RAMSEY - Flaherty and Collins -- and money. And thoughts about the proper role of government.

The Republican led present council [with the McGlone, Ramsey and Wise seats up in the 2012 election, (perhaps all seats except that held by Backous will be up, because of the census and adjustment of ward lines)] has competed with private enterprise, as land speculators, in buying the failed Town Center out of foreclosure. It again competed, this time as deal promoters, against the private sector in competing to have the VA clinic on city land (but Jim Deal, not an amateur, knows what he's doing with the Clinic construction now advancing on Jim Deal's land, as Jim Deal's private sector promotion). Now there is Flaherty and Collins, appearing as if wanting to gamble for profit using city money, with the city somehow roped into being a co-venturer, with the F-and-C claimed "financing woes" reminding me for some reason of this album title:

It is hard to know exactly what is being proposed, given somewhat cryptic agendas, not naming amounts the F-and-C promoters want to fob off onto taxpayers, under what terms and conditions. In presently available City documents I am only aware of the following, and I challenge readers to get useful and meaningful facts from any page (click a thumbnail image to enlarge and read):

There is no detail. There is a distinct flavor. That kind of consciously incomplete and insubstantially documented documentation, for some reason, reminds me of this image:

Moving on ...



Emailings

My opening email:

eric zaetsch <[...]@gmail.com> Sat, May 21, 2011 at 11:44 AM
To: Randy Backous , Dave Jeffrey , hnelson@coratramsey.com, hnelson@ci.ramsey.mn.us

Randy, Dave, and Heidi-
I saw the council update by Backous-Jeffrey, or more correctly a part of it, and the council [wearing HRA hats] was reported to have split 4-3, and I wondered how Elvig and the new guy, Tossey, voted. Also, minutes will not be available, but could you send an online link to the full agenda page where the issue of terms including timing alterations with the F-and-C team were put to a vote. My understanding is initial proposals had the City extending credit, and possibly that decision may worsen. Any help would be appreciated. Heidi, as the city's HRA key staff person, I am asking your help too - could one of the three of you send a "reply all" helping me out? I believe I already know the voting of mayor, Wise, McGlone, and the two email addressees who, in the segment I saw televised identified their voting, so it is only the Elvig and Tossey votes that are a mystery to me.

Also, is there any city knowledge of whether Landform is receiving a commission or other cash, present or future-conditional, FROM F-and-C? I know the new contract has monthly money plus conditional commission payment to Landform, but I saw nothing in the contract barring Landform from working the other side of the street too; so, are they?

Thanks.

Eric

Backous replying, on the record and requesting no editing or paraphrase in that he chose his words carefully,

Randy Backous Sun, May 22, 2011 at 8:12 PM
To: "[eric zaetsch ...] <[...@gmail.com>, David Jeffrey , Heidi Nelson
Mr Zaetsch:

Thank you for your questions and for your interest. Elvig voted for the motion and Tossey voted against with Jeffrey and me. The HRA meetings are now being televised so you can watch everything on the QCTV website.

The question at hand was whether or not we should move forward with negotiations. I won't comment on the votes of others but there were many reasons for my vote.

While I love the project I don't believe the city or any government should be involved to the point that we are being asked to participate in this project. Our job is to literally pave the way with roads, other infrastructure, utilities, etc. Our job is not to be a major participant in the financing. That is the private sector's role. I'm a capitalist who believes in the power of the free maket and whenever we start questioning or manipulating the free market we will get into trouble one way or another. I believe the free market spoke loud and clear and I think we should listen.

In my opinion, by voting to move forward with this scenario, we publicly made a statement that we have the stomach for putting public dollars into a private project in the role of a lender. That only sends the message to all future developers and their lenders to go to the City of Ramsey and demand more and more. It also sent the wrong message to F&C in my opinion in that they no longer have an incentive to find other lending or private equity options.

I want The COR to succeed and I too am getting impatient but I don't think we should get desperate or get into the trap of believing that F&C is the only project that will help us move forward. Responsible development will be the key. This project is starting to resemble a young couple who gets seduced by that beautiful new house that they will do anything to get. You try to warn them about the cost of utilities, property taxes, landscaping, upkeep, furnishings, etc but they don't want to hear about reality or consequences - just getting that house.

I would rather take a more careful, patient, flexible approach.

Sorry I haven't responded sooner. I've been working all weekend.

Randy

Again, the text speaks for itself. No paraphrase here. I do not speak for Backous, and disagree with some opinions he holds. He explains a basis for his viewpoint.

I also sent an intervening follow-up email, and aside from the Backous response I have had no other replies or comments:

eric zaetsch Sun, May 22, 2011 at 7:57 PM
To: Randy Backous , David Jeffrey , hnelson@ci.ramsey.mn.us, hnelson@coratramsey.com
Cc: Kurt Ulrich , Mayor Bob Ramsey , tammy.sakry@ecm-inc.com
David, Randy and Heidi-

This evening I saw more of the Jeffrey-Backous Council Update.

Please confirm, that beyond being land speculators as done already in buying the failed-foreclosed parcel from foreclosure, the Council in its HRA implementation is now contemplating being a co-investor, co-landlord (i.e., positioning to gain rental income, if any, from the F-and-C venture), and co-developer of the Flaherty-and-Collins thing.

I was shocked to hear that. Shocked!

Next thing city employees will be laying bricks!

This, if I understand it correctly, is expanding the subsidized competition of the city governmental arms with private enterprise far, far further into speculative land dealings than previously.

Please confirm, or deny and explain.

Please give this inquiry prompt attention.

What's up? How far down this land deal co-promotion co-speculation path is the city going?

Will the city also have to pay money to Landform for the part of things it is co-venturing into with city cash; a commission, bounty, whatever it is called these days?

Eric Zaetsch

cc: mayor
cc: city administrator
cc: Sakry

These posted items largely exhaust my understanding of the situation. I have not viewed the HRA part of the televised meeting dealing with Flaherty-and-Collins financing visions/revisions. Backous indicates catching the rebroadcast might be helpful for me and others wanting an understanding. I believe Sakry of ABC Newspapers may plan to have a story this week of how the city is investigating options regarding F-and-C co-venturing, and to the best of my knowledge no city decision has yet been made to jump into the deep end of the pool with those gentlemen.

My understanding is the city purports to have $3 million from some source unclear to me but outside of city taxing, earmarked for expanding the existing underutilized parking ramp but with any city decision-making in limbo because of the slippery situation with F-and-C and what it ultimately may do/not do with/without shaking more cash and concessions out of Ramsey than previously given/contemplated.

It appears the F-and-C gentlemen are playing to flip the deal unless they get more sugar.

My feeling is to tell F-and-C to take a hike. Enough is enough. I think it is a disadvantageous project for Ramsey, one that never should have seen the light of day to get where it is.

Bless them in Indiana where they live and prosper.

We really gain nothing from a big rental project in town. It can only go downhill as it ages.

_______________UPDATE______________
What's to be understood from this; the Silence of the Lambs even extends to Darren's propaganda site, coratramsey.com

Either that or the propagandists' search function is dysfunctional.