The URL can be used to link to this page

272012 WHITE - CITV CLERK / PINK - FINANCE COUtICll w/�� ^� CANqRV - DEPARTME G I TY OF SA I NT PAU L � �; / .�� - BLUE - MAYOR . Flle NO. • / - ' -�� Council Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, the City Council, in performing its functions as the Saint Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority, has termiT nated the contract with the developer at the Central Village pro j ect; and WHEREAS, serious and substantial questions have been raised publicly concerning alleged irregularities in the organization, ma.nagement, operation and funding of the Central Village project, so as to warrant further inquiry; and WHEREAS, it is time to dispel the rumors and ascertain the facts; and - WHEREAS, resolution of the que8tions concerning the Central Village project will both enhance the future of Gentral Village and strengthen other federal and state cooperative projects in the City; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul, both as Council and as Housing and Redevelopment Authority, hereby requests that the Mayor direct the appropriate personnel in the Department of Police to undertake a thorough, immediate investi- gation into any alleged improprieties in connection with all aspects of the Central Village project; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Ma.yor direct all City departments to cooperate with such investigative efforts, with such resources as may be available to them; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council supports the investi- gation. COUNCILME[V Yeas Nays Requested by Department of: Butler � In Favor Hozza �— Hunt L,evine _ � __ Against BY Maddox Showalter Tedesco Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted b � ouncil: Date � � �� . Cer ied Yassed ouncil ecretaFy BY ' — y Appr by Mavor: a e ' —�� B 1978 Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council BY — — BY �S��s�EO r�ov i i 1978 .•�NOt,*iNG AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE GITY OF SAINT P/�UL, MINNESOTA �� V� � . � �� REPORT TO THE COMM{SSIONERS DATE october 18, �97s �� a"�� R E G A R D I N G CENTRAL VILLAGE DEVELOPER In the process of reviewing the four developer proposals for Central Village it has beco�e evident that the developers have expectations of HRA and City financial assistance which have not been stated clearl.y. In an effort to bring out these expectations, the attached letter was sent requesting each developer to state specifically those areas of HRA/City assistance that were implied in the proposal. To date only one of the four developers has reported. The single major�roblem in the past hisi:ory of Central Villa�e c,;as this failure to clarify .in advance the precise roles of HRA/City and the developers. The recommendations made by both the Central Village homeowners and District 8 have strongly urged that this error not be made again. The specific problems which have arisen are as follows: 1. Several developers apparently expect HRA/City to provide the following: a. construction loans or low-interest construction financing b. extraordinary lot costs - special subsidy for soil problems c. substantial reduction in land costs 2. Only one of the four developers has responded formally to the staff's request tor specif ic assistance requirements Althou�h sever�.l of the proposin� developers may be capable of completing tt�e pro'Lt, it is recocrmiended that a choice not be made until the �round rules are clearly understood. 1. � . r 1► ` • .. _ z - Report to Che Cammissioners - It is recommended that the Board reaffirm the conditions under which the present developer solicitation is being conducted, and direct staff to meet with all four developers to see if they are clearly willing to proceed under these conditions. A recommendation of selection will then be made from among the groap of developers who are willing to proceed under the adopted conditions. It is recommended that the following conditions be adopted for further developer discussion on Central Village: 1. Remaining 2and will be sold at approximately $0.40/ft. as set by revised appraisals. � 2. The developer will be required to purchase at the outset of remaining lots in Additions 2, 3 and 4. 3. No extraordinary soils or site development costs will be paid by HRA/City. Developer will purchase site in "as is" condition.. 4. A1Z construction financing and long-term mortgage f inancing must be provided by the developer. 5. Developer accepts the specific assignment of duties as outlined :!�"��!ri�:'d-� . . /: � • A _ !� _.__ in-the-_d�t ached 1is C. ,,v� ,; . '��t' � � ' � .\ : � , _ _ _._ _ ___ Octvher 18, 1978 ,,,, CETITRAL VILLAGE PROJECT HRA/City responsibilitiea are Zimited to the following: � - 1. Maintenance of aIl HRA owned land (land not conveyed to developer). � 2. Title guarantee. . 3. Cocapletion of cul-de-sac in Addition �,`5. 4. Conveyance of marketable sites at $.40 a square foot. 5. Completioa of plat for Additioa ��5 for townhouse development. ' 6. Public walkcvay/park maintenance; repair �tnc� operation of public walkway lighting. 7. Payment of a11. pending assessments. � _ 8. Reconstitute. the Homeowners Associations. The_ Central Village selected developer responsibilities include but are nofi limited to the follocring: - . . 1. ModeZ(s) develop�ent, construction, financing, furnishing, maintenance, staffing, security, etc. (Models are at the developer's option). 2. Sales, advertising and marketing. 3. Tnterim construction financing. 4. Perntanent mortgage financing. 5. AZ1 necessary subdivision approvals for Addition �4 and �5 (e.g., FHA, VA) and any revisions to plats for Additions �`2 and ��3. . 6. All necessary mortgage commitments (e.g. conventional, FHA, VA). 7. Site plan preparation. - _ 8. Revisions to bailding plans, specifications. ' 9. Acceptance of land in an as-is condition; extraordinary lot and development costs, if any. � 10. Al1 staffing and operating activities. 11. Maintenance of all conveyed Iand. � 12. Acceptance of articles of incorporation, declarations and covenants of Homeowners' Associations Additions ;rl and �2, and participation a.n operating any and aIl Central Village Homeo��ner Associations. :7,y � � � � . � � �, � . • �a.' . �� . � (. ' • 13. 5AC charges. I4. IItility connection.s. 15. Grading and site improvements. � - 16. Additional surveying�work beyond initial pZat, including maintenance of survey monuments and construction staking. 17. Security for development construction. 18. Soi1 testing. ' 19. Insurance. 20. Taxes. 21. Closing and related costs. 22. Temporary construction facilities and utilities. 23. AI1 developer's responsxbilities not specified.� J � ' �' `�.� ' P'� GITY 4F SAINT �AUL � � ��.�� OF'FICl+� OF TAl� C.ITY COIINCIL � 'A �@\.! � •6OfY�S�M � m SpB�f88 . . ' �VC31 RON MADDOX - , KARL NEfD. JR. Councilman Legislative Aide November 2, 1978 Dear Members of the City Council: Today I respectfully ask you, as members of the City Council and the St. Paul Housing & Redevelopment Authority, to request the Mayor of St. Paul to direct a full scale, thorough, detaiied iavestigation into the entire Central 9illage project. I am authoring the attached resolu- tion, based on my letter of last week and discussions, to finally resolve and bring to completion Central Village in the most exped3tious and judicious manner. Numerous questions, alleged irregularities, rumors, discussions, specific complaints, special actions, continual adjustments, and review, researeh and development of data by my office, lead me to this decision of today. The resolution in its most pure sense asks Mayor George Latimer to direct the Police Department to conduct immediately a compZete and overall investigation of Central Village from the original date of land acquisiti.on to the present day. In addition, the entire cooperation of a].7. City depart- ments and agencies i� essential. I am asking Mayor Latimer to direct all departments to fully cooperate in th3s invest3.gation. Finally, I am asking for your support in this investigation -- and, in turn, to bring an end to the rationalization and proceed toward realiaation. � Since assuming office in June of this year, no other iadividual issue has dominated more time, effort, hours and discussion than the background, data and problems of Central Village. The work of the previous Council was carried into this Council's term and I sincerely desire to finalize the issue before the 1980 Council term co�ences. My office has done m�ny hours of study, review and research on the entire matter. Many rumors, discussions, issues, alleged accusations, allegations, public irregularities, alleged malfeasance and alleged misfeasance of operations, and alleged mismanagement, have heen stated and received by my office from many people. These people represent not on�.y the public and private sector but also contractors, developers, suppliers, homeowners, and most importantly, the taxpayer. CITY HALL SEVENTH FLOOR SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 612/298-4475 ,_�:55 - � City Council � -2- Nov. 2, 1978 Since my initial request for an investigation, several meetings have been conducted by my office to determine the correct course of action. 'Mayor Latimer and each of you have had discussioas with me on oux legislative and executive roles and responsibilities. Chief Rowan and Deputy Chief McCutcheon and LaBathe, have stated their analysis of the situation and agreed to i�nediately and forthrightly enter into this investigation by authorization and directiun from the Mayor and City Council. City Attorney Suzanne Flinsch has provided the legal opinion relating ta onr investigative powers, the status of pending lawsuits, and the legal course in which to follow. In addition, meetiags with Gary Stout and appropriate members of the Department of Planning & Economic Development has produced concurrence and additional comments and ideas. In prefacing any of my remarks, let it show on the public record that my questions and comments are based on the research and does not state ia detail the specifics, but merely raises the quest.ions that need to be answered in the investigation. Furthermore, the data and facts of today are alle ed and should be understood and taken in that veim. One is innocent until proven otherwise and so be it with the actions of the , Central Village pro�ect. � � To many times statements are.made that are based on hearsay and allegations,' however, they are perceived as truth, accusations, and indictments. I believe the investigation shall prove the pure, true facts and sincerely encourage you to support the right of the public to get the real story and bring to a head the completion of this entire matter. In conclusion, I have added several appendices of supplementa2 material on which we might commence our discussion and undertake iu�ediately the investigation. Furthermore, I am aot an accountant, .I simply ask as an elected official only some of the questions, not accusations, that need to be addressed. My office, and also that of Councilwoman Butler, has wrestled publicly with the Central Village problem for some time and, in addition, each and every one of qou have other unanswered questions. As representatives of all citizens in St. Paul we have the right and respon- sibility to question and overview the expenditures of the residents and I am exercising that right and responsibility. I sincerely wish that eaeh of you do likewise and support this investigation of Central Vil.lage. The business of St. Paul is too important to waylay any loager the ever present problem of Central Village. It is time to change the past, investigate and correct the wrongs, and proceed to achie� its original goal, a strong urban housing development. It is not who is right, but what is right. Sincerely, _ __.__.-- ---_ _ .__ �� • � n Maddox Councilman RM:daj cc: Mayor Latimer Suzanne Flinsch Chief Rowan Gary Stout f " CITY OF SAINT PAUL ��,��`�'1� ' OP'FICTL' OF '1`FIF. CITY COUl�TCIL o: wns e ns�awa��s sas4�aE R�N MADDOX KARL NEtD. JR. Councilman Legislative Aide CENTRAL VILLAGE QUESTIONS FROM THE OFFICE OF COUNCILMAN RON MADDOX: PRELUDE These are not accusations, but only guestions that require investigation and aaswers. These , are only a few of the many that this office � has researcfi and deeeloped. � CITY HALL SEVENTH FLOOR SAINT PAUL, MINNFSOTA 55102 612/298-4475 �C� 1. June 23, 1976, the HRA of St. Paul entered into a Contract with Central Village, Inc. a/k/a/ James Milsap, to develop and construct 80-100 housing units in a geographic area of Summit-University known as Central Vi�Iage. Such contract and completion was to be accomplished in 30 months or in other words, December, 19.78. Furthermore, in December of 1977 Central Village, Inc. was reaffirmed � as developer and they stated that such original contract would be 80X completed by 1978. In June of 1978, the HRA and the City of St. Paul declared Central Village, Inc. in default of the contract and terminated as developer. Since 1976 the City has started or built 9 units in the area. Central Village, Inc. has started or built 12 units, ranging from only basements and foundations to full completion. These 12 uaits only represent approximately ISX of the original contract. Due to the fact of Central Village, Inc. termination, the �oai �ii never be reached by the contractor. Why did the alleged non-compliance of the contract pers3st for aver 2 years when in no way possible the terms could realistically be lived up to? Why did the alleged misfeasance and alleged malfeasance on the part of the contractor and contract continue? 2. Many checks were issued to subcontractors and suppliers for services and materials. Why is it that today some of the same persons that were supposedly paid according to Central Village, Inc. sworn construction statements, are now issuing lieas and requests for payments? . 3. Why are contractors and suppliers submitting requests for payments of services that are not on sworn construction statements of Centra� V311age, Inc.? 4. Why were checks issued �ointly to Central Vi�lage, Inc. and the tax departments � for payroll taxes at the origination of the pro3ect and at a later time direct payments were made to the State for allegedly past due taxes? 5. Why were checks issued �ointl� to Central Village, Inc. and their employees for services provided and now in turn requests for payment are allegedly made by some of these employees? Why were payroll checks issued for employees without proper documentation and time cards? � 6. Why were approximately $77,000 of staffing costs expended in an approved budget of $25,000? 7. Why was approximately $10,000 expended for legal expenses in a budget of 0 dollars? � To whom were these legal costs made and for what services? 8. What is a commitment of approximately $2,000 for architect's fees when the contract with Central Village, Inc. is terminated and closed? 9. What are approximately $5,500 of furnishings over and above the budget amounts? In addition, what are the expenditures for desks, files aad other office supplies, including $53.00 in 60 watt bulbs? 10. What are approximately $4,600 of over budget expenditures for sales center operations? 11. In addition, what are the unpaid and unaccounted biZ1s for allegedly $438.91 of phone costs including many long distance calls to Evansville, Indiana and Vail, Colorado? i2. Operating advances o� insurance and salaries were issued to Ceatral Village, Inc. in the amounts of approx�mately $40,000. Closings of several homes amounted ' to a reduction of those advances. However, �pproximately $25,000 of obligations are still outstanding over and above the terms of the contracts. Did these advances go for the proper purposes for proper costs? Will Central Village, Inc. repay these advances in full, and when? 13. Why were direct payments allegedly issued to a subcontractor of which one of the principals was also the principal of Central Village, Inc.? 14. For those homeowners whose homes are under construction or yet to be built, why does the City have to pay over $120,000 of cost overruns, inadequate construction and noncompliance items that were in the original construction contract of Central Village, Inc.? 15. What are the costs of approximately $10,000 for homes that are not in the geographic area but liable to Central Village, Inc.? 16. For those homeowners in occup3ed and completed homes, �hy the necessity of approximately $41,000 of costs for bad construction and inproper landscaping? 17. Seven buyers signed agreements with Central Village, Inc. for developed homes according to a specification. These homes were never started and they settled instead on purchase of the model homes. Why the cost of approximately $60,000 for St. Paul to honor the commitments and contract of Central Vfllage, Inc.? � 18. Why did the President of. Circle Security guarantee bank loans of approximately $35,000 for Central Village, Inc.? 19. Why was it necessary for Central Vi�la�e, Inc. to secure bank loans for construc- tion and operations when both items were being pa3d according to the terms of the contract with the City? 20. Are other loans and notes guaranteed at other banks for Central Village, Inc. and by whom? 21. In 1975 and 1977 a prospective homeowner purchased several lots for approximately $2,900 from Central Village, Inc. for development of his home. Central Vi�lage never commenced construction on the home and the person was repaid for his lot downpayment by St. Paul. Where and how were these funds spent by Central Village? Why was St. Paul never reimbursed for that amount? Also, when shall we receive full repayment? 22. To what extent were furnish3ng and materials burglarized from buyers homes and by whom? 23. A prospective buyer submitted to Central Village, Inc. dues and services in the amount of $500.00 in the homeowners association. To date, they have not received any accounting of the money, any form of services, and where did the money go and for what purpose? - - 24. Why is the terminated contractor st311 the legal president of the homeowners association? ,25. What actions were taken in response to the early warnings of Chicago .Title . Insurance? - 26. Why was the Model Center excluded from the July injunction restraining - activities of Central Village, Inc.? 27. Why the continuing and weekly unveiling of more City costs on alleged Central Village, Inc. errors? 28. Where does the City's obligat3ons end? r �. . . � ,- Councilman Maddox Page Two • October 31, 1978 The broad investigatory power of the legislative branch of govern- ment appears to be universally recognized, and extends to state and municipal legislative bodies as well as to Congress. See 72 Am. Jur. 2d States �� 48-50 (1974) . The courts have, for the most part, limitecTtris power only when an investigation encroached on the constitutional liberties of an .individual. � , Clearly the Council has the power to conduct an investigation relative to Central Village if it determines that such investiga- tion might aid the Council in the exercise of its legislative ' , function. This function is at least as broad in scope as the .�; areas outlined for Council action in Sections 6.03.1-6.03.3 of . the Charter. The City Council may conduct its investigations through a Council committee and ma.y obtain and use the services of investigative staff to assist in gathering information. It may not, however, under the doctrines of separation of powers and non-delegation of legislative powers, delegate its investigatory function to the Chief of Police or his employees. It is probable that any number of agencies and departments, federal, state and local, may have the power to investigate Central Village. The City Council has no direct power to control or supervise the investigations of other departments and agencies outside of its jurisdiction and control. Under Section 7.03 of the St. Paul Administrative Code, the Chief of Police is accountable to the Mayor and subject to his supervision and control. This means that the Mayor, not the City Council, would have the direct power to supervise any investigation conducted by the police department. The fact that the City Council �commenees an investigation would in no way preclude other appropriate federal, state or local agencies or departments from conducting their own investigation. We have not considered the legality, nor does this opinion deal with the question of whether and under what circumstances the Ma.yor might detail a police officer or other administrative _ _ employee to assist the Council or carry out investigative chores for the Council. Nor is it clear which arm of government would use any information so gathered for its respective functions. � ' . �:�;n.:L,4, _ CITY OF SAINT PAUL �• �:� OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY : � ;� �, ¢ �;:, '�''�'�„e� SUZANNE E. FLiNSCH, CITY ATTORNEY �0�a„�a�,�� 647 Ciry Hall,Saint Paul,Minnewta 55102 612-296-5121 GEORGE LATIMER MAYOR October 31, 1978 �� NOV 1 g97$ CJIUP�CIi.i'�1;�P•! 1'.Gy P�IADDOY. Councilma.n Ron Maddox Seventh Floor City Hall � Saint Paul, Minnesota Dear Ron: ' , f You have asked whether the City Council has the power to investi- ,' gate all matters relating to Central Village. The Council i:s granted broad investigatory powers under. Section 4.07 of the City Chaxter, which reads as followsz "Sec. 4.07. Investigations. The council may make investigations into the affairs of the city and the conduct of any department, office, or agency and• for this purpose shall have the power to administer oaths and require the presence of witnesses and production of evi- dence by subpoenas obtained by order from the District Court on application from the council." � The power to conduct investigations ha.s been held by the U.S. Supreme Court to be inherent in the legislative process, Gibson v. Florida �nvesti ation Committee� 372 U.S. 539, 9 L.Ed.2d , . t. 9 . e ourt in�ibson stated: ". . .that power (to conduct investigations) is broad. It encompasses inquiries concerning the administration of existing laws as well as proposed or possibly needed statutes. It includes surveys of defects in our social, economic or political system for the pur�ose _ of enabling the Congress to remedy them. ' - 9 L.Ed.2d at 935. �� - ��:��:�,�r;� _,:..� co��i� r�aaoX Page Three -- October 3I, 1978 � CONCLUSION The City Council has the power to investigate all matters affect- ing the affairs of the City and/or the conduct of any City depart- ment, office or agency. Under this power the Council may conduct an investigation of matters relating to Central Village to the extent that they may affect the affairs of the City or the conduct of any City department, office or agency. While it is possible that the City Council ma.y use the assistance of the police depart- ment in its investigation, the Council does not have the direct Chaxter power to compel the police departmei�t to conduct an �in- vestigation or to control an investigation carried out by members of the police department. The Mayor has exclusive. executive responsibility for the supervision and control of the police department. Yours very truly, � � - - � � � SUZANNE Ee FLINSCH � City Attorney SEF:jr cc: Mayor George Lati.mer Nlembers of the Council Gary Stout Chief Richard Rowan Bernard J. Carlson . ,., • �.�, e . HOUSIHG APJD REDEVELOP:�NT AUTFIORITY ��' ��vr,� � '� � OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MIN:iESOTA • 6 -. ..�" � � . _ " CENTRAL VILLAGE - NORTHE.�ST QUADRANT BUI3GET (TAX LEVY) ..� , •� �: AS OF AUGUST 3I, 1978 ' � - � � AriOtNT UNEXPENDED � . . :; BUDGET EXPENDED b COyMI2TID . . •IT�i . A�:OU�tT 8/3I/78 COMMITMENTS BALANCE Staff SaZaries. � � $ 25,000 $ 77,082 $ -0- $(52,082) " : _ . I.ega1 Expanses ..� .. - -0- 10,182 ' - -0- . (I0,182) ; .�. Arc�itects Fee, Model Genter 27,551 27,552 Z,032 t (2,033) �:'` �Furnishing & Sales Office Constr. . 55,000 60,544 - -0- . (5�,544) "� �- Marketing Ylan and � 35,000.- 60,899 -0- 18,601 :� . Media/Protcotio�l Graphics ' 44,500 - _ � , - - � Sales Center Operatioa � 34,800 39,402 -0- - (4,ff02) Includes: Telephone � Telegragh, Office Furn. S Equip. , Other Snndry, . _ . � � •Maintenance of Center � � ,- - � Bui].ding Constivction � � 372,000 397,997 _ -0= -�(25,997) � `;Landscape - Site Deve2op�ent `�50,000 49,330 _ -�0- - _ 670 � � .I,andscape Architects Fee � . . , 6,840 . 6,840 _ _ -0-- • _ � � --0- _ Security �. 10,00Q 9,513 -0- " 487 ;.Cul-de-sacJUtility Coristruction 136,000 . 96,056 - 32,693 8,251 . ::Contiagency . . �5,Q00 39,673 � -0-. 35,327 , °:.Title Registration � Abstract ' - - �Continuation Costs `20,000 -0- = - -0- . _ 20,000 5tudy of Coaditions of Purchaser's 4,000 3,190 810 -0- Ho=ae Construction Co.mpletion 73,444 _ 5,460 -0- �. 67,484 SUB-TOTA�. $969,135 $884,220 $ 34,535 $ 50,380 Proceeds from Sales of Property . $ -0- $(45.,312) $ -0- $ 45,312 ,: A/R Central Village - Advance -0- 40,427 -0- (40,427) ` Central Village - Contracts for Deed -0- (2,732) � -Q- 2,732 Petty Cash . . -Q- 100 -0- . � (100) '` Rental of Model Center Homes -0- , (640) -�- fi00 �•GRAND TOTAL $969,135 $876,103 $ 34,535 . $ 58,497 , <.. . . _ _ � _ - . OPERATING ADVANCES TO CENTRAL VILLAGE BY HRA INSURANCE PAYMENTS 4-8-76 $2,619. 52 � 5-13-76 2,343.00 11-17-76 1,374. 48 12-14-76 1,482.�00 � $1,$I�' " � CONSTRUCTIDN LOAN ADVANCES � . 8-17-76 $ 1,810.00 . 8-25-76 2,106.03 .. 8-31-76 1,843. 09 ' 9-7-76 1,773. 73 � � 9-8-76 . 3,015. 00 9-14-76 1,944. 21 . 9-20-76 1,766. 31 9-20-76 970. 30 . �-20-76 416. 01 - 9-20-76 103. 32 � 9-29-76 1,732. 32 . 9-29-76 101.33 10-5-76 1,946. 77 10-5-76 � 113. 89 10-13-76 1,451.86 � 2-16-77 1 737. 56 , �� MISCELLANEOUS 5-17-76 FHA Filing Fee $1,040. 00 5-26-76 Incorporation Fee 5,000. 00 7-27-70 Accounting Services 3,800: 00 ��b� TOTAL OBLIGATION $40,490.56 6-22-78 Credit Applied 6,775.94 -10-27-78 Credit Applied 7 ,979.08 K OUTSTANDING OBLIGATION ;: $25,735. 54 � ; � .� " .- . .__ : EXPECTED. CENTRAL V�LLAGE SETTLEMENT COSTS PUNCH I:IST � - ESCROW FOR TOTAL �N� ' 8ZD�FOR REPAIRS ' I;ANDSCAPING � POSSIBLE REPAZRS HRA COST Marquardt 4,795 1,450 300 6,545 Erickson 6,426 1,450 950 8,826 L�verett 4,121 1,100 -0- 5,22� Schockley 7,282 1,300 -0- 8,582 � Arnvld 7,892 1,320 -0- � 9,212 Long 2,954 . -0- -0- : 2 954 . . . . : �;�� CON►�LETI�ONS NAr1E COST OVERRUN ' LnT COST � �UI:=DE-SAC TOTAL HR.A COST _ Crutchfield 10,000 3,323,08 � _ 4,097.17 17,420.25 � Buchmeier � 10,000 (est. ) �aid . 3,234. 27 (.�) �3,234. 27� . Cooger � 10,000 1,442,46 4,097. 17 15,539. 63 � Anderson . 10,000 1,540. 46 . 4,097.17 � x5,637. 63 . �' - �Presley 10,000 � 2,039. 28 4,097.17• 16,136. 45 ' Gordon � �10,000 (est.) Paid 1,862.90 (?) 11,862. 9U - �Tachiki 10,000 (est.) Faid 4,097. 17 (?) 14,097. �.7 �i�Test 10,000 (est.) 2,386. 62 4,097. 17 - 16,493. 79 � � . - � �� 120,422. 09 .. . OUTSIDE SALES : `�Walker � � 2,250 For Repairs . � ' . - . . Aitkins `� 5,000�' (Paid) For Repairs " - Parker � ' S00 �Goodwill Gesture - _ - :A.dams . 2,949 Paid Central yillage, �nc. by ;Adaans ' � _ � . � 1,824. 74 Lot CQSt Due From Centxal�Village, Inc. to HRA _ `_ . ; 1,124.•26 Dif�eren�e Due to Adams . . . - - _ . , . � �_.2,949. 00 �Total HRA Cost if not Regained from _ . . - Central Village, Inc. ' . '- _ � _. .. , _ : . $I0,699.00 _TOTAL HRA COST -� ..:, • � � . . . - � - : . . : , . . _ . - . .. - .�,�.- . - . . . . . . . . - ,,• _ . . - . . . .. , . . .. . . _ ., . . . . . ... : . . . . _ .... . . . _ : .�. � � • � - . _ , _ . . . . . . , . . , . . .. . . . . . - : . . . . _ . .. ._ . .... . . ....: . _ , _ . . . •_- . . .-�.; . .. . : � . '.. � . _ . _ Y� _ . . _ _ :-'f. _ a' . - - _=�: . •. / , �� O O 9 Cr+'f «� H a Z . � ty � .�j�. t`��' '� � � � � ,a x � ry o a � � t� _ � - � o ty � ry � t� c� r,� ry � � � tr � � � v �n C o � �v a� � r rn � � � _ � r F-+ l,n N � V V O C. O O U� O O O O Cr! O . O O O O O O . � . � ' . _ O � Z . • y � w� � w w w rn cn � • � v v ao v w o � o, : ln .� N F-' ln O C? d . '� °o o c°�n o 0 0 °o � � o ,.., r', . � � � � � � . t� c-� y - OC t=i t7 H r n � � oo v o0 0� � � � .. . . .. . � o. o 0o v r rn o c� � y o v� oo v+ �n v o H � • O. O tJ� O O O O H H 'tl Z 7' H � C.: • n � � d rt r°n A.�.O ° 'd K n v cT tD O � y �"t � � ,�n � a r•a� � o �w N . W • N �F'� w '',.f' � � I I 1 1 (p O(D N �C :� � h�•QQ (J� tD O. O O O� � � C� � t�u � �. � '� i � � i � � �o �. " a� a a � •. �n y d �rt � � w f,, � � o rt � �-iti� � � � a a x H �" ..oo v .� oo v t~.� r~-+ � H `o t�_ _ . . .. . ,. n9 v� r o 00 � r rn o o t-� � o r-r o u, oo �n c,� v a v� •• ' ' . � • o o u� o o O o H v �� #- � � � ,� �� , � j - ,Y J, a �_...t 5! .... .s� � v � _M'� ..... �:;` � GITY OF SAINT PAUL , `'r' OIn1rIC1r OP' THF. CITY COIINCIL �� . �. r`J �:..«rec�. �a ti.� ��i15�a�aaa�+e - � a��9~ . �,;�, OCT 3 0 �Qr-�r . '.�d,:'� � ~ Cauncil President �Z�N M�IDDOX Davjc�4q�,R��. �a- Cauncilman Legtslative Aide October 27, 1978 1N"�;�or George Latimer • City Council. Members - ��z z� City of St. Paul - 5t. Paul, l�i 55102 Dear Mayor Latimer & Council Members: �. , Af�er a lot of consideratioa and review by my office, S am asking each of you �`> �o consider the City Council to iavoke their invest3gativo �owerss under - Section 4.07 of the City Charter, which reads as follows: � "Sec. 4.07. Investigations. The Council may make investigatians into the affairs of the city and the conduct of any department, office, or agency and for this purpose shall have the power to administer oaths and require the presence of witnesses and pxo— duction of evidence by subpoenas obtained by order froin the � District Court on application from the council." I am requesting that this be part of the City Counc3l Agenda for Thursday, N��vember 2, 1978. I was going to ask you to consider this several wPeks ago, but as you know some other plans were made on my behalf. Z am also requesting on this date that the City Attorney furnish each of you with background on how and what powers we have relative to 3.nvestigatiob of specific cases. I have decided to do this now rather than wait because I think that the whale situation of Central Village has gone on long enough. I am canv3nced in my mind, bas�ed on the rumors, allogations, investigations that the previous City Council did, and the review that my office has done in reference to HRA records and in direct conversations with several persons concerned, that it is time for rat3.onalization to be over and realization to start. I think if you investigate the City Charter under Section 4.07 there are several - -�- ways that we can conduct this investigation. My suggestion would be that we appoint a committee of tha Council including a high echelon staff person such as Dick Broeker or the Mayor. The reason that I am suggesting this 3.s that I think one of the problems that we have run into since my experience on the CitS• Gouncil, is that there has been several times when the right hand didn�t know what the left hand was doing. Because the Mayor 3s the chief executive of this cit�r I, therefare, would like to �have his office directl�r involved. CITY HALL SEVENTH FLOOR SAINT PAU4 MINNESOTA 5S102 612/298-4475 'f •�� ' •-., . . . �'��4� ,,� _2_ The second suggestioa that I am making is that after talking to Deputy Chief McCutcheon & I hope later today after talking with Chief Rowan�that we have one person assist from the Yolice Department to conduct this investigation. The importance of this is for two reasons. Number one, we have the personnel to do the investigation and I don't see any reasoa to expend city monies, because we are already in a xight budg��. Secondly, I think upon reading the files•and questioning the various people involved, that �ur Department is fully capable of handling this investigation. .. I truly hope that you don't take this letter lightly. I have been conceraed about this issue since I have become a Councilmember� I am also including an addenda that shows that since 1.970 there has been upwaxds of $72 million expended in and around District S and I think that the public in the City of St. Paul not oaly should know, but �as a right to know, of the situations that happen, like the bizarre incidents of Central Village. Sy , no means do I want to cast dispersions on Model Cities, Community Development, ' • the Neighborhood Development Program, the Urbau Renewrsl Bond Fund, the Neighbor—'% hood Facilities Grant, the Major School System Improvement, or Rehab I.oans and �� Grants. I think that Central Village has been so clouded over that it is time that it is cleared. I have purposely not become specific in several of the things that I am sure you are all aware of because I donTt want to do aaything that would hinder ths investigation. I will be contacting each of you personally, I hope before you get this letter, and I would encourage you to take the HRA file and personally talk to Chicago Title if .you have any questions pertainin� to the seriausness of wY�at I think 3s an importaait issue. . Sincer ly, - � Ron Maddox Councilman . RM:daj ' . cc: Suzanne Flinsch _._. _ _ _. , - . � � . , �, , � � � , `��• - �'��;�,, - F�� OCT 5 ig?g CITY OF SAINT PAUL Cv^Lp,�C��ti,�A� INTER-DfPAR7MENT MEMORANDUM r:GN 1,�,�.�p�X DATE: October 4, 1978 TO: Councilman Ron Maddox . FROM: Gary Stout -r � SUBJECT: Financial : nvestment in. District,8' � : � . _ . t , . In response to your question regarding the investmen� ot pubZic' funds into District E (the Summit University area) , x have ".�.F accumulated the following -data on- investments since abou� 1970 z ..s �Ni - _ ... M�del Cities. . ..... . .... .... ..... . . . .. . .. ... ..$ 6,?40,�00 (Years I & II and transition funds) . . Oxford Pool was a Model Cities funded - pro j ect matched with CIB funds� amounting to...... . .... . . ..... e . .. .. ..... .. _ 280,600 , � Community Development. .. .. . . .. .. . . . .. . .. .... .. 9,224,316 (does not include city wide programs such _ . as rehab loan & grant) - � . . • CD I.. ... . ... ... .$4,580,000 CD II. . . . .. .. ... . 3,006,3�6 - CD III.. ..... .... 1.383,000 . - CDN. .......... . 255,ODO , ' � � �l�Teighborhood Developsnent Program. . .. ...... .... 35, �79,839 NDP I. . . . .. ...,.. .$10,972,349 - NDP II_ . ..�. ... .'. . �5,746,776 � NDP III. . ... ...:. 4,612,076 NDP IV.. .. . ..... . 7,537,852 _ ,__ _ NDP V. . .. : .. . . ... fi,310,786 . .. . _ _' ___ _ . - �Jrban Renewal Bond Fund_ . . . . . .. . . .�. . . . . . ... .. . - 8,018,546 • (includes funding for O�cford Recreation � Center) . • • � . . . � � . � � f M t� . Councilman Ron Maddox �- Neighborhood Facilities Grant of � aPProximately. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ... .... . _ . . .$ 1,00O,OOQ (matched with private agency funds of � about $618,000) built the Martin 'Luther King Center - Major School System Improvement-Dist. #625. . ._ 6,578,333 Webster Magnet School. . . . . . . . .$1�804,48f3 Hill Elementary School.. .. .. ... 2,825,338 Maxfield Elementary S�hool. . . . 1,948,50? - � Rehab Loans and Grants. . . . . . . . . ..... ....r�:••_. • .. 5,367,648 (Jan. 1. 1970 - Aug. 31. 1978) . �. 312 loans.. ... . .. . .. .. . . . .. . .�.$3,278,35U . 115 grants.. ...-... . . . . . . .. . . . . �- � 'I?9,790 . � . � i ;� .... .,.... _ ; _ _,. : ,. � Local bond fund loans. . .. .. . .. 29,300 _ ' CD loans. . ... .. .. .'. . . . . . . . . ... ' 286,300 - - - � CD grants..:... .. . . . . . . . . .. . .. . 626,258 N�'A loans.. .... .. . .. .. . . . . . .. �92,282 . MHE'A grants. ..... . .. . . . . .. .... 175�368 _ . . (Model Cities rehab loan and _ . - - grant figures are included in : the Model Cities' total) � � ` . . TOTAL ' �` 572,.349.282 ' - �hese figures comprise a beginning amaunt which is easily docunc�ented. � Construction assistance funds under 235, 236 or public housing are �. -- .�not included.-'� T�he costs to the city administration for applicationsr _ management, monitoring and close-out of programs can be only estimated. Less substantial school projects have not been researched, nor Yias the CIB figure been calculated. These figures can be pursued ifyouu � desire. . _ . � - cc: Mayor George Latimer _ . � Jim Bellus . - _ _ __.- - - _ Douglas Ford - Bill Patton � � �, - � WHITE - C1TV CIERK � PINK - FINANCE � G I TY OF SA I NT PAU L � Council � . � CANARV - DEOAitTMENT �+ /� � - BLUE =� MpVOR . [-11e �V• � � Council Resolution � � � � � � �� Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, the City Council, in performing its functions as the Saint Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority, has termi- nated the contract with the developer at the Central Village pro j ect; and WHEREAS, serious and substantial questions have been raised publicly concerning alleged irregularities in the organization, ma.nagement, operation and funding of the Central Village project, so as to warrant further inquiry; and � WHEREAS, it is time to dispel the rumors and ascertain the facts; and WHEREAS, resolution of the questions concerning the Central Village project will both enhance the future of Central �illage and strengthen other federal and state cooperative projects in the City; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul, both as Council and as Housing and Redevelopment Authority, hereby requests that the Mayor direct the appropriate personnel in the Department of Police to undertake a thorough, immediate investi- gation into any alleged improprieties in connection with all aspects of the Central Village project; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Ma.yor direct all City departme�nts to cooperate with such investigative efforts, with such resources as may be available to them; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council suppoxts the investi- gation. COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays Requested by Departmeat of: Butler (n Favor Hozza Hunt Levine Against BY Maddox Showalter Tedesco Form Approved by City Aitorney Adop!ed by Counci!: Date . Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY ' By A►ppro�ed by Mavor. Date Approved by Mayor for Submission to Councii By By