Page Title

Said Councilmember Paulsen, “I’m happy to get the quotes, but we need a plan. This is real capital. It’s real money. But tearing them down is not the silver bullet. What good does it do to tear them down? Nobody goes there.”

Defending the decision to purchase the properties in the first place, some years ago, Councilmember Richard Tieden said, “Those were different times when they were purchased. This Meuwissen [Creamery] project will change the perception of these parcels. It won’t look to be so bad a decision two to three years down the road. it was not an irresponsible venture.”

“We do have some unusual times now,” agreed Councilmember Roden, “but I don’t like the way these buildings look.”

At this point, Mayor Mary Thun took the bullhorn. “I don’t agree at all with Jim or Tim,” she said. “We’re talking about $150,000 to $300,000 in loss of TIF dollars. This is IF somebody comes in to develop it. It’s not money out the door ...

“I am proud of our downtown now. I’m tired of looking at those houses. This is a prosperous city. I think it’s time to get rid of those houses. We ought to talk to the Fire Department about getting them down. I get more calls complaining about those houses than anything else. I think it’s time we fish rather than cut bait …

“I think that TIF is an excuse. A green area open space would add a lot to this community. It’s time for those houses to go!”

Replied Councilmember Amundsen, “Because someone on the council is tired of something, that does not give us the right to lose $276,000 of the citizens money.”

Asked Councilmember Paulsen, “What can we configure as a use for those properties? Senior housing? All the kings men don’t seem able to figure out a use.”

Stated Councilmember Tieden, who sat on the council when the old houses were being purchased by the city, “Aren’t you moving in a direction as to what a developer would do? That parallels what we’ve done in the past. We do have new streets and new businesses now. Things don’t happen all at one time. Keep in mind that’s where we were a number of years ago.”

***

It might be noted that the City of Victoria requested and received a recommendation from Shannon Sweeney, a financial consultant with David Drown Associates. On October 24th, 2007, he wrote, “If the city’s goal is to maximize the current and future increment (TIF), my recommendation would be to leave the buildings until such time as a redevelopment project is imminent. This strategy would preserve multiple options that the city could consider at the point in time that a redevelopment project is likely to occur.

“If the buildings are considered unsightly, a nuisance, or safety issue, the city can remove them causing a minor impact ($3,000) to current revenues from the district. While this would reduce future options regarding the use of TIF to promote redevelopment at this location, the aforementioned issues may outweigh the benefit of preserving those options.”

On March 5th Mr. Sweeney wrote, “My recommendation continues to be to wait until a redevelopment project is absolutely imminent ... By keeping the substandard structures, the city is able to continue to qualify the parcels for future redevelopment activities. If the substandard structures were removed ... the city would limit its ability to fund public improvement projects in the vicinity of these same parcels as they would no longer be substandard.”

VICTORIA REFINANCES FIELD HOUSE

ANTICIPATES SAVINGS OF $58,619

Victoria City Councilmembers, sitting in session as the Victoria Economic Development Authority, adopted a resolution on February 28th to refinance bonds issued originally to finance the costs of acquisition of 40 acres of land for parks and open space in Victoria and issued $805,000 in lease revenue refunding bonds.

That 40 acres has come to be known as Diethelm Park. The City of Victoria spent $1.2 million to acquire that land from the Eklo family in 1999.

Stated Finance Director Jylan Johnson at the recent meeting, “We completed sale of the bonds. The market was very good to us. The city’s net savings is $58,619.”

Said Paul Donna, the city’s financial consultant, “There are inflationary worries. The timing was right. Right now the market is having liquidity issues. There’s a lot of success with area banks, the local community banks. They know the project.”

As City Administrator Steve Sarvi reported, “The refinancing was to take advantage of the drop in interest rates from when the bonds were issued to now. The city could use future annual lease payments from School District 112 to help pay down the bond.”

Click here to continue City Scoop.