Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989/01/03 - ADMIN - Minutes - Economic Development Authority - Regular7 MICROFILMED MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA January 3, 1989 l. Call to order The meeting was called to order by chair Thomas Duffy at 7:00 p.m. 2. Roll call The following members were present at roll call: Bruce Battaglia, Thomas Duffy, Keith Meland and David Strand. Allen Friedman arrived at 7:13; Larry Mitchell arrived at 7:15. 2. Approval of the minutes of December 12, 1988 It was approve 4-0. ) moved by Commissioner Meland, seconded by Commissioner Strand, to the minutes of the December l2, 1988 meeting. The motion passed 4. Approval of agenda It was moved by Commissioner Meland, seconded by Commissioner Strand, to approve the agenda for January 3, 1989. The motion passed 4-0. 5. Public hearings None. 5. Reports None. 6. Unfinished business None. 7. New business J a. Discussion and direction re Naegle sign on condemned parcel near Excelsior V • Mike Cronin, Naegele Outdoor Advertising, addressed the EDA. Naegele recognizes that the sign on the On the Avenue site is unstable, that they have had communication with Rosewood Corp. and that they had continued to pay rent to Theros through Mar, 1988. They had assumed the project would move forward more quickly than it has. He was asking this evening if it were possible to enter into a lease agreement with the City on the sign. He said this request was two-fold: it would al low the City to earn income off the property until the development does go forward; secondly, it would postpone the City's having to deal with Naegele's claim for relocation compensation. Economic Development Authority minutes January 3, 1989 2. Mr. Cronin stated that the request for $3,000 per month rental in the City's letter was unreasonable, that they were paying the Theros family $9,000 per year. They would like to negotiate a more reasonable lease. Jim Steilen, attorney for the EDA, said there had been discussions between Rosewood Corp. and Naeg 1 e with respect to the sign and an at tempt to work out an arrangement for lease payments to be made. One complication in the lease was the Theros people had an obligation to make a payment to Naegele at such time as the lease is terminated & going back to 1982 whereby Naegele agrees to give the City or HRA a $20,000 credit against any condemnation award. However, those discussions did not proceed too far because the then Executive Director had some strong feelings about billboards in general and in that location specifically. He felt it would be important to determine Naegele1s willingness to pay the back rent as well as future rent. Mr. Cronin said he could commit to Naegele paying the back rent from the time of the HRA acquisition of the property at the rate of their agreement with Theros. Commissioner Strand asked if Naegele were willing to take the sign down now. Mr. Cronin said Naegele really did not have a choice, that they would remove the sign and then file for relocation compensation. Commissioner Strand asked how the $3,000 per month rental was arrived at and was that communicated to Naegele. The President said it was communicated via a letter sent on Oct, 12 and he was not aware at how the monthly rate was arrived at. Commissioner Friedman asked if the EDA was under any legal obligation re removal of the sign and relocation expenses. Also, does the EDA have any obligation to lessors prior to the EDA taking over the property. Mr. Steilen responded that Naegele does not have a lease with anyone at this point. Commissioner Friedman did then not understand why the City had any obligation. Chairman Duffy said Naegele was acknowledging that if asked to remove the sign, they will remove it. The question is is the EDA willing to lease to them the land for an amount of money until such time as that land is ready for development. Commissioner Friedman just wanted the sign off the property as quickly as possible. Mr. Cronin said Naegele was not asking for damages, simply relocation. It was moved by Commissioner Friedman, seconded by Commissioner Strand, to direct Naegele to remove the sign within ten days. Commissioner Strand said the question for him was what would be a reasonable timeframe. He felt it was reasonable for the EDA to be paid for the period of time the sign was up after the property changed hands. He wished to amend the motion to specify a reasonable period of time in which the sign could j Economic Development Authority January 3, 1989 3. MICROFILMED 7 be removed and to pursue payment that otherwise would be owing from the time that the EDA came into title to the property to the final date the sign exists on the property. By consensus, January 31, 1989 was targeted at the date by which the sign must be removed. The motion passed 6-0. 8. Communications and bills ] President Duffy asked attorney Steilen for an update on what has occurred over the past three weeks. Mr. Steilen responded that several commissioners and himself had met with the developer to discuss indemnification. The developer had said they wanted to use the month of December to educate two potential lendors as to the letter from the MPCA and the actions of the EDA. He said that had not happened as quickly as had been hoped. He said meetings were now expected for January at which time EDA representatives will participate. It was moved by Commissioner Meland, seconded by Commissioner Battaglia, to approve and authorize vendor claims. The motion passed 6-0. 9. Adjournment It was moved by Commissioner Meland, seconded by Commissioner Battaglia, to adjourn the meeting at 7:25 p.m. The motion passed 6-0. William C. Dixon, Executive Director J