Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 <br /> <br />II <br />I <br />! <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied if there were to be something specifically happening, a one <br />month extension could be requested. but an extension would be a hard sell if there is nothing <br />occurring. <br /> <br />Council member Look inquired about the ability for TIF to be utilized to offset the cost of <br />architectural upgrades for businesses that may want to relocate from the Ramsey Crossings area <br />to other available property in the City. He suggested slaff put together a financial analysis <br />depicting the investment in these properties as they currently stand and what the investment <br />could be in a new location with financing tools that may be available. <br /> <br />Councilmcmber Elvig indicated this type of analysis should include information regarding the <br />1031 tax benefit. <br /> <br />Council member Strommen noted job creation requirements may be an issue with any of the <br />existing businesses relocating to a TIF district. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Trudgeon indicated there arc standards in place for TIF <br />agreements. It is possible there could be special cases \\lith these businesses relocating. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strommen indicated she would be wary of going through a formula to present to <br />all of the current businesses. as the TIF agreements that have come through have been on a case <br />by case basis. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look indicated his thought is that the analysis would be completed for one or <br />two of the businesses; not all of them. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strommen asked whether the Target agreement was exclusive with RCM. <br /> <br />Mr. Lasher replied Target has decided to locate in Ramsey. Their initial assessment was to build <br />in 2009, and RCM requested that they open in 2008. The timefrarne in the RCM agreement is <br />about eight months earlier than Target would prefer, but they have made a real estate decision to <br />be in Ramsey. The RCM deal consisted of not closing without the two major anchors closing. It <br />should be noted that the initial proposal of Ryan Construction was about $2 million less for the <br />land than the RCM proposal. <br /> <br />Council member Elvig expressed concern with the TIF portion of this project being supported <br />without the anticipated build-out. <br /> <br />Council discussed the conveyance of the message of RCM pulling out of the development <br />project. <br /> <br />Interim City Administrator Nelson indicated, from stafPs perspective, the approach is that the <br />City is moving on with Ryan Construction. Marc will be known about the Ryan proposal in one <br />week. The positive note is that Ryan Construction is at the table and the City is \vorking with <br />them to move this forward. The residents want to see Target in the City; they do not care who <br />the developer is. <br /> <br />City Council \Vork Session / January 30, 2007 <br />Page 15 of 16 <br />