Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023/06/05 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session (2) Official minutes City council study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota June 5, 2023 The meeting convened at 7:21 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Nadia Mohamed, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd, Yolanda Farris, Lynette Dumalag, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jake Spano Staff present: City manager (Ms. Keller), deputy city manager (Ms. Walsh), community development director (Ms. Barton), economic development manager (Mr. Hunt), public services superintendent/deputy public works director (Ms. Fisher), finance director, (Ms. Cruver) Guests: Stacie Kvilvang, senior municipal advisor, Ehlers & Associates 1. Enhanced TIF 101. Ms. Kvilvang presented the report. Councilmember Dumalag asked about the districts and noted the Elmwood example which funded the public infrastructure. She asked when closing housing districts, do they consider not taking on additional debt. Ms. Kvilvang stated the benefit is they can be used for local projects. This helps set up where the budget should be and look at TIF to reduce total tax dollars. Councilmember Budd asked about pooled TIF. Ms. Kvilvang stated in redevelopment, when the obligation is paid off, the district must be decertified. She added if this is kept open for affordable housing, 35% can be collected for affordable housing. She stated if the housing obligation is done in 10 years it can be kept open for 16 years, to collect the TIF, with a 26-year statutory maximum, and for flexibility for future councils, to be able to do what they want with the funds. Councilmember Rog asked what triggers an inclusionary housing policy. Ms. Barton stated if someone requests a PUD rezoning or a Comp Plan Amendment that increases density. Any kind of public assistance request triggers the affordable housing policy. Councilmember Rog asked how often this occurs. Ms. Barton stated with redevelopment in St. Louis Park, PUDs are requested frequently to get things to fit. Councilmember Rog asked if the city would gain the same affordability benefits in most cases. Ms. Barton stated adding more affordable units into a pro forma makes the project more expensive, so the developer comes back to the city asking for financial assistance. Councilmember Rog stated her concern is developers have come to expect and assume TIF agreements as part of their financing package and in bigger amounts. Councilmember Rog added she has always had concerns about the “but-for” clause and someone decided if a development would be built, and if the city stood down more often or had a different approach to TIF as a community, we would still see development occurring in St. Louis Park because people want to live here and there are many reasons to do development here. DocuSign Envelope ID: 303658BA-800E-4585-896D-9F2D74534BE8 Special study session minutes June 5, 2023 Councilmember Rog noted police and fire and other public services that are here, we do not require additional taxes to provide these services among others, and the existing community is left to absorb those costs. She added if more is tied up in TIF, she is concerned about the burden growing for these residents. Councilmember Brausen stated council is not being asked to make any policy decisions at this time. He added districts will decertify and most of the infrastructure with new developments is put in by the developer. He added he doesn’t see a big cost for public safety, and ultimately everyone benefits from TIF as a reinvestment in our community and getting what we want with affordable housing units. He stated that to presume developers will put affordable housing in the city without TIF is a bit presumptuous. He added staff does an analysis and developers do have a gap in their finances, so TIF is needed in these cases. Councilmember Dumalag said non-profit developers can always exit a project, so it is not a one- for one as non-profit can’t recoup their return as they most likely won’t sell, adding that is not in their mission. She stated she thinks of TIF as a cost benefit. Mayor Pro Tem Mohamed stated she agrees both with Councilmembers Brausen’s and Rog’s points, adding she looks at TIF as a way to be more selective and focus on the 30% AMI, the truly affordable housing projects. She added expressing where each councilmember falls related to TIF is acceptable for tonight. Councilmember Rog added she knows this is not a policy discussion but appreciates the opportunity to use her voice. She stated Ms. Kvilvang does a great job of promoting TIF, but there are different perspectives around TIF and whether it is beneficial and what the unintended consequences are is a voice she wants to be included in these discussions. She stated the city has one of the highest tax capacities tied up in TIF of any city in the state, and a higher percentage than Minneapolis and St. Paul. She stated this alone warrants discussing further and thinking outside the box. Councilmember Brausen added this is a good discussion to have each year, pointing out decertifying districts will also need to be reviewed and it makes sense to have as much knowledge as possible. He added Minneapolis is very behind on their goals for affordable housing where St. Louis Park has been very successful in this area. Mayor Pro Tem Mohamed noted Mayor Spano’s email sent about the discussion, and his appreciation for the information and where the discussion will go. Councilmember Budd asked about returned increment and asked if there are only 2 districts returning funds. Ms. Kvilvang stated that was the 2022 report and noted these were planned returned dollars and potentially there could be more. She added the amount returned is the returned funds in a calendar year to the county for redistribution, which goes back into the general fund and is unrestricted. Councilmember Budd asked if a developer sells property what happens to the TIF. Ms. Kvilvang stated all agreements have look-back statements in them, which is done at the time of qualified DocuSign Envelope ID: 303658BA-800E-4585-896D-9F2D74534BE8 Special study session minutes June 5, 2023 costs and once the note is issued, and they are occupied at 95%, the returns are where they should be, then TIF transfers to someone else, if property is sold. Mr. Hunt explained the process staff goes through with testing the look-back statements. 2. Discuss yard waste proposals. Ms. Fisher presented the staff report, noting the city’s current contract will expire on Sept. 30, 2023. Councilmember Brausen asked who is providing services under the current contract. Ms. Fisher stated Waste Management currently has a group collecting yard waste. Councilmember Rog asked about the every-other-week collection option in summer. She asked why the cost of $38,000 over 5 years is so low. Ms. Fisher stated it is not common for yard waste to be collected every other week and the prices reflects the contractor’s need to cover their costs to collect across smaller geographic areas in the city. Councilmember Rog asked about vehicle miles traveled and noted that 60% of respondents were either in favor of every-other-week collection or neutral. Ms. Fisher clarified that 24% of respondents were in favor and 45% were neutral. Councilmember Rog confirmed that only 31% of respondents wanted weekly pick up, and that is worth noting in terms of resident expectations. Ms. Fisher added based on previous surveys and experience with every-other-week garbage collection, residents expect a reduction in rates, but the cost savings would be minimal. Councilmember Dumalag stated residents call her to say their yard waste has not been picked up. She stated it’s best to do this every-other-week and she is supportive of both policy questions and staff recommendations. Councilmember Budd stated this is a 300% increase. Ms. Fisher stated yes, and the contract rates are part of the overall cost. Councilmember Budd stated if the city does move to every-other- week, residents would expect to see a reduction in cost. While that won’t be the case, it also won’t be a significant increase. She stated for that reason she will support both policy questions. Councilmember Brausen stated he has environmental concerns about sending these collection vehicles through neighborhoods every week. He is not pleased that residents claim to need weekly service when, for the average household, every-other-week collection could be sufficient. He added he appreciates all the work staff has done but is frustrated by the situation with the opt-in option costing almost $10 more per resident, per month. He stated that is a $120/year increase for residents. He stated he is conflicted on option 1A or 1B and noted it feels contradictory with allowing the additional vehicles to enter neighborhoods. Councilmember Rog is supportive of the hauler as well. She added staff needs to look at vehicle miles traveled as a data point so council can evaluate those impacts, especially considering the city’s climate action plan. DocuSign Envelope ID: 303658BA-800E-4585-896D-9F2D74534BE8 Special study session minutes June 5, 2023 Councilmember Farris stated she will support both options. Mayor Pro Tem Mohamed added she also will support both options. She noted the conflict brought up by both Councilmembers Rog and Brausen related to climate in option #2. She asked if council is interested in having this discussion. Ms. Keller stated 5 have said to move forward on negotiating the contract. She added the council also stated they would like to model the impacts of these decisions on environment. 3. Consider study session topic proposal. Councilmember Rog asked if council is supportive of the topic proposal as presented. The councilmembers indicated they are supportive of exploring this topic further. Councilmember Rog stated she supports and sees value in the Human Rights Commission (HRC) looking into this first to help inform the discussion, as was also suggested by Mayor Spano. Ms. Keller stated that is valuable, but she has concerns about timing as staff is looking to engage with HRC on the neighborhood grant program this summer. She wants to first see if they have capacity to engage on both projects this summer. She stated if council can be flexible on timelines, depending on HRC’s capacity, that would be helpful. Councilmember Brausen asked about the scope of this issue and if it relates to big grocers or others for inclusion in staff reports. Ms. Keller stated if council wants to move forward with this, Ms. Guess would further research the topic and bring back information for council policy direction. The other option is to ask the HRC if they have capacity to do this work and prepare a recommendation for council consideration. Mayor Pro Tem Mohamed stated her concern is to be sure the HRC has capacity to do this first. She would suggest Ms. Guess take the lead on this and provide a report back to council. It was the consensus of the council to have Ms. Guess research further and provide a report to council with possible next steps for consideration. The meeting adjourned at 9:14 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor pro tem DocuSign Envelope ID: 303658BA-800E-4585-896D-9F2D74534BE8