Agenda - Council - 09/26/2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Member Williams stated that there is value in a smaller parcel and believes that the City should be compensated for allowing this option for over a year. She stated that she was not in favor of the price of the parcel originally and the City needs to consider the opportunities and costs that would be missed. She stated that some key information is missing. She stated that she would be in favor of an increase in the purchase price for the future closing, non-refundable earnest money, and/or non-refundable option fee would assist her in supporting this change. Councilmember Kuzma stated that he understands the reasoning for splitting this purchase agreement to decrease the costs. He stated that having the option for the second parcel is important for the growing of the builder but would put the City in a tough position for the holding costs and therefore would like to see the purchase agreement adjusted for the holding costs. He stated that if the builder walks away from the second parcel, the holding costs should be covered. Acting Chairperson Riley asked if non-refundable earnest money would resolve the issue. Member Williams stated that she is not comfortable negotiating a larger deal and then splitting that into two. She stated that in her opinion, the second parcel is worth more than the first parcel and with the delayed timeline, she would like to see something in addition to the non-refundable earnest money. Member Hardin stated that there is already a signed purchase agreement with an agreed upon amount and therefore he would not be in favor of increasing that agreed upon price. He stated that there is not interest in the parcel from another development and delaying the development by one year does not cause additional holding costs. He stated that he would support the staff recommendation. Member Williams stated that this parcel has never been marketed, although this is the second purchase agreement that has come forward. Member Hardin stated that the City has owned this parcel for 10 to 15 years and only two offers have come forward. Acting Chairperson Riley stated that there are only four EDA members present and therefore a consensus would need to be reached. He asked if Member Williams would agree to anything that would not involve changing the price, as the purchase agreement has already been agreed upon. Member Williams stated that she would support the request if there was non-refundable earnest money. Motion by Member Hardin, seconded by Member Riley, to recommend to City Council to approve the Purchase Agreement amendment and second Purchase Agreement, between the City of Ramsey and Maple Investments LLC; subject to final review and amendments by the City Attorney with the additional language added to specify the $10,000 earnest money is non- refundable. Economic Development Authority/August 10, 2017 Page 6 of 8