Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MEMORANDUM Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District
1
To: Board of Managers Date: December 5, 2018
From: Mike Kinney
Subject: McCullough Property Background/Discussion
I recently received a phone call from Robert (Bob) McCullough who owns two parcels of land just south of the Bixby Park project site in Forest Lake. These parcels are zoned commercial but are almost entirely wetland. The westerly parcel has several billboards on it pursuant to a lease that generates an unknown amount of revenue. The anticipated 2109 property taxes for the westerly parcel that has a boundary with I-35 is $18,772 and for the easterly one is $986. Mr. McCullough has expressed interest in a scenario in which he would convey the parcels for an amount of roughly $750,000 while donating the remainder of the value, with the associated tax benefits. Mr. McCullough communicated that the property value is roughly $4.1 million and that he’d like to structure the donation, or the tax benefit, over 10 years. Furthermore, he would like to retain some interest in the billboard revenue for some period into the future. I advised Mr. McCullough that the Board of Managers would be required to review such a matter through the process laid out in in section 4.6.9 Land Acquisition and Management of the District’s Watershed Management Plan (WMP). He recognized that there would likely be a process and simply wanted to start the discussion. At first glance, considering the water resources and upland activities of the surrounding area, these parcels would seem to be of interest. It is important to note, though, that without some additional agreement, easement or acquisition of other similar property that is within the same hydrologic realm as these two parcels, the ability to complete any kind of restoration or to construct a project becomes unlikely. Also, of course, the District does not presently have a basis to value the property in question and we do not yet have a basis to determine whether the District’s and Mr. McCullough’s expectations may be similar. Mr. McCullough raised a similar proposition to the District in about 2012, but the matter did not proceed further. In addition to the parcel map of the properties, I have also included the two pages of the District’s Watershed Management Plan that refer to the process the Board is to reference when considering any land acquisitions. Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the Board obtain a scope from EOR for a preliminary feasibility review of the parcels. Proposed Motion: Manager ____________ moves to direct staff to work with EOR to develop a scope for a preliminary feasibility review of the parcels. Seconded by Manager ____________.
MEMORANDUM Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District
2
Attached: Parcel map; 2012-2021 Watershed Management Plan, Volume 1, pages 66a & 66b
PEM1Ad
PSS1/EM1APEM1C
PEM1CPUBG
PEM1Ad
PEM1C
PEM1C
R4SBCR4SBC
R4SBC
PABGx
R4SBCR4SBC
Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community,Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan (amended January 2018)
66a
4.6.9 Land Acquisition and Management (5900 Series)
District-Wide (5920)
Under this project category, the Board of Managers will support the District’s goals
(stated in Chapter 3) by acquiring land or land rights to manage for conservation
purposes, support of capital projects and related purposes including public
education and recreation.
In most instances, a project that the District undertakes for water quality
improvement, flood management, habitat restoration or other District water
resource goals will require that the District obtain rights from a cooperative
property owner to construct and maintain the project. In these cases, the necessary
land rights are acquired as a part of project development.
In other cases, however, the District may have an opportunity to acquire a fee or
easement interest in a property for a favorable price. It may be property owned by
the state for nonpayment of taxes and available to local units of government, or
private land placed on the market on favorable terms, or offered to the District at a
below-market price for tax benefits or other reasons. It may be undevelopable land
that has a low market value but value for water resource purposes.
The District’s land acquisition and management program allows the District to
acquire such lands or easements even when they have not been specifically
identified as necessary for a specific District project that has been authorized by
the Board or that is under feasibility or design.
District spending under this category encompasses both spending to evaluate a
potential acquisition (e.g., appraisal, resource evaluation, environmental
assessment) and the costs associated with the acquisition. Before committing funds
to acquire a fee or easement interest, the Board of Managers will consider the
following:
The potential suitability of the property for a capital project or other project identified in the Plan.
The potential for the land rights to facilitate the District’s pursuit of water quality, flood management or other water resource goals identified in the Plan, with respect to specific waterbodies or more generally.
The market value of the rights to be acquired, by means of appraisal or other valuation as the Board of Managers determines appropriate for the transaction.
The water resource value of the acquisition.
Consistency of the District’s acquisition with the city’s or township’s land use classification and plans and potential for collaboration on use of the property.
2012-2021 Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed Management Plan (amended January 2018)
66b
The extent to which the water resource purposes of the acquisition may be achieved without the District’s spending public funds, due to physical, regulatory or similar constraints on use of the property.
Ongoing property management costs.
The District’s ability to dispose of its property interests if its potential use for a capital or other project fails to materialize.
This category also encompasses the District’s management of its fee and easement
interests. At the time the District acquires such an interest, it will prepare a plan
for natural resource management as well as general property management for
public safety and risk protection purposes. Resource management may involve
very little action or may involve demolition of existing structures, vegetation
management or other actions to maintain or enhance both the financial and the
natural resource value of the property. Spending for any action constituting a
capital project would occur only pursuant to the process requirements of Minnesota
Statutes chapter 103B and other applicable requirements.
Progress Evaluation Metric
Success in using this program will be judged by a qualitative assessment of how
the District has used it for cost-effective support of its capital and other projects
and in collaboration with its cities and towns in pursuit of complementary public
goals. Each year, the District administrator will report to the Board of Managers
on the implementation of management plans; carrying costs; and recommendations
for potential project siting, continued holding or disposition of District properties.
Potential Partners
Partners may include cites and townships within the District as well as
Washington and Chisago Counties.
Potential Funding Sources
The District expects to fund activities under this program area through its annual
ad valorem levy on the basis of annual budgeting of funds for potential
acquisitions. Collaboration with other units of government may supply funds and
if necessary the Board of Managers may consider financing acquisitions through
loans or other legally available means.