CC_Minutes_2014_0127 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, January 27,2014 Page 22 fulfill their obligations under the lease agreement, providing a significant and di- rect interest in the matter. Ms. Mathern opined that they were of the opinion that the City Council had made a correct decision, and with the matter going before the Court of Appeals, it was their intent to file a brief as well, since their client has an interest in the outcome of any action. Ms. Mathern noted that the landlord had not been served as of last Friday, the last day to do so; and asked that the City Council not grant a stay, but continue forward as originally intended. At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Ms. Mathern confirmed that the lease agreement had been signed September 3, 2013. Mayor Roe offered both parties an opportunity to respond to comments made af- ter their initial testimony. Tamara O'Neill Moreland Ms. O'Neill Moreland clarified that they were not asking the City Council to re- verse their decision, but simply asking for a stay; while they sought the Court of Appeals action to reverse the City Council's decision. In addressing the definition of "respondent," Ms. O'Neill Moreland reviewed statute language regarding who needed to be served, questioning who the adverse parties were; and opining that just because someone said they were going to bring a motion did not mean they would be permitted to do so by law. Ms. O'Neill Mo- reland noted that Total Wine& Spirits had to pay rent regardless, and that negated their argument that the landlord was a respondent. While not having seen the lease or motion yet, Ms. O'Neill Moreland further opined that it may be depend- ent on how those improvements are recouped during the term of the lease. How- ever, Ms. O'Neill Moreland noted the need to focus on what is the damage to the City of Roseville. Regarding public safety issues, Ms. O'Neill Moreland referenced their submission showing research of what had occurred in other states; and regardless of their commitment to community, opined that the firm had committed errors in their op- erations resulting in significant fines, which had not been fully disclosed to the City Council during their earlier deliberations. Ms. O'Neill Moreland noted that the City was not considering this company for opening a shoe store, but for a con- trolled substance; and their apparent shell game of not disclosing what needed to be disclosed now needed to be done. David Tron Mr. Tron addressed damages, noting that the lease called for their firm to pay rent, with a ten-year lease, with fifteen years in options, which he had personally