City Council questions armory deal

Officials are dismayed to have had so little input on the project.

By JANET ZINK, Times Staff Writer
Published September 21, 2007

TAMPA - In July, a developer that promises to turn the abandoned Fort Homer Hesterly Armory into a luxury hotel and cultural arts center signed a contract to buy the property from the National Guard.

But Thursday, the City Council questioned why it hasn't yet been able to weigh in on how the property, considered pivotal to the revitalization of West Tampa, will be developed.

And some council members weren't pleased with the answer.

City attorneys told them they could approve or disapprove of the developer when they consider whether to give up the city's interest in the land, which was deeded to the National Guard years ago, and when the property comes to them for rezoning.

But council member Mary Mulhern said that according to her reading of legal documents, the council should have had the right to approve a developer well before that point.

"I don't think our decision comes at the end," Mulhern said, after pointing out that a request for proposals to develop the land finalized in April 2006 makes reference to approvals by the City Council.

City Attorney David Smith confirmed her point, noting that the document also says the "selection process is not complete until approved by City Council."

Mulhern said the process should begin again.

Council members Tom Scott and John Dingfelder also expressed dismay that the matter hadn't been brought to the council earlier.

But Cyndy Miller, director of growth management and development services for the city, told the council the negotiations are between the National Guard and the developers, who plan to build a $98-million project at the site on Howard Avenue.

The city never recommended a proposal, she said. A review committee ranked the top three proposals and forwarded those to the Armory Board, which oversees all Florida National Guard properties.

Regardless, the Armory Board in July signed a contract to sell the property to Heritage Square after a board meeting where, according to records, Miller recommended that negotiations begin with the top-ranked company because working with all three potential developers was too cumbersome.

It was unclear Thursday just how the questions about whether the council had its proper say would affect the project.

The city deeded some of the land that houses the Armory to the National Guard years ago with the understanding that if the soldiers left the property, it would be returned to the city.

Senior Assistant City Attorney Julia Cole told the council it would have a say in the development proposal when members consider whether to give up the city's interest in the land.

But, according to a memorandum of understanding between the city and the Armory Board, the city is required to give up its interest in the property once the sale of the armory has closed.

And by the closing date, the developer will already have spent more than $5-million relocating the National Guard, which is required in the contract.

The conversation between the city staff and the council ended abruptly when Mark Bentley, an attorney for the armory, discreetly told Smith that there may be legal problems with giving the City Council the option of nixing the deal later in the process.

Smith immediately asked the council for more time.

"When someone threatens that there's a potential legal problem, it makes no sense to continue," Smith said after the meeting. "It makes sense for us to think through all the potential ramifications before we make our case in public."

Janet Zink can be reached at jzink@sptimes.com or 813 226-3401.

[Last modified September 21, 2007, 00:45:44]