1985-03-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes March 26, 1985 I Benke inquired about the seriousness of the other develop- ment proposals; Winkels responded, from all indications, they are quite serious. Benke then asked if we are in a position to enter a bidding competition to see which proposal gives us the best deal; Sinda felt that, at this time, we are not in that position but, with additional time, we may be in that position. Schmidt asked how much time would be required. Winkels responded that we want to keep track of the September 1, 1985 deadline; we need to start reserving that allocation; feels we should be looking at alternative uses for the allocation by July 1, 1985. Benke asked if there are any other proposals being dis- cussed at the legislature indicating we would lose lOB's altogether if we do not act, or would it dramatically impact us if we do not do something before the legislature acts. I According to Winkels, we would not lose the ability to use lOB's; they are talking about restricting uses and placing the allocation system more into a pooling concept. It appears that legislation would not be all that unfavorable to the City of New Brighton; they are talking about prior- ities being industrial and redevelopment; however, there is that uncertainty that we will not know the amount. Benke restated that, even if the legislation is adopted and it is somewhat favorable, the fact that they change the legislation is going to create delays in the processing of requests which, if our timing is not convenient, could cause delays on any of our particular projects. The worst case is that we might be in danger of losing the bonding we now have and, for that reason, the end of April may be a time when we should see where we are (that would be shortly before legis- lature adjourns about May 20th); we may have to make some tough decisions at that point. Benke stated he heard in Washington, D.C. there is some discussion that could cause us to lose IDB's as early as this fall. Motion by Harcus, seconded by Blomquist, to amend the motion by adding AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE HOTEL DEVELOPER ADVISING THEM THAT WE WISH TO HAVE AN AGREEMENT FORMALIZED BY APRIL 23, 1985. I Blomquist indicated he felt a little longer time may be adequate. Schmidt stated he believed the letter lets them know we have taken the action to get the IDB's and we are giving them first priortty for the hotel; City Council will review it on a thirty-day basis and readjust our priorities, given their good-faith efforts. Page Nine