Old Town Redevelopment

That’s right – Vicki Hunt voted YES to a 20-year development agreement with ZERO engagement from the public. 

But, she told the Arizona Republic THIS just 1 month ago, “I have an open door policy and know that our best work on the council comes when we are engaged with those that we represent.”

Here are the “highlights”:

1       Zero Public Engagement
        a       NO Public Notice
        b       NO Public Meetings
        c       NO Public Outreach
        d       NO Effort to ask citizens what they want or what they thought of the project or the company
        e       NO Public Input
        f       September 13th – CLOSED DOOR, executive session held – NO Public Input
       

2       No Project Information, Concepts, Designs, etc. Provided
        a       No site plan provided
        b       No renderings provided
        c       No Proposal by Developer provided
        d       No Information on Developer provided
        e       No Development Plan has been provided.  Makes absolutely no sense to enter into a contract without a development plan.
        f       No information on the permitted uses of the properties
        g       No information on the density and intensity and the maximum height and size of proposed buildings
        h       No information on the provisions for preservation and/or restoration of historic structures.
       

3       This is a 20 year development agreement
        a       87 Page Development Agreement Given to Council Only 5 Days Before Council Meeting
        b       No Economic Impact Report
        c       An 87-page, 20-year contract, with NO public input, no project information, and given to Council 5 days before a vote. 
       

4       City Leasing, Not Selling Sites 1 and 2. 
        a       Lease is only $1.00 per year for the first 3 years
        b       Lease Term is 20 years (Initial Term is 10 and automatically renews for 10 more years)
        c       City has option to sell or lease “site 2” but there is no purchase and sale agreement included in the exhibits, only a lease agreement
       

5       City is selling Sites 3, 4, and 5, but again there is no purchase or sale agreement included in the exhibits
       

6       Agreement includes $1.5 million in reimbursement for public infrastructure
        a       Demolition of NAPA building is included – although owned by the city this does not qualify for reimbursement of public infrastructure.  How do you reimburse a developer for destroying public property?  The intent of the statute is to reimburse for public infrastructure that is created, not destroyed.  
        b       Includes Core and Shell Improvements which are improvements to City owned buildings that will be leased or sold to the developer – this violates the gift clause
        c       The Goldwater Institute will likely file suit on this agreement, and they’ve already beat the City at the Supreme Court on violation of the gift clause.

Posted on 25 Oct 2022, 11:56 - Category: News