Chamber leaders and council at odds over proposed lease language that implies ownership

Councilors and the city attorney discussed a revised proposed long‑term lease for the Chamber of Commerce that contains language suggesting the Chamber would own a building on city land.

City attorney Mr. Chisholm told the council the chamber’s revised lease still leaves unanswered questions about what would happen at lease termination, whether the Chamber could remove or control the building and how grant‑funded improvements would be treated. Devin Reese, identifying himself as the Chamber board president, told the council "we want to say on paper that we physically own the building" and said community members raised funds for its construction and that ownership would support stability and certain grants.

Several councilors expressed reservations. They noted other long‑term lessees (for example the ski club) treat buildings as city property, maintained by lessees but ultimately belonging to the city, and that grant‑funded improvements could complicate future transfers. One councilor said he would not favor listing the tenant as the owner; another said the revised lease removes some obligations (for example certain infrastructure upgrades) the council expects to remain city responsibilities.

Council did not adopt lease language at the meeting and asked staff and legal counsel to continue review. Mr. Chisholm indicated he had reviewed original documents and found some Council memory of the building's history may not match the written record; the attorney said some terms remain problematic and further clarification is needed before any ownership language is accepted.

The council will consider the issue again at a future meeting after additional legal review and clarification of the deed and grant conditions.