Responses to GPHC Opposition to TIF-funded Redevelopment at 9th and Colorado
The Board of the Greater Park Hill Community, Inc., often writes letters of support or concern on issues facing the community.
At the September meeting of the GPHC, a discussion took place on Fuqua Development’s plan to apply for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) through the Denver Urban Renewal Authority (DURA) to help fund redevelopment at the former University of Colorado Hospital site at 9th Avenue and Colorado Boulevard. Should DURA support TIF funding for the site, a vote on the funding would rest with City Council. The GPHC Board of Governors wrote a letter to City Council to express opposition for TIF funding at the 9th and Colorado site. In response, GPHC received the following response(s).
Date: October 5th
From: Chris Nevitt, City Council District #7
To: GPHC, Inc.
Re: Tax Increment Financing(TIF) for the current proposed development at 9th and Colorado Boulevard by Fuqua
We’ve gotten a lot of email on this subject. I generally hesitate to assert myself in a matter in someone else’s Council district (I represent south-central Denver, quite a distance from 9th & Colorado), at least at this relatively early stage in the game, but I wanted to offer you some reassurance. I can well imagine how much anxiety it’s causing all of you to contemplate the prospect of Wal-Mart as the anchor for the development you’ve been waiting so long for.
Here’s my reassurance: I would find it extremely difficult to vote in support of a tax-funded subsidy to build a Wal-Mart. I am speaking only for myself, but I believe my views are shared by a substantial number of my colleagues. We all want something to happen at this site – and hence conversations continue – but we’re not going to settle for just anything, nor expect you to accept just anything.
Indeed, Jeanne Robb and Mary Beth Susman, the Council members who represent the neighborhoods surrounding the 9th & Colorado site, recently made a public declaration in opposition to public financing for Wal-Mart and this project. You have excellent representation in those two ladies, and I doubt a majority of Council would be willing to vote against them in this matter.
All that said, however, there may be some finance and development context realities we all need to face up to. Is the University of Colorado demanding too high a price for the property? Have we placed too many constraints on the overall site plan, constraints no project worth having could overcome? If we say “no” to this project we may need to revisit some of the constraints on the site so we can say “yes” to something else. And we will need you and your neighbors to work with us to think through the trade-offs of such choices and not let the ideal become the enemy of the real.
Finally, I want to offer some additional reassurance regarding the position of Mayor Hancock. Contrary to some of the angry email traffic we’ve seen, he is not deaf to the concerns of neighbors. Having worked with mayor Hancock on Council, I know that he has no interest in shoving any project “down the throats” of an unwilling community. But I return to the question of “if we say ‘no’ to this; what are we willing to say ‘yes’ to?” As mayor, Michael Hancock faces a very real concern that, in this fragile economic recovery, we leave the impression that Denver has a take-it-or-leave-it attitude toward business and development. That is not an impression we want to leave.
So I hope you find this reassuring. Of course I also urge you to remain vigilant, active, and forceful, but I hope you understand that your elected leaders are, indeed, listening and attentive to your views. And finally, I hope you take seriously my urging that you and your neighbors will have to reconsider the various constraints on this site so we can say “yes” to something in the future even as we say “no” to Wal-Mart today.
-CN-
——————————————————-
Chris Nevitt
Denver City Councilman, District 7
720-337-7777
www.DenverGov.org/CouncilDistrict7