04/23/13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Commissioner Kuzma asked for further explanation of Option 3, Notify Landform that the HRA intends to withhold some portion of the amounts owing and if Landform objects, commence a declaratory iudament action seeking an adjudication of the parties' rights. HRA Attorney Bray explained it is a unique situation because unlike a typical dispute, the Statute says the party seeking to recover compensation is not entitled to maintain an action. The Statue is set up to give the HRA a "shield" but not a "sword." Nonetheless, if there is a dispute, there is always an option to go into court and ask for declaratory judgment, saying "we have a dispute and please resolve it." HRA Attorney Bray explained that in order for the HRA to avail itself of that approach, there would first have to be a dispute. If the HRA said that in their view, the fair allocation of compensation is $200,000 and it intends to withhold that amount and Landform agreed, the HRA would not be entitled to go into court (i.e., no dispute). However, if the HRA decided to withhold and Landform disputed it, then it can go into court for resolution of the dispute. Commissioner Elvig asked if the HRA has received its intellectual properties. HRA Executive Director Ulrich advised the HRA is current on Landform's monthly billings and had asked for and received indication from Development Manager Lazan that the City would get the intellectual property; however, that had not yet been received. HRA Executive Director Ulrich stated it is staffs intention to put a specific date on the request because the intellectual properties were expected to be received by now. In addition, Development Manager Lazan indicated at the last meeting that it would be no problem to provide that critical information to carry forward the projects. Commissioner Elvig stated that is an important factor since it was the intent to move the projects forward without "skipping a beat." He indicated if the intellectual properties are not provided, he would support moving forward with declaratory judgment. If received, he would support Option 2, Determine if Landform would be willing to meet and attempt to negotiate a mutually acceptable resolution or would be willing to jointly enaaae a mediator or arbitrator to assist in resolving the issue. Commissioner Strommen stated support for staffs recommendation to provide Landform with a specific request and timeline to provide the intellectual properties, noting it is currently past the end contract date and a reasonable request. She suggested moving forward with that action and then if the intellectual properties are not received, the HRA can decide a course of action. If the information is received, she supported Option 2, Determine if Landform would be willing to meet and attempt to negotiate a mutually acceptable resolution or would be willing to jointly enaaae a mediator or arbitrator to assist in resolving the issue, as the most prudent option in terms of being responsible to public dollars and respectful of HRA's relationship with Landform. Commissioner LeTourneau stated his appreciation for staffs analysis of this complex matter. He stated he favors finding a resolution that is mutually agreed upon. Commissioner LeTourneau indicated there is need to recover some things so the HRA is able to drive projects forward. He stated he would lend support to Option 2, Determine if Landform would be willing to meet and Housing and Redevelopment Authority / April 9, 2013 Page 5 of 9