Renovation funding on the ballot

Voters will decide if Temple Terrace should raise property taxes to pay for redevelopment.

By JOSH ZIMMER, Times Staff Writer
Published July 31, 2005

TEMPLE TERRACE - The city heads into its Tuesday referendum with uncertainty shadowing a massive plan to redevelop 56th Street.

Despite months of intense effort aimed at finding a master developer, residents will vote whether to pay higher taxes for infrastructure improvements without knowing who their main dance partner will be.

The city, after spending about $20-million to acquire 35 acres at the southeast corner of N 56th and Bullard Parkway, is asking residents to approve a 1 mill tax increase. While allowing the city to raise up to $20-million in bonds if approved, the measure would also add $125 to the property tax bill of someone who owns a $150,000 house and takes the standard $25,000 homestead exemption.

Supporters of the referendum say the city needs a yes vote to convince a master developer that Temple Terrace is committed to a project that could create new tax revenue and provide a major social boost. If early voting is an indication, there could be a large turnout.

According to Hillsborough County Supervisor of Elections Buddy Johnson, as of 1 p.m. Friday - early voting ends Monday - 1,345 ballots had been cast. That figure includes 221 returned absentee ballots, including 11 from overseas.

Backers predict victory - council member Ron Govin said he thinks 65 percent of voters will support the tax hike. But their passionate pleas haven't prevented a vocal opposition from trying to scuttle the referendum, which some see as a misguided and extravagant effort to redevelop a shopping area that's fallen on hard times.

Although he lost in a landslide last November while every elected seat went to project supporters, former mayoral candidate Ken Tozier made his opposition to a government-driven redevelopment plan the keystone of his campaign against current mayor Joe Affronti. He continues to deride the proposal, saying it is too expensive and should be left to private developers to figure out.

Meanwhile, others have passed or sent out their own letters, challenging the sea of proreferendum signs and waves of door to door volunteers. They include former council member Bill Hammontree and Republican businessman and small-government advocate Ralph Hughes, who owns a house in the city.

Hughes, citing rising cost estimates that far outdistance the original price tag of $150-million, criticized the money the city has spent on advertising the project.

Hammontree, saying residents haven't had enough opportunity to comment on the property's future, wrote: "We are being asked to blindly buy a pig in the poke. Our NO vote will also send a message to those responsible that we want, and demand, a practical and affordable solution."

It's impossible to say how naysayers will affect the vote. If supporters are worried, they aren't showing it.

Patrick Finelli, a University of South Florida professor and member of the developer selection committee, said he believed residents understand the importance of the referendum.

The city needs to show it is committed to a partnership with the master developer, whoever that may be, he and others say.

The City Council won't vote until Aug. 16 on whether to enter more formal talks with Unicorp National Developments Inc. in Orlando. Two other finalists, development giant Trammell Crow and LNR Property, a division of Lennar Corp. in Miami, dropped out, citing a mix of financial concerns about the project.

The $20-million raised by the proposed tax increase is just a portion of what the city expects to spend. Building a new city hall, performing arts center and riverfront park would increase that contribution to $60-million over the next decade, officials estimate.

Director of community development Ralph Bosek said the city originally wanted to have a master developer on board before presenting residents with the referendum. But he said he also thinks - hopes - that residents will see the referendum, and the ongoing debate over Unicorp's $325-million proposal, as two separate issues.

"We feel . . . that it really became unnecessary to push the developer process forward quickly," Bosek said. "The reason for that is, we know the city needs the money the referendum will raise. If it's not Unicorp, it's going to be another developer."

Working closely in recent weeks with public-private project expert John Stainback, city officials have narrowed down the financial issues they would like to resolve before entering contract negotiations with Unicorp.

Stainback, hired on a $32,000 contract, initially criticized the lack of financial detail in Unicorp's proposal. But after one particularly negative assessment, Stainback recently reported that Unicorp came back with information showing the company has the financial assets to handle the project.

However, he recommended a series of steps the city should take to protect itself before negotiating with Unicorp, including having a clearer idea of how much each phase would cost as well as the city's financial exposure.

"John is the real McCoy," Bosek said. "I feel like we've come a long way . . . making sure we have an understanding who's going to do what when."

Council member Frank Chillura said he still has serious doubts about proceeding with just one developer in the mix. Stainback has downplayed the other finalists' reasons for dropping out. But, at a City Council workshop on Tuesday, Chillura read a letter from Trammell Crow that forcefully restated the company's lack of confidence in the process.

Trammell Crow's Florida area director Robert Abberger said the company felt stymied by long-term leases with such companies as Kash n' Karry and Burger King. Trammel Crow also is concerned that the city still doesn't own all the land it needs to fully build out the project. He also criticized the project's marketing report as outdated, said the city could save money by making more use of existing infrastructure and suggested the proposed condominium tower just north of the Hillsborough River might have to be reduced to make room for more retention pond space.

The company, he wrote, "is not in the sweeping assumption business."

Chillura, who wanted the city to approach lower-ranked companies after losing the two finalists, seized on the letter.

"For them to raise these problems and concerns, that has a lot of credibility," Chillura said. "I just have some concerns going through this procedure with one developer standing."

Bosek responded that Trammell Crow just didn't want to spend the money on the process, as did Unicorp.

He and others acknowledge the city would be forced into a major reevaluation should the referendum fail, though that could include finding other ways to raise millions of dollars.

"There's no plan B," Bosek said.

Stainback predicted it would take 45 to 60 days to resolve those issues if the city decides to proceed with Unicorp. Govin, elected last year, said he thinks the council will vote to do that when it meets Aug. 16.

By that time, he thinks the referendum will be in the bag.

"It's the best thing for the people," Govin said. "Perhaps I'm naive enough to think the right thing will prevail.