Geoff Johnson, the new reporter for the Daily Democrat wrote this: "Until recently Caceres' project was in competition for city funding with a Cinema West proposal to build a new theater on the same street." This is the second time he's used this phrase which is a complete misrepresentation of the City of Woodland Redevelopment Agency's Request for Proposals for a downtown multiplex.
He also wrote, "Cinema West withdrew its request for funding and announced plans to build a theater entirely with private funding, a move decried by State supporters."
These statements can be found in the Democrat's new article about the Friends of the State Theatre email campaign to Chase Bank (AKA "Bank" or "major bank") called "Bank may talk to developer of Woodland Theater." Woodland Theater? Really? When has Ron Caceres, the RDA, or the Friends of the State Theatre ever referred to the project as the "Woodland Theater?" Caceres' response to the RFP was presented as State Galaxy Theatres - and it addresses Project 105 of the Downtown Specific Plan, the State Theatre Renovation and Expansion. It was never called the Woodland Theater and it never will be.
To address the "competition for funding" and "request for funding" falsifications, on May 5 the RDA issued an RFP for a downtown multiplex to be developed at one of two locations. The RFP was based on the fact that the RDA's top priority project for the next few years is a downtown multiplex. Caceres and Paul Petrovich responded to the RFP with budgets (at least in Caceres' case) that outline a variety of funding sources including cash, equity, investments, bank loans and federal and state grants in addition to listing a possible RDA contribution (since it is their project). Then Petrovich quit, leaving the State Theatre plan as the only downtown multiplex plan - at least in the eyes of the RDA. The RFP is not, and was not intended to be, a competition for funding. That is a false characterization of the RDA's priority project and the RFP by the Democrat's editor who evidently continues to support the quitter Petrovich and his crony Dave Corkill and Cinema West.
This is from the RDA: "The primary focus of the redevelopment investment strategy is to assist the historic downtown core area in transitioning from a general retail location to an entertainment center with restaurants and unique destination retail shops. The three investment strategy goals for the downtown are to:
· Create new entertainment venues and activities
· Increase residential units, and
· Develop currently underutilized or vacant sites, while renovating and preserving existing structures.
Note the RDA's use of the phrase "investment strategy goals." The RDA budgeted $4 million for a downtown multiplex project, unbeknownst to at least Caceres... why they would withhold that information is beyond me. Caceres has stated that he has budgeted for a $2 million loan from the RDA. He has yet to request any funds - from the agency, the city, the state, the feds, investors, banks, etc. - because he has received NO COMMITMENT from the RDA or city.
How can Caceres request ANY funding if he has not been selected as the exclusive developer? When he has an agreement with the RDA, and the building and financing process begins, then he will work with the RDA and create a realistic budget that may, or may not, include a request for an RDA loan. (Did you notice that the budgeted $2 million loan - that will be paid back - is half of what the RDA has budgeted to spend?) The RDA was supposed to wrap up Stage 1 of the RFP on July 6 when they were to simply rank the proposals and select a developer and operator. Caceres vs. Petrovich? Galaxy Theatres vs. Cinema West? Preserving the State vs. demolishing the Electric Garage? Removing blight vs. replacing one tax base with another? Yeah, I suppose it must be a very difficult choice for the selection committee and the RDA, especially when the Daily Democrat chooses to report the way it does.
This Democrat article represents why the Woodland Journal and the Woodland Record exist, to provide alternative - and in most cases more accurate - information on issues that are important to the community. Some people think the WJ and WR need to be more balanced in our "reporting," but they fail to realize we are providing balance to the daily rag and to city's lack of communication and to the county's propaganda. And some people also think The Realist and I should allow unbridled comments like DailyDemocrat.com does - but again, we exist to balance the unchecked and largely inaccurate articles and blog comments you see over there.
Posts
