Woolstock to lead urban renewal area for planned county expansion; Wright County supervisors approve consent resolution

The Wright County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to approve a resolution consenting to the City of Woolstock taking the lead on an urban renewal area for a private expansion project near the southeast corner of C-70 and White Fox Road. The board’s action was taken after a presentation from the county’s economic development director and a consultation with Woolstock officials.

Daryl Steven Carlisle, Wright County economic development director, told the board he had been working with a prospect considering expansion in multiple counties and that the firm had decided to locate “here in Wright County at the Southeast Corner Of C 70 and White Fox Road.” Carlisle said the parcel proposed for inclusion in the Woolstock urban renewal area falls within a two-mile radius of the city and that the county had previously contracted with a consultant to study a possible urban renewal district. “It’s a win win win for everybody,” Carlisle said, describing benefits for the prospect, the county and the city.

The resolution before the board asked the county to consent to Woolstock establishing the urban renewal area and to allow the city to administer tax-increment financing and a redevelopment agreement. When asked for an estimated valuation of the project, Carlisle said “right around 2.5,” and he added that the figure would be refined once private parties finalize numbers; the transcript does not specify the units for that figure.

Supervisor discussion focused on the potential local benefits the urban renewal district could provide to Woolstock’s capital needs, including the city’s water treatment plant. Carlisle said the urban renewal approach could help fund a rebuild of that plant while providing tax revenue to Wright County. The board moved to approve “Resolution 2025-20: inclusion of certain property into the 2025 Woolstock Urban Renewal Area,” the motion was seconded, and the roll was recorded as unanimous; the board chair then signed the resolution and order.

The board did not discuss or adopt a redevelopment agreement text in the meeting; Carlisle indicated the city would be the lead on the urban renewal area and that a separate redevelopment/rebate agreement would be handled by the city. The board also did not identify a project name or state a final completion date for the private expansion; Carlisle said he had no firm completion date yet but had heard the prospect might store grain by this fall.

The supervisors directed that the executed resolution and order be returned to county staff for filing. The meeting record shows the motion carried with an unanimous vote by the five-member board.

Looking ahead, county staff and city officials will continue to refine valuation and project details, and any future county-level approvals related to tax-increment financing or intergovernmental agreements would appear on subsequent agendas.