My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-26-07-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
03-26-07-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2007 9:12:20 AM
Creation date
4/18/2007 11:34:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
Regular City Council Minutes
General - Type
Minutes
Date
3/26/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 26, 2007 <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes questioned the meaning of Clause 3. She noted that clause said if <br />there was nobody to transfer the property to, the property would not be used for public purpose. <br />Mr. Filla noted the City had already agreed to do this, so this was not adding an additional <br />burden on the City, but why the GSA wanted this he did not know. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpsted stated he read Clause 3 as two separate clauses. Ms. Wolfe stated they were <br />correct that item 3 was included at the suggestion of legal counsel in Kansas City and she <br />believed if they did not have a willing transferee, potentially the transfer of that piece would not <br />occur. She indicated she believed this was done for liability purposes and to not hold the City <br />liable. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes stated the City was not a willing transferee. Mr. Filla stated this was <br />partially a timing thing. He indicated they can close on the transaction with the GSA even if they <br />did not have someone to transfer the athletic field to. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes stated she did not understand the purpose of Clause 3; she did not <br />believe it was necessary, and she did not know why it was there. Ms. Wolfe responded the <br />reason it was in there was that there may be reasons discovered as they went through the process <br />up until closing and, if there was not a willing transferee, this would give them the ability to have <br />further discussions about that. She noted the property would need to get transferred back to the <br />City from the developer because the developer would have it for remediation. <br /> <br />Ms. Barton stated this would all be spelled out in the Master Development agreement as to who <br />RRLD would be transferring the property to after it was cleaned up. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden noted they had a workshop meeting on Thursday night and asked if <br />they could have an emergency session to approve this on Thursday night to give the staff time to <br />talk to legal counsel as to the need for Clause 3. <br /> <br />MOTION: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a <br />motion to table the current motion to an Emergency Council meeting on <br />March 29,2007. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS <br /> <br />A. TCAAP <br /> <br />Ms. Barton updated on the Council on recent TCAAP developments. <br /> <br />9. COUNCIL REOUESTS <br /> <br />A. Councilmember Grant asked when the street sweepers would be sweeping the <br />streets. Mr. Hoag responded they started street sweeping a week ago Tuesday. <br />He noted they were approximately half way done with the City as of today. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.