This link. No excerpt. Read it all at ABC Newspapers site. While it remains online.
______________UPDATE______________
One hard truth the city has not considered, and should look at, is that Jim Deal is responsible for the VA center. He built it. He, alone, is responsible for Allina, it being on land he sold them. Nobody should discount his input to thinking while the Governor and staff were writing this last session's bonding bill, wherein Ramsey got four million in State money to advance the Northstar stop proposals from a mere idea, to construction later this year. Never forget --- Deal was most instrumental in the second of two (2) restaurants opening at Town Center. It is in his building. He did it all. All the heavy lifting. Because he is no amateur. He knows how to attain results. All the Landform and staff effort achieved was the grossly subsidized Flaherty rental adventure out of Indiana, which still is hanging fire. Perhaps it is time for those wise on the council to sound out Jim Deal on whether he'd buy the remaining distrssed mess land and develop it, if so what he'd pay - his terms and conditions - including how big a loss the city would take to cut its losses and get out of private sector things, leaving development to those experienced.
____________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
In responding to an email, Nelson has broken down by task area her activities:
10%-TIF
70%-HRA
10%-EDA
10%-General Fund-Admin
I have not inquired into how Ulrich's time would be allocated among task areas, and for a CEO that question might be irrelevant since the CEO is the chief professional-staff policy person, for the city as in the private sector where a board of directors sets general things but otherwise basically keeps hands off detail operations.
Certainly the City is nobody's sole proprietorship, or partnership, despite how James Norman during his tenure may have viewed things and how the Gang of Three now operates. Small business analogs are inapplicable to larger sized ventures.
Ramsey has an EDA, an HRA, and general tax levies to go with taxation by the other two. Present council has imposed a liability for a transit district tax on the order of $290,000 annually, subject to change without city control of such a change. Running bus service before this tax change has been suggested as an offset, but that was a discretionary money sink, this one now becomes mandatory what with the Northstar stop being put into Ramsey. It's now a married-to budget item, without possibility of divorce.
Because of bonding hand waving, the EDA owns title to the City Hall [Norman Castle] and the City pays rent to the EDA in an amount sufficient to service the interest and debt retirement on the EDA's bonding to build the structure as it is.
Beyond that the EDA does TIF stuff, and has personnel that overlap but do not duplicate [and additionally compensate the council members, unlike HRA which is just another taxing entity with same folks sitting under different "hats and name tags" and paid further stipends, with mayor being paid more than other council members and as I understand it the HRA chair being paid a slightly higher amount than other council/HRA members].
Anytime cutting expense [and taxes] for "Ramsey" is at issue, it is disingenuous to not aggregate, but to talk as if the left hand does not know what the right is doing, [and with taxpayers paying for each of however many hands are outstretched].
In terms of professional staff, Lund and Olson each represent technical specialities which neither Nelson nor Ulrich, as generalists, could take over. Each post is imperative to keep. Also, Olson has consistently been one of the more open and informative officials the city has had, from times of James Norman's tenure, to the present. The same can be said for Lund. City Clerk Thieling has specific duties, and no city I know of in the entire state has gotten along without a city clerk overseeing elections, records, and related duties. I cannot see any of those positions being eliminated, and if the mayor and colleagues want to get into pay cuts they should remember that just as in the private sector, there is a premium required to attract and keep top-tier talent and if not paid, the talent level drops. The old phrase cautioning against being penny wise and pound foolish comes to mind, as instructive of better thinking.
That leaves Aaron Backman, TIF and Economic Development specialist, who could expand duties should one of the two administrators be fired.
Or if Landform is finally declared to have cost much and failed, less Assistant Administrator duties with HRA would ensue from a "sit tight, hold down expense, and wait" strategy, or from one seeking to unload the Town Center property even if at a loss to the city, selling to a private sector risk taker, instead of folks from the council table talking one-on-one with Darren trying to be developers with taxpayers holding risk for that. Such a reform would free up a major portion of Assistant Administrator time, should the council decide to release Backman after having decided bare months ago to recruit for the post and to hire Backman as the most promising available person.
It seems that the City has no actual and sound option than to cut Landform/HRA costs, and to unload that bothersome land to the private sector, even if at a loss. It may not be something that can be accomplished tomorrow, or within the next five years, but sitting tight and cutting the bleeding is not to be ignored as a rational choice.
Also, since present Landform effort deviates greatly from the walkable-community thinking originally involved, looking instead to multiple store sites each with substantial auto-friendly parking lots, the notion that this shopping center and office park promotion stuff differs greatly from any other has been gutted and scrapped. So, being no different, and with the others sitting tight and waiting to follow the market, what's cause to do otherwise? What's Landform done to uniquely justify the cash drain it has been? What with signs and rebranding and attending Las Vegas conventions being costs, entirely, and not returns of any kind on cash spent?
BIG QUESITON: How can the bunch that caused all the Landform waste to ever happen by buying the failed thing at too great a cost from the banks now credibly posture as "fiscal conservatives" in ramping up to this fall's elections? I don't believe that being autocratic about staff cost when it's already been pared to the bone is a legitimate thing, but it's what the three of them are doing. The track record is against them. Matt Look had sense to see that in chasing the bigger paycheck, and bailing when he did on the effort he was so instrumental in fostering.
Are they going to use the Vietnam [and now Iraq approach]? Call it a success and get the hell out?
It will be interesting to see what Ulrich proposes and what the Gang of Three responds, and whether their politicking for reelection can gain a fourth vote to reach yet another ill-advised 4-3 cramdown.
These are the same people who never said peep when the cost of the Norman Castle was being incurred sitting on council now crying over debt service cost that went with it being built, something apparent to all at that time, and now they oppose having a referendum on the cost of Landform. Dev Crabgrass has consistently wanted a referendum each time.
And each time a referendum would likely have forestalled great waste.
_____________FURTHER UPDATE_______________
One thing Sakry did not report, and I only learned today: Without changing the voting makeup of the HRA, Colin McGlone was named new chair of the HRA, replacing David Elvig, who was named by the HRA to take over when David Jeffrey resigned. I am unaware whether this indicates any policy redirection of the HRA, or whether the change is strictly administrative. I presume the latter.