Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 [11] Nov 26CITY OF ST. JOSEPH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AURTHORITY Meeting Minutes -Wednesday, November 26, 2008 Present: EDA Board Members Ken Jacobson, Carolyn Yaggie-Heinen, AI Rassier, Tom Skahen (arrived at 3:05), and Dale Wick. Absent: None. Also present: St. Joseph Resident Mike McDonald, Professor of Economics at SCSU Dr. Mary Edwards, Continuing Studies SCSU Representative Gail Ruhland, SCSU Graduate Student Reeta Ale Mager, SCSU Graduate Student Yotiaud Vivien Apoutou, SCSU Department of Economics Chair, Dr. King Banaian, and EDA Consultant Cynthia Smith -Strack of Municipal Development Group. Chairperson Wick called the November 26, 2008 regular meeting of the St. Joseph EDA to order at 3:02 p.m. Agenda. Chairperson Wick introduced the agenda. No changes were requested. Moved by Rassier, seconded by Jacobson to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried 4- 0. Approval of Minutes. Chairperson Wick introduced the minutes from the October 22, 2008 regular meeting. Motion by Rassier, second by Jacobson to approve the minutes from the October 22, 2008 regular meeting. Motion carried 4-0. EDA Accounts Payable. Wick introduced the topic. Wick noted accounts payable for the month which totaled $2,417.28 for contracted services. Motion by Rassier, second by Heinen to approve the EDA accounts payable for the month of November 2008 in the amount of $2, 417.28. Motion carried 4-0. Financial Report. Wick introduced the agenda item. Wick noted the packet included financial reports. Strack referenced the Treasurer's Report which illustrated year to date expenses of $30,592.91 and a current fund balance of $27,082.57. Motion Heinen, Second Rassier to approve the October 2008 financial reports as presented. Motion carried 4-0. Economic Impact Study: Student Residency Change Wick introduced the agenda item. Strack noted The EDA continues to move forward with proactively responding to a pending change in on-campus residency requirements espoused by the College of St. Benedict and St. John's University. At the October EDA meeting the Board discussed and approved spending up to $1,500 for a study by SCSU graduate students which would measure the economic impact of the on-campus residency change. Since the October meeting, the potential study has evolved as additional information has surfaced. Most notably, the preliminary cost estimate discussed in October has changed. Dr. Edwards after reviewing the scope of the project and meeting with students she has refined the estimate to $3,000. In addition, requests for additional input from the EDA have been put forth. After reviewing initial documents Dr. Edwards and the graduate students have indicated they we would be willing to conduct the study based on the data from the 2001 impact analysis of CSB/SJU; however, they don't believe that it would be in the EDA's best interest. That's due to the fact the 2001 study covers more than St. Joseph and Collegeville, including area from St. Cloud to Albany. Dr. Edwards notes that if the study finds a decrease in student spending in St. Joseph due to on campus residency, there would likely be an increase in spending by CSB/SJU to house them. If CSB/SJU purchases most foods from Apperts, or another group based in St. Cloud, the decrease in student spending in St. Joseph may well wash out the increase in spending by the two facilities if we use the same geographic area which would be required to be accurate. SCSU is willing complete a more comprehensive study of just the impact of CSB/SJU residency on St. Joseph itself. To do this, SCSU would need spending by zip code from the university and the college as well as any potential spending for construction of new dorms and cafeterias if needed. Study authors would also need to send a survey to the students, but such surveys could go by email and an on-line survey group (like Survey Monkey) could provide the results to us in a digital format. Strack noted Dr. Mary Edwards was in attendance to present a proposal for the study from SCSU. Dr. Edwards distributed proposals to the EDA Board. She noted the current study as proposed relied on using data from the 2000 impact analysis conducted by CSB/SJU. Edwards stated that this could be done; however, the study area far exceeded the City of St. Joseph and included all areas from Albany thru St. Cloud. The larger area she explained would dilute the impact study and the effectiveness of the impact specific to St. Joseph. As an alternative Edwards proposed a study estimated at $6,160.00. The study would be specific only to zip codes 56374 (St. Joseph) and 56321 (Collegeville). Edwards stated the study would require the following information be supplied by the College and University: 1. Expenditure data by zip code 2. Planned on campus residential construction 3. Taxes and other payments to government 4. Average deposits of CSB/SJU in local banks 5. Fees for licenses and permits taken out by CSB/SJU 6. Gross compensation paid to faculty/staff/students 7. Either student email addresses or agreement to distribute survey to students In addition, if supplied by CSB/SJU the study could be completed for use by CSB/SJU if the following were supplied: 1. Proportion of faculty and staff residing locally 2. Total disposable income of faculty staff 3. Total number of faculty and staff on payroll 4. Number of visitors annually to campus from outside of the area. Here it would be good to count potential students (and their families), speakers, scholars, etc. Finally, the EDA would need to conduct a survey of local businesses regarding annual expenditures on student rentals property by zip code for 56374 and 56321. EDA Minutes -November 26, 2008 Edwards also presented two other potential study ideas, the first relating to potential correlation between on-campus residency and grade point average, the other relating to a housing market study. Edwards then introduced the graduate students in the audience and other SCSU representatives. Edwards noted the graduate students were ready to begin immediately and could complete the project, if information was supplied, within two months. The EDA discussed the proposal and requested clarification regarding the difference between option one (using area data from 2000) and the alternative suggestion (obtaining only local data). In addition, the EDA discussed the role of other entities in this project. Heinen offered to reach out to CSB re: submission of data. Jacobson noted that as a rental property owner, he felt interested in the outcome of such a study and thought other property owners may also. As such Jacobson suggested the EDA approach landlords regarding participation in funding the study. The EDA discussed whether or not the study was needed and what the specific benefits of such a study would be. Strack noted that we don't have an idea of the fiscal impact the residency change will have on the community. The public can speculate students' spending habits may change and student rental units may need public assistance to convert to different uses; however, until we have objective documentation we can't determine to what extent. The study would further be used to apply for competitive state grant programs, and potentially attract other stakeholders to the project. Motion by Skahen, seconded by Heinen to authorize study expense of $6,160 contingent upon release of required data by CSB/SJU. Motion approved 3-1, with Jacobson abstaining. If participation from CSB/SJU is secured Strack is to organize a meeting with rental property owners. Student Rental/Conversion Inventory Wick introduced the agenda item. Strack stated MDG had compiled a technical inventory of rental units and potential conversion options. Strack introduced MDG Associate John Anderson who had compiled the conditions survey and conversion options. Anderson is a licensed real estate agent and has a Masters Degree in Urban Planning. Anderson said the inventory included approximately 130 parcels of which some were multiple apartment structures, attached townhomes, and single family detached houses. An estimated 100 units were renter occupied single family units. Anderson stated the pending residency change would, in his opinion, result in additional foreclosures in St. Joseph. Anderson cited the current glut of houses on the market, deflation of housing values resulting in people owing more than units are worth, and the slow economy as factors further exacerbating the potential for foreclosures. Anderson suggested the EDA first focus on structures with the least potential for conversion, such as the former Campus Villas. Anderson noted the structure of the units was not likely to be suitable for occupation by families and that other households group occupancies would be limited due to the sheer volume of units on the market. In addition Anderson suggested some units would obviously return to owner-occupied units, these units are primarily dispersed throughout the conventional subdivisions as opposed to the original townsite. Anderson estimated approximately 70 units, primarily single family renter occupied dwellings, could be converted to commercial, owner-occupied, or public use. Anderson noted the coding as to structural condition, surrounding locale, and conversion options were available at the close of the spreadsheet. EDA Minutes -November 26, 2008 3 Strack stated that the intent of this agenda item was to allow the EDA to begin a methodical review of the technical inventory so as to determine priorities and provide direction to discussions with other groups including the Planning Commission, rental property owners, and eventually the college and university. The EDA discussed the approach to reviewing the material contained in the inventory. Wick suggested the EDA may wish to have a map of structural condition made which could indicate where clusters of units in poor or fair condition are located. Wick suggested the map could reveal good places at which to start discussion. Rassier supported the creation of simple maps noting potential conversion options might lead the EDA to discover some improvements possible within the Downtown, whether it was a park, a parking lot, or new commercial area. The EDA directed Strack to make a simple map illustrating structural condition of units in poor/fair condition in the downtown. Strack to overlay with units with potential for conversion to commercial use. The maps will be completed by the December 17`h EDA meeting. Downtown Update Wick introduced the agenda topic. Strack has contacted Father Joseph Feders from the Church of St. Joseph regarding the potential to create a small, public space on a portion of the Church parking lot. Father Feders has noted the Parish is currently planning for future space needs and is not in a position to partner with the City at this time. Strack also spoke with Randy Schmitz of Scenic Specialties who is interested in meeting with the EDA to talk about greening up the downtown. Finally, the owners of Millstream Shops and Lofts are requesting approval of several banners for their facility in downtown. The banners are not currently allowed under Central Business District sign standards. City staff/consultants discussed the issue at a recent staff meeting and supported an update of the CBD sign standards to allow a limited amount of banners in downtown. Board Member Reports Skahen noted the economic slowdown has impacted a portion of his business interests. Heinen noted a series of events led to the closure of her business. She expressed a desire to remain on the EDA. Adjournment. Meeting adjourned by consensus at 5:0 PM. 2~~r~ ~~~ EDA Minutes -November 26, 2008 4