News, sports, politics, blogs and forums for International Falls, Minnesota • (218) 285-7411

International Falls, Minnesota

Click to Login
No account? Sign up!

Advertising

Advertising

City may reestablish its own EDA, By LAUREL BEAGER, Editor


» Read similar stories filed under:

International Falls EDA would be lead agency in economic development efforts

International Falls will refocus its efforts and resources by resurrecting the city’s economic development authority.
The International Falls City Council Tuesday proposed a draft amendment to its strategic plan that would redefine the city’s relationship with the Koochiching Economic Development Authority and define members of a city EDA.
The council is expected to vote on the proposal when it meets Sept. 15 to allow a vote of the full membership. Councilors Gail Rognerud and Paul Eklund were absent from Tuesday’s meeting.
Councilor Tim “Chopper” McBride, who serves as the chairman of the city’s Economic Development Committee, said the council agreed to get aggressive on economic development when it met three years ago to discuss changes to the city’s strategic plan.
While the city agrees that the KEDA has value, McBride said the agency needs to be changed. The city will continue to play a role in the KEDA when collaboration between governments is needed, if the amendment is adopted, McBride said.
Instead, the city will use its own EDA to help draw development and expansion to the area.
McBride said the city’s EDA Committee would not be political and would be made up of area citizens who are successful entrepreneurs and finance specialists, one elected city official and at least one citizen at large. The group would advise and recommend projects and actions to the EDA, which would be made up of the council.
Mayor Shawn Mason noted that the draft amendment would define the Falls EDA as the lead agency for efforts within the city.
The city would support efforts by the KEDA to expand cold weather testing and the countywide Small Business Development Center, which is located in the KEDA office, she added.
The proposal also calls for the KEDA Board to meet with Minnesota Rep. Tom Anzelc and Sen. Tom Saxhaug to discuss the KEDA’s structure and future. Mason said the political model of the KEDA “is ill.”
“The city needs to make sure it’s in control of its own destiny,” Mason said.
Rob Boyd, a former member of the KEDA, credited the council for moving forward with the city EDA. The city deserves its own EDA, based on the city’s economic viability and population, compared to other communities in the county, he said.
“We need economic development now and we need economic diversity now,” he told the council.
In other business Tuesday, the council heard from Joe Boyle, attorney, who said the city will await a decision regarding Minnesota Highway 332 from Minnesota Transportation Commission Tom Sorel.
An earlier decision, which has been withdrawn, was the basis for lawsuit against Sorel and the state. As a result of the withdrawal, the court dismissed the case brought by the city and said it may seek relief should Sorel issue a decision that the city again disagrees with.
The council also heard from Councilor Cynthia Jaksa, chairman of the city’s Finance and Legislation Committee, that the council is expected to adopt a 2009 levy that is much lower than the amount collected from taxpayers this year.
Jaksa said the council could see a $300,000 decrease in the amount it collects from city taxpayer in 2009 compared to 2008. The council must set a proposed levy by Sept. 15, according to state law. The proposed levy may be reduced after that, but not increased.
The council agreed to support a subordination agreement involving a building owned by Daniel and Deborah Griffith at 343 Third St. The council agreed to a deferred loan repayment agreement for $19,148, which includes forgiveness of the debt after 10 years and a revolving loan mortgage for $9,573 which includes deferred payments for five years, with monthly payments after that for five yeas at 2-percent increase.
The action will allow the Griffiths to make improvements to an apartment within the building.
The council also approved a 2-percent hourly wage increase, retroactive to Jan. 1, for clerical and public works employees represented by the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 49.

Advertisement. Article continues below.




Although I agree that the...

Back to page top

Although I agree that the city is indeed moving in the right direction in regards to forming it's own EDA, I question that if the city, "agreed to get aggressive on economic development when it met three years ago to discuss changes to the city’s strategic plan.", why is it now three years later that something is being done?

KEDA was setup legislatively, with spots for both the county and the city to participate on the Board. But regardless of that fact, why would that ever be a reason to not have our own Economic Development Authority at the same time? The KEDA is there to promote economic development across the entire county, which is needed county wide, there is no doubt. But International Falls needs to promote economic development across all of International Falls as well! How is it a good thing to put all of our "eggs" in one basket, and not work things from multiple angles? Competition isn't always a BAD thing!

Again - an International Falls EDA is a single baby step in the right direction. But much, much, more has got to be done - and any plans that are set in motion, should have a solid long range plan on how we are going to get there, to back it up. One that includes planning for addressing some huge issues that are plaguing the city right now, such as housing, infrastructure, education, and of course health care – all of which have direct ties to economic development. We can’t just put a smile on our face, tell people we are a great place to live, and expect people to just be lining up to open up a business here.

Rob Boyd said it best - we need economic development and diversity - NOW. But it's going to take a lot more than just our own EDA to get it.

Finally, I have a real quick response in regards to the possible $300,000 reduction in taxes for the taxpayers of International Falls.

In 2008 we were certified to receive Local Government Aid (LGA) in the amount of $3,386,933. Now that total for 2009 is projected to be close to $4.2 Million. Now I know that for 2009 there has been a cap put on the amount that the city can levy - and that it essentially has bitten into that LGA increase. But something to think about:

Here is a quote from MPR back in June that quotes our City Administrator Rod Otterness, "Otterness says International Falls already runs a tight ship and an aid increase is badly needed. He says some of the city's streets and sidewalks are in rough shape and need fixing, but the city can't afford it.

"We had been expecting increased aid," Otterness said. "We had been deferring projects and spending some of our reserves in anticipation of increased aid. But now we're unable to take care of those deferred matters, because levy limits came along with it."

Well my response to that is this. If we are being fiscally responsible and running a "tight ship" - how do we allow ourselves to rely on LGA for almost 30% of our cities Operating Budget? What other expenses are taking priority over simple infrastructure such as maintaining our city streets and sidewalks? Now I am not an expert by any means on the ins and outs of how International Falls has been managed in the past in regards to fiscal and project responsibilities, and Rod Otterness is about as sharp as you can get when it comes to a government administrator. But some further investigation needs to be done.

So when the city dangles a $300,000 tax savings carrot in front of the tax payers (on an election year) - they realize at what price they are truly paying for that tax break. Is it more projects that are being deffered? Perhaps more city streets and sidewalks that are going to stay in rough shape? And god forbid we might want to consider that the state could possibly continue to make budget cuts in the coming years, and not only continues to cap the available levy for cities, but then also reduces the amount of LGA we receive. Leaning on the state for almost 30% of our budget just seems problematic – but maybe that’s just me.

It’s time that we take a good hard look at ourselves – and ask if we perhaps haven’t been operating this city, above our fair city’s ability to pay for it, and doing it with our eyes wide open.

~Allen Kruse


Submitted by allen_kruse on September 3, 2008 - 9:39pm.


Recent comments

Advertising

Advertising

Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 576 guests online.

Who's new

  • bobbyrick
  • Hashim Amla
  • sparky84
  • martysharp2
  • ifallsgirl

Today's Poll


» Read similar stories filed under:


1

Advertising