HRA Minutes 01-10-1996
.
.
.
MINUTES
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, January 10,1996 -7:00p.m.,City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairperson AI Larson, Vice Chairperson Brad Barger,
Everette Ellison, Tom S1. Hilaire, and Roger Carlson.
STAFF PRESENT:
Jeff O'Neill and Ollie Koropchak.
HRA ATTORNEY:
Steve Bubul.
PUBLIC:
Planning Commissioners Jon Bogart, Rich Carlson, and Dick Martie.
Parks Commissioners Bruce Thielen, Steve Andrews, Earl Smith, Fran Fair,
and Larry Nolan.
I. CALL TO ORDER.
Chairperson Larson called the HRA meeting to order at 7: 10 p.m.
2.
CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE DECEMBER 6,1995 HRA MINUTES.
Al Larson noted a correction to the minutes on page 4, paragraph 3, deleting the
sentence: (Larson suggested the Kjellberg building be a future agenda item for
consideration.) St. Hilaire noted two corrections on page 5, paragraph 3, amending
(AI Larson made a motion authorizing the HRA to hire a planner with expertise
. . . . . .)0 (AI Larson made a motion to begin the interviewing process of consultants
with expertise __ __ __) And amending (Plan/ study defined within the
northerly/ southerly.____.) to (The plan/ study to determine the
northerly/southerly........) Tom S1. Hilaire made a motion to approve the amended
HRA minutes of December 6, 1995, as so noted. Roger Carlson seconded the
motion and with no further corrections or additions, the amended minutes were
approved on a 5-0 vote.
3.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Bruce Thielen, spokesperson for Parks Commission, indicated Park Commissioners
were present to encourage HRA members to consider acquiring the riverfront
property (Block 64) for possible extension of West Bridge Park. Chairperson Larson
suggested as elected officials, perhaps, the City COlmcil should be approached by the
Parks Commission for consideration to acquire the property for park dedication.
Additionally, Larson indicated the HRA's interest lies in blighted/substandard
property for redevelopment.
Page 1
.
Barger said upon fmal adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Update, after
consideration of the HRA to approve the draft copy of the RFP for consulting
services, and upon completion of the proposed study/plan; the HRA would consider
acquisition of Block 64. Thereafter, together, acting as a city, improvement
strategies would be defined. Park Commissioners saw the acquisition of Block 64
as an opportunity and felt it would be a shame to let the opportunity slip through the
city's fingers with the focus of the Comprehensive Plan Update on riverfront
development.
O'Neill briefly reviewed the objectives of the RFP which would be considered later
by the HRA.
Tom St. Hilaire noted that projects on the table between the school, churches, and
city totaled nearly $80 million in expenditures and not $1 of revenue is proposed.
And he noted all projects were worthwhile projects.
.
Rich Carlson of the Planning Commission stated that the downtown concepts
presented by Steve Grittman showed the riverfront to remain as public not private.
Even the 1996 Comprehensive Plan identified riverfront development. Representing
the seller, Carlson had seen Block 64 as an opportunity and worthy of further
investigation by City Hall therefore city staff was approached. Asked if Block 64
was blighted property, the Planning Commissioner responded "no"but the properties
surrounding Block 64 were blighted. St. Hilaire recalled the early downtown
concepts and viewed the concepts as a sales pitch for a community center.
Additionally, St. Hilaire felt the role of the HRA is to facilitate redevelopment much
the same as with the Mississippi Shores project. He did not see the role of the HRA
as owner or as a developer. Additionally, he commented the proposed RFP includes
completion of a market feasibility analysis which must be free of any pre-conceived
ideas. Chairperson Larson agreed with the role of the HRA as a facilitator.
John Bogart of the Planning Commission felt the downtown was changing and the
focus on downtown redevelopment was toward a bedroom community with the river
as its asset. O'Neill felt if Block 64 was restored and the garage replaced, the
purchase value would be out-of-reach and an opportunity would be lost. Again,
HRA members suggested the elected officials consider acquisition of the riverfront
property as the HRA has already identified a blighted property for condemnation
with a cash balance in the TIF Surplus Fund of approximately $250,000-$300,000.
HRA Attorney Bubul informed members that the riverfront property lies within the
Redevelopment Project No. I boundaries and the Minnesota Statutes are quite broad
and allow the City Council to request the HRA to consider purchase of the property,
at least, in part of the taxpayers. However, it then becomes an HRA policy and
"timing" appears to be the question.
.
Page 2
.
.
.
HRA MINUTES
JANUARY 10, 1996
Earl Smith acknowledged and agreed with the HRA' s concern of proposed
expenditures with no proposed revenues; however, Smith also felt the HRA should
consider the intangible. The intangible, a vision that the acquisition of Block 64
would result in the greatest benefit to his children and grandchildren, not himself.
Barger suggested a purchase agreement, $5,000,one year option to purchase. Bubul
suggested a right of first refusal. St. Hilaire cautioned members with limited TIF
resources is the need to evaluate the best use of the funds. The HRA has
earmarked a blighted property for condemnation, approved a $10,000 loan, and
allocated dollars for consideration to interview consultants with expertise in the area
of riverfront/downtown redevelopment.
It appeared to Attorney Bubul that individuals had the same goal: Acquisition of
Block 64 for either private or public redevelopment; however, timing remained the
issue. He suggested two options: One, the Council be requested to consider
acquisition or second, the HRA offer the sellers an option agreement to purchase.
Rich Carlson informed members that in eleven years of real estate, private property
has not sold for less than the appraised value. S1. Hilaire reaffirmed his position
that the property was worth $50,000 to $55,000 minus demolition.
Roger Carlson agreed with Attorney Bubu! to consider acquisition of Block 64.
Ellison and Barger agreed on a purchase option, $5,000 down, for one year. Rich
Carlson responded as the seller's representative, he could not recommend the seller
accept the purchase option.
Brad Barger made a motion offering an option to acquire Lots 1,2,3,4, & 5 of Blk
64 & No 40 ft of Vac River St, City of Monticello under the following terms: An
option to acquire the property for a price of $163,000 (the appraised value), which
may be exercised within six months after the date of an option agreement. The
HRA would pay the amount of $2,500 upon execution of an option agreement, which
amount would be applied to the purchase price. If the HRA elects not to exercise
the option within the terms of the agreement, the sellers retain the $2,500 option fee.
Al Larson seconded the motion and with no further discussion, the motion passed
on a 4-1 vote. Yeas: Barger, Larson, Ellison, & Carlson. Nay: St. Hilaire. S1.
Hiliare opposed the amount of the purchase price. Purchase Option to be drafted
by Attorney Bubul after acceptance of the HRA offer by the seller.
Page 3