Monthly Archives: December 2009

M P R B Purchase Of Scherer Bros. Site

MPRB PURCHASE OF SCHERER BROS. SITE

By Harvey Ettinger
East Isles Resident
For Minneapolis Park Watch

Brief review of the Park Board’s December 16, 2009 presentation/discussion of the Park Board’s intention to sign a purchase agreement with Scherer Bros. for the Scherer Bros. Lumber yard property along the river:

Just minutes before J. Rietkirk’s presentation of the Scherer Bros. land purchase (last item on the agenda), Park Board Attorney Brian Rice had a revised resolution handed out:

THAT THE BOARD AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF A PURCHASE AGREEMENT BASED ON THE APPRAISED VALUE WITH SCHERER BROS. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND AN EARNEST MONEY DOWN PAYMENT OF $400,000 FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE SCHERER BROS. LUMBER FACILITIES LOCATED AT 9-9TH AVE NORTHEAST IN MINNEAPOLIS CONTINGENT UPON THE BOARD’S APPROVAL OF THE FINAL ACQUISITION FINANCE PLAN BY MARCH 31, 2010. THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE RETURN OF ALL EARNEST MONEY IF THE BOARD DOES NOT APPROVE THE FINAL ACQUISITION FINANCE PLAN.

The other caveats brought up during the discussion by Park Board President Tom Nordyke to be included were:
a) Chair of the Planning Committee Bob Fine would have to sign off on Agreement.
b) Final document had to be re-presented to the entire Board no later that March 2, 2010.

Rietkirk was very tentative throughout his presentation and actually said that this decision had to be made before year end and not deferred to the new Board in January. Again, the sale price of the property was not discussed. He assured the commissioners that adequate funding was available to put deal together. The $400,000 earnest money will come from the $700,000 I-35W land condemnation fund.

After much fanfare about what a great opportunity this was for the Park Board to further develop parkland along the downtown riverfront, 7 of the 8 commissioners present voted to move forward with the purchase agreement. Only Annie Young, who introduced information (provided by Park Watch) that there was very likely ground pollution (possibly vermiculite) on the site, abstained. However, Rietkirk and Rice downplayed the significance of this issue.

M P R B Board Meeting

The regular MPRB meeting will be held at 5:00 pm on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 at Park Board Headquarters, 2117 W. River Road. For the meeting agenda and other information, go to the Park Board’s website minneapolisparks.org.

Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board meetings are broadcast live from 5-9 p.m. on the Minneapolis Comcast cable network Channel 14 and online on the City of Minneapolis Government Meeting Channel.

Heads Up For December 16, 2009 Park Board Meeting

HEADS UP FOR DECEMBER 16, 2009 PARK BOARD MEETING

The regular MPRB meeting will be held at 5:00 pm on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 at Park Board Headquarters, 2117 W. River Road. For the meeting agenda and other information, go to the Park Board’s website, minneapolisparks.org

The December 16th Park Board meeting is the last meeting for 2009, as well as the last one for the current board. There is one item of major interest on the agenda for this meeting. It is under “New Business” and is a vote to acquire 13 acres of land assessed at $8M. It is a multimillion dollar commitment and the planning staff and Superintendent Gurban want the commissioners to vote on this acquisition the very same night it is presented to the commissioners for the first time. See below:

ACTION: THAT THE BOARD AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF A PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH SCHERER BROTHERS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND AN EARNEST MONEY DOWN PAYMENT OF $400,000 FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE SCHERER BROTHERS LUMBER FACILITIES LOCATED AT 8TH AVENUE NORTHEAST IN MINNEAPOLIS CONTINGENT UPON THE BOARD’S APPROVAL OF THE FINAL ACQUISITION FINANCE PLAN.

By bringing the purchase agreement vote directly to the full board, the planning staff and Superintendent Gurban have circumvented the required review and action by the Administration and Finance Committee, thereby violating Park Board procedures. It is egregious that staff has advanced this project to the point of a purchase agreement without following Park Board protocol.

And what is even more outrageous is the fact that staff has not provided the commissioners and the public with a purchase price. The superintendent and his staff are requesting that the commissioners enter into a major real estate transaction without providing the commissioners and the public with complete and detailed information–not even a purchase price.

The justification for this transaction is that it falls within the boundary of the Above the Falls Master Plan. Nevertheless, there needs to be a much more thorough study of a transaction of this magnitude.

There are many questions to be answered BEFORE this proposed project moves forward. Here are a few:

* Why is there no mention of the purchase price? What is it?

* It is customary to negotiate a purchase price before executing a purchase agreement. So why is staff executing a purchase agreement prior to negotiating a purchase price?

* The assessed value of the properly is $8M. What is the appraised value?

* Where is the $400,000 down payment going to come from?

* Why has staff entered into purchase negotiations with Scherer Brothers without any direction from the commissioners?

* Isn’t it premature for staff to approach the Met Council regarding funding options before being directed to do so by the Park Board commissioners?

* Why has this matter been placed on the December 16, 2009, agenda as “new business” and why has a purchase agreement not yet been brought–as required–to the the Administration and Finance Committee first?

* Why is this matter appearing on the agenda of the very last meeting of the year and of the very last meeting of the lame duck 2006 board? Isn’t this a matter for the new board to consider?

* Why is this matter being advanced so quickly in authorizing the “execution of a purchase agreement” that there is no opportunity for the public to make any comment before the commitment is made?

* Who owns the piece of land next to 8th Avenue?

* What is the Park Board going to do with the seven buildings on the property? And what condition are they in? What will be the cost of maintaining them or tearing them down?

* Who owns the shorefront between Scherer Brothers and 10th Avenue?

* What kind of storm water fees are there on the property?

* Who is responsible for the railroad spur?

* Why does staff state that “staff and Scherer Brothers are committed to closing on the sale within 90 day (sic) after the full execution of the Purchase Agreement”? Why does staff think it is it so urgent to do so?

As the Park Board commissioners are considering this major real estate transaction, it is a good idea to reflect upon two of the Park Board’s previous real estate acquisitions (Fuji Ya and the 201 Building) which were financial failures that became entangled in costly litigation. Park Board staff does not have a successful track record with major real estate transactions. Therefore, it would be wise for the commissioners to avoid another real estate disaster by instructing the staff to send this matter to Administration and Finance first, thereby postponing any decision until the new board is seated and a more thorough study has been conducted. It is the appropriate action to take at this time.

***

MPRB meetings are broadcast live from 5-9 p.m. on the City of Minneapolis Government Meeting Channel 79 on Comcast cable and online at ci.minneapolis.mn.us/webcasts.

The regular meetings are rebroadcast on Channel 79 at 1 p.m. Saturdays and 5 p.m. on the second and fourth Wednesdays. Webcasts for the recent two months are posted two to five business days after the meeting and are available for viewing at Webcast Archives.

Review Of December 2, 2009 Park Board Meeting

REVIEW OF DECEMBER 2, 2009 MEETING

Park Board observers were dismayed by the numerous procedural irregularities that occurred from the minute the topic of Renewable Energy Options was placed on the Park Board agenda for the December 2, 2009 meeting.

First, the topic should have been postponed because the study report on Renewable Energy Options was not ready in time to be included in the Commissioners’ packets, which are sent out prior to the Park Board meetings. Commissioners were not given adequate time to review the report before the December 2 meeting.

Second, the Renewable Energy Options study report was moved prematurely out of committee and to the full Board at Wednesday’s meeting. Not all of the Commissioners had sufficient time to read and digest the report.

Third, Commissioner Jon Olson introduced and read a surprise resolution which would have advanced the Park Board’s buyout of Crown Hydro. The resolution was assumed to have been written by Nikki Carlson on behalf of Crown Hydro. (Bill Hawks, Crown Hydro’s investor, was sitting in the audience with Nikki; and Commissioner Dziedzic indicated during his remarks that she had given the resolution to Commissioner Olson.)

The resolution was composed of 17 “Whereas” clauses and the following two egregiously inappropriate paragraphs:

“Now therefore be it resolved that the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board supports public ownership of a hydro facility in Mill Ruins Park, and encourages the next board to acquire the rights of water use, and authorization and resources needed to complete construction.

“Be it further resolved that this board instructs staff to provide the new board with comprehensive information about this project, with complete development, finance and construction options by end of February 2010.”

Commissioner Kummer, an unwavering supporter of Crown Hydro, spoke favorably for the resolution.

Commissioner Scott Vreeland strongly objected to the resolution and said he felt “ambushed,” referring to the fact that it came out of the blue. The commissioners had not seen or read the resolution until Jon Olson presented it. Commissioner Vreeland went on to say that this was not the way the Park Board should be doing business.

Commissioner Walt Dziedzic agreed with Commissioner Vreeland and offered a substitute motion which advocated the postponement of the Renewable Energy Option resolution until the new board is seated in January of 2010. It passed 4 to 3.

Those voting in favor of postponement were Commissioners Vreeland, Dziedzic, Mary Merrill Anderson and Tracy Nordstrom. Those against were Commissioners Carol Kummer, Jon Olson and Bob Fine. The resolution will come before the full Board on January 6, 2010.

Arlene Fried
Co-founder of Park Watch

Hand Count Results From The November 3 Election For Park Board Districts 4 & 6

The following item by Cristof Traudes and Jake Weyer is from an article that appeared in the November 30, 2009 issue of the Southwest Journal:

HAND COUNT RESULTS FROM THE NOVEMBER 3 ELECTION FOR PARK BOARD DISTRICTS 4 AND 6

Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board newcomer Anita Tabb was confirmed to have received 5,012 of 5,143 first-round votes, or 97.45 percent. Tabb ran unopposed for the District 4 seat and will succeed outgoing Commissioner Tracy Nordstrom.

In District 6, newcomer Brad Bourn came away with a win in round two, with 4,300 of 8,354 votes, or 51.47 percent. Meg Forney finished second with 3,506 votes.

Little Support For Hydropower At Falls

The following article by Cristof Traudes appeared in the December 7, 2009 issue of the Downtown Journal:

LITTLE SUPPORT FOR HYDROPOWER AT FALLS

When the new Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board is seated next month, one of the first tasks it will have is to decide whether to further research construction of a hydroelectric power plant at St. Anthony Falls — and whether it would be feasible as a publicly owned municipal utility.

Park Board commissioners share a consensus that a privately owned power plant at the falls — essentially, the long-stalled, controversial Crown Hydro project — simply wouldn’t work. But the board also has a sustainability goal to get the parks system “off the grid,” or make it entirely energy self-sufficient. Park Board research shows hydropower would be less expensive an alternative energy source than wind and solar.

In October, board staff performed a small online survey to test the waters on public ownership. The response: still not much support, Planning Director Judd Rietkerk said.

One of the key reasons people have opposed the Crown Hydro project is because they are worried it would cause St. Anthony Falls to run dry. Under public ownership, the Park Board would be responsible for tracking and controlling the falls’ flow rate, but that didn’t change respondents’ approval levels.

Rietkerk said a hydro plant at St. Anthony Falls — in whatever form — is generally not supported.

Still, the board came close at its Dec. 2 regular meeting to voting on a resolution that would have had it declare support for “public ownership of a hydro facility in Mill Ruins Park” and encourage “the next board to acquire the rights of water use, and authorization and resources to complete construction.”

Commissioner Jon Olson, who will be a member of the next board and who introduced the resolution, said it wouldn’t have bound the board to constructing a hydropower facility. Rather, it would have allowed for further research to better gauge feasibility.

But the resolution’s late appearance — it wasn’t seen by most other commissioners until a half hour into the meeting — sunk it. A vote was postponed until January.

Public Ownership Of Hydropower Plant Intrigues Some, Worries Many, Study Finds

The following article by Kathryn Holahan and Cristof Traudes appeared in the November 30, 2009 issue of the Southwest Journal:

PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF HYDROPOWER PLANT INTRIGUES SOME, WORRIES MANY, STUDY FINDS

Community response to potential public ownership of a proposed hydropower facility at St. Anthony Falls was the core discussion item at the Nov. 18 Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board meeting.

Most responses from an online survey conducted in mid-October by Park Board planning staff indicated that the facility is generally not supported, said Judd Rietkerk, director of citywide planning and project management.

Private company Crown Hydro introduced the controversial topic in the late 1980s. The potential for a facility that draws power from St. Anthony Falls appeals to some commissioners while concerning others.

Addressing the issue of public ownership, there is concern that a municipal utility is outside of the Park Board’s expertise. The board would be responsible for controlling the flow rate over the falls and would have professionals ensure adequate flow while preserving the historic area, Commissioner Jon Olson said.

Damage to Mill Ruins Park is a significant concern of residents, adjacent property owners, commissioners and the city, according to survey responses. Commissioner Tracy Nordstrum said she likes the idea of sustainability, but encourages discussion.

“Hydro is going to happen in other venues,” Commissioner Annie Young said in reference to other hydropower facilities utilizing the Mississippi River.

Currently, Brookfield Power is working on installing six small “run-of-the-river” turbines in lower St. Anthony Falls. The turbines didn’t require a new dam and don’t interfere with river navigation.

Though the board does not have a lot of information from stakeholder input, the information they do have is that public ownership does not resolve the issue, Vreeland said.
Board General Manager Don Siggelkow said he began looking into public ownership after hearing from commissioners that they weren’t necessarily against building a power plant at St. Anthony Falls, just that it would be a privately owned. If the board were to continue down the public ownership path, it would be its first municipal utility.

Fuji Ya Dispute Resolved

Fuji Ya Dispute Resolved
No Condos To Be Built

On March 17, 2005, the Park Board entered into a purchase agreement with Columbia Development for the purchase of the Park Board’s Fuji Ya property. The purchase agreement stipulated that there would be a condo development with a parking ramp and that the Park Board would lease 85 stalls from Columbia and rent them out to the public. The income from the leased stalls was intended to enrich the Park Board’s enterprise fund.

In November of 2005, Columbia Development sought title to the Park Board’s Fuji Ya property prior to the completion of its contractual obligations. The Park Board objected to Columbia’s demands and on December 17, 2008, the Park Board voted to terminate the purchase agreement with Columbia. Columbia continued to force the sale. On November 12, 2009, District Court Judge Marilyn Rosenbaum ruled for the Park Board and against Columbia, stating that the Park Board had the right to terminate its purchase agreement with Columbia. The judge’s decision is attached below.

Consequently, there will be no Wave Condo development on the Fuji Ya site and the Park Board will retain ownership of the property.

Arlene Fried
Co-founder of Park Watch
Order Granting Summary Judgment.pdf

Boom Island Citizen Advisory Committee Meeting, Tuesday 12/15

The MPRB will hold a series of Citizen Advisory Committee meetings to develop recommendations for redevelopment plans for Boom Island Park in conjunction with development of the adjacent B F Nelson Park. This will be the first meeting.

Date: 12/15/2009
Time: 7:00-8:30 p.m.
Type: Regular
Location: MPRB Administrative Offices, Board Room Suite 255
Address: 2117 West River Road, Minneapolis

www.minneapolisparks.org/default.asp?PageID=34&calid=597

Map and Directions

Boom Island Citizen Advisory Committee Meeting, Tuesday 12/15

The MPRB will hold a series of Citizen Advisory Committee meetings to develop recommendations for redevelopment plans for Boom Island Park in conjunction with development of the adjacent B F Nelson Park. This will be the first meeting.

Date: 12/15/2009
Time: 7:00-8:30 p.m.
Type: Regular
Location: MPRB Administrative Offices, Board Room Suite 255
Address: 2117 West River Road, Minneapolis

www.minneapolisparks.org/default.asp?PageID=34&calid=597

Map and Directions