news-record.com

NEWS

City clears up bond project confusion

Wednesday, January 20, 2010
(Updated 4:39 pm)

— The City Council unknowingly gave its final approval for downtown development projects to use federal recovery financing, city and state officials determined Tuesday.

That decision — council members originally were told they would have a final chance to review the projects — could be rescinded if need be, City Manager Rashad Young told the council on Tuesday.

Regardless, no council members indicated that they wanted to prevent the projects from using the tax-exempt financing method.

But some council members said they felt misled by city staff, who repeatedly told the council members their December decision was procedural and members would have a chance to vet the projects in January.

“I specifically asked, 'Are we voting just to get in line for the money?’ I was told yes,” Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw said. “I said, 'Are we committed to any of these three projects?’ And they said no.

“Now, we have this whole hullabaloo going on,” she said. “I feel totally misled.”

Young said the city staff was under the impression that the council would have to approve the projects and rank them before a countywide bond authority approves them and forwards them to the state for consideration.

The bond program was created under the 2009 federal stimulus act. It allows private developers to finance certain construction projects at a low interest rate.

Three local projects qualified : a proposed downtown luxury hotel, an apartment and retail building on South Elm Street, and a new building for Deep Roots Market.

The city had until Dec. 15 to tell the state that it planned to use about $20 million in bond capacity. At the time, the City Council had not yet had an opportunity to review details of the projects, but members were assured they’d have the chance later.

But, as Mayor Bill Knight and Councilman Danny Thompson discovered while researching the issue last week, that was not the case. As far as state officials were concerned, the Dec. 15 decision was a final decision.

Councilwoman Trudy Wade said, “I don’t think we did our due diligence, and I don’t want that to ever happen again.”

Young said there has been confusion about the program as the state and cities try to work out the details quickly.

“The information we gave you on the 15th of December was the best information we had with us,” Assistant City Manager Andy Scott said. “There was not an attempt to deceive you.”

Throughout the day Tuesday, Young worked with state commerce and treasury officials to try to resolve the confusion. They concluded that the City Council could take a closer look at the projects, especially the hotel, which has changed substantially since mid-December.

Council members chose not to take that route Tuesday.

Local businessman Randall Kaplan, who discussed the hotel project on behalf of investors Tuesday night, assured the council the hotel would go through several levels of financial validation before it would be built.

He reiterated that the public would not be responsible for the project’s debt. “Being on the eligible projects list is just the beginning,” Kaplan said. “It’s just saying this would be something that would be great for downtown.”

The City Council will revisit the hotel project in the next week when it discuss whether the city should pay to build a parking garage to accompany the project .

Contact Amanda Lehmert at 373-7075 or amanda.lehmert @news-record.com

Accompanying Photos

John Newsom (News & Record)

Photo Caption: This parking deck is part of the property being considered for a new luxury hotel in downtown Greensboro.

From the City Council meeting

Speakers unhappy

Several speakers Tuesday asked Mayor Bill Knight to revisit his decision to move the open public comment period of the City Council meetings to the end of the  agenda.

“Some people could interpret that as meaning you don’t want to hear from folk,” state Rep. Alma Adams said. “I suspect if four or five hours pass, you won’t have people sitting here.”

The agenda outline is the mayor’s prerogative. Knight said Greensboro provides more time than is required by state law for public comment. He said he studied past practices of Greensboro and other cities before setting the new policy. “Our job is to have efficient meetings,” Knight said.

Shoes for Haiti

Counterfeit shoes seized by the Greensboro police in criminal investigations could soon be on their way to Haiti.

City Council members voted unanimously, at the request of Councilwoman T. Dianne Bellamy-Small, for the staff to take any actions necessary to have the shoes turned over to the Red Cross or some other charity.

City Attorney Terry Wood said the city will have to ask the trademark holders to agree to allow the items to be distributed and have the local district court lift an order to destroy the shoes.

Minimum wage petition denied

A petition to increase the local minimum wage was denied.

City Attorney  Wood told council members  the petition was about 500 signatures short of the required number . Also, in Wood’s opinion, the City Council did not have the authority to increase the minimum wage.

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Oona

January 19, 2010 - 8:28 pm EST

i find it deceptive for the developers and their representatives to continue to state that this is at no cost to the taxpayers. yesss.... except for the $20 million in bonds which could be put to better use with the #1 priority of long term job creation. How can the council members represent thier constituents on a matter of which they themselves are unsure?

Amanda Lehmert

January 19, 2010 - 9:07 pm EST

Oona, no money is given away in this program. It simply allows private companies to borrow money from other private investors at a low interest rate. The bonds were designed to be used for construction projects that create jobs. The projects have to meet that standard in order to get approved.

Oona

January 19, 2010 - 9:18 pm EST

thank's Amanda, i appreciate your response

Andrew Brod

January 19, 2010 - 9:50 pm EST

Amanda, I don't believe that's quite right. These are special low-interest bonds, and unless I'm mistaken, that means the federal government will subsidize the interest. So while it's true that the government won't give away $20 million of free money for this project, it will give away a portion of the interest needed to finance that $20 million. Spread out across projects around the country, that's a lot of cash.

Another way to look at it is that this bond program is part of the federal stimulus, the purpose of which is for the government to inject funds into the private sector. If nothing's "given away," then nothing's injected.

StealYourFace

January 20, 2010 - 9:11 am EST

Andrew - Perhaps is best to say that the LOCAL government would not be on the hook for any expenditures. Federal dollars and local dollars are in separate pots. While I am aware that you know that fact, many readers may misinterpret your reference to "the government" to mean City Council and city staff, i.e. - "local" government.

Suffice it to say that dollars are dollars and most of us pay federal taxes. So, if you're upset with how the federal government is spending your money, then I recommend voting to change the current leadership at the federal level (congress, senate, etc.). Likewise with local leadership (City Council, County Commissioners, etc.). Too often the lines of "government" are blurred and citizens are confused on what to expect from each level. That tells me that we are ALL in need of some civics lessons!

To all of the other N&R readers - have a wonderful day...and remember that to enact change, you must become a POSITIVE force of leadership in your community. Sitting back and simply complaining about the current state of affairs gets us nowhere!

Oona

January 20, 2010 - 9:34 am EST

i agree with your comments regarding staying positive, and thanks for suggesting that all citizens could benefit from civics lessons.
my point is that if our local community has the opportunity to put federal stimulus financing dollars to use, i hope that our representatives have the opportunity to put serious thought towards how best to proceed. given what the country has experienced on an economic level in the past year or more, it would be a shame not to have learned a lesson of careful, well thought out city and economic planning.

Mick

January 20, 2010 - 9:37 am EST

Boy o Boy are you at the wrong site!

Panacea

January 19, 2010 - 8:40 pm EST

I can understand not wanting to lose federal stimulus funds, but you shouldn't put the cart before the horse.

Not thinking through the best uses for such money isn't smart. The Council should carefully explore all options before going ahead with selling these bonds.

We have enough bad projects on the plate.

Mick

January 20, 2010 - 9:39 am EST

I suppose there are legal reasons but I dont get why the GAC wasnt put in line for this stuff. Anybody know. "Shovel Ready" seems to be loosely interpreted.

StealYourFace

January 20, 2010 - 9:45 am EST

Panacea - You are quick to point out that Council should "do this" and "do that", etc, etc, ad nauseum. Realize that Council are humans and, as such, are subject to the same criteria we all are - including the option of making mistakes. Council relies of staff input to make decisions. Apparently, staff was told that the elected body (Council) would have a second look at the projects before "OK'ing" them. Quite often, information coming down from the federal level through the states can become confusing. That has ESPECIALLY been the case with the federal "stimulus funds". The federal government has required local staff and elected officials to "ACT NOW", often giving staff less than 30 days to determine a project and have the elected body (Council) "OK" it to "qualify" for grants. This has led to confusion for all concerned...and is likely the reason Greensboro has this issue now.

The federal government wishes to help in some capacity...but it acted without having good methods for project selection and timely distribution of the cash. Personally, I felt like the federal government could have utilized a different method for injecting cash into the economy - namely, large tax refunds for those who pay taxes. Just my $0.02 worth!

scgriffi

January 20, 2010 - 4:22 pm EST

The circus that is the Greensboro city council continues. This is what happens when people don't vote.

connieohyeah

January 20, 2010 - 6:21 pm EST

It seems like Rashad Young could have prevented this confusion. He needs to know exactly what he is talking about when he advises the council. It's his fault. He's expected to know stuff like this in-and-out. He is a full time employee with more interest in this issue than the volunteer, part-time council members. You can't expect them to know every detail, but you better have a City Manager who knows every detail.

Oona

January 20, 2010 - 9:25 pm EST

i wonder if,other than the three projects that qualified,any others were submitted.
and i'm a bit confused, did they give "final approval" or can "the descision be rescinded if need be" ?

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Mobile
  • Social
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search