Council reviews Boosies lease terms, rent process and transferability questions

City staff and councilors discussed terms of a proposed lease for a tenant identified as Boosies and sought clarifications about rent enforcement and transferability provisions.

A councilor asked whether the city had been “badmouthed” publicly in a previous episode where rent was not paid and whether the city’s lease language had been strengthened. A staff member responding for the city said the issue was not solely lease language but a defined process for responding to missed rent payments and subsequent misses. “There is a process in place... and so that process has been followed as recently as one of our other tenants was having that issue,” the staff member said.

Councilors also asked about a transferability clause (section 11.3) that allows a tenant to transfer the lease to an entity under common control or resulting from a merger, provided the acquiring entity has a net worth at least equal to the tenant. A councilor said that provision seemed “generous” for a city-owned building and asked why the city would not require approval of a new entity. City staff replied that the clause is a standard commercial term that governs changes to the legal entity owning the tenant business but does not change permitted use under separate lease paragraphs.

Councilors also noted the tenant had been listed as a nonprofit in draft materials; staff acknowledged that was a mistake and said the tenant is for-profit and that the paperwork will be corrected.

No formal action was taken during the discussion; staff said they had clarified the enforcement process and would update the lease paperwork to correct the nonprofit labeling.