Darren had his way with things. He got his favorable contract. It is no surprise. Dave Jeffrey walked out at the start. He had the good sense, courage, and decency to do that.
Randy Backous stayed as the voice of reason. Each took a course that, without qualification, I applaud.
I stayed longer at that last HRA meeting than made sense. It stunk from the start of a done deal - strung out as if something different, as if more of a deliberation than it was.
I walked out of the thing when I could take it no longer.
I walked out before any vote, but expecting the likelihoods to be as they were, the Landform love-in to end as it did, (give or take a vote), and yet I waited until there was a reliable press report published before fully deploring the situation.
The writing was on the wall when I left.
Four votes, at least, were in the Landform pocket. My guess was five. They had their way with Ramsey.
All but one of the "Final Four" will be up for reelection in 2012.
What that means is that the three lame ducks, knowing the limit to their current terms in office, hamstrung the new post-2012 council with a year more of Darren and Mike and the Landform firm.
Voters will have no recourse to "vote out" the Landform dealings because they added that hanging-on extra year. For no good reason that I can see. They, in effect, disenfranchised 2012 voter volition. Volition to vote the entire package immediately out.
That is obligating things well beyond the reasonably foreseeable future, with the bad economy more likely than not to hang on past the 2012 elections, and it was simply an unparalleled giveaway of town dollars - the Landform situation is unparalleled in the entire history of City of Ramsey.
This is what I call "Landform's 2012-Threesome."
---------------
Next, the new guy who ran unopposed after John Dehen's sincere effort to rein in excesses. The new guy could have said wait a couple of months at least, and see if closings really happen, and even then, see how favorable or unfavorable terms are to the city.
We know what's favorable to the party sitting to take a commission from closed deals. But council members should first and foremost serve the interests of the city. The interests of the party set to seize a commission should be secondary. The new guy went with the flow. He was the swing vote. Absent his joining the 2012-Threesome, the deal would have been held in abeyance, for now while there's nothing yet closed to show except what Jim Deal's closed, on his own effort, not using Darren's "expertise."
The new guy was the hinge vote. This is the new guy who went with Landform's 2012-Threesome. As swing vote, as not as married to the prior decisions as the 2012 Threesome is, he had a discretionary chance to go either way. I blame him most for the result:
 |
| New guy. |
If you want coverage beyond opinion, read Tammy Sakry's ABC Newspaper coverage.
It is well written.
This link.
----------------
This brief excerpt from the ABC reporting, mid-article [read the entire thing because I only excerpt the part that, to me, represented sound don't-give-away-the-store city government]:
If Landform’s services are terminated before March 2013, the HRA will be required to pay a termination fee of $60,000.
“I disagree with the whole (contract negotiation) process,” said Backous.
The HRA should have discussed the contract and the changes it wanted without Landform being present and then it should have been taken to Lazan for negotiation, he said.
Backous was not in favor of having a two-year contract.
This world is changing quickly and it is irresponsible to agree to a two-year contract, he said.
Backous also wanted the administration compensation of $15,000 reduced.
He would rather see the administrative compensation at $5,000 and the incentive compensation at $20,000, Backous said.
“I think it’s reasonable. There will be a big payday at the end of this for Landform,” he said.
Elvig said he would rather go out for requests for proposals to sell the remaining 118 acres as a large block and the contract length is a deal breaker for him.
I find it disgusting, what was done, how it was done. Despite two people at the front table saying what was right. What was a conservative approach. Truly so, without posturing as if conservative.
Backous clearly explained the way it would have been done if a well-reasoned public interest motivation were underlying council action - caucus, form a position, and do not let the other side sit with a friendly staff person and write and hand down little beyond a complete wish list.
To not do that gives an appearance of abdication of the council function. Why it was done as it was can be a dark question, many things can be imagined, with motivations being always open to question. "Judgment" can always be open to being touched in ways we might only imagine.
On the surface it looks as if spooked and impatient amateurs were tempted to be unwilling to wait out a down market, and to fly willy-nilly into the face of a trend that other governments have decided to wait out.
I go with the majority judgment. Of the other governments. Sit tight. Curb unjustified waste.
These "contrarian" full-speed-ahead-into-the-quagmire decision makers could suceed. Anything's possible. For now we can only guess at the greatest probabilities - and I foresee disaster. Big time disaster, and big time waste.
MY PERSONAL BOTTOM LINE: The store's been given away so further questioning of decisions - beyond possibilities at the next ballot box - are moot.
------------------------------
DO NOT FORGET, CITIZENS OWN THE NEXT BALLOT BOX.
FOR NOW IT IS ALL WE HAVE.
THAT, DARREN, AND DARREN'S CASH FLOWS.
---------------------------------
Do not misunderstand. I hope, even under present circumstances, for the best build-out feasible. Something nice and worthwhile besides Coborns. My expectation, however, is it will be just another crowded mediocre suburban blight-scape, purchased at its enhanced price, rushed to market during bad market times, being long lasting as it will on our landscape, and with possible unanticipated luck yielding a tiny handful of at least okay-to-mediocre-chain restaurants, if any, beyond the Mexican food branch in Ramsey and the Wells effort, which we can look forward to with positive anticipation.
It is good that Jim Deal and the Wells people brought that about. Once open, Ramsey citizens should look to make it a successful and lasting dining place, as the expected quality is something we should aim to keep. Hopefully it will not be as disturbingly loud a place as the other restaurant down by the Caribou Coffee shop.
____________UPDATE____________
Sakry's reporting, again here, ends:
Elvig said he would rather go out for requests for proposals to sell the remaining 118 acres as a large block and the contract length is a deal breaker for him.
Hats off to Landform for getting project to this point and the excitement it created, but there may be interest from a developer in it now, he said.
Landform has met with numerous developers and there is not an interest in buying the whole thing yet because the rail station is not in place and the Armstrong/Highway 10 overpass is not done, Lazan said.
It was an interesting thing for Elvig to have proposed, not something I'd have necessarily have thought of myself because of the way the marketing has been on a consistent piecemeal basis. Lazan's explanation likely was reassuring to the council, (as an HRA whole), that such a possibly was not being ignored by Ramsey's exclusive negotiating agent. I recall from day one, back when the distressed property had just been purchased out of foreclosure, meeting with Matt Look, the mayor, and Lazan at the Hwy. 47 Caribou Coffee where Lazan, then at the start, had extensive drawings and explained the direction he intended to take was piecemeal, being able to offer prospective buyers of a part a "site ready buildable slab" is how I recall it phrased, and to pursue that direction until no vacant site space remained. That appears to have been the ongoing direction taken in the exclusive negotiations Lazan has pursued, as he indicated back then it would be. The public, of course, is not now privy to any listing of entities contacted and offers and discussions, based on a "competitive disadvantage" view expressed repeatedly during discussion at the two recent meetings I attended; that view being the view stated by Ramsey's agent as attaching, purportedly to Ramsey's detriment, to disclosure. I recall this thread was not a new concern, but consistent with earlier minutes, with part of an earlier Crabgrass post noting:
In a Sept. 14, 2009 HRA meeting, p.5 of the minutes has this curious exchange [emphasis added]:
Commissioner McGlone stated we are trying to sell Ramsey as a unique opportunity. Because we are only 10 percent built out - that's a unique opportunity not found anywhere else. [sic] We can talk about what we are trying to do but they may have a specific thing in mind let them know we are open to whatever.
Commissioner Look asked where Senator Jungbauer is on the water recirculation grant.
Mr Lazan stated he is nervous about being too public on that.
Commissioner Look stated maybe we leave out the grant partbut say we are interested in expanding on that.
[emphasis added.] This makes you say, "Huh?" Jungbauer and some kind of grant at issue? "Water recirculation grant?" It is out of the blue. It is limited discussion. It is irregular in many ways.
And "nervous." Nervous "about being too public on that"? There are many things in irregular situations, but being nervous about "going public" in an open meeting about city business, what does that mean? In that context, why, exactly, would "nervous" apply.
That was written July of 2010. My thinking then. Yet, I do recall, however, how that "competitive disadvantage" thing fits into what was told to me at the outset, back at the Caribou Coffee shop right after Ramsey's purchase of things, that if word of possible grant funds for a water project got out prematurely, other towns might "eat our lunch," is how I recall Matt Look phrasing it then. It seems that such a repeated assurance of disclosure needing to be constrained and controlled was given, in what now appears to be an ongoing pattern from purchasing the site, to now.