Laserfiche WebLink
precedent because it would result in paying for the creation of buildable lots. HRA Executive <br />Director Ulrich noted the HRA had rejected the purchase agreement when it came up for <br />consideration so, perhaps, if the HRA rejects it then it owes the Development Manager an <br />advance for his efforts. He pointed out if the development of Lot 3 goes through then the <br />Development Manager would be reimbursed fairly quickly but if it is not developed, there would <br />not be reimbursement. <br />City Attorney Goodrich presented his review of the Landform contract, Section c, Page 12, <br />number 4 and advised the contract does contemplate appropriate compensation on specialized <br />deals. <br />HRA Executive Director Ulrich concurred the HRA has the authority but not the obligation <br />under the contract. <br />Commissioner Tossey stated he supports approval of the $4,000 for Sophia Ramsey LLC and to <br />request additional documentation on the $6,000 request. With regard to the $25,000 Lot 3 <br />advance, he asked if the contract assures Landform is paid for deals in progress that close even if <br />its contract has expired. <br />HRA Executive Director Ulrich stated once an agreement is reached on incentive compensation, <br />then it is paid in accordance with the schedule. If the Landform contract is terminated prior to <br />January 31 or prematurely terminated, there is a 15-month window of time. <br />Commissioner Tossey asked why the HRA would consider the Lot 3 advance since that deal will <br />get done, one way or the other, for the Armstrong overpass. He stated he would like the Lot 3 <br />deal done sooner rather than later so the City can go to the Legislature to request the overpass. <br />Commissioner Tossey asked again why the HRA would pay a Lot 3 advance now since the <br />Landform contract has a contingency to assure the Development Manager will be paid. <br />Chairperson McGlone stated he found this situation to be different because the HRA decided to <br />terminate the purchase by tabling indefinitely. <br />Commissioner Tossey stated there is a precedent issue and he wants to assure the HRA is not <br />boxing themselves in. <br />Development Manager Lazan stated with the dynamic nature of this portion of the contract and <br />request, it indicates there is no precedent and he would acknowledge it is considered on a case - <br />by -case basis. He stated he had worked in good faith to bring the project (Lot 3) forward and <br />believed it is a distinct difference that the project had received positive votes for over a year. <br />Landform acted on that, expended a tremendous amount of work, and is asking the HRA to <br />consider this advance request. <br />Commissioner Tossey felt the distinction on this deal (Lot 3) is that it has to get done to get the <br />Armstrong Boulevard overpass because it goes through the Wiser Choice Liquor property. <br />Because of that, Landform is assured to get paid for services rendered one way or the other. <br />Housing and Redevelopment Authority / October 23, 2012 <br />Page 5 of 7 <br />