Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember Musgrove referenced the Anoka Chamber Manufacturing Cohort and expressed <br />disappointment on the feedback regarding what was happening. She didn’t feel an objective <br />business plan was being obtained, didn’t see growth, support, or help for businesses. She <br />referenced the recent Anoka Chamber of Commerce flier which says Mr. LeTourneau is the <br />director of manufacturing but she thought it was a separate thing from the Anoka Chamber of <br />Commerce. She was confused about what was being paid for as a manufacturing cohort, which <br />she believed to be separate from the Anoka Chamber but it seems he is actually the manufacturing <br />spokesperson for the Chamber. She questioned the funding, the objective plan, and the value the <br />City was getting from the program. She wasn’t sure she could support it when it comes up even <br />though it is in the budget and wanted to see more objectivity and impact statements. <br /> <br />Councilmember Howell concurred with Councilmember Musgrove and shared her concerns, <br />noting she wanted tangible results from programs in the community. She referenced an email with <br />an update that was the same as in February, which she felt lacked tangible examples of impact so <br />she didn’t support it. <br /> <br />Mayor Kuzma replied there was one company in which the Cohort had helped with an employee <br />shortage. <br /> <br />Councilmember Heineman commented that he also voted against it due to lack of impact and he <br />still had questions. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff commented that the budget is set and this is an EDA decision. He <br />would rather see it in the budget and have the EDA deny it, than to hear a case that would support <br />continued funding and have to then find the money. <br /> <br />Mayor Kuzma replied that it may be reasonable to ask Mr. LeTourneau to provide more <br />information for justification. He supported keeping it in the budget. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich asked if it was paid on a calendar year. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan stated that it is typically for a one-year duration but <br />invoices have been received at various times throughout the year. Invoices have been paid through <br />the first month or two of the year when invoices are typically received to be processed. He noted <br />that invoices are brought into EDA to start, the EDA makes a recommendation and ultimately, the <br />City Council decides whether or not to fund it. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich commented his point was that it is typically a mid-year decision. <br /> <br />Councilmember Riley suggested, with this being a budgeting process, that it be left in and when it <br />does come to the Council if more information is needed, those questions get answered. Then, <br />decisions would be based on the answers. <br /> <br />Councilmember Heineman commented he is okay with leaving it in but he wasn’t okay with <br />waiting until this comes back around to the Council again before it gets talked about. He suggested <br />being more proactive in getting answers instead of pushing it to next year. <br />City Council Work Session / November 23, 2021 <br />Page 5 of 15 <br /> <br />