Council approves Daley Court contract.
The East Hartford Town Council met at a special meeting on Thursday evening to review and approve the previously posted contract for the Daley Court property. The contract gives New Samaritan 2 years to secure their funding and get to work. It seems this project is not quite so urgent after all.
The meeting, video below, went as expected with a couple notable bits. First, despite the Republicans voting unanimously against this deal back in June all three voted in favor of the deal at this special meeting.
The next interesting bit pertains to our town legal counsel Richard Gentile. I am becoming increasingly concerned with the opinions that are coming from him. Mr. Gentile changed his position on 8-137 to agree with my interpretation of the law, which is that the Redevelopment Agency may not sell a piece of property for less than its use value, even if the Council approves it. Mr. Gentile then went on to give a wholly unqualified opinion of the current use value of the property to justify the sale price to New Samaritan. All the Redevelopment Agency needs to do to comply with the law is get a qualified opinion of the current use value from a licensed commercial appraiser. If it’s 50K or below, great. If not, get what the taxpayers deserve for the property. We must start following the law here in East Hartford.
The issue of the Burnside Redevelopment plan’s status came up as well. Mr. Gentile goes on to claim that the Council must only review the plan and by approving past actions in the Redevelopment zone that satisfied the statute. Mr. Kehoe, to his credit, did not waffle on the issue and grabbed a copy of the Connecticut General Statutes which are conveniently in the Council Majority Chamber. A quick perusal of the relevant statutes verified that the Council is in fact required to re-approve or amend the plan at least every 10 years in order for the plan to remain in effect. The East Hartford Redevelopment plan, having not been re-approved or amended since 1997, is no longer in effect which puts us at risk as tax payers.
I have recommended that this situation be corrected immediately. With no plan in effect the Redevelopment Agency does not have the statutory authority to take the actions they have and they may not have the authority to enforce existing redevelopment deals.
Unfortunately, even after agreeing that the plan was expired the council voted to authorize the contract under the Burnside Plan. Insanity.
We need four things to happen here and quickly.
1st: The Redevelopment Agency needs to approve a replacement redevelopment plan for the Burnside Corridor and send it to the Council for approval.
2nd: The Redevelopment agency needs to secure an appraisal of the use value of 590 Burnside Avenue. Currently the Redevelopment Agency has absolutely no data to establish a use value on Daley Court and therefore cannot comply with the statutory requirement to sell for a minimum of the use value.
3rd: The Redevelopment Agency & Council need to re-approve this deal under the authority of the NEW development plan to ensure it is enforceable. Although I disagree with this particular development plan it is their prerogative to select it if they choose.
4th: Our town legal counsel must start being straightforward and strict with interpretations of the law. It might give the Mayor or someone else credibility to say the legal counsel said a particular action was ok, but that isn’t going to help should we end up in court.
Thanks to Eric Thompson for asking questions. Glad you are back in there.
Redevelopment Approves Daley Court Contract
The East Hartford Redevelopment Agency approved the sale contract at a Monday morning special meeting as expected. The video below is interesting. When asked about Chuck Koteen’s involvement in the deal the Chairwoman, Robin Pearson, acted as if she didn’t know who he was. Jeanne Webb, Development Director for East Hartford, on the other hand addressed the question stating that Mr. Koteen is no longer involved and had no role in the project aside from referring the RFP to Sheldon Oaks. Considering that the position Mr. Koteen was penciled in for, Local Housing Consultant, pays $50,000 of federal funds on a redevelopment deal this size I think there is something to think about here. Influence peddling? Political favors? Not in East Hartford. That section of the video is around the 12 minute mark I think.
I managed to talk to Corp. Counsel Gentile in the hall where he stated his belief and that of 2 other unnamed attorneys is that the Redevelopment Agency under C.G.S. 8-137 is allowed to sell property below it’s current use value with the approval of the Town Council. He declined to discuss that particular issue further, perhaps wisely, since it is unlikely we would agree on the interpretation. Interestingly he also acknowledged my complaint from back in June that the the Burnside Redevelopment Plan is expired having not been renewed within 10 years of it’s approval back in 1997 as required by state statute. That means that the Redevelopment Agency no longer has power under the Burnside Ave. Redevelopment plan. It is void and without force which leaves us in a very dangerous situation of uncertainty in whether we can enforce the past Redevelopment Agency agreements which fell under the Burnside Ave. Redevelopment plan. It certainly gives great question to whether the Redevelopment Agency has any authority over this deal at all.
From the contract:
(i)
As an inducement to Redeveloper to acquire, redevelop and improve the Property, the Agency has agreed to sell the Property at a discount to present fair market value.(a) ·1 the terms, covenants, and conditions of the Agreement, the Agency will sell the Property to the Redeveloper for, and the Redeveloper will purchase the Property from the Agency and pay therefor, the amount of Fifty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($50,000), hereinafter called “Purchase Price”
Property Assessment as of 06/08/09: $490,870 difference = $440,870
http://brainflation.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/property-card-2009.pdf
I bring up that value because in the absence of any form of appraisal that is the most recent valuation data available. Federal standards now place FHA appraisal validity at 120 days and in that light our officials ought not even consider a 7 year old appraisals as a reputable source of valuation.
From C.G.S. 8-137, emphasis mine:
The consideration paid for the sale, lease or other transfer of the real property shall be determined by the redevelopment agency, provided, if the cost or carrying charges of such real property to the redevelopment agency are greater than such consideration, the redevelopment agency shall first have specific authorization from the legislative body of the municipality for the sale, lease or other transfer at any lesser consideration, and the municipality may appropriate and authorize the expenditure of money to compensate for any portion of the difference between the acquisition cost of such real property and such sale, lease or other transfer price of such real property at a lesser consideration to a redeveloper, but in no case shall such sale, lease or other transfer price be lower than the use value of such real property.
