Last incentives package was ~$24 million in forgivable loans.
New package is $64.4 million, including $22 million in forgivable loans, a $15.3 million REV grant, and an eye-watering
$25 MILLION completion grant. Completion grant is roughly the same as Iguana is asking for the completion of their Four Seasons riverfront development.
Oy.
From the JBJ:
QuoteIt started as a $75 million hotel project half the size it is now, Atkins said. Covid prevented the project solely becoming a hotel, leading to the addition of multifamily. The total cost now stands at more than $178 million.
Atkins said the project material costs increased on a 30-40% basis, but city assistance is warranted because of its location, what the project represents and its potential transformational impact.
"Not only did the financial markets change, so did the cost associated with projects change in that one-year period from late 2021 to late 2022," Atkins said.
Atkins gave a breakdown where the developer would ask for public funds. The project will ask for $22.1 million in Downtown Preservation Revitalization Program funds, a Recapture Enhanced Value of $15.3 million and the $25 million completion grant. Each grant is divided for the multifamily and the hotel portions.
"We still have a gap. We have to fill the gap to make the numbers work not only for financing but returns on investment for the project as well, so we're respectively asking city council to consider a completion grant," Atkins said.
Full article: https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2023/04/19/1788m-price-tag-laura-street-trio-seeks-funds.html
Jeez. That's... wow.
I'm not gonna say absolutely not, but... I'd really want to see a close look at the books for this. Or some indication that this project is still feasible, by Southeast or someone else. Man.
Quote from: Ken_FSU on April 19, 2023, 11:30:11 PM
Completion grant is roughly the same as Iguana is asking for the completion of their Four Seasons riverfront development.
In terms of importance to Downtown Jax, The Trio > Four Seasons all day, every day, and twice on Sunday.
^ Developers seem to be pros at giving the City moving targets. And, the City is happy to take shots at them. Where does it end?
This is a great project but DIA/City has created a precedent and is now being asked to continuously follow it and up the ante for each round.
If the City took all the incentives given to Downtown developers and invested them, instead, in riverfront parks, urban mass transit (excluding the wasteful U2C), increasing security, fixing and improving streetscapes, adding more public art, staging more events, etc. maybe all these projects would be just as viable and everyday citizens could also enjoy some benefit from their tax dollars, not just the Mayor's friends.
As a side note, I have noticed Downtown streets not only are sporting ever more potholes but the City isn't even keeping up with striping them. Paint is almost completely gone in areas. That's the cheapest part of street maintenance and the City isn't even keeping up with that. But, we have tens of millions for incentives to a billionaire.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on April 20, 2023, 12:19:19 AM
^ Developers seem to be pros at giving the City moving targets. And, the City is happy to take shots at them. Where does it end?
This is a great project but DIA/City has created a precedent and is now being asked to continuously follow it and up the ante for each round.
If the City took all the incentives given to Downtown developers and invested them, instead, in riverfront parks, urban mass transit (excluding the wasteful U2C), increasing security, fixing and improving streetscapes, adding more public art, staging more events, etc. maybe all these projects would be just as viable and everyday citizens could also enjoy some benefit from their tax dollars, not just the Mayor's friends.
As a side note, I have noticed Downtown streets not only are sporting ever more potholes but the City isn't even keeping up with striping them. Paint is almost completely gone in areas. That's the cheapest part of street maintenance and the City isn't even keeping up with that. But, we have tens of millions for incentives to a billionaire.
Hopefully soon. The article about the Trio doesn't install any confidence that all of a sudden these numbers will make it work. It actually black & white states in the JBJ article that both Southeast & the DIA recognize theres still a gap? Even with this package? I hope I am reading that wrong but don't think I am. So even with this massive incentive package, and historic tax credits, theres still a gap? Might not be worth it, which is sad to say. I'd rather Vestcor come in with fixed-income housing.. at least we know it will get done and it won't cost an arm & leg to do it from the city. Or I guess Southeast could wait.. again.
Why would Atkins or anyone sell the building to Vestcor? Or why would Vestcor want to buy it for fixed-income housing? There are a lot of other sites where the proforma for that product works much better. Also, I can't really tell.......has the project mix changed again?
There's no reason they would. It is a pipe dream. Not sure Southeast can pull this off imo. I think this could be a case where the rehab costs do exceed replacement costs. Which those projects usually become some fixed-income housing if they are important enough to save.
To answer you question, yes. This is probably the third or fourth change to the overall end product.
$180M for a 143-room hotel, and 169 apartments. So lets be super generous and say the hotel unit cost is on par with apartments... that is a staggering cost of over $550k per unit. That doesn't pencil out in most markets, regardless of this being a depressed market relatively speaking here in JAX.
So my response is, either Southeast is doing some type of white collar theft, or there genuinely needs to be another developer in play.
And for context, market rate hotel's cost roughly $150-200k per door. Market rate apartments are roughly $150k-$300k per door.
Exceptions apply but hard to justify $550k based on any comp locally. Maybe I am missing something.
Quote from: fsu813 on April 19, 2023, 11:55:36 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on April 19, 2023, 11:30:11 PM
Completion grant is roughly the same as Iguana is asking for the completion of their Four Seasons riverfront development.
In terms of importance to Downtown Jax, The Trio > Four Seasons all day, every day, and twice on Sunday.
Don't disagree, but one is a $370 million project tied to additional park space, an extension of the Riverwalk, and a lot of bed tax dollars floating back to the city. The other is a $170 million project that, right now, has a negative ROI on paper.
$25 million is a big completion grant. It's half of what ultimately tanked Lot J.
I'm not above pinching our noses, paying the ransom, and getting this thing done because it truly is that important to downtown Jax, I'm just tired of the hostage crisis with these buildings and this developer. First the incentives package was like $12 million. Then $26 million. Then it was dependent on the housing committee. Now it's $64 million. When the talk gonna end and the construction going to begin?
When I first read this, I thought, "is someone putting money or extra money in their pockets?" And I believe this is what is happening in Jax relative to these Developers; I can't believe there is no way to hold them accountable, or, maybe economics has a play in all this? (i.e. supply and demand and costs).
Quote"I don't know whether the gap is exactly $25 million, we haven't vetted all the construction numbers to that level, but there's no doubt there's a gap," Boyer said.
She said the completion grant for new construction requires a return on investment of 1, which the DIA determined the project did not meet.
"We're now going below an ROI of 1 on new construction, it's making sure you give us guidance with how we distinguish every other new construction project going downtown that we don't go below 1, or what the basis is we do go below one because that's the criteria in our plan," Boyer told council members.
It sounds like the completion grant is meant to close the gap Atkins alluded to. I'll be interested to see how far below 1.00 this grades out to, and I wonder what level of completion grant (if any) would comply with the target of 1.00. At a minimum, I would hope the grant is conditioned on and pro-rated according to what is actually spent.
As ridiculous as this may seem, Lot J's hotel rooms implied a cost of something like $1 million per key and nearly passed. Atkins is no Shad Khan, but he is providing the pro forma for DIA review, so I doubt $550k/room alone raises too many eyebrows on Council.
Here's a Daily Record article that clarifies further. The $25 million completion grant is meant to close the gap but the DIA refuses to back it since the ROI is less than 1. Councilman Carlucci and Boylan will introduce legislation that covers the $25 mil.
QuoteDIA CEO Lori Boyer said at the meeting her agency could support the historic loans and Recapture Enhanced Value Grant, a property tax refund, but cannot back the $25 million completion grant.
The DIA's Council-approved policy does not allow it to support a completion grant investment that has a return on investment to the city below $1 for every $1 invested. The final ROI calculation for the proposed Trio incentives is not yet complete but DIA officials said the $25 million grant would fall below that threshold.
Boyer said after the meeting the project could qualify for a smaller completion grant.
"There are adopted rules and regulations of having the ROI at 1, and it doesn't get there. I doesn't meet the tiers analysis, so we can't recommend it. But we can acknowledge that there's a (financial) gap that exists," Boyer said.
For Atkins and Southeast to receive the additional $25 million, she said City Council will have to approve separate legislation, which Boylan and Carlucci said April 19 they intend to introduce.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/apr/20/atkins-wants-25-million-completion-grant-larger-city-incentive-deal-in-trio-renovation/
Would you guys vote yes on a $25 million completion grant and $15 million REV grant, contingent on stipulations that require Southeast to start major construction this year without further extensions?
I think I would, with quiet rage, just because it's such a vitally important project.
It's an obscenely large ask, but I think we're actively losing money and development opportunity by allowing it to sit in its existing state as well.
Damned if you pay the ransom, damned if you don't.
I just wonder how you prevent every developer moving forward from asking for a similar handout.
I'm sort of torn. I don't trust Atkins at all. His riverfront proposal is some of the biggest cowboy shit I've ever seen. However this project is so fundamentally important to Downtown Jax and we are now so deep in it with Atkins that I also want to see it finished by any means necessary.
Hopefully after this we can wash our hands of him. Sick of these developers with a shaky track record like him, Spandrel etc being given such premium real estate out of sheer desperation.
Quote from: jaxoNOLE on April 20, 2023, 12:28:30 PM
Quote"I don't know whether the gap is exactly $25 million, we haven't vetted all the construction numbers to that level, but there's no doubt there's a gap," Boyer said.
She said the completion grant for new construction requires a return on investment of 1, which the DIA determined the project did not meet.
"We're now going below an ROI of 1 on new construction, it's making sure you give us guidance with how we distinguish every other new construction project going downtown that we don't go below 1, or what the basis is we do go below one because that's the criteria in our plan," Boyer told council members.
It sounds like the completion grant is meant to close the gap Atkins alluded to. I'll be interested to see how far below 1.00 this grades out to, and I wonder what level of completion grant (if any) would comply with the target of 1.00. At a minimum, I would hope the grant is conditioned on and pro-rated according to what is actually spent.
As ridiculous as this may seem, Lot J's hotel rooms implied a cost of something like $1 million per key and nearly passed. Atkins is no Shad Khan, but he is providing the pro forma for DIA review, so I doubt $550k/room alone raises too many eyebrows on Council.
With a price range like that, you can really only hope this project turns out to be a gem with super high-end finishes. In my mind, that's the only way the public can get a small win from this. I hear ya on the 4S project.. but the costs there are at least shared amongst several other uses. I guess because this project by Southeast is basically an infill project, the price range of it seems crazy. The Lions skyscraper (which many have doubts on its pricing anyway) claims to be "cheaper" per unit than the Trio now? How can a 40-story building be cheaper than the Trio? lol
So hopefully this thing turns out to be an absolute gem, to make it somewhat worth the tag?? I unfortunately feel like this is a scenario where the city has already shown its full hand.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on April 20, 2023, 03:10:25 PM
Quote from: jaxoNOLE on April 20, 2023, 12:28:30 PM
Quote"I don't know whether the gap is exactly $25 million, we haven't vetted all the construction numbers to that level, but there's no doubt there's a gap," Boyer said.
She said the completion grant for new construction requires a return on investment of 1, which the DIA determined the project did not meet.
"We're now going below an ROI of 1 on new construction, it's making sure you give us guidance with how we distinguish every other new construction project going downtown that we don't go below 1, or what the basis is we do go below one because that's the criteria in our plan," Boyer told council members.
It sounds like the completion grant is meant to close the gap Atkins alluded to. I'll be interested to see how far below 1.00 this grades out to, and I wonder what level of completion grant (if any) would comply with the target of 1.00. At a minimum, I would hope the grant is conditioned on and pro-rated according to what is actually spent.
As ridiculous as this may seem, Lot J's hotel rooms implied a cost of something like $1 million per key and nearly passed. Atkins is no Shad Khan, but he is providing the pro forma for DIA review, so I doubt $550k/room alone raises too many eyebrows on Council.
With a price range like that, you can really only hope this project turns out to be a gem with super high-end finishes. In my mind, that's the only way the public can get a small win from this. I hear ya on the 4S project.. but the costs there are at least shared amongst several other uses. I guess because this project by Southeast is basically an infill project, the price range of it seems crazy. The Lions skyscraper (which many have doubts on its pricing anyway) claims to be "cheaper" per unit than the Trio now? How can a 40-story building be cheaper than the Trio? lol
So hopefully this thing turns out to be an absolute gem, to make it somewhat worth the tag?? I unfortunately feel like this is a scenario where the city has already shown its full hand.
I'm not really saying $550k is reasonable, I just don't think it's likely to be a stumbling block for council approval. It goes back to the issue of precedent. While this deal looks like a huge increase in ask, in reality the prior deal had crept up to $26.7M city incentives on a $70M project for 140 hotel rooms and no multifamily, or $500k/room at a city subsidy rate of about 38%.
The new ask of $62.5M on a $179M project at a rough rate of $550k/room with a city subsidy rate of 35% looks pretty reasonably aligned to the existing deal--they're just expanding the scope using the same terms. The city has already lost the credibility to challenge the project based on cost.
Quote from: jaxoNOLE on April 20, 2023, 04:09:13 PM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on April 20, 2023, 03:10:25 PM
Quote from: jaxoNOLE on April 20, 2023, 12:28:30 PM
Quote"I don't know whether the gap is exactly $25 million, we haven't vetted all the construction numbers to that level, but there's no doubt there's a gap," Boyer said.
She said the completion grant for new construction requires a return on investment of 1, which the DIA determined the project did not meet.
"We're now going below an ROI of 1 on new construction, it's making sure you give us guidance with how we distinguish every other new construction project going downtown that we don't go below 1, or what the basis is we do go below one because that's the criteria in our plan," Boyer told council members.
It sounds like the completion grant is meant to close the gap Atkins alluded to. I'll be interested to see how far below 1.00 this grades out to, and I wonder what level of completion grant (if any) would comply with the target of 1.00. At a minimum, I would hope the grant is conditioned on and pro-rated according to what is actually spent.
As ridiculous as this may seem, Lot J's hotel rooms implied a cost of something like $1 million per key and nearly passed. Atkins is no Shad Khan, but he is providing the pro forma for DIA review, so I doubt $550k/room alone raises too many eyebrows on Council.
With a price range like that, you can really only hope this project turns out to be a gem with super high-end finishes. In my mind, that's the only way the public can get a small win from this. I hear ya on the 4S project.. but the costs there are at least shared amongst several other uses. I guess because this project by Southeast is basically an infill project, the price range of it seems crazy. The Lions skyscraper (which many have doubts on its pricing anyway) claims to be "cheaper" per unit than the Trio now? How can a 40-story building be cheaper than the Trio? lol
So hopefully this thing turns out to be an absolute gem, to make it somewhat worth the tag?? I unfortunately feel like this is a scenario where the city has already shown its full hand.
I'm not really saying $550k is reasonable, I just don't think it's likely to be a stumbling block for council approval. It goes back to the issue of precedent. While this deal looks like a huge increase in ask, in reality the prior deal had crept up to $26.7M city incentives on a $70M project for 140 hotel rooms and no multifamily, or $500k/room at a city subsidy rate of about 38%.
The new ask of $62.5M on a $179M project at a rough rate of $550k/room with a city subsidy rate of 35% looks pretty reasonably aligned to the existing deal--they're just expanding the scope using the same terms. The city has already lost the credibility to challenge the project based on cost.
I do agree with you on that! I guess because the ask is so high now, it's harder to digest.
I don't like this. I l always though this project as 1st priority, but this guy needs to go. Let's start again!
For those more familiar with historic rehab and general construction costs than myself, does $180 million seem within reason for what's proposed here?
(https://media.yourobserver.com/img/photos/2023/04/19/Laura_Trio_Presentation_W_Forsyth_South_Elevation_t1100.jpg)
I only have other projects to compare it to:
Independent Life building rehab - $23 million
New JEA Headquarters - $75 million
RISE Doro Project - $50 million
Union Terminal Warehouse Project - $75 million
Jags Sports Performance Center - $120 million
FIS Headquarters - $156 million
One Riverside Phase 1, with 270 residential units, a 600-spot garage, and retail/restaurant - $83 million
I have a tough time understanding how a 143-room hotel, 169 apartments, and restaurant net out to more than Union Terminal and One Riverside combined. Or as much as FIS Headquarters and Independent Life combined. Or as much as the Jags new Sports Performance center and new parks at the Landing and Shipyards West combined.
From my understanding, Southeast doesn't even have to build structured parking, as VyStar took that burden off their hands with the new garage.
I know it's more expensive to bring these old buildings up to code than to build fresh, but is THIS much more expensive? These buildings aren't exactly huge, much smaller than the Barnett, for example, and a good chunk of this project is new construction as well.
$180 million pass the smell test?
Quote from: Ken_FSU on April 20, 2023, 10:02:50 PM
One Riverside Phase 1, with 270 residential units, a 600-spot garage, and retail/restaurant - $83 million
Just a point of clarification here. The $83M for One Riverside is to build the phase one residential only. The total project is valued at $250M.
However, in my opinion the Trio should not cost two and a half times what Union Terminal costs. I think it should cost about $100M. The old structures are already stripped down and ready to be built back as their new use and the new construction component is not a large development. $180M for this work is tough to comprehend.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on April 20, 2023, 10:19:19 PM
Quote from: Ken_FSU on April 20, 2023, 10:02:50 PM
One Riverside Phase 1, with 270 residential units, a 600-spot garage, and retail/restaurant - $83 million
Just a point of clarification here. The $83M for One Riverside is to build the phase one residential only. The total project is valued at $250M.
However, in my opinion the Trio should not cost two and a half times what Union Terminal costs. I think it should cost about $100M. The old structures are already stripped down and ready to be built back as their new use and the new construction component is not a large development. $180M for this work is tough to comprehend.
Either someone doesn't know what they are doing or, SOMEONE is putting money in their and others pockets and coming up to the table greedily for more money. I smell a skunk in a pickle juice barrel.
Update from the Daily Record.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/jun/16/dia-committee-advances-3655-million-laura-street-trio-deal-amid-caution/
Unfortunately, I'm not confident about this one, but wish them well.
- Historic levels of incentives from the city
- National Historic Tax Credits
- No built parking
Couple that with this project being estimated at 36 months to complete.. This is just another form of money laundering. Holding valuable city assets hostage and proposing absolutely insane deals. Thank you to those in city leadership taking a stand for what is right in the long run. Those buildings need to be left vacant if this is what the city has to pay to make it happen. Hard to imagine with historically low interest rates, Southeast couldn't make this happen. What makes anyone think now they can? I'll be okay with waiting until the next boom cycle.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on June 16, 2023, 08:45:30 AM
- Historic levels of incentives from the city
- National Historic Tax Credits
- No built parking
Couple that with this project being estimated at 36 months to complete.. This is just another form of money laundering. Holding valuable city assets hostage and proposing absolutely insane deals. Thank you to those in city leadership taking a stand for what is right in the long run. Those buildings need to be left vacant if this is what the city has to pay to make it happen. Hard to imagine with historically low interest rates, Southeast couldn't make this happen. What makes anyone think now they can? I'll be okay with waiting until the next boom cycle.
OK with waiting until the next boom cycle? WHAT???!!! None of us know when that will be; it is a very uncertain world and the next boom cycle may not happen; and I, and most of you as well, might be dead before the next boom cycle. However, that doesn't mean that we let these thug developers keep wringing money out of the taxpayers coffers screaming high prices for materials and supply and demand issues. If this keeps up, Jax might be declaring bankruptcy very soon (I know it's hard for that to happen). Insane, insane, insane.
Quote from: heights unknown on June 16, 2023, 09:30:30 AM
Quote from: Jax_Developer on June 16, 2023, 08:45:30 AM
- Historic levels of incentives from the city
- National Historic Tax Credits
- No built parking
Couple that with this project being estimated at 36 months to complete.. This is just another form of money laundering. Holding valuable city assets hostage and proposing absolutely insane deals. Thank you to those in city leadership taking a stand for what is right in the long run. Those buildings need to be left vacant if this is what the city has to pay to make it happen. Hard to imagine with historically low interest rates, Southeast couldn't make this happen. What makes anyone think now they can? I'll be okay with waiting until the next boom cycle.
OK with waiting until the next boom cycle? WHAT???!!! None of us know when that will be; it is a very uncertain world and the next boom cycle may not happen; and I, and most of you as well, might be dead before the next boom cycle. However, that doesn't mean that we let these thug developers keep wringing money out of the taxpayers coffers screaming high prices for materials and supply and demand issues. If this keeps up, Jax might be declaring bankruptcy very soon (I know it's hard for that to happen). Insane, insane, insane.
36 months, with $100M in debt @ 10% net (all assumptions are conservative) is $30M in interest payments alone.
36 months, every percentage on debt is a net is $3M increase in cost.
Given this project has a negative ROI, we are literally fronting money because of the debt cycle we are in now. In other words, this projects equity gap is wild and should the city really pay for a private project to be even remotely feasible? Maybe if there was a city component, but there isn't.
This one just makes me sad.
Feels like we're looking at years of additional decay and blight at this site.
Southeast should sell it to VyStar (or another developer with deeper pockets) at market rate and let someone else move the project forward.
VyStar would be HEROES in the local community if they found a way to finally solve the Trio problem.
Curious, does Jacksonville have/has Jacksonville ever considered a vacancy/blight tax on unoccupied buildings and surface parking lots like we see in other cities? Just to put a little extra pressure on owners of these properties to develop or sell more quickly?
Really agree with you on that first part. There has to be another use for the building, with a limited-income %. Corner Lot got incentives for that Cecil apartment project which only had like 30% of the development slated for income-limited units.
There are other programs and ways to finance this, outside of a fully market rate product. This is a legacy project for Southeast, and clearly are trying to steer clear from an affordable component, as evident in them not being able to bring a prior deal to the table when there was some affordable components on the board. There are so many state & local programs.. which clearly this project could warrant that interest.
But having this entire project be $500k net per door, with 0 parking, makes you wonder on all the numbers honestly. Construction costs included. I see this whole thing imploding pretty bad.
I thought that there was a parking garage in their plans/proposal(s) on the corner, or was that a previous vision and plan for this trio?
I could be mistaken but I believe Vystar took that over completely with their new garage & the updated proposals do not include a parking component.
There is no parking garage planned that I'm aware of. The parking will be in the Vystar garage.
Quote from: Jax_Developer on June 16, 2023, 01:42:37 PM
I could be mistaken but I believe Vystar took that over completely with their new garage & the updated proposals do not include a parking component.
Thanks JD. You are absolutely correct. But I do remember in past/initial renderings they did have a Parking Garage; but that was before VYSTAR came along.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 16, 2023, 02:43:51 PM
There is no parking garage planned that I'm aware of. The parking will be in the Vystar garage.
Thank you.
Shouldn't these incentives be, up to the agreed-to cap, tied directly to construction invoices paid to a contractor who had to bid for the project or at least price the project at the average of what 3 construction cost experts would agree on via a price audit of the subcontracts and overhead? For this kind of money, it is easily worth the effort and isn't all that hard to accomplish. If the costs come in lower, the City pays out less incentives. In an "honest" deal, the developer and the City should both want the costs to be as low as possible while maintaining the integrity and quality of the project.
This should help squeeze out any game playing by a developer. Criminal penalties should apply for any attempts to perpetuate a fraud such as kickbacks, bribes, dishonest presentations, etc.
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2023/jun/21/dia-board-bunts-6356-million-laura-street-trio-incentives-decision-to-city-council/
In short, DIA advanced this to City Council without voting yes or no (rare move).
I'm actually okay with this because:
- I think we all have doubts this will actually happen.
- If they vote for it, then they're setting a weird precedent.
- If they vote it down, then there's little chance it passes at council.
Additionally, I think everyone knows this deal might be an exception because of the nature of the buildings and location. Conversely, everyone knows SOMETHING for the Jags is coming.
Atkins' biggest mistake might be not figuring out a way to get this going before the Jags came to the table. Everyone knew they'd be coming soon.
$63M in total incentives for this project is just unprecedented. Nothing says we are open to being financially taken advantage of than this project.
Let's just say the hotels are apartments to make this conservative in nature.. 143 + 169 = 312 total units. So $63M/312 units = $201,932 per unit. I can find more than a dozen local new construction ground-up developments whose cost averages for the entire project are less than $202k a unit. To have that in incentives alone is wild. I can also find other historic rehab projects outside of Jacksonville that's per unit cost basis is pretty close to just their incentive ask per unit...
This whole thing doesn't make any sense, and to Jaxlongtimer's point I think this request should be met with absolute transparency on the construction costs, broken down by line item. The lack of any information is baffling and we are just supposed to believe their numbers I guess.
Nate Monroe is pretty upset (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1671929356375977988?s=20) about the "bunt" by DIA. Arguing that it invalidates (https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1671934095142666265?s=20) the DIA's existence.
So it's been a month now, any sign of action by City Council one way or another?