09-26-77 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 26, 1977 REGULAR MEETING RECONVENED (CONTINUED) He said it was his understanding that the Council believed an agreement should be reached, and as of this time there was no agreement. He said he would request that each of these resolutions be continued until Thursday. Council Member Adams asked if they should have a special meeting o continue this meeting, due to legal requirements. Mayor Nemeth indicated the Council has the right to set a regular meeting at any time they decide. Council President Parent indicated that this meeting should be continued until Thursday, September 29. Council Member Miller indicated these resolutions do not refer to the agreement with the developers and all three must be addres by the Council whether or not we go ahead with a mall project. He said it was his feeling that the Council could act on.these resolutions tonight. Council President Parent indicated that since the Mayor feels there may be an agreement by Thursday, we should continue public hearing. Council Member Kopczynski made a motion to continue the public hearing until Thursday, September 29, at 4:00 p.m., seconded by Council Member Serge. Lillian Stanton, 919 Oak Ridge, indicated she thought the meeting time should be set when the public can come. Mr. Tim Woods, attorney for the downtown merchants, asked if anyone had considered whether or not what the Mayor and the developers are doing is legal. He asked if they could reach an agreement with the developers contrary to HUD requirements. Miss Barbara Schankerman, 1619 Rockne,, indicated that the majorit of the public here are business people and they cannot lock up their business. Council Member Adams indicated there was no negotiation on the sale of the land. She asked the Mayor the scope of the negotiations. Mayor Nemeth indicated that the Redevelopment attorney is in the process of handling this and the City will not do anything that will violate the law. Mr. Kevin Butler, Redevelopment attorney, indicated they are not negotiating the purchase of the property. He sai the discussions have centered around the developer's proposal, which in form is a letter of inte A roll call vote was taken on the motion to continue public hearing until Thursday, September 29 at 4:00 p.m., the motion failed on a vote of three ayes (Council Members Taylor, Horvath and Parent) and five nays (Council Members Serge, Szymkowiak, Miller, Kopczynski and Adams). Council Member Miller made .a motion to recess, seconded by Council Member Adams. The motion carried and the meeting was recessed at 8:11 p.m., and reconvened at 8:26 p.m. RESOLUTION RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, SUPPORTING THE COMMITMENT OF PUBLIC SECTOR RESOURCES TO THE CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT AND REVITALIZATION OF THE SOUTH BEND CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SUBMIT TO THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, ; AN APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY.DEVELOPMENT FUNDS UNDER TITLE I OF THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974. A public hearing was held at this time on all three resolutions. Council President Parent annou they would have one -half hour of public hearing, and then he would entertain a motion to continue public hearing until Thursday, September 29, at 4:00 p.m. Mr. Tim Woods, attorney for the down- town merchants, indicated that the conditions the developers have placed on their participation in this mall were in part illegal. He said the developers were asking the City to build the common areas of the mall, and he did not think the City has that power. He said with regard to the negotiations he thought they were talking about price, because there was one of the items contained in Mr. Chandler's letter. He said the developers are not only talking about price, but also what City is going to provide, and if they are talking about this, then they are acting in an illegal manner. He said that with regard to the resolution that has been passed by Re- development he thought that the procedure followed has been contrary to statutes. He said that everything that has been done to date has been contrary to statutes. Mr. Douglas Kline, 63551 Miami, owner of Powers Discount, read the following statement: "I am speaking now as a re- presentative of The South Bend Revitalization Committee. At the Tuesday evening, September 20th 1977, Council Caucus, I informed this Council that The South Bend Revitalization Committee had many questions regarding the proposed mall. Council President Roger Parent asked for these questions to be submitted in writing. Representing The South Bend Revitalization Committee, I submit this written list to you now. I ask that my statement and the memo I am about to read be made a part of the official record." "September 26, 1977, To: Common Council, % Mr. Roger Parent,.President. From: The South Bend Revitalization Committee: As per the statement made to the Council on Tuesday evening, September 20th, 1977, the following questions concerning the proposed Century Malli.are hereby submitted: 1. Does the South Bend Urban Observatory Study (Citizen Attitudes Survey) indicate that a mall of this magnitude, necessitating destruction of many sound buildings, is required or desired by the community? 2. Did this survey indicate that tax money of $10,000,000 (10 million) or more should be spent for this proposal? 3. If this survey stresses a need for more parking and a larger variety of stores, is the Century Mall AS PLANNED what the people actually want? 4. Rather than imposing their.conclusion and plan ipso facto, why did the City Administration take the position that the Century Mall pro- posal, requiring the destruction of sound buildings, is the only solution? 5. Why were alterna suggestions and plans not solicited from the public and other interested parties? 6. Is the City Council and the public aware of the financial contributions that.Government (public funds) must make towards this PRIVATE venture: (a) Cost of acquiring all remaining Downtown buildings in the proposed mall area.. (b) Cost of relocating existing buisness. (c) Cost of demolition to provide clear land in the heart of South Bend. (d) Cost of constructing all walkways and public areas including the roof thereof. (e) Cost of providing heat, air conditioning and vent tion in the mall public areas. (f) Cost of providing benches, planters, curtains, etc., (what extent is etcetera ?) -and the landscaping. (g) Cost of maintenance and security in the mall and parking garages. (h) Cost of building a parking garage adjacent to the mall and the cost of providing three hours of free parking in thenew garage as well as in the existing parking garage at Jefferson and St. Joseph Streets. (i) Cost of the loss of revenue in the Jefferson Street Parking Garage and the probable loss of parking meter income. (j) Cost of the loss of tax revenue during the construction period. (k) Cost of the loss of property tax revenue for five years due to the statutory tax reprieve the new mall would receive. 7. At what stage will the investors become fully obligated to build the mall? 8. In the eventthey fail to build the mall (which could occur for various economic reasons and unforseen contingencies), what would be their penalty? 9. If the land were to be cleared and the mall could not be completed, what contingency plans has the City made? 10. Is it not a fact that more jobs would be lost Downtow than would be created by the new mall? There are many more vital questions, financial and technical in nature, that could be subsidiary to the above ten questions. More detailed studies must be made before the final decision is reached regarding Century Mall. Signed: Barbara Sue Schankerman, Douglas E. Kline, Edgar E. Wertheimer, representing The South Bend Revitalization Committee." Council President Parent indicated the questions raised were very good ones. t 0 ed