Williston, ND Active Issues

Sue Evans · Senior Member

RE: city commission

Kelly Aberle · Newbie

The 50 private residential lots in the previous post were vacant lots located in established subdivisions. (i.e. Rachel's Subdivision, lots along 25th Street West and 19th Avenue West which are located in Joan Hagan 1st Addition, Coyote Crossing Subdivision, etc.)

I was not referring to individual lots that people may own around town they may use for extra yard space or storage space.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

NDGirl wrote:

Sue, I have asked this question before, and didnt get an answer, maybe you can answer it. Where are these aditional lots going to come from? Are they expecting people in the area around the city and in the city with empty lots to sell them? We will not sell ours. We use our empty lot for our boat and camper to park off the street. We have had people approach us to buy, but we really do not want to sell. I know a few people who live in the 1mile radious around town who have lots that do not want to sell either. Many of us feel there is no need to sell and end up having to buy it back again in a few years when the oil boom is over. or have people move campers in on these lots next to us (this is happening way too often)

I think we now have an answer to your lot question. It does appear your lot is calculated in with the others.

Kelly Aberle · Newbie

Sue Evans wrote:

http://www.willistonherald.com/articles/2010/06/16/news/doc4c18ef794f57c245284841.txt

Here it is. Found some of the lots. Finally. 1 city lot and 50 private lots. Whew. 199 left to go.

I thought it was rather funny that Common Sense had to post in the Herald but not on here. I still want to know where the 250 lots are coming from...

I am going to try my best to help clarify this issue regarding the development going on in the area regarding the residential lots available. Mayor Koeser was referring to 250 lots that will be developed or are developed. There is a new subdivision called Timbers Subdivision west of town on 19^th Avenue and 26^th Street West. I believe there are approximately 125 lots planned for that development. Kyle Hexom has also started developing Creekside Ridge Subdivision which Phase 1 has been completed and there are 3 more phases to go. That would bring in another 75 lots. Currently, there are 50 private residential lots that have not been developed that already have services to them. So that would bring the total to 250. Mayor Koeser was providing an approximate number. Not an exact number. There is another proposed subdivision called Granite Peak Subdivision which is on 40 acres of land north of 26th Street that will have another approximate 125 lots. A quick breakdown goes like this (all numbers are approximate):

Developed Lots (privately owned) = 50
Timbers Subdivision (currently being developed) = 125
Creekside Ridge Subdivision (Phase 2-4 to be developed) = 75
Total number of potential residential lots = 250
(The total does not include Granite Peak Subdivision since the plat has not been approved by Planning and Zoning or the City Commission)

As far as infrastructure costs, they are currently very high. My husband and I just built a house last year on 23^rd Street West (right next to the new Timbers Subdivision) . There were no services into that lot, so we had water/sewer/street/curb/gutter installed in 2008. We own two lots and the cost for those improvements were $46,000.00 ($23,000.00 per lot). I hope this helps anyone out that may have questions regarding the number of lots available or soon to be available.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Sigma wrote:

Just throwing this out there, but can't the illusive city plan be found here?

Thank you. I have visited here before. This is the site I found the survey I posted quite some time back.

This must be fairly new. I don't recall finding this when I got the survey results.
http://www.willistonplan.com/pdf/DraftComprehensivePlan05-04-10.pdf

I read many pages that cited the survey.
Some pages to note:
Pg - 63 Gov't public services
pg - 67 Walking and bike paths
pg - 82-83 city limits
pg - 95 priority acres to develop
pg - 96 if we relocate the airport
pg - 106 increase the size of city hall
pg - 121 annexation
pg - 122 Williams Co. constructing an east/west hwy along 58th st w....

I thought you all may like to note these pages. There were many maps and graphs.
Good job Sigma. Thank you.

Did anyone review the releaf program? The proposed sign regualtions? The ordinances that are proposed to be put out there? Hey, in places, this sounds like Williston is working towards a home owners association.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Sigma wrote:

Just throwing this out there, but can't the illusive city plan be found here?

Thank you. I have visited here before. This is the site I found the survey I posted quite some time back.

This must be fairly new. I don't recall finding this when I got the survey results.
http://www.willistonplan.com/pdf/DraftComprehensivePlan05-04-10.pdf

I read many pages that cited the survey.
Some pages to note:
Pg - 63 Gov't public services
pg - 67 Walking and bike paths
pg - 82-83 city limits
pg - 95 priority acres to develop
pg - 96 if we relocate the airport
pg - 106 increase the size of city hall
pg - 121 annexation
pg - 122 Williams Co. constructing an east/west hwy along 58th st w....

I thought you all may like to note these pages. There were many maps and graphs.
Good job Sigma. Thank you.

Sigma · Veteran Member

Just throwing this out there, but can't the illusive city plan be found here?

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Sue Evans wrote:

http://www.willistonherald.com/articles/2010/06/16/news/doc4c18ef794f57c245284841.txt

Here it is. Found some of the lots. Finally. 1 city lot and 50 private lots. Whew. 199 left to go.

I thought it was rather funny that Common Sense had to post in the Herald but not on here. I still want to know where the 250 lots are coming from...

Sue Evans · Senior Member

I thought it was rather funny that Common Sense had to post in the Herald but not on here. I still want to know where the 250 lots are coming from...

Steve Powell · Guru

Sue Evans wrote:

I don't know. I posted what I could get. We all have to urge our commission to show us the packets that they are talking about in the plan. The ones Cindy Gray refers to handing out at the library. WE need to know the MASTER PLAN. This is our city. I can only go so far. I will continue to try, hold their feet to the fire and work to get information out here. In 1989 there was talk of moving the bypass.

Why would we post a 'welcome to Williston' sign out as far as the water treatment plant. A few months ago that was the site chosen for a commanding 16' - $50'000 sign. I would think it to be a bit far out in more ways than one.

My goal is to push for answers. The more information out here, the more questions will be asked. If our City Leaders are working for us, they must tell us what the plans are for our own city, taxes, growth, and profits/losses.

Welcome to Williston sign by the water treatment plant? What if people passing through turn left at the four mile? They miss Williston by 4 miles...but they still feel welcomed?

Sue Evans · Senior Member

http://www.willistonherald.com/articles/2010/06/13/news/doc4c145d842b1af655878915.txt

I would like to have people on here review the comment from "common sense" at the end of this article.

I just want to know where are the lots? No one can tell us where the 250 lots are...We have all been told about the cost. The actual words were, it would cost $20'000 to $40'000 to develop a lot, not an increase from $20'000 to $40'000. I understand I am bringing forth issues on here. I will not stop. If you feel stirred up, then tell me, where are these lots?

-- Edited by Sue Evans on Wednesday 16th of June 2010 12:36:23 PM

Sue Evans · Senior Member

I don't know. I posted what I could get. We all have to urge our commission to show us the packets that they are talking about in the plan. The ones Cindy Gray refers to handing out at the library. WE need to know the MASTER PLAN. This is our city. I can only go so far. I will continue to try, hold their feet to the fire and work to get information out here. In 1989 there was talk of moving the bypass.

Why would we post a 'welcome to Williston' sign out as far as the water treatment plant. A few months ago that was the site chosen for a commanding 16' - $50'000 sign. I would think it to be a bit far out in more ways than one.

My goal is to push for answers. The more information out here, the more questions will be asked. If our City Leaders are working for us, they must tell us what the plans are for our own city, taxes, growth, and profits/losses.

NDGirl · Veteran Member

I see where you get that idea, but which way are they planning on moving HWY2 west? Has the city/county approached the land owners and asked them a price they would be willing to sell for? I did hear that the hegan family had been approached to sell to develop a housing project, and the hegan family said no.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

I have attempted a concrete answer. The best I can find are the following articles.
http://www.willistonplan.com/pdf/Prog_9-16_11-19.pdf
(This one seems difficult for me to open but after several attempt I can enter)

http://www.willistonherald.com/articles/2010/05/21/news/doc4bf6ae42de3f5605582559.txt

http://www.willistonplan.com/pdf/PACRecMtg111908.pdf

http://www.willistonplan.com/pdf/WillistonMissRidgeTwpFGMtg.pdf

These all come from Meeting minutes posted by Cindy Gray and one article from the Herald. It appears from what I have read, the decisions were made in 2009. You tell me if you are understanding the same thing.

NDGirl · Veteran Member

Sue,
Which way on HWY2? North or west? I know a businesses is going in North in one of the only open areas, and as to west, I thought that land along the hwy was all private or slated for industry.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Williston Herald does not get it. Read this opinion then scroll down and you will see my response. How can we expect HELP and FUNDING for housing on land we do not have? The city can not file for these grants when we have no place to build. We can only conduct dog and pony shows.

http://www.willistonherald.com/articles/2010/06/14/opinion/editorials/doc4c165e05874bb212055467.txt

Sue Evans · Senior Member

NDGirl wrote:

I think one of the developments is the one currently going in south of the 4mile bar. It would be interesting to know where these lots are going to come from.

Sunday paper - Mayor Koeser stated the 2 developers he is talking with - the first he will know in a few weeks and the second in a few months. I suspect our commission has to find some city ? to build in/on..

From what I can find, our master plan has big plan with Hwy 2 bypass. When will our commission tell us the whole plan with our city? Why are they are planning the new welcome to Williston sign to be placed out by the water plant? Why a $50'000 sign anyway? The article in the Herald was still really vague.

NDGirl · Veteran Member

I think one of the developments is the one currently going in south of the 4mile bar. It would be interesting to know where these lots are going to come from.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

NDGirl wrote:

Sue, I have asked this question before, and didnt get an answer, maybe you can answer it. Where are these aditional lots going to come from? Are they expecting people in the area around the city and in the city with empty lots to sell them? We will not sell ours. We use our empty lot for our boat and camper to park off the street. We have had people approach us to buy, but we really do not want to sell. I know a few people who live in the 1mile radious around town who have lots that do not want to sell either. Many of us feel there is no need to sell and end up having to buy it back again in a few years when the oil boom is over. or have people move campers in on these lots next to us (this is happening way too often)

When the Mayor announced the 250 lots, I tried to get him to sell them. The commission had to admit the city did not have them. I attempted every tactic I could think of to wake people up to expose their public words. I also want them to tell us the MASTER PLAN. The city does not belong to a commission of 5. It belongs to all of us. I know they lurk on here. I also know of the letters to the editor in the Minot Daily and the Fargo Forum. Where exactly are these 2 developers going to place housing??? We only have one lot in town available for multi family housing. This was stated in the May City Commission meeting.

YOU HAVE AN EXCELLENT QUESTION. SHOW US THE LOTS/LAND.

NDGirl · Veteran Member

Sue, I have asked this question before, and didnt get an answer, maybe you can answer it. Where are these aditional lots going to come from? Are they expecting people in the area around the city and in the city with empty lots to sell them? We will not sell ours. We use our empty lot for our boat and camper to park off the street. We have had people approach us to buy, but we really do not want to sell. I know a few people who live in the 1mile radious around town who have lots that do not want to sell either. Many of us feel there is no need to sell and end up having to buy it back again in a few years when the oil boom is over. or have people move campers in on these lots next to us (this is happening way too often)

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Here we go. Mayor Koeser at Kotana tells us we will know in a few weeks to a couple of months if the developers will come through. In the Fargo Forum, he said something a little more positive. We HAVE two...

Of course, We also had the governor here for 250 lots, then a meeting to discuss the 1 lot and the Senator to tell him less than 50 lots.

What are our broader plans? Any one find the full plans on Hwy 2 bypass yet? I have googled Cindy Gray and only gotten what I posted further down on this thread.

http://www.willistonherald.com/articles/2010/06/13/news/doc4c145d842b1af655878915.txt

Sue Evans · Senior Member

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/281354/group/Opinion

ND Senate Majority leader and the ND Senate Minority Leader have written to remind Western ND what we did get in the last legislative session and the pkg the Governor gave us in April. This I suspect was in response to Mayor Ward Koeser having his letter saying he was waiting for another legislative session for our housing so he was going to address broader needs until the legislature meets at regular session. He may have lit a fuse here.

These leaders are letting ND know we don't have to wait on them. It has been given to us and the dollar amounts plus programs are listed in the article.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Now, did you have a chance to read these articles?

Our Mayor is waiting for a session of ND legislature to work on housing. This is my understanding. He said this is because Williston has broader issues.

The Governor does not tell us we need any session from the legislature. The legisture has many plans in place that Williston had not fully tapped. Hoeven set us up with more help and aid through the Bank of ND.

April we got help to develop 250 lots

May we had a commission meeting that showed we actually had one lot left

June 1 we had Senator Conrad here and again asked for help and the Mayor spoke telling him we had less than 50 lots

June 6th, the article appears in Fargo, saying we are working on broader things. Going to wait for a regular legislative session we don't need.

Now, don't just take my word. Go to City of Williston web site and look for the city meeting minutes. Find Bekkedahl's words in May minutes yourself. Look at the articles I have posted earlier. We don't have the land. I actually believed their words when they spoke to the governor that we had 250 lots..NOT NOW!!

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Sue Evans wrote:
The Williston plan does load. Try it a couple times, it does take a few seconds. It appears rather slow....

LOOK AT THE DATE ON THE ARTICLE....

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/280875

We have changed our minds since April. No special session needed. Williston in the Fargo Forum...

More plans for our city?
http://www.willistonplan.com/pdf/Prog_9-16_11-19.pdf
http://www.bismarcktribune.com/news/opinion/editorial/article_4223ff28-4321-11df-916a-001cc4c002e0.html
This is just a to refresh the memory...We weren't getting a special session.

-- Edited by Sue Evans on Thursday 10th of June 2010 08:58:38 PM

Sue Evans · Senior Member

LOOK AT THE DATE ON THE ARTICLE....
http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/280875

We have changed our minds since April. No special session needed. Williston in the Fargo Forum...

More plans for our city?
http://www.willistonplan.com/pdf/Prog_9-16_11-19.pdf

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Sue Evans wrote:

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/280875

We have changed our minds since April. No special session needed. Williston in the Fargo Forum...

More plans for our city?
http://www.willistonplan.com/pdf/Prog_9-16_11-19.pdf

Sue Evans · Senior Member

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/280875

We have changed our minds since April. No special session needed. Williston in the Fargo Forum...

-- Edited by Sue Evans on Wednesday 9th of June 2010 10:31:32 PM

Sue Evans · Senior Member

I went to the library for the hearing with Conrad and Pomeroy. Public attended but not heard. The TRE was not discussed here. They are going to hold it for their next stop. Like Mr. Conrad stated, he heard last year from our city when he came through.

Mayor Koeser reported it would roughly cost between $20'000 and $40'000 to develop infrastructure per lot. I still think that is a broad amount. Can we define the cost a bit closer to one value or the other?

In April Governor Hoeven was here and we discussed the development of 125 initial lots then onto the a total of 250 lots.

In May at the Public Forum It was discussed we only had 2 lots left when I talked about selling city lots cheap.

Now it is June and Mayor Koeser told the congressman "we presently have less than 50 lots available."

Last commission meeting the auditor said the remaining city lots had been sold.

Any of you tax payers know what we have??

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Dr. Bekkedahl is also on the board for the TRE. This is the Theodore Roosevelt Exp. He works hard on the 4 lane projects. Our city over a 4 year period donated $100'000 out of our penny tax to the TRE. Our county donated $40'000 over the same time period to the TRE.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkxgDDzC_z0&feature=related

Facts to go along with my prior post.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

We were all a part of development in our community. Our Mayor has an ad I would like you all to take a look at. Mayor Koeser is not claiming involvement in the list of things he has beside his name. He has never said he is responsible for these issues. Ward Koeser did mention the items in his ad during his speech at the open forum and also stated he had did not take credit for these items. I will show you a few of the things he mentioned. We all are responsible. We are tax payers in the county just the same as he is and share an equal responsibility in many of the items he has listed. The expansion of the college is done by a whole separate thing. I worked for the Foundation for many years. Our city attorney is on the board but I do not ever recall our Mayor having participated.
http://www.williamsnd.com/Minutes.aspx?ID=89

http://wscfoundation.com/about/what-we-do-vision-mission-goals

http://www.williamsnd.com/Minutes.aspx?ID=73

The meeting minutes from the county should explain our industrial park, the confluence, the half penny tax for the law enforcement center, and the college foundation is also here.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

http://www.cityofwilliston.com/usrfiles/CM/Docs/04272010.rtf

Page 11, Ordinance 927, first reading. This will tie in a bit more with the city owning the sales of water for commercial use. Also if Steve is able to scan the document I sent him so all may view the future plans for our water plant you will all have a greater understanding.

Steve Powell · Guru

Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. Had to pack the camper and travel to grand forks.
Only images can be put out here. I'll see if I can create images of each slide and post them individually. Not promising anything though.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

file:///C:/Users/Owner/Desktop/State_water_presentation%5B1%5D.pdf

Remember our 30 million dollar water project for Williston? We are paying for it as the taxpayer. Is our city going into the water sales business? Check page 8. Do the taxpayers who are paying for this plant, get a tax cut now, a reduced bill, or? Go to page 8 and take a look. What should we be asking?

Steve, if I send you this can you get it to link?

-- Edited by Sue Evans on Friday 28th of May 2010 06:02:15 PM

Sue Evans · Senior Member

http://www.willistonherald.com/articles/2010/05/28/news/doc4bffe18f97012995080804.txt

Thank you Dr. Ashton. He is also paying to have the caboose moved here. Do you think this was a good offer or not? I thought it was great!! Just my opinion. What is yours?

On another note: The flex pace program is another name attached to the Jobs creation program.

-- Edited by Sue Evans on Friday 28th of May 2010 12:12:54 PM

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Steve Powell wrote:

I think we can keep this thread open. It's an informative thread. In fact, I am thrilled that we have been able to discuss an issue posed to a city commission. We have been somewhat enlightened and at the same time are able to put ourselves in their shoes so we understand the difficult decisions they have to make.

I wish we could discuss more scenarios like this. In fact, now that I think about it...as a board member, could one post the issue on a message board like this to get a feel for what the community is thinking and to get an idea on how to provide the best resolutions?

Ok, as long as it is understood my goal is to obtain public input. NOT BASHING. This forum offers time to think. In a commission meeting the topic can move rather quickly and only those who know the topic in advance have the opportunity of study. Here I feel individuals may have a moment to comtemplate prior to making a statement. My goal is to seek thoughts from others that I can not get else where. Not all items are reported in the Herald and when reported, not always will there be room for the full story and at times, accuracy is compromised when the editing process is completed.

I have over 1100 conservative members on my Facebook page. Many passionate people about government and the issues that we are all faced with. I have posted this site on there. I don't know how many hits it got. Through my msging and chat and email I have let people know this type of forum is a good idea. I have tried to make this well known. I did caution about certain critics and am glad you took a handle on it.

Steve Powell · Guru

I think we can keep this thread open. It's an informative thread. In fact, I am thrilled that we have been able to discuss an issue posed to a city commission. We have been somewhat enlightened and at the same time are able to put ourselves in their shoes so we understand the difficult decisions they have to make.

I wish we could discuss more scenarios like this. In fact, now that I think about it...as a board member, could one post the issue on a message board like this to get a feel for what the community is thinking and to get an idea on how to provide the best resolutions?

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Steve Powell wrote:

Upon further review, this thread has led to some personal shots against individuals. This cannot continue if we are to preserve the integrity of this message board. If you have constructive criticism, by all means use it. Any further disruptions will not be tolerated.

Thank you.

Perhaps we should delete this thread. It inspired the wrong result.

Steve Powell · Guru

Upon further review, this thread has led to some personal shots against individuals. This cannot continue if we are to preserve the integrity of this message board. If you have constructive criticism, by all means use it. Any further disruptions will not be tolerated.

Thank you.

Steve Powell · Guru

Grondahl wrote:

I am not sure, but am I the only one who is really tired of the "negative" rhetoric coming from Sue Evans?....A mayor from our community has to be a positive role model for our community statewide AND in our community, and all she can do is find problems with people who work their tails off for our city.......frankly I am tired of it, and so are all the people I have heard from.......what is she going to do for our community to make it better? what is she going to do to be a "positive" role model for Williston?
and yes, I do not post often, and probably won't post much more.....but it is apparent that this woman is NOT a positive influence for Williston, and if she gets elected, we have major problems...........

I understand what you mean about being positive, Larry. But in all aspects of leadership, especially government, it's good to have entities that are willing to hold peoples feet to the flames. If we sit back and never question, Lord only knows what kind of corruption may occur.

rickywaitman · Veteran Member

I'm glad to see that our park board president has actually taken the time to write/comment. I am dissapointed that he can't respond when a question is asked about his policy making but he can jump right in when he has the chance to attack someone who questions his self believed omnipitence. Once again... attaboy.

So let's make it clear as to what we've established about our current Park Board President:

1. He believes that a private entity can receive benefits (out of the tax payers pockets) because they are "friends of the district".

2. He thinks it's wrong for anyone to question the decisions he's made from a publicly elected position.

Wow. "If she gets elected, we have major problems...". I'd say we already have major problems.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

http://www.cityofwilliston.com/usrfiles/CM/Docs/112409.doc

Page 10 of this document tells of the costs involved in the RR park construction. The numbers I was hearing cited did not equate to what I was issued as the total. What was left out of this transparent minutes listing? The recap of the project. We did have discussion of leaving out the water feature, and the costs of benches and garbage containers that were way high. In the thousands each. The survey that stated more people use the RR than the air port and this should have been done first. It was born out of a need for a drain issue. Do we get grants to cover KLJ? It sure would have been nice if the recap would have been included. At least you will understand some of what our hard working leaders are doing.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Grondahl wrote:

I am not sure, but am I the only one who is really tired of the "negative" rhetoric coming from Sue Evans?....A mayor from our community has to be a positive role model for our community statewide AND in our community, and all she can do is find problems with people who work their tails off for our city.......frankly I am tired of it, and so are all the people I have heard from.......what is she going to do for our community to make it better? what is she going to do to be a "positive" role model for Williston?
and yes, I do not post often, and probably won't post much more.....but it is apparent that this woman is NOT a positive influence for Williston, and if she gets elected, we have major problems...........

So a leader would not question, remain with the status quo and any attempt to correct - improve upon a proceedure or seek input from the community would equate negative value. This would not be a positive role model? In my view, I would like to know how the community thinks. What would the people like to see. Perhaps due to lack of the public attending meetings, a forum such as this can provide more insight and provoke more questions. More time to think.

Grondahl · Member

I am not sure, but am I the only one who is really tired of the "negative" rhetoric coming from Sue Evans?....A mayor from our community has to be a positive role model for our community statewide AND in our community, and all she can do is find problems with people who work their tails off for our city.......frankly I am tired of it, and so are all the people I have heard from.......what is she going to do for our community to make it better? what is she going to do to be a "positive" role model for Williston?
and yes, I do not post often, and probably won't post much more.....but it is apparent that this woman is NOT a positive influence for Williston, and if she gets elected, we have major problems...........

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Steve Powell wrote:

Does the purchaser have ties to the city?

Excellent question.

Steve Powell · Guru

Does the purchaser have ties to the city?

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Steve Powell wrote:

Ahh, gotcha. They granted the first submitted buyer an extension. Do we know who that first buyer was?

After the deadline passed, the auditor chose not to bring the next offer to the commissioners? Even though it was a greater offer? Is there something I'm missing there?

Is there some information we haven't covered on this deal?

No extention granted. Just assumed. Yes, I know who the buyer was. I presented this at the commission meeting last night. It was not covered in the Herald. I was just testing the waters on here to see if I was the only one so off base as to think this should be pointed out to the commission. The auditor appeared puzzled. It was the first time he has ever been questioned about this. Not a first for me.

Steve Powell · Guru

Ahh, gotcha. They granted the first submitted buyer an extension. Do we know who that first buyer was?

After the deadline passed, the auditor chose not to bring the next offer to the commissioners? Even though it was a greater offer? Is there something I'm missing there?

Is there some information we haven't covered on this deal?

Sue Evans · Senior Member

The first bidder did not meet the April 15th dead line.
The auditor retained the earnest money.

The Auditor allowed a second bid and earnest money on April 30th.

The commission had another meeting on May 11th.

I claim the bid should have been presented due to the first bidder not having met the closing date.

City Attorney claims a closing date is not concrete. Bidder number one, was given the ability without completion of the process, to retain the lot until ?

Could we all do this? I asked should there be a concrete timeline?

Now the auditor wanted to also approach the board about another bidder who wanted a closing date of some time in August. (a different lot) He felt this to be a long period considering this is May.

HMMM. June, July - August. 3 months. That is long. Now, they just got done with one that began on March 3rd, and ended on May 19th. It had gone passed it's closing date of April 15. A non concrete time. So does a closing date really matter?

-- Edited by Sue Evans on Wednesday 26th of May 2010 02:47:57 PM

Steve Powell · Guru

Considering the offer hadn't actually been submitted on May 11th, and the April deadline came and passed, doesn't that mean the lot is still open for bids until the next scheduled board meeting?

Here's what I'm seeing. After April 15th, a quit claim gets filed. The property is open for bids once again until May 11th. No bids were submitted to the commissioners on the 11th as the auditor failed to submit the second offer so the property is still open for bids until the next scheduled meeting.

Is this how it's supposed to work?

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Steve Powell wrote:

A. April 15th, deadline came and went. Earnest money goes back to initial bidder.
B. April 30th, second offer comes in but must wait until May 12th to submit to board.
1. You're wondering why the auditor did not submit the bid to the board.
2. Chapter 2-20 states this must be done on all offers.
C. Quit claim drawn up on May 12th, dated May 12th, but doesn't get signed until May 19th (by the first party I assume).

Since the board had not approved the second offer it would appear to me that offers could still have been accepted at that point. I would question whether the board has to have some kind of session to approve the sale however. If the auditor wants to complete the second offer, can the board somehow initiate a way to approve that sale without waiting for the next board meeting?

I don't think it's wrong to ask questions. In fact, it's very good to ask questions. Sounds like the city is trying to free up city owned property. Isn't this what you've been asking them to do?

Steve, this was my point. You cited the way I saw it. The second party with a bid did not get their bid submitted. The first party due to prior board approval had the lot held in limbo until a date undetermined. Even though there was a closing date set and a second bid after that was allowed. This does not free up the lots, but rather ties up the lots. Offers must be submitted to the board in the next REGULAR meeting by chapter 2-20 of city ordinance.

This is not done when a closing date is surpassed. They mayor compared it to a home sale falling through. He would not like it if a home he were purchasing was sold to someone else for more money because he could not make the closing date. I tried to tell him if I owned the property, I would not allow him to tie up my property. As an owner I think I would go for the sure sale. Not the buyer with so many issues. The board threw out many items that would slow down a sale and then it came out that none applied to city property because the city only signs a quit claim deed. They don't have to clear the title.