2/4/09 - CAC MEETING REPORT - The name is bond. STAR bond. Couldn't resist that opener to this report.
NOW AND THEN: The meeting started off with a presentation by Neal Cobb. He presented some before and afters of certain areas of Reno, including UNR, Renown Medical Cetner, and several shots of downtown. The jist of his presentation was that long term redevelopment in Reno has worked.
MORE RELEVANCY: Then the meeting moved to the next issue, which involved the CAC itself. In the coming months, the CAC will become much more relevant in the process, with 9 members now, and a new name 'Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board.' The CAC will review all projects before they go to the Redevelopment Agency, and Dan Gustin, who was the council liaison in this meeting,
STAR BONDS: The meeting then progressed to STAR Bond discussion. Between this CAC Meeting and the last one I attended, there was special meeting to fill the CAC in on the three STAR bond proposals. So, yesterday's meeting was more about taking action and less about learning about the STAR Bond projects. Those of you who read my site long term already know the details. This step was simply to recommend to the city council that STAR Bond Districts be established, so the process can move forward. These STAR Bonds are nowhere near close to actually being approved by the City Council. First, the districts must be established; the boundaries of each STAR bond district.
Before a decision was made, Mark invited each of the three developers to come up and speak to the board. First up was Nick Pavich, from the Tessera project. Nick basically re-argued the point that he felt Tessera was an "appropriate, reasonable and feasible project", and that developing in an urban environment is extremely difficult, and that it's pretty unprecedented a developer has a chance to develop a project like this, and that they've spent the last 4 years acquiring tens of millions of dollars in land to get to this point.
After Pavich, Fernando Leal from L3 Development spoke about his project. He was very passionate, mentioning that "It was a very painful process to hand the Montage back to Corus". He also re-affirmed he isn't going anywhere, and he is still committed to his original long term plan and vision. Leal mentioned to the board that it is absolutely vital to continue the redevelopment that started because it's not just about creating jobs with these projects, it's about making Reno has a whole more appealing to attract businesses here to create high-paying jobs, not just construction jobs. He said he was 'not just here on behalf of L3.'
This is where what I'll call 'developer love' began to fire up. Here we had 3 of downtown's largest, most influential developers, and instead of competing against one another and bumping egos, they banded together in a united front, and REALLY tried to get this CAC board to understand that without tools like these to entice development, projects of this magnitude would never happen in Reno, in any economy. Each of the developers referenced the others' projects several times in their dialog with the CAC. Jim Hunting, president of DIA and all-around cool dude, mentioned how important it was to have these types of tools to attract large scale projects. And he's right (I'll go into that on another post, with how Los Angeles attracts large developments).
Drake, a downtown resident who has some kind of firm, has maintained a block by block property tax grid of downtown Reno for years, to track how redevelopment raises property tax, thus creating the revenue to do more redevelopment and pay off bonds, loans etc. He stood up in the meeting and said right now, the the property tax revenue for the land for the baseball district and Tessera, is less than .10 per square foot, while on the other side of Virginia Street, property tax revenue is anywhere from $1 to $15 per square foot (land under Silver Legacy). Since one primary goal of redevelopment is to raise property values and thus property tax revenue, he strongly supports these three projects.
And then there was Nate, owner of the Peppermill. I forget his last name, I am horrible with last names. It was clear the last special meeting about STAR bonds helped the new CAC Board members understand the process and pros and cons quite a bit, except for Nate. Right after the baseball folks finished saying their baseball stadium would be far more successful with supporting retail projects around it, Nate said he felt it would be a better approach to just finish the stadium first, then wait a year to see how it pans out, and then take a look at other projects. Huh? Nate really surprised me with some of the things he said. This spawned quite a heated discussion between Nate, these three developers, and Mark Lewis, Redevelopment Administrator. I agree more with Jim Litchfield, who said 'it's absolutely critical we start this process now. I don't feel comfortable waiting any longer, and would be irresponsible not to make a motion." So in the end, they made a motion to recommend to the Redevelopment Agency Board to move forward with all three projects, and only one, Nate, voted 'Nay'. I'll write about the Sierra Spirit discussion in a post this afternoon.
FYI - Nat's (or Nate) last name is Carasalli and he is a minority owner of the Peppermill.