Business owners discuss proposed center
Thursday, August 14, 2008
That’s why recent talk at a city council meeting by a developer looking to locate a shopping center where more than a dozen small businesses now sit raised some legitimate concerns of those who could potentially be affected.
To help ease those concerns and begin a dialogue with the business owners, the Farmington Chamber of Commerce hosted an informal luncheon meeting Tuesday afternoon to listen to what the business owners had to say.
“We’re here to support the business community,” Chamber Director Ursula Kthiri said of the meeting involving business owners in the affected area and chamber directors.
A couple dozen business owners and managers turned out for the meeting. The focus was developer R.L. Jones — otherwise known as Ramona and Lloyd Jones — proposal during a recent council meeting to capture a couple city blocks to use for development of a new shopping center. In a presentation about their plan, their spokesman, Randy Black, talked of asking the city council to pursue a forced buy-out of property owners who might refuse to sell to R.L. Jones.
“By way of eminent domain?” Mayor Jeannie Roberts had questioned Black.
“Well ... yeah,” Black answered.
Black and the Joneses were at the July council meeting to ask for the city’s support in establishing a Tax Increment Financing, of TIF, district and Community Improvement District, or CID, to cover the area of their proposed development. The target area would take in the shopping mall which now houses Blockbuster, Fashion Bug, Tractor Supply and take in the area bordered by Karsch Boulevard, Potosi Street, Maple Street, and possibly all the way west to Walton Drive.
While Black’s speech to the city council in July was to be about a TIF and CID, he spent much of the time discussing ways to take in properties within the proposed shopping center. He said R.L. Jones had one trailer park under contract and was pursuing purchase of the county’s maintenance building off Maple Street. He alluded to the fact that property owners within the target area had been asked to sell their land — and some were in favor, while others were not.
“We can’t allow somebody to hold us up and rob us,” Black added, referring to property owners who might ask for more than fair market value for their land or refuse to sell altogether.
To that end, the Farmington Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors decided to hold an informal luncheon meeting to discuss the proposed TIF, CID and the suggestion to use “eminent domain” for the Jones shopping development and invited business and property owners within the affected area to meet with chamber officials at noon Tuesday in the Farmington Civic Center.
The meeting was a chance for the board of directors to hear any concerns of member and non-member business owners in the affected area. Chamber Director Ursula Kthiri explained at the start of the meeting that the chamber of commerce had not taken a position on the issue at this point, but wanted to hear what business — and land-owners — had to say in case the time came when the chamber needed to make a collective stand on the matter.
Questions ranged from asking about the boundaries of the proposed shopping center, to getting an informed explanation of “blighted,” a term used in the eminent domain process.
City Administrator Greg Beavers was on hand for the meeting and answered many of the questions concerning TIFs, CIDs and eminent domain. He explained that the general perception of “blighted” was not necessarily the same interpretation used by municipalities in the eminent domain process.
“I could blight Wal-Mart Supercenter,” Beavers said, explaining the wide-ranging power of communities to use eminent domain. He repeatedly said while the city might have the power to use eminent domain, that didn’t mean the city council would wield that tool for just any development that came along.
The question was asked by someone in the crowd of how many people had been approached by R.L. Jones to sell their property. Kthiri said she did not have that number, and knew of no written contracts at this time but only of some discussions between Jones and business owners.
“The first I ever heard was when I read it in the paper,” a representative of P.A.T.H. services, a help agency located off Maple Street, said. One by one a few business owners told stories of being approached in recent months by either Lloyd Jones or Randy Black asking if they would be interested in selling their land. Most indicated they were not.
“Is anyone in favor of selling, or seeing this development built?” a chamber board member asked. No one responded that they were.
More than once it was asked why Jones would need a TIF and CID and have a long list of national tenants looking to fill a new shopping center when the city recently approved or is considering TIFs and CIDs for two other developers — both of which have failed to bring a new business to town to date.
Beavers explained that the Farmington Crossing development west of U.S. 67 had a TIF and CID in place and was apparently working to line up tenants before breaking ground. He alluded to the fact that the shopping center might have been held up initially for a few months. That developer had indicated this as a reason why they had been unable to secure major tenants so far.
He went on to say the Gundaker development east of U.S. 67 had obviously spent a lot of money to build a building and parking lot, but had yet to secure any leases from either national or local businesses. He said that developer had now approached the city about a CID tax, which would be discussed by the council and TIF commission in coming weeks and months.
Beavers said Jones would have to begin the long process of working with the city and TIF commission to create a TIF plan before the use of eminent domain to force the sale of properties could ever be used. Then, he said, the developer approved for the TIF district would have to get appraisals and make fair market value offers to purchase properties before the city would even take the next step of deeming the target properties as “blighted” to force their sale to make way for the new shopping center.
“It’s a very long and public process,” Beavers said.
A couple property owners suggested Black and Jones might be working to purchase select pieces of property to fragment the area and make it more difficult for existing property owners to find retail and service tenants for their businesses — in turn driving down future values of the properties and making it easier to purchase at a later time.
When asked if representatives of R.L. Jones had been invited to the luncheon, Kthiri said “no,” explaining that the intention of the meeting was to hear discussion from business and property owners who might be affected by Jones’ plans, and that there would be plenty of opportunities in the future, if the plan progressed, for the owners to address the Jones group directly about their intentions.
Danny Miller, owner of Total Electric, located off Potosi Street, said he had been approached by the Joneses to sell by way of a verbal question only, and was not interested. He added it was his understanding the process of a TIF and eminent domain was a very long one, and that other business owners should not panic and have sleepless nights at this point about the future.
The luncheon ended with several people thanking the chamber for hosting the informational and discussion luncheon.
Kthiri said afterward that she felt the meeting went well and provided the open forum that people needed to see where everyone, chamber members and non-chamber members alike, stood on the matter.
Ads by Yahoo!
Reader Comments (0)The comments below are from readers and do not represent the views of the Daily Journal
Search the archives
Last 30 Days
Advanced Search
Advanced Search
This Week's Most Viewed Stories
» All Most Viewed
This Week's Most Commented Stories
» Latest Comments
- Police release surveillance footage (23)
- Police make arrest in attempted Burger King robbery (14)
- Wounded deer attacks on hunter who shot him (10)
- Landrum announces run for mayor (8)
- Roberts announces she will seek another term (7)
» Latest Comments
This Week's Most Emailed Stories