Financing Questions Delay Vote On Developer

By GEORGE WILKENS

Published: Jul 23, 2005 TEMPLE TERRACE

With the biggest bond referendum in city history looming, council members, city officials, a consultant and residents continue to scrutinize and debate the proposed $300 million downtown redevelopment plan.

John Stainback, of Houston, the expert hired to evaluate the sole proposal on the massive redevelopment plan, told the council Tuesday night that it "could be fantastic," but "it's got some flaws."

Questions about financing details required Tuesday's one-hour council workshop to be extended 45 minutes. On Wednesday, the city delayed a decision on accepting the developer's proposal, action originally scheduled for next Tuesday's special meeting of the council.

"I have a lot of questions. I think we all do," Councilman Ron Govin said after an overview by city Finance Director Lee Huffstutler and remarks by the head of the consulting partnership, Stainback Public/Private Real Estate.
"Sometimes this thing seems like a moving target," Councilman Frank Chillura said. "There's a lot of different scenarios out there. It's confusing."

As an example, Chillura said the $17.7 million municipal bond voters are being asked to approve Aug. 2 is twice as costly once 30 years of interest is factored in. "Actually, the bond will cost $35 million, not $17.7 million," Chillura said.

"That's a big number I didn't even know about. I want those facts presented. I don't want, 'Oh, by the way, we left $17 million in the closet.' "

Huffstutler and city Redevelopment Director Ralph Bosek said tax increment financing will offset bond expenses by generating income for redevelopment as the project's improvements lead to higher property assessments within the project.

The balance of the $60 million the city will invest in redevelopment will come from grants, community improvement tax revenue, gasoline taxes "and other capital campaign efforts," according to the city Web site.
Addressing Chillura's comments, Mayor Joe Affronti said, "I want everyone to understand the city is in no way trying to hide anything from anybody, and everything is on the table."

Stainback, who usually requires two to three weeks to evaluate developers and their proposals, said he had less than one week to examine Unicorp National Developments, he said. Some financial details were lacking, raising "a little bit of a yellow flag," he said.

Summarizing his 24-page report on Unicorp, Stainback said, "They're a very good retail developer, no doubt about it. Whether they can handle mixed use is another story."

Redevelopment targets the area southeast of Bullard Parkway and 56th Street, the site of an old shopping center.
Unicorp's plan, which is a mix of retail and residential development, calls for a "lifestyle street" complete with river walk, bike trail, gardens and interactive fountain. A new city hall and civic center is also in the "New Urbanism" plan.
"I strongly disagree, I guess, with the tenor," Unicorp's project manager, Austin Simmons, told the council. Unicorp provided all information required in the city's proposal request, Simmons said.

Addressing Stainback's criticism that Unicorp does not specify how much it will pay the city for land and the expenses associated with acquiring it, Simmons said those costs remain unknown. "Tell us what they are; we'll work that out," he said.

Simmons said he was "a little concerned" that Stainback relied upon Unicorp's outdated Web site to determine the status of the company's three Orlando area projects. "We're horrible at updating our Web site," Simmons said.
Stainback's report dismisses concerns expressed by the two other short-listed developers that declined the city's invitation to bid on the project. "None of these reasons can withstand close scrutiny," Stainback said.
Stainback will attend the 7 p.m. Tuesday special meeting to answer all questions.

"The idea is to get all of the facts and information and move forward in an educated manner," city spokeswoman Paula MacDonald said in a statement Wednesday. "One thing that we want to get across to our citizens is that the referendum and the developer decision are not interconnected," and the Aug. 2 vote is important, she said.
"Discussions will continue to progress with the potential development partner until the council feels comfortable in making an informed decision on whether or not to enter the next phase of the project."