Will Project Really End If Vote is No?

A major point of contention between proponents of “yes” and of “no” votes is whether the Park District project put forth by DTN Management will go forward if the voters vote “no” tomorrow on the authorization of City Council to sell three parking lots. (ELi has explained separately why the blight at the corner of Grand River and Abbot is not the development at issue in this vote; read more here.)

The bottom line is that legally, there is no reason why the project cannot proceed if DTN opts to stay in the process after a “no” vote, and no reason why the area cannot be redeveloped under another developer if DTN opts to pull out after a “no” vote. But practically, DTN could opt to pull out if the ballot measure fails.

DTN will not conclusively answer questions about whether they will pull out if the measure fails, so I asked two proponents each of “yes” and of “no” for their reads of the reality of the situation.

Doug Jester, former East Lansing mayor, member of the Downtown Development Authority, and resident of Downtown, urges a “yes” vote. Jester told me, “It is a legal possibility that the question of selling these lots could be placed on the ballot again. However, the cost to a developer to get all other approvals in place as you suggest prior to such a vote is considerable. A developer is highly unlikely to commit those funds if they believe that there is a high probability that the vote will be against the sale and they will have spent for naught; developer planning is normally premised on an option to purchase or similar reasonably certain contract for this reason.”

Nathan Triplett, current mayor of East Lansing and advocate of a “yes” vote, told me, “The Council can always vote to ask the voters again, but there will be no project to ask them about.” He says that is because, “If the measure is not approved, DTN will understandably withdraw its development proposal for the City and DDA owned parcels of land.” According to Triplett, a “no” vote would mean, “The community will need to start over and devise a new plan for the revitalization of the western entrance of downtown.”

Councilmember Ruth Beier, proponent of a “no” vote for this ballot measure, sharply disagrees with Triplett’s dire prediction of what would happen if the measure fails. She tells me, “City planning staff are already working on plans for the DDA-owned properties in case the ballot question fails.” DTN could elect to be part of that plan, if the company so chooses and Council agrees. Beier adds, “Nothing stops a developer from making another proposal based on a voter-approved sale.”

Beier finds “most irritating” Triplett’s statement that "the community will need to start over and devise a new plan for the revitalization of the western entrance of downtown."

Says Beier, “When voters read, ‘the western entrance of downtown,’ they think of the big bank building on the corner [of Abbot Road and Grand River Avenue]. But the ballot question has no impact on the proposal to develop that parcel. The western entrance to downtown can be redeveloped regardless of the ballot proposal.”

I also asked Mark Meadows, former mayor of East Lansing and proponent of a “no” vote, to respond to Triplett’s predictions of what happens if the vote is “no.” Meadows wrote in a recent message to his followers that, “The only way the current process can come to an end is if the City Council says it comes to an end. Even if DTN walks away from the process, the council can continue to market the parking lots and other city or DDA owned properties in the Valley Court area.”

Meadows added that, “If a ‘no’ vote ends the process, then the council's statement that there is a much larger review procedure that must still be engaged in rings very hollow.” He tells me, “If the threat is that we have to start over, then Nathan [Triplett] is saying the council is going to approve their project no matter what.”

ELi has previously reported that some are seeing this vote less as a vote on a particular project than on the trustworthiness of the seated Council, since what the vote does is entrust Council to make the parking lot sales appropriately before an approved plan is in place.

Jester closed his remarks with a call for unity after the vote: “I urge everyone in this debate to go forward with a focus on the substantive issues at hand and the decisions to be made, whether or not this vote goes their way.”