Mr. Villa: I hope I have always made my position clear. All parties to and agreement should be expected to live up to the terms of a bargain. I argued for, and got the drop dead dates in the revised contract (with the help of councilmen Cahill and Arredondo) as well as the performance security of $300,000 that will become the City's on January 31. Because of the drop dead dates we have the opportunity to terminate the peabody agreement so that the delays will end and the stagnation of all other development opportunities will finally cease. I voted not to "extend" the contract on October 26, 1999 and I will vote to sent the notice of default on February 3, 2000. Had I had my way with the Council, the notice would have been sent this morning. It takes four of us to act together. I believe that will occur on February 3.
Hugh
-----Original Message----- To: neil_giuliano@tempe.gov; ben_arredondo@tempe.gov; dennis_cahill@tempe.gov; len_copple@tempe.gov; hugh_hallman@tempe.gov; joseph_lewis@tempe.gov; joe_spracale@tempe.gov Sent: 1/27/00 7:47 AM Subject: peabody hotel fails to come up with financing
i noticed in todays paper that the peabody hotel again failed to come up with the financing for the town lake hotel.
in the past it seemed that the peabody hotel had a sweetheart deal with the city of tempe. when ever the peabody hotel didnt live up to its agreement the city didnt do anything to punish peabody for failing to delive the goods, but let peabody continue to have its share in the gravy train profits.
will this be the case again. ie: peabody doesnt deliver, but peabody gets the contract to build the hotel. while other companies who are capable of building the hotel, and have the financing to build the hotel but are excluded from building the hotel because of the sweetheart agreement between tempe and peabody hotel?
or will tempe sue peabody this time and end the sweetheart agreement.
thanks
mark villa