1987-03-24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I Council Meeting Minutes March 24, 1987 Schmidt saw several problems: our city attorney is trying to answer questions on the proceedings even though he is not the attorney involved in the condemnation proceedings; it is not out- lined anyplace with a report for council to review; we are looking at an economic problem (if we buy just the property we want to make it possible to do the project that is supposed to be coming forward for approval in a few weeks; and there is not any money to pay for the rest of the land that has already been included in the overall condemnation process); once we initiate the quick take process we will be committed to acquiring just those lots that are being designated as part of the action tonight, and the rest of the land is questionable in terms of commercial viability; and we also have no control because it still will be Mr. Hedlund's pro- perty and he can do with it as he wants. In regard to the mortgage filed against the property sometime ago in connection with the overall project, Schmidt asked if it will be resolved in this condemnation process and is he going to end up with clear marketable title for those lots to be developed as Hedlund so chooses. Locke stated we do have a mortgage on his property at this time; we already own a good deal of land which is clearly in our best interest to have developed; and we want to minimize our costs in getting the land developed. Schmidt echoed Williams's concern about the remalnlng land; Benke indicated he was more concerned about the impact of the prior mortgage. Locke looks at the mortgage on the property as a bargaining tool for proceeding with the negotiation and understands it should not create a problem acquiring the properties. Benke asked what would happen if action were deferred tonight so it could be considered concurrently with the proposed developments to give us a chance to clarify with bond counsel what the options might be; Williams concurred and moved to DEFER ACTION UNTIL THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING (there was no second to the motion). Schmidt questioned the timing for starting the 90 days of the quick take proceedings; Locke responded it begins 90 days from when the petition is filed. Schmidt asked if we could abandon the process within that period; Locke responded affirmatively. Schmidt stated if we approve the original motion tonight, the only jeopardy to us during that period is the legal cost for the quick take proceedings; LeFevere stated if council follows staff recom- mendation the 90 day period can begin and if council later decides Page 12