2015-02-17_HRA_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Agenda 3 HRA Meeting Minutes Tuesday, January 20, 2015 Page 13 1 Discussion ensued regarding timelines based on which approach was taken and various parties 2 involved in the process, and recognizing that both the HRA and City Council meeting 3 schedules would need to be taken into consideration creating further delay for potential 4 actions; with consensus of the body that they wanted a definite drop dead date if negotiations 5 were to continue with GMHC. 6 7 At the request of Member Etten, Ms. Fleming stated that Western Bank would have their 8 approval or denial of this transaction within the two to three week time frame; and if it resulted 9 in denial, they would provide clear findings for that denial, including resolution of those items 10 that would move the project toward her approval. Ms. Fleming clarified that Western Bank 11 did not engage the services of an appraiser and take a proposal to this level without having 12 confidence that the project would get to the finish line. Ms. Fleming stated, on behalf of 13 Western Bank, that it would be their hope that a deal could be struck and GMHC could be in 14 the ground with the project sooner rather than later. Ms. Fleming stated that, if the HRA 15 granted a thirty-day extension to GMHC, Western Bank would work within those guidelines 16 and would seek to make their approval earlier if at all possible. 17 18 Further discussion ensued on timing of any extension with GMHC and meeting schedules of 19 the HRA and City Council; concerns about how the situation evolved to this point without 20 attempts to address issues; and document deadlines for staff to prepare reports to the HRA and 21 City Council in a timely manner. 22 23 Member Etten stated that he was leaning toward some sort of written extension to a date 24 certain with GMHC, but less than thirty days and within the meeting framework required. 25 26 Chair Maschka noted that the HRA and/or City Council could schedule a special meeting if 27 necessary. Chair Maschka expressed his agreement with an extension, as long as a date certain 28 was established, preferably within the 2-3 week timeframe provided by Western Bank to keep 29 things moving along if a new RFP was required. 30 31 Member Lee noted that all parties had been moving forward in good faith; and opined that it 32 seemed only fair to allow time for Western Bank to review the appraisal, noting that appraisals 33 on multi-family developers were costly and more complicated in their review than a simple 34 single-family homes appraisal. Member Lee further opined that since the appraisal was only 35 received last Friday, and before a holiday, it seemed prudent to allow time for sufficient review 36 before closing the door on GMHCs proposal. 37 38 Member Wall noted the incomplete nature of those items on page 2, Section 3, items a through 39 f of the PDA, and the need to make sure they are completed within the time frame allowed for 40 review of the appraisal and final financing decision, and not just ignore that, but make them 41 due by a date certain as well, or consider the deal over with. 42 43 Chair Maschka concurred with that comment. 44 45 At the request of Member Etten, Ms. Olson responded to the status of items a through f as 46 referenced in the PDA, noting that most are considered complete, but just not submitted to 47 staff. 48 49 Member Masche noted that the HRAs basic consideration is the amount of risk it wished to 50 take based on the facts presented and tonights discussion, including funds expended by both 51 parties; relationship considerations, working with a developer with a known reputation, an 52 interested lender, receipt of the appraisal currently under review, versus starting over again 53 with an unknown developer and possible lender that may come back with something 54 unacceptable to the HRA, City Council, or neighborhood. Member Masche noted that the 55 lender has testified that they will work in good faith to resolve any issues and make this project