City didn't get all its share for parking
March 25, 2007
By John Estus
Staff Writer

A development company that has a deal with Oklahoma City to operate a parking lot near the Ford Center has made nearly $300,000 parking cars since late 2004, but failed to share about $44,500 of the income with the city until The Oklahoman asked about the missing payments.

City officials accepted blame.
"The buck stops with me,” city special projects manager Tom Anderson said. "It's an obligation I owe the citizens and my superiors. I failed in this case.”
Bricktown Real Estate LLC paid the $44,513 tab this month after The Oklahoman asked city officials about the outstanding debt.
The city owns the lot and has leased it to the company since 1999 — before the Ford Center opened. It's now a popular parking spot for Ford Center, Cox Convention Center and Bricktown patrons.

Paying dividends
The lease was renewed in 2004 with an added requirement that the company share 35 percent of parking revenues with the city.
According to the lease, the company is to pay the city:
•$2,000 a month to rent the portion of the lot north of Interstate 40 near the rail depot.
•35 percent of gross parking income minus rent and sales tax for the portion of the lot north of I-40, paid annually.
•$1,200 a month for the portion south of the interstate, beginning in February 2005.
But the company never paid, nor was asked to pay, the percentage of income made from the 110-space lot north of I-40 or the rent for the south lot.
"That was where I fell short,” Anderson said. "We've identified a problem, and we're trying to work it out.”
Bricktown Real Estate owner Jim Brewer said city officials told him that paying to rent the south lot wouldn't be necessary until the city learned how the I-40 realignment project would affect it. He said Anderson also told him not to worry about the income share payments, either.
"He (Anderson) just said hold off until we find out,” Brewer said. "We didn't think it would be very long.”
A boulevard is to replace the existing I-40 once it is moved south in 2012. A portion of E.K. Gaylord Boulevard eventually will have to be reconfigured to accommodate the new boulevard. That could affect the portion of the lot south of the interstate.
As a result, the lot hasn't been approved by the city for parking use as was planned when the lease was signed, which is why the company hasn't been asked to pay rent for it, Anderson said.
Still, Brewer said his company has occasionally charged people to park in the south lot during large events.
"It's not been approved by the city for parking. It's going to have to be brought up to code and improved by the city for parking,” Anderson said.
Brewer said money made from parking cars in the south lot was included in the total income amount listed in a report he delivered to the city this month.
The report says the company made $286,549 parking cars on the lots from November 2004 until February. An independent auditor will confirm that amount in the next three months, Anderson said.
The city has no record of how much money the company made off the lots from 1999 until the lease was renewed in 2004 because the original lease didn't require Bricktown Real Estate to provide that information.
Brewer said about $100,000 in improvements were made to the lot after council members approved the lease in 1999. Brewer said it was "just a mud lot” then.

Proposal questioned
The 1999 lease required the company to make those improvements, and also created a stir at City Hall when some council members questioned whether it was a better business decision to have the city operate the lot.
"It was public property where a private individual would benefit,” said Ward 6 Councilwoman Ann Simank, who voted against renting out the lot in 1999.
Bricktown Real Estate received the contract without a competitive bidding process, and Simank said city officials need to do a better job of honoring the contract.
"The city has a fiscal responsibility to enforce all contracts and leases with anybody when it involves public property,” Simank said.

this has already been discussed

Where's the accountability?

Tom Anderson simply forgot to ask Jim Brewer to make $44,500 worth of payments owed the City of OKC. Does the City of OKC let you go without paying your water bill for 26 months? Mr. Anderson may be a nice guy, but this is absolute malfeasance. Was Mr. Anderson reprimanded or disciplined for this oversight?

Jim Brewer is permitted to pay City of OKC its portion of the parking lot proceeds 26 months late (and only after the Daily Oklahoman asked him about the non-payments). Was Mr. Brewer required to pay a penalty for his late payments? (Anybody that knows the time-value-of-money realizes how much interest he made on the $44,500.) Does Mr. Brewer let his tenants go 26 months without paying their rent?

Where's the outrage?

first of all that is alot better ROI than COPTA could of given the city.

Johnnyboyokc:

Does your lease with the City of Oklahoma City include any provisions concerning delinent payments?

No but, like i said that is a great return for the city of okc......If it were copta they could not charge a price of 10 dollars however the garage at the marriott sets prices too.....with a price of 20 dollars a car in a garage that was built by the city of OKC for the city so help you the people who only have time to discuss parking prices seriously learn how to spell delquient.

1. There's no way the City of OKC drafted a parking lot lease that doesn't address delinquent payments. Are you sure?

2. Are you sure the City of OKC owns the parking lot next to the Ford Center? I thought the Courtyard Marriott owns it.

no the courtyard parking is subsidized by the city......yet they still charge a fair market value......."5 to 20 dollars" proximity matters, along with demand.....BPI followed the lease as planned, delinquency was not an issue....it stated 2000 a month and with an annual audit of 35 percent......2000 a month was always paid and BPI was gladly to pay the percentage anytime......BPI is in a wonderful situation with the city so why would BPI try to hinder that....Mr. Brewer has done many wonderful things for OKC from beginning to end, If it was'nt for his sacrifice, along with many others that created MAPS, downtown would be nothing............

The people of Oklahoma City invested in downtown, which is why Bricktown and the surrounding areas are thriving. Brewer simply saw a golden opportunity to make the most out of that investment. One can argue that Jim truly wants what's best for Bricktown, but when you penetrate the smoke screen you'll notice that his interest in seeing the area succeed is merely for personal gain. For example: A nice parking garage would be great for the area, but that would cost too much money for Brewer. First he would have to construct the garage, then he'd lose out on all of the revenue he would generate with parking lots. He's all about the supply and demand. Result: Plenty of surface parking and a story coming out about extra money being pocketed.

Now, does Brewer have an interest in seeing Bricktown succeed? Yes, he does. But you have to ask yourself why. When you put the pieces of the puzzle together, you'll see he's concerned about the financial aspect of it all and not about making Bricktown a better place.

__________________
...this shortest straw has been pulled for you

Three thoughts:

1. How is the Courtyard Marriott subsidized by the City of OKC? JQ Hammons paid for the hotel and parking garage. So, Brett, you're wrong.

2. Wait a minute. You said that "Brewer Parking Incorporated followed the lease as planned." The City of OKC signed a parking lot lease that didn't specify when you were supposed to remit its percentage of revenues? Let's get Tom Anderson to chime in. Seriously, can somebody ask Tom Anderson to respond to this discussion. (He is a public servant, this is public property, and we are OKC citizens, right?) If the City of OKC signed a lease without a reference to penalties for delinquent payments, then somebody should be fired.

3. "Mr. Brewer has done many wonderful things for OKC..." Did you seriously just refer to your father as "Mr. Brewer"? Come on, Brett, enough with the formalities. Next time, you can just call him "dad."

Any response, johnnyboyokc?

I agree with johnnyboy -- while perhaps Brewer's plans aren't the "best" possible for the city, they're the best IN the city. COTPA, for example, can't even turn a freakin' profit on their Santa Fe garage (still operating in the red after 20 someodd years due to exorbitant administration fees and expenses paid to friends of the Trust). I doubt the city which can't even remember to collect the rent on time would do a much better job.

I've dealt with the city attorney's office -- they're a bunch of money grubbing sharks (and for you citizens, that's a good thing!). I find the explanations to be believable in that the I-40 thing was expected to happen faster and that often once the deal is done, no one really examines anything too closely again.

Bricktownlife, if you really want answers, I'm pretty sure a lease with the city would be a matter of public record. If you really care, you can fill out an FOI form and find out for yourself. Honestly, I wouldn't mind knowing myself. I can't imagine Brewer would do anything to queer the deal he has with the city for the reasons johnnyboyokc mentioned. There are any number of explanations which come to mind for this situation though. While the city does have a duty to answer for these sorts of things, unfortunately, we the people don't get to specify the time and place which they do so -- but you know that

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Is there any area of Bricktown development that isn't questionable? We could go down the line, starting with Bass Pro. Sure, things are looking up downtown, but why are a handful of businessman/politicians allowed to benefit from our taxpayer dollars?

That's how public investment works SB. Do you think COTPA or a city parking entity could handle the parking situation in Bricktown as well as a for-profit entity? I really doubt it.

Brewer's company has done a pretty good job managing the parking out there. Before they managed these lots, the city wasn't making a dime off of all the cars parking in the field under I-40.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Midtowner:

I'm not familiar enough with COPTA to tell you who would run Bricktown's parking lots better. But I'm wondering why every city parking lot has to be "profitable." Aren't there are certain public services that can be provided without having to generate a profit? How many fewer families, for example, would enjoy city parks if they were charged admission to enter?

There is abundant free parking in Bricktown -- either on the streets actually next to the restaurants or in the CBD and just a quick walk or trolley ride away.

Pay-to-park serves multiple policy interests of the city. Of course, first and foremost, it makes money for them... lots of it. That's pretty big.

Aside from that, the lots are maintained, a modicum of security and safety is provided (how many robberies are going to occur when there is a parking lot attendant on duty?), the best parking is not taken by employees of the Bricktown area, people don't abandon cars there, the lots are maintained, and the lot attendants ensure that the lots are filled to capacity.

Brewer's operation is different from COTPA. COTPA is the Central Oklahoma Transit and Parking Authority. They operate all of our public transportation and all of the public parking garages, the Santa Fe garage, the new garage by the court house, etc. While Brewer turns a profit on all of his parking lots -- and a healthy one at that, you'd think these city lots would do the same...

Not the case. The Santa Fe parking lot, while being a HUGE parking structure which gets plenty of business from the Chase Building employees as well as most of the East side of the CBD has never turned a profit. This is primarily due to exorbitant contracts for "management," hugely expensive contracts with cleaning companies, essentially, it's an organization much like many of our public trusts -- quasi-public entities which use the city's legitimacy to milk the taxpaying public and line their friends' pockets. It's as simple as that.

Brewer's operation on the other hand, is quite straight forward -- it's for lining his own pocket. Also, unlike the COTPA garages, instead of being money-pits, these garages are also generating a significant income for the city.

In my world, that's a win-win.

Folks have to get past the fact that for a quality urban entertainment district, you might have to pay to park (unless you're okay with walking a little bit). Go check out Greensville during OU-Texas weekend (closest thing to Bricktown in this region)... parking spots were hard to find, even for $15-$25 last time I was there.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Midtowner:

Since I knew very little about COPTA, I appreciated your response. But it still doesn't address the fundamental question: Aren't there are certain public services that can be provided without having to generate a profit? From an urban redevelopment standpoint, maybe the more appropriate question should be: Are there certain public services (i.e. parking) that must be provided without a profit?

Unfortunately, I don't agree with your reference to Greenville (Dallas) during OU-Texas weekend. Simply stated, Oklahoma City isn't comparable to Dallas, or Los Angeles, or New York City, or any other large, metropolitan city that the Brewer's like to reference. If we're sincere about debating urban redevelopment, we have to select models more comparable to OKC, relative to population, geography, and other pertinent economic drivers.

Ft. Worth would be a much more accurate comparison. According to the 2000 Census, Ft. Worth's population (534,694) is close to OKC (506,132). (Neither figure appear to include the cities' greater metro area.) Both target travelers from the same surrounding states (Arkansas, New Mexico, Kansas). Both have a rich, western history.

I would encourage anyone interested in an honest debate about entertainment district parking should take a look at Ft. Worth's entertainment district:

Sundance Square Fort Worth - maps

Both public and private parking lot owners recognize the importance of free and affordable parking in an urban entertainment district, and they've sacrificed personal gain (profit) for the greater benefit of the merchants in the district. (For example, a large number of Sundance Square parking lots are free after 5 p.m.)

Visit their website. You'll see several trends that Bricktown will never achieve, at least not while Jim Brewer controls the city-owned parking lots: National clothing stores, bookstores, and restaurants. (I'm not a huge advocate of national chains, but they do compliment local tenants.)

Does anyone disagree with the Ft. Worth comparison?

Not really -- In Bricktown, sure, there are pay lots, but as I said before, if you want free parking, it's not too tough to find.

I was just in Bricktown last night. Found a spot right behind the movie theater -- reasonably close to everything I wanted to do. Could I have been closer for $5.00? Sure.

Brewer's parking attendants only really charge for the choicest lots... and in times when parking is going to be tight, they charge a premium. This allows people who value the better parking to be able to get that.. and the folks who don't care to still be able to park for free (in the CBD or vicinity) and walk or ride the trolley in. There are hundreds of spaces downtown available even on the busiest nights and the trolley runs all the way down to the museum. I can't imagine that there every wouldn't be free parking available to someone who wanted it.

I liken the situation to a concert... those who are willing to pay the money will pay a premium for the best seats in the house. I approve of that -- it works to everyone's benefit. Imagine if everything were just general admission? Why would anyone be in favor of that?

I think you might have a serious argument if there were no other parking options in Bricktown than Brewer's lots, but that simply isn't the case.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Midtowner: Other than Lower Bricktown, which city-owned lot does Jim Brewer not control?

[quote=bricktownlife;105537]
Along all of the streets as well as the area north of Spaghetti Warehouse/City Walk. All of those meters are free after 6PM. Also, a parking bus (or more than one) makes runs all over those parking lots delivering folks to their destinations.

Trolleys stop running at 11PM on weeknights. I agree, that's an issue, however, street parking is free all over the CBD after 6PM and it's really not that much of a walk. With all of the hotels and other venues down there, I don't feel bad walking around there at night. I actually live on the western edge of the CBD and have made frequent walks to bricktown... no big deal.

Considering what I eat/drink in Bricktown, I'm sure the exercise doesn't hurt.

People are going to Bricktown regardless of the cost of parking (so long as it's within reason. Why should the city not recoup some of that investment from the people who actually utilize it? It's a lot like a toll road in that respect. I see no problem with this.

That's why the retail that's down there is built to either be destination retail -- as in if you're going to drop $200 on a pair of jeans at Firefly, who cares what you pay for parking... or there's retail which compliments the club/restaurant scene, such as the Painted Door.

I don't think Bricktown yet has the tourist traffic (get a Hyatt Regency down there and it will) to support full scale shopping. I think once the foot traffic is there all day long, we'll start to see a decent mix of upscale clothing and gift shops. None of those sorts of places will be in competition with what we see on Western Avenue, Spring Creek, etc. Bricktown isn't aiming to compete with those types of places. It is, and ever should be a tourism/entertainment district.

That I'm not sure about. I'm sure a certain member here would have been happy to answer that question for you, but I'm not sure he's willing anymore.

I personally visit Bricktown a lot more often than the average Oklahoma Citian.. I *NEVER* pay for parking. It's just a matter of being willing to walk a few blocks sometimes.. That's life in the big city for ya.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Bricktown Parking only has one city lot all 8 of the others are owned by Mr. Brewer sorry...............

Johnnyboyokc:

Are you saying that your Jim Brewer only controls one city-owned parking lot? That's absolutely untrue. For starters, let's discuss the 700+ parking spaces in the city-owned lot immediately north of Main Street in Bricktown (aka North Parking Lot).

Does Jim Brewer have an ownership interest in the investment group that leases the North Parking Lot from the City of Oklahoma City?

Yes or No?

that is strickly an investment to help bricktown....which he has no control of, Don Karchmer runs the BPI lot north of btown.

Until / unless the City gets control of the parking lots, and manages them in a much more user-friendly (read less expensive) manner for visitors, the Bricktown parking issue will continue to be a thorn in it's side.

the lots north of bt are irrelevant.....we are a mall society and we like to park at the front door.........lets talk about the ones he own in the heart of bt......should we give away free enchiladas at chelinos of course not business is business