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.