(Milford)– Two development agreements drew considerable discussion and some controversy at Monday’s Milford city council meeting.
The first involves Hot Spots LLC, developers of Boji Junction on the city’s north side. Several councilmen said they want updated plans and that utilities and other infrastructure already installed be brought up to city standards before proceeding with any additional development of the area. They also questioned why original plans for hotels, an R-V park and other amenities for the site haven’t been followed through with.
A spokesman for Hot Spots told the council they still have high hopes for Boji Junction, but the current economic situation has made it a real challenge. He told the council they can’t guarantee original plans for two hotels and an upper scale R-V park will actually proceed.
He added the Boji Fun House Pavilion remains under construction and now won’t open for another year. It was originally to have opened this coming summer.
The representative added Hot Spots has already made considerable investment in the Boji Junction development, siting the convenience store, strip mall and Perkins restaurant that have already been constructed and are up and running.
However one councilman, Mike Anderson, expressed concern, saying he wants to see definitive plans for future proposed development of the area.
Regarding the infrastructure issue, Hot Spots agreed to have their engineer meet with the city’s to come up with a punch list of what needs to brought up to city specifications.
The other development agreement puts the city at odds with a housing developer, D & W Development and developer Rick DeMuth. The city and DeMuth originally entered into a development agreement and tax increment finance package for phase two at Hunter Hills in 2007. Now the city’s bonding attorney says the agreement is void because it didn’t include a provision giving the city the option to review the tax increment appropriation on an annual basis. The letter says the city’s ability to carry out future projects and its bond rating would suffer if it doesn’t incude the annual appropriation provision.
DeMuth wanted assurrance the city wouldn’t deny payments in the future based on the provision. Council members say that’s something they can’t guarantee as they can’t bind future councils. DeMuth questioned why it took this long for the city to find out the original agreement is now null and void. City officials say they just learned of it Friday after receiving the letter from their bonding attorney.
After further discussion the council voted unanimously to stand by the bonding attorney’s advice.
