March 27, 2019
Dear Editor:
The following is a response from Carmel resident Mike Shaver to the members of the Carmel City Council, including Council President Jeff Worrell.
Dear Mr. Worrell & Members of the Carmel City Council:
Thank you for responding to my inquiry regarding the “Developer Guarantees” for City Center, and for including The Reporter. Mr. Worrell, I appreciate your good work on Carmel Fest, and respect you as a Councilor. Transparency is critical to democracy.
I appreciate your acknowledgement that the construction is substantially behind schedule, and affirmation that “Developer Guarantees” exist. I would like to clarify exactly how those ‘developer guarantees’ function.
Your response stated, “… the Developer is paying the bonds as required…,” and provided actual amounts of PIATT (Payments in Addition to Taxes) payments, as shown in the table below, which summarizes the bond payments shown in the Bond Official Statement, page B-19, as well.
As anyone can see, your figures show that the Developer PIATT is far less than the amount of the bond payments. So, what, EXACTLY, has been ‘guaranteed?’ The Council promised that the taxpayers were “completely protected” (IBJ, October 2014) by the Developer Guarantees. The facts you offered do not support that promise.
Bond documents specifically state the expectation that bond payments would come from tax increment, and it is clear that non-existent buildings do not pay tax increment. On top of that, the ‘Developer Guarantees’/PIATT that you cite appear to be paying only a tiny fraction of the bond payments.
Unless the Developer Guarantees actually cover the full bond payment, the taxpayers would appear to be left “on the hook.” With genuine respect to you and your peers, your answers provide little alleviation of taxpayer concerns.
Respectfully, it is time for the transparency which has been promised. I am attaching new copies of the Public Record Requests that were filed on March 18 to this email. Each member of the Council now has a copy. I look forward to seeing the actual ‘guarantee’ documents from at least one Councilor.
In closing, I respectfully offer a suggestion with regard to the graphic portrayal of the “Layers of Protection,” which you provided. The portrayal literally depicts a downward spiral with the taxpayers at the bottom. Is that really the message which the Council intended?
Respectfully,
Mike Shaver
Carmel
