Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Tax Forfeit Property topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

EDA reviews tax-forfeited 9-acre parcel, counsel to research new statute and auction restrictions

Dayton Economic Development Authority · October 15, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff told the EDA a nine-acre tax-forfeited parcel held by the city is subject to a county deed with a 30-year use restriction; staff reported a newly enacted statute may require returning the parcel to the county and triggering a public auction process, and the EDA asked counsel to research options before moving forward.

Staff briefed the EDA on a roughly 9-acre tax-forfeited parcel the city currently holds under a special-use deed containing use restrictions tied to transit-related uses and a 30-year term. Staff said Hennepin County staff (referred to as Amber) told them that a statute enacted during the recent legislative cycle may require jurisdictions to return certain forfeited parcels to the county and trigger a public auction process rather than permit an outright sale to the city or a private buyer.

According to staff, the deed was forfeited in 2012 and the staff member said that, under the new statute and Department of Revenue guidance, the city could be within a statutory window that would require a public auction if the county were to retake the parcel. Staff asked whether the commission wanted further legal research into that interpretation; commissioners expressed interest in understanding options and the potential to either hold the parcel for the remainder of the restriction (about 22 years), ask the county to resell it, or pursue other approaches such as seeking a public auction or pursuing a swap.

Commissioners noted competing objectives: preserve public-use options (e.g., transit hub or public facility), secure tax-base generating development, and avoid unnecessary legal expense. Counsel recommended further review of the statute and department guidance; staff estimated the additional research would take a few hours.

No formal decision to sell, transfer or pursue immediate action was taken; the board asked staff and counsel to return with verified legal guidance and options for next steps at a future meeting.