Laserfiche WebLink
Economic Development Manager Sullivan commented that this was a unique PA in which earnest <br />money was not required noting that the City was going to be fully reimbursed for the price of the <br />land through TIF. He asked Member Riley the amount he would suggest requesting as a payment. <br /> <br />Member Riley suggested $3,500 to $5,000, as the City should receive something in return for <br />holding this land off the market for one year. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan confirmed that if the PA is extended, the City would <br />hold the property and would not be able to entertain other offers on the property during that time. <br /> <br />Chairperson Steffen agreed that there should be some type of good faith payment to hold the <br />property for an additional year. He asked where the $3,500 figure mentioned in the case comes <br />from. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan explained that because this project and Gigi’s were <br />moving forward in similar timeframes, there was a lot of surveying work for the platting of the <br />property. He stated that there was language that would allow the refunding of the platting costs <br />($3,500) when the property closes. He stated that language could be removed or negotiated to <br />lessen the amount of City reimbursement. <br /> <br />Member Hardin asked if staff is aware of any other inquiries related to this site. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan replied that there has been no other interest in this site. <br />He stated that development in the retail market has slowed and he did not anticipate that this would <br />be a site that many people would be interested in with current market conditions. <br /> <br />Member Hardin stated that perhaps rather than requesting additional funds, the PA be extended <br />for six months, to spring, at which time it could be reviewed again. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan stated that the developer is asking for one year and <br />confirmed that could be a pushback in the negotiation. He stated that he would like to keep the <br />deal in play and not push the developer away. <br /> <br />Member Kuzma stated that on the news this morning they are predicting that the pandemic could <br />kick up again. He stated that cashflow is difficult for everyone right now. He stated that perhaps <br />the one-year extension be granted with a $5,000 or $10,000 fee implemented if the developer walks <br />away after that one-year period. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan stated that would be similar to non-refundable earnest <br />money which would be similar to Member Riley’s suggestion. He stated that while that could be <br />considered an incentive to move forward, he would guess that the City would be required to obtain <br />that money now and hold it during the agreement period as the City would be hard pressed to gain <br />that money after the one year period. <br /> <br />Member Heineman asked if there is another way to get the developer to have more skin the in <br />game without requiring a payment to the City, which would incentivize them to move forward. <br />Economic Development Authority/ August 13, 2020 <br />Page 3 of 7 <br /> <br />