Rather than repost the thing just follow this link. And think about it in the context of eight million city dollars at risk behind a secured institutional lender of over twenty million, on a high-risk rental where the quality of security in a David Flaherty personal guarantee is an unknown factor. Is Flaherty over-exposed by too many projects going on at once, at differing locales? Is that firm's capital spread too thin? Is it encouraging to see Flaherty using a Flaherty construction affiliate as general contractor, as I believe to be the case with the by-the-rails-rental, where this general contractor may be unfamiliar with ex-urban Minnesota winter construction practices? We wait. We shall see. We hope for the best, with city money at risk, such as it was committed by a council majority with two key operatives challenged on reelection effort, this election cycle. The decision to put the city in the position of being a secondary and arguably ill-secured creditor to Flaherty (behind his Pittsburgh institutional lender having a security interest first position re the rental property), was a decision to so participate where a key close vote was dominated by a troika, one of whom did not survive a primary election.
To gamble in this adventure was a decision made by a 4-3 vote, risk exists, and do we citizens really want any more of that kind of gamble? By November 7 we in Ramsey will have that question answered. However you vote on local issues November 6, please do hope the rental thing is a success. Taxpayer money is riding on that outcome. Not that I would ever have voted for such a gamble, but it is how history happened. Hope for the best.
