Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds view City Council <br />Regular Meeting <br />Mr. Phil Seipp, president of SYSCO/Continental stated <br />he appreciated the help of the City and Staff in <br />getting this project moving along. He also thanked <br />the citizens who showed up at the meetings and after <br />researching the project, put their support behiau` it. <br />Jim Casserly, the attorney working with the developer, <br />explained this was a very complicated project and he <br />appreciated the help the City had provided. He <br />stated there were two issues to be resolved yet, one <br />being the use of the dedicated property. He stated <br />he felt by specifying those uses as specified in the <br />provisions of the existing code, and putting them <br />right in the deed, would be sufficient. He stated <br />the second item deals with the bond term, and is <br />not a financial or legal impediment but zolely a <br />language issue. He explained a 14 year increment <br />means a 15 year term, and the change in the time of <br />the bond sale would cut one year of increment off. <br />He explained they had always assumed 14 years of <br />increment would be available in doing all their <br />calculations, and the loss of one year would <br />present a problem. <br />Mayor Hankner asked if a 14 year increment had <br />been calculated from the beginning of the project. <br />Mr. Casserly replied it had, and that is how they <br />originally put together the schedule. <br />Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained that to go <br />beyond 1.5 years is a policy decision that would <br />have to be made by the Council. He added the <br />Council has clearly indicated to Staff that 15 years <br />in the maximum they would go, and he questioned <br />whether the Council meant 15 years for the term of <br />the bond issue or 15 years of receipt of the bond <br />issue increments, which would add 10 months to the <br />bond. <br />Mayor Hankner stated it would still assume 14 years <br />of increments with an almost 16 year bond. <br />Mr. Casserly stated that as the available bond <br />proceeds have come downp they have tried to keep <br />the total capital at $1.8 million. <br />Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained the 10 months <br />would equal $50,000 to $60,000, and the developer <br />is simply trying to make up the difference. <br />Ms. Porti,00d stated the cost of the public improve- <br />ments wlil not exceed $1.8 million, and the developer <br />will not get the full amount,.as costs will be taken <br />out first. She stated the sum of the revenue note <br />and proceeds of bonds to the developer will not <br />exceed $1.8 million. <br />J <br />January 23, 1989 <br />Page Two <br />