urbanMSP

Braun Intertec was out drilling in the parking lot the other day, and the "free building" sign is down so this one is moving along.

"Neighbors for East Bank Livability" filed an appeal of the Planning Commission approval. It's on the agenda for this Thursday at 9:30am. Please attend and speak in favor of the project if you can make it.
http://stopalatus.blogspot.com/

Looks like they're raising money for a lawsuit too: https://twitter.com/WedgeLIVE/status/77 ... wsrc%5Etfw

People donating $56,000 to this is pathetic.

They seem like such a lovely bunch of people, especially those running the twitter account. Not mad and bitter at all.

What are the chances of a law suit talking this down anyways? They have neighborhood association support right? And it's a no brainer for the city to approve? What grounds do they have?

Money.

They're going to have to come up with a hell of a lot more to persuade the city. Tax revenue for 200 Central is going to be high.

If they do take the city to court, I really can't see a judge giving this the time of day. There has been a long public process with multiple public hearings, including appeals at both HPC and now Planning Commission. People opposed to the project have had ample opportunity to make their objections known. They have lost (after Thursday morning anyways) and apparently are willing to pay a lawyer several thousand dollars so they can lose again in court, when a judge immediately rules in favor of the city.

"Tax-deductible donation"? Sounds more like a get-rich-quick scheme for some lawyers.

1. Set up non-profit to "fight" a development
2. Solicit donations from peeps by appealing to their animal instincts
3. "Fight" the development in court, lose, pocket money

If they do take the city to court, I really can't see a judge giving this the time of day. There has been a long public process with multiple public hearings, including appeals at both HPC and now Planning Commission. People opposed to the project have had ample opportunity to make their objections known. They have lost (after Thursday morning anyways) and apparently are willing to pay a lawyer several thousand dollars so they can lose again in court, when a judge immediately rules in favor of the city.

Are the historic structures gone?

ETA: Are the height restrictions in historic district guidelines a resource? (Wouldn't think so, but I don't know anything).

You can't just "set up a tax deductible organization" - it takes years... This would seem to be very sketchy...

They should not say "tax-deductible" anyways. They should say "check with your tax advisor". I question the $54,000 amount. People like to complain but people do not like to send in $1,000 checks for a cause like this that they will most likely lose. On their Facebook link they had a few comments and both of them were pro for the building.

I'm fairly certain that spending this much money on lawyers - lobbying in essence - is not compatible with 501(c)3 status. There are specific limits regarding the amount of political activity, "Educational" activity, etc allowed for those organizations. Maybe this should be a 501(c)4? They should be audited.

Appeal denied.

They can still appeal to the full council, though, right? And then presumably the Governor, the President, and God Himself?

Appeal denied.

They can still appeal to the full council, though, right?

Nope. The committee action (denying the appeal) will be placed on the next council meeting agenda for final decision, and it won't be a public hearing. There's no further action for the appellant to take (aside from the seemingly inevitable lawsuit)

Would a lawsuit prevent construction?

If they can get a judge to issue a temporary restraining order it would. That would depend on the alleged harm and preliminary read on their likelihood of success.

I can't imagine a TRO for construction... That's something we've seen for demolition. But if a developer knows there's litigation pending and decide to move ahead anyways, that's risk they're taking on rather than risk borne by the public or the plaintiff (such as demolishing a historic resource).

If the historic structures are gone, it's hard to even know what the claim would be, but yeah hard to see the harm to plaintiff in starting construction vs. tearing down.

They could do something like a judge did with the Terrace Theater...require the plaintiff to come up with a significant amount of money as a bond. In that case, it's about $6 million.