Our local governments have been giving away the store.
This example is a proposed lease of a parking lot that the city seems to think that they need for either the new city hall or the 801 Texas building (even though they told us that they would not need this parking lot. See No parking zone.) The landlord is the railroad company that also owns the train tracks next to city hall.
This is a ten year lease. The amount to be paid will automatically increase by 3% each year, compounded.
Many leases tie their rate increases to the Consumer Price Index that is published by the general government. The published number changes each year and for the last ten years has been beneath 3% — it was even negative one of those years.
Why give away 3% in advance? Maybe because you think that inflation will come back with a vengence during the 10 year lease and locking in a mere 3% is smart business.
Then why does the lease let the landlord “redetermine” the rent every 3 years? The landlord wins either way!
Are they competent to manage our money?
Or could it be that as FedUp wrote yesterday that this is a way to give the landlord a blank check for something else? Rumor has it that the new ball park will require building over the sunken train way that is next to it. Some say the site is not large enough for a ball park without building on top of the train way.
Is leasing this parking lot part of they way the city plans to pay the railroad for the right to build structures over the train way?
We deserve better
Brutus
elpasospeak 
I’ll sleep a lot better knowing that the El Paso City Chief Financial Officer is on the EPISD board since she is to one who stated we did not need additional parking for the New City Hall (Buildings) and now recommends we lease, for a measy 650 K, a parking lot 3 blocks form the New Hall for employees and the Council. I may have nightmares.
Can’t they take a City Bus?
LikeLike