CC PACKET 10142003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

12 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes September 23, 2003 Page 12 1 that could potentially be used to redevelop the Apache Medical Building,which he understood 2 also met the criteria.. 3 4 Mr. Inman responded comment could not be made on future actions, as the current proposal only 5 involved tax increment generated from the particular parcels considered in the two phases. 6 7 Mr. Beck indicated they were not asking for a commitment but were asking that whatever came 8 to them did not go elsewhere. He stated they could move ahead with their own plans if there was 9 no intent to acquire the property. He added they were supportive of what had been put together, 10 as success of the redevelopment project was positive for the medical building. 11 12 Ms. Baker asked if money was being allocated to buy out and condemn apartments, which would 13 displace tenants. Mayor Hodson responded condemning of apartments was not planned. 14 Discussion followed regarding buildings that would be affected. 15 16 Ms. Baker asked who was going to take responsibility for the park property. Councilmember 17 Horst responded that would be included in the Redevelopment Agreement that would be 18 formulated after the current process. 19 20 Ms. Baker stated she understood the contractor would be carrying"his own paper," receive the 21 tax breaks and make a profit when selling the property. Councilmember Horst explained there 22 was a 26-year time period to pay the developer the money he had loaned to himself. He added 23 there were no tax breaks involved and that this was a"good deal" for the City. 24 25 Ms. Baker indicated she wanted to see some of the profit come back to the City in the form of 26 taxes. She asked if the contractor would pay full tax as she must pay on her home. 27 Councilmember Thuesen responded it was not uncommon for these types of projects to come 28 onto the tax roles sooner than planned. Discussion followed. It was noted Ms. Kvilvang from 29 Ehlers and Associates would address this issue further. 30 31 Mr. Cadwallader stated he had not received any answers to his questions. Mr. Gilligan 32 responded there was no final zoning approval on the property. He added there was no 33 recommendation for the owner's signature on the preliminary approval; however, it was needed 34 with the final approval. Discussion followed regarding the developer's ability to apply for 35 redevelopment of Mr. Cadwallader's property. 36 37 There was further discussion regarding the reasons why some properties were included and 38 others excluded from the district. Mr. Gilligan explained the included properties were properties 39 where development was likely to occur. 40 41 Mr. Cadwallader asked why the US Bank building was excluded. Mr. Gilligan replied there was 42 no development planned for that property. 43 44 Mr. Malkerson noted the US Bank building was in another TIF district and was not being 45 decertified for placement in the new district. It was noted Mr. Malkerson was correct. 46 47 Mayor Hodson closed the public hearing at 8:50 p.m.