Agenda - Council Work Session - 01/10/2017

Home

challenging market).Attached is the 2011 study for example. Examples:McComb Group LTD, buxtonco.com, nielsen.com Funding Source: Depends on scope of work,and type of work. Recommendation: STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is generally comfortable with the "traditional broker approach" which is currently being deployed(i.e. CBRE). This approach is cost-effective. CBRE charges 5%commission only on deals that close (market ranges from 5-8%). CBRE doesn't charge any other fees (many other options do).Utilizing CBRE puts the city in a low risk situation(if a deal closes, they get paid, if not--we don't lose anything). CBRE has a large network of contacts,they utilize many other well-known listing networks,and they have a big reach. CBRE is a respected and well established firm--their listing materials,website,and staff are very professional. This case is being presented to the EDA with several alternatives because staff has received continues feedback from various elected and appointed officials,members of the public, and businesses about the city's need to attract restaurants and retail. Which,has resulted in the direct questioning of the city's current approach(utilizing a traditional broker, currently CBRE). EDA RECOMMENDATION (1) The EDA was not comfortable with executing a long-term contract with CBRE at this time (i.e. 3 year contract). The EDA was comfortable with entering into a short-term contract with CBRE (i.e. 6 month contract). General EDA feedback on CBRE: the EDA is not opposed/against another long-term CBRE contact, and hopes to get a proposal from CBRE as this process unfolds. The EDA understands,respects,and appreciates the services that CBRE has/can provide(see background section of this case for details). However,the EDA is not satisfied with the current scope of services being provided by CBRE(this could mean the City needs to more clearly define our scope). The EDA does not feel that Ramsey is being represented as a truly valued individual customer by CBRE--the EDA is concerned Ramsey is instead being treated as a commodity to the larger CBRE real estate listing portfolio across the Twin Cities. In other words, Ramsey's unique needs,unique questions,unique properties,unique policy items are not being answered/ addressed with customer service unique to Ramsey--rather are being generically responded to/addressed (same answer that would be provided to all clients). Also,the EDA was generally frustrated that CBRE does not keep Ramsey updated on new listings (in other cities)that they take on, that are in direct competition to Ramsey(i.e. Anoka Station listings). The EDA does not feel that CBRE attempts to develop new relationships/new contacts/new leads on Ramsey's behalf, and rather works within existing networks and relationships only. Lastly,the EDA feels the City may need a greater level of professional consulting services than provided by CBRE(i.e. aiding staff with research,reports,presentations,negotiations, etc.). (2) The EDA is interested in further evaluating other options for marketing/selling city owned land. Specifically, value-added brokers and master developers. The EDA had a robust discussion about the many alternatives available to market/sell City owned land(see alternatives section of this case). The EDA was generally interested in private sector real estate firms (Le. brokers and developers)rather than considering general professional services firms (i.e.public relations firms,marketing firms, economic development firms,more city staff, etc.). (3) Eventually,the EDA wants to submit a RFP to various real estate brokerages and developers. However, the EDA first wants to determine the City's scope (what are the City's expectations). In order to get that process kick started, the EDA wishes to complete informational interviews. Informational interviews will allow for open dialog between the city and various brokers/developers. It will