2002-01-08 CiTY OF MOUND
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
JANUARY 8, 2002
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Mound, Hennepin County, met in regular
session on Tuesday, January 8, 2002, at 6:30 p.m. in the council chambers at 5341
Maywood Road in said City.
Members Present: Chairperson Pat Meisel, Commissioners Bob Brown, Mark Hanus,
David OSrnek and Peter Meyer.
Others Present: City Manager, Kandis Hanson; City Attorney, John Dean; City Clerk,
Bonnie Ritter; Community Development Director, Sarah Smith; Executive Director,
Pinky Charon; Larry Olson, Lou Stocco, Sid Inman
1. OPEN MEETING
Chairperson Pat Meisel opened the meeting at 6:33 p.m.
2. SWEAR IN DAVID OSMEK AS HRA MEMBER
City Manager, Kandis Hanson, swore in David Osmek as HRA Member.
3. APPROVE AGENDA
MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown to approve the agenda. All voted in favor.
Motion carried.
4. APPROVE MINUTES
MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown to approve the minutes of the November 27,
2001, regular meeting. All voted in favor. Motion carried.
5. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
A. Monthly Bills for December, 2001 and January, 2002.
MOTION by Meyer, seconded by Osmek to approve the bills for December, 2001 in
the amount of $101,002.33, and the bills for January, 2002, in the amount of
$13,787.31. Ail voted in favor. Motion carried.
B. Information Items
1) Budget Progress Report for October ad November, 2001.
2) Marquette Bank Statement
3) Wells Fargo Bank Statement
4) MBIA Summary
5) Levy Money Received
6) NAHRO Information flyer
7) Memo about Executive Director Review
HRA Minut~ - January 8, 2002
6. METRQPLAIN~ DEVELQPMENT AGREEMENT
City Attorney, John Dean, explained the revisions in this agreement compared to the
initial agreement dated December 4, 2000. He stated that the overwhelming reason for
the amendment and restated contract is to modify th6 manner in which financial
assistance payable to the developer will be made available to the developer. The
difference is the nature of the instruments that will determine how the assistance is
provided. This amended and restated contract called for two bond issues (one tax
exempt and one taxable), and two notes (one to the commercial and one to the
residential) to cover the tax increment, up to the agreeable amount.
Sid Inman of Ehlers & Associates, also addressed the Council, summarizing that the
amended and restated contract does not increase the City's liability.
City Attorney Dean presented a letter to the City Manager, stating his opinion that
Chairperson Meisel has no conflict of interest in voting on this matter.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Osmek to approve the Amended and Restated
Contract for Private Development between the Mound HRA and MetroPlains
Development, as presented. The following voted in favor: Brown, Hanus, Meisel and
Osmek. The following voted against: Meyer. Motion carried.
Chairpereon Meisel stepped down as Chair because of a perceived conflict of interest
on the next item. Chairperson Hanus took over the meeting at this point.
7. GRAMERCY CORPORATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
City Attorney Dean gave some history, stating that last Fall the HRA considered and
gave preliminary approval of a draft of a development agreement with Gremercy
Corporetion. Since that time, there have been a series of discussions with the
developer concerning preparation for the final form of the agreement, which is before
the HRA now. He stated that the proposed agreements splits the project into three
components; housing on Lake Langdon, housing on Auditor's Road, and the
commercial portion on both sides of Commerce Blvd.
Hanus voiced concern over the phasing issue stated in the agreement. The agreement
gives priodty to the Lake Langdon residential first, then the Auditor's road residential,
followed by the commercial. He has concern that after the two residential portions are
completed, the developer has no legal obligation to complete the commercial portion of
the project, leaving the downtown with only residential development. He expressed that
he thinks it's more difficult to find a developer to come in to take on only the commercial
aspect, which is the riskiest portion of the project. In order to support this agreement,
he stated he needs some form of guarantee that the commercial will also be done, or
linked with the residential and done concurrently, Brown has these same concerns.
2
HRA M.b~ - Jem~ry 8:2002
Lou Stocco of Gramercy Corporation, stated that when it comes to the commercial
portion of the project, they will build what they can lease. He feels that before the
dommercial portion can be started, the downtown has to have the residential to provide
the clientele for the commercial businesses.
Meyer stated support for this development agreement, that the City needs activity
downtown and that the Council Should move forward and iron out the details.
Dean explained that the tax increment financing is connected to the commercial portion
of the project, and that the developer cannot take advantage of this financing unless
they complete the commercial portion of the project. Osmek asked what the amount of
this financing -'whether it is a big enough carrot to attract another developer if
Gramercy would end up doing only the residential portion of the project.
MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Brown to table this item until the January 22r~
meeting, in order to get the figures on the tax increment financing for this project. The
following voted in favor: Brown, Hanus and Osmek. The following voted against: Meyer.
Meisel did not vote as she had previously stepped down for this portion of the meeting.
Motion carded.
Chairperson Meisel returned to preside over the balance of the meeting.
8. ADJOURN
MOTION by Brown, secor~ded by Meyer to adjourn at 7:53 p.m. All voted in favor.
Motion carried.
¢~------~~e~Attest.. Executive Direc~o~r~
Chairperson Pat Meiser
3