Is the Push for Housing on OLF-8 Actually About "Affordable"---------- or is it Really All About "Upscale" Rental Housing?

If the push is for "affordable" rental units to be constructed on OLF-8--I don't see how rents of between $1,000 and 2,000 Monthly on a proposed 900 such units on the OLF-8 property fits that bill....$1,000 monthly for a studio sounds like a Luxury rental in Pensacola.....

The surreal revelations of last week surrounding our supposed BCC consultant's recommendations for OLF-8 have taken a dramatic series of sideways turns as I have now read through all the emails previously provided via a public records request.

As I have now pointed out in a series of blog posts--It appears that our consultant was working against some of our priorities as it relates to OLF-8.

But why the unwavering, uncompromising lobbying by DPZ for rental housing on OLF-8?----why the dogged, unflinching push by them to build more residential housing on this field that was acquired by the county to create jobs?

The first red flag was their outright refusal to consider the value of jobs and payrolls from companies that might become employers on that field--when attempting to rate/rank the "value" of plans they would bring before us.  This resulted in apples to pineapple comparisons of plans that were faulty.  We finally got them to bring an analysis from the Haas Center of the power of payrolls on our area---- if the right jobs are targeted and placed on OLF-8.  Now we are getting a better analysis of the economic value and power of jobs.

But initially--the vision from DPZ focused solely on the ad-valorem revenue the structures built on OLF-8 would generate for the county.  (Which are significant--yet paltry when compared to the impact of payroll dollars from a large employer rippling through an economy yearly--generating home purchases, retail purchases, gas tax and sales tax for the county.)  As an example of this at Thursday's meeting I pointed out something important that I learned earlier in the week after speaking with Escambia County Property Appraiser Chris Jones.  Navy Federal Credit Union has built about a Billion Dollars worth of facilities adjacent to OLF-8.  And if you peel off the incentives applied via eDATES provided to NFCU---the ad valorem value of the facilities constructed comes to about $4 Million yearly.  (The county only collects about half of that, though.  The balance goes goes to the School Board, the Sheriff's MSTU, and the Library MSBU).  The payroll that the 8400 Employees of NFCU generate, by contrast, is estimated to be in excess of $350 Million per year.

What's better:

$350 Million per year for jobs     or    $2 Million per year in the county's coffers as ad valorem revenue.

But wait!  It's not an either or.  We get both--as long as we put good companies on the field!

What we don't get, if we build a bunch of residential and low-wage retail on the field, is BIG PAYROLL dollars rippling through the economy.  We only get the facilities' ad valorem tax revenue. Which as I illustrated in the example above is paltry in comparison...

So I went back to the complete draft Weitzman study from last August and looked at the pages our DPZ Communications Subcontractor was highlighting in emails I have seen.  Pages 248-251 were what he

was apparently fixated upon.

And these pages describe a vision of  900 rental units to be constructed on the OLF-8 field in phases, with average rents exceeding $1,500.00 per month.

Is that really what one would consider housing that is affordable?  How does that help the county at all?  And why advocate that the county support the building of more of these type of upscale apartment complexes----when the private market is building several of these already---within walking distance of the field.

It didn't and doesn't make sense to me.  It doesn't make sense from any perspective so far as I can tell.  Current residents don't want it, it's not what the field was acquired for, and even if the altruistic "goal" was for such rental complexes to be "affordable"-----they're not.  $1,000 for a studio?? $2,000 for a 3-bedroom??

So I don't see how DPZ is looking after the client (Escambia County) when upscale rental residential units by the hundreds are spotlighted and supported as the best use for OLF-8.  Unless, that is, someone else--other than the client--is pushing for this.  But then that would be another, different problem altogether.  

Again, as I have stated at the meetings:  We're not a corporation looking to maximize the value of an asset at a point of time via a real estate sale to the highest bidder.  We're a small government trying to create a transformational, jobs-generating project with land we sought here that will help citizens county-wide--for generations to come-- find a great job while also creating some retail opportunities that will help the county recoup some of its investment in this property.  And adding some amenities (school, walking trail, post office, restaurants, a regional park, tennis, disc golf, etc.) for nearby residents is appropriate and I'll surely support that as well.

But I'm not in this to source land for "high-dollar" luxury rental complexes for folks with a different agenda.  Nope.

Read the five pages from the 293 page Weitzman draft study describing what they believe the rental market potential for OLF-8 is, here.