Please take time to read the following.  I believe it is of vital importance to our City's future.  Thank you very much.  Dawn Introduction: The City Council may soon vote on an Agreement between the City of Tacoma and Cosmos, of Bellevue, a development group, involving the possible construction of tall buildings on the parking area at the Tacoma Dome.  I find the terms very shocking!  Please take time to read this. I am attaching an Analysis of that Agreement, done by a prominent local person.  I do not use his name as I don't want to subject him to phone calls.  Suffice it to say that I discussed this Agreement and Analysis with Council Member Kevin Phelps last Wednesday and he agrees the Analysis is accurate. (And, yet, unbelievably, he is supporting the Cosmos plan.)  I do have the original 2 Agreement documents in my computer and will be glad to send them to you if you request them.  They are lengthy.  I have read them. The Agreement provides: 1.  Cosmos will pay to the City $10.00, total,  for the right to develop the parking area by the Dome, over a period of 21 years.  They do not have to provide any plans for 18 months, which can be extended to up to 5 years before ANY action has to take place. 2.  There is NO penalty for non-performance, therefore, no guarantee of performance. 3.  If the Council approves the Agreement, the Council ceases to have any authority to negotiate with Cosmos regarding what they will build.  All future negotiations will be done by the City Economic Development Department with no input from City Council or members of the community. 4.  It provides for a possibility of up to 4 tall buildings near the Dome which will be out of scale with the neighborhood and with with no description of what the purpose of those buildings will house.  (See Art Popham's column of 5/26 regarding Tacoma scale). 5.  Developers and business leaders who have invested in down-town oppose the Cosmos project and fear that for 5 years (at least)  the local investment community will not move forward while waiting to see what Cosmos will do, if anything.  Our Downtown is now making such progress, this seems an unacceptable risk.  (Remember, there is no penalty for non-performance by Cosmos for their  $10.00 investment with 21 years to perform). 6.  The Tribe is moving forward in that area with a major Casino/Hotel development which will be a tourist and convention attraction. (This is not taken into account in any of the Cosmos negotiations.)  Those who come to the Casino/Hotel will bring families who will come to see the LeMay auto collection, the best in the world (LeMay is now threatening to leave Tacoma because of the City's inaction regarding their requests, due to the Cosmos negotiations).  Our new Museum of Glass and the new TAM, the WA History Museum, Chihuly Bridge of Glass, Train to the Mt. etc., will bring us fame and tourist dollars. 7:  THIS WILL RESULT IN THE DOME PARKING AREA BECOMING HUGELY VALUABLE - CERTAINLY WORTH MORE THAN $10.00. Please read the details below. Thank you very much. Dawn COSMOS / DOME Option SV 04/16/02 & Development Agreement SV 04/14/02.    TIMING: 1.    Cosmos has 18 months from the effective date of the Agreement (approval of the Option and Dev Agmt by the Council) within which to submit to the City its Concept Design Plan for all Development sites (see para 4 (b) of Option). 2.    Next, Cosmos has up to 3 years from after the date that the City approves the Concept Design Plan within which to Close the Easement.   Closing the easement is the granting by the City to Cosmos of the right to start construction on the site.   See para 4 (c) of Option.  So at this point we are at least 4 1/2 years out � and potentially longer if the City does not approve the plan immediately. 3.    Next, Cosmos has 8 months more within which to actually start construction of the improvements.  See para 5.2 of Development Agreement.    So now we are out 5 years and 2 months by when construction must begin. 4.    Substantial completion of the improvements on the Development Site must be completed within 18 months of Closing of the Easement Date.   So, this appears to mean that all improvements must be substantially completed no later than 6 years from when the Council approves the Option and Development Agreements.   This assumes no delays or extensions by anyone, which is rare.   See para #5 of Option Agreement. 5.    Applying the above to Development Site #4 means that Cosmos has up to 19 1/2 years (assuming no extensions or delays) from the date of Council approval within which it must exercise its Option to acquire #4 and Cosmos must complete the construction thereon within 21 years. 6.    Note that the above time lines "could" easily be extended upon agreement of the parties � and it is common for developers to ask for extensions and/or the City to do the same.     It is very uncommon that extensions are not granted.   Just think of how many times the Opus Option was extended for no consideration. OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST contained in the Documents. 1.    At this time NO ONE knows what Cosmos is going to build, if anything, at the Dome site.  Section 2 of Development Agreement pretty much allows them to build anything at all as long as the City internally says its ok upon its review of the Design Plan.    It is interesting to note that we don�t really know what Cosmos has in mind until 18 months AFTER the Council approves the deal. 2.    Once the City Council approves the Option and Development Agreement, the project NEVER comes back before the Council.   From that date forward, the Design Plan, permitting, etc. all only go back to the City internally for review and approval.  This is despite the fact that currently no one knows what Cosmos might build out there.    See para 6 of Option which refers you to the Development Agreement (but note that "interested parties" is not defined in the Dev Agmt), and see page 3 of Dev Agmt, along with para 5.4.4 thereof.    3.    There is no requirement for approval of the Cosmos design by the LeMay Museum or other neighboring property owners or parties in interest (ie the Public whose land is being optioned away).   The closest wording on this point appears to be in the Dev Agmt page 2 under definitions of "Administrative Design Review Process" - see (j). 4.    A MAJOR FAILURE of the documents is that it does not address what happens to the Dome parking during the 18 months of construction on each site of the improvement & replacement parking by Cosmos.   Does this mean that the City has to somehow provide such in the interim?  At a minimum this could be a huge loss of parking revenue to the City (depending upon how much acreage is being developed at the time by Cosmos) AND it could be a huge loss of revenue from Dome Events that might go elsewhere by reason of this. 5.    I do not find any mention of Developer Mitigation requirements (i.e. street improvements, traffic lights, side-walks, etc) which are normal as a project gets started.  Often mitigation requirements depend upon what the Developer plans to build.   However, see Dev Agmt para 6.2 can easily be interpreted that the City is required to pay for and provide all mitigation - new access roads, lights, off ramps from the freeway, etc.   This could be particularly costly to the City.    Just think of the problem an office tenant is going to have getting people to a meeting at his/her office when a Dome Event is taking place - day or night. 6.    Development Agreement para 14 includes very self serving language: "Developer represents that its purchase of the Property is for development and not for "land bank" speculation."     Interesting, since they are paying only $10 for the Option and we could be out 5 years and 2 months before any construction has to start for Development Site #1 and for Dev Site #4 we could be out 20 years and 2 months.   Land bank speculation?    I don�t know a Developer who wouldn�t take a free look on any property on these terms. 7.    Dev Agmt para 5 is particularly interesting.    It talks about the ultimate price to be paid by Cosmos for the land - assuming that it actually builds improvements thereon.    It must transfer outright ownership of the replacement parking to the City.  The replacement parking structure is appraised and if the value is equal to or greater than the value of the bare land today (note it has a blank as to the base price per foot - so we don't really know this figure) then that's all that is paid.   If the appraised value is less than the bare land now, then Cosmos has to pay the difference in cash.   But, there is no appreciation factor or cpi built in.   This could be 6 years from now. The same formula is applied to all future Development Sites, except that they at least have a cpi increase for them.    I truly question whether or not a cpi realistic?    Once the light rail is completed along with the LeMay Museum it is my feeling that the Cosmos option land will have a far greater value than today.   So why is the land not appraised at that time for its highest and best use?   The City is committing to sell property potentially as far out as 21 years from now for a price set on today's values with a cpi. 8.    There are numerous important exhibits and #s missing from these draft documents, for example: the site plan; project schedule of completion; blanks for land value; etc. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: 1.    It appears this deal originated behind closed doors.   Cosmos was a loser on the County's Pacific Block RFQ.   Kevin and the City's EDD then grabbed Cosmos and made the deal with them on the Dome Site.   This was done without the normal public RFQ process.   It is interesting to talk with the alleged other developers who were contacted about potential development on the site.   None with whom I've spoken said there was any real description of the proposed deal.   And many large developers say they weren't even contacted.   Why was a public RFQ not followed?     2.    Why weren't the constituents consulted prior to making the deal?    None of the downtown community (retail, building owners, local AIA, developers, etc) were consulted about this idea before the plan was almost a done deal.   The Executive Council has yet to even hear about Cosmos formally.   Yet, practically all other plans are first floated out for input from our constituents - the Convention Center, Pacific Block, Thea Foss, Light Rail, and the list goes on and on.   Had the downtown community been brought in before the draft deal was struck, perhaps we would not be in the mess that we are today.     3.    Why doesn't Cosmos want to come downtown to the Pacific Block now and give up the Dome.   If they did, the downtown community would welcome them.   Its the same tenants and they can get just as large of a floor plate here (maybe not 4 separate large buildings, but they could at least do stage #1 here)?    Why?  Answer: the City's giving them such a great deal out at the Dome - a free option for 4 1/2 years and the potential to buy property in 21 years at today's prices with a cpi. 4.    The Dome property is a public community asset of which the Council is our fiduciary owner and protector.     Most of us have always thought of that area as being developed into more public use facilities: Dome, Exhibition Hall, LeMay Museum, and similar projects.    If we let office buildings be built there, then the public use opportunities that "may" come as a result of light rail and LeMay will not ever be able to be created.   Before we give it away to a Developer, shouldn�t we be sure that what they are going to build there is what we want?    Perhaps a simple study by an outside consultant would benefit us all before we make a decision that can never be changed !?!      Even former Mayor Mike Crowley said that he is concerned about the "hop scotch" development in Tacoma AND that he always thought the Dome area should be for public use development, not office buildings. 5.    What will be built @ the Dome by Cosmos.    Originally they said 1 million sf of office space and 200,000sf of hotel, with phase #1 being 225,000sf of office.   They have said their cost to build will be $85sf.    The Columbia Bank Center was $130sf for shell and core, and with all costs it was over $206sf.    The Columbia Bank Center is a typical suburban style 9 story building without any glitzy expensive items (ie marble, etc.).    So, at $85sf, is this what we want at the "Gateway" to our City? 6.    The "deal" seems to keep changing.   The Council should not vote until it is absolutely sure of what it is doing and firmly believes this is in the best interest of the City.    All members should have FINAL drafts of an Option & Dev. Agreement agreed to by City staff and Cosmos.   These then need to be fully explained by legal and the Council should then have plenty of time to study it along with their constituents.    Meantime � no vote.   Abstain. 7.    Your Constituents are truly concerned about the Mall effect upon downtown Tacoma.   Certainly the downtown building owners are protective of their own investments, but more than that we see the Cosmos proposal as just plane poor urban planning which runs totally contrary to Destination Downtown.   That plan told us that we must concentrate development in the downtown core to create the density that provides the city with a vibrant people place, allows housing, shops, restaurants, night clubs and the arts to thrive.    Mark Hinshaw, Seattle Architect whom our city recently paid to write our current downtown zoning, agrees and was quoted in the paper as saying "allowing Cosmos to develop huge buildings at the Dome guts Destination Downtown." The local board of the AIA agrees and unanimously wrote a letter to the Council on this point.    Mr. Haub wants to see competition and investment by others in our downtown.   He would be in favor of Cosmos, if they would be proposing building in the downtown core.   This feeling is shared by most downtown building owners and developers.   We are 100% behind the Rainier Pacific project and were 100% behind Opus.     Tacoma's Citizens have invested a lot of money in our downtown over the recent past (Theater District, TAG, Pantages, Convention Center, TAM, Glass Museum, Thea Foss, History Museum, UWT, and so forth).    Let's not jeopardize this just because someone has some $ and wants to invest it somewhere in our City.    We are selling Tacoma�s future development for the next 21 + years for $10 and no penalties for non-performance.   Would Seattle or Olympia do this? Doesn't it mean something if the entire downtown is against this?  Shouldn�t the Council stop and question this decision if the vote is this close and causing this much dissension in our community?   Let's pull together, not apart.    Is this project worth the outfall?