A change in leadership often upsets the balance of projects already in motion. And sometimes the extent of the fallout will never be known, or perhaps not for many years.
The Dalles Mayor Steve Lawrence and Councilor Linda Miller were elected in 2012 with stated opposition to the urban renewal agency, run by the city council, spending money on Rapoza Development’s plans to convert the Granada block into a hotel and conference center.
For the past three years, Lawrence and Miller have relentlessly questioned the viability of the project. They have gained the ear of other councilors and citizens with their expressed frustration over the length of time that Michael Leash, principal of Rapoza, was taking to get a $24 million funding package together.
It is unfortunate the council, including two new members, chose Monday to set aside Rapoza’s plans when there has clearly been foward movement.
Ironically, the day after the council’s decision, Leash learned from a business finance firm in the Southwest that $1.5 million was available if the Hilton franchise application for a Garden Inn is approved.
The money is to be used to secure the site of the hotel and advance the project. A reporter confirmed this new information Friday.
Prior to the Oct. 12 meeting, Leash provided email correspondence to the council showing that the Hilton application submitted in April, and the final building designs, appeared to be getting a favorable look.
In addition, state Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles, informed the council — in its role as the Columbia Gateway Urban Renewal board— at the meeting that he was confident about getting $1 million for the project. He planned to ask the Legislature for the funding in early 2016 so urban renewal could be reimbursed for properties it purchased to accommodate Rapoza.
By stopping Rapoza’s plans, the council effectively turned down that offer.
With that action, the elected body put itself on the hook to find a new developer by March with an equivalent plan to revitalize the block that is now 75 percent vacant or underutilized.
Leash estimated Rapoza’s hotel would have created 150-170 new jobs and put about $153,000 more property tax revenue in the city’s coffers.
Whether Rapoza could have ever gotten the multi-million dollar project off the ground is something we can only speculate about at this point.
What that vision meant to Leash became clear this week when he turned in the keys and provided city management with a rundown of things that needed to be done to care for the Recreation Building, Blue Building and Granada Theater during the winter months.
Seems he has been paying $700 in added monthly electricity costs for the past year to keep a stable temperature in the structures.
For the past five years, Leash has shelled out an average of $200-$300 per month to have a team of workers perform inside and outside maintenance. Apparently, that wasn’t easy given the deplorable condition of the vacant properties.
For example, Leash said extension cords had to be run from nearby facilities to portable heating units in order to keep the fire suppression system in the Recreation Building from freezing.
When city officials got impatient with Rapoza’s progress, downtown business owners reminded them that there was no one else “waiting in the wings” to tackle revitalization of the “blighted” area.
The city council now has the opportunity to prove them wrong.
Although the entire council bears this responsibility, Lawrence and Miller have an even larger share of the burden.
They are both on record as saying that urban renewal dollars should not be invested in new development, such as that proposed by Rapoza, until existing historic structures, such as St. Peter’s Landmark where Miller has served on the board, have been renovated.
In addition, Lawrence, as a board member of the Civic Auditorium, has also expressed concern that a hotel complex would compete for business with his organization. Miller also volunteers with the Civic.
A look back at past records of Leash’s interaction with Lawrence and Miller does not paint them as objective or even mildly supportive.
For example, in December 2014, Lawrence grilled Leash at length about the status of his “capital stack” and publicly expressed doubt about his ability to nail down financing.
“I don’t think Rapoza is in a position to make this process succeed and, therefore, I’m going to vote against (an extension of 2013 development agreement),” the mayor said of his vote as an urban renewal board member.
Lawrence noted during that meeting that there was “just so much uncertainty” in Rapoza’s lengthy planning process.
Is it that unusual for an extensive period of time to go by as a developer assembles the finance package for a 117-room hotel, about 6,000 square feet of dining space, retail outlets and multiple meeting rooms?
When told by city officials last year that he needed to have more “skin in the game” in regard to the project, Leash complied with the request for a $50,000 nonrefundable deposit.
That money allowed the city to catch up on $10,000 in back taxes for the Recreation Building. Leash was granted the right to apply the other $40,000 toward his $75,000 application to Hilton, which is still pending.
People on the council who were critical of Leash for taking so long to get Rapoza’s project up and running should, by rights, now face the same time constraints.
They need to find a developer that meets the criteria set by Lawrence and Miller and get that individual to work on a block-wide project in less time than it took for Leash to pull his plans together.
If that doesn’t happen, should the council expect more grace than they gave a private businessman?
We wonder how many of our elected officials will be dragging extension cords and portable heaters around this winter to keep the historic buildings from falling into further disrepair.
Commented
Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.