Loading...
HRA 10/13/1983 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1983 7:30 P.M. City of Fridley AGENDA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1983 7:30 P.M. Location: Council Chambers (upper level ) 'CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Housing & Redevelopment Authority Minutes: September 8, 1983 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: CONSIDERATION OF FRANK SHEAR ASSOCIATES PROJECT 1 1C (Johnson Printing & Packaging) Continued item from September 8, 1983 -PUBLIC HEARING ON DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY AT 40 77TH AVENUE N.E. . 2 (Frank Shear Associates) A. Documentation in folders CONSIDERATION OF SKYWOOD MALL/MOTEL PROJECT 3 - 3C CONSIDERATION OF MODIFICATION TO RELOCATION PAYMENT FOR COMMUNITY CREDIT 4 - 4E CONSIDERATION OF GEORGE M. HANSON COMPANY AS HRA AUDITORS . . . 5 - 5B INFORMATION ON LION'S CLUB 6 CHECK REGISTER 7 ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Commers called the September 8, 1983, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Larry Commers, Elmars Prieditis, Carolyn Svendsen, Duane Prairie Members Absent: Walter Rasmussen Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Sid Inman, Finance Director Dave Newman, City Attorney Jim Casserly, O'Connor & Hannan John Marsh, Langer Construction, Burnsville, Mn. Stu Weitzman, Johnson Printing & Packaging, Mpls. William & Judith Von Klug, Von Klug & Assoc. Mark Haggerty, Fridley APPROVAL OF JULY 14, 1983, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN, TO APPROVE THE JULY 14, 1983, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF JULY 21 , 1983, SPECIAL HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MS. SVENDSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE THE JULY 21, 1983, SPECIAL HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES,AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1 . REQUEST FOR CONTRACT CHANGES BY VON KLUG & ASSOCIATES: Mr. Boardman stated he felt this situation primarily revolves around a mis- understanding of the contract between Von Klug and Associates and the HRA, in the sense that when they started the contract in August 1982, Von Klug & Associates indicated there were two ways of going on a relocation contract. One would cost the HRA $9,000 and the other would cost the HRA $14,500. After some discussion on the matter, the HRA made the determination to go HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 2 with the $9,000 contract and carry out the relocation based on that contract. Somewhere down the line, Von Klug & Assoc. did take on the work that was necessary according to what their description was on that part of the contract that would have been part of the $14,500 contract. Mr. Boardman stated they got some indication of this in March when they got a billing saying Von Klug & Assoc. had completed $6,000 of the contract and were requesting an additional $3,000. The HRA started the contract by paying Von Klug & Assoc. $3,000 up-front with a payment due when certain projects were completed. On March 3, 1983, Von Klug & Assoc. did request an additional $3,000; and at that time, they did note there was an agreement that specified different services; however, they also said they were definitely due another payment of services, but that they were currently reviewing the situation. Mr. Boardman stated he had talked to Mr. Von Klug and Mr. Von Klug indicated they were working things out. Mr. Boardman stated he assumed that to mean that Von Klug & Assoc. were going to be able to work it out and still come under the $9,000 contract, but this was not the case. What they meant was they would work it out with the HRA for a contract modification. In August 1983, Von Klug & Assoc. came up with a contract modification. The problem with the contract modification is that the work had been completed without any opportunity for the HRA to approve or not approve those changes. Mr. Boardman stated he has talked this over with Mr. Newman. They have looked over the records and the contract, and based on the contract, they feel there was some obligation on the part of Von Klug & Assoc. to contact the HRA prior to the time those expenditures were going to be made. Mr. Boardman stated that at this point in time, the HRA has two alternatives: (1) The HRA can say there are no contract modifications; or (2) They can authorize Mr. Newman and Staff to sit down with Von Klug & Assoc. and try to come up with an equitable solution. Mr. Commers stated they have a copy of a breakdown of services performed by Von Klug & Assoc. from August 1982 through June 1983. Were there any real questions as to whether these services were or were not performed? Mr. Newman stated he did not think there was any dispute that Von Klug & Assoc. performed those services. In looking at the contract as prepared by l,on Klug & Assoc. the description of services are described in a general sense and in looking at the services provided, it appears a number of those things could easily have been included under services that were supposed to be pro- vided under the $9,000 contract and not as additions. Mr. Boardman stated Mr. Von Klug did meet with Staff as far as the acquisition of the items in Lennies' Laudromat. Von Klug & Assoc. are claiming that was acquisition work and not part of the relocation. The City did use their ser- vices but were not aware that it was an additional cost to the contract. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 3 Ms. Svendsen stated that on page 2 of Mr. Von Klug's Aug. 2, 1983, letter, Mr. Yon Klug stated that because two businesses' relocations were to be funded with CDBG funds, "the fast-track evaluation method cannot be used in that. circumstance; hence our contractual reference to a tax increment project, wherein the evaluation method is allowed". She asked Mr. Boardman to explain this. Mr. Boardman stated that when they started the project, they were not aware they were going to use CDBG monies. That didn't come up until the HRA approved the plaza. He stated one problem he has is that he has only received one kind of report, and that was the report Von Klug & Assoc. said they had used for CDBG-type projects, so Mr. Boardman had not noticed any changes. All the reports were the same reports. Mr. Prieditis stated he had studied the letters from Von Klug & Assoc. and Mr. Boardman's and Mr.Newman's reports. He felt a contract is a fixed-fee contract for a certain amount of money. He believed that the hours were spent by Von Klug & Assoc. , but this was not the contract agreed upon between the HRA and Von Klug & Assoc. He did not feel the HRA owed Von Klug & Assoc. anything over what was agreed upon in the $9,000 contract. Being professionals, Von Klug & Assoc. should recognize that sometimes projects are easier and some- times projects are more difficult. It is just part of the situation. Ms. Judy Von Klug stated there are several factors they feel enter into this. First of all , they did work on acquisition of property, even though their contract was for relocation. They buy permanent real estate and they buy trade fixtures and relocate the rest of the movable property. Their contract stated that they work with the movable property and the only reference in the services section on the acquisition was that they will make sure there is no duplication of payment. Ms. Von Klug stated their contract started on Sept. 17, 1982, and on Sept. 23 they started with Lennies' Laundromat. The first thing they found was that none of the fixtures had been acquired. This was something they had talked about with City Staff and felt there was an understanding that it was much less- expensive to the HRA to acquire fixtures than to move them. At that point, they expended at least 58 hours on seeing that the HRA acquired the fixtures, rather than relocating them. They would not have had to do that; they could have simply taken the inventory and worked with it. At the time they thought Mr. Boardman and City Staff understood what the contract covered and what it did not. When they talked to Mr. Boardman about the need to hire appraisers and get them on site and get these things taken care of, they mistakenly thought Mr. Boardman understood there was no acquisition within their contract, that it was only specified that they would make sure there was no duplication of payment. Their confusion was that when they talked to Staff about doing the work and were authorized to go ahead and work with the appraisers, they thought Staff understood this was not part of the base contract. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 4 Ms. Von Klug stated that with the introduction of CDBG funds, while it only affects two businesses, it not only affects the amount of documentation in the claim for the payment but also affects the amount of services they are required to give on an ongoing basis. That leaves them with the choice of whether they take those two businesses and give them special services they would not give to the rest of the businesses simply because the two businesses were funded one way and the other businesses were funded another way. Within their company, they believe very strongly that the Uniform Relocation Act's main purpose is to achieve uniformity, and that it would not be fair to give Dr. Ryans and the Battery Discount more services than the other businesses. That is why Mr. Boardman did not get two different reports--one for tax increment and one for CDBG funds and why they continue to work and give more services to the tax increment businesses. Again, they thought they had explained the two methods of services, and that the Staff understood the technical aspects well enough to see the difference and that Staff would know that when two businesses were funded with CDBG monies, it would trigger extra work. Mr. Commers asked what extra work was involved with the relocations funded with CDBG funds. Ms. Von Klug stated site search was one example. When they do an evaluation under tax increment, all they do at the initial time they go in is survey the market for about 2 weeks to determine if it looks like there are some types of vacancies available and make a prognosis as to whether that business will be able to find a site. Under CDBG, they are under an obligation to provide constant site search and make constant referrals to the businesses on an ongoing basis. Ms. Von Klug stated that in March 1983, they still hoped to be able to do the work under contract, but they found they couldn't. That is why on the March invoice they noted that there was a discrepancy on what they had provided and what was called for in the contract and that they were trying to evaluate it. The first letter to Mr. Boardman was dated in July 1983, and Mr. Boardman asked for a follow-up letter which was dated August 2, 1983. Ms. Von Kiug stated that, if anything, their biggest problem was they did not look out for themselves. Instead, they tried to look out for their client, the HRA. For example, when they started with Lennies and found the HRA had not acquired the fixtures, they should have stopped right there and renegotiated the contract. Instead, they went ahead and did the work under the assumption that Staff knew the limts of the contract and that what they were doing was in excess of that contract. They also honestly felt that with all the savings to the HRA for acquisition versus relocating, it would not be difficult to get paid for the extra hours they put in. Mr. Inman stated that if the HRA chooses to have Staff and Von Klug & Assoc. get together to negotiate a solution, he had no problem with that. However, he wanted to point out that ?in Mr. Newman's letter in reference to Paragraph J HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 5 of the contract, Mr. Newman pointed out that all changes in the contract must be in writing. To Mr. Inman's knowledge, there has been nothing in writing. If Ms. Von Klug"s contention was true, then it was the situation from the bidding perspective where you hire someone to provide apples and they are providing oranges which is something totally outside the contract. Mr. Commers stated it was certainly obvious that there was a lack of communi- cation and understanding between both sides. Mr. Commers asked Mr. Von Klug if they were willing to work with Staff to see if something could be worked out. Mr. Von Klug stated they were. Mr. Prieditis stated that from their previous background and experience, why hadn't Von Klug & Assoc. foreseen that some additional services might be required? Mr. Von Klug stated that in the Twin Cities area, they do not encounter this type of situation very often, mainly because the bulk of the appraisers who work with municipalities are familier with fixed appraisals. The appraiser the HRA hired, Mr. Mauser, was obviously not familiar with commercial properties. Ms. Von Klug stated Von Klug & Assoc. has been in business since 1974, and this is the very first time anything like this has happened. They have never had a contract increase. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO NEGOTIATE WITH VON KLUG & ASSOC. AND BRING BACK A RECOMMENDATION TO THE OCTOBER HRA MEETING. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Ms. Von Klug stated that if they got paid for every single thing they did, they would get $15,000. They recognize they did not look out for themselves in that they did not follow the procedure of their contract. Mr. Commers stated there seems to be problems on both sides of the situation in terms of understanding what the contract was, understanding what work was involved, and whether or not there were changes that were made that were within or without the contract. It seemed to him that there should be some reasonable way of trying to arrive at a medium ground in resolving it. Mr. Von Klug stated he agreed and that was why he and his wife were at the meeting. MOTION BY MR• PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO RESUBMIT THE MOTION TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO MEET WITH VON KLUG & ASSOC. IN AN ATTEMPT TO NEGOTIATE A REASONABLE SETTLEMENT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE HRA. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 6 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. PUBLIC HEARING ON JOHNSON PRINTING AND PACKAGING COMPANY- REQUEST FOR IDB ASSISTANCE: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON JOHNSON PRINTING AND PACKAGING COMPANY. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:25 P.M. Mr. Inman stated this is the first time the HRA has held a public hearing in this fashion, and there were two reasons for it: (1 ) When Johnson Printing and Packaging began to discuss coming to Fridley, Staff began to put into motion some of the processes for the types of financing they would need to review. The rationale was that since there is such a long lead time in the IDB process, they thought it was prudent on their part to get the public hearing on the agenda. To his knowledge, Johnson Printing and Packaging has not yet firmed up their final type of financing and, therefore, the only action for the HRA to take at this meeting is to hear public comment and hear about the project; (2) In some of the discussions and comments made by the HRA, the Staff and the HRA felt it was important to be made aware of all types of development in the City of Fridley, whether the HRA has a direct or a sub- sidiary interest. From that standpoint, Staff felt it was important to allow the HRA to hear testimony and discuss the project. In the future, Staff will probably be recommending similar types of hearings or at least discussions to ensure the HRA is informed of all types of IDB's throughout the City so they are aware of all types of developments, again whether it relates directly to the HRA or not. Mr. Inman stated that at the current time, Johnson Printing and Packaging is negotiating to establish a printing location on the property on Osborne Rd. (the Consolidated Can property). The request on the IDB application is for $4.3 million. There are some discusssions on the actual amount of financing when the final building plans are set up. Johnson Printing and Packaging is estimating that approximately 100 new jobs will be added. The estimated amount of taxes will be based on the final building plans and size. The original proposal was for 100,000 sq. ft. , but that has been reduced to 75,000 sq. ft. Mr. Inman stated Jim Casserly from O'Connor & Hannan was at the meeting serving as bond counsel , and there were two representati-es, one from Johnson Printing and Packaging, and one from Langer Construction. Mr. Casserly stated that the reserve financing mechanism evolves that the HRA, in fact, will be issuing the bonds and since the time when Johnson Printing and Packaging came in, they did not know what system would be avail- able, they decided to hold a public hearing before the HRA and the City Council . That is why there was a double notice and a double system in doing this. That may not have to be the case in the future. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 7 Mr. Coroners asked if the location where Johnson Printing and Packaging was planning to build was located in the tax increment district. Mr. Inman stated that at the current time, they are not included in the tax increment district. They are included in the modified project area that the HRA approved and sent on to the City Council. The City Council will be acting on the modified project area on Monday, Sept. 12. Mr. Inman stated that at this time, there is no action required by the HRA until Johnson Printing and Packaging has its financing all arranged. If Johnson Printing and Packaging does need assistance, then there is a ho e p . " ' can o ow o a•. is area in o e ax lncremen .is n c . Mr. John Marsh, Langer Construction Co. , stated this would be a 75,000 sq. ft. printing plant--a very clean printing plant. There will be 15,000 sq. ft. of office and 60,000 sq. ft. of manufacturing with the ability to expand another 60,000 sq. ft. Johnson Printing and Packaging prints packaging for different products sold commercially. The building will be primarily of masonary construction, 16 ft. high and located on about 61/2 acres. The building will front on 77th St. Mr. Stu Weitzman, Vice President of Johnson Printing and Packaging, stated that right now they are located at 300 - 1st Ave. So. Johnson Printing and Packaging has been in existence since about 1912, at which time they had a location in both downtown Minneapolis and downtown St. Paul . Approx. 1920 they merged the two plants and were operating out of a portion of one floor in the building they currently own. It is a lovely, historic, five-story building, but, unfortunately, they have outgrown it. They are looking at moving their manufacturing onto one floor which will allow them to have larger format equipment and a tremendous amount of production savings. Mr. Weitzman stated the project is going forward very well . They hope to have all the financing completed by the following week. They would like to move ahead very quickly and would like to begin breaking ground and start building soon. Mr. Commers stated they are looking forward to having Johnson Printing and Packaging in Fridley, and the HRA will do whatever they reasonably can to accommodate them. Mr. Weitzman stated City Staff has been tremendous, and the cooperation with the City Staff is one of the reasons why Johnson Printing and Packaging is very excited about coming to Fridley. Mr. Commers asked if any special meetings were going to be necessary. Mr. Casserly stated that depending on the structure of the financing and the arrangement with the company to provide some assistance, it may require a very short special meeting for the HRA to authorize whatever arrangements are needed. Johnson Printing and Packaging can start construction after the preliminary resolution is approved, but the kind of assistance the City might provide is going to require further resolutions. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 8 Mr. Coroners requested Staff to put together a memo to the HRA defining tn detail the nature and the extent of the types of assistance that Johnson Printing and Packaging might be reauesting. He stated he would like that memo mailed to the HRA members prior to the next meeting. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:45 P.M. Mr. Commers stated further consideration on this item would be carried over to the October meeting unless a special meeting was necessary. He thanked Mr. Marsh and Mr. Weitzman for coming and wished them good luck with their project. 3. CONSIDERATION OF A REDRAFT OF RIGHT OF DEVELOPMENT WITH ST. PHILIPS HUMAN SERVICES, INC. (Aug. 11 , 1983, Letter to St. Phillips Human Services, Inc. from Executive Director) Mr. Boardman stated this was on the July agenda as a possible alternative if St. Phillips was going to the option arrangement.. At this time, they have not gone into that option; however, Howard Helgen will be working with Mr. Saliterman over the next couple of weeks. Mr. Boardman stated he gave Howard Helgen a copy of the August 11th letter on this subject to see if Mr. Helgen had any problems with it. Mr. Helgen indicated St. Phillips Human Services, Inc., had no problems with it. Mr. Boardman stated this letter was a rewrite based on the service based on the appraisal the HRA had done. The HRA's appraisal came in at $2.20/sq. ft. St. Phillips 'possible option is $2.36/sq. ft. Mr. Commers stated that in giving assistance and acquiring property directly, they have always required an appraisal and have been required to go basically with their appraisal with respect to the acquisition. Their appraisal in this case is $2.20. If St. Phillips Human Services, Inc., enters into the option with. $2.36/sq. ft. , the HRA can still give them assistance since the HRA will not be acquiring the property; however, their option price is in excess of what the HRA's appraisal would seem to indicate should be paid for the property. Mr. Boardman stated that was correct. Staff is suggesting that the HRA give St. Phillips assistance up to $2.20/sq. ft. St. Phillips has gotten commit- ments for other assistance from the City with CDBG funds of $00,000 which would cover the balance of the acquisition. There is a possibility the HRA could provide other assistance in other areas, such as soil correction, but he felt their actual commitment was the $2.20/sq. ft. appraisal . Mr. Coroners asked if there was any action required of the HRA. Mr. Boardman stated the HRA had previously approved a right of development to St. Phillips Human Services, Inc. , which covered their actual acquisition of that property and, if not, it would be a condemnation action. In this situa- tion, because St. Phillips is talking about entering into an option, if they get that option, the HRA needs a different kind of right of development. That is why this letter was written. • HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 9 Mr. Boardman stated he would like approval from the HRA of this right of development so they have this on record as the right of development for St. Phillips since they are planning on entering into an option agreement. It was his understanding that St. Phillips was agreeable to this proposal . Legal staff has reviewed the agreement and feels the HRA is protected. Mr. Commers asked if there was any reasonable expectation that additional monies will be requested by St. Phillips Human Services, Inc. Mr. Boardman stated there is some reasonable expectation that there is going to be some soil correction on this site which would be in the range of $24,000. He wanted to make it clear that the maximum assistance the HRA would grant in any case is $320,000 or the amount of taxes that would be generated on that project, and that he had stated in the letter that the "total HRA assistance including future commitments, shall not exceed $320,000 or that value of tax increments generated based on the development of 40 units with a building value of $1 ,360,000, paying an estimated $47,649 in taxes". Mr. Commers stated it was his concern that it is clear to St. Phillips Human Services, Inc. , the type of assistance they are going to be getting so they do not make any commitments beyond what is reasonably expected of the HRA. Mr. Boardman stated he has explained this in depth to Howard Helgen, and Mr. Helgen understands the situation. Mr. Boardman stated he had recommended to Mr. Helgen that any option they do go into with Mr. Saliterman be run by the HRA attorney to make sure both the HRA and St. Phillips Human Services, Inc. , have some amount of protection. Mr. Helgen indicated they would have to put up $2,000 as far as an option payment; however, there are stipulations within that option that, if for whatever reason they do not get their funds or the HRA does not come up with funds, St. Phillips will get that $2,000 back. Mr. Commers stated that as he understood it, Mr. Boardman will rewrite this letter with a current date and submit it to St. Phillips for their signature. Mr. Boardman stated that was correct. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE THE NEW LETTER GRANTING ST. PHILLIPS HUMAN SERVICES, INC., A RIGHT OF DEVELOPMENT AS PROPOSED IN THE LETTER DATED AUGUST 11, 1983. UPON A VOICE VOTE, COMMERS, PRIEDITIS, PRAIRIE VOTING AYE, SVENDSEN ABSTAIN- ING, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED. 4. CONSIDERATION OF NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT WITH COMMUNITY CREDIT COMPANY: (Letter from Virgil Herrick) Mr. Boardman stated that at the HRA's June meeting, they had discussed that Community Credit was looking for leasehold damages. At that time, the HRA authorized Staff to try to negotiate with Community Credit to get those leasehold damages covered . Agellft HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETINGt_ SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 10 Mr. Boardman stated Mr. Herrick has been working with Brian Hurd of Community Credit, and they have come up with the solution for settlement as outlined in Mr. Hurd's letter to Mr. Herrick dated August 12, 1983. They agreed to leasehold damages in the amount of $3,750, but the HRA would also cover the appraisal fee of $300. The HRA will note that there is a figure of $12,752 for leasehold fixtures and improvements. Those are fixture pur- chases that would have to be made anyway. There is also another cost they had just received from Von Klug & Assoc. at tonights meeting for relocation costs. Those relocation costs are in the amount of $1 ,558.54. Relocation costs would also have to be made regardless of any settlement of the leasehold damages. MOTION BY MS. SVENDSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION MADE BY MR. HERRICK, CITY ATTORNEY, WITH RESPECT TO A SETTLEMENT TO COMMUNITY CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,360.54 (WHICH INCLUDES A RELOCATION PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,558.54). UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. DISCUSSION ON HARDWARE BUILDING: Mr. Boardman stated there is no specific proposal from the Lions Club at this time. The last time they talked to the Lions Club was a couple of months ago, and what the Lions were looking at was a reduced payment initially in the first year. They looked at a 3-year lease with two 1-year options which would have extended the lease out five years. If they were to go into the building, they said they would have to put about $50-55,000 into the building to bring it up to code. Mr. Boardman stated that if the HRA felt comfortable with this kind of arrange- ment with the Lions Club, Staff will work very hard to negotiate with them to put them into the building. He stated the only thing that might possibly come to the hardware building is the Fridley Medical Center, which is looking at an expansion of an additional 60,000 sq. ft. by 1986. If this would be the case, there would be the potential problem with the two 1-year options which the Lions Club wanted. Mr. Commers asked if there could be exceptions put into those options that the Lions could have those options with the one exception that if a right of development is granted and development does start on that parcel , the HRA could terminate or the Lions would lose their option ability. Mr. Boardman stated this could be discussed with the Lions Club to see if they were in agreement. He stated they would work with the Lions Club to See if some reasonable solution could be worked out that would not tie the hands of the HRA if development did go in on this property. Mr. Commers directed Staff to contact the Lions Club and explore this matter further. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 11 Mr. Boardman stated that, regarding the hardware building, he has been approached by-Kurt Schrupp of the Fridley Jaycees about the possibility of again using the hardware building for their Halloween haunted house. He had told Mr. Schrupp he would bring this request before the HRA at the Sept. meeting. Mr. Commers stated he had no problem with the Jaycees using it for this purpose. He stated he thought it was a great use for the building, and the funds are used for their service efforts. Mr. Coroners stated it was the concensus of the HRA members to approve the use of the hardware building by the Jaycees for their annual haunted house activity. 6. CONSIDERATION OF HRA NEWSLETTER: Mr. Boardman handed out copies of a sample newsletter. He stated it would probably be mailed out to the public around Oct. 15. He stated the total cost of the newsletter is approx. $3,000. He felt it was well worth the expenditure. It is something that should be done, not only this year, but be an annual publication by the HRA. Mr. Boardman stated he was looking for the HRA to authorize the expenditure of the funds needed to put the newsletter together. Mr. Commers stated he thought the members should be allowed time to comment and make suggestions before the newsletter is mailed out. Mr. Boardman stated the members will get the proofs and will get time to comment and make changes before the newsletter is printed and mailed out. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO GIVE STAFF THE AUTHORITY TO GO AHEAD WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE FRIDLEY HRA NEWSLETTER. Mr. Commers and Mr. Prairie both expressed some concern about the timing of the newsletter coming out just before elections. They did not want it to become a political tool. The newsletter should be a factual brochure and that is all. Mr. Boardman stated the problem they are seeing right now is most people do not understand the tax increment district or the function of the HRA. He felt it was very important at this time for the HRA to explain its role and function and get the facts out to the public. Mr. Newman stated he did not think it was realistic to pretend this newsletter will not be political , no matter how well it is presented and how factual it is. People are going to interpret it the way they want to interpret it. } HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 12 Mr. Inman stated he has been with the City for five years, and the biggest criticism he has received is that people are not told what is going on or are getting misinformation. The City is never criticized for the quarterly newsletter. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. FINANCIAL REPORT: Mr. Inman stated the first report was the HRA's Combining Funds as of 9/7/83. He had also included a bill for $30,138 for salaries up until the end of Sept. There will be forthcoming approx. an additional $4,000 which will not he salaries. The reason for this is that certain people that bill the City, bill for both City and HRA-related expenses. They are now trying to explain to people that they should bill the City and HRA separately. Mr. Inman stated there was a memo requesting the HRA to approve the payment of $30,138 that will bring the year-to-date total to $35,581 for total staff expenses. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN, TO AUTHORIZE THE PAYMENT OF $30,138 FOR SERVICES RENDERED BY THE CITY FOR HRA PROJECTS. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. CHECK REGISTERS: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE THE CHECK REGISTER DATED AUG. 8, 1983, TOTALLING $304,804.26. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN, TO APPROVE THE CHECK REGISTER DATED SEPT. 1, 1983, TOTALLING $5,207.17. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. OTHER BUSINESS: a. Additional Services Due InterDesign Mr. Boardman stated that under the contract with InterDesign was a section on additional services. Those are services that are requested specifically by the HRA for design work. InterDesign did the design work, new design work was added, and because of other modifications, InterDesign was asked to go back and redo some areas. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 13 Mr. Boardman stated he sat down with people from InterDesign and City Engineering staff who have been working on the project and reviewed the seven items listed under additional services by InterDesign. The only one the City felt was inappropriate was #5 (changes to the fountain slab and wall details that were directed by the City and then had to be readjusted). InterDesign did agree to drop .#5. At this time, the City feels the other six additional services are appropriate for InterDesign. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF $1,090 TO INTERDESIGN FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. b. Invoices from Court Appointed Commissioners Mr. Boardman stated they have received three invoices from the three commissioners appointed to the Hearing of Ryan's Auto condemnation. Each invoice was for 8 days at $100 per day, totalling $800. Mr. Conmers stated he thought $800 seemed rather expensive. He could understand the fee of $100/day, but he could not imagine eight days of work being necessary. He stated these invoices should be held over until the next meeting and Staff should check into this further. c. Demolition of Structures at 6339-6389 University Ave. N.E. Mr. Boardman stated the HRA did approve a contract with Renollett Trucking of $12,950 for the demolition of these structures. Previously, the HRA approved the first payment for $8,611 .75. The final payment of $4,338.25 is now due to Renollett, and he would recommend the HRA approve that payment. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN, TO APPROVE THE FINAL PAYMENT FO RENOLLETT TRUCKING IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,338.25. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. d. Telephone Quotation Mr. Boardman stated that once the structures at 6339-6389 University were removed, they wanted to grade that area, put in black dirt and sod. They did get two telephone estimates on the cost. One estimate was for $1 ,040 and one from Renollett Trucking for $960. He stated they approved the $960 and now need authorization from the HRA to pay that contract. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 PAGE 14 MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE THE PAYMENT TO RENOLLETT TRUCKING FOR $960 FOR THE GRADING AND SPREADING OF BLACK DIRT ON THE DR. RYANS' BUILDING SITE. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE SEPTEMBER 8, 1983, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, (%z. -x_.1_ 444 Lynne Saba Recording Secretary Item 1 THE CITY OF C .. HOUSING .. _._ € �_ tAnil ,, .. and '=' ' (11; REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ::: • E ... .:i:::"---1::: FRIDLEY ...� FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MEMO NO.83-72 DATE October 7, 1983 TO ACTION INFO. SUBJECT Housing & Redevelopment Authority x Johnson Printing & Packaging (Referred to as Frank Shear Associates for purposes of Private Development Agreements) As was discussed at the September 8, 1983 meeting, we have been successful in our negotiations to bring Frank Schear Associates into the City on the redevelopment property located at 40 77th Avenue N.E. I have enclosed for your consideration, the draft Contract for Private Development between the HRA and Frank Shear Associates. The contract terms call for the HRA acquisiton of the redevelopment property through the exercising of the option being held by Johnson Printing at the agreed to value. The HRA will then sell the property to Frank Shear Associates at an equal value for the construction of the facility. $30,000 will then be placed in an interest bearing account as a reduction to the purchase price and held until a certificate of completion is issued. When the certificate of completion is issued, the $30,000, plus interest, will be paid to the company. If the certificate is not issued within 18 months from the contract date, the $30,000, plus interest, returns to the HRA for its use. With your consideration of the Contract Documents is also the Resolution No. HRA 16-1983 _ approving and authorizing the execution of a contract for private development. Representatives of the Company and Representatives of O'Connor Hannon (HRA Bond Counsel ) will be at the meeting for any discussion on this matter. I will also have additional information on the taxes generated by the proposed development. JLB/de • • r SZ - •-.... ; VOTING f 8Q . .:•,:t", .?r;';-..-.'-'47,;'1.7:'.',..7%.1 j — — _ ..- ... OISTIKC75 DISTRICTS = t � J:l — �x1 ils\ ._--_ /— . I J -_ mo -_I ' I• \ t - ^ v ot Ai1111Th - . > 'R ..- _ -/ _ _ • ! r I 7'. •-c- :i - I + 1- X11 II- i I . W1 _l -E - I 6 r'1 j ��1 �r hr- I II ) y _ , 1 I ,a 1. ! /4, : js ,....... ......., . . • . . , ,,,,, . ._ , . . _. _ .. . _. .... . . . . .. ... . .. ... . . 7...,.. , . ..... ,,,..,...", , lc ..., . ii .,..... . jr l fiktetito ir°6°°C11------ 46 41e• tt I I 1 ih.-..h..rv.nrr F I I � -- • *so' 1 • i.+f.o• j ,iso' ` T lMa• .o' T • ... 1 i ri . j ... a • V ,s-q, • 0 4 i IPI I i cm . ,1 -1,� ylC L S , t o L 1 � 1.! Wfl1fI I U It ..... 1 iii � � �ii ,s....� , , ...,.. , . 1 ,„ .1 „,. ...c.. , , 11. ,..,, I I , I I I L la Item #2 TIRE CITY OF -77J,1211, HOUSING 1IN "'.€ and �, .,. REDEVELOPMENT ,MEMORANDUM .. AUTHORITY :__ FRIDLEY ... T `.. FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MEMO NO. 83-73 DATE October 7, 1983 TO ACTION INFO. SUBJECT Housing & Redevelopment Authority X Public Hearing on Disposal of Property at 40 77th Avenue N.E. Because State Law requires a public hearing on the disposal of HRA property and the contract documents between Frank Shear Associates and the HRA callfor such a sale, we have called for a public hearing at this meeting, October 13, 1983) so as to be considered with the Contract for Private Development. Attached is a resolution authorizing the sale of property to Frank Shear Associates as per the Contract Documents. JLB/de Item #3 THE CITY OF --Ej„„,i, -- HOUSING :=�- -- and �, - .,. -. Altai REDEVELOPMENTMEMORANDUM .. ,.. AUTHORITY _ ,'' : k 3 :: 90111 . FRIDLEY ��� , FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MEMO NO. 83-74 DATE October 7, 1983 TO ACTION INFO. SUBJECT Housing & Redevelopment Authority X Skywood Mall Project Please see the attached copy of the site plan for the new Skywood Mall Project that is being submitted to the City Council for Public Hearing on October 17, 1983 for the issuance of IDB financing. As was discussed with you previously, we will be bringing all IDB projects that are located in redevelopment project areas before the HRA. The project developers will be at the meeting to address and questions that you may have. No Action is needed by the HRA at this time. JLB/de ".1 VOTING I I SC11OOLs ' OIS! CTS /`-\- C 1 CTS (a r - � ---- \-' -'",, z--------"L' I ''' : --"-- — . t:.1 :-& I., 1 I ' .11 I _7:___,A;,, t 17 1 1 P h s : .'i[=-- 0 1 m ter- �,- - ,r __� /� �� rl J °� I J I I I n 31__ I 7 , - ill ?_I_, �: L.I.!Lt, �. � —\ k--._a te__ i; IL_it ILLI :' ,I -.. • _1c II -'• I I j I� 1 ill ' r 3 =. . F J: as-r_ ti. I .. l` P I. �. r '� ::11",4........ z I 17 -..�r 1 �. A illy, • 't L `- � iL�� t 1 `` - �� I . �� lar •v, w 1 1 / \\\-11,7- y tibi _Lii-i-i--1,' t_ ss... ,--------:' ,_ ?02,0)6 C.T" y , -'tip ' ‘ :,..,..\\ i , —T—- — =.: -1 ---. - :T-5-..117.A.: '.: --'-'z :7=7 E •-•ii^ ' -—t '' t.-LIIII'I 1-- ::----;?; ii —,.. , rs-Fe,-ti. F-.1. 1 k-— il E — I Vie: -- E. -- L. _. .e..� �-_ cornms Ls. aii - — „STRET MAP—CITY OFLLe FRIDLEY M- ♦ 5 S 41 Ill •IL U: co zzlIt.J.i, il?sti ,, .i _ . 1- 2 ts4114iii;ii !lt ill It .1 3C < • .i. •p..t t 4••• ct ekit`''‘,_ •,,, \ mmil z a. qi ,4".........r.x42,.... 11 )•• 4' • , IlL f CI III,' 7. S . ir•0 ft*? 0 o•voilo..,, „a . ••"•.:•.1• .% s• 3. a %% --.7 ....••, ..... e' i' l$i$IYY§IEE1.1 ..- ; 1 . . ' •• % • f , . N I -. m-•-• , , .. a • • .\s:._,y' 41 i ' ) • . i. )• .),..j ..•-__...;'. i • 'I. -. . , • ....:..0 ....._„..Y.. ,• * '' -.%). ?'-' .I' -..1.. 'j/ - .. • \' ' - A • %s_.../`t : . . ',----- '--- ‘s-•--P./\...„2.„.,* . , -,• ••••rs...„...• 't,. .. • ;- ... , • _ .... - ' 1 ---- - • . "..,_ -,,•:. .-.:, ` _ .k . \.c..../ .... , ; . ' -.11 • 1 - 1.;•-...k-,.. •%, • . . .' k• ...\•••••,,:••••\ .•...":f, • l'• % • .. I '47' . •* • ---. 4 ,.* , ••.N.,'• • ''.. ., ,... . - •, 6 / • I . -- ., • •••t- •""."- flt/PAIllk...“.7. ,1%. t•._%.4.-x14174.11‘. ' •. ..., \ . • .. • •...• --ter,,,,.. • i . . . . . . •... _ . 1 .. . • . . -. . . . i .: . ! ' '. . se-stn• ioNotirar-ala - . • I :' • . --!•• 1 ,• I ....P•' WIDNES .1.....1=1011=IIIR.L 7..1111111111111r.ININNI111.2111.1111.11101111•111110 .. it _,..,... .., •- ,,. .44 .Prir . -. . ., • •. . • •-- r• ,-. .... . ; - , ,, .76ar%.• - -a."',s a... .,_. .; :,•-*: - .,.„...,,,,all•... . • • • •• .t.. . ...t ,,.. •, rir- le...v ,e6, _ ....4. ....r. . r ..... . . ,p ., 4,4 - ..,.,_,..„r(. . ... st• .-;- ; iN'f,,,,,..• ‘..... .• -.I A:177 •• ; ' # 4.1 1 - .'..• - o.•Wovi: .74; '-,-;' 4 jo,,....14k/ . . - ...: ...•• - • I g - __ .. . _ f - - tii' •••". .• 43r 7 .,..,,.. , -mr.- -.--f.v....L-.).,-.,.,;.r .7 ;1" : r,...i. • 1..• . '-% i,,,. -:r:•. ..)- -. „is:41Ft / 10... •- .. • a . ' '. `, - • . -0 ..,,.. ..e. -. •., . ...:-.. - .--..-.• .k...?5$ •-.1.-'• -1.• 4, NE -. I • ,'1 *;' '04 ..r 4 -"-: ,t'. '1.- - -;.i''-- -:i•. . .. 4:."0-14.4;;,„fiillo..77,,;- .",-. ,."-..s,.:'• -; ;--•••• ?4,4,Pik 01 E• ' 4,16-c -1• ./7Z.'" 7 -11 - • -......71-• •'''':' r•et----. '•,... ...... • ii... . ..:-. , . .: ..,• • IN- ..,. ,• - •••#,:.44„0,-...:x.•11 I. '• ; - 4.,•••--,....., .., . ,„. .... •-.• via .-- - • - .• ..- ..„ • ... ., ..,0 ._ . --,,,,,,.......:,,,...„. ...,„,,,,„;e, ,; • '-44: - '- :._ _, ,, ..e. .. ...,,ii, _,4 „4,.. .... •,•... ,.. .-..7 ./;A; . ..,, $ 11,1"111.1, . . ‘ ."0 -1 " • -0.kJ ...,4tir •- .4. .,,,-. . ' kr: .it,l‘• r.\44/0.4 -.3...6 ..--,4.,;,•.: 4 • AT- ‘,- • . ,. --, : . ..- .1,, p. . • ;4... i 1 -,"....."' - Xs'. - C'•.,;•:'--,34. .... .- , - ..„.. . - '". •ow .1 ' Mt- -:-'''-.- ,' rijr ., i,.. A -A, 7 - ,et•-4-..;,' ",`, :,;„N-. 7 -:4 • ,-.;" "rtt- .0,--.:.,c. ` .1 ' • ' ..3,a.v.,r.-i '•-.,, ."". i4: ' ----vie ,i••P•! 7'F.;4f, •-, ..,41'. P` .••% ' - 4-4:*".. ;...'''S'''.- .1 -..1 -S' b't :t.,- 1" .... ' . A.,:-%.'"--=7. -. ti`-- . ..,:fe"...14....• :.'.,..4.'i:- .. T , ,.. . ' ' -''''. f,... • tk ' . 5 ' ' -ei'm --. 4001 ' • *' . ''. - c..•rtrigli, ''''t',•'...'''• i'•rvis-4" 4:.. , . .. .... . - -..' 7-4. 14 :••' -,:ilir„ ' 'pt., ' ‘., • ••-• • %,•1. h.,'•'.:."-:-.. rc:"....--." ....lir ' r. 1....„ ... .. . . ,-. of .' .. 4,..••' • .4. .. . '.." ." 4i . • . -7. . '.. • 4•••F - -.". • -• - - .4. imer„4-1.;.. ...,. • 4 s.-:-...."....-•••„.:: - .ir-. '7 .volaC'' , • ."*.; 7.,,:„‘ : , ."' . • -. --4 1 . , -111.7,40grilik..!1..e.:•ii%i&-iii- 1111M, la 1111.111111.11111111111 4 •7x.e.-.4k Newil--. a, - -:-•-• -r..:- "QT.", .k.t.... ,_ „.4• , -. fit - .: i . , ....-. i .--,_:- . . i . ii 0 . I . .i . .,. _ .. , ... • . . . •• 1 . . , • ..•,• . .. . ...,. .<,, • ...._r_...,... , ‘2' , • • 'W.gbirt • .16,-, ' • 1 . . • • 1 iia....'.4 . .11 • . . 14W ./ • -, . 4 . . IP- 1 • --.F. , Z a V At I • 30 411m.......-....• • / . . w. • .. n• 1 • 1 -;• • ...,. O ; ,-.. 2; _--1" , : • . . . • ., .• , .g,___w,,,-. il . •s . .Y\ , . f ... . . ., .- .1,' -• ,-. . _- 1 . . • t t' t . . ., C•:.-?:. "ti :- '6, •-'_•1, ''• ' - . Ir.-2‘...1 .• •'... _.. - 1 •. t I • • (...`? . • . , .•...__1 k... ••. . , - . ' . :,:a ', .,-,""- ,,-"f-.--,4 •••.•: -• ..-l..i•-%. -...4tz•.•-Nbli• 1. l- . Y af.- -. ." . •--....v... . ..• . . : .. - .. i ‘-' , '.- ' -24. . .. = • • • . , _ 7. -1.-- = .• • ;. .m. 1 .I,Ut.,..' _:... I . I. A - s .••; . . i ,:, .•• , • • - • •. : . . • • . . . . . .. • • . • . ' . . . .. . i , { .• • l' .• .- 7 4 t""'''''';‘..,"."7,- : •••••-•-•-••e--1".":•i:,...!"... .....:;;; 1: .7.4.' •:•- t'6,„; ' '4 ' • .4 r • "=' ': •••• _. - 10=4.00.4 -.• ci • • .. , :' - ' .. .....4-:;: • ••- -i . -,, ........1....w ...: : :. ;' .-. •- 1 0:.. _ . :.. . • .1 , ' '; ". , e.".,• ..• .. . • / . ••••••••11.•"'") ; . :.- - ;'••- ,..",, ' ' ..• - . . . I. • • ." A . . , . • •• • - t • ‘ I ; • '•,•/ .•-•'t, . (11 ' - ' . • •.ti • • ,, • . . 4 , • ' • • • i . .. •. - . • • • . : ' • :.•7: -_ _ `1. • )1Tili 11 IIJ 1 ii11-11 rf .• • . _ . . ... . . . , . . . . .:: . . ,. . . . _ . . .. . . _ . Item #4 THE CITY OF ---TjAily "' HOUSING C -' .. Aritir--- and .. REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ...:: f � MEMORANDUM ,.. , ....�, ::: ... ;�I FRIDLEY •„... FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MEMO NO.83-75 DATE October 7, 1983 TO ACTION INFO. SUBJECT Housing & Redevelopment Authority X Modification to the Relocation Payment to Community Credit On September 8, 1983, the HRA authorized a total of $18,360.54 in payments to Community Credit Company. These payments as recommended by our attourney, Virgil Herrick, were broken down as follows: Fixture Acquisition $12,752.00 Lease Hold Damage Settlement $ 3,750.00 Appraisal Costs $ 300.00 An additional figure of $5,558.54 was added for relocation because we had received our consultants report at the meeting. On September 9, 1983, I discussed this action of the HRA with Mr. Hurd, attorney for Community Credit, who indicated that he was satisfied with the HRA action with the exception of the cost excluded from the relocation report by Von Klug & Associates in the amount of $854.34. Mr. Hurd felt that the move notice of $214.34 and the new signage facia and canisters of $640.00 as submitted as part of their cost documentation is clearly part df their-relocation expenses allowed to the Company under law. In further discussion between Dave Newman and Mr. Hurd, they have reached an agreement for payment of $214.34 for the move notices with no reimbursement for sign costs. If this arrangement is acceptable to the HRA, I would request authorization to increase the total payment to Community Credit by $214.34 for a total of $18,574.88. JLB/de 4A K'.: 4725 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD/SUITE 401 MINNEAPOUS.MINNESOTA 554 IS 15123/25-5557 DENVER AREA(3031431-5123 September 12, 1983 Mr. Brian Hurd Corporate Law Department Community Credit Company 3101 West 69th Street Edina, MN 55435 Subject: Relocation Evaluation 6339 University Avenue NE Outlet Fridley Center City Project Dear Mr. Hurd: Enclosed please find a copy of the Business Relocation Evalua- tion which was formulated and completed, as well as approved on September 8 , 1983 , by the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Please note that an evaluation is a much more cursory report of eligible benefits than is a formal claim booklet. It also does not require the claimant' s signature. Due to the time limitations, you were not notified of the status of your re- quest, however it is my understanding that you have had discussions with Jerry Boardman regarding same. Exhibit VIII will be of special interest to you and is self- explanatory involving those costs which are not specifically reimbursable under the applicable legislation. If you wish to file a grievance for those expenditures, please contact Mr. Boardman, who will set up the procedure for the Fridley HRA. Von Klug 6 Associates, Inc. Specialists in Redevelopment Relocation • 4B Mr. Brian Hurd September 12, 1983 Page 2 Thank you for your cooperation in documenting your relocation expenses. Sincerely, acquelyne Wentworth Relocation Consultant sl mac: Jerrold L. Boardman Von Klug 6 Associates, Inc. Specialists In Redevelopment Relocation 4C COSTS EXCLUDED FROM RECOMMENDATION Two specific costs have been mentioned by the claimant as being eligible for reimbursement by the Fridley HRA. They are the following: I. Move Notice A. Stock $ 15.36 B. Envelopes 11.93 C. Typesetting and printing 17. 05 D. Postage 170. 00 E. Subtotal $214. 34 II. Signage A. New Facia Plates $540.00 B. New Canister 100. 00 C. Subtotal $640. 00 III. Total $854 .34 Payment of the former cost is not compensable under State Law as there is no provision made in that legislation for reimburse- ment of advertising the move. Reimbursement of the latter expenditure is not allowable because , it is our understanding that the Fridley HRA is purchasing all the business' s signage as immovable fixtures. It is the considered opinion of Von Klug & Associates , Inc. that payment of the above costs are inappropriate, and excessive given the circumstances; therefore no reimbursement is advised. If, however, the HRA deems these acceptable, all other displaced businesses must be handled in the same manner. 'on Klug 6 Associates, Inc. Specialists In Redevelopment Relocation 4D :4\\JP1414:11\P COMMUNITY CREDIT CO. EXECUTIVE OFFICE 3101 west 69th Street Edino.Mnnesoto 55433 Mono:9209270 September 14 , 1983 Ms. Jacquelyne Wentworth Von Klug and Associates, Inc. 4725 Excelsior Blvd . Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 Dear Ms . Wentworth, I have reviewed the Business Relocation Evaluation report which you submitted to the Fridley HRA in connection with our claim for reimbursement of relocation expenses. I believe your conclusion that expenses associated with the move notice are not compensable cannot be supported by applicable law and ask that you reconsider your recommendation to the Fridley HRA that they not be paid . The federal regulations found at 42 C.F.R., section 42.1 , et seq. govern the payment of relocation expenses whether or not the acquisition is accomplished with the assistance of federal funds. See Minn. Stat. §117.52. Section 42.305(12) generally authorizes the payment of any moving related ex- penses that are not ineligible under section 42.313, provided they are determined to be reasonable and necessary. The move notice is not covered by any of the catagories of ;neligible expenses found in section 42.313. The question, therefore, is whether the expense is reasonable and necessary. I be- lieve it is inaccurate to characterize the move notice as an advertising expense. Instead, the notice is designed to advise our customers of our new address. As you know, our company is engaged in the consumer loan business. As such, it is absolutely essential that our customers be appraised of where and how to make their loan payments. Failure to ap- praise them of our new address would result in substantial delays in receiving loan payments, cause defaults and default charges on loans and reduce daily cash collections. More- over, customers who intend to pay in person or obtain secur- ity documents after payment in full would in many cases be unable to determine the location of our office. I also be- lieve the state banking department would harshly criticize any licensed lender which relocated its office without noti- Ms. Jacquelyne Wentworth September 14, 1983 Page 2 fying its customers. Finally, I believe there is a limit to the time during which the post office will forward mail and understand they charge a fee for an address correction ad- vice. It seems to me that at some point in time, payments sent to our old address would never reach us. Clearly, the move notice is reasonable and necessary and properly compensable under applicable law. I would appreciate your reconsideration of your recommendation regarding this expense and advising Mr. Boardman accordingly. Yours truly, BrianJ. fur Law Department BJH:sz cc: Mr. Jerrold Boardman Executive Director Fridley Housing & Redevelopment Authority Lee 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Item #5 THE CITY OF --. --L----- HOUSING :: -- •, and •,� . Air' REDEVELOPMENT .. ,.. AUTHORITY • ; , iFji FRIDLEY ••• FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MEMO NO. 83_77 DATE October 7, 1983 TO ACTION INFO. SUBJECT Housing & Redevelopment Authority X Approval of George M. Hanson Company Please see attached letter of understanding for the authorization of George M. Hanson Company as auditor for the Housing and Redevelopment ,, Authority for the year ending December 31 , 1983. George M. Hanson Company has been selected by the City Council for Auditor Services for the City of Fridley and has performed this service satisfactorily for the HRA for the past four years. JLB/de 5A G IVI H C o GEORGE M. HANSEN COMPANY, P.A. A Professional Corporation of Certified Public Ac I()await', August 23, 1983 Commissioners Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Dear Commissioners: This letter will confirm our understanding of the arrangements covering our examination of the financial statements of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Fridley, Minnesota for the year ending December 31, 1983. We will examine the combined balance sheet as of December 31, 1983, and the related financial statements for the year then ended. Our examination will be made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and will include such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we consider necessary in the circumstances. The objective of our examination is to express an unqualified opinion on the financial statements, although it is possible that facts or circumstances encountered may require us to express a less than unqualified opinion. Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the trans- actions recorded in the accounts, Wsts of the physical existence of inventories and direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected customers, creditors, legal counsel and banks. At the conclusion of our examination, we will request certain written representa- tions from your staff about the financial statements and matters related thereto. The fair presentation of financial position and results of operations in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles is management's responsibility. Management is responsible for the development, implementation and maintenance of an-adequate system of internal accounting control and for the accuracy of the financial statements. Although we may advise you about appropriate accounting principles and their application, the selection and method of application are responsibilities solely of management. Our engagement is subject to the inherent risk that material errors, irregularities or illegal acts, including fraud or defalcations, if they exist, will not be detected. However, we will inform you of any such matters that come to our attention. 1 75 SOUTH PLAZA BUILDING WAYZATA BOULEVARD AT HIGHWAY 100 MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 55416 612/546-2566 5B Commissioners Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Fridley August 23, 1983 Page 2 Fees for our services are based on our regular per diem rates, plus out-of-pocket expenses, all of which will be billed as our work progresses. Our fee for this engagement will not exceed $1,200. Should any situation arise that would increase this estimate, we will of course advise you. During the course of our engagement, we may observe opportunities for economy in or improved controls over your operations. We will bring such matters to the attention of the appropriate level of management, either orally or in writing. Please indicate your agreement to these arrangements by signing the attached copy of this letter and returning it to us. We appreciate your confidence in retaining us as your certified public accountants and look forward to working with you and your staff. Very truly yours, GEORGE M. HANSEN COMPANY, P.A. ff.-5377 JGM:ap J. Gregory Murphy g y � y Enclosures - 2 Approved by: Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Date Fridley Item #6 THE CITY OF HOUSING ; `- . and .� :: :: zier.... REDEVELOPMENT ...� MEMORANDUM ♦ ... .tom.... AUTHORITY ::: FRIDLEY '''" - - i:: FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MEMO NO. 83-79 DATE October 7, 1983 TO ACTION INFO. SUBJECT Housing & Redevelopment Authority x Discussion with Lion's Club as per HRA Recommendation I followed up with the Lions Club for the potential leasing of the Hardware as discussed at the HRA meeting on September 8, 1983. They indicated that they are still interested. I will be meeting with than at the end of October and would hope to have a proposal to the HRA at the November Meeting. JLB/de