The Carroll City Council voted 5-1 at Monday’s meeting to schedule the public hearing on a proposed development agreement and urban renewal area for Ziegler Equipment. Nearly 2.5 years ago, the city annexed property just west of Carroll to build a new location for the company. Multiple factors, primarily slowdowns in Iowa’s ag economy, hindered the project’s progress, but City Manager Aaron Kooiker says Ziegler is now ready to proceed.
The city’s investment in the project is $1.1 million, to be provided in the form of a 20-year forgivable loan to Ziegler for the infrastructure installation. The agreement would finalize the equipment dealer’s plans to construct a 7,400-square-foot retail and warehouse facility with an actual value of at least $5.5 million. The site will also bring a minimum of six new jobs to Carroll. Ward 2 Councilman Jason Atherton says the city’s proposed investment has remained roughly the same throughout negotiations, but the project’s scope has shrunk considerably compared to the initial offer.
Ward 4 Councilwoman Carolyn Siemann raised a point of order to Atherton’s question, noting the agenda calls only for the setting of a public hearing, not debate over the terms of the agreement itself. Kooiker says it can be challenging to compare development agreements head-to-head, as site selection, job creation, infrastructure needs, and more all play significant roles in the process. He uses the Echo agreement as an example.
In Echo’s case, there was already existing infrastructure nearby their site, so the city’s investment by default would be lower than for a new installation. The council voted 5-1, Atherton being the sole nay vote, to schedule the public hearing for the May 26 meeting. Near the end of Monday’s meeting, Ward 1 Councilwoman Deb Koster noted recent concerns about the city’s transparency involving economic development negotiations and how proposals are presented. She cited the Golfview Development Agreement with Kerkhoff Kraftsmen Inc. She noted that the developer had signed an agreement before the council’s meeting. However, that signed version was not presented to city officials. Kooiker says he cannot say for certain why the signed copy was not included in the council’s packet, but generally speaking, city staff will always bring a pre-agreed-upon contract to the council for consideration. He says it would be disadvantageous to the city to have the council consider an agreement without the other party having already been committed. A link to Monday’s council meeting video is included with this story on our website.
______
