My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 09/03/2009
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2009
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 09/03/2009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:00:43 AM
Creation date
8/27/2009 11:26:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
09/03/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
114
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Further discussion: Councilmember McGlone explained that he would be opposed to the permit <br />motion as he fInds it unnecessary to place additional restrictions in regard to the length of the <br />term. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Ramsey, Councilmembers Look, Dehen, Elvig, Jeffrey, and <br />Wise. Voting No: Councilmember McGlone. <br /> <br />Case #2: <br /> <br />Consider Lease. Property Purchased from PSG, LLC at 6811 Highway 10 <br />NW <br /> <br />Economic Development Coordinator Sullivan reviewed the staff report. <br /> <br />Councilmember Wise thought that there had been an issue in regard to the utility type conditions <br />in past lease options and wanted to ensUre that the City was properly protected. <br /> <br />Mr. Deal stated that the reference to Pro Sports would be Pro Power. He explained the split <br />betWeen the companies that had recently occurred in -regard to liability issues. He stated that the <br />current lease for the land was with T AMM Corporation and advised that if the Council wished, <br />they could renegotiate the lease contract' with them. He stated that the $1,600 lease option rimy <br />be below market value at this time but explained that the rate could be renegotiated in September <br />2010. <br /> <br />Mayor Ramsey questioned why the lease back term conversation did not occur prior to the sale <br />of the property. <br /> <br />Mr. Deal explained that they have been close to settling several times before and have been <br />working on this for the past six months. He explained that it is very complicated because it <br />involves so many different parties. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen questioned what the middle and high-end rates would be in terms of <br />leasing the property. <br /> <br />Economic Development Coordinator Sullivan stated that it is difficult to find comparables for <br />this type of use. He stated that this infonnation was given from the realtor and explained that the <br />other values were not given because of the tough economic times, especially along Highway 10. <br />He stated that staff thought it was a fair request to continue with this lease and renegotiate after <br />the one plus year term. <br /> <br />Councilmember Wise stated that this would only be a one-year lease and after that term, a <br />contact could be negotiated with TAMM Corporation for a new dollar amount. He.did not think <br />that anything was currently being sold or leased at market value. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look questioned how there was a binding lease on the property if the City were <br />purchasing the property. <br /> <br />City Council/July 28, 2009 <br />Page 6 of 13 <br /> <br />P18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.