Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Transfer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council moves to closed session to discuss revised land-transfer agreement with MLM Holdings LLC
Summary
Council discussed a revised land-transfer agreement for about 4.65 acres with MLM Holdings LLC (Michael Mays), including added protections (DBAT as party, reversionary deed and loan subordination). The council recessed into a closed session under Utah Code Annotated 52-4-205 to discuss real property and development strategy.
Get email alerts on the Land Transfer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Herriman City Council temporarily recessed into a closed session Sept. 10 to discuss a revised land-transfer agreement with MLM Holdings LLC and developer Michael Mays.
Todd, representing city staff, outlined the updated agreement for roughly 4.65 acres the city had earlier agreed to deed in exchange for construction of public improvements and an indoor baseball facility. "Previously, we had a business owner here in Herriman, Michael Mays, approach the city and ask the city to deed him property... Mr. Mays, for various reasons, failed to perform under the agreement," Todd said, describing the motivation for stronger protections in a revised deal.
Key additions in the revised agreement include making DBAT and Mr. Mays named parties responsible for performance, recording the agreement against the property, requiring any investors to acknowledge the agreement, making any loans junior to the city's interest, and preparing a reversionary deed to be recorded in case of default.
Because the property and agreement implicate potential negotiation strategy and real-property interests, Council member Tara moved to recess to a closed session under Utah Code Annotated 52-4-205 (strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation and to discuss the purchase, exchange or lease of real property and proposed development agreements). Sherry seconded; roll-call votes were recorded in favor of the recess and the mayor announced the council would return as soon as possible.
Council did not vote on the agreement in the public session; staff said the closed session would allow further strategy and follow-up discussions, and the council will return to public session if the council needs to take formal action.
The city indicated the revised draft was intended to give the city additional protections if the project does not proceed.

