Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 12 2011 EDA Minutes 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes December 12, 2011 1. CALL TO ORDER President Hedberg called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Present were Hedberg, Hitchcock, Morris, Choudek and Myser, Community & Economic Development Director Rogness, Executive Director Boyles. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION BY MYSER, SECOND BY CHOUDEK TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Hitchcock, Morris, Choudek and Myser. The motion carried. 3. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES MOTION BY MYSER, SECOND BY MORRIS TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 28, 2011 AND DECEMBER 5, 2011 MEETINGS AS PRESENTED. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Hitchcock, Morris, Choudek and Myser. The motion carried. 4. PUBLIC HEARING No public hearing was scheduled. 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Broadband Consultant Selection. Rogness: reviewed the two proposals that were submitted by Design Nine and Lookout Point Communica- tions. He reminded the EDA members that they had requested further information from each of the two broadband consultants to include their work plan proposal and associated cost. Design Nine’s proposal in- cluded 135-150 hours of time at a cost of $19,900. Lookout Point’s proposal included 420 hours of time at a cost of $52,000 with an additional $25,000 for legal/design work. Rogness indicated that these proposals were requested without a detailed Request for Proposals (RFP) process; rather, they came to the city as a follow up request to their initial Request for Qualifications (RFQ) submissions. EDA commissioners: discussed at length various aspects of the two broadband consulting proposals. As they reviewed each proposal, the commissioners began to question what they really wanted at the end of this process and which proposal helped them best to get there. They also discussed various approaches related to businesses versus residents and city-wide versus targeted areas. The commissioners came to the realization that they could not select a consultant until they had a better agreement upon what they want as the end product from a consultant. Therefore, they asked staff to talk with Eric Lampland of Look- out Point about his interest in working with them initially on a time and materials cost basis. Lampland would attend the EDA’s January meeting to help the commissioners identify the end goal and product. Boyles: Asked the commissioners to identify their questions related to broadband in Prior Lake as a way to help Eric Lampland understand their issues. Those questions included:  What successes and failures exist for establishing public private partnerships and what lessons do they offer?  Is Prior Lake unique, and if so, how? What does it mean for our project?  Do we want to build the system community-wide or targeted incrementally to businesses or residents?  What are the various approaches to build the system?  Will customers support it with their money?  Are there similar urban communities with three existing providers who have made such a system work?  Are there systems close to Prior Lake that have either failed or succeeded?  Are there better or worse private partners?  Is there a way to do a potential problem analysis?  Is it an asset or a liability that our business areas are small and spread out?  Are there key variables that make for a successful project?  Is SMSC included in the city’s analysis?  Are there city services that can be offered on the fiber either as a service enhancement or a revenue generator?  What information will convince people (EDA, City Council, general public) to move ahead with this? EDA Commissioners: requested that the Broadband Advisory Subcommittee join them for the discussion with Eric Lampland on January 9, 2012. 6. NEW BUSINESS A. (1) EDAC Report Rogness: reviewed a list of topics for EDAC discussion in 2012, including its review of the recent Meet-N- Greet comments (i.e., business area signage, Farmer’s Market location, city business friendliness), a con- tinuation of the business surveys in Deerfield Park, and a review of the Maxfield Commercial/Industrial market study. Choudek: asked whether the EDA should consider giving more direction to the EDAC on topics. (2) Broadband Fiber Network Report Rogness: explained that this item was part of the discussion with Agenda Item 5.A (3) Technology Village Incubator Report Rogness: summarized the status of its review of a framework and its tour of the old NOREX building. Hitchcock: reviewed more details of the subcommittee’s process related to the framework and its plan to meet again with the owners of the old NOREX building. Myser: requested that the subcommittee return with a program evaluation and business plan that would help identify the best strategies for a business incubator in Prior Lake rather than jumping to an initial con- clusion on one particular building. B. Resolution Adopting the 2012 EDA Budget Boyles: reviewed information presented in a staff report by Jerilyn Erickson that shows the proposed 2012 operating budget of $137,923 reflecting a use of reserves in that amount, leaving approximately $202,077 in the Economic Development Authority Special Revenue Fund. MOTION BY CHOUDEK, SECOND BY HITCHCOCK TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION ADOPTING 2012 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BUDGET. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Hitchcock, Morris, Choudek and Myser. The motion carried. 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Draft January 9, 2012 Agenda ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY CHOUDEK, SECOND BY HITCHCOCK TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. With all in favor, the meeting adjourned at 5:55 p.m. Frank Boyles, Executive Director 2