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