Okay, so we have um we have uh adjourned out of executive session and have moved back into the regular meeting and it is 823.

So resuming regular meeting and it is recorded.

Here we go.

So if there's somebody out there who's willing to pay 20 million, then why don't you ask them to put an offer together and we can look at it in a week?

Yeah, getting it in a week or not, I'm not sure that I can do that.

Well, except I don't think we can't do that.

We're not allowed to do that.

Yeah, it's got to be open to whoever.

So here's tax.

If it's a tax supported governmental entity, so a governmental entity, then we can negotiate uh direct conveyance to that entity.

Based on what you told me, it's not a governmental entity.

It could be a church.

So what would happen in that church?

Yeah.

What would happen in that case?

Um you would be able to put it to bid and knowing that they may be a bidder.

You could exchange property if they had property exchange that you felt was an equal value or you know, good consideration.

Well, yeah.

And the bot the bottom line is if there's people out there wanting to do some, then let's hear it.

But all I've heard is negative negative negative.

Nobody has stepped forward.

This is the first time somebody has said uh uh that we could step forward and buy it under the same conditions as CWI and pay the 20 million.

If that's the reality, then we should be looking at it.

If it's not people the opportunity to do that yet, and that is correct.

We haven't given them the opportunity.

So at this point, we would need to go out.

How about the auditorium district?

I mean, that's they don't have any.

We haven't even talked about yet.

That's because how that how that starts playing out.

I think they start collecting here this next month is what I heard.

But they won't have funds till 27, right?

Yeah, they won't have funds so and so how does that again a land exchange or a land purchase or parceling off?

How does that all play out in light of the auditorium district's um revenue?

Does it all get diverted to civic center?

You know, that's see that's what we're doing.

The Fort Idaho Center is listed as a recipient.

And so I think even if it's sold, it would still be eligible.

There just has to be a joint powers agreement based on what legal has said within the auditorium district.

If we're going to put it on the market, then we need to go ahead and identify this group needs to identify what are the deed restrictions that we're going to put on it.

And then we need to put it out, officially put it out.

So we need to identify the deed restrictions, and in addition to that, what the dollar, if we want a minimum dollar amount.

And so I think Dale, you suggested 100 million because Randy, you have mentioned many times that's the value.

So we would have to when I went back and looked at the fiscal year 20, or yeah, it was uh 17.

2017 numbers through the ICRIF report, that's where I just put together that valuation, and then now that's gone up, our valuation's gone up as far as 100 million dollars just in what they're insuring at this point.

So I'm not sure what the true value is, but you look at the Jacobs report, just the four buildings alone was 1.5 or 150 million.

But that was it for the value of the replacement value.

The true value is what a willing buyer and a willing seller are willing to negotiate and pay and receive.

So that's what value is for us throwing out these numbers is it is not material.

We don't have that negotiation ability with the cell.

You put a number and it's just are you willing to come to the table with that cash?

Do we need to put together a true market value though?

Or have one down by a third party?

That's it's really up to a majority vote at the end of the day.

No, because if there's a willing buyer out there, they will make a willing offer.

And that tells you under those circumstances and terms, that's what the market is saying the property is worth to them.

There's no reason for us to do an appraisal, there's no need for appraisal.

So I have a question.

Then let the market tell you what it's worth.

Okay, so just to to move it quickly along.

In the deed restrictions, we had the term sheet that we had put together with CWI, which could form the basis for some of the deed restriction.

Correct.

So which of the deed restrictions?

So for example, the Fort Idaho Center continued use with the Snake River Stamping Rodeo.

Is that yes?

Yes.

All that everything that's in there has to remain.

Everything that's the only way you know what the marketplace is willing to do.

Okay, well, the parking, because a lot of this is CWI parking, right?

CWI.

We're criticized for uh the negotiations with CWI and not seeking others, etc.

So CWI is willing to do the deal according to those terms.

So you leave those terms in there and they'll find out is there's somebody better than CWI who will come in and these terms, etc.

And so you know, not every nonprofit's gonna take on the liquor license issues and uh and operate a venue that has liquor license.

Not every nonprofit is going to uh take on that uh OVG can bring any act into the Idaho Center and make money off of, whether we like what the act is or not, but potentially maybe there is somebody, and so therefore that's that's how you have to look at it.

I'd be real surprised if there's a nonprofit church who's willing to take the facility on under the same terms as CWI.

But if they are and they're willing to pay 20 million or maintaining the rodeo, if nothing else were there, maintaining the rodeo alone would be very difficult because of the cost of the dirt and all of that.

You know, it's setting aside for two weeks and all of that, it would be difficult.

But that said, so maybe what we do is Preston, you uh put together based on this document what you believe the deed restrictions would be, and we bring that back to council for review.

Um is that the convenience agreement?

This is the facilities use agreement.

This is just the terms, the all those various things, and it talks about the recreation facilities, public safety training facility, advisory commission, soccer fields, parking, ticket office.

Three page documents on a couple of these, I can ask the question soccer fields.

That was unique to CWI because they're immediately.

It wouldn't be there.

It wouldn't be there.

You want to put something in there that you got to come up with 10 acres of land?

Okay.

Nope.

So what if you sell it to a group that's becomes insolvent, and you uh and they and OBG is like, we're gonna pack our silverware and we're out of here because this guy's insolvent.

And uh the rodeo agreement still on the deed restriction, the horse park and the horse park, all the stalls have fallen down, it's in disrepair.

You can't run an event there, and then uh the rodeo is supposed to go on and then but they can't even the roof falling in.

Right.

How do we guarantee that that doesn't happen?

We need to have this event for the next hundred years for the stampede.

We need to have it maintained.

When you sell it, you lose that, I believe.

Yeah.

Mary, are we stuck on 20 million?

Or is that just a rank brought up?

No, no, no.

It's just a number that was I think Dell suggested 100 million because that was the number that had been.

That's what I would want to do.

That it would be a hundred million.

Okay.

Preston, I want to add though, if we can put in there the the local stuff.

So the graduations and the gun shows, gun shows we've been asked to keep in there.

Just thinking after public.

Well, the graduations and the state tournaments, right?

We do the host state chair, state basketball.

Yeah.

What other venues are there out there, Victor?

Because you you're on that committee, right?

What other things are we missing?

No, I don't know, Dale.

I wish I could tell you.

I all I know is that is that as long as we do it this way, people are gonna look at it and be okay at least they try it.

Yes, and that's gonna work for us.

And then we get down to the Negrity, then it'll it'll be the only way I can look at it, is what is best for us.

There you go.

There's craft shows.

If you can think an event that needs to be protected that we're not getting in there, then we you get to be just those two.

That's the main park and rodeo.

And the road is only there six seven days out of the year.

Two weeks.

They have it about two weeks.

Yeah.

Two weeks, yeah.

Yeah.

So they there's the prep time, there's the money spent that's come up, you know, to move dirt and get it set up.

There's there's a great deal of expense that they've got to put forward to use the facility.

I know, I know.

It's it's uh it's important to us.

Like I know.

I'm I'm just glad that we're gonna go.

Oh, body country.

Oh, yeah, that's in your center.

Uh go with different routes and take a look at the whole picture, and I I'm okay with that.

Absolutely.

So what do we put in there that they would um maintain the contract with OBGE like CWI?

Because that's there, that needs to be in the agreement as well.

I think everything that's in that term sheet, except for like the the uh soccer fields.

I guess the question is so Preston will work on that and he'll pull it back together.

And the what is our next council meeting is on the second.

But that's like today is Monday, it's a week from tomorrow.

Do you I don't know how fast you can turn around that deed restriction?

That's pretty quick.

I think that could be the area.

It's really up to you if you think it'd be invaluable to have it by the second, we can try to make that happen.

It is a holiday weekend.

Um then we have the 15th, right?

So I think the second of the second um the second one in the month.

The second meeting of the month.

Yeah.

The 15th of September.

Yeah.

Okay.

And you know, I I don't want to wait into policy stuff much.

I you know, I want to just advise on the legal guidance and council stuff, but you know, you kind of see a decision here where there is kind of an immediate benefit.

You get cash for the home or you know, for selling it.

Um who will be the steward of that property?

I think that's where the tussle is, the tug award.

And the conveyance route gives you that option to know who's going to be in this house, who will be running the property.

Whereas you do have some risk in putting it out for sale.

You do get a short-term windfall, but you can't control who is going to buy it.

And statute says shall go to highest bidder.

I think the thing that's really the positive for the community is they're saying they're upset with the idea of just giving it away.

Uh whereas if there was if it's being stated by this council and the mayor that uh we're allowing the conversation to go into the sale of, then that's that answers some of the concerns that people have been raising because now we are addressing that.

This is an opportunity.

Is there a true interest out there, bring it forward?

And if not, then you know we're we're continuing the dialogue a little bit further with other options.

But at least that's been pursued, and they can come forward then the people that have been saying sell it.

Okay, well, uh, we'll put it out there and see what kind of offers we truly get.

And you know, reach out to Boise Valley Economic Partnership, have them be a part of the conversation as well to see if there is a national interest.

But again, back to who you're giving it to is important as much as what you're getting for.

Yeah, have a national interest or an international interest come in and operate your facility in your community.

Yeah.

You could put in some deed restrictions if you really want to know who's at the table.

Again, I'll follow up if I think there's a different if this wouldn't hold up, but I think it would.

You could put in a deed restriction that you had to have been an entity who submitted a proposal to the city if you really wanted to know, right?

Somebody you already knew in advance, and that would mean that shrinks the field to those who then presented pretty much their presentation, you know, what they could do with the city, their wherewithal financially, their vision, their values, and that could be something if you want to have some control.

I'm just concerned for you.

You know, I want to support you and whatever you do, but I think you want to make the right decision.

Well, you're qualifying the buyer.

Yeah, it's that pretty much that.

But it doesn't allow us to do that in statute, right?

To qualify the buyer.

It what it says is you take the highest bidder.

It what you put in your deed restrictions is up to us and what the law permits.

So if George Soros comes in here, there's a hundred million dollars to him is like a quarter to us.

He comes in here and he goes, I'm gonna have a Bernie Sanders event here every single week, and I'll allow the rodeo for two weeks and the horse park to go on.

There's not a dang thing we can do about that.

If there was nothing in the deed restrictions, right, where you're kind of dictating how they use it, then you're right.

They could do that.

But if the deed restrictions is carefully crafted intentionally with terms that are acceptable to you for long-term ownership, I think that gives you the cover you're looking for.

And what those terms are, that's where we need to talk about them.

At least we sold it.

Yeah.

So if they don't abide by our terms, then it would be it would come back to us.

We could put that language if they violate whatever one term or all the terms, and you have a reversion of ownership back to us.

Yeah, okay.

Which is exactly what CWI is.

Somebody who's invested a lot of money into the property.

Yeah, it's just a million.

It would be more good.

Or we can just hang on.

Trust him, what is the so after this after this that then we have to notice it for two weeks?

Yeah, well, this is for um this is still this conversational, though.

Right here.

You're not talking about having an action item on the 15th.

Yes, yeah.

But you are yeah, that we would actually put it up for sale.

Oh.

So that's what you're talking about.

Is the action item he would be bringing forth the agreement?

But do we need to do a public hearing?

So that if you will, so you gotta get the timing of this right.

If you want to do the official vote, we have to have a formal declaration of our intent how we're proceeding.

Do you have only do that on the second?

And you could do that on the second, and then you need to wait at least 14 days, so it would put us out to probably the first public hearing in October.

October, right?

Then we need to have a put it on the market for sale or to sell it.

Well that does it authorizes you to then go and sell it.

Yes.

You don't have to have another public hearing to sell it.

You're allowed to do that.

It's a public option.

Yeah, once you have that public hearing, and if there's a majority vote, it says you are now authorized to go sell it, and this is what you do.

It has to be sold at a public auction to the highest bidder.

And you can't accept the bid for less than the minimum value.

Does it have to be determined underutilized before you can do the public hearing to sell?

Yes.

Okay, so we would have to do the decision for underutilization at on September 2nd, then on actually on or the 15th, then a month later, you have a public hearing to determine that you can actually put it on the market for sale.

So that's yeah.

So and for the second public hearing, I would advise that you have in there this deed restrictions, right, as an exhibit.

Right.

Yes.

You're saying, hey, this is what we're gonna sell it as world, these are the deed restrictions.

And that would give that give me enough time to articulate that.

Um we can circulate that probably.

So do we want to vote on we didn't really discuss underutilization?

And that is step number one, which could be on the second, and then the first meeting, which is October 8th, I believe, would be the meeting, a public hearing to actually um determine that you're gonna put it on the market for sale.

Yeah, and and part of the uh I guess call it proceedings or papers you would have would be you know the resolution and all that, and that's gonna be fleshed out of the reasoning for underutilization.

So the month of September would be preparing for that October 8th.

I think that's the date.

Maybe it's the And we can't have that by September 15th?

No, because it has to be a public hearing has to be noticed for 15 days, 14 days.

At least 14 days.

And by the time you get out of the meeting on Tuesday the second, and it gets in the paper, it isn't getting in the paper until Friday.

Then you've got it out for 14 days, so the soonest you can do it is the first meeting in October.

Okay.

And I think that it may be the seventh is the first meeting.

Um but anyway, that's what it would be.

But I guess the question is are we ready for the yeah, the sixth?

Are we ready to have a vote for underutilization?

Because we didn't talk tonight about underutilization.

Um I think that we have a really good case for it being higher, it it can be higher utilized than it currently is.

Um could you get the underutilization ready by Monday night?

My read of the statute is it's optional to have it.

Tuesday night, I'm sorry.

It's optional to have it all fleshed out for that first uh declaration.

But when you do the final decision in writing, like we have made this decision and we're writing it out.

That is where you put all those, you know, all the all the findings.

We find that it's underutilized for these reasons, X, Y, and Z.

That can be drafted in the time from the announcement.

Think of it as Tuesday as kind of the the formal announcement.

And October as all the findings are all spelled out in writing.

And the public hearing is ratifying this.

Yes, and that's where you're saying, hey, we've we've reviewed it, and yes, we agree that it's underutilized or not used for a public purpose.

You know, legal it was drafted this, it's all there, we reviewed it, we're on board.

Let's have a vote.

So, Mayor, I'm I'm thinking that under utilization is no longer an issue if we wanted to sell it, right?

It has to be legal.

Oh, legally, we have to do that in order to sell.

That is the that is the opening gate.

That's the threshold.

Okay.

Which is kind of sad.

Yeah, and to sell it.

You know, this is all, you know, this is a published case.

Anyone can go read it.

Um it's a U.S.

district court of Idaho case that says that account a city can determine that a property is not only presently underutilized, but will be or would be in the future at some point underutilized.

I do.

And that is different in my opinion than underperforming.

Um it's more of what level could this property be utilized to?

And if you feel like it's not there, the courts have said you can make that determination.

I'll put that in the findings.

Okay.

Yeah.

I would say, Mayor, it would help to flesh that out a little more on Tuesday, September 2nd.

Maybe a discussion of underutilization.

And that would give me a little direction then on drafting that come October 6th.

Getting that all in writing.

Is that the direction we want to go?

Yep.

Yep.

And this is a workshop, so no votes, but it sounds like we're just saying work on it.

But to vote on it the second, any realization?

Uh-huh.

Think of it like formally kicking off the process.

Now we're committed to a track.

You're gonna go down a track.

You're committed to a sell.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

So is there anything else we need to talk about?

So does that mean we're communicating to CWI that we're not transferring it to them?

Currently that we're gonna pursue a different path.

I need to call Gordon.

They put a lot of effort in it.

They put a lot of effort and expense into it.

A lot of expense.

So Eric, could I ask the question just to kind of guide this decision?

Um is it more a matter of consideration, meaning dollars out of this transaction?

Or is it more that it has to be a bid?

Because CWI could still, through a conveyance from one government to the other, put money on the table.

And then so the question is is it more of just some sort of value for this exchange, or is it how you're doing it?

Is this really no, we want to sell it, we don't want to convey it.

You want to buy it, they buy it.

For one dollar.

So I tell you what, I think what I think I'm hearing is that we are saying as a as a group, we're ready to move forward and do something.

Yeah, either path, you have to first start by underutilization, which we're gonna have you ready to do on September 2nd.

And then we'll visit with CWI, and obviously this is all public record and recorded.

Um, and we'll make a decision at this point.

What we're talking about doing is putting on the market with deed restrictions.

But if we don't get that, if you don't get the bid, a response back, we do have the option to figure out what we want to do.

Is that correct?

You're saying if nobody manages our minimum number.

Yep, your playbook's still open.

Okay.

And so we'll talk before the second before we're ready to go out, because that's not until October.

You'll spend some time figuring out what we're looking for from people because that may give us some information on how we can move forward.

Like when they're giving us when they're coming in to bid on something.

And you can have your decision kicked out, whatever.

If you we more time, it could be till November or whatever.

Yeah, to do that.

But it's a George Soros type buyer.

We're comfortable with that.

Nope, nope.

We're not.

You could put some deed restrictions on that.

Okay, so how do you put a deed restriction restricting who the buyer is?

No.

You can't do it on your face code.

In real estate.

We're talking about we're talking about the potential sale of the facility.

That's what we're talking about.

I'm trying to bet it out.

Yeah, well, and all I'm hearing is well, the the fear of maybe this person will buy it instead of we we have the fear-driven approach and other ways.

So I mean, that's why I thought maybe we could talk this out a little bit more.

You're just all upset because I brought forward an idea that someone might have an interest in buying the facility.

And now it's expanded.

I'm trying to look at the whole issue.

So am I.

And you and you discount trying to bring it in.

That there is when you put it out on the open market, depending on the terms, there may be somebody who says, Yeah, I'm gonna buy it.

Are we comfortable with whoever buys it from the outside?

Well, I I see maybe a conglomerate that maybe other businessmen from the area coming together, maybe pooling their resources and buying it.

So we don't know.

But we'll just say real quickly, we are required to sell to the highest bidder.

Right.

We are required no matter who it is.

And that might be local people.

If it reaches the hundred million or the amount that we put out.

All I'm trying to say is that you're comfortable with the highest bidder.

You're whoever that may be.

That's what we would do.

That said, I think we're ready.

So I'd stand for a motion to adjourn.

All right.

Okay.

I think we're ready.

So thank you.