HomeMy WebLinkAbout[03c] Minutes - January 26 2011CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AURTHORITY
Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Present: EDA Board Members, Steve Frank, Carolyn Yaggie-Heinen, Ken Jacobson, Tom Skahen, and
Dale Wick.
Absent: None.
Also present: St. Joseph Resident Michael McDonald and EDA Director Cynthia Smith-Strack.
Chairperson Wick called the January 26, 2011 regular meeting of the St. Joseph EDA to order at 3:00
p.m.
Agenda.
Chairperson Wick introduced the agenda. Strack requested that item 5(a) “Farm to School Program
Facilitation” be advanced on the agenda so as to accommodate a 3:05 conference call.
Motion by Heinen, second by Skahen to approve the agenda with requested change. Motion carried 5-0.
Facilitation of Farm to Institution Program: Conference Call with Lyn Halvorson Winona Public
Schools.
Chairperson Wick introduced the agenda item as Strack placed the call to Ms. Halvorson. Halvorson has
on numerous occasions provided valuable information to Strack regarding her involvement with farm to
school programs and other partners who facilitated the establishment of a Winona area program. Ms.
Halvorson will share background information regarding her experience and will be available to answer
questions from the EDA.
Following introductions Halvorson explained how she, as the School Nutritionist at Winona Public School
District became involved with an area-wide farm to school initiative in 2005. Halvorson noted a group of
students seeking variation in school foods initiated the district’s movement toward farm to school.
In 2006 Halvorson noted she attended a “Foods Forum” which brought producers and school food
purchasers together with local business owners. The event was sponsored by the local EDA. That event
resulted in Winona ISD purchasing locally produced apples for re-sale to students on an ala carte basis.
In 2008 Halvorson explained she attended a networking event for local farmers and chefs and
purchasers. The event brought producers and end-use purchasers together in a ‘speed dating’ type of
fashion. It was at this event where Halvorson met critical contacts that increased her volume of purchases
from local producers.
Halvorson said most of the locally produced products are sold on an ala carte basis. Primary sales
include jerky sticks, hot dogs, buffalo, pepperoni sticks, and some produce. The items are typically
included in snack bars. Halvorson said their focus in the coming years will be to work with processors to
allow preservation of locally produced food, for example, freezing sweet corn.
When asked how the EDA could help facilitate a local farm to processor to institution program Halvorson
suggested an initial meeting which brings together producers, processors, and institution purchasers. The
meeting could feature people involved with farm to school programs that speaking about past successes
and highlighting local market development benefits. An opportunity for networking could follow the
speakers.
At the conclusion of the conference call the EDA discussed St. Cloud’s efforts at promoting sustainability,
including a ‘sustainability toolbox’. The EDA asked this agenda item be placed on the February regular
meeting agenda for additional discussion.
Election of Officer for 2011.
Wick introduced the agenda item and noted that at the first official meeting each year the EDA is required
to elect officers. Current officers are: Chair – Dale Wick, Vice-Chair – Ken Jacobson, Treasurer – Tom
Skahen, and Secretary – Carolyn Yaggie-Heinen.
Motion Skahen, second Heinen to appoint Wick as Chair for 2011. Motion approved 5:0.
Motion Heinen, Wick second to appoint Skahen Vice-Chair and Treasurer for 2011. Motion approved 5:0.
Motion Wick, second Jacobson to appoint Heinen Secretary for 2011. Motion approved 5:0.
EDA Accounts Payable and Approval of Financial Reports.
Wick introduced the topic. Accounts payable for the month totaled $10,807.75 and included monthly
contract services of $2,807.75 and annual dues for the St. Cloud Area Economic Development
Partnership at $8,000.
Wick then introduced the monthly financial reports.
Frank inquired as to whether or not the SCAEDP dues would be acted on by the City Council. Strack
confirmed that the EDA follows department head rules pertaining to spending authority which is capped at
$1,000 per purchase/expense.
Wick noted that the SCAEDP was considering a wholesale restructuring or reorganization as a non-profit
entity which could function like an Economic Development Corporation with copious amounts of private
sector funding rather than the current structure.
The EDA noted that changes were rapidly evolving regarding the SCAEDP and by recommending
approval of the dues payment they were doing so as of today’s date and not with regard to changes that
may be forthcoming.
Motion Heinen, second by Skahen to approve the accounts payable and monthly reports. Motion carried
.
5-0
2010 Annual Report/2011 Goals.
Wick introduced the agenda topic. Strack noted the annual report had been slightly reformatted for ease
in reading. The report includes:
Executive Summary
2010 Appointments
Mission Statement
Overview of Core Functions/Strategic Directions
Detailed information – Organizational Development Function
Detailed information – Infrastructure Development Function
Detailed information – Business Development Function
Information – Workforce Development Function
Detailed information – Market Development Function
2010 Meeting Dates
Progress toward Diversification of Tax Base
2010 Updates: Prospects/Technical Assistance/Coordination
Progress Report 2010 Goals
EDA Minutes – January 26, 2011 2
Strack continued that the following goals are included in the Annual Report for 2011 along with work
strategies applicable to each proposed goal:
1. Extension of sanitary sewer and drinking water to new CSAH 2 (Infrastructure Development
Function).
2. Manage response to economic impact of the Implementation of four-year residency
requirement at CSB/SJU (Business Development and Market development function).
3. Market St. Joseph opportunities within greater Minnesota and market available commercial
and industrial lots, land, lease space, buildings, etc. (market development function).
4. Investigate and pursue proactive measures to secure and provide for shovel ready industrial
sites and encourage build-out of Parkway Business Center (infrastructure development
function).
5. Work with property owner to proceed with “St. Joseph Professional Plat” (infrastructure
development function).
6. Continue to work with property owners seeking development of land adjacent to proposed
CSAH 2 (infrastructure and business development function).
7. Host at least two events for business owners (business development function).
8. Implement capital improvement projects (organizational development, infrastructure
development, and business development function).
9. Respond to inquiries and continue proactive follow up of viable leads/prospects (business
development function).
10. Continue to pursue revitalization within the Downtown (infrastructure and business
development function).
The EDA reviewed the report and correspondence from Mr. McDonald. The EDA requested the following
changes: change all references to “Main Street” to “Minnesota Street”; add business names to street
addresses when possible, change the total meeting dates on Page 15 to 15 from 14, change the Title on
Page 16 from “Diversification of Tax Base”, remove ‘and’ from the final sentence on Page 30, and to
change the reference to “National Guard” on Page Three of the report to “Army Reserve”.
McDonald inquired as to whether or not the table on Page 17 of the report could reflect out-going
abatement and increment payments. Since payments are based on a ‘pay as you go’ basis and trail the
issuance of building permits by two years, the EDA recommended adding a note to the table which
indicates the calculations do not include TIF or abatement agreements.
Strack noted she had met with Mayor Schultz on a few occasions. He had the following suggestions for
EDA goals:
1. Improving the EDA’s image within the community (perhaps strengthening outreach,
communicating more efficiently).
2. Creation of illustrations for some parcels within the Downtown showing what infill or
redevelopment of the property could look like.
3. Creating a downtown that is like Lanesboro, MN.
4. Extending sewer/water to new CSAH 2.
EDA Minutes – January 26, 2011 3
5. Extending Wobegon Trail and urban streetscape from Downtown to new CSAH 2.
With regard to improving the EDA’s image, the EDA asked Strack to invite Mayor Schultz to a future
meeting to further discuss the issue. The EDA noted that suggested goals two, three, four, and five were
included in the EDA’s past goals and those for 2011, except that goal number three was stated in terms
of an active, pedestrian friendly downtown.
Jacobson suggested a web page with before/after photographs of projects that the EDA had assisted. For
example, before/after pictures of The Local Blend which utilized the BFA grant and RLF programs, or
Millstream Shops/Lofts which was a vacant parcel prior to issuing TIF.
Frank noted that the City Council on March 4, 2011 would be holding a retreat/strategy session. One of
the items the Council will discuss will be splitting an HRA function from the EDA.
Strack will invite Mayor Schultz to a future EDA meeting to discuss EDA image.
Motion Skahen, second Heinen to approve the report with requested changes and direct Strack to
present to the City Council. Motion carried 5:0.
Data Practices Act and Business Confidentiality.
Wick introduced the agenda topic. Strack noted that she had received a tentative request (not for specific
information, not written) from an elected official regarding data on file for development leads. The EDA
has typically identified projects with a code, for example, Project 03-A, so as to protect business
confidentiality and the integrity of economic development efforts.
Strack noted that under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA) all government data is
presumed to be public unless specifically identified as private by Minnesota statute. Strack referenced
information included in the EDA packet relating to businesses, economic development, and the MGDPA.
Based on review of the information, Strack noted it seems likely that data retained regarding business
leads would likely be classified as public data on non-individuals.
Strack requested the EDA discuss access to data on business leads noting three alternatives would seem
to exist at this time: (a) a finding that public information regarding development leads is public, (b) a
finding that information regarding development leads is private based on information contained in the
packet, or (c) referral of the issue to a higher authority.
Wick noted that other EDA’s use coding systems for tracking leads, for example, the new software system
for the SCAEDP relies on coding and as such was approved by the software representatives a compliant
with data practices.
Frank suggested requesting an opinion from the State’s Information Policy Analysis Division (IPAD)
regarding distribution of information on project leads. Strack noted the request was very general and may
need to be more specific for IPAD to provide an opinion thereon. For example, Strack suggested IPAD
review the EDA as a holder of trade secrets or the EDA as a holder of information from individuals and
non-individuals seeking financial assistance.
Skahen suggested the City Attorney comment on business information as it relates to MGDPA.
The EDA directed Strack to proceed as follows: check with colleagues from other cities, review City’s
Data Practices Manual, request discussion at staff meeting, if still unclear ask City Attorney and IPAD for
opinion.
Formal Review Process: Business Prospects Locating Elsewhere.
Wick introduced the agenda topic. Strack noted she had received an inquiry from an elected official
regarding a process for determining or reviewing why development leads opted to locate in a community
EDA Minutes – January 26, 2011 4
other than St. Joseph. The elected official was specifically recommending a formal procedure be
established so as to provide the City/Council with sufficient knowledge as to how to improve or become
more competitive in securing development leads.
Strack continued that although we (City or EDA) have not performed formal “reviews” for projects not
moving forward, we have discussed such information as obtained anecdotally and through personal
follow-up with previous leads. Examples include business financing falling through, taxes/fees being too
high, land prices being too high, getting a better deal elsewhere, deciding to stay in their current location,
and having a feeling of a ‘better fit’ in another community. In addition the EDA/City has followed up on
occasion (i.e. comparing fees/utility rates with area communities and retaining competitive tax rate).
Strack requested discussion from the EDA as to the merit of establishing a formal ‘review’ procedure and
allocating resource thereto.
Frank recommended the EDA not frame the issue as negative, but rather turn it to a positive. For
example, Frank suggested the creation of fact sheets or flyers pertaining utility rate comparisons and tax
rate comparisons. The flyers could be posted on the web site.
EDA members embraced Board Member Frank’s idea.
MDG Contract.
Wick introduced the topic. No changes to the 2010 contract were suggested.
Motion Skahen, Second Heinen to recommend approval of the contract to the City Council. Motion carried
5:0.
Board Member Announcements.
Strack noted that recent events required the EDA to consider calling a special meeting for February 9,
2011. The EDA by consensus approved of the special meeting request.
Adjournment.
Motion Skahen, second Heinen to adjourn the EDA meeting. Meeting adjourned at 4:50 PM.
Cynthia Smith-Strack
EDA Director
EDA Minutes – January 26, 2011 5