|
<br />. ,
<br />
<br />..
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />"B~tA ~()tit-.
<br />--I
<br />
<br />"t( 1 ( IJ Z-
<br />
<br />,r' :..; j; <' , ''O.~ f ';{ I" (', ff) hI ,;! I' , 'C C'
<br />~J, ,'--"\01. J.....- "'.,-,, ,\.~,-/",h. I'"~ ---"'-...
<br />
<br />April 25, 2002
<br />
<br />Mr. Daniel J. Beeson. Esq.
<br />leVander, Gillen & Miller. P.A.
<br />633 South Concord Street, Suite 400
<br />St. Saint Paul. MN 55075
<br />
<br />RE: AT-S. Steels, Inc.IHPMK, LLC
<br />
<br />Dear Mr. Beeson:
<br />
<br />Thank you for your letter dated April 10, 2002. Although I believe it was unintentional because you were
<br />not part of many of the conversations, your letter inaccurately describes our negotiations and the
<br />conversations that we had with your client's representative, Mark McKee. Chesapeake remains interested
<br />in buying your c1icnt's property, but, as we told Mr. McKee. we cannot do so until we have a user for thc
<br />property.
<br />
<br />Your letter suggests to us that you are unaware of the histol)' of this property. The A.T.S. Steels property
<br />has been part of a redevelopment districl in the City of Arden Hills for the past twelve years. The City
<br />created the district in 1990, long before we had any intcrest or even knew of your client's property.
<br />A.TS. 's use of the property had been rezoned as a "non-confonning use" when the City created the
<br />redevelopment district. Thus, A.T.S. Steels has known for twelve years that its property is going to be a
<br />pan of a future redevelopment project.
<br />
<br />When Chesapeake became interested in your client's property, it initially offered to buy the property for
<br />what it believed then was a fair price. This amount was based on our analysis of the market at that point
<br />in time. As you no doubt know, since we made our offer in the fall of 2000, the economy, the
<br />development market, sales priccs and rental rates of office/warehouse property in the Twin Cities have
<br />declined. AT.S. elected to reject our offer. The reaction of your client was that our offer was too low.
<br />Subsequently, at your client's request, we later toured the building to determine if we had undervalued the
<br />property. In response to the tour. we followed up with a phone conversation and a meeting with Mr.
<br />McKee regarding the property. We explained our need to find a user before buying the property and he
<br />explained his intention to continue to use the property and find a tenant for the unused property. We
<br />understood that he would take that course and we encouraged him to do so. lbis conversation, like prior
<br />ones with your client, was pleasant and each side eXplained what it intended to do. We did not
<br />understand your client to suggest that he placed his business and business planning on hold. Quite to the
<br />contral)'. he lold us that he would move forward wilh his plans. We believed that Mr. McKee understood
<br />our situation, and we understood his situation, and we were therefore surprised to receive your letter.
<br />
<br />1111)1l \\"\) ':.U.\ Iltll I i'\ dlll . -;, II -"., ~ \\"-'_1 t< ''-h \. \\;'.'.1 ".(;1 \ _l:',")!)."
<br />rl.ll-:J'!I(),T ('j",'.!) ."--L- '-1-1-1 . I \'-. ,'1.,', ,I, ~.!-1
<br />
|