HomeMy Public PortalAboutAppendixDSECTIONS
1) Recommendations for a Redevelopment Entity, November 22, 2000
2) Draft, Missouri State Penitentiary Redevelopment Corporation Act,
November 2, 2000
3) Sheet 1 – Existing Conditions, November 22, 2000; Revised March
2001
4) Sheet 2 – Consensus Plan, November 22, 2000; Revised March
2001
5) Project Team Directory
Appendix D – Miscellaneous Items
SECTION 1
Recommendations for a Redevelopment Entity, November 22, 2000
Appendix D – Miscellaneous Items
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A
REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY
Jefferson City Correctional Center
Jefferson City, Missouri
Prepared for State of Missouri,
Office of Administration,
Division of Design & Construction
November 22, 2000
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
CONSULTANTS IN REAL ESTATE, ECONOMIC, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
10 S. Broadway • St. Louis, Missouri 63102-1743 • (314) 421-2800
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................2
SELECTING A TYPE OF ORGANIZATION AND ITS PROGRAMS .....................................3
GOVERNANCE ...........................................................................................................4
LEGAL STATUS .........................................................................................................5
GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS .................................................................................................5
PUBLIC REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS .............................................6
ADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN REDEVELOPMENT .................................7
DISADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN REDEVELOPMENT ............................7
PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS ..........................................9
TYPES OF PRIVATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS ............................10
Chambers of Commerce .....................................................................................10
Certified Development Corporations.................................................................10
Community Development Financial Institutions ...............................................11
ADVANTAGES OF PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS ..............................11
DISADVANTAGES OF PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS .........................12
PUBLIC-PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS 13
TYPES OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS..........................................................13
PUBLIC-PRIVATE STRUCTURE AND GOVERNANCE ..................................................14
ADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS ....................15
DISADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS...............16
FORMING A NON-PUBLIC REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION ..........17
WRITING A MISSION STATEMENT ...........................................................................17
BECOMING AN INCORPORATED ORGANIZATION ......................................................18
ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION ................................................................................19
BYLAWS..................................................................................................................19
LEGAL STATUS .......................................................................................................20
Qualifying as a 501(c)(3) Corporation ..............................................................20
CASE STUDIES ....................................................................................................... 23
RECOMMENDED STRUCTURE AND MISSION FOR REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE JEFFERSON CITY CORRECTIONAL CENTER PROPERTY ...... 49
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Development Strategies has conducted research and a case study analysis of nine ex-
amples of redevelopment organization in a variety of communities across the U.S. to
assess and recommend a management organization that can oversee redevelopment
of the JCCC site. Based upon the research and assessment, Development Strategies
recommends that a corporate entity be created to develop a Master Plan for the JCCC
site and its access facilities. Its mission should be to oversee development and im-
plementation of the Master Plan in a manner that is fiscally responsible to the resi-
dents of the State of Missouri. It is recommended that the corporation be identified as
the Missouri State Penitentiary Redevelopment Corporation, as the JCCC will con-
tinue its operations at another location in 2003. The Corporation shall have a gov-
erning board composed of ten members appointed by the State of Missouri, Cole
County, and the City of Jefferson and members shall possess the skills, talents, and
resources necessary to collectively fulfill the mission of the corporation. The com-
position of the board is derived to support the corporation's efforts in securing civic,
public and private support for the mission of the corporation and to facilitate the
governmental approval process that will be required to implement any project(s)
proposed for the JCCC property and access corridors. The governing board should
adopt by-laws that address the practical, internal rules of the organization and pro-
vide guidance, structure, and formality to the organization. It is also recommended
that a Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC) be initiated to advise the board on issues
that involve the public at large and to assist the board and public agencies in devel-
oping long term financial and public support for the project. The CAC can be loosely
organized and, while the CAC would serve primarily in an advisory capacity, a rep-
resentative from the CAC should be selected to serve on the governing board of the
corporation.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
2
INTRODUCTION
Redevelopment is a process through which the quality of life is enhanced by re-
establishing community stability and business wealth. It is also a process by which
communities change the uses of land from obsolete or relocated uses to more appro-
priate and productive uses suitable for a particular site. The result is an increase in
community prosperity that is achieved by:
1. Advancing private enterprise
2. Making productive use of local resources
3. Creating high-quality jobs
4. Enhancing the employment and residential environment
5. Generating new personal income
6. Broadening the tax base.
Each town, city, region, or state has a unique set of challenges for economic devel-
opment and almost nothing is more unique than a site that has served as a maximum
security correctional center for over 160 years. Therefore, there is no single strategy,
policy, program, or organizational structure for achieving successful redevelopment.
Several factors, however, increase the likelihood of successful redevelopment:
1. Public Participation and Discussion: A strong understanding of the strengths,
weaknesses, and critical issues facing the community and the economy.
2. Planning: Policies and programs that are planned around an area’s needs and
maximize comparative site and economic advantages.
3. Leadership: The ability to stimulate the collaboration of different public and
private sector entities and the general public in the local economy.
This report focuses on the creation of a redevelopment entity to take charge of the
leadership in redeveloping the Jefferson City Correctional Center. This entity would,
therefore, continue the already well-advanced planning and public participation pro-
grams that are identifying re-use alternatives for the 142-acre property. Such an en-
tity would take over responsibilities from the JCCC Task Force and state govern-
ment. Moreover, an entity with the specific mission to oversee redevelopment of the
site can most efficiently create the business and community partnerships and obtain
the funds necessary for successful implementation.
The recommendation of this analysis is to create a formal, public-private corporation
with non-profit status in order to embrace the best of the advantages offered by either
public or private entities. In order to understand the value of merging the forces of
the public and private sectors, the advantages and disadvantages of public and pri-
vate entities are, first, separately outlined and, then, combined to identify the strong-
est possible type of organization for the JCCC.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
3
SELECTING A TYPE OF ORGANIZATION AND ITS PROGRAMS
There are many different types of redevelopment entities, each with its own set of
characteristics. Some serve more as oversight or “umbrella” organizations, setting
policy and attracting private development for specific projects. Others are more di-
rectly involved in development and implementation. Examples include:
• Local governments that take or retain ownership and redevelopment responsi-
bilities.
• Chambers of Commerce, particularly those in downtown areas or commercial
centers.
• Port Authorities for water, air, and rail centers, with one of the more well-known
in redevelopment being the Tri-State Port Authority in the New York metropoli-
tan area.
• Development Authorities such as, in Missouri and Illinois, the Bi-State Devel-
opment Agency.
• Business Improvement Districts (BIDs), known under Missouri enabling legisla-
tion as community improvement districts (CIDs).
• Technology Transfer Organizations including, for example, business incubators
that locate in urban redevelopment areas.
• State enterprise zones that combine a wide range of public and private resources
to encourage wide-scale redevelopment and social enhancements.
• Community development banks whose role is primarily in focused lending but
who also serve as points of community meeting and collaboration.
• Certified development corporations (CDCs) that are typically non-profit neigh-
borhood based but are also a part of a larger network of CDCs that can facilitate
staff and community training and pool knowledge of resources.
• Local redevelopment corporations such as urban redevelopment corporations
created in Missouri under the authority of Chapter 353 of the state statutes that
have powers of eminent domain and property tax abatement authorized by the lo-
cal municipality.
• Industrial development corporations that focus on former industrial areas or
where industrial and manufacturing uses would be the most appropriate redevel-
oped uses.
• Utility companies with a special interest in assuring that their utility infrastruc-
ture is used most productively. AmerenUE, for instance, takes an active role in
redevelopment to encourage industrial development.
• Universities, medical centers, and similar large institutions that have strong
vested interests in their surrounding environments and also have access to ample
resources. The Missouri Botanical Garden, for instance, has recently helped to
lead the creation of a redevelopment entity for the four neighborhoods it abuts.
• State economic development organizations who have a special interest in assur-
ing that the state’s resources are most efficiently utilized, especially where the
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
4
scale of the redevelopment area is so large that local government cannot support
an effective effort.
Yet, not all redevelopment organizations fit neatly within one category or another.
Broadly, however, redevelopment entities can be defined in terms of:
1. Governance,
2. Legal status, and
3. Geographic focus.
GOVERNANCE
There are three basic forms of governance for redevelopment organizations: public,
private, and public-private partnerships. The type of governance is typically speci-
fied by what individual or group is responsible for the overall direction of the or-
ganization. This group may be a mayor and city council, a separate board of public
officials, a strictly private sector entity, or a board comprised of both public and pri-
vate representatives. The private redevelopment entity is, by far, the least common,
as long as private redevelopment entities are not confused with private redevelop-
ment builders, or companies that actually engage in the construction of redevelop-
ment projects.
Redevelopment, virtually by definition, is most often a public-private affair with the
interests of the public sector centering on reinvigorating a once-thriving part of town
and the interests of the private sector focusing on market opportunities afforded by
the location and improved business/residential climate. Each sector needs the other
to apply necessary skills, to obtain necessary funding, and to work through the public
approval process.
These three classifications are defined also by the sources of funding.
• Public entities are completely funded by the public sector, though the entity may
be responsible for attracting private builders and property owners to fulfill the
redevelopment plan. But the entity, itself, is publicly funded, frequently through
a variety of sources, including State and Federal grants and programs and bond
proceeds
• Private entities are initially funded by stock ownership or memberships with fu-
ture resources frequently based on sales and fees from the redevelopment area.
• Public-private partnerships combine these sources of funds with the public sector
often provided front-end “seed money” and/or funds for public improvements,
such as utility lines and roads, and for property assemblage in what are usually
complex ownership patterns that have evolved over decades. These front-end in-
vestments make a redevelopment area more cost-effective for private developers
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
5
and builders whose own capital pays for the bulk of redevelopment while the
public sector can receive payback for its investments by becoming equity part-
ners in the project and from the increased taxes that will be generated.
LEGAL STATUS
Legal status is usually of most concern when non-profit and public-private partner-
ships are created for redevelopment. Public and private entities have their legal
status set by state law or charter. But public-private partnerships usually fall into the
following main classifications:
• 501(c)(3) – This is a tax-exempt classification within the U.S. Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) code for entities operated for public purposes. The entity can also
receive tax-deductible contributions but is highly restricted in its relationships
with legislative bodies.
• 501(c)(4) – This classification can earn temporary profits but are restricted in the
acceptance of tax-exempt contributions. Many industrial development organiza-
tions are in this category.
• 501(c)(6) – This classification is also tax-exempt but is supported through mem-
berships and is generally oriented towards improvement of business conditions.
Chambers of Commerce normally fit here.
GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS
Redevelopment organizations are typically restricted to specified geographic
boundaries although they will normally have stated responsibilities for coordinated
actions with surrounding areas or cities. While an economic development or plan-
ning organization may have responsibilities for a large jurisdiction (e.g., city, county,
or region), redevelopment entities have specific duties within much smaller areas but
these duties should be tied to a community’s overall planning goals.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
6
PUBLIC REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS
Public redevelopment organizations, or those operated from within the government,
have different formal and informal powers than private entities. For example, they
can assemble land, can access grants from state and federal government not available
to private corporations, and can provide public sector funding and tax incentives that
otherwise would not be available. Public redevelopment organizations encourage
economic development through implementation and utilization of:
• Infrastructure improvement
• Eminent domain
• Ownership of land
• Control of rights of way
• Zoning and land use regulation
• Special permits
• Special improvement districts
• Tax increment financing agreements (TIFs) to support public improvements
• Construction and operation of public facilities
• Business incentives, both tax and non-tax varieties
• Business marketing, retention, and expansion
• Entrepreneurial assistance.
Because they are part of local, city, county, or state governments, public redevelop-
ment organizations have access to, and influence upon, government decision makers.
Public entities can often direct public or political pressure onto other public agencies
to improve factors that have become increasingly important to redevelopment in-
vestment decisions. Clearly, public organizations can play a significant role in
forming government policy. Additionally, public agencies can assist economic de-
velopers by loosening regulations that are often considered stumbling blocks to rede-
velopment.
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC REDEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATIONS
Economic distress, disinvestments, or the relocation of existing land uses often mani-
fest themselves visibly in the physical decline or obsolescence of a community. De-
cline is frequently exacerbated by the public sector’s inability to meet the service
demands of the area, by market conditions that discourage private investment, or
both. Relocations or closures of major facilities, such as military bases or, as in this
case, a prison put extraordinary pressures on government to reverse or prevent fur-
ther decline.
In any case, government has significant influence on the shape of redevelopment in
their jurisdictions. In response to area problems, the government can organize, cre-
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
7
ate, and implement a variety of policies and strategies. Governments’ access to the
planning process, other municipal agencies, public funding sources, and political
leadership means that they are capable of doing a range of activities.
ADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN REDEVELOPMENT
1. The public sector has superior access to incentive mechanisms that leverage pri-
vate reinvestment.
2. Likewise, the public sector has direct access to sources of public funding from
other levels of government such as Community Development Block Grants.
3. Public redevelopment organizations have municipal powers such as taxing
authority, eminent domain, ownership of land, access to rights of way, zoning
and regulatory powers, and the ability to construct and operate public facilities
and services all of which can be used in redevelopment initiatives.
4. Public agencies have ready access to the services and skills of other public of-
fices such as planning, research, and public works.
5. A public sector redevelopment entity is more likely to have fuller support from
public officials and executives for redevelopment initiatives.
6. Public redevelopment entities can use their municipal powers and planning capa-
bility to create and coordinate city-wide policies and strategies.
7. The public sector can lease or buy land or facilities required for redevelopment
which helps to reduce the private sector risk of investment it, and thus encour-
aging or “jump starting” a larger scale project.
DISADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN REDEVELOPMENT
Despite the many advantages of public redevelopment organizations, there are sub-
stantial drawbacks to them as well:
1. Their influence is essentially limited to their political jurisdiction although, in the
case of the JCCC, this should not be a limitation since the site is entirely in one
city and, of course, is all within the State of Missouri.
2. Public entities are subject to municipal debt limitations to the degree that debt
would be used in facilitating redevelopment.
3. Public organizations are often prohibited from lending money directly to the pri-
vate sector, which could be a useful incentive tool for attracting investment.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
8
4. Likewise, the public frequently cannot participate in profit-making ventures un-
less carefully crafted to avoid the appearance of improprieties. Still, many gov-
ernments are able to structure redevelopment “deals” such that the public is an
equity partner or otherwise can share in the proceeds of redevelopment.
5. Governments normally cannot build or operate non-public facilities so there will
almost always have to be a reliance on private investment.
6. It is often difficult to justify the spending of public resources for marketing or
promoting an area that is being redeveloped.
7. The turnover of elected and appointed leaders in a community can cause incon-
sistent redevelopment policies, thus discouraging long term commitments by ei-
ther the public or private sector. A community with a particularly strong history
of stability, on the other hand, can readily overcome this disadvantage.
8. Private organizations often mistrust government activities or motives so the nec-
essary private commitment to redevelopment must be accompanied by assur-
ances of long term commitment and dedication to the planned program.
9. Public disclosure laws or “sunshine” requirements for meetings may discourage
sensitive negotiations with private sector investors. At the same time, private
sector insistence on public sector incentives or financial participation in a project
should give the public sector the right to all relevant financial information from
the private entity. All due privacy rights should be fully respected, of course.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
9
PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS
A private redevelopment entity typically has a mandate for promoting economic
growth but without the public control of governance and little formal links to gov-
ernment. Private organizations emphasize business attraction, retention, and expan-
sion or residential rehabilitation and construction. Some of the most common rede-
velopment tools, which closely relate to economic development tools, to achieve
these goals include marketing, advertising, entrepreneurial assistance, advocacy for
infrastructure improvements, and direct loans to builders and property or business
owners.
Private, non-profit redevelopment organizations are virtually free from public ac-
countability except to the degree that the public sector must make development ap-
provals or issue permits. A private entity, therefore, can rely more on its own deci-
sion-making process to act quickly and flexibly. Privately organized plans need not
comply with lengthy public reviews, administrative red tape, civil service hiring re-
quirements, or travel and entertainment restrictions. That is, at least until specific
plans are put forward that require zoning approvals or building permits. But getting
to that point can frequently be achieved more quickly than a similar process in the
public sector.
Additionally, the staff of the private entity has direct contact with well-known com-
munity leaders via a board of directors whose members are generally selected be-
cause of their ability to influence the allocation of resources for urban redevelop-
ment. But the private agency may also lack adequate clout with local politicians, a
potentially major limitation, particularly if the political climate changes.
A corporation structure typically shields board members from liabilities and risks
which may have to be incurred in order to stimulate an area’s redevelopment. Indi-
vidual members are insulated from risk because of the private organization’s corpo-
rate form. This can have the further advantage of encouraging the organizations to
take bolder initiatives than the public sector might.
Governance of private economic development organizations typically takes the form
of a board of directors. The members of the board tend to have a variety of back-
grounds and expertise and are chosen for what they can offer in terms of counsel,
logistical and financial support, and public relations for the organization. Funding
can come from membership dues or from contracts with public agencies to provide
redevelopment services. The majority of the organizations in this classification are
registered as non-profit corporations.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
10
TYPES OF PRIVATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS
CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE
While Chambers of Commerce are traditional leaders in business promotion that
helps in general economic development, it is frequently these leaders who also per-
ceive the need for redevelopment in their areas and have the vested interests to initi-
ate private reinvestment. Chambers provide a variety of services and programs that
are normally organized around business development but can also be targeted toward
encouraging redevelopment if properly structured, including:
• Membership services such as publications, networking, entrepreneurial training,
and public relations. All this serves to bolster communication, a critical element
in the risk-taking necessary for redevelopment.
• Marketing of the area as a reinvestment opportunity as well as marketing to at-
tract businesses and customers.
• Business and economic advocacy with community interest groups and the public
sector that can lead to regulatory reform, particularly regulations encouraging
changes in land use.
• Job training to encourage certain types of businesses to either reinvest in the area
or to encourage them to move into redeveloped facilities.
Membership dues are the primary source of funding for chambers of commerce.
Other sources include private sector contributions, publication sales, seminars and
conferences, and local government funding if the local government is an active
member of the chamber.
CERTIFIED DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS
Certified Development Corporations (CDCs) are established to implement commu-
nity-based redevelopment. They may be created under federal or state law to meet
community needs as defined in their enabling legislation. They may be organized as
cooperatives in which community residents purchase shares, or as non-profit um-
brella corporations, or as for-profit corporations with non-profit subsidiaries to ac-
cept federal grants and private contributions.
The redevelopment functions of a CDC include:
• Acquiring, developing, construction, rehabilitating, and leasing of real estate;
• Owning and/or operating businesses;
• Lending or guaranteeing loans, making equity investments, and making grants to
businesses;
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
11
• Providing manpower training, technical assistance, and counseling services to
support business growth.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) are designed by the U.S.
Department of the Treasury’s Community Development Financial Institution Pro-
gram. Their purpose is to create private, for-profit and non-profit financial institu-
tions to promote community redevelopment in low income areas that do not have
access to money. These institutions consist of banks, credit unions, loan funds, and
venture capital funds. They provide a wide range of financial services and products
including commercial loans to start-up and expanding small businesses, to first-time
home-buyers, to builders rehabilitating rental housing, and for community facilities.
ADVANTAGES OF PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS
1. Private organizations can serve as the critical intermediary through which repre-
sentatives of private investors and builders can deal with the government, re-
moving any unhealthy tension that can arise when direct negotiations regarding
land use regulations, incentives, and requirements are under discussion.
2. As noted above, private entities are not directly accountable to a broad constitu-
ency and, therefore, can usually make reinvestment decisions more quickly and
in their own best interests.
3. Likewise, they are typically organized to make decisions quickly as are most
successful private organizations.
4. Private organizations are able to perform functions and activities that may be in
the public interest but are not necessarily allowable “government activities” for a
municipal corporation. An example would be lobbying or campaigning for a tax
increase during an election period to support a redevelopment area or initiative.
5. Private groups may invest equity capital and generate profits if they are struc-
tured as for-profit corporations. The profit motive can be a powerful economic
incentive.
6. As private entities, they are able to raise funds in the private market through eq-
uity partnerships or stock sales. If they are not-for-profits, they can receive tax-
deductible donations.
7. Private corporations are also able to insulate individual investors from substantial
risk. Investors are typically only at risk for the amount of money they have in-
vested. Board members, who may also be investors, are protected from direct li-
ability risk under corporation laws.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
12
8. Private redevelopment organizations are free to create and utilize subsidiary for-
profit and non-profit resources for specific project development purposes.
9. While not able to directly receive most federal redevelopment-related funds,
some, like Small Business Administration grants and loans, can be obtained di-
rectly thus diversifying the resource base to encourage redevelopment.
DISADVANTAGES OF PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS
1. Private organizations lack the strong municipal powers of eminent domain and
other public land management powers. (The State of Missouri is an exception.
Chapter 353 provides for use of eminent domain by private corporations.) This
requires submitting most redevelopment proposals for public review and permit-
ting.
2. Because they are not directly accountable to a broad constituency, private entities
may lack sufficient public sector support and commitment prior to announcing
specific redevelopment plans.
3. Private entities may be subject to taxation for profits and individual investors
may be subject to taxes for distribution of profits or capital gains. And minimum
annual distributions of earned assets may be required.
4. Private redevelopment organizations face strict prohibitions on self-dealing, such
as when a director wishes to sell a real estate asset to the redevelopment corpora-
tion even on terms favorable to the corporation.
5. Since the private agency must support itself (i.e., no government support), some-
times efforts are shifted away from redevelopment and into more promising in-
come producing ventures in order to pay the bills. However, many private agen-
cies and corporations may be eligible for indirect government assistance in the
form of interest rate or land cost reductions in redevelopment areas.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
13
PUBLIC-PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS
Quite often, neither the public nor the private sector has sufficient resources to as-
sume a lead role in addressing redevelopment. In this situation, an organization that
systematically and formally joins public and private sector resources and powers can
be most effective in formulating and/or implementing economic development poli-
cies and programs. Public-private partnerships are long-term, shared commitments
between the public and private sectors designed to pursue common goals related to
the social, political, and business environment in a community.
Key participants could include elected officials from city, county, and state govern-
ments, economic development officials, top officers and owners of major businesses,
large institutions in the redevelopment area, representatives from utility companies,
neighborhood groups, chambers of commerce, banks, real estate developers, attor-
neys and accountants, and labor organizations.
Public-private entities have greater flexibility than public organizations to conduct
redevelopment activities since they do not have to answer to as broad a constituency.
They are typically established as non-profit corporations with public and private rep-
resentatives on their boards of directors. Funding is provided from both sectors in-
cluding all levels of government. In general, they are formed around specific rede-
velopment areas or projects.
Public-private organizations may be public-benefit corporations or authorities. They
are created by a legislative act. They are not part of the structure of government and
have, at least in principle, some degree of autonomy. The public-private mix within
these bodies may occur in board representation, funding, objectives, or staff. They
straddle the boundaries between public and private and there are distinctions between
those institutions that take a “more private” and those that take a “more public” ap-
proach.
For example, in a more public organization, the mayor might appoint a board of both
public and private representatives for an organization that is publicly funded. For a
more private organization, the major might appoint an all private board of directors
even though the organization will be both publicly and privately funded.
TYPES OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS
There are two basic types of public-private redevelopment organizations:
1. Policy Planning Organizations One type is an unincorporated committee that
performs planning, technical advisory, policy development, and information dis-
persal functions. Quite often, this role is initially assumed by the public sector
but might also be conducted by a chamber of commerce or a neighborhood
group. Once an acceptable plan has been prepared, an implementation body is
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
14
created to see to the plan’s execution. The JCCC Task Force presently serves in
this capacity.
2. Implementation Organizations The other type is normally incorporated as a
non-profit, tax-exempt entity that has financing and implementation responsibili-
ties as well as on-going policy, advisory, and planning functions as circum-
stances change over time. Many times, the policy planning organization is re-
constituted as the implementation entity although usually the board, created from
the original committee, is much smaller in size to speed up decision-making pro-
cedures. The remaining committee members, plus the board and others as neces-
sary, frequently remain active as an advisory council on policy and planning
questions.
PUBLIC-PRIVATE STRUCTURE AND GOVERNANCE
While a public-private partnership operates like a for-profit organization, the board is
typically appointed by elected officials or some members are legislatively given ex-
officio board seats from selected community organizations (e.g., from the chamber
of commerce, environmental groups, a nearby university) because they have interests
in the redevelopment area or can provide specific insights and expertise.
If the partnership is initiated by the public sector (as the JCCC circumstances would
suggest), public money is used in setting up the organization until it is self-
perpetuating at which point it becomes more like a private corporation.
A public-private redevelopment organization is governed by a mixed (public-private)
board of directs and may have a strong executive director or paid president. Most
public-private boards are composed of business, labor, and civic group representa-
tives as well as elected and appointed public officials. These boards provide a useful
institutional setting for improving coordination and smoothing differences between
public and private interests. It also provides additional capital commitments from
the local business community resulting in more capital leverage. The members are
selected because of their ability to influence the allocation of resources or their spe-
cific expertise.
There are several advantages for public-private redevelopment groups having board
members from both sectors. Through the board of directors, the organization’s staff
(which may be very small in number such as an executive director and an assistant)
has direct access to public and private talent and resources. Executives of financial
institutions offer advice on financing tools and they participate in reviewing redevel-
opment loan packages. Business representative advise on the investment climate and
provide contacts with other local and even national business executives. Public offi-
cials can smooth over bureaucratic problems that may arise and assist redevelopment
staff in meeting specific client needs. In short, the board gives the staff a direct ex-
tension into the public and private sectors and they, in turn, assist the staff’s efforts
to influence private sector redevelopment in the community.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
15
ADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS
1. Excessive politicization of the redevelopment work is less likely to occur because
the organizations is removed from direct public oversight and because the board
includes private sector representation.
2. Neither public nor private organizations have any greater freedom in personnel
practices than are possible in public-private partnerships.
3. Public-private partnerships can undertake greater risks because most or all of the
directors sitting on the board do not run for general election (some boards will
necessarily include elected officials but they are a distinct minority). An unpaid
board directing a public-private corporation has little to lose from making bolder
decisions because they earn their livings elsewhere.
4. Public-private corporations can often use public resources and powers without
the degree of public limitations (e.g., red-tape, citizen review, civil service re-
strictions) necessary in the public sector alone.
5. Public-private redevelopment partnerships are free to expand on government
powers since they are not restrained by, for example, a city charter partially be-
cause they can use the functions and powers of legal, private subsidiaries and af-
filiates. Thus, they can more easily invest in non-profit and, sometimes, for-
profit ventures to fulfill the goals of redevelopment without having to demon-
strate a clear public purpose.
6. Moreover, they can insulate governance from financial risk through incorpora-
tion laws.
7. Some public-private partnerships take on a valuable “straw man” role by pro-
posing a specific project and sampling public reaction before asking for com-
mitments from the government sector.
8. Public-private partnerships can mobilize both public and private funds simulta-
neously and creatively. This includes ready access to public financing tools and
incentives as well as tax exempt funds for infrastructure construction. They are
exempt from municipal debt ceilings since they are independent of local govern-
ment.
9. The mixing of public and private resources, knowledge, skills, contacts, public
support, and private support gives public-private partnerships strengths and con-
sensus not as readily available in other ways.
10. Public-private groups find that it is frequently easier to raise funds in private
sector for a public purpose than in the legislature or city council. This includes
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
16
attracting equity investors in specific projects as well as accepting tax-deductible
donations for tax-exempt purposes.
11. Public-private partnerships eventually can be self-supporting from the use of re-
volving funds from the sale of properties, from lease agreements where the part-
nership retains ownership of property, and from fees for property management
and real estate transactions.
DISADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
PARTNERSHIPS
1. Public accountability is limited, a factor that can thwart the public approval proc-
ess when zoning changes or sought or permits needed unless the public repre-
sentation on the board advises properly.
2. Still, there is restricted freedom of action because of public participation on the
board and in the funding.
3. Possible forfeiture of influence if public sector is not satisfactorily represented or
appeased.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
17
FORMING A NON-PUBLIC REDEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION
The most fundamental part of forming a non-public organization is determining its
structure. The best way to structure the organization is directly related to strategy
development since the organization’s resources are, in large part, a function of its
membership—including members’ expertise, time, and financial resources. In addi-
tion, structure affects the organization’s ability to draw on outside funding such as
charitable contributions, foundation or corporate grants, and public monies.
There are certain guidelines that should be followed in order to create a strong, vi-
able organization. Legal considerations and both political and managerial experi-
ences must be addressed before a partnership may begin to grow and prosper. In the
origination of the organization, three key steps should be followed:
1. The political environment must be tested. This includes a clear definition of the
redevelopment entity’s primary boundary lines and its anticipated “sphere of in-
fluence.” The organization must anticipate its future public and private relation-
ships and define these in a way that allows for the greatest resources and appro-
priate autonomy.
2. A list of potential initial members of the board of directors should be identified
and the groups or kinds of groups that should be represented should be acknowl-
edged. Most or all of these groups and individuals may already be involved in
policy planning prior to the organization’s formal creation, but it is wise and
healthy to re-visit these lists as the planning evolves. It may be determined that
certain groups or individuals involved to date need not be at the table during im-
plementation but that others who will be affected by the redevelopment, or who
can bring specialized skills and resources, are now necessary.
3. A clear budget should be drafted for wide review, especially funds needed for
start-up. Potential sources of such funding have to be identified and approached.
These include, of course, certain agencies and programs of the public sector if it
will be a public-private partnership. But business, foundation, and other private
resources should also be noted and contacted prior to incorporation of the rede-
velopment organization.
Then it is necessary to prepare a formal mission statement, complete the incorpora-
tion process, and write the organization’s by-laws.
WRITING A MISSION STATEMENT
Preparation of and agreement on a mission statement is a crucial step in formalizing
an organization because everything else centers on what the mission is and, subse-
quently, what actions will be taken to carry it out. A mission statement is a procla-
mation of the organization’s role or purpose. Good mission statements are relatively
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
18
brief and flexible; but they also focus an organization’s efforts towards redevelop-
ment of the target area without allowing it to drift into other income producing busi-
ness ventures.
A mission statement is also a key ingredient in obtaining funding, especially initially.
When contributors are convinced that the organization knows its own mission, they
are far more comfortable in providing funds and are much better able to match their
funding goals with those of the redevelopment entity.
BECOMING AN INCORPORATED ORGANIZATION
The new organization must complete the incorporation process. This is when the
organization becomes a legal, non-profit entity. This requires the services of an at-
torney since lawyers have the necessary procedural knowledge and access to infor-
mation such as standard articles and by-laws. To obtain legal status, the organization
must produce and file articles of incorporation with the Missouri Secretary of State.
Becoming an incorporated organization is a choice, not a necessity. It is a choice
most organizations make because there are substantial benefits. There are also many
specific demands put on an organization in order to maintain its incorporate status.
Becoming incorporated bestows a legal identity with rights and liabilities separate
from those individuals who make up the staff, membership, and board of directors.
A non-profit corporation has the following principal characteristics:
• Limited Liability Individuals responsible for governance and administration
do not, individually, have full legal and fiscal responsibility for the organization.
Instead, it is a collective responsibility wherein no single person can be held fully
liable for the actions of the corporation.
• Continuity Corporations are assumed to exist in perpetuity unless otherwise
specified. Board members may come and go and staff will change over time, but
the corporation continues to exist.
• Standardized Rules Corporations operation according to state law which es-
tablishes standards for administrative expectations o the organization.
• Exemption from Taxes Incorporation as a non-profit corporation allows for
application for tax-exemption from state and federal taxes of the corporation it-
self. Paid staff members and members of the governance board, of course, are
not exempt from paying individual taxes.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
19
ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
The information needed for articles of incorporation should include such fundamen-
tal items as:
• The corporation’s name.
• The corporation’s purpose or intended mission.
• The name and address of the registered agent for the corporation (frequently an
attorney).
• If a non-profit corporation, it is sometimes wise or necessary to state that it is not
the intent of the corporation to make profits or significant pecuniary gains.
• The length of time the corporation intends to be in operation. This may be a re-
quirement of law or ordinance or it may be a target of the corporation. Typically,
a corporation indicates that its length will be in perpetuity. It then retains the
right to go out of business when it feels that its goals have been accomplished.
• The incorporators’ names and addresses. This may be the full list of the first
board of directors.
• The names, addresses, and tenure of each board member.
• A description of how the officers are elected (e.g., president, vice president, sec-
retary, and treasurer).
• The limits of personal liability for members of the board of directors and the
staff. Such limits have foundation in law.
• The procedures for dissolution of the corporation and the apportionment of its net
assets.
• The determination of the extent of membership in the organization. Members, if
this is relevant, would include dues paying individuals or groups with the dues
becoming part of the annual revenues of the corporation.
Articles of incorporation must be filed and recorded with the Missouri Secretary of
State in order to obtain legal status.
BYLAWS
The redevelopment corporation must produce a “code of internal rules” called by-
laws that will govern it. The bylaws are generally not a requirement for the corpora-
tion but serve a very practical purpose that should not be overlooked. The bylaws
can be of varying thoroughness but the higher the level of detail, the less question
there will be as to how the organization is to be managed. On the other hand, less
detail allows for greater flexibility among the individuals charged with managing the
corporation. In a non-profit, public-private organization, greater detail is probably
the wisest to assure that minority interests of the organization are not ignored.
The bylaws typically address procedural aspects of the corporation, such as:
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
20
1. Purpose and mission of the organization.
2. Membership, including financial obligations and voting rights (if applicable).
3. Number of board members, tenure, how selected, procedures for filling vacan-
cies, frequency of meetings, and quorum criteria.
4. The size, selection process, number of meetings, and operation of the board
meetings and committee meetings.
5. Board authority for creating committees and the composition, powers, and tenure
of standing and ad hoc committees.
6. The executive director’s description for qualification, responsibilities, and pow-
ers. Typically, this is the only staff position that is the responsibility of the board
of directors. Given the mission of the organization, the executive director has
powers to hire and fire as necessary to fulfill the mission within the limits of
budget and other resources set by the board. If the board is unhappy with the
progress of the organization, it reserves the right to release the executive director
in order to find a more compatible fit.
7. Description of the responsibilities of various officers including their length of
tenure, how they are selected, and procedures for filling their vacancies.
8. There may be provisions in the bylaws regarding procedures for contracting, dis-
bursing funds, and reporting to the board and the public on financial matters.
9. Bylaw amendment procedures should be laid out so the organization can adapt to
changing circumstances.
10. Other provisions and details as the board deems necessary and advisable.
LEGAL STATUS
Tax exempt status generally means that the corporation is not required to file a tax
return and is not liable for federal income tax (nor, in all likelihood, state income tax)
on its net income, with certain exceptions. There are some 28 categories of special
purpose organizations described under Section 501 of the Federal Tax Code, some
with familiar acronyms as 501(c)(3), which is the principal charitable category. De-
spite the word, charity, a 501(c)(3) is probably the most appropriate legal status for
this redevelopment corporation.
QUALIFYING AS A 501(C)(3) CORPORATION
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
21
501(c)(3) non-profit corporations are either classified as public charities or private
foundations. Contributions to these organizations are tax deductible under Section
501(c)(3) of the Federal Tax Code. These organizations are more likely to receive,
or be eligible to receive, federal grants and contracts than other non-profit counter-
parts; it is likely that the JCCC will want to assure maximum opportunity for such
grants, in particular, it helping to implement some of the redevelopment plans.
Private foundations receive their income from endowments, investments, or corpora-
tions and are required by law to give away five percent of their assets annually to
public charities. Private foundations are limited in what grants they receive from
other private foundations.
Although qualification as a non-public redevelopment organization is preferable to
promoting redevelopment through a public organization for several reasons, it is sig-
nificantly more difficult to qualify and there are strict standards to be met. The rea-
son for the difficulty that redevelopment organizations face in obtaining 501(c)(3)
status is because they do not genuinely fit in either the private foundation or the pub-
lic charity categories. Nevertheless, there are three ways for an organization to
qualify in this non-profit classification.
1. At least one-third of the organization’s support must be derived from contribu-
tions from private sector sources. This refers to the broad range of potential
contributing entities including individuals, corporations, partnerships, trusts, and
estates. In light of the prospective plans for substantial public recreation areas
and, perhaps, historic building re-use for museum space, it can be reasonably ex-
pected that the redevelopment corporation would be in a position to accept such
donations in support of plan implementation.
The redevelopment plan, however, is not yet completed so this is not yet a con-
firmed purpose of the organization. But the public process of completing the
plan can likely be considered a charitable or public purpose so tax-deductible
contributions in support of the planning process, perhaps for specific plans for
the recreation and educational areas, will probably meet the requirements of this
classification.
2. If the entity cannot meet this one-third test, but at least ten percent of its support
comes from private sector sources and the organization meets certain other tests
indicating public status, the entity will, nonetheless, be classified as a public
charity. The other tests include the requirements that the organization have a
continuous and bonafide fund-raising program designed to attract new and addi-
tional public and governmental support, and a board representative of broad pub-
lic interests.
3. The third way for a prospective 501(c)(3) organization to qualify for public char-
ity status is as a supporting organization for another qualifying tax-exempt entity,
such as the Chamber of Commerce. If this method is chosen, the entity will sac-
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
22
rifice a certain amount of independence because it will be controlled by the
Chamber. This is accomplished by giving the Chamber total control of the entity
which may or may not be in accordance with the goals of the redevelopment
plan.
Of critical importance for a 501(c)(3) corporation is that it is prohibited from certain
political activities and is severely limited with respect to lobbying activities. In all
likelihood, the redevelopment organization created for the JCCC will have many rep-
resentatives from state, city, and county government on the board and will be relying
on government staff members for some of the specialized work, especially during the
planning process. Thus, it and they will be closely tied to government but great care
must be taken to avoid political involvement or acts of lobbying. While the organi-
zation will have excellent access to political and government decision makers, the
ways in which these contacts are used may come under close scrutiny.
An “insubstantial” or incidental amount of lobbying is permitted, but these terms are
difficult to quantify. Five percent is sometimes used as an informal guideline,
meaning that an organizations staff should not devote more than five percent of its
time and/or five percent of the budget to lobbying. This is, however, not an official
Internal Revenue Service guideline.
Section 501(c)(3) organizations can have two kinds of business income:
• Related business income which is not taxed, and
• Unrelated business income which is subject to tax at regular corporate rates.
Unrelated income might arise if the corporation takes consulting fees for advising
other redevelopment groups; this may not be considered income that is directly in
support of the redevelopment mission. Still, such income may be useful in support-
ing the mission if it contributes to the ability of the corporation to implement its mis-
sion. Generally, having unrelated business income will not affect the organization’s
tax exempt status unless the business activity is significant.
A non-profit organization can have subsidiary types of non-profit and for profit or-
ganizations. The idea is to take advantage of the strengths of each of the different
types of organizations in addressing particular needs and goals. It may make sense,
therefore, to create a subsidiary membership organization (typically a 501(c)(6)) if
membership will be an important source of income and volunteer support. A for-
profit subsidiary may take charge of real estate transactions with the profits from
such deals helping to support the non-profit organization.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
23
CASE STUDIES OR FOCUS ON REDEVELOPMENT ENTITIES IN
THE U.S.
This section describes several cases of redevelopment management organizations.
The purpose of this section is to describe a range of options that could be used as ex-
amples in the formulation of a redevelopment organization and management entity to
oversee the redevelopment of the Jefferson City Correctional Institute (JCCC) site.
The cases examined for this review were selected for several reasons. They repre-
sent examples of sites with similar characteristics to the JCCC site. Many of the
cases are site specific facilities that were vacated and no longer used as originally
designed. Local communities were faced with the prospect of being home to large,
vacant facilities in their community, and efforts to reuse the facilities or readapt the
site were made to bring the real estate property back into a viable use.
Other cases were examined because the real estate in question involved multi-tiered
governmental entities, such as State (or Federal) and local community interests. The
Capital Riverfront Improvement District in Augusta, Maine is an example of a State
and local community joining efforts in solving real estate planning and management
issues of a local district that encompasses the State capital, other State owned prop-
erties and local governmental facilities. Military base reuse cases represent the
joining of efforts by Federal and local interests. The reuse of Union Station in Kan-
sas City involved implementation of state enabling legislation from Kansas and Mis-
souri to raise sales taxes to support redevelopment of the site. Thus, management
oversight involved cooperation and coordination among multi-tiered levels of gov-
ernment. The cases are examined with reference to their scale or size of develop-
ment, their scope or mission, ownership, and organization structure and governance.
In most cases, particularly where a specific site or district were the subject of con-
cern, the management process included two major phases: a planning phase and an
implementation phase. Often, an initial organization known as a planning organiza-
tion was created to oversee the preparation and adoption of a Master Plan or a rede-
velopment plan. This organization was often a special purpose committee or task
force that was created to oversee a planning process involving extensive participation
by the public and stakeholders. Often, this process was led, guided and funded by
the governmental body that owned the property initially, but not always.
In some cases, an independent group was created over concerns that the landowning
entity would be less inclined to involve other stakeholders, including the public, in
the planning process. The planning for reuse of the Denver Stapleton Airport site,
for example, evolved out of the business community's concern that the Airport
Authority would sell off the property piecemeal, and without guidelines that re-
flected community concerns, objectives, and values.
In most cases, a Master Plan was adopted and an understanding of the transfer of
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
24
property (if needed) was determined, then a management organization would accept
the property transfer and manage redevelopment according to the Master Plan or
other planned objectives. Often this implementation organization evolved from the
original planning organization. In some cases, the two functions were conducted by
two distinct organizations, but, in most cases, the planning and implementation
functions were closely related and coordinated.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
25
Focus On: Union Station Assistance Corporation (USAC), Kansas
City, Missouri
Overview
The Union Station Assistance Corporation (USAC) was created in 1994. The pur-
pose of the organization was to oversee the redevelopment of the historic Union Sta-
tion of Kansas City. The original developer was unable to renovate the property, so
the City acquired it (lawsuits were involved) and the property was re-sold by the City
to the USAC. The renovated structure opened in November 1999.
The USAC was formed as an outgrowth of a grass roots campaign to preserve the
historic structure. Public and business interests in preservation of the structure gen-
erated the funds to hire technical consultants and experts for assessing how to re-use
the station. The formation of a non-profit development corporation arose out of the
recommendations conducted by a private consulting firm during the feasibility
analysis process firm.
Economic Development Focus
The focus of the USAC organization has changed over time. Early on, the organiza-
tion was focused on developing a plan for re-use of the Union Station and acquiring
funding for construction. It was at the forefront of the eventual establishment of the
bi-state 1/4 cent sales tax used to pay for construction for re-use of Union Station.
As resources were acquired to fund the planned activities, the organization served as
overseer of the construction efforts. It solicited contractors and technicians for con-
struction and monitored their progress. Now, as the Union Station facility has re-
opened as a mixed use entertainment and recreational attraction, the USAC manages
the property, assets, and tenant leases of the facility.
Organization Structure and Staffing
The USAC has three persons on staff - an Executive Director, Project Coordinator,
and an assistant to the Executive Director. They also hire a building manager to
manage Union Station. Much of the project management work is actually contracted
out to Hines Mortinson. The USAC sends out RFPs for general contractors, archi-
tects, etc.
Governance
There are five board members. The board is comprised of "heavy hitters" - individu-
als with influence in the business community and individuals who come from the
major geographic areas that levy the tax used in supporting the Union Station. Cur-
rent membership is as follows:
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
26
! one member who is the CEO of a local bank
! one member who is the CEO of the Erving Foundation (owners of the Royals)
! one member associated with the "Friends of Union Station" - the group that
originally developed the idea to renovate the structure
! one member from the Overland Park (Kansas, in Johnson County) Chamber of
Commerce
! one member who is a real estate developer from the north Kansas City area
The board represents individuals who have a combination of technical capabilities,
such as real estate development, finance, business and political representation from
affected taxing jurisdictions.
Funding and Budgeting
The USAC primarily receives money from a 1/4 cent sales tax from the Missouri and
Kansas bi-state area. They also receive private donations. The site was developed
using Federal and State grants and incentives, particularly the historic tax credits.
The bi-state tax helped create the Science City and renovation of Union Station. The
USAC also leases space and received rents from tenants, including retail stores and
restaurants.
Relations with Other Economic Development Organizations
As an organization relying heavily upon a bi-state tax, the Union Station Redevel-
opment Corporation is responsible to the legislature of both the State of Kansas and
Missouri in terms of performance and fiscal accountability. It also works closely
with the City of Kansas City, the jurisdiction within which it is located.
Also, as the redevelopment efforts and funding mechanisms were focused on the
historic character and preservation of the building structure, the redevelopment or-
ganization worked closely with the National Trust for Historic Preservation and State
Preservation Offices. The corporation worked with those offices in determining a
preservation and re-use program that met statute and regulatory requirements in ac-
quiring financial incentives, such as the historic tax credit, to develop an economi-
cally feasible project.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
27
Focus On: Lowry Redevelopment Authority (LRA), Lowry,
Colorado:
Overview
The closing of the Lowry Air Force Base in Denver and Aurora Colorado was an-
nounced in April 1991, as part of the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) proc-
ess that affected many U.S. military bases across the country during the early 1990s.
In the case of Lowry, the 1,866 acre site has undergone extensive land use planning
since the announced closure. The site will be a master planned community with
more than 800 acres for recreational parks and open space, up to 45 holes of public
golf course, approximately 4,000 residential units, commercial areas for office and
retail, 156 acres of urban college campus, five private schools and one public school,
and state of art telecommunications to each business and residence.
The first privatization of property came in the form of "Public Benefit Conveyances"
or PBCs between the military and various nonprofit and public benefit entities. Un-
der BRAC regulations, public and non-profit entities were able to apply for existing
buildings and property at Lowry at no cost. Nearly 400 acres were awarded to 16
different applicants, including a regional blood bank, a regional college, and a local
department of parks and open space. All of these uses are consistent with the Lowry
land use plan.
To coordinate the redevelopment of the remaining properties, the cities of Denver
(which has 90% of the airforce property in its jurisdiction) and Aurora (which has
10% of property in its jurisdiction) formed the Lowry Redevelopment Authority
(LRA) via an inter-governmental agreement. It is a nonprofit organization, quasi-
governmental authority charged with many functions. It can raise debt, buy and sell
property and conduct many public related functions. It cannot levy taxes. The LRA
is charged to direct and oversee redevelopment such that the process is complete in
five to ten years and is "income neutral" to both cities. All components of the site's
infrastructure must be brought to municipal standards and conveyed to the respective
cities while the remaining properties will be privatized.
Economic Development Focus
The primary economic development focus of the Lowry Redevelopment Authority
(LRA) is to implement the redevelopment Master Plan for the Lowry Airforce base.
Organizational Structure and Staffing
The LRA is a non-profit organization. It now has 120 persons on staff. Because
they maintain the public facilities that remain on the site (very similar in this respect
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
28
to the Stapleton Airport Re-use), many of its employees are construction and mainte-
nance workers. For example, there remains substantial military housing that is
rented out for low and moderate income families (pursuant to McKinney Homeless
Act). Other departments and staff persons of the LRA include:
! Executive office - Ex. Director, Deputy Director, and Assistant to both
! Real estate department - one section for commercial; another for residential
! A marketing and public relations department with a director
! Comptroller department - deals with contracts, accounting, sub-contracting,
! Human resource department
! Construction and Operations - operation's staff manage the public facilities that
remain on site; the construction staff prepares the sites for development, accord-
ing to the plan
! There is an on-staff attorney who primarily specializes in residential real estate,
and administers the closings, disposition etc. of properties for residential use
! A direct liaison regarding environmental issues who coordinates environmental
programs with the Air Force, EPA, does the demolition (ahead of construction)
and ensures that all remediation has been completed prior to conveying deeds.
! Support staff for all departments - includes the IT and MIS functions
Governance
The Board of Directors membership is comprised of individuals from the proportion-
ate distribution of land among the Cities of Aurora and Denver. The mayors of the
two cities appoint the individual members of the Board.
There are nine voting members, generally apportioned according to the amount of
land located in the two local jurisdictions. Seven of the members are from the City
of Denver and appointed by the Mayor. Two are from the City of Aurora and ap-
pointed by the Mayor. The members serve staggered terms and may be reappointed.
They can also resign at any time. All board members are from the two communities
of Denver and Aurora. The board members include developers from the two com-
munities, bankers, attorneys, educators (one is the President of the Aurora commu-
nity college - education is an important component because there is an electronic
technical training center located as part of the re-use plan, supported by Lucent
Technologies).
There are also two ex-officio, non-voting members of the Board. They are repre-
sentatives from the departments of planning from both communities. The director of
planning for Denver, and a senior planner from Aurora currently fill these positions.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
29
Funding and Budgeting
The administrative and overhead costs of the organization were paid for from a vari-
ety of funding sources, including lease revenues to land and building tenants, land
sales to the private developer, EDA and OEA grants, and contracted revenues from
the BRAC program.
Relations with Other Economic Development Organizations
The re-use plan is incorporated into the comprehensive plan for both the City of
Aurora and the City of Denver. There is tie-in of the Board to the public functions of
both communities by having representation, though non-voting, from the planning
departments of Aurora and Denver. This provides a formal communication channel
between the Board and the public sector. And, as the re-use plan was adopted by the
communities as part of their comprehensive plans, the Board and the local govern-
ments have agreement on the re-use of the site, in advance of actual development.
This will facilitate the public approval process that will be required during the devel-
opment and construction phase.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
30
Focus On: Stapleton Redevelopment Authority, Denver, Colorado
Background
The Denver Stapleton Airport was closed for operations in 1997, when regional air-
port operations were shifted to the newly constructed Denver International Airport in
1997. The Stapleton site encompasses 4000+ acres. The business community initi-
ated a Master Planning process in the early 1990's in anticipation of Stapleton's clo-
sure. At the time, the Denver real estate market and economy was in a downturn. the
Aviation Authority, a joint public authority governed by the City and County, owned
the land and operated the airport facilities. The business community and the public
were concerned that the Aviation Authority was going to sell the land piecemeal
without a Master Plan and guide for land disposition.
Economic Development Functions
The Airport Authority's primary interest was with disposition of the property at the
highest price offered; it wanted little involvement in a public planning process. FAA
regulations stipulated that disposition of the property be at the highest price the
Aviation Authority could obtain. Local concerns were that this may not be in the
best interests of the community, particularly as many in the community wanted green
space, park and trail facilities to be developed on the site. The Mayor was a leader in
organizing efforts towards the creation of a Master Plan to coordinate, guide, and
facilitate development that would be responsive to community needs.
The business community contributed funds for developing a Master Plan that was
adopted by the Denver City Council and incorporated into the City's comprehensive
plan in 1995. The plan's major objectives are to create multi-use development and
preserve open space. The Master Plan for the site establishes guidelines such that
1,000 acres be retained for open space use, and 3,000 acres be sold to private users.
It also called for the creation of a non-profit organization named the Stapleton De-
velopment Corporation (SDC) to oversee the development of public facilities as
identified in the plan, asset management of the property and facilities, and disposi-
tion of the property to a selected developer through a Request for Proposal process.
The scope of the Stapleton Development Corporation is to oversee the implementa-
tion of the Master Plan by disposition of the property to Forest City Development
Company, the private company selected as the master developer for the site.
The SDC is supported by business enterprises (such as leasing hangar space to U-
Haul) that continue to be operated on the periphery of the airport grounds. It also
receives funds from the City and County Aviation Authority to maintain the airport
grounds.
The vehicle for implementation of specific development projects was conducted
primarily through a Master Lease and Disposition Agreement between the Airport
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
31
Authority and Forest City Development Company. The SDC oversaw the negotia-
tions and formulation of the agreement. The Stapleton Development Corporation
serves as a pass-through for the real estate transactions, between the Airport Author-
ity and the Forest City Development Company that will be phased-in over a 15 year
period.
Organizational Structure and Staffing
As development is now underway, per the Master Plan and the Agreement between
Forest City Development Company and the Airport Authority, the role of SRC is
winding down. It will continue to oversee maintenance of the airport grounds and
will serve as a pass through for the real estate transactions between the Airport
Authority and Forest City Redevelopment Company.
Governance
The Board of Governance is comprised of ten voting members and nine ex-officio,
non-voting members. The members of the board are selected from the business and
civic community.
Relations with Other Economic Development Organizations
The Stapleton Redevelopment Corporation has worked closely with other economic
development organizations within the City of Denver. While its role has decreased
recently as the Master Lease Agreement between the Aviation Authority and Forest
City Development Company has been executed to serve as the guide for implemen-
tation, the SRC has formed many relationships with other economic development
organizations through the years. Early on, the SRC worked closely with the business
community and the Mayor's office in developing the Master Plan for the site. It also
worked closely with the Aviation Authority in negotiating the master lease with the
Forest City Development Company and in maintenance and disposition of the prop-
erty.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
32
Focus On: Central Correctional Facility, Columbia, South Carolina
Background
Upon a court order, a new replacement prison was constructed and the correctional
facility in Columbia, South Carolina was closed in 1995. The vacant facility is lo-
cated on a 24-acre site located along the river bluff near downtown Columbia. Its
location on the bluff provides the only walk access to the canal in this portion of the
City.
The property was State owned. The State would have preferred to place a RFP for
development and sell the property out right. The City wanted to retain control of de-
velopment of the site and purchased it from the State for $3.2 million. The State ab-
sorbed the environmental remediation costs, estimated at $1.5 million. Upon pur-
chase by the City, a two year marketing process was undertaken, with a RFQ issued
to solicit interest in the development of a Master Plan. The RFQ generated thirteen
responses. From the thirteen submissions, the City invited five firms to submit a
proposal for development of the Master Plan.
Economic Development Focus
The City purchased the 24 acre site from the State, after the State remediated envi-
ronmental problems with the site. The City directed the master planning process and
feasibility analysis and is now focused on constructing public facilities and working
with the private developer retained to implement the master plan. Demolition is
now underway.
Organizational Structure and Staffing
The City owns the property and the City Department of Economic Development is
charged with overseeing development of the site. It is an operating department of the
City and funded primarily by general revenues. It is not an independent economic
development corporation.
Governance
The economic development department is an operating department of the City and its
director reports to the City Manager, who is appointed by the City Council.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
33
Funding and Budgeting
The City purchased the property from the State and will issue TIF bonds to fund
public infrastructure costs. However, total revenues from the sale of the developed
property are not expected to cover the City's costs for improvements.
The Master Plan calls for a mixed use, urban style development totaling over $150
million. At least $10-12 million will be spent on the development prior to selling the
land to a developer. These costs are for infrastructure development, such as water,
sewer, roads and a public walkway along the canal. Tax Increment Financing will be
used to pay for some of these public improvements. However, the sale price of the
property to a private developer, upon completion of public improvements, is ex-
pected to be in the $10-12 million range. A pro forma analysis indicated that the
City will expend $5 million in total (non-recoverable costs) upon sale of the prop-
erty.
Relationship With Other Economic Development Organizations
The City owns the site and the Department of Economic Development is charged
with overseeing development on the site. It is a City department and not an inde-
pendent economic development corporation.
There were historic preservation issues as many of the buildings were constructed in
the 1850's. The State negotiated with the State Historic Preservation Office to retain
only two buildings and remnants of a stone wall that lined the site. Market studies
indicated that little economic use existed for the historic structures, thus most of the
buildings were demolished. One of the newer buildings, the site of a prison business
enterprise, was retained and is anticipated to be re-used.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
34
Focus On: Capital Riverfront Improvement District,
Augusta, Maine
Background
Augusta is the capital city of Maine, and is located on both sides of the Kennebec
River. The City population is approximately 20,000 and the State administration is
the largest employer. Upon demolition of a 100 year-old hydroelectric dam, up-
stream from the City, efforts at the State and City level were combined to find ways
to reorient the City towards the River, both in terms of physical design and economic
development. The State enabling legislation creates a district on both sides of the
River. The legislation is not specific with respect to boundaries, but the Commission
has created a plan with specific boundaries.
Economic Development Focus
The State Legislature created the Capital Riverfront Improvement District (CRID)
Commission to oversee development of a Master Plan for the District. The plan was
developed over a nine month period and involved public input and the use of con-
sultants in market research and urban design. The plan was primarily a vision for the
district and market opportunities were examined to estimate the scope and scale of
potential development in the district. The Commission can issue debt. Tax incre-
ment revenue districts can also be created. The State does not allow cities to levy
local sales taxes, thus the City of Augusta restricted in its ability to raise non-
property tax revenues for capital and operating uses.
Organizational Structure and Staffing
The City's Director of Economic Development currently staffs the Commission.
Support staff is derived from the City's Department of Economic Development and
other City departments as needed.
Governance
A commission was formed by State enabling legislation that includes State and local
ex-officio members, residents and elected officials. The Board consists of 16
members. Six members are appointed by the Mayor, including:
! one member of the "Heart of Augusta", a non-profit organization with the mis-
sion of promoting downtown Augusta
! one member of the Augusta City Council
! one member of the City's Planning Board
! three City residents
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
35
Other positions include:
! the Augusta City Manager
! an expert in riverine habitat protection also has a position on the Board
! the Director of the State Planning Office
! the Director of the Maine State Housing Authority
! the Commissioner of Transportation
! the Director of Bureau of General Services
! the State Senator from the City area
! the State Rep from the City area
! one resident of the City but appointed by the Governor
! the Director of Maine Historic Preservation Commission
Funding and Budgeting
State and City funds were used to procure a consultant team for creation of the Mas-
ter Plan. Ongoing support of a staff person for the commission will likely be born
out of the City's Department of Economic Development
Relations With Other Economic Development Organizations
Property in the district is owned by individual private and public entities. The
Commission represents diverse public and private interests and has representative
commissioners from several state and local departments involved in economic de-
velopment activities.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
36
Focus On: Joint Capital Area Study Commission, Montpelier,
Vermont
Background
In 1995, the State Assembly created a City-State Commission called the Joint Capital
Area Study Commission to encourage cooperation between the State of Vermont and
the City of Montpelier in solving mutual problems and planning for the future
growth of the capital city. The Commission was charged with preparation of a Mas-
ter Plan for land use and development within the downtown area near the capital
grounds, called the "Capital Area District". The statute appropriated State funds for
consulting services to carry out the Master Plan, but required that a matching amount
of City funds be made available for consulting services. The state statute stipulates
that the Commission terminate on July 1, 2004.
The Commission solicited consulting services to perform a two phased study. The
first phase required an assessment of the parking conditions and issues in downtown
Montpelier with recommendations and guidelines for addressing parking needs. The
second phase of the study addressed several key issues and projects concerning the
capital area. Issues addressed in the second phase included: the projected need for
state office space, the appropriate use of riverfront land, and the feasibility of a
multi-modal transportation and visitor facility.
Economic Development Focus
The commission serves primarily as a study commission to address issues related to
the capital area district.
Organizational Structure and Staffing
No new organizations were created nor was additional staff hired to administer the
work of the commission. The State Buildings Division provides support staff to the
commission. The commission meets on an as-needed basis.
Governance
The commission consists of eight members - four from the state and four from the
city. The members appointed by the state include:
! The commissioner of state buildings
! The chair of the Senate Institutions Committee
! The chair of the House Institutions committee or his/her designee
! An individual appointed by the chair of the Senate Institutions Commit-
tee
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
37
The members appointed by the city include:
! The mayor of Montpelier
! A resident appointed by the mayor
! The chair of the Montpelier Conservation Commission
! The senior senator from Washington County
Funding and Budgeting
No additional funds were provided to administer the functions of the commission.
The State and the City provided funds to procure consultants to conduct the two-
phased consulting work that addressed parking and land use needs.
Relations with Other Economic Development Organizations
The commission's primary role is to oversee the master planning of a land area that
has state and city interests. It does not function as an economic development organi-
zation or a planning commission. It has worked closely with City and State agencies
that have an interest in the issues addressed through the planning process. It reports
to the house and senate institutions committees and to the Montpelier city council
concerning its work, but currently has little implementation powers.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
38
Focus On: Forest Park Forever, St. Louis, Missouri
Background
St. Louis' major urban park, Forest Park, is more than 120 years old and is one of the
largest urban parks in the country. Owned by the City, it is comprised of 1,370-acres
and houses major cultural institutions including the Saint Louis Art Museum, History
Museum, Zoo, Municipal Opera and the Science Center. It also houses numerous
recreational facilities such as tennis and handball courts, an 18-hole golf course and
an ice rink. It receives more than 12 million visitors annually.
In 1986, Forest Park Forever, a 501(C)(3) non-profit organization, was founded to
work in partnership with the St. Louis City Department of Parks, Recreation and
Forestry to improve and maintain the park's facilities and landscaping, as public
funds were insufficient to meet the costs of improvement. The organization raised
money to make improvements upon existing facilities within the park.
By 1993, Forest Park Forever and the City of St. Louis began developing a Master
Plan for the park to meet the needs of current users while conserving it for the future.
The Master Plan was approved in 1995, and Forest Park Forever and the City of St.
Louis began an effort to each raise $43 million for improvements in athletic facili-
ties, buildings, infrastructure, and the environment. As of September of this year,
nearly $41 million had been pledged or donated from individuals, corporations and
foundations. Work has been well underway in improving the park's facilities and
landscaping.
Economic Development Focus
The organization's primary functions are to raise $43 million in private donations for
Forest Park capital improvements, and to oversee the implementation of the Master
Plan by coordinating maintenance, construction, and conservation activities among
contractors and the City service departments.
Organizational Structure and Staffing
There are seven persons on the administrative staff of Forest Park Forever. The po-
sitions include: an executive director, marketing manager, capital campaign man-
ager, director of the Annual Friends campaign, an Annual Friends special event as-
sistant, an office manager, and a data assistant. The annual administrative budget is
between $300,000 - 400,000. Administrative costs are paid for with funds raised
through an annual fund drive called the Annual Friends Campaign.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
39
Governance
The number of Board members may change from time to time but must be com-
prised of no more than 60 and no less than 30 directors elected by the Board. Ten
individuals who hold the following ten offices are also board members (included in
the 30 - 60 range). The offices are:
! The Mayor of the City of St. Louis
! The Alderperson whose ward comprises the greatest area of Forest Park
! The Director of Parks, Recreation and Forestry of the City of St. Louis
! The manager of Forest Park
! The Chief Executive Officer of the Missouri Historical Society
! The Chief Executive Officer of the Saint Louis Art Museum
! The Chief Executive Officer of the Triple A Golf and Tennis Club
! The Chief Executive Officer of the St. Louis Zoological Park
! The Chief Executive Officer of the Muny Opera
! The Chief Executive Officer of the St. Louis Science Center
The Executive Director of the Corporation serves as an ex officio, non-voting mem-
ber of the Board of Directors. The responsibilities of individual Board members are:
! To attend a minimum of three meetings annually of the Board of
Directors
! To serve as a member of a Board Committee as appropriate
! To contribute to the annual Friends Campaign, preferably at the $1,000
level
! To support the Capital Campaign, financially and with advice as appro-
priate
! To serve as an enthusiastic spokesperson for Forest Park Forever and
Forest Park.
The nominating committee is charged with identifying individuals within the com-
munity who would be strong candidates to serve as a board member. The needs of
the board members may change over time to reflect the agenda and needs of the or-
ganization. During a capital campaign, for example, board members may be se-
lected who are connected to the corporate community and can raise capital for the
organization. But overall, the board is a mix of individuals who represent the diverse
interests of Forest Park and its users. Most of the cultural institutions in Forest Park
are funded with a tax levied in the City of St. Louis and St. Louis County. Thus, it is
important for the board to be comprised of a mix of individuals from both the City
and County who represent ethnic, racial and gender diversity.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
40
Funding and Budgeting
The organization relies primarily on private fundraising and donations to fund its op-
erating and capital activities. It has established several ongoing fundraising cam-
paigns, including the Annual Friends fund drive to raise funds for administrative and
the annual operating costs, and a capital fundraising campaign to raise $43 million
for capital improvements to the Park (based upon recommendations from the Master
Plan).
Relations with Other Economic Development Organizations
As stated previously, the City of St. Louis owns Forest Park. Thus, Forest Park For-
ever has close ties with the City's formal departmental structure and works on a day
to day basis with the Department of Parks, Recreation and Forestry. Typically the
City's crews would perform the services of maintenance and upgrading of City
owned facilities, including Forest Park. However, in some instances, Forest Park
Forever desires to have specialized services and contractors solicited independent of
the City's standard bidding process.
Though Forest Park Forever generally follows the City's procurement practices, such
as goals for minority and women's business enterprises, it has need for specialized
and additional services beyond the City's manpower capabilities. For example, while
the City's Department of Parks, Recreation and Forestry is responsible for ongoing
maintenance of the park, Forest Park Forever is able to outsource maintenance of the
many new gardens and landscaping projects that have recently been installed. These
newer and younger plants and gardens require additional maintenance, care and
tending that go beyond the City's available manpower.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
41
Focus On: Naval Training Center (NVT), Orlando, Florida
Background
In 1993, an announcement was made to close the Naval Training Facility (NTF) in
Orlando, Florida, as part of the military's Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
plan that affected many military bases throughout the country. The NTC is com-
prised of four facilities located within the City of Orlando limits. The main base of
the NTF is comprised of 1,100 acres and is located approximately three miles from
the Central Business District. As a naval training center, it included three campus-
like settings with combinations of classrooms, dormitories, offices and recreational
uses. Another part of the complex, called the McCoy Annex, is located near the Or-
lando International Airport and included over 900 residential units. And two ware-
house complexes were also part of the BRAC plan but are not addressed here.
Following the Pentagon's decision to close the NTC, the Mayor appointed a Base
Reuse Commission, made up of Central Florida business and government leaders, to
identify alternative uses for the base. The City's concern was for a quality develop-
ment with sufficient private investment to generate additional tax revenues. The City
established and staffed an NTC Base Reuse Office, with financial assistance from the
U.S. Department of Defense Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA). Since the an-
nouncement, over 200 public meetings have been conducted as part of the planning
process for re-use of the facility.
The City and the Navy came to an agreement to release a Request for Proposals
(RFP) from developers to implement the Master Plan. Six were received, of which
four were responsive to the request. Those four firms were invited to offer detailed
plans and financial proposals, including an offer for the purchase price of the prop-
erty. A consortium of developers called Orlando Partners was selected to receive
development rights to the property and to carry out the objectives of the Master Plan.
In the early years following the announcement, it was anticipated that many of the
military facilities could be re-used, such as a military fire training facility that was
newly constructed. In addition, as part of the BRAC guidelines, other public agencies
were allowed to "cherry pick" the facilities if needed. As a result of that step in the
process, a VA clinic and a finance and accounting service of the Department of De-
fense located on a portion of the site. The balance of the site on the main base was
retained for private use.
Economic Development Focus
No formal redevelopment corporation was created to implement the re-use plan.
Rather, the City serves as a pass through for transfer of the property from the Navy
to Orlando Partners.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
42
Funding and Budgeting
The cost for the property to be developed by private developers was $5 million. The
City retained 25% (or $1.25 million) to cover administrative costs over the life of its
involvement in the project, and the Navy received the balance, or $3.75 million.
Organizational Structure and Staffing
Because of the scope and scale of this development, extensive plan review and pub-
lic approvals are required. The City has the lead role in overseeing the development
process and has assigned specific planning staff members to work solely on admin-
istering plan approvals for development of this project. In addition, the agreement
between the City and the developer include performance criteria on the City's part to
facilitate the development process, such as timely review of development applica-
tions and the issuance of building permits.
Because of the type and size of the development, several local regulations are appli-
cable in this case, including a design review process, a neighborhood planning proc-
ess, and a Planned Development process. The City of Orlando, which has experi-
enced enormous growth in the past decade, has implemented design review commit-
tees as part of their Growth Management Plan.
Part of the funding for public improvements adjacent and on the site is through a
Community Development District, which is a financing structure that works simi-
larly to a special assessment district. That is, bonds are issued to provide funds up
front for public improvements, and the bonds are paid back from the increased tax
revenues from a special assessment levied on properties located within the district.
This is not to be confused with a tax increment finance program (TIF) that in the
State of Florida require County level participation. As stated earlier, the City also
served as a pass through of the $5 million land transfer from the Navy to the private
developer.
Governance
Five members comprise the Community Development District Commission. The
commission is accountable primarily to the City, and the local residents and property
owners located within the District.
Funding and Budgeting
The development districts are self-funding in that administrative funds can be cap-
tured from the tax assessments. A "cottage industry" is being developed in the State
to manage the development districts. One firm manages 80 percent of all develop-
ment districts in the State.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
43
Relations with Other Economic Development Organizations
The City and Community Development District work closely together in coordinat-
ing development of public infrastructure on the site. Historically, the City has spear-
headed the planning and developer recruitment efforts and worked with numerous
public groups and the military and Federal agencies overseeing transition of the
property from military to private use.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
44
Focus On: Washington University Medical Center Redevelopment
Corporation, St. Louis, Missouri
Background
In 1973, the Washington University Medical Center Redevelopment Corporation
(WUMRC) was formed under Missouri Chapter 353 (Private Redevelopment Corpo-
ration) statutes. The purpose of the organization was to serve the public purpose of
providing for the health and safety of the public through efforts to redevelop the
neighborhood surrounding Washington University Medical Center in the central west
end of St. Louis
Economic Development Focus
The corporation has the powers of Chapter 353 - it can purchase, acquire, lease and
dispose of property; it can utilize redevelopment programs and funds to carry out de-
velop activities and projects within its defined corporate boundaries. It can utilize
eminent domain to acquire properties. The corporation works within a well defined
boundary in the central west end area of St. Louis that includes the Washington Uni-
versity Medical Center and surrounding neighborhoods.
Organizational Structure and Staffing
The Washington University Medical Redevelopment Corporation has three full time
staff members and one part time staff member. Full time members include a finan-
cial analyst, a secretary, a manager, and a part time treasurer.
Governance
The redevelopment corporation is owned by the Washington University Medical
Center (WUMC) and Barnes Jewish Christian (BJC) organizations. There are six
members of the Board of Directors. Three members represent (BJC) interests, and
three members represent Washington University Medical School.
Funding and Budgeting
Under the Chapter 353 state statutes, administrative funds can be retained through
the development process. In the early years of the corporation, during the 1970s,
funds were provided through a bond debenture that involved a five bank consortium
of investors. Typically, the corporation will buy and sell properties and receive a
portion of the sales transaction for administrative costs. Allocation to the corpora-
tion is also provided through line item budgeting (unrestricted) in the BJC and
WUMC organizations.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
45
Relations with Other Economic Development Organizations
The organization works very closely with Washington University Medical Center's
development arm, the City of St. Louis development agencies, such as the Commu-
nity Development Agency, St. Louis Development Corporation, Land Clearance for
Redevelopment Authority (LCRA), and Operation Impact.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
46
Focus On: Ft. Sheridan Redevelopment Commission,
Ft. Sheridan, IL
Background
Ft. Sheridan, located along the north shore of greater Chicago in Lake County, is an-
other military facility that was decommissioned as part of the BRAC program in the
early 1990s. Not all of the acreage contained within the military base was re-used
for non-military purposes. A portion remains in use by the Army and Navy. The
Towns of Highland Park, Highwood, and Lake Forest received 405 acres though an-
nexation agreements. And a fourth section was transferred as unincorporated prop-
erty in Lake County. It is currently used as a golf course. The portion of the base
that is now privatized originally contained barracks and single family and duplex
homes for a full hierarchy of military personnel. This portion also contains historic
areas, particularly the military parade ground. The parade ground will be used as a
town square style open space in the new development.
When the announcement was made for a partial base closure, the local communities
created several inter-governmental agreements that addressed key issues, notably,
annexation of the property into the local communities and conceptual planning and
re-use of the property. Lake Forest eventually discontinued participation in the inter-
governmental arrangements as they annexed a small portion of the property in ques-
tion and utilized it as a public works facility.
The other two communities, Highland Park and Highwood, led the efforts to develop
a joint conceptual plan that was adopted by both city councils. A joint agreement to
issue a request for development proposals was also established, with a consortium of
four development companies, called the Town of Ft. Sheridan Development Com-
pany, selected as the development company charged with implementation of the
conceptual plan.
Federal rules required that disposition of military property be given to the local juris-
diction, (after public entities are provided an opportunity to examine the property for
their use). The local jurisdiction may then retain or sell the property. The commu-
nities of Highland Park and Highwood , therefore, served as a pass-through for the
transfer of property by receiving property from the military and transferring it to the
Town of Ft. Sheridan Development Company. The two closings occurred on the
same day. The plan submitted by the Town of Ft. Sheridan Development Company
to the respective communities was administered as a planned unit development.
Of the 405 acres purchased by the development company 290 acres will be retained
as open space. Much of the land retained as open space is comprised of ravines,
lakefront, and undevelopable bluffs. Approximately 115 acres will be devoted to
high end residential uses, including single family homes and warehouse style con-
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
47
dominiums. A golf course is also planned for development.
Economic Development Focus
An inter-governmental agreement created a joint planning commission and common
approvals process between the Towns of Highland Park and Highwood to guide and
facilitate the development process for the Town of Ft. Sheridan Development Com-
pany. It was created to provide a seamless development approval process and to re-
solve public approval issues that are inconsistent between the two communities or
issues that arise that vary from the original planned unit development requirements.
The joint commission serves as a recommending authority to the city councils of the
two communities on issues that affect both communities. For properties and issues
that are relative to only one of the two communities, the joint planning commission
is not involved.
Organizational Structure and Staffing
The Ft. Sheridan Development Company owns all of the property. Staff members of
the planning departments of Highland Park and Highwood serve the joint planning
commission. The Highland Park staff is responsible for the administrative duties of
preparing for the planning commission meetings.
Governance
The joint planning commission is comprised of seven members. Four members are
residents of the Town of Highland Park and three members are residents of the Town
of Highwood. The respective mayors appoint the commissioners from their commu-
nities. Currently, the commission meets on an as-needed basis, approximately once
per month.
Funding and Budgeting
During the planning process, the three communities involved (Lake Forest, Highland
Park, and Highwood) committed staff members to facilitate the process. Currently,
staff members are assigned to the joint planning commission. No additional staff
was hired, though consultants were used early on to conduct specialized market
studies.
Note that the location of the privatized 405 acres is prime and highly marketable.
The property is located among the most affluent suburban communities of Chicago,
along the Lake Michigan shoreline. Much of the military street configuration and
public utilities were not re-usable. The public infrastructure will be paid for by the
development company. No public funds will be utilized. (Though it is unclear how
the infrastructure will be financed, for example, whether debt will be issued and paid
back via the increased public tax revenues generated from the project, or whether the
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
48
infrastructure will be paid for by private debt, or up-front payments by the develop-
ment company.) However, the strength of the market and location of the property
supports private funding of the public infrastructure. Condominium units will sell
for upwards of $400,000 and single family homes will sell at prices approaching $1
million.
Relations with Other Economic Development Organizations
The joint planning commission works closely with the planning departments and city
councils of the two communities - Highland Park and Highwood, within which the
Ft. Sheridan project is located. It also works closely with the Town of Ft. Sheridan
Development Company in ushering through the public approvals required for con-
struction of the project.
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
49
P ROPOSED M ANAGEMENT STRUCTURE FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE
J EFFERSON CITY CORRECTIONAL CENTER
Introduction
Beginning in 1999, the State of Missouri began to consider what to do with the
JCCC facility upon its closure in 2003. A task force was convened to provide early
planning and guidance towards determining an approach and process for redevelop-
ment of the site into uses that would benefit the public and be fiscally responsible to
the State of Missouri, the City of Jefferson, and Cole County. It is anticipated that
legislation will be introduced in the 2001 legislative session to establish a manage-
ment structure and guidelines for the redevelopment process for reuse of the JCCC.
This section represents a working draft of major issues and objectives to be ad-
dressed in the proposed legislation.
Development Strategies recommends that a corporate entity with a governing board
be created to develop a Master Plan for the JCCC site and its access facilities, and
that it oversee development and implementation of the Master Plan. The following
outlines our recommendations with regard to the board's mission, objectives, govern-
ance structure, and powers.
Mission and Objectives
Mission
The mission of the corporation is to prepare a plan and carry out a development pro-
gram for reuse of the JCCC. The corporation is to oversee the reuse of the Jefferson
City Correctional Center property and grounds in a manner that is fiscally responsi-
ble to the residents of the State of Missouri. To avoid confusion, it is recommended
that the corporation be identified in reference to the Missouri State Penitentiary, as
the JCCC will continue its operations at another location in 2003.
Objectives
Several objectives are to be undertaken by the corporation, including:
! To prepare a Master Plan for redevelopment of the site; and
! To conduct all appropriate studies for planning and pre-development; and
! To identify and capitalize on relevant sources of funding for planning and devel-
opment, including public and private resources; and
! To prepare the property for redevelopment; and
! To oversee the development process either directly or through a master devel-
oper; and
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
50
! To maintain a high degree of state, county, and local government oversight and
participation; and
! To coordinate actions and interests of the State of Missouri, Cole County, and the
City of Jefferson related to disposition of the property; and
! To adequately maintain and repair all facilities and land until they become the
legal responsibility of other parties; and
! To take legal control of property at appropriate time(s).
Proposed Governance and Powers
Governance
A board of directors will govern the corporation. The board will be composed of ten
members appointed by the State of Missouri, Cole County, and the City of Jefferson.
The composition of the board is derived to support the Corporation's efforts in se-
curing civic, public and private support for the mission of the corporation and to fa-
cilitate the governmental approval process that will be required to implement any
project(s) proposed for the JCCC property and access corridors. Members of the
Board of Directors shall possess the skills, talents, and resources necessary to collec-
tively fulfill the mission of the corporation.
Powers
The board's powers will include:
! To develop a comprehensive plan, Master Plan, or redevelopment plan for the
JCCC and to hold public hearings on the plans; and
! To create, develop, and implement plans for JCCC and the redevelopment of the
JCCC and its access corridors, including traffic corridors, urban design corridors
that address aesthetic issues and pedestrian connections, and infrastructure corri-
dors, that include, but are not limited to street, sidewalks and utilities; and
! The development and implementation plans may provide for various uses, in-
cluding but not limited to recreation, cultural, open space, historical, public
space, and commercial uses; and
! To prepare, submit, and administer plans, and to participate in projects or inter-
governmental agreements, or both, and to create reserves for planning, con-
structing, reconstructing, acquiring, owning, managing, insuring, leasing, equip-
ping, extending, improving, operating, maintaining, and repairing land and proj-
ects that it owns or leases; and
! To provide for the insurance, including self insurance, of any property or opera-
tions of the Board or its members, directors, officers and employees, against any
risk or hazard, and to indemnify its members, agents, independent contractors, di-
rectors, officers, and employees against any risk or hazard; and
! To appoint an executive director to retain, and employ offices, agents, independ-
ent contractors, and employees to carry out its powers and functions; and
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
51
! To make and execute any contract with any agency of the state or federal gov-
ernment, any unit of local government, or any person or corporation; and
! To form an assessment taxing district encompassing the JCCC site, for the pur-
pose of generating capital for carrying out the Board's powers and functions, in-
cluding but not limited to capital for public infrastructure; and
! To sue, initiate or appear in any proceeding; and
! To adopt and amend bylaws necessary or useful for carrying out any of its duties;
and
! To acquire real or personal property, or any interest in real or personal property,
including rights or easements by gift, purchase, transfer, foreclosure or lease; to
improve, hold, sell with or without public bidding, assign, lease, rent, encumber,
mortgage, loan or otherwise dispose of any real or personal property, or any in-
terest in real or personal property, or mortgage interests owned or in
its control, that may be less than market value, custody or possession and release
or relinquish any right, title claim, lien, interest, easement, however acquired;
and
! To lease or rent any land, building, structure, facility or equipment comprising all
or a portion of a projects, projects or part of a project for such amounts as the
Corporation determines; and
! To make and execute all contracts and other instruments necessary or convenient
to the exercise of its powers.
Citizen's Advisory Committee
Development Strategies also recommends that a Citizen's Advisory Committee
(CAC) be initiated to advise the Board on issues that involve the public at large and
to assist the Board and public agencies in developing long term support for the proj-
ect. Citizen's Advisory Committees can be beneficial in lobbying for resources, such
as Federal grants and loans, and in providing a channel through which the Board can
communicate to the public on issues relating to the planning and development of the
site. The CAC can be loosely organized and structured, and interest and participation
from the committee will likely wax and wane in tandem with the types of activities
being addressed by the Board. While the CAC would serve primarily in an advisory
capacity, a representative from the CAC should be selected to serve on the Board of
the JCCC Redevelopment Corporation.
Funding
! Resources will be required in the pre-development stages of the project to cover
costs such as engineering, architectural analysis, environmental and feasibility
analyses to determine and refine development opportunities and project costs.
! Resources will also be required to cover ongoing administrative and operations
costs for the corporation and for maintenance of the facility property prior to re-
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
52
development.
! An individual and supporting staff should be recruited to manage and execute the
functions of the Board. An important task for the executive staff will be to seek
capital and administrative funds to assist in paying for pre-development costs and
long-term operating costs of administering to the Board in carrying out its objec-
tives.
By-laws of Organization
Upon incorporation and the official establishment of the organization, the Governing
Board should adopt By-laws that address the practical, internal rules of the organiza-
tion. The By-laws represent a code of internal rules that can be enforced and provide
guidance, structure, and formality to the organization. The By-laws may include,
but not be limited to the following issues:
Duties of board members
! Board meeting attendance
! Functions
! Meeting requirements
Executive Committee
! Composition
! Functions, duties
! Meeting requirements (quorum, frequency)
Terms of Office
! Voting members
! Non-voting members, if any
Sub-Committees
! Purpose
! Duties
! Minimum requirements for membership
! Chairperson, if any
Quorum and Voting Requirements
! Full Board
! Executive Board
! Committees
Meetings
! Frequency
! Annual meeting, if any
! Place
! Public disclosure guidelines or requirements
Amendments to By-laws
! Requirements for amending By-laws
! Process for amending By-laws
Additional Personnel
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONS
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
53
! Executive director and staff, for example
! Lines of accountability
! Responsibilities of personnel
! Personnel policies
Conflict of Interest
! Definition of conflicts of interest
! Process for determining conflicts of interest
! Process for resolving conflicts of interest
Reporting Requirements (of the Board, to the State, County, City, if any)
! Establish reporting requirements, if required or needed
! Definition of reporting requirements
! Time to deliver required reports, and product, and process
JCCC REDEVELOPMENT ENTITY RECOMMENDATIONSDEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES54Real EstatePlanningCommitteesFund Raising/(as needed) FinanceMarketingState of MissouriJCCCRedevelopmentCorporationGoverning BoardExecutiveCommitteeof theBoardCity of JeffersonPROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL AND MANAGEMENT PROCESSFOR REDEVELOPMENT OF JCCCCitizen's Advisory CommitteeJCCC ExecutiveDirector and Staff(as needed)Cole County
SECTION 2
Draft, Missouri State Penitentiary Redevelopment Corporation Act,
November 2, 2000
Appendix D – Miscellaneous Items
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES D R A F T: 11/02/00
FILENAME: JCCC MGMT PROP LEGIS 11-02
Missouri State Penitentiary Redevelopment Corporation Act
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows:
Whereas, the Jefferson City Correctional Center (hereafter JCCC) is a State owned
maximum-security facility that began operating in 1836 and encompasses over 50
structures on 142 acres of land located above the river bluff in central Jefferson City.
Whereas, the current operations of the Jefferson City Correctional Center will be
relocated in 2003 to a new location east of Jefferson City.
Whereas, a Consensus Plan for redevelopment of the facility has been prepared after
many public meetings and was adopted by the Jefferson City Correctional Center Task
Force which has been meeting since July 1999.
Whereas, it is the intent of the State of Missouri to assist in the preparation of the facility
and its land for redevelopment upon the relocation of correctional center operations.
Whereas, the State desires that a management entity and guidelines for the redevelopment
process for reuse of the Jefferson City Correctional Center be created.
Whereas, the State desires to establish a non-profit, public-private corporation to develop
a Master Plan for the current Jefferson City Correctional Center site and facilities in
conjunction with the City of Jefferson and Cole County, and that this organization shall
oversee implementation of the Master Plan.
Now therefore be enacted the following:
Section 1.
It is hereby declared that the site currently occupied by the Jefferson City Correctional
Center be defined for the purposes of this legislation, and referred to hereafter, as the
Missouri State Penitentiary (MSP).
Section 2.
There is hereby established the "Missouri State Penitentiary Redevelopment Corporation"
(hereafter, the MSPRC). The corporation is established to prepare a master
redevelopment plan and to carry out a development program for reuse of the Missouri
State Penitentiary buildings, structures, and grounds. The corporation is to oversee the
reuse of the property and grounds in a manner that is fiscally responsible to the residents
of the State of Missouri, the City of Jefferson, and Cole County
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES D R A F T: 11/02/00
FILENAME: JCCC MGMT PROP LEGIS 11-02
Section 3.
The objectives of the MSPRC shall include:
(1) To prepare a Master Plan for redevelopment of the site
(2) To conduct all appropriate studies for planning and pre-development
(3) To identify and capitalize on relevant sources of funding for planning and
development, including public and private resources
(4) To prepare the property for redevelopment
(5) To oversee the development process either directly or through a master developer
(6) To maintain a high degree of state, county, and local government oversight and
participation
(7) To coordinate actions and interests of the State of Missouri, Cole County, and the
City of Jefferson related to disposition of the property
(8) To adequately maintain and repair all facilities and land until they become the
legal responsibility of other parties
(9) To take legal control of property at appropriate time(s)
Section 4.
The corporation shall be governed by a board of directors comprised of the following:
(1) The board will be composed of ____ members appointed by the State of Missouri,
Cole County, and the City of Jefferson.
(2) The composition of the board is derived to support the Corporation's efforts in
securing civic, public, and private support for the mission of the corporation and
to facilitate the governmental approval process that will be required to implement
any project(s) proposed for the Missouri State Penitentiary property and access
corridors.
(3) Members of the Board of Directors shall possess the skills, talents, and resources
necessary to collectively fulfill the mission of the Corporation.
Section 5.
The powers of the Missouri State Penitentiary Redevelopment Corporation shall include:
(1) To develop a comprehensive plan, Master Plan, or redevelopment plan for the
MSP and to hold public hearings on the plans;
(2) To create, develop, and implement plans for MSP and the redevelopment of the
MSP and its access corridors, including traffic corridors, urban design corridors
that address aesthetic issues and pedestrian connections, and infrastructure
corridors, that include, but are not limited to street, sidewalks and utilities
(3) The development and implementation plans may provide for various uses,
including but not limited to recreation, cultural, open space, historical, public
space, and commercial uses;
(4) To prepare, submit, and administer plans, and to participate in projects or
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES D R A F T: 11/02/00
FILENAME: JCCC MGMT PROP LEGIS 11-02
intergovernmental agreements, or both, and to create reserves for planning,
constructing, reconstructing, acquiring, owning, managing, insuring, leasing,
equipping, extending, improving, operating, maintaining, and repairing land and
projects that it owns or leases;
(5) To provide for the insurance, including self insurance, of any property or
operations of the Board or its members, directors, officers and employees, against
any risk or hazard, and to indemnify its members, agents, independent
contractors, directors, officers, and employees against any risk or hazard;
(6) To appoint an executive director to retain, and employ offices, agents,
independent contractors, and employees to carry out its powers and functions;
(7) To make and execute any contract with any agency of the state or federal
government, any unit of local government, or any person or corporation;
(8) To form an assessment taxing district encompassing the MSP site, for the purpose
of generating capital for carrying out the Board's powers and functions, including
but not limited to capital for public infrastructure;
(9) To sue, initiate or appear in any proceeding;
(10) To adopt and amend bylaws necessary or useful for carrying out any of its duties
(11) To acquire real or personal property, or any interest in real or personal property,
including rights or easements by gift, purchase, transfer, foreclosure or lease; to
improve, hold, sell with or without public bidding, assign, lease, rent, encumber,
mortgage, loan or otherwise dispose of any real or personal property, or any
interest in real or personal property, or mortgage interests owned or in
its control, that may be less than market value, custody or possession and release
or relinquish any right, title claim, lien, interest, easement, however acquired;
(12) To lease or rent any land, building, structure, facility or equipment comprising all
or a portion of a projects, projects or part of a project for such amounts as the
Corporation determines;
(13) To make and execute all contracts and other instruments necessary or convenient
to the exercise of its powers
Section 6.
A Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC) shall be initiated by the MSPRC Board
(1) The purpose of the Citizen's Advisory Committee shall be to involve the public at
large and to assist the Board and in developing long term support for the reuse of
the Missouri State Penitentiary site.
(2) The Citizen's Advisory Committee shall serve primarily in an advisory capacity.
(3) A representative from the Citizen's Advisory Committee shall be selected to serve
on the Board of the Missouri State Penitentiary Redevelopment Corporation.
Section 7.
An executive director shall be retained by the Missouri State Penitentiary Redevelopment
Corporation.
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES D R A F T: 11/02/00
FILENAME: JCCC MGMT PROP LEGIS 11-02
(1) The purpose of the executive director shall be to assist the Missouri State
Penitentiary Redevelopment Corporation in securing pre-development costs and
long-term operating costs in carrying out its objectives.
(2) Support staff may be retained by the executive director to assist him/her in
carrying out the functions and duties of the MSPRC.
Section 8.
The Board of the Missouri State Penitentiary Redevelopment Corporation shall establish
by-laws that address the practical, internal rules of the organization. The By-laws
represent a code of internal rules that can be enforced and provide guidance, structure,
and formality to the organization. The By-laws can include, but not be limited to the
following:
(1) Duties of board members
! Board meeting attendance
! Functions
! Meeting requirements
(2) Executive Committee
! Composition
! Functions, duties
! Meeting requirements (quorum, frequency)
(3) Terms of Office
! Voting members
! Non-voting members, if any
(4) Sub-Committees
! Purpose
! Duties
! Minimum requirements for membership
! Chairperson, if any
(5) Quorum and Voting Requirements
! Full Board
! Executive Board
! Committees
(6) Meetings
! Frequency
! Annual meeting, if any
! Place
! Public disclosure
(7) Amendments to By-laws
! Requirements for amending By-laws
! Process for amending By-laws
(8) Additional Personnel
! Executive director and staff, for example
! Lines of accountability
! Responsibilities of personnel
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES D R A F T: 11/02/00
FILENAME: JCCC MGMT PROP LEGIS 11-02
! Personnel policies
(9) Conflict of Interest
! Definition of conflicts of interest
! Process for determining conflicts of interest
! Process for resolving conflicts of interest
(10) Reporting Requirements (of the Board, to the State, County, City, if any)
! Establish reporting requirements, if required or needed
! Definition of reporting requirements
! Time to deliver required reports, and product, and process
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES D R A F T: 11/02/00
FILENAME: JCCC MGMT PROP LEGIS 11-02
Section 9.
Fiscal appropriations shall be made to support the functions of the MSPRC board during
FY 2002.
(1) An appropriation in the amount of $_____________ will be made to cover costs
such as engineering, architectural analysis, environmental and feasibility analyses
to determine and refine development opportunities and project costs for the MSP
development site.
(2) An appropriation in the amount of $___________will be made to cover ongoing
administrative and operations costs for the corporation and for maintenance of the
facility property prior to redevelopment.
(3) An appropriation in the amount of $________________ will be made to recruit an
executive director and support staff to manage and execute the functions of the
Missouri State Penitentiary Redevelopment Corporation.
SECTION 3
Sheet 1 – Existing Conditions, November 22, 2000; Revised March 2001
Appendix D – Miscellaneous Items
.' Map Key Building Descnpt on Map Key Build rig Descnpnon
.�
�
Housing Unit No. 1 - Control Center - 'H' Pall 21 Recreat on Budd rig
2 Housing Unit No. 2A 413 or Yous rig UnitNo 2 -'F' + ' Halls 22 Chapel
3 Housing Unit No. 3A CD or roue rig Unit No 3 - .B" + "C Has 23 'I' Hall -Warehouse
At Housing Unit No. a - 'A' Ha 24 Warehouse (Ins de Warehouse)
5 Housing Unit No. 5A A B xi Housing Unitmy No. r -. + "K" Halls 25 Outs t Canteen
SC Housing Unit No. SC Maximum Security (Super Max) 26 Vacant Bulldog Yobby and Craft Building
6 Housing Unit No. 6 -'D" Dorm 27 Garage f Outside Construction
7 Housing Unit No. 7 -'L" Hall 29 New Po Storage
P.pO eR 8 Administration 29 New Power rouse
ry 9 O d Power House 30 D esel House
`NE
' O Shoe Factory
Soap Factory (Cnem cal Products
2 Fu -n cure Factoy
13 Metal Working Plant (License
'sj 4 Clotnmg Factory
5 Food Sevice
\ \ 1141‘ i ----` 6 Hosp to
7 Maintenance M f M (Maintenance
8 Housing Unit No. 0 Central
• 4211 9 Corridor Canteen
20 Gymnas um
'Fo
rgPo ♦� �` \� ® ® _
\ \ _ _ -
•\‘',
��\j 4 4,
• i ,
j ®
s
�Eh, \
-65.. PROPERI,�NE
®
C, 4 /
31 Planning Un t Warehouse
Factory) 32 Outs de Industry Warehouse
33 Centennial Cells
Plate Factory) 34 Gas Chambe-
35 Clean rig Pant
36 Sally Port (Old Sally Port)
37 -rucR Gate (Sally Pot)
f Necnamca Build ng) 38 D esel Plant Well
Clothing Educat on Budd ng 39 Underground Storage Build rig Potato House
a0 Slaughter YOuse
41 n nerator
42 Lard rouse
a� -raining Center e
Water lower
n5 New Well Wvers de Drive
>6 Garage
a7 Storage Quonset
vg Office; Main Warehouse
a9 Open Shed
50 Paint Shop
51 Closed 5ned
it
State of Missouri
MEL CARNAHAN GOVERNOR
Office of Administration
Division of Design and Construction
Randy Allen, Director
Room 730,Truman Building
P.O. Box 809
Jefferson City, Missouri) 65102
•
•
.. ?)
.
PROPER
YLINF
II
•
• ,�•` .. ��♦��• .---
�y %S* • ,:• eon
77,
II
O .
200 100 20,
SHEET
� Vii♦ �i I � ♦♦
iii
�� ��I �i ♦ I� / Q
♦ ` 1�
.�
SECTION 4
Sheet 2 – Consensus Plan, November 22, 2000; Revised March 2001
Appendix D – Miscellaneous Items
State of Misso uri
Prepared by:
Parsons Harland Bartholomew & Associates, Inc.
rn
N=
CONSENSUS PLAN
PROCESS DEFINITION PLAN
JEFFERSON CITY CORRECTIONAL CENTER
JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI
PROJECT NUM BER: C0020 01
MEL CART
IOVEF' ,
Office of Administration
Division of Design and Construction
Randy Allen, Directo r
Room 730,Truma n Building
P.O. Box 809
Jefferson City, Missouri) 65102
400 Woods Mill Roa d South, Suite 300
St. Louis Missouri 63017-;427
In Association with:
Development Strategies, Inc.
Trivers Associates, Inc.
TS! Engineering, Inc.
William Tao & Associates, Inc.
George Dickie Associates
REVISIONS',
PARSONS FBA PROJECT NUMBER 7395
SECTION 5
Project Team Directory
Appendix D – Miscellaneous Items
Masterplan for Redevelopment Jefferson City Correctional Center
PROJECT TEAM DIRECTORY 6/15/01
PARSONS HBA 1
Client: State of Missouri – Office of Administration
Post office Box 809
301 West High
Jefferson City, Missouri 65102
Project Manager Charles Brzuchalski
(573) 526-7814; (573) 751-7277 (F)
brzucc@mail.oa.state.mo.us
Members Planning Advisory Team
Director Randy Allen, Division Of Design & Construction
Project Manager Charles Brzuchalski, Division Of Design & Construction
Task Force Member Mark Schreiber, Department of Corrections
Task Force Member Chris Yarnell, Cole County Public Works
City of Jefferson Janice McMillan, City Planner
Consultant Doris Danna FAIA, Architect
Developer Mike Goeke, Developer
Lead Firm Parsons HBA
400 Woods Mill Road South, Suite 330
St. Louis, Missouri 63017-3427
(314) 434-2900; (314) 576-2702 (F)
PIC Barry Hogue barry.hogue@parsons.com
Project Manager Dan Bockert dan.bockert@parsons.com
Landscape Architecture Noel Fehr noel.fehr@parsons.com
And Urban Design Marcus Grillot marc.grillot@parsons.com
Economic Development: Development Strategies
10 S. Broadway St. Louis, MO 63102
(314) 421-2800; (314) 421-3401(F)
Economic Development Richard Ward
Market Feasibility Bob Lewis (314) 805-0712 (M)
blewis@development-strategies.com
Development Planning Larry Marks
Economic Development Bob Lewis
Urban Design: GDA
242 West Whitehall Road
State College, PA 16801
(814) 867-2935(V)+(F); (814) 883-0996(M)
Urban Design George Dickie gxd15@psu.edu
Masterplan for Redevelopment Jefferson City Correctional Center
PROJECT TEAM DIRECTORY 6/15/01
PARSONS HBA 2
Architecture: Trivers Associates
100 N. Broadway St. Louis, MO 63102
241-2900; 241-2909(F)
Principal Architect Andy Trivers
Project Architect Jeff Morrisey (ex17)jmorrisey@trivers.com
Architectural Historian Laura Johnson
Engineering: TSI Engineering (Tech Services, Inc.)
2 Campbell Plaza, Bldg. C St. Louis, MO 63139
(314) 644-3134; (314) 644-3135(F)
Environmental Manager Sylvester Douglas (ex230), 954-6897(M)
sdouglas@tsi-engineering.com
Mechanical/Electrical: William Tao & Associates
2357 59th St. St. Louis, MO 63110
(314) 644-1400; (314) 644-6152 (F)
Facility Engineering Bruce Levitt blevitt@wmtao.com