Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Edstrom Smith stated that the City has no obligation to pay McDonald's for the property. <br /> She stated that if McDonald's is willing to part with the property, she would believe the <br /> negotiation would fall under some kind of compensation but again noted the City does not have <br /> an obligation to pay them. <br /> Councilmember Kuzma stated that he would be willing to offer one more round of negotiations <br /> offering to let McDonald's build one more time or they will lose the property. <br /> Ms. Edstrom Smith stated that a judge could make the decision that even though the City is not <br /> obligated to compensate McDonald's, in terms of fairness they may deem that the City must pay <br /> a certain amount for the property. <br /> Councilmember Shryock stated that while she would like to avoid creating bad blood with <br /> McDonald's, she would still like to see something built there whether that is McDonald's or <br /> another business. <br /> Councilmember Johns stated that she would fall on the side of filing suit. She stated that she <br /> would support one round of negotiations but wants to see something built on the site. <br /> Councilmember Riley agreed that everyone wants to see something built on the property. He <br /> asked whether it would hurt or help the City if they were to file suit on a landowner in Ramsey. <br /> Mayor Strommen stated that she frankly does not care if McDonald's comes to Ramsey at this <br /> point. She stated that there were agreements made that have expired time and time again and <br /> they do not share information with the City. She agreed that this is a valuable piece of property <br /> and it should be available. She stated that last year the City stated that this would be the last <br /> extension and McDonald's did not even sign the agreement or provide the escrow. <br /> Councilmember Kuzma stated that if the City were to bring action he does not think that would <br /> bring a bad light to the City but simply show that the City takes their agreements seriously. <br /> Councilmember Williams agreed with Councilmember Kuzma's statement. She stated that real <br /> estate agreements such as this are often in place and when you do not fulfill the agreement the <br /> other party has the right to pursue their options and enact the clauses in the agreement. <br /> City Administrator Ulrich stated that the City and McDonald's are both in different positions <br /> than they were when the property was sold and the City is in a good position to either build or <br /> take the property back. He stated that it is probably worth it to go back to McDonald's and ask <br /> them to clarify and express their intentions more clearly. He stated that if the development <br /> cannot continue as originally agreed upon to build, the City should then pursue their rights under <br /> the agreement to obtain the property. <br /> Councilmember Kuzma confirmed that the restrictive covenants have been removed from the <br /> property. <br /> City Council Work Session /March 28,2017 <br /> Page 3 of 6 <br />