[0:00] 12:00, let's call the Economic
Development Authority regular meeting
[0:04] to order, please, for August 26, 2026.
Please call roll.
[0:11] » Here.
Here.
[0:14] » Here.
>> Yes.
[0:17] » Here.
>> Here.
[0:19] » Here.
[0:22] » All right, approve minutes from regular
meeting 5 27 26.
[0:30] » I'll move.
>> Second.
[0:32] » All in favor?
>> Aye.
[0:35] » All opposed, same sign.
All right, bills and communication.
[0:42] Any questions? You have to wait till we
see Carla.
[0:45] » She's out today.
[0:50] » Any questions, comments, concerns?
Nope, moving on.
[0:57] Delinquencies.
She loves this part.
[1:00] » There's none.
[1:03] » Director's report.
[1:07] » So, in the past couple months that we've
been in doing summer, it's been very
[1:11] busy here. People have been building
houses and starting businesses and
[1:15] taking out permits to do construction
and rehab on their commercial buildings.
[1:19] There's been a lot of business visits.
We've been taking advantage of the good
[1:23] weather to go out and walk to visit
different businesses and tell them about
[1:27] our microloan program and ask how things
are going. And it's been very positive
[1:32] sentiments, which is awesome. I'm
hearing that people are remaining stable
[1:36] in their operations and staffing and
some slight increases in terms of
[1:41] staffing levels. And people are adding
different product lines. At the same
[1:44] point, too, we're also working on kind
of fielding those requests and questions
[1:48] that are coming from the Simplot
redevelopment project. So, as you can
[1:51] see, there's been a lot going on. And
then also the preparation for the fall
[1:55] North End Valley Career Expo is well
underway, so
[1:59] all the good stuff.
>> I like the highlight of like the fire
[2:04] chief that retired and things like that.
You've done a number of articles on
[2:07] individual people. Actually really like
seeing those as well. They're They're
[2:10] good. They're good community members.
>> Yes, that was Brenda's idea. I was going
[2:13] to mention it later, but
we've had like some low participation
[2:17] during the summer from businesses. So,
she's gone ahead and like filled in
[2:21] relevant people from the city and like
real estate and they've performed very
[2:25] well. So, it's also valuable for our
communities
[2:28] appearance to like external entities and
our spending for consumers and just
[2:33] quality of life. So, yeah.
>> Yes.
[2:35] » I agree.
>> All right.
[2:39] I'm going to skip over here.
Financial reports are
[2:43] » Unless there's anything we need to like
make a note of.
[2:46] » anything.
>> Me neither.
[2:48] » Okay.
Social media report.
[2:51] » Okay, well timed.
So, this
[2:55] report covers the last three months of
combined metrics. So, you get to see the
[2:59] top posts from the last three months and
they do actually include some of the
[3:03] city staff.
Um let's see here.
[3:07] And this has taken up a good portion of
Brenda's time to go out and you know,
[3:12] schedule the appointments to talk with
the businesses, get the right person, do
[3:15] the interviews and then the photos and
the write-ups, but it's very valuable.
[3:19] The newspaper still pulls it and posts
it in there. They've had a little bit of
[3:23] staffing change, so it's I think they're
going to be on a different page than
[3:26] what it usually is, but
it's still a valuable content piece that
[3:30] we add.
Any questions on that?
[3:34] » Any questions? All right.
Unfinished business. Residential tax
[3:39] abatement program renewal update.
>> Okay. We talked about this back in
[3:46] I think May
and there was an interest in moving
[3:50] forward with renewing the program.
Luckily, the school district has theirs
[3:54] already in place until 2031. So, this
was a matter of just seeing if the
[3:58] county wanted to renew it, and they
agreed to
[4:02] renew the program until 2029.
So, at that point, houses that are newly
[4:08] built
no later than January 31st, 2029 would
[4:13] be eligible for the program. And
sometimes it takes 2 to 4 years for them
[4:16] to get up to full value. So, it's
possible that they could request the
[4:21] rebate as late as 2031, 2033, somewhere
in between there.
[4:26] So,
that is the installment on that. And
[4:29] then the next step for this process, if
this was a recommended to continue, I
[4:33] would take it to city council, the work
session. They would mull over the
[4:38] request, and then it would go to
um a regular council meeting with a
[4:43] public hearing since it involves city
dollars from the general fund.
[4:50] » I'll move to make recommendation to
continue.
[4:54] » I'll second.
>> All in favor.
[4:58] » Aye.
>> Aye.
[4:59] » Aye.
>> All opposed, same sign.
[5:03] Excellent. Simplot request for proposal
updates.
[5:08] » So, our last day for the RP process is
Monday next week. So, we're getting
[5:14] really excited about what could be
potentially coming into our offices in
[5:17] terms of designs and proposals for that
10 acres of land that we have sitting
[5:22] over there that's been vacant.
And I've had a ton of great
[5:25] conversations and phone calls and
emails. I've reached out to 34 different
[5:31] business and construction companies
directly with requests of, "Hey, please
[5:35] consider community." And one of them led
to somebody saying, "Hey, while we can't
[5:39] do it this time, we'll consider your
community for other options in the
[5:42] future." Which is good cuz they've
worked with us in the past. It's listed
[5:46] on the commercial real estate index that
Crexi
[5:50] RFP database.com.
Deed was very helpful in helping us get
[5:55] it onto GovDelivery, so it's on there.
League of Minnesota Cities social media,
[5:59] and then we are able to post it on our
billboards. So,
[6:03] I'm not sure what to anticipate. There's
been a lot of good excitement and
[6:06] interest. We did a webinar,
and we had some attendees for that, and
[6:10] we had an on-site tour, and we had some
We had a person attend as well, so
[6:15] Hard to know, but exciting times.
>> Yeah.
[6:18] Next slide.
All right, new business.
[6:22] Infill lease renewal.
>> Mhm.
[6:25] » Okay.
This one is for the Golfsted Law Firm,
[6:30] which is coming to the close of their
lease term at the end of this year.
[6:35] And so, we met with the loan committee,
and
[6:39] Ron, the attorney there, mentioned he's
not sure how long he wanted to do the
[6:43] term, so we discussed what would be the
best option.
[6:46] So, the recommendation was to keep it
flat at the 11.25 a square foot that it
[6:50] currently is for the next 5 years
with an opt-out clause for retirement or
[6:55] sale of the business. Since, I believe,
his business is currently in the renewal
[6:59] decline phase, he may be seeking a
buyer, or he may look to transition it
[7:03] somehow. So,
>> Sure.
[7:06] » If that sounds good, we can decide on
that, or if there's other ideas, we
[7:10] could listen to those, too.
>> I I'm just curious on the opt-out
[7:15] clause, is it one-sided, or is it
two-sided? So, like, if if he sale
[7:19] sells,
are we doing a new lease with a new
[7:23] business, or how do how does that Are
they taking over that lease? Like, how
[7:26] is that working
with that opt-out clause?
[7:29] » actually. I think we
If it's the same company,
[7:33] and I may need help from Reed on this.
If it's the same company, then the
[7:35] lease, I would assume, would hold place.
It would just be cuz the lease is with
[7:39] Golfsted Law, and not with Ron.
>> Right. I'd assume it would continue on,
[7:44] but
when that ends, we would have to renew
[7:46] it with them. If it is a totally
different company that say like comes in
[7:50] and it's like Ferguson Law or something
else totally different, think it'd have
[7:53] to be a new lease.
>> Mhm.
[7:56] » Correct.
>> I was just wondering, too, cuz I mean it
[7:58] it's Golseth, Jensen, and McCann. So, if
one of them retires, like I'm just
[8:02] curious
>> Well, one isn't even with us anymore.
[8:05] He's been gone for
>> Right.
[8:07] » ever.
>> I I I'm just It was just a question. I
[8:11] just didn't know if it was a two-way
opt-out clause or
[8:14] we're we're we're just locking this in
for a business for the next 5 years.
[8:18] » Whatever business shows up.
>> Yep.
[8:20] » Very good.
>> any business No, not for any business,
[8:23] for Ron's business. If the If the name
changes or if Ron retires or Ron decides
[8:30] to move to Grand Forks, he would be in
breach of this contract. That's he he
[8:34] It's upon retirement that it's on his
terms is what I think we kind of
[8:39] proposed, right?
>> Yeah, that's the the proposal at the
[8:42] loan committee that I recall, too, is
it's a little bit one-sided to your
[8:46] point, Daniel, but it was
um so that if Ron chooses to retire in
[8:51] the middle of the term of the agreement
um or opts to sell the business as part
[8:57] of a succession plan, it would allow him
to opt out at that time.
[9:01] Um the benefit on the city side is we
lock in a 5-year agreement, where
[9:04] otherwise it may be a shorter term with
more uncertainty on that end for the
[9:08] city.
>> And then the reason we left it flat is
[9:11] because we did it with Mike's and we
felt that that was the right thing to
[9:15] do.
>> So, and that I didn't have a I just
[9:18] wanted to clarification on that. So,
thank you.
[9:24] » Any other questions?
Looking for a motion.
[9:29] » I'll make a motion.
>> I'll second it.
[9:32] » No, you go ahead. Please call roll.
[9:37] » Yes.
>> Black?
[9:39] » Yes.
>> State?
[9:40] » Yes.
>> Brenda?
[9:42] » Yes.
>> Pat?
[9:43] » Yes.
>> Morgan?
[9:44] » Yes.
>> Al?
[9:46] » Yes.
[9:48] Perfect. All right. Fiscal year 27
budget.
[9:54] » So on the last page of your packet is
the budget summary.
[9:58] We met with city council and gave them
kind of a very early proposal of what
[10:02] our
departmental budgets could look like.
[10:06] There is one change to note on this.
Since Brenda has been helping a lot with
[10:11] the different duties with the EDA,
especially with those spotlights, we're
[10:15] kind of consuming more of time that she
normally is spending with planning and
[10:19] there was kind of an emptiness in the
need for time with planning. So we are
[10:23] looking to shift her over to 50/50 EDA
planning split. And that would probably
[10:29] take um
place January 1st of 2027.
[10:34] So yay, we get more support.
But that will change the wages,
[10:38] insurance benefits part at the top. Um
just due to that change. However, from
[10:43] if I understand correctly, planning has
already budgeted in for her normal 75%
[10:48] we've already budgeted in for her
quarter percent. So it comes from the
[10:52] general fund, so it's not it wouldn't be
a drastic change, it would just be like
[10:56] a a ratio.
>> Yeah, essentially.
[11:00] So that would be something to note and
then the other thing is our expenses.
[11:03] We've kept them flat. We're able to
offer really great programming and
[11:06] support. And I've had a ton of people
ask me from different towns, like how do
[11:11] you do your business spotlights? You
know, what are you using for tracking
[11:15] your contacts and your deals through
convergence, so
[11:18] it's nice to be a trailblazer in that
regard with our um effective operating
[11:23] budget we have.
And then we're getting close to the end
[11:26] of our Waters Edge lot sales. There was
some interest in reducing the the that
[11:30] we have budgeted for that 30% or 30,000
for 2027. Um we did have a conversation
[11:36] which kind of foreshadows the next
agenda item with North Star neighbors
[11:40] and they expressed some interest in
potentially acquiring some more of our
[11:42] lots
and we are working with someone else who
[11:45] is
um looking to do that $100,000 builder
[11:49] loan program. So
we have five lots left in the PUD. So
[11:55] that's all we have remaining.
>> I I just don't think it'd be wise to
[12:00] reduce them now.
I mean
[12:05] there's no way
>> No, we weren't going to reduce them.
[12:06] » No, not the lots, just the amount
budgeted that she's going to make up for
[12:09] sales.
>> So
[12:11] » Sorry for blowing up.
>> And out of those five we need to
[12:16] recognize that two of them are going to
be very hard to sell.
[12:18] » Hard to sell.
>> Yeah.
[12:19] » I think two or three, right?
>> Two for sure.
[12:22] » The PUD, the duplex, and that one on
23rd.
[12:25] » Yep.
>> Those are toughest.
[12:27] So we may have to like look at different
creative ways on those.
[12:31] Um
So that's what I have for this budget.
[12:35] If anyone feels like something could be
changed or edited, we can absolutely
[12:39] make changes cuz we're still in the
editorial part before council gets to
[12:44] lock in the the amounts.
[12:49] » Any changes, questions?
>> How's our real estate agent doing?
[12:54] » Really well. He's sold four houses
already. Or not houses, but four lots.
[12:58] » That's a good change.
>> Yes. Yeah.
[13:00] » From May, I think he came on in May?
May to now.
[13:04] » That that was a good a good investment.
>> Yes. And he said that he'll be starting
[13:07] his second phase of advertising. Um
unfortunately I don't recall the
[13:11] specifics of it, but he said he was
doing like different phases of outreach
[13:15] to get people engaged in it. I was going
to reshare one of his videos too that
[13:18] talks about like don't miss out on this
opportunity of building here. There's
[13:22] also been a good number of people taking
out housing building permits, so
[13:27] we might be just capitalizing on a
really good time, too, to list.
[13:29] » just pretty much stop now, though, and
until spring? Is anybody
[13:34] usually buying in the fall?
>> Hey, you never know.
[13:37] » You never know? Okay.
>> You see a lot of people potentially
[13:40] still buy lots in the fall to be ready
to break ground
[13:43] » spring. Okay.
And two of our Northstar neighbor houses
[13:46] are supposed to start breaking ground in
the fall, tentatively. So,
[13:51] people might use the same contractor.
>> Right.
[13:54] How many lots do we have left?
>> Five. We have five and one PUD.
[14:00] » But it's I mean, there's action over
there. There's two of them getting built
[14:03] in the Tribune Circle right now, and
>> It's a lot less than when I started on
[14:06] this board, so.
A lot less.
[14:10] » That's good.
[14:15] » So, we're looking for a motion.
>> On the budget?
[14:19] » No, budget's already done. We're
discussing housing and lots.
[14:21] » Okay, housing and lots. Oh, we haven't
gotten there yet. Okay.
[14:24] » Do you need a motion for the budget?
>> Yes.
[14:27] Yes.
>> I'll move to approve budget
[14:30] » Thank you.
>> has it.
[14:30] » I'll second.
>> Call roll, please.
[14:37] » Yes.
>> Black.
[14:39] » Yes.
>> Say.
[14:40] » Yes.
>> Andi.
[14:41] » Yes.
>> Katz.
[14:42] » Yes.
>> O'Brien.
[14:44] » Yes.
>> Andi.
[14:46] » Yes.
[14:49] » All right. A housing and lots
discussion.
[14:52] » Okay, this is the juicy nugget one for
conversation.
[14:56] I'm excited about this one.
And it leads in well, cuz Dana said we
[14:59] just finished selling most of those
lots. Well,
[15:02] we're at a predicament here.
We've sold most of our city-owned
[15:06] residential lots, and we are
anticipating a large influx of hopefully
[15:11] permanent residents into the greater
MSA.
[15:14] Um whether it be from Agristo, the Air
Force Base is doing some different
[15:18] projects in Grand Sky. We're hoping to
be a little proactive in getting
[15:22] affordable and available housing. We're
at a pretty low available housing rate
[15:26] currently. Um, back in like Q1 it was
around 1.99% for rental vacancy, which
[15:32] is really low. Ideally it's somewhere
between like 5 to 10% so it gives people
[15:36] options and flexibility.
So, we're looking at
[15:40] what is our next step? The council in
the past had signaled that they don't
[15:44] want to be a residential developer, that
we want to be out of it, hands-off, let
[15:48] someone else come in and do it.
Um, unfortunately those outlays have sat
[15:52] there just kind of not having any action
and it begs the question then of like
[15:58] should we engage in, you know, preparing
those lots that go north of Waters Edge
[16:04] and get them ready? Should we put out an
RFP and ask a developer to do that? Are
[16:09] there incentives that we should try to
position so we can get more housing? And
[16:13] then I included some really fun facts
that I pulled
[16:16] um
so theoretically
[16:19] Gen Z,
I've heard some conflicting information
[16:22] from other sources but consistently the
research I'm finding is saying Gen Z
[16:27] wants to own a house, which I feel like
is normal for any up-and-coming
[16:31] generation. They want to own a house,
it's an easy investment, they're wanting
[16:35] to start families, they're motivated to
grow and start families and we have a
[16:39] huge population of those coming through,
you know, the university and through the
[16:43] college and apartments are good but
they're they're not a permanent
[16:47] necessarily housing option that
everybody wants.
[16:50] So,
a lot of Gen Z is looking for home
[16:53] ownership programs to help them
typically government ones. So, I don't
[16:58] know if that's a a consideration we want
to look at if we did that $5,000 down
[17:03] payment program and we're at pretty much
the end of those. There's just a couple
[17:06] where people are moving out before the
full term. So, we're getting some of
[17:09] that back as that miscellaneous revenue
but
[17:12] is that something we want to do in the
future?
[17:14] Do we want to consider
you know
[17:17] other programs that are helpful. And
another unique trend is that we're
[17:22] seeing retirees are not downsizing. I've
experienced this personally. I've seen
[17:25] it happen. Um there's that aging in
place concept of I'm comfortable in this
[17:30] house. It's paid off. It's got a great
interest rate. I know where everything
[17:33] is. I can walk it in the middle of the
night.
[17:35] So we're not seeing necessarily people
who are wanting to, you know, when they
[17:39] hit retirement age move into a smaller
house or downsize. Uh largely people are
[17:44] either staying in their house or they're
buying a house of the same square
[17:47] footage or even 100 square feet larger.
And then there is a little typo here,
[17:51] but 18% of those who are 80 years old to
100 year old um want to plan to
[17:56] basically downsize. So we're not seeing
that shift until people are getting kind
[18:00] of up in their ages where they're, you
know, there's a lot of upkeep with a
[18:04] house when you're that age and mowing
and things.
[18:07] So then that's kind of some food for how
we want to do this.
[18:11] » I think one of the problems that you'll
that you I see it from
[18:15] people that I work with in my industry
that are looking to downsize at a
[18:19] certain age.
Problem is right now is downsizing costs
[18:23] you more.
So in in that instance, you know, yeah,
[18:27] they'd probably love to get into a town
home or something where maybe they don't
[18:31] have to mow, they don't have to do the
snow removal or something or maybe
[18:34] they're snowbirds so they don't have to
worry about, you know, snow still
[18:38] getting moved it looks like somebody's
there in the winter. But everyone that I
[18:41] talked to that wants to downsize said
it's going to cost them more. So it's
[18:45] difficult to do it.
>> That was actually Gen X's biggest
[18:48] complaint. They would like to downsize,
but they're also dealing with the cost
[18:52] of
like doing a whole new house, new
[18:54] mortgage.
>> They said there's nothing in their price
[18:57] range
that two 300,000 dollars. I mean there's
[19:01] just nothing. And and the
>> How can there be when you buy a new
[19:05] pickup? They're 100 grand.
>> Right.
[19:07] » You know.
>> Right. Because they're like, oh, they
[19:09] want 20% down or whatever it whatever it
is now. They So they look at it like,
[19:14] "Oh, I need like $50,000
cash before I can even buy a house."
[19:19] » Mhm. Mhm.
>> And so it's it's been really hard and
[19:21] there's nothing in their price range. So
it goes more like four or five 600,000.
[19:25] They're like, "We just can't afford it.
We can't don't have the down payment for
[19:28] it." So I've heard that a lot cuz I work
a lot with that that age group and
[19:32] stuff. But
>> And which at that time we
[19:35] we're in the same boat.
>> Mhm.
[19:38] Yeah.
So
[19:40] » Still are. So if we're going to go
forward and we were looking at this, I
[19:43] guess my question would be is is what
would we be looking to develop those
[19:46] houses into?
What's the income range that we're
[19:49] targeting for that? Because I mean if
we're going to target and have these as
[19:54] like half million 400 or above $1,000
houses,
[19:58] you're not attracting people who are
going to be coming for the jobs that are
[20:02] that are coming into town. Well, that's
the question.
[20:04] » are with with Agri school and with Grand
Sky, you are.
[20:10] » Yeah, people in their 40s, 50s?
>> Yeah.
[20:12] » I mean, those are going to be those are
going to be very well-paying jobs that
[20:15] are coming. And we talked about this at
the loan committee of
[20:19] we have no inventory of lots. And with
some of the jobs that are coming,
[20:24] um we're going to put ourselves at a
disadvantage if we don't even have the
[20:27] ability to capture some of those people
that are going to be looking to move
[20:30] into town to fill those jobs.
So that's where the discussion comes up
[20:34] of
do we look to develop it? Do we put an
[20:36] RFP out to find a developer that wants
to develop it? Um Ben knows a little
[20:41] more about some of them that they they
did it and there's some that are almost
[20:44] pretty close to ready to
>> There's some that's
[20:47] I would say
and Reed can speak to this, but there's
[20:50] some lots out there that there isn't a
whole lot of infrastructure to put in.
[20:55] There's also a big portion of it that
there's a lot of infrastructure to put
[20:59] in out there. So I mean trying to
partner with a developer
[21:03] to get
some things done. I I know we've always
[21:07] said no way, we're not doing this again,
but
[21:11] there's lots out there where if we had
them ready, they'd sell tomorrow. That's
[21:15] just the way that it's looking.
>> That's the shift.
[21:18] » That's that's the way it's looking right
now. And I know I can speak that, you
[21:22] know, it's difficult. I I know from a
city perspective,
[21:27] there's uh value to that land. From a
developer
[21:31] perspective, there's a lot less value to
that land just because of the inputs
[21:37] that you'd have to put into it. So,
um
[21:40] yeah, I guess it probably goes back to
council.
[21:44] You guys to decide if you
want to pursue an RFP type situation. We
[21:50] talked about it at the loan committee of
I think that's probably the right step.
[21:54] » Yes.
>> Because,
[21:56] you know, otherwise it's the city
unless you guys decide as a city, we
[22:01] want to develop that and do lots again.
>> I think the discussion was uh in the
[22:05] loan committee is that if we put out an
RFP, there's not going to be a whole lot
[22:09] of interest just because of the type of
capital that it's going to take.
[22:11] » We don't think so.
>> Probably not.
[22:13] » We don't think so.
>> But I think that's the first step.
[22:15] » Yeah.
>> I mean, I I think there's probably an
[22:18] agreement with not only across this
board, but city council that we we don't
[22:21] want to be in a position of
owning lots and having to sell lots
[22:24] again, but um
there's no other lots in town anywhere.
[22:29] » Right. I think we
>> There's nothing on the south south end
[22:31] left. I mean, we probably have
There's two lots
[22:34] » on the south end that we talked about
that came up and
[22:37] » Yep. Besides those two,
there might be one or two more, and then
[22:41] R5, like there's probably less than 10
lots available in town.
[22:45] » And there's develop I mean, with the
lagoons gone now,
[22:49] it's a
it's a de- you know, the around that
[22:52] golf course is
>> Nice.
[22:53] » That's nice. That's why people are
building out there right now.
[22:57] » I I I'm still skeptical on on the
housing and in the market that
[23:01] targeting, but how can we make it
something that somebody wants to come in
[23:06] and develop so that we're not in that
business.
[23:09] What what what can we do?
>> Give away the land.
[23:13] I mean, honestly.
You know, or partner with partner with
[23:17] somebody so it makes financial sense.
>> But it's got to make financial sense.
[23:20] That's why I'm curious to like is it if
it's giving away land and it's something
[23:24] that we need, then that is that what
we're considering here?
[23:26] » Yeah, I don't know.
>> Is that that's the only That's the only
[23:28] way I see
>> So
[23:30] I think
I know what I'm talking about. RFP for
[23:33] the land and if not, then we consider
developing the land ourselves.
[23:36] » Yeah. I think that's
>> Say that again, Ben.
[23:39] » We do an RFP to see if there's a
developer that is interested in
[23:42] purchasing the land and developing it
themselves
[23:46] and if they can't, then
as a council and as a city, we change
[23:51] change course and say, "Okay, we're
going to
[23:53] develop these lots
that we said we were never going to do
[23:56] again and
>> Right, cuz there is some infrastructure
[23:59] already in that we almost have to recap.
We're looking probably to recapture some
[24:03] of that, I'm guessing.
>> I think some of it has to be redone,
[24:05] right?
>> Uh no, I'm not aware of any of that
[24:08] needs to be redone. Uh there's sanitary
sewer already there. Um
[24:14] about 29 lots could be serviced by the
existing sanitary north on St. Andrews
[24:18] Drive to that lift station. If you build
houses on both sides of that street, the
[24:22] sanitary line that's already there would
serve those.
[24:25] » Yep.
>> So you still need to bring in
[24:26] electricity, drinking water, storm
sewer, and roads, right?
[24:31] » Yep.
>> But the sanitary is that's a big expense
[24:33] that's already there.
>> Yep.
[24:34] » To your point, Justin, there's there
could potentially be special assessments
[24:39] » Mhm.
>> for that sanitary line that was
[24:41] installed 20 years ago. Still that may
need to be spread across those lots.
[24:46] » Right.
>> Um I have a not spent enough time to
[24:49] look at a calculation of what that cost
would look like or if it's something the
[24:52] city wants to eat just to help push up
development along. Um but that's there.
[24:57] » Yep.
>> I think there's other scenarios to
[24:59] consider too and look at is that, um,
you know, is is Bob going to develop any
[25:04] more on the south end? And if we have
those talks and if he has plans on it,
[25:09] we obviously don't want to compete with
private developers either and let them
[25:13] develop.
Um, so if he does and how many lots is
[25:16] he going to input and then maybe that
makes a decision easier for the city
[25:20] that says, "Hey,
nobody's interested in it, but let's do
[25:24] some and not all of it." And then that
gives us a little bit more inventory so
[25:29] we've got inventory on both ends of town
in case somebody chooses one end or the
[25:33] over the other.
If
[25:36] if we don't have anything that's going
to be developed on the south end, we
[25:39] need to hardly consider how do we get
lots available and not miss out on
[25:45] potential tax base to build for the
city.
[25:48] » We had also considered too, there's
housing TIF. I don't know if there's an
[25:51] appetite for that, but that would allow
the ability to wrap all the expenses
[25:55] into like a as the increment increases,
ability to get reimbursed to help kind
[26:00] of build a lot of housing at one time.
>> Does that constrain you on the building
[26:05] end? Once you, like if you put them in a
district like that, is that a
[26:10] is that constrain the buyer or is that
just a
[26:14] » Okay.
>> a financing part.
[26:15] » Just a financing part. Okay.
>> And that can go up to 26 years and then
[26:21] there is excess increment that's
generated between like the taxable value
[26:25] and the new value. That could be used in
like in the surrounding area to kind of
[26:28] help with like sidewalks or other value
added at
[26:32] value added access things.
>> Well, like Ben already mentioned, I
[26:37] think what we we talked about at the
loan committee is, our consensus anyways
[26:41] is like let's put it out there, see if
anybody wants it first and get it and
[26:44] then if not, then council's got to make
a decision on where do we go from there.
[26:51] » Cuz there's really been no action
or
[26:54] RFP ever put out on this, right?
>> I don't think so.
[26:58] » Okay.
>> I don't believe there has been. The The
[27:01] city like Widseth has done some site
plans that has laid out potential lot
[27:06] sizes and utility locations.
Um but I think even those are probably
[27:11] 10 years old at this point.
>> Yep.
[27:16] » So,
we're looking for a motion to
[27:21] Ben's going to head it up at the console
and
[27:25] » Stump's going to say good idea.
>> Ben, please. Not Ben.
[27:29] » Yeah, there you go.
>> You can certainly make a motion if you
[27:32] want, but I think we could just take
this direction to staff direction and
[27:36] maybe you know, I can start working on
RFP and then, you know, at next month's
[27:39] meeting have an RFP ready for your
review
[27:42] um to bring to council for their
approval.
[27:45] » Yep.
I think everybody's in consensus that
[27:48] we'd like someone else to do it if
possible, but we'll see what happens.
[27:53] » But like you said, what hand are we
going to be forced? I mean
[27:57] » If the the other lot's more attractive,
they're going to go there.
[28:00] » Well, it it it it
back to it.
[28:05] » So, the lots that are left are the less
desirable lots.
[28:07] » Yeah.
>> There's three that are probably
[28:10] » probably not going to sell.
>> Yeah.
[28:12] » Yep.
>> So, if we open up additional land that
[28:16] can be developed
>> Better chance of people moving.
[28:19] » desirable lots.
>> Yeah.
[28:21] » Um which will then
facilitate further building in that
[28:26] area. And once they start building, you
know, like
[28:29] hopefully it's like on the south end of
Grand Forks where once they start
[28:32] » It'll just keep going.
>> Yeah. These these would be lots that
[28:35] line the golf course again, so your
backyard would be up to the next to the
[28:38] holes and not
>> They were the first ones that They were
[28:40] the first ones that sold the first time.
>> Yeah, so and they'd be the first
[28:44] » I like that. I'd like to see more people
move in.
[28:46] » I
>> mean, you
[28:47] I think there's probably 12 on that side
left. I think they'd go pretty quick.
[28:53] » Yeah.
Yeah, a local contractor has said that
[28:56] he could have four or five of them sold
today if
[28:59] » I agree with him. It's the rest of it
that Right.
[29:02] There's there's no sewer on the north
side. So, there there's more work it the
[29:07] 29's easy. It's the rest of it is
challenging.
[29:11] » Um I just if there's still time for more
conversation, Ben made a point I think
[29:15] it's worth bringing up
of the existing four or five lots we
[29:18] have left. And a lot of you have said
it, there are a few that are probably
[29:23] less than desirable.
There's I think there's one in
[29:26] particular that probably merits some
conversation. It's
[29:30] um
I don't remember what the lot number is.
[29:32] It's on the corner of 23rd Street and
>> Saint Andrews.
[29:35] » Saint Andrews Drive. Yep. It has a lot
of a big chunk of the property is
[29:40] um
interfered with by the underground
[29:44] » natural gas line.
>> And it's also in that section of the the
[29:49] subdivision that has recorded governance
on it. So, the combination of those two
[29:53] things, the size of the home and the
size of the garage that are required,
[29:57] and the amount of property that's
affected by the underground utility,
[30:01] you can fit a house in there, but it's
going to be a really funky house and not
[30:04] much yard. It'd be front or side yard
depending upon how you lay the house
[30:08] out.
>> Well, there's personal property
[30:10] » and we're our asking price, yeah. Our
asking price on it is 39,950. And of
[30:15] course, that's driven by the cost of the
special assessments on the property.
[30:21] You know, I didn't bring any paperwork
with, but that's one to me if the board
[30:24] has any
idea for how to be creative to allow a
[30:29] home to be built there. Otherwise, I
fear as we bring more new lots on, it's
[30:33] going to sit and we're going to end up
just making it a park someday.
[30:37] » Right.
>> Planting trees.
[30:39] Maybe that's what it is. Is that Is that
where the conversation should go?
[30:43] » That's and that's of what I'm wondering.
>> There is not any playground equipment on
[30:46] the on the north side of 23rd Street.
>> There is Danny. I mean that certainly
[30:50] could be an option.
>> I I wouldn't I wouldn't mind seeing if
[30:53] we can package that in somehow if that
Northstar wants to
[30:58] have a few more lots if if we can agree
to them like
[31:01] » We did pitch that to them yesterday.
>> If you take a couple more lots, we'll
[31:05] kind of basically almost give you this
lot if you take three more lots or
[31:08] something.
>> Um that's the the unique uniqueness of
[31:12] that lot is troublesome for Northstar
even
[31:15] because the price is high. It's 5,000
more than we're asking for other lots
[31:20] cuz it's a bigger lot
and with those
[31:24] um
square footage requirements, it makes
[31:28] the home build a lot more expensive.
So Northstar prefers some of the smaller
[31:32] lots and the the I think it's Waters
Edge third that don't have the covenants
[31:37] that have square footage requirements on
them.
[31:40] So if we could find a work around to the
covenants and come up with a price, I
[31:45] think they'd be willing to play ball,
but as it stands today with what they
[31:48] know about it, it's
they wouldn't be able to make it work
[31:51] for the grant funding they get on their
homes.
[31:53] » And whether it's council that makes the
decision or whatnot, I I think I'd be
[31:59] interested to see if can we package that
somehow with them and
[32:03] » Yeah, if you're going to take three more
lots, we'll give you that one for half
[32:06] the price or something just to get rid
of it and have a wholesale on it.
[32:10] Yeah.
>> The interesting part is I don't think
[32:14] I don't think we can change the
covenants on the rest of the
[32:17] development.
>> That would be my question is is because
[32:19] of the covenants there is
is it feasible?
[32:23] I like I I mean is it actually feasible
because if they're having trouble with
[32:27] it, I mean just not based on price but
with the layout of how the house has to
[32:30] be, would it be a
>> They're
[32:33] It's not feasible for them cost wise not
for
[32:36] » why don't we say hey, we're okay with
that cost wise and they say it's 5 grand
[32:39] more.
Why don't we Okay.
[32:42] Say it's 15 grand.
That's the difference and it's the same
[32:46] money for them to build.
To be flush with that square foot.
[32:51] Would we be money ahead?
[32:54] You know, instead of 40 grand, it's 20
or 15.
[32:58] » Well, that's what I was saying. Like if
they if we if we come to an agreement
[33:01] that they buy two or three more that we
give them that lot for like half the
[33:04] price and include it in with a
whole bundle, you know?
[33:09] I don't know. And but I mean you look at
it as a park and then well, that's going
[33:12] to cost more money, too, because then
you've got to put the put a park in
[33:16] Well, and that's not cheap to put all
that playground equipment.
[33:18] » That one's actually really close to Nash
Park. Yeah, Reed and I were just looking
[33:21] at a map. Um it's right across Like two
blocks two blocks away.
[33:27] » Yeah, wouldn't make any sense.
>> Yeah.
[33:29] » So so the house building the house there
is feasible. It's just not feasible at
[33:33] the price at which the lot is at.
>> it's price wise from what I understand,
[33:36] right?
>> Cost prohibitive.
[33:38] » Yeah, because of the square footage
requirements, right? Yeah, I think it's
[33:41] 1,800 square feet minimum two stall
attached garage is what the covenants
[33:46] call for for it the square footage. When
you get to that size,
[33:50] the way that North Country Neighbors
builds their homes, they're getting
[33:53] Minnesota housing grant funding for it,
which requires that it be built with
[33:58] full accessibility and full energy star
certification. So it's already more
[34:03] expensive home build as it is.
>> True.
[34:05] » And then you have to if you have to meet
those square footage requirements, it
[34:09] just it all kicks what they can get in
grant funding.
[34:12] Um
>> Let's see what
[34:15] I'm thinking about it that way.
>> Yeah, I'm thinking about
[34:17] » mean like where they say it's no, and we
say no, okay, well, we're back to the
[34:21] same boat.
>> Right.
[34:23] » Yeah.
>> You know, and I I don't I wouldn't push,
[34:27] you know, if you got if you buy these
two, we'll do this.
[34:31] You know, like Jenner's Jerry fireworks
or something. Yeah, I would
[34:34] » A bug going in.
>> Let's just concentrate on one and
[34:36] » Yeah.
>> Cuz if they if they're going to build
[34:40] more, they're going to buy more anyway.
>> That's good.
[34:44] » How does this work to partner with you
to
[34:47] get this done?
>> Before there's nothing to partner with.
[34:50] » Correct.
>> What do we have to do in order to get
[34:52] you to get take this off?
>> we do to help you help ourselves? You
[34:57] » Is that something that we can ask him
then is is what do we need to do?
[35:00] » That's the direction
That's the direction we're going to go.
[35:03] » Okay.
[35:05] I'm good with that.
Do you need a motion or something?
[35:08] » Sure, cuz nothing's happening. Yeah,
it's just
[35:10] » All right.
>> Okay.
[35:12] » Wow.
>> Look at us.
[35:14] » Motion to adjourn.
>> I'll move.
[35:17] » Second.
[35:20] » It's always quick.
>> Benny.
[35:23] » Are you sure we should go?
>> I'm sure.
[35:25] » By the way,
I got
[35:28] easy a poop yesterday.
On my back seller.
[35:32] » Oh, yeah?