CLINTON — Members of Clinton County and the city of Clinton do not agree whether an amendment to the 28E agreement for the railport project is necessary.
Recently the Clinton County Board of Supervisors denied taking development costs and credits into account when splitting “sales proceeds,” a term not properly defined in the agreement. Supervisor Jill Davisson asked that the board consider defining this in the agreement.
The possible amendment, presented to the board by County Attorney Mike Wolf, defines “sales proceeds” as the gross sale proceeds, minus: abstracting expenses, legal expenses, recording fees, property rate prorate, platting expenses, land and any other expenses agreed upon by the county and city. He also included a list of items that shall not be deducted from the gross price.
A final paragraph set the sales price at no less than $42,000 per acre, unless agreed to by the county and city.
“It’s a starting point,” Wolf said.
Several members of the city and county believed the second and third sections are unnecessary. Rich Phelan, from the Clinton Regional Development Corp., said there is no reason to put the minimum sale price.
“We could live with paragraph one, although I’m not sure that any one of the three paragraphs are really needed,” Clinton Mayor Mark Vulich said. “Because I think we already set a standard of what’s acceptable.”
Supervisor Brian Schmidt agreed the amendment is not required. However, Davisson said it was. Wolf told the board that it is up to them, adding that all three paragraphs might not be needed.
“The more words you put into it, the more detail you put into it, the harder it is for the two sides to agree,” Wolf said.
The board agreed to discuss the matter further on Nov. 18.