2005_0411_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

is private data under the Data Practices Act, at least until the property has been acquired or an eminent domain case is underway. Accordingly, being private data, that parcel-specific appraisal data could not be released without creating liability for the City and the City Council. There may be other examples of data in Mr. Casserly's office that are private data or a mixture of private and public data under the state's Data Practices Act. Those situations would have to be reviewed before such data were released, assuming the Council wants to allow one or more of its Members to access that data at all. (Note: Through Mr. Casserly's public reports and through Rottlund's public submissions the Council and the community have had access to aggregate, not parcel-specific, data showing generally how much Rottlund anticipates it might cost to acquire all the property they don't currently control as part of this redevelopment project.) C. As to Rottlund materials in Rottlund's office, the situation is different. First of all, Rottlund data that has not been disclosed to the City or to the City's consultant is not the City's data, it is Rottlund's data. Second, at this point Rottlund has no contractual or legal obligation to make that data available to the City. Before the City approved Rottlund's second milestone under the Contract for Exclusive Negotiation, the City Council could have requested that Rottlund submit additional information to that which Rottlund already submitted on February 28 and March 14. But the Council majority having considered the information Rottlund did submit on February 28 and March 14, and a Council majority having adopted a Resolution on March 14 saying that Rottlund has met its obligations under the Contract for Exclusive Negotiation, there is no basis now for the City to mandate Rottlund to release or disclose additional information about its pro forma or the second milestone. The time has past under the Contract for Exclusive Negotiation for the City to mandate, by motion or otherwise, that Rottlund submit or make available additional material relating to Rottlund's pro forma or the second milestone. ff the Council still desires to have access to information in Rottlund's files in Rottlund's office relating to its pro forma or to some other aspect of the Twin Lakes project, a possible process to consider is to ask, not mandate but ask, Rottlund whether they would make some or all of their files in their office available for inspection by a Councilmember and, if so, under what circumstances.