HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMinutes_2008_01_29 483
Brookings City Council
January 29, 2008
The Brookings City Council held a special meeting on Tuesday,January 29,2008 at 2:00 p.m.,at the
1921 building in joint session with the Brookings County Commission. The following city members
were present: Mayor Scott Munsterman, Council Members Julie Whaley,Mike Bardey,Ryan
Brunner (2:09 p.m.),Tim Reed,Tom Bezdichek (2:25 p.m.), and Gingex Thomson. City Manager
Jeffrey Weldon,City Attorney Steve Britzman, and City Clerk Shari Thornes were also present.
The group discussed the following issues in a work session setting: Brookings County Rail
Authority (Mission—improving safery and rail service);Update on Transportation District Bill (Rail
Corridor TIF Project);Future Growth Needs fot the Brookings Region: 34`t'Avenue Improvement
Project, Overpass and Interchange Plans - DOT Discussion and Strategy Update, Innovation
Campus Infrastructure Improvements, County Industrial Park;and Joint Space Collabotation:
Creating Opportunities fox Efficiency. No action was taken by either governing body.
Brookings County Rail AuthoritX. Mayor Munsterman and County Commissioner pon Larson
met and have developed a concept for review and discussion. The Rail Authority would draw upon
broad representation for a county-wide xegional approach. The proposal would create a Rail
Authority with regional representation for a total of 11 representatives: Brookings County (3), City
of Bxookings (3),Township (1),Volga (1), Elkton (1),Aurora (1), and Arlington (1).
Munsterman asked States Attorney Mark Kratochvil for his opinion if the current Rail Authority
could be used to carry out this mission. He suggested the following draft mission statement for a
Rail Authority: "Promotion and Development of a comprehensive long term rail safety and service
plan." Kratochvil said the current Rail Authority could be modified to provide for involvement of
the City as well as other involvements of the county. The City could become a member of the Rail
Authoxity.
Munsterman said this idea has a lot to do with the former Railroad Ad Hoc Committee. They
identified collaboration as a mission and goal to puxsue.
Thomson asked what the boundaries would be. Kratochvil xesponded that it would be a Bxookings
County Rail Authority. Laxson noted that the overall goal is the fact that safery is an issue but not
just for the county or city,but includes small towns and townships. This pxoposal would erase some
of those boundary concepts and get everyone working together as a county to accomplish specific
goals.
Dennis Falken, County Commissioner, asked why the proposal had three city and three county
reptesentatives and only one from the other cities.
(Brunner arrived at 2:09�im)
Larson said nothing is etched in stone and is presented for discussion. The goal is to have
representation for everyone in and outside of Brookings ciry limits.
Whaley asked if the entities would open it up for applications to be on the Rail Authority.
Munsterman said the city appointments would follow the usual appointments process. The other
governing bodies would appoint their representatives.
Reed asked what the next step was. Larson said the County and Ciry of Volga was the original Rail
Authority. The Rail Authority would need to meet and agree to expand theit membership.
Kratochvil said the agreement could be amended to pxovide for additional members/representation.
Bardey asked what capacity the existing Rail Authority has serviced, specifically,what projects has it
worked on. Falken said the SD Soybean Processors plant in Volga. T'he Ciry of Volga boxrowed
funds from the railroad fund for the spur between Brookings and Volga. Another project is the
expansion of the SD Soybean Processors Plant infrastructure for rail car storage and biodiesel
facility. � .
Bardey said if the Rai.l Authority's scope is expanded,it would now include safety which wasn't really
there before. Its mission has been infrastructure projects. The Rail Authority also has taxing
authority and he doesn't know what it has in place right now. Is that property tax only? Does state
484
law allow or prevent sales tax use on a Rail Authority? Kratochvil said the Regional Rail Authority
doesn't have ta�ng authority.
Bardey asked if there are any joint issues with respect to properry taxes in any cities or townships
involved. All are referable if using property taxes as a funding mechanism. Kxatochvil cited a
limitation that the Rail Authority cannot levy taxes without the approval of the government
members.
Bardey said it will be important as the mission statement is developed to understand the Rail
Authority's past projects and that those haven't been related to safety or a service plan.
Larson said that two rail authorities aren't needed. We should have one for the city and one for the
county. It's best to erase the boxders and get everyone involved.
Munsterman said the strategy at addressing a Rail Authority is to create a fair process. The proposed
Transportation District Bill (SB183) started out as an idea to capture enough funds if long-texm
strategy for rail safety demands a lot of money (i.e. depressed rail,bypass). The idea was to create a
Tax Increment Finance District along the entire corridor to capture funds in the rail development
process. T'he scope of the bill changed because cities are losing road funding, so it was written to
include rail and roads. Munsterman noted that SB183 passed out of committee on a 6/1 due pass
vote and is expected on the Senate floor sometime the week of Feb. 7�'.
Synopsis of the bill:
• Provides local governments the ability to elect to use a tool to solve funding issues pertaining to
transportation (rail and road):
o Federal and State DOT funds are `drying up'
o Future funding availability will be questionable
o Addition of Air transportation was suggested by Arne Brown
• Allows for the expansion of the district across political boundaries addressing a wide range of
needs across the state
o Rural communities need road improvements
o Urban communiries are expanding and need new roads '�
• Fle�bility provides a wide range of local projects: road,rail or transportation services, etc. '
(Section 1.11)
• Elected positions serve on the district governing board
• Citizens within the district have the power to refer any t�measure �
• District must establish a five year capital improvement pla.n,prioririzing pxojects which are.
meaningful to the region '
o Promoting a higher level of efficiency of funds used on the local level '
• Revenue neutral to the state as a whole;and may be argued it will lessen the burden on the State '
DOT funds by allowing local control of prioritizing and funding the needed projects
• A much needed tool for communities like Brookings and Pierre—communities who have
serious safety and quality of life challenges with the rail expansion. This would provide a strong
revenue source for large projects;such as a bypass—again, the people locally would be in control
of making that decision.
I
Larson said the general idea was okay,but it must be clear so as not to create another layet. Citizens '
and local governments must be able to understand it. He wants to prevent entities being confused
on who has jurisdiction. .
(BeZdichek arrived 2:25 pm) I'�
Bartley said both proposals serve the same funcrion and we could end u with conflicts or overla . �!
p p
One entity may tax and it's referred;the other entity taxes and isn't referred. Munsterman said he
posed the same question to Todd Meierhenry who drafted the bill.
Bardey was concerned that two funding sources for public benefit would end up as a losing
proposition. Munsterman said this is in the planning stages. A new bill takes time,possibly two to
three years. I
I
Future Growth Needs. Munsterman reviewed a draft proposal for a 34�'.Avenue and 20`h Street ��i
Overpass Project to improve traffic flow and safety to the Industrial Park. It would consist of a 3- '
I
485
mile extension of 34`�Avenue south, an overpass on 20`'' Street, and an interchange. A traffic study
would be necessary to qualify for funding. HDR Engineering out of Sioux Falls has submitted a
proposal for study. The State Department of Transportation is updating their traffic lighting plan
for 2009. A consultant has been hired by BEDC to help move this project along.
Dennis Micko, Banner Enginering,has done the preliminary work on this project working with a
gxoup East of I-29 organized by A1 Kurtenbach,Daktronics,who recognizes the traffic problems.
The survey data found 2,500-3,000 employees per day creating traffic ptoblems on off-ramps of I-
29,which results in motoxists not being able to get off of I-29 at e�t#132. The focus of the study
has been to solve the problems the manufactuxers have and also to look at the bigget picture.
Micko said the community has talked about a 32"`'Street South interchange for years,but it's not
even on the state's 10 year plan. There are discussions with the DOT looking at correcting the
current traffic problem with short-term solutions and longer range options. Howevex,he thinks
those options such as signals at the I-29 off-ramp or 32°a Avenue are band-aid solutions. The logical
connection for xesidents on the west side is a 20`h Street overpass. A traffic study will be needed
regardless of how we move forwatd. The reason for preparing the document is to have something
to show to the players. This document can be used in conjunction with the traffic study.
Weldon said the estimated cost for a traffic study from HDR is $138,500. It may be possible to
reduce the project scope and reduce the cost. The City would take any pattners in helping fund this
study. Council review of this item is on February 12`''.
Falken said there has been talk about�an overpass fox 10 years. With the extension of 34`� to 32nd'
would that affect the possibility of something on 20`'' Street South if it fi�ced the issue ot made access
on 34`h? Micko said there are differing opinions. The goal is to connect 34�' to 32°d,improve the
road east and provide residents othex options.
Falken noted that was a township road. Micko said projects are bumped by the state every yeax
based on need and we have a documented need. Falken followed up saying if the ciry doesn't have a
study we can't get on the list.
Munsterman said the city will need help with these transportation issues (an overpass, 34�'Avenue).
Micko noted that the first phase would be haxd surfacing 20`� Street to 32"a
Larson noted two major fundamental issues: limited resouxces (sexvice&providing better service)
and safety (traffic problems east of I-29). Thexe are several projects with critical needs and the
County has limited resources. Safety is the real issue,which involves both entities of government.
Micko noted that it would be a long shot to get"earmark"money.
Whaley asked what the estimated cost would be fox all four projects. Micko said estimated cost for
all four is $12,500,000. The interchange would be$6M today.
Research Park Infrastructure/Loo�nroiect.
Munsterman introduced Teresa McKnight to speak on this topic. McKnight distributed a ptoposal
with four options for considexation. In oxder to recnut and attract business, the innovation campus
needs infxastructure in place.
Scenario #1: Cutrent Status—double roadway off 22°d Avenue to roundabout and extending to
Innovation Center Building entrance. Includes all utilities to Innovation Center Building. Includes
utilities only (water, sewer, stoxm drainage, electrical,gas, telephone and data) to the Seed Tech
Building—estimated cost-$1,082,400. She noted that they have the funding in place to install now.
Scenario #2: Road to Seed Tech Building—extension of road from roundabout north to Seed Tech
Building and e�ting back onto 22"d Ave. Includes road, curb,gutter, sidewalk and all utilities (water,
sewex, storm drainage, electrical,gas, telephone and data)—estimated cost-$709,530.
Scenario#3: Road to Seed Tech Building and Gravel Roadway around remaining outside and inside
common roadway—Extension of gravel roadway around remainuig outside and inside common
roadways. Includes grading,base,utilities and storm drainage—estimated cost-$1,523,500.
Scenario #4: Full Completed Loop and Infrastructure—Entire site,which includes roadway, curb,
gutter, sidewalks,water, sewer, storm drainage, electrical,gas, telephone and data —estimated cost—
$4,478,745.
486
McKnight asked the group to look and consider the magnitude and public/private investment fox a
total build-out of the entire 125 acres.
She said thexe are over 200 research parks in the United States and Canada. It's important for the
elected officials to understand the amount of companies that locate at these parks, the number of
employees they hire, and the total economic impact to a community.
NDSU created a 50 acre park in 2000. To date, over 60 people are employed for one company with
an average salary ovex$55,OOOK. T'he total estimated economic impact is $128,000 resulting in a
direct contribution of$2.6 million to the tax base.
McKnight said if we don't have everything in place,we'll loose these companies and opportunities.
Companies will be attracted to the connection with the university and the proximity to I-29 and the
park will be successful.
Mary Negstad, County Commissioner,asked if there was a funding commitment from the state for �'�
the infrastructure. McKnight said the state pxovided a portionfor the initial infxastructuxe and part ,
of the first building. The question is do we wait for the state or get the ball rolling now to atttact
these businesses? '
Reed asked if lots were available now in Phase 1. Yes,howevex there are no roads. I
McKnight said realisrically a large company or developer who wants 5 patcels,the ideal locarion for '
a cluster is the far southeast paxcel of the park. She can't market to that type of client and say it will
be years before we have a road there for you.
Reed asked if there is an average number of lots per company in a research paxk. No. �I!
Falken asked in the long range plan for the park if it be at full-capaciry in 20 years. WiII the hot and �
cold weather affect the longevity of unoccupied roads? No,there will be traffic on the roads. ''
Munsterman said Option 3 may be the best way to start. The roads are surfaced but she could still
drive clients around and there'd be water and sewex installed. The TIF Disrict can help begin to
fund it.
Larson commented on option 3,that the money needs to be stretched and do as much as we can �
with limited resources. If McKnight is able to recruit the right company, thexe should be a '
contingency plan to facilitate and bring a completed road up to them to meet their needs. �'
Bardey asked if this would cxeate a footprint that wasn't alterable. Sometimes it's not realistic to �,
plan 15-20 years because things will deteriorate before development. Will the Seed Tech Building
locate in the northwest corner? Yes,and they've already sold a site a distance from headquarters '
with better visibility and access for their trucks.
Bartley expressed concern that things change over 20 yeaxs. Munsterman commented that it's the '
"chicken or the egg." The Growth Partnership Board hired consultants who provided a xeport on '
the layout,hired an executive director,who has in turn, offered advice on how this park should be '
laid out.
Larson said that we've worked with the city utilities and Banner&Assoc. to create an economy of
scale and would have to defer to them on what is the most efficient way to do it.
Deanna Santema, County Commissioner, said she was in favor,but as a Brookings County 'I
Commissioner she must be concerned and take care of the entire county's needs. She noted that the ,
County doesn't do any work on township roads or for private entities on the lakes. The County has
set precedence that they don't do this. She questioned how this would take precedence over those
other needs.
Munsterman said each governing body needs to understand the gtowth needs and potential and each
have different financial responsibilities. He felt this issue should be a regional approach decided
collectively as a gtoup.
III
i
I
� 487
Larson said no money has been spent. This is a report for each entity to xeceive and mull over and
also for the citizens to see. He sees this not as a problem, but as a challenge.
Reed said everyone needs to look at the park with a different mindset. Rather than looking at ways
to improve or f�cuxrent infrastructure, this is the other side of the balance sheet. Will doing this
infrastructure build-out increase the revenue side with more taxes and people? It helps the county
too.
Larson said fxom the fixst time dixt is turned,we're gauung sales tax revenue. Both sides need to sit
down and talk out how to accomplish this goal that is beneficial to all.
Falken clarified that they're not trying to decide on how much money. It's an information sharing
session to show both entities the paxk's goals and plan to meet the inftastructuxe needs.
Emil Klavetter,County Commissioner, said this issue is much bxoader than just Brookings and we
should seek state earmark funding. Munsterman noted that not much earmaxking is being done.
Bardey asked what funding options were. Tax increment financing, earmarks,bonding authority,
private donations, city and county, opt-out,grants.
Jackie Lanning,City Engineex,noted that there is a 5 year window on a TIF district and the clock is
ticking as of the suminer of 2007.
County Industrial Park. A1 Heuton,BEDC Dixector,presented the group with information,but
indicated that he did not have a funding request. He showed the location of current industrial la.nd
and its availability and geographic limitations for development of future industrial land (i.e.
floodplain, state owned land,utilities,lift stations).
He gave an update on the status of undeveloped industrial land. Just about everything is sold in the
Telkamp Industrial Park. There are 40 acres north of the new DOT land with 10 acres sold and
another industry intexested in the rest. There's 26 acres available in the Wiese Industrial Paxk.
Heuton reviewed the futuxe gYOwth patterns in Brookings.
Elkton has 40 acres.with no utilities,but the site will never have natural gas. Volga is out of land. ,
Arlington has 40 acres on the Kingsbury side and a 6 acre heavy commercial on the Bxookings side
with no util'tttes.
The choices for industrial la.nd are very limited and he is interested in trying to identify other choices
in Brookings Counry. Within the last year he had 17 contacts with different heavy type commercial
ox light industrial business,but had no place to put anyone. He clarified that the BEDC is not in
heavy recruitment mode for that reason. His focus is woxking hasd to keep up with growth o£
e�sting industries,and trying to meet their labor and housing problems.
Bartley commented that the 2020 Comprehensive Plan planned for industrial development (800
acres),but it may be too expensive to do that. The cuxrent parks took a long time to fill and now
they are suddenly filled. T'he entire objective of an industrial park has changed because the concepts
and technology are different. When looking outside the City of Brookings it will be impoxtant to
look at services provided. I-29 is our number one draw and venture too far away from that or utility
access there will be issues.
Munsterman outlined funding options for regional growth plan to include the Innovation Campus
and Industrial Paxk and asked how to move ahead from here.
1. The City of Brookings and Brookings County cooxdinate a joint bond effort to fund the
Innovation Campus Infrastructure and the County Industrial Park, or...
2. Split out the project funding:
• City of Brookings fund the Innovation Campus Infrastructure
• Brooking County fund the County Industrial Park through the BEDC
Weldon said he could put together various funding scenarios and ways to structure the ta�cing
authority (joint bond effoxt).
488
Brookings Government Cam�us Proposal.
Munsterman asked the group where the City and County could work together to find funding. He
noted the growing pains that our economy is having. He asked how to plan for continued success.
He also noted that each entity has identified space needs and presented a proposal for a government
campus, combining the city and county offices in the 1921 building.
The components to the plan are to develop a long-term collaboration between the City of Brookings
and Brookings County through the development of a Government Campus Master Plan. The
campus would consist of a Government Administration Center, Economic Development Center
(BEDC, Chamber/CVB, DB�, and Law Enforcement Center. This would be accomplished
through a space agreement in where possibly the County extension moves into current City Hall
space or other available joint efforts currendy developing and the City expands the use of the Swiftel
Center for convention use in the current County Resource Space.
Munsterman said Swiftel Center representatives will be presenting an expansion proposal to the City
Council on February 12`''with plans to expand into more of a convention facility and part of that
plan would include occupying the current County Extension Resource space. If that were the case,
the Extension Offices could go where City Hall is currendy located as one option. Another idea he
has is an outdoor lifestyle type center that may have some of the mission and focus of Extension.
It's something to think about.
In his proposal,the Brookings Government Administration Center would be located in the 1921
Building. The design layout would be to allow for efficiency and citizen`user friendly'access to city
and county services. Cost efficiencies can be realized through combined offices and services '
coordinating for a higher level of service functions (ie: receptionist, county GIS with city technology
staf£ have already collaborated on employee trauun�. Taxpayers would only invest once in items
such as: technology infrastructure (high speed connection and network),meeting rooms,board
room (with sound system and video system installed),joint public information terminal (access to
public documents, electronic records). Economic Development/Chamber/DBI entities would be
collaboration with local government in the same faciliry.
He pxesented a"Rent-to-Own proposal"in where the city would rent until we are able to buy out
the properties identified as expansion areas within the proposed master plan. Construction of a
Joint Law Enforcement facility would also be within the long range plan.
Munsterman said the ciry's space needs ate currently 20,000 square feet for Ciry Hall. The Ciry isn't '
in dire straights and he noted that the County needs to do something now. The City is sensitive to
this timing issue,but if a collaborarion opportunity is possible,the City would like to pursue one. '
Weldon distributed and reviewed a proforma on a joint city/counry government center. The report '�
has some assumptions. One is that the county needs 21,000 sq. ft. and city needs 19,000 for a total '
of 40,000 sq. ft. He noted that there were several city departments excluded for their space needs
evaluation. Based on the raw needs of 40,000 sq. ft. and a main construction standard of$173/sq.
ft. , the total would be$6.9 million. The$173 figure comes from the County's report. The 1921 '
Building has a bit more space with 55,000 sq. ft. The additional square footage would present
opportunities to bring in other government and economic entities such as the BEDC, Chambet of
Commerce,Downtown Brookings,Inc. Estimated renovation costs based on information from the
owner is $52/sq. ft. Weldon estimates a cost of$364,000 for first floor needs and$1.4 million fox
second floor renovations for a total of$1.8 million. This is also based on an assumption of the
ownex extending the offer for a joint project. The owner has offered a rental rate to the county for
2009 with the idea of selling on Januaty 1,2010. Annual rental rate is estimated at$10/sq. ft.,which
would provide$544,000 in income. The owner had offered to sell for$3.1 Million.
Governance options could include one enrity owning and the other renting,with some common �
area costs. Both could co-own and split out common areas. Both could be handled with a Joint
Powers Agteement.
There would be some parking and site work needed. There's also an oppoxtunity to share a meeting I
room to explore additional savings. i
Thomson asked what the curxent paxking situarion was. Stephanie Vogel,County representative,
said the County owns the lot to the north. The gym has a permanent easement for use of the '
paxking lot. 'I
I
I
489
Weldon said the two entities could work out a wide variety of rental rate options (lease for 5, 10
years, etc.).
Larson noted regarding financing options that public/private ventures would help stretch dollars.
Thomson asked if there was anything we could do with the new Children's Museum. Yes, there are
partnership opportunities with the private sector that could be pursued.
Larson said both entities need to be concerned about its limited resources and oppoxtunities to
stretch all the dollars. The City is investing millions upgrading the downtown streetscape. If a joint
law enforcement center is reasonable, then both entities should collaborate on a sttucture. Cxeating
a new joint administrative center (government campus) helps stretch all the citizens'ta,x dollars.
HIavettex questioned the accuracy of the$52/sq. ft. figure, citing it probably didn't include other
needs of the County such as new elevators, a vault and new restrooms. Are those things included or
would that be extra? Are those figuxes based on general office spaces?
Negstad expressed concern regarcling security from the basement access to the public.
Larson said the two groups are trying to figure out how to fund the research paxk infrastructure.
He said that they can't do one project without affecting another project because neither group has
pools of money. Expansion of the Rail Authority would be for the benefit of the rural residents.
Industrial Paxk expansion would benefit the smaller communities by providing them with more
opportunities. All these issues can't be just Brookings. This is the first step of oux entire
community togethex and part of the ovexall decision-making process.
Reed commented regarding the government complex concept that people expect one-stop shopping
in the same building. Right now people we serve perceive government as too complex and this
center would help.
Thomson asked if state offices could be included. Larson said the subcommittee didn't get that far
yet. It would be important to look at what other government services are provided that would co-
locate in this section of town. They looked at building new,utilizing the 1921 Building and other
buildings in their review of this issue. But there may be other options that they didn't look at.
Thomson asked what other city and county offices are located together in either South Dakota or
the region. None.
The assessed value is $1.7 Million. The project is under the 8-year Historic Tax Moratorium
Program. The city�zeroed out the value on the building to what it was before consttuction was
done.
Weldon said there aten't many combined government centexs,but there axe many combined law
enfoxcement centers. If the two parties proceed with a center, he would recommend forming an
intergovernmerital board between each entity that would determine square footage and costs
associated.
Klavetter said the County's space needs are fairly immediate. He asked how long this plan would
take. The County has made plans to address their space needs and have designated funds towards
that end. They recendy voted to build a new building and plan to proceed and take care of their
space needs in a timely manner. He was concerned the City's proposal would take quite a while.
Munsterman proposed that the City would be ready to move in with the County into the 1921
building by 2009. He apologized for getting the idea to the County so late, but if they see this
option as valuable and if it would save money in the long haul;he encouraged them to consider it.
Each entiry must decide how to use its funds and how those funds are prioritized. The City wanted
to make sure to put this idea on the table for the County to considex. If the County felt it was cause
to reconsider, that would be great.
Klavetter expressed concerns about storage and office space,asking if it was adequate for county
and city. He'd like to know the bottom line numbers because he didn't feel the proposal was high
enough. Munsterman agreed and said if this proposal costs more than new construction,then it
doesn't make sense.
490
Munsterman said that it's not fair to ask the question,but if this proposal looks tike something that
should be explored,would the County be opposed to setting action steps with staff for firm
numbers to be able to assess this and compare to what we're doing.
Klavetter commented that the project would have to be bid,whether it's rented or owned.
There was concern that the income from the second floor wasn't included in the cost analysis. That
income was not taken into consideration.
Bezdichek noted thexe are three potential structures in downtown Bxookings that could provide
space fox the city and county needs; former Kings Wok, Fergens and the bank building at 5`h St and
5`h Ave.
Vogel said the county looked at the bank building but it wasn't big enough. They did not look at the �!
other two buildings.
Doris Roden,DBI Program Manager, said there is a business intetested in the Fexgen's building and I
the owner of the King's Wok building has plans to open a second Chinese restaurant location.
Falken said he wished the proposal had been made two years ago. The County is in a space needs '
crunch right now. The decision has been made to move forward on a new building and to change '
gears now would be difficult. The money has akeady been set aside to move forward with their
plans. The City looked at their space needs after the County did. Each has their own
responsibilities on which way to proceed. The County needs to look at its critical needs. He felt the
County needs to continue to move forwaxd with its plans as it has joint discussions with the City on
this issue.
Munsterman asked when the County is scheduled to be in its new space. Falken said the '
construction will start in 2008 and in the new building by 2009. Munsterman suggested that if the '�
City was able to do its due diligence on costs and the full Council collaborated on what to do, and
was able to arrive at a decision in a 2-3 month time period,how long would it take to do renovations
on the 1921 Building. Would it end up meeting the same timeline of 2009? He agreed that both the
ciry and county want the best use of money. If the numbers make sense, can the City meet the
County's timeline of when it needs to be in a new space?
Falken expressed concern how this could be coordinated in a rimely manner. Munsterman said if �'
the city decided this is what it wanted to do,it could move very quickly and meet that timeline.
'i
Santema asked if the joint law enforcement and state office could move into the 1921 Building and I
the County stay in the Courthouse. Munsterman said there's value to that idea. He suggested both ,
entities be considering this area as a government campus center and work on buying pxoperties ovex
the next 5 to 10 years. � I,
���
Klavetter said the County will be hosting a public meeting to take input on their building plans and �
court services repxesentatives will be there to explain the space issues and their needs. He said the
county has looked at this issue for a year and it hasn't been easy. They will still move ahead with the
public meeting on input and will talk about the new concept. However,he feels they need to
proceed with their plan and move ahead. He said he couldn't answer the Mayor's�question on the 2-
3 month response.
Negstad said she believes the ownex's estimate is based on what he thinks needs to be done and I�
doesn't include what the county needs. She feels the number will be totally different from figures �!
provided today. �,
i
Thomson asked why the Counry doesn't expand within the 1921 Building. I
Larson thanked the Mayor,Weldon and Vogel for working together on this joint effort. He said he �'
found it a rewarding experience. The proposal has now been laid out before boards and the public
with the concept of wotking together and doing things joindy. This brings everyone in the County
into the decision making process.
Munsterman suggested the two groups meet again in 4-5 weeks regarding more infortnation on the �'
scope of the project. In the meantime,both entities can get input from the citizens and evaluate the
feasibility of the proposed timetables.
�
i
491
Klavetter said the County has specific needs that the 1921 Building doesn't have, such as a walk-in
vault.
A1 Kurtenbach thanked the City and County fox having a joint meeting and hoped they would find a
way to collaborate on the fitst three agenda items. He would like to see action going forwaxd on
these areas.
SDSU President David Chicoine said it's time fox the thxee major entities (City,County and
University) to think about how to lock in funds and continue the momentum of growth.
A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Reed, to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 4:18 p.m.
Ciry o rooking
C�j�OF
o����~e�0� ��
�s ��,� .
�= f�q�,9 ��� D. M terman,Mayor
ST: !
Ur
V
Shan hornes, City Clerk