Minutes - Council Work Session - 09/22/2026

Home

language would notify applicants that responsible-contractor requirements apply. In contrast, enforceable provisions, reporting requirements, remedies, and any project-specific clawback language would be incorporated into the applicable TIF agreement, development agreement, loan agreement, or other financing document. City Attorney Amanda Johnson explained that the proposed acknowledgment would require an applicant seeking City financial assistance to affirm that it meets the minimum criteria to be a responsible contractor under Minnesota Statute 16C.285, subdivision 3, and will comply with reporting requirements for itself and its subcontractors. She clarified that the application itself is not the enforcement document; enforceability would come through the subsequent agreement governing the financial assistance. The Council discussed which City assistance programs should be covered. Examples included tax increment financing, tax abatement, revolving loan funds, land write-downs, HRA-related assistance, LAHA funding, and other City or EDA assistance. Smaller programs, including the awning program and SAC/WAC deferments, were discussed as examples that generally would not reach the proposed dollar threshold. Councilmembers discussed whether the requirement should apply only to TIF projects or more broadly whenever the City contributes significant financial assistance. Several members favored a threshold-based approach so smaller projects would not face unnecessary administrative requirements. In comparison, larger projects receiving substantial public assistance would be subject to the responsible-contractor provisions. The Council also discussed whether loans should be included. Concerns were raised that a conventional loan differs from a grant or forgivable assistance because the City expects repayment. Other members noted that loans still place public funds at risk and argued that responsible- contractor requirements could help protect the City’s financial interest. City Attorney Johnson explained that remedies would depend on the type of assistance and the specific agreement, and could include default provisions, letters of credit, repayment remedies, or, in a land transaction, a reverter provision. Staff and representatives familiar with responsible-contractor requirements clarified that the proposed policy would not automatically impose prevailing-wage reporting. Contractors would generally submit an affidavit or acknowledgment confirming that they satisfy the statutory responsible-contractor criteria. The documentation could be retained electronically, with project agreements establishing consequences if an affidavit were falsified or the requirements were violated. After discussion, the Council reached consensus to have staff prepare a policy and resolution requiring responsible-contractor provisions for projects receiving more than $50,000 in City financial assistance, regardless of the form of assistance. The applicable contract or financial agreement would contain provisions related to the responsible-contractor requirements under Minnesota Statute 16C.285. The Council requested that the proposed resolution and final language return to a future Work Session for review before formal action. City Council Work Session / September 22, 2026 Page 2 of 5