Laserfiche WebLink
<br />E. S & W Agreement <br /> <br />The Bank asks that the term of the S & W Agreement be extended by ten years, so that payments <br />can still be made through March 22 of the year 2031 instead of the present ending point of March <br />of the year 2021. Our reasoning is that with the decline in new construction, the pace of future <br />new home construction is not likely to result in full reimbursement of the $6.0 million provided <br />by Oakwood (using the Bank's funds) within the original timetable. We would also ask that we <br />clarify that the obligation to pay the future hookup fees is not subject to any type of deduction or <br />other developer deals. In return, the Bank is willing to forego any claim regarding the <br />$208,216.00 given in credits to Sweetbay, and to agree to all of the other matters listed above. <br /> <br />We point out that in our opinion, the agreement to extend and clarify the S & W Agreement <br />does not cost the City of Ramsey one penny in out of pocket expense. The $6.0 million was <br />provided for City benefit at no interest, and went into hard improvements, not soft costs or blue <br />sky. The benefit will remain in the ground indefinitely. The only possible negative to the City <br />would be that if the fifteen years otherwise elapsed without the full $6.0 million being <br />reimbursed, the City would have reaped a windfall at the expense of a failed developer. That is <br />not what Cities are about. <br /> <br />F. Future Development <br /> <br />The Bank would ask only that the City agree in good faith to allow future development and <br />existing lot sales to occur in the ordinary course of business, under the ordinances currently in <br />effect, without any attempted retaliation or artifices designed to correct past errors. <br /> <br />IV. Summary <br /> <br />In our numerous meetings with staff, which have been cordial and sincere, we have repeatedly <br />heard the question, "What is in it for the City?" We do not criticize staff for this question, as it is <br />legitimate and represents the implementation of their duty to look out for the interests of the <br />taxpayers. <br /> <br />We believe that by settling these issues, the City obtains the following benefits: <br /> <br />a. Settlement of the Knife River issue and the avoidance of future potential litigation co~ts, <br />which mayor may not be insured expenses if based in contract. In addition, the payment from <br />the Bank represents payment of $135,000 more than the Bank may be obligated to pay, resolving <br />that issue as well. <br /> <br />b. Receipt of funds sufficient to complete the punch list items without dispute over what <br />constitutes performance security and what constitutes maintenance security. <br /> <br />c. A greatly improved Owner's Association organization (as opposed to no organization), <br />hopefully with the ability to deal with future financial issues regarding common areas. <br /> <br />d. $90,000.00 in cash to deal with existing maintenance problems and future homeowners' or <br /> <br />8 <br />