson Steffen asked why costs differ from city to city and is that based on land cost and <br />fill. Ms. Kvilvang stated the biggest factor is land cost. Chairperson Steffen asked if they did <br />not have fill brought in would they still be asking for TIF assistance. Econ. Dev. Mgr/Assistant <br />City Administrator Brama stated the amount of fill brought in was close to $500,000 so it was <br />hard to say if they would have come in or not. <br />Member Hardin stated PSD response shows the single largest overage is the actual bid for the <br />construction of the building. Chairperson Steffen thought that was correct because it was bid a <br />year ago versus today. <br />Member Skaff stated they have to go back to the time that the City sold the land to PSD, had <br />they come to them knowing that there was $500,000 in fill needed at that time they may have <br />required the City to bring the land up to a buildable position and it is possible back then that the <br />City would have acknowledged that. <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated this was probably an engineering calculation mistake. He <br />thought they had more tagged on the construction costs that went up or there was some initial <br />miscalculations that were made for this site. Chairperson Steffen stated the requirement for the <br />fill has not changed. City Administrator Ulrich stated it has not. <br />Member Hardin found it frustrating that when they sold the parcel to PSD that they did not have <br />requirements with financing in place and construction costs in place before they closed on the <br />lot. He thought this is something that the City should put in place before they close going <br />)RAF Economic Development Authority/September 17, 2015 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />