Ignorance of the facts is no excuse to alter mall subsidy ban

County commissioners debated 90 minutes last week while dancing around key questions crucial to a final vote on an impactful decision – and they don’t seem to know the answers.

They say they don’t know why predecessors six years earlier banned subsidies for American Dream Mall, which had been pitched as a $4 billion investment, later raised to $5 billion. If built as publicized it’s a game-changer as the county’s largest mall and one of the biggest in the US, though commissioners said they don’t know what developers now plan. They just wanted to aid it regardless.

But they did so while each claimed the aid isn’t a subsidy, it’s an economic development tool. They could all have been reading out of the CliffsNotes from American Dream lobbyists while they seemed to ignore the opposition blue binders handed out by lobbyists for other malls.

Why were restrictions placed in 2018? “It was politics,” explained Commissioner Juan Carlos Bermudez as he moved to kill the ban outright, which of course would not be politics but merely good policy. “I don’t think we should have these limitations on us.” Or on American Dream Mall.

Commissioners took turns saying the ban on subsidies for only American Dream Mall is unfair and takes away their tools to build the economy, which could be logical enough if you know why the rules were put into place, which they never learned.

“Before you take down a fence, ask why it was put there in the first place,” suggested Commissioner Keon Hardemon, who then argued to take down the fence to speed economic growth in the area. Nobody told him why the fence was erected – and, in fairness, none of the commissioners was there back when the ban on direct aid to American Dream Mall was required as it got zoning approval over objections of competing malls.

Commissioners all said they didn’t favor subsidies to the developer, just economic aid. It escapes me how they differ. Since almost all of them are lawyers they of course can see a tremendous difference.

None of those seeking to aid the developer mentioned who the developer is today, nor did the legislation. We know it was one of the world’s largest mall developers in 2018 when Canadian firm Triple Five Group won zoning approval for 82 acres beside Florida’s Turnpike that it bought below market value from the state. But the group’s name was not in the legislation. Who is the developer now?

Carladenise Edwards, county chief administrative officer, referred to “the current developer,” saying it “has been in contact with the administration about submitting plans and those plans have not been submitted.” Is that “current developer” the former developer? Nobody asked, nobody told.

Ms. Edwards said the developer is “currently not in compliance with the agreements that were put in place” and “our concern is without having that we may be another four years with nothing happening.”

Asked by Chairman Oliver Gilbert III “when were the plans due?” she replied “they were due in 2020 and it’s 2024. They are non-compliant. The letter will be going out to that effect from the County Attorney’s Office.”  

Only Mr. Gilbert seemed concerned by that as commissioners voted to lift bans on two taxing tools that could help finance roads to aid the developer. 

Instead, staff efforts to get compliance were viewed as disrupting commission economic development. “Whose ideas reign supreme?” asked Mr. Hardemon, the staff or the commission? Why not open the door to aid to American Dream Mall? “I’m struggling to find the why not?”

If there is a why not, Mr. Hardemon might take his own advice and find out why the fence was built in the first place. He could also tell the world who owns the site and what is planned there today, because commissioners didn’t seem to know.

Commissioner Raquel Regalado had an answer to why the fence is there and who opposes removing it: “Whoever would want to buy this property on the cheap.”

If that’s the case, is use of tax money to add new roads nearby just helping the owner make an even bigger profit by selling the site, which all agreed has risen greatly in value while lying dormant?

Attorney Jeffrey Bercow, who represented other malls in opposing zoning approval in 2018, said before the vote to allow road aid that the county had required Triple Five to fund transportation improvements for $235 million and barred the county from funding them.

“Our entire growth management system is based on developers funding and making infrastructure available to mitigate development,” he said. “Why should the county fund a private developer’s infrastructure obligations?”

Commissioners never discussed that, either.

We don’t know enough to either favor or oppose paving the way to aid American Dream Mall. Commissioners don’t seem to either, though they’ve already staked out positions.

Before the final vote, commissioners must learn what the American Dream plan is today, what developers have been required to do that they haven’t done, why the requirements exist, who the developer is, and whether anyone has vetted the financial ability as well as willingness to comply with county agreements.

Without that, they’re just working off the talking points of opposing lobbyists, not the pivotal facts.