By Antonio D. French
Filed Monday, June 26, 2006 at 9:54 AM
EXCLUSIVE VIDEO Labels: BJC/Park_Deal, Exclusive, Video_Reports
Three representatives of Barnes-Jewish Hospital made their case Friday for why it is in the best interests of both the City and the hospital expand a current lease on a section of Forest Park.
June Fowler, BJC's Vice-President of Communications, Michael DeHaven, BJC’s general counsel, and Linda Martinez, a partner with the Bryan Cave law firm, told members of the Forest Park Lease Committee that, while BJC would prefer to outright purchase the land, the hospital would be willing to commit to the following as part of a 90-year lease:
(1) building a health care facility on the land, (2) including a price escalator in the annual lease payment, (3) ensure all of their lease payments went to maintaining the rest of the park, and (4) pay for moving the Hudlin tennis courts and playground wherever the city decides.
In this video, Fowler gives a brief history of the different appraisal amounts of the land. Clearing up one source of concern, she says that the public parking meters near Euclid are not part of this land.
In this video, Fowler outlines the things that BJC is willing to commit to in the agreement.
In this video, Alderman Freeman Bosley, Sr. (3rd Ward) questions Fowler and DeHaven about BJC's intentions with the land. One of the things to come out of his questioning is that BJC has future plans to tear down Barnes-Jewish West Plaza and Queeny Tower, which was just built in 1965. DeHaven pointed to the buildings' inability to withstand a major earthquake.
In this video, Fowler outlines what she sees as the benefits to the city and hospital from this proposed deal. She said that the proposed lease payment is the highest per square foot rate in the city.
In this video, Fowler says it does matter who is asking for this lease. She says BJC is a good and committed corporate citizen and deserves consideration for the services it provides to the area.
Editor's Note: These video postings include our 100th YouTube video. It is also our 570th blog posting since PUB DEF returned in October 2005.
9 Comments:
Linda Martinez is a partner in and resident of the Paristyle Building ast 1517 Washington. Other partners and residents include Richard Callow and Barbara Geisman and Chris Dornfeld.
6/26/2006 11:23 AM
I think its a good deal for the city --->"only if"<---- the monthly payments paid by barnes will increase yearly with inflation. otherwise in the long run the city will be getting the very bad end of the stick and when the lease is up barnes may have a huge upperhand in lease price talks because would "a major city" condemn a public hospitial or would they offer a lower lease price??? if barnes builds on the land, hang it up, the next go round they might own the land and pay the city nothing else if they put lets say a cancer center or an aids research center on the land, the city wont be able to talk them up on a higher lease nor will they be able to option out of accepting a lower lease, they might have to sell the land in the long run
6/26/2006 1:23 PM
Isn't it interesting that BJC is willing to pay so much more than the City was initially willing to settle on? If we had to depend on our aldermen and the mayor, the city wouldn't have asked for this much.
Just goes to show that this administration and most aldermen think businesses are way more important than residents, forgetting that businesses don't vote. Citizens do!
I'm shocked that Queeny Tower is coming down. Makes me think BJC will end up with a tower on the land they want now, and parking on the site of Queeny Tower.
So in the end, we'll lose park space for . . . PARKING.
6/26/2006 1:48 PM
Anony, I doubt that a new parking garage is on the top of Barnes' wish list. I think a strong case can (and has) been made for the hospital's need to increase their number of beds. That is likely what will be built. Will it have parking? Probably. But they are too landlocked to afford wasting that whole footprint on parking.
But your other point is very, very valid. For those that remember back to the early days of plans to build a new stadium for the Cardinals, Mayor Slay then too originally supported a plan that was a much worse deal for taxpayers than the team eventually settled for.
And for all of you who supported the proposed changes to the City's charter a few years ago, you should know that if that had passed, this deal would have already been done -- and with the Comptroller as nothing more than an auditor, the mayor would have allowed it to pass without a price escalator and without Barnes telling the public what they planned to do with the land (which they still have not done a great job of doing).
6/26/2006 3:41 PM
barnes is going to build straight up in the air with that land. They want to build a very tall tower or towers to take the place of the older towers so they can be raised and rebuilt taller
6/26/2006 5:56 PM
There is a rumor that BJC has 425 empty beds at its facility. However, in the event of an epidemic what would the requirement for beds be?
What would be nice is if another emergency room was opened in order to create alittle competition for Medicare dollars.
6/26/2006 6:47 PM
^But hospitals on South Jefferson will close in a few years, with another on Hampton, not far behind. Down the line, South Grand and the CWE will be it for "Medicaid beds" within the City.
And comparing the Stadium deal to BJC's lease is a joke. While the Cards ended up paying substantially LESS taxes, BJC is willing to pay substantially MORE rent. And pay ten times more rent for land the City already decided over 30 years ago to lease away.
6/27/2006 12:28 PM
I think you're missing the point. BJC is willing to pay more -- Yes. The Cardinals were eventually willing to pay more - Yes. Did the Mayor's Office ask either of them to? No.
As a matter of fact, the mayor carried the water for both of those organization when the price to taxpayers was much higher.
He went to Jefferson City begging for more state money for the Cards. And he supported this BJC deal before a price escalator was agreed to.
That price escalator (and the committment to build a health care facilty, as opposed to a garage or an office space) makes this deal a whole lot better for the taxpayers. To support this deal BEFORE those things were publicly committed to is crazy.
6/27/2006 3:13 PM
We all know that St. Louis needs more parking spaces. We don't have a public transit system (mucho sarcasm; we just need people to, you know, use it). First off, BJC owns plenty of land already. Have they considered building multilevel parking along Clayton Ave, where they could potentially triple the available parking? Has anyone even considered that?
I'm against using public parkland for anything other than public parkland. That said, what is this obsession with parking lots in St. Louis? I've lived here all my life, and I'm beginning to wonder if St. Louis has more parking spaces that residents, or buildings. Isn't there something wrong with that picture?
6/27/2006 6:33 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home