CC_Minutes_2007_1203 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Truth-in-Tazation Hearing and Regular City Council Meeting Monday, December 03, 2007 Page 13 Councilmember Roe noted that it was upfront, but they have had to incur those costs with or without TIF monies. Councilmember Kough opined that Ryan had been good to the City of Roseville for many years; and opined his support for negotiating with them. Public Comment John Kysylyczyn, 3083 N Victoria Street Mr. Kysylyczyn, in his personal research of old records, noted that this wasn't the first time Ryan had been to the City seeking this money; and provided historical information from the Senate Tax Committee in 2001, attended by Mr. Kysylyczyn and former Councilmember Dean Maschka, along with lobbying of Ryan at the State level. Mr. Kysylyczyn further noted the City's cancellation in 2003 of a previous 5-10 year exclusive agreement with Ryan in the Twin Lakes area. Mr. Kysylyczyn offered a broader picture for 48 acres of property passed through al- leged closed door litigation to Ryan, along with requested zoning changes, and homeowner relocations. Mr. Kysylyczyn opined that "with risk comes reward," and suggested that if indeed Ryan lost money on the Centre Pointe project, that they provide an independent analysis and open their books completely to indicate sales, commissions, construction profits and kickbacks, for a determination of ac- tual losses or profits. Further discussion included any required TIF reporting on revenues by Ryan; and natural termination, rather than City-cancellation of the past exclusive agreement. Mayor Klausing opined that the question before the Council was not whether the City should feel sorry for Ryan Companies, but whether there was a greater public good to renegotiate this contract or hold Ryan to the letter of the contract; and whether the Council majority was interested in having Ryan make a presentation to the City Council. Councilmember Pust opined that she couldn't imagine what Ryan Companies could tell her that would make her feel inclined to renegotiate the contract, just because the risk worked out differently than anticipated; and further opined that she couldn't imagine what a greater public purpose may be. Councilmember Ihlan opined that one public purpose in negotiating the contract would be if there was a genuine threat of litigation. Councilmember Ihlan further opined that she wanted written legal advice as part of any negotiations with Ryan, given the City's past history with the past group of developers with Twin Lakes. Councilmember Ihlan opined that this was a public policy matter, and the City Council needed legal counsel as to whether there was a threat of litigation, and if no threat was evident, there would be no reason to forgive that money or to pro- vide them with any TIF subsidy.