Laserfiche WebLink
be discussed by the EDA. Staff's recommendation is to remove retail as an eligible aCtivity for <br />the funds. <br /> <br />Economic Development Consultant Mulrooney indicated this issue was discussed at the staff <br />level as well. Part of the reason staff recommends retail being excluded is due to situations <br />where a loan has been provided to one retail business that might be in direct competition with <br />another retail business. This could be seen as the EDA showing favoritism to one business over <br />another business. This type of situation does not occur often in industrial businesses. He <br />explained the language has been worded to allow the funds to be provided for redevelopment. In <br />the case of the Sunshine Commons Project, it' was a building and site that needed redevelopment <br />and may have been able to meet that definition. <br /> <br />Member Gromberg noted the entire project would 'be considered, which would be key to <br />allowing the funds to be used for redevelopment. <br /> <br />Chairperson Riley asked if the stricter guidelines would bring about any legal ramifications. <br />Economic Development Consultant Mulrooney replied the EDA is not legally obligated to <br />approve any loan. First and foremost certain credit tests must be met that show the ability to pay <br />back the loan. Once that is done it is determined if the project fits into the overall goals of the <br />EDA. The EDA could also establish goals based on the top priorities that are outside of these <br />guidelines. <br /> <br />Economic Development/TIF Specialist Sullivan advised the EDA could also state that the funds <br />are limited and loans are not presently being distributed. <br /> <br />Chairperson Riley questioned the language in Item VII of low-interest loan. Economic <br />Development/TIF Specialist Sullivan replied the low interest rate is an advantage of choosing <br />this loan. <br /> <br />Economic Development Consultant Mulrooney indicated this language came from the wishes of <br />the Council when this was originally approved as an incentive financing type of program. <br /> <br />Motion by Member Kiefer, seconded by Member Stef£en, to recommend that the City-Council <br />adopt the February 2005 Revolving Loan Fund Guidelines. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Riley, Members Kiefer, Steffen, Gromberg, <br />LeToumeau, and Strommen. Voting No: None. Absent: Member Elvig. <br /> <br />Further discussion: Member Steffen asked if applications for the Revolving Loan Fund would <br />come to the EDA for review. Economic Development/TIF Specialist Sullivan replied staff <br />would weed out the applications that do not meet the minimum requirements. The applications <br />that meet the requirements would come to the EDA. <br /> <br />Economic Development AuthoritY/February 16, 2005 <br /> Page 4 of 9 <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br /> <br />