Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mayor presents economic-development agreement for vacant lots near the Y; board records terms and penalties
Summary
After reopening the meeting March 18, the mayor presented an economic development agreement to convey multiple vacant city lots for market-rate townhomes near the Y, with penalty provisions of $5,000 per month for failure to start or finish on schedule; the board entered the agreement into the public record.
The Muncie mayor presented details of an economic development agreement March 18, describing plans to convey a set of vacant city lots for market-rate townhome development near the Y and to include monetary penalties if the developer misses agreed start or completion dates.
The mayor said the agreement was negotiated by Jeff Howe of the Muncie Redevelopment Commission and stressed that the city would not provide direct funding for the development. “We’re not providing any funds uh for this development,” the mayor said, adding that the city would convey vacant lots at a reduced price but include substantial penalties to ensure progress: “It’s 5,000 a month if they don't start when we asked them to and it's 5,000 a month if they don't finish when we asked them to.”
A member of the public, Ricky Anthony, asked for clarification about which properties were involved and how they relate to the Y. The mayor read the list of properties to be conveyed: 703 North Mulberry; 705 North Mulberry; 707 North Mulberry; 108 East Columbus; 701 Mulberry; 655 North Mulberry; 701 North Jefferson; 206 East Columbus; 208 East Columbus; and 703 1/2 North Elm Street. He said the parcels are vacant lots the city has available and confirmed the intended use as market-priced housing.
The board initially tabled the agreement because no representative for the developer was present to allow public disclosure, then reopened the meeting after the mayor arrived and placed the agreement into the public record for transparency. The mayor indicated the agreement includes penalty language meant to protect the city’s interests but did not detail financing or construction timelines beyond the penalty framework. The board did not indicate a formal vote on funding; the mayor said the arrangement relies on conveying property and contractual penalties rather than a city subsidy.
The item was entered into the public record; the board advised that representatives be present for future proceedings and that the matter would return for further public consideration as needed.
