Rushed deals are usually bad deals. According to the Peterborough Examiner the City wants to move quickly on this one. It involves $2.0 million of taxpayer's money for the DNA Cluster project, subject to Trent's agreement to nine expectations from the City. Apparently the City has violated its own direct capital participation policies and Trent documents reveal that President Bonnnie Patterson "was conscious that the administration of this project had not followed the usual University process for tendering and for seeking Board approval of architect selection, preliminary design, etc."

Why the rush? What is really going on here?

The February 12 Peterborough Examiner article "City reveals wish list for DNA cluster commitment" references two City documents. We have made these easy to find;

1. Essential Components of the Memorandum of Understanding
   Letter from City Planning & Development Director M. Hunt to Trent University Vice President (Administration) D. O’Leary
2. Report PLPD05-015: Trent University – City of Peterborough Memorandum of Understanding
   Report from City Planning & Development Director M. Hunt to Chair and Members of Planning Committee

Various members of the public warned the City that granting the intial $2 million to DNA Cluster project was a slippery slope of more handouts. Well, it's starting already. In the February 3 letter the City is forking over another $5,000 by proposing to waive the parks levy that any other development/developer would face.

In the report city staff have figured out that there won't be any revenue to share - and sharing revenue was a condition of the City's contribution - so it appears they recommend giving up that revenue. Further, City staff indicate that the financial viability of the project would be undermined if Trent were to share any revenue with the City:

"Staff are now satisfied that any prospect of revenue sharing from phase 1 of the project will be nominal at best. Furthermore, revenue sharing undermines the financial viability of the initial phase of development."

What? If Trent's DNA Cluster project were to share revenue with the City (proportionate to the City's contribution) the financial viability of the project would be at risk? Does this not seem odd?

On the one hand we have Trent University and its administrators telling us the DNA Cluster project is going to be this huge revenue generator bringing 6,000 jobs to Peterborough. On the other hand the City tells us the first phase is on such shaky ground that not only will it generate minimal revenue, to share that revenue with its municipal "investor" would undermine the project's financial viability.

Would you be inspired to invest in a project that would be at risk if it were to pay a return to the investor?

For additional reference, here's the Examiner article;

The city is revealing details of a plan that would see Trent University swap land in exchange for a $2-million commitment to the DNA cluster project.

When the city announced the funding last fall, it noted a condition on the grant that Trent sign a memorandum of understanding. It relates to land that may be needed in the future for road widening, utility corridors, parks and housing.

The details of the proposed conditions are contained in a report to be submitted to council at Monday’s planning committee. Planning director Malcolm Hunt will recommend council endorse essential components of a memorandum of understanding with Trent and that the mayor and clerk be allowed to execute the agreement.

The memorandum could not only help bring about the DNA cluster, but help move along some long-standing city projects, the report said.

“The negotiated (memorandum) provides clarity to many capital projects of the city. The negotiated (memorandum) also allows the city to fulfil many of our mandated service responsibilities without the added cost of land.”

Hunt’s report said city staff hope the university will agree the requests are reasonable given the city’s “significant financial contribution” and the fact it was breaking its own policies regarding direct capital participation. Several of the city’s land proposals directly benefit Trent, Hunt also noted.

The city’s nine expectations fall into the three categories of: matters for immediate acceptance, matters to be accepted in principle and those that would be negotiated later.

These are detailed in a Feb. 3 letter from Hunt to Trent’s vice-president of administration, Don O’Leary.

– Immediate Acceptance: Trent will provide at no cost the lands required for the proposed ring road project, a parcel of land to widen Water Street, land for building a new Nassau Mills bridge and lands involved in the realignment of Armour Road which includes the land between the old and new roadway for public space and the land needed to realign the Rotary Trail. (See: City... Page A3)

– Agreement-in-Principle: The deal would allow the city to use 12-15 acres of Trent land for recreation purposes, though it wouldn’t require the university to help pay to create the sport fields. The city also wants a four-acre parcel of land on the west side of Water Street to be used for an affordable housing project.

– For Negotiation: Trent is being asked to grant a two-year period of exclusivity for a 70-acre parcel of land at the northeast corner of Woodland Drive and Water Street. This land could prove important depending on the completion of talks with Smith-Ennismore-Lakefield Township. The city also wants the deal to acknowledge Peterborough Utilities Services is the preferred partner to build proposed power stations at Locks 22 and 23.

City staff want to move quickly and finalize a memorandum of understanding with the university so Trent can proceed with its capital program.