Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Development Authority topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council describes alternative to dissolving UDA, keeps reuse authority role
Summary
Council members said they chose an alternative to dissolving the Urban Development Authority so the city would continue to serve as the reuse authority and avoid inheriting unresolved UDA problems.
A council speaker recounted that the council asked the Urban Development Authority (UDA) to decide how to proceed and said the city adopted an alternative to dissolution so it could continue to function as the reuse authority. "We had we had the the council asked the UDA to decide. Right? The legal effect of the UDA dissolving would be we inherit all its problems. So we ended up doing this alternative to dissolution so that we continue to serve as the reuse authority, because it just streamlined the process. It made a lot of sense," the speaker said.
The speaker told the council that the city's position regarding property under the UDA would be the same now as it would have been if the UDA had dissolved: "what you're in the same position today than you would be with regards to property that you had that you would be if they dissolve a partner request. Alright." The remarks framed the decision as a procedural choice intended to streamline reuse authority responsibilities.
The transcript excerpts do not show a formal vote or ordinance adopting the alternative; the remarks describe an administrative path chosen to avoid complications from dissolution rather than a newly enacted legal instrument.
