Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the Providence City Council meeting on this Thursday, April 3. Madam clerk, please call the roll.
Council president Miller, present. Deputy majority Whip Vanderbijl? Present. Councilwoman Anthony? Present.
Senior deputy majority leader Gonsalves?
Councilwoman Graves? Present. Deputy majority leader Harris? Present. Councilwoman Peterson?
Council president Pro Tempur Pichardo is absent. Councilor Royas?
Councilwoman Ryan? Present. Majority Whip Sanchez? Present. Councilman Taylor?
Councilwoman Anna Vargas? Present. Councilman Oscar Vargas? You have 14 present and one absent. You have a quorum.
Thank you, madam clerk. This evening, the invocation will be given by deputy majority leader Harris. Will everyone please rise? Heavenly father, I stand before this public to ask you for your mercy upon this nation. Lord, as we witness every day complete chaos and people are not at peace, More and more health, fear, hunger, the suffering of human conditions than ever before.
Now is the time for all our leaders, especially in government, to take bold stands to bring about that which is needed in order to fill the prophecy that you have designed for your perfect will. I ask that you bless our city, our people who live and work here. I ask that the decisions that we make is made because we are doing the best we can to serve the people from a place of love and peace. Amen. Thank you.
Tonight, the pledge of allegiance will be led by councilwoman Shelly Peterson.
To the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
Madam clerk, please read item number three.
Madam president. Majority leader. Motion to waive the reading of item three and move approval.
Second, madam president. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on item three? All in favor? Aye.
Any opposed? Any abstentions? The motion passes. Item four.
Madam president. Majority leader. Motion to waive the reading of item four through six.
Second, madam president. We have a motion on item four through six. Any discussion? All in favor? Aye.
Any opposed? Any abstentions? The motion passes. Madam clerk, please note item four as received. Item five, refer to the committee on finance, and item six as received.
Madam president. Majority leader. Motion to waive the reading of item seven and pass for the second time in a roll call vote.
Second, madam president. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on item seven? Hearing none,
madam clerk, please call the roll. Council president Miller, aye. Deputy majority Wip Vanderblois, aye. Councilwoman Anthony, aye. Majority leader Espinal.
Aye. Senior deputy majority leader Gonsalves. Aye. Councilwoman Graves. No.
Deputy majority leader Harris. Aye. Councilwoman Peterson. Aye. Council president Pro Tempur Pichardo is absent.
Councilor Arroyas? Aye. Councilwoman Ryan? No. Majority Whip Sanchez?
Aye. Councilman Taylor? No. Councilwoman Anna Vargas? Councilman Oscar Vargas?
No. You have 10 ayes, four nos, one absent. The motion carries. The matter is passed for the second time
on a roll call vote. Thank you, madam clerk. Item eight.
leader. Motion to weigh the written order eight and nine.
Second, madam president. We have a motion and a second on items eight and nine. Any discussion? Councilman Reyes.
Madam president, thank you. I just want to discuss item eight, which is a resolution that we're sending to ordinance committee, that would allow the city of province to enter into a long term lease with Excel Academy who is, seeking to occupy the College e Laurel School building. Be... Before we debate the merits of this in committee, I want to give all my colleagues my analysis of the lease in its current form. While I understand the urgency to find use for our vacant school buildings and while I recognize the broader debates around charter schools, this lease isn't just about that for me.
This this is about the terms, and the terms of this lease are frankly one-sided. After reviewing the, lease agreement, I've identified I've identified five key concerns that are particularly troubling for me, each of which shifts control away from the city, limits our future flexibility, and exposes taxpayers to risk. I wanted to start with the length of the lease. On paper, it's a thirty five year lease, but built into the agreement are three automatic ten year renewals unless Excel Academy decides otherwise. That means the city is handing over control of this property for up to sixty five years, nearly seven decades without any way to opt out our...
Ourselves. I don't know of any responsible business or public agency that would lock itself into a sixty five year real estate agreement without a way out. And I don't believe we could realistically predict what province's educational or real estate needs will look like in 2089. That is a decision that will outlast most of our careers and likely our lifetimes. Second, I wanna talk to you all about the rent or more accurately the lack thereof.
The base rent in this agreement is 750 per square foot. That might seem fair until you redefine print. Excel can apply rent credits for capital improvements, repairs, or upgrades they're they're already obligated to do under this lease. These credits can reduce their rent by up to 80% every year, and any unused credits can roll over. So I wanna be clear.
The city would receive as little as 8,000 per month total for a large central... Centrally located public school building. And if if we only get that... And we only get that if we can verify and approve all of Excel's improvement spending, which becomes our administrative burden. That is not a reliable sustainable income stream.
It's a bad deal for the city, and I think an open invitation to disputes over what counts as a capital improvement. Third, the lease gives Excel the ability to sublease the building to another organization without city approval so long as its subtenant has a similar purpose. There's no cap on how much they can charge that subtenant. There's no requirement to report those agreements to the city, and there's no obligation to share that revenue. So imagine this.
Excel pays the city deeply discounted rent, thanks to the rent credits, and then subleases part of that building at market rate to another operator or nonprofit and keeps a difference. We, the city, would be subsidizing a private entity's profit on a public asset with no transparency, no oversight, and no return. Fourth, Excel can mortgage the lease. That is used as collateral for a loan. This is common in in commercial real estate but here's the risk.
If Excel defaults on the loan, the lender takes over. The lender would have the right to take over Excel's position in the lease, find a new subtenant of their choosing, or even sell the lease interest to a third party. That means the city could find itself dealing not with a school operator, but with a bank, a private investor, or an out of state holding company whose interests are pure... Purely financial. That wouldn't...
They wouldn't be accountable to our students, our families, or our our neighborhoods. And we'd have no control over who's who's using the building. And perhaps I'm sounding like an alarmist, but we ought to be. This is sixty five years. Finally, there's the issue of the city's administrative burden.
This lease, in my opinion, shifts a significant amount of responsibility to city staff when it comes to tracking, verifying, and managing the rent credit system. If Excel spends, if Excel spends our renovations, the city has has to audit those costs and determine whether they qualify. This isn't a one time task. It's an ongoing compliance job. One one that the lease builds in with no additional compensation to the city.
Colleagues, I know this lease is framed as a solution to a vacant school building, but this isn't a solution. It's a long term giveaway of public property wrapped in language that sounds collaborative but offers a city little in return. If this lease moves forward as written, we're locked into this deal for potentially two generations of students and taxpayers. And again, I don't believe our city can adequately predict what our educational needs or real estate priorities will be decades from now. Again, there's no minimum guaranteed rent.
There's no oversight over subleases. There's no broad opt out rights for the tenant, and there is real legal exposure if something goes wrong. And so as this goes to the ordinance committee, I ask that we debate the merits of this lease in good faith and we center aspects of our dialogue on fiscal responsibility and what public control over public assets mean for our city and our residents. Thank you, madam president.
Thank you, councilor. Before I ask for further discussion, madam clerk, please note that pro tem Picciardo has... Is present. Further discussion on items eight and nine, account... Majority leader Espinal.
