HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-26-10City of Lakeville
Economic Development Commission
Meeting Minutes
January 26, 2010
Marion Conference Room, City Hall
Members Present: Comms. Matasosky, Tushie, Vlasak, Schubert, Emond, Brantly,
Longie, Ex- officio member Mayor Holly Dahl, Ex- officio member City Administrator
Steve Mielke, Ex- officio member Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Todd
Bornhauser.
Members Absent: Smith, Starfield.
Others Present: David Olson, Community Economic Development Director; Adam
Kienberger, Economic Development Specialist.
1. Call Meeting to Order
Chair Matasosky called the meeting to order at 5 :00 p.m. in the Marion Conference
Room of City Hall, 20195 Holyoke Avenue, Lakeville, Minnesota.
2. Approve November 24, 2009 Meeting Minutes
Motion 10.01 Comms. Tushie /Emond moved to approve the minutes of the
November 24, 2009 meeting as presented. Motion carried
unanimously.
3. Election of Officers
After a brief discussion, Chair Matasosky asked if anyone was interested in being an
officer for the EDC.
Motion 10.02 Comms. Emond /Schubert moved to re -elect Jack Matasosky as
Chair, re -elect Gary Tushie as Vice Chair, and re -elect Bob Brantly
as Secretary for 2010. Motion carried unanimously.
4. Continued Discussion of Business Assistance Policy Issues
Dave Olson reviewed the EDC memo and discussed the list of business assistance
tools currently available to the City as well as community attributes that we attempt
to use when trying to convince businesses to locate in Lakeville.
Steve Mielke added that while it is valuable to be aware of the tools available, the
bigger question the EDC needs to address is when should those tools be used?
What criteria are important to the City and in what circumstances should business
assistance be made available? What are the community's goals for development?
Economic Development Commission
Meeting Minutes
January 26, 2010
Chair Matasosky and Comm. Tushie noted that the City needs to establish a "vision"
to help gauge when a prospective business would fit into a business assistance
policy.
Mr. Olson stated that the City of Lakeville doesn't currently have a detailed business
assistance policy to help make the decisions of when a business would be eligible
for assistance.
Chair Matasosky added that assistance should be based on a return on investment
analysis including items such as jobs, redevelopment, etc.
Comm. Brantly asked the group what's important to the City.
Comm. Schubert noted that it can be difficult to formulate because you need
consistency, but you also have to allow for unique circumstances or business
situations. It can be a catch twenty -two.
Mr. Mielke reviewed the recent ImageTrend land acquisition deal the City completed.
The City had a land asset available that was able to be sold to a growing business at
a favorable rate in exchange for quality jobs and increased tax base.
Mr. Mielke continued by stating that the Life Time Fitness deal was the result of a
City Council goal to attract a specific use to Lakeville.
Mr. Olson added that when jobs are the primary reason for business assistance,
what are considered quality jobs. $10 per hour? $20 per hour?
Comm. Emond responded that the City needs a vision that is able to be flexible and
change with the times. The ImageTrend and Life Time Fitness deals are prime
examples of this.
Mr. Olson asked the group if older projects that were subsidized would qualify in the
current environment.
Mr. Mielke added that historically growth and development in Lakeville has funded
public infrastructure. Development has traditionally paid their own way and is this
something that may have to be looked at differently in the current economy.
Chair Matasosky suggested that the EDC could possible form a subcommittee to
address this issue.
Mr. Olson reviewed an example of a business subsidy policy provided by the League
of Minnesota Cities. He reviewed several topics in which business assistance could
be considered for the group to discuss:
2
Economic Development Commission
Meeting Minutes
January 26, 2010
To remove blight and encourage redevelopment in the commercial and
industrial areas of the City in order to encourage high levels of property
maintenance and private reinvestment in those areas.
o The EDC agreed that blight removal is an important goal.
To increase the tax base of the City in order to ensure the long -term ability
of the City to provide adequate services for its residents while lessening
the reliance on residential property tax.
o The EDC agreed that this statement is too broad and needs be
more specific if tax base is to be a goal.
To retain local jobs, increase the local job base, and provide diversity in
that job base.
o Comm. Tushie stated that in most cities higher paying jobs have
shifted away from the industrial sector and more over to office jobs.
o Comm. Vlasak asked if the City opens itself to any potential risk of
discrimination by establishing benchmarks.
o Mr. Olson responded that it could potentially lead to more
subsidies.
o Comm. Tushie added that a subsidy shouldn't be looked at as a
right, but as a selective privilege. The "but for" test would still need
to be considered.
To increase the local business and industrial market potential of the City of
Lakeville.
o Mr. Olson and Mr. Mielke asked if this should focus on emphasizing
development types the City doesn't currently have much of.
To encourage additional unsubsidized private development in the area,
either directly, or through secondary "spinoff' development.
o Mr. Olson noted that this is sometimes referred to as an industry
cluster approach. It doesn't always work if you have a
concentration of businesses in a similar industry and there is a
sudden decline in that industry.
To offset increased costs of redevelopment, over and above the costs that
a developer would incur in normal development.
o The EDC agreed that this is similar to the blight removal point and
is an important goal.
To accelerate the development process and to achieve development on
sites which would not be developed without this assistance.
o The EDC discussed that this can be useful for infrastructure costs
on challenging sites or priority sites.
To meet the following housing related issues: (full text included with EDC
packet)
3
Economic Development Commission
Meeting Minutes
January 26, 2010
o Mr. Olson stated that the Dakota County CDA has developed
several affordable housing projects in Lakeville and helps meet
some of the demand for Lakeville.
o Comm. Tushie added that some type of subsidy is needed for most
housing density or apartment developments.
o Mr. Mielke stated that the City Council currently has an adopted
policy that the City shouldn't use property tax base to spur
affordable housing. This is a discussion that should continue and
be re- evaluated if the EDC feels that affordable housing is a priority
of a business assistance policy.
o Comm. Tushie noted that affordable housing isn't stereotypical
"subsidized" housing. This is housing for young professionals,
educated people in entry level job that can't afford an apartment or
house in Lakeville. Lakeville is extremely short of apartment units
and there is a segment of the population that can't live here for a
period of their lives. People who have grown up in Lakeville often
can't afford to continue to live here.
o The EDC concluded that this item needs more discussion.
Mr. Olson asked the EDC if there were other values that should be discussed as a
part of this ongoing business assistance policy dialogue.
Comm. Brantly noted that there should be some measure of the financial strength of
a prospective company. Consider industries that are on the rise versus on the
decline. There are advantages of having a business locate their headquarters here
instead of just a branch of the company.
Comm. Tushie added that corporate headquarters are what provide a diversity of
executive homes and can add to the available housing mix in Lakeville.
Comm. Matasosky stated that a return on investment test should be performed.
Comm. Tushie noted that there are certain categories such as arts and
entertainment that are hard to include in a traditional format. Non profits, arts and
entertainment venues, professional sports teams and other groups are often valued
and desired by communities, but they don't necessarily "pay their way
It was the consensus of the EDC to have staff summarize the input received and
place this item on the agenda for continued discussion a the February meeting.
5. Review and Discussion of 2008 -2010 Strategic Plan for Economic
Development Work Program for 2010.
This item was tabled and will be discussed at the February EDC meeting.
4
Economic Development Commission
Meeting Minutes
January 26, 2010
6. Director's Report
Mr. Olson reviewed the Director's Report.
Mr. Olson reviewed a Metro -wide housing report and indicated that over the past
decade, Lakeville ranked fourth in the total number of housing units built.
Mr. Olson also noted that staff is working on the 2009 Economic Development
annual report and will present it to the EDC at a future meeting.
7. Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by:
Attested to:
Adam Kienber r, R. T. Brantly, Secreta
Economic Development Specialist
5