Anthem approves negotiations for bid on new building

MARC BUCKHOUT ~ MANAGING EDITOR~ 2/1/2012

After years of discussion and planning the Anthem Community Council is taking a step forward in efforts to establish a permanent home for Anthem staff.
Following a presentation and an extensive discussion the council unanimously approved directing Chief Executive Officer Jenna Kollings power to negotiate the purchase of a new building at the Jan. 25 community council meeting.
With the lease at their current location, 3701 W. Anthem Way, set to expire in May of  2013 and with a depressed real estate market staff recommended there was no time like the present.
“The time has come to take the next step,” Kollings said. “We’ve gone from planning, to investigating and now it’s time for action. Lets make it real. Make it happen.”  
Kollings said there will be three targeted buildings that will be considered in the search for a permanent home. Along with 3701 W. Anthem Way, which is a 36,500 square foot building, 3715 W. Anthem Way, which was previously considered for purchased by the Anthem Community Council and is 62,000 square foot along with building F in the Venture Court Professional Plaza, at 41810 Venture Court, a 27,000 square foot space.
Kollings acknowledged that their current location makes more sense than 3715 in terms of space needs and in terms of a visible location compared to the Venture Court property. Still, she said depending on price and other considerations either of the other two could be viable options.
Beyond office space for staff the building could also be used for some combination of a visitor’s center, a continued space sharing relationship with Maricopa County Sheriff officers, class space for community college courses, fitness space, performing arts space and senior services.
The council made a stipulation in granting the go-ahead that any contract signed must include a 90-day window that will be used to educate Anthem residents about the proposed purchase.
Kollings said postcards will be mailed out advertising a meeting to give the public a chance to ask question, voice concerns and hear about how the proposed purchased building will be used.
During staff’s presentation Doug Greenstein, the community’s financial officer, went over estimates regarding the economic impact such a purchase might have on the community.
Greenstein, with the help of Country Club resident Steve Champion, came up with some estimates that they deemed conservative in nature. Estimating a purchase price somewhere between $2 – 3 million and projected refurbishing cost in the neighborhood of $1 – 1.5 million, Greenstein explained that by making a down payment on the selected property out of the enhancement fund and with a modicum of income brought in through leasing out space within the building that the purchase, “will not create in our opinion a financial burden to this generation of owners or the next generation of Anthem owners. This project can be funded with an insignificant impact on assessments.”
Looking at a 25-30 year loan with a six percent interest rate Greenstein said that the building could be paid for while still leaving ample money to contribute to the enhancement fund in the second year following the purchase.
“Based on conservative estimates of numbers we believe that this project is extremely doable with exceptional benefits, and all said we believe it would be in this community’s best interests,” Greenstein said.
Board vice president Bob Copen expressed concerns about whether the public’s input
had been heard, citing the response received from Swaback’s proposals,
one that included a main street area with numerous amenities.
“In my book you didn’t account for the interests of the residents,” he said. “I don’t think we’ve done our due diligence.”
Copen also expressed trepidation about pushing a time frame on the purchase of any of the buildings.
He wondered aloud whether building on undeveloped land had been given proper consideration.
Board members Tim Fyke and Emily Wrinkle disagreed.
Fyke said Swaback’s concept of a downtown Main Street for Anthem simply wasn’t realistic while Wrinkle suggested that Anthem could be left in the lurch should the council continue to drag its feet when it comes to finding a new home.
“We have a realistic, practical idea of what we want to do with this building,” Fyke said. “It’s a real use to us. Let staff work a deal. If they come back and it’s an idea we don’t like or a price we don’t like we can reject it. This isn’t rocket science.”
Wrinkle agreed.
“I feel like we need to go forward with this right now,” she said. “I would hate to have any one of the buildings we’re looking at be sold and see our rent upped or us get kicked out and have no place to go.”
The Anthem Community Council board  believes if they are looking to make a significant expenditure of funds Anthem residents should have an opportunity to vote on such an issue. There are a vocal number of residents that show to Community Council meetings that openly express concerns about such a scenario. They are of the belief that letting residents, that don’t show to meetings and are presumably uninformed of the issues, vote would be counterproductive.
How do you feel about the differing viewpoints? Are you comfortable with the board member that you voted for making the financial decisions impacting the community or do you think that as dues paying residents you deserve a vote when it comes to significant decisions impacting community?
Share your thoughts by sending a letter to the editor at ffeditorial@hotmail.com or by starting a dialogue on The Foothills Focus Facebook page at facebook.com/thefoothills.focus.