My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9. EDSR 08-14-2006
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Economic Development Authority
>
EDA Packets
>
2003-2013
>
2006
>
08-14-2006
>
9. EDSR 08-14-2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2011 12:56:29 PM
Creation date
9/29/2011 12:56:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
EDSR
date
8/14/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Pagelofl <br />From: Steve Pederson [stevep@knetica.com] <br />Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 7:54 AM <br />To: Mehelich, Catherine <br />Cc: Joe Roushar; Jeff Saunders; Jeff Gongoll; Gary Puffett; Harlan Jacobs <br />Subject: K-Netica issues <br />Cathy: <br />I received the letter from the City of Elk River notifying us they were to exercise their put clause. We lived within <br />the intent and the explicit language of the contract, but were still unable to find adequate space in Elk River. A <br />few thoughts: <br />1. Keep in mind that it was never our intent to "leave" Elk River this year. <br />2. We lost our lease early this year and had a little under 3 months to find a new location. <br />3. During this time, the City chose to discontinue the Incubator program. <br />4. As outlined in my letter to Jeff Gongol (attached), we were unable to find affordable, suitable space in Elk <br />River after agood-faith effort on our part in concert with Heidi, the City, and the Chamber of Commerce. <br />5. You mentioned to me in a phone call that Bixby Energy also lost their lease when they were in the City's <br />incubator program. Because Bixby was unable to find a suitable replacement, the City waived the put <br />option <br />So...for the City to demand a 2X put option, (with no available space or an incubator program), it will trigger a <br />number of things: <br />1. It will negatively impact our ability (from a cash flow standpoint) to stay whole and to hire the <br />necessary engineers to meet the needs of our current client commitment. <br />2. It could create a precedent where others with convertible loans may question the viability of our <br />company given the action of the City and contemplate similar options <br />As you may know, the (Foundation has decided that the investment in K-Netica is a "win" and they have agreed to <br />convert their loan when our internal securities audit is complete. <br />I believe we lived within the spirit and intent of the agreement. Without new, affordable space and the loss of the <br />incubator program, I seriously question why the City is taking this action, given the precedent with Bixby Energy. <br />My hope is that the board will reconsider their action in this matter. <br />Regards, <br />Steve Pederson <br />(w) 763-274-1000 x101 <br />(c)612-840-6888 <br />K-Netica Corporation -CEO <br />6120 Earle Brown Drive, Suite 502 <br />Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-4112 <br />Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the named recipient and may contain confidential, <br />proprietary or legally privileged information. Unauthorized individuals or entities are not permitted access to this <br />information. Any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have <br />received this message in error, please advise the sender byreply e-mail, and delete this message and any <br />attachments. <br />file://S:\EDA\Incubator\K-Netica\Letters\IC-Netica issues.htm 8/10/2006 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.