As debate has swirled around the CBRE "success fee," Mayor Ashton Hayward addressed the issue in "Upwords," e-newsletter Thursday.

In the newsletter, Hayward says he "worked closely with CBRE to negotiate a $1 million reduction, capping the fee at $1.5 million. And all options are on the table; should we decide this project is not right for us, we may opt to use a commission structure going forward."

Members of the Community Maritime Park board have said they were surprised to see the fee — which would see the developer of the parcel pay the real estate broker 4 percent of the post-development value of a project.

The "success fee" as it is called was noted in the request for proposals that were issued last September calling all comers to the develop the remaining vacant parcels of the city's signature downtown waterfront redevelopment project.

In January, the board members gave the thumbs up to a $65 million proposal from the South Florida firm MCM-BAP to develop boutique housing, a hotel and retail space on the bulk of the maritime park site.

The CMPA board voted to send the proposal to the Pensacola City Council for final sign off, but it does not yet appear on a Council meeting agenda.

[sidebar]

Here is Hayward's statement:

I want to be abundantly clear about my position on the proposed MOU for development at the Community Maritime Park and the “success fee” that would be paid to CBRE, the City’s commercial real estate broker.

CBRE is recognized as one of the world’s strongest, most reputable commercial real estate firms and an expert in the arena of public-private partnerships. This year, for the second year in a row, they were recognized as a 2015 World’s Most Ethical Company® by the Ethisphere Institute. The “success fee” structure has been used by CBRE across the country, and there was nothing unusual about its use here.

It’s important to understand that this fee will be paid by the developer — not by the City or CMPA. While CBRE deserves to be compensated for their great work, it’s important to me that we maximize the potential of any project. Accordingly, I have worked closely with CBRE to negotiate a $1 million reduction, capping the fee at $1.5 million. And all options are on the table; should we decide this project is not right for us, we may opt to use a commission structure going forward.

At this point, I neither support nor oppose the proposed project. I’m excited about the potential revenue and job creation this proposal could create, but we’re not far enough along in the vetting process for our community to fully evaluate the proposal, the developer, or the details. Any development at the Maritime Park must be consistent with the voters’ intent and preserve public access to the waterfront. What I do support is continuing to do our due diligence and opening a dialogue so that we can make a decision based on the facts and on a deal negotiated in the City’s best interest.

Let’s not vilify out-of-town brokers and developers for simply bringing a project to the table. Pensacola citizens have invested tens of millions of dollars in the Community Maritime Park. We owe it to them to carefully evaluate every option, and to select whatever project maximizes the return on their investment, whether it’s brought to us by local brokers and developers or those from beyond our borders. We will develop this property carefully, deliberately, and in a way that provides the greatest benefit to our city.

[/sidebar]

Did former Community Maritime Park executive director Ed Spears err when he didn't point out the success fee in big red letters to his board? Probably.

Did the board members, who a mere few years ago bristled with righteous indignation when the YMCA went to City Council first with a proposal to build the downtown Y on Site 8 at the park, fall down on the job by not reading carefully the documents put before them? Probably.

Is sniping at each other via reporter, as some of the CMPA board members have done of late over the idea of who was really paying attention to the details and who wasn't through the whole process, the best way to manage the city's key piece of prime real estate? Probably not.

But that's how we roll in the 850.

Which leaves the average citizen with the feeling that sometimes, there aren't any adults in the room. And that, friends, is bad for us all.

When the memorandum of understanding (MOU of government speak) does come to Council, I hope each of those good men and women will read ALL the words in the paperwork that comes to them about the project.

Here's hoping they are each thorough, thoughtful and realistic when they read — and vote.

Someone needs to be around here.