When I was a boy, I learned an important lesson on my family’s winery: if you mix the wrong barrels together, you don’t get fine wine—you get a mess. Turns out, the same principle applies to city finances, though some folks in Frisco’s leadership seem to have skipped that life lesson.

Frisco’s new Performing Arts Center has sparked a debate over the methods and madness with which the city is trying to fund the project. Half the city is applauding, marching in lockstep with the mayor and city council, trusting them like a magician who promises he didn’t just make your wallet disappear. The other half? They’re watching this financial sleight of hand and calling foul, led by former city leaders who actually understand the difference between Economic Development Corporation (EDC) money and Community Development Corporation (CDC) money—a distinction that apparently gets a little fuzzy when a big, shiny building is on the table.

The Great Money Shuffle

In our last blog, Frisco’s Bond Ballet, we gave you a civics lesson about how EDC funds are meant to attract businesses and create jobs—you know, the kind of things that keep a city economically stable. CDC funds, on the other hand, are for quality-of-life projects—parks, libraries, and yes, performing arts centers. Two separate barrels, two separate purposes.

Frisco’s Cultural Civil War

Now, I love the arts. I really do! I’ve been to my fair share of performances and appreciate a well-done production. But let’s not pretend that “The Great EDC Heist” is just an innocent case of creative accounting. On one side, you have the true believers, the ones who think this Performing Arts Center will turn Frisco into the next Broadway. They trust the mayor and city council like a cult waiting for the mothership. To them, any skepticism is just negativity.  “Why don’t you want Frisco to have nice things?” they ask, as if wanting accountability is the same as being anti-art.

On the other side, you have the cynics (or as I like to call them, the realists). These are the people pointing out that raiding the EDC fund to pay for a performing arts center isn’t just bad policy—it’s a dangerous precedent. If we’re playing fast and loose with money now, what’s next? A city-funded theme park? A mayoral gold statue? Maybe we’ll just rename Frisco to “Vanity Project, Texas.”

It is time to pay attention and speak against the moves by the city when it comes to treating EDC funds like their personal arts-and-crafts budget, shifting money around with the confidence of a three-card monte dealer on a New York sidewalk.  But every time I hear current leadership speak, I hear “Don’t worry, this is totally above board.”  Right. And I’m the Pope.

Former city leaders—the people who helped build Frisco into the powerhouse it is today—are stepping forward and saying, “This is not how we do things.” And instead of listening, the current administration is waving them off like cranky old men shouting at clouds. But let’s be clear: these aren’t just some bitter retirees whining about change. These are the people who made Frisco what it is, and they’re telling us that this funding scheme smells fishier than a back-alley sushi joint.  Let’s see what they have to say:

In His Own Words: George Purefoy, Former City Manager – aka “The Man Who Built Frisco”

In a recent Facebook Post by Smart Frisco, Former City Manager, Purefoy stated his concerns about the proposed project.  He said, “Unlike the other major Public Private Partnerships (P3), this proposal does not have a private partner on board agreeing to be responsible for all construction cost overruns and for the annual cost for operations and maintenance.  Unlike the other Frisco P3 projects, this project does not project to have all of the funding in place for the construction of the project by the award of bid for construction, thus it is projected that the project will be built in phases, thus cost containment will be even more difficult with inflation.

Purefoy continued, “currently there are no costs for parking included in the projected budget. I estimate that there will be a need for approximately 1200 spaces which will require an additional 12 acres of land if it is surface parking at an estimated construction cost of $7 million (plus land), or if it is structured parking, an estimated $50 million.”

Purefoy went on to say, “To say that there is $0 Cost to Frisco Taxpayers for this project is about as erroneous as anything I’ve seen in political advertising.  Then he said, “Without the need for an election, the Economic Development Corporation funds currently can be used for the cost to build major thoroughfares and utility projects, and the Community Development Corporation funds can be used for both of the above projects plus many others which benefit the City and would lessen the impact on Frisco property taxpayers.”

Purefoy also has “major concerns about what will happen during economic downturns. To add this project to the list of annual budget needs of the City will result in other city departments being negatively impacted in order for the City to fund the performing arts center.”

George continued by saying he was told that the proposed 300-seat community theater included in this project will be used primarily by Prosper ISD.  If that is true he continued “then the primary facility for most of our local arts groups will be extremely limited for their use.”  In his opinion, this effort needs to be led by a local group of private citizens which raises private funds from individuals and companies for both building, operating, and maintaining the Arts Center. The city can then be approached to provide supplemental funding for the construction. Purefoy closed his comments by saying, “With all of the needs Frisco will have to keep up with the aging infrastructure in the not-too-distant future, the City does not need to create another major city obligation to fund on a continued basis.”

After making these statements Purefoy went to one of the Open Houses and updated his statements above. We also had an implant to attend the open house and several of the statements matched what Purefoy had said but we want to share them with you because these were comments by CITY STAFF.

In The Words of City Staff:   

Public Private Partner & Construction Costs and Overruns: “City staff: It is accurate to state that the proposed project does not have a private partner that agrees to be responsible for all construction cost overruns. The city is in the process of selecting a venue operator through an RFP process. While it is accurate to say that to date, we don’t have a private operational partner in place, the city is pursuing an operator-at-risk model for the operation of the venue. This means the selected venue operator would assume financial responsibility for the ongoing operations of the facility without the City of Frisco providing financial guarantees for the day-to-day operations of the facility. Having this type of agreement in place is an important component of moving forward with the project.”  Our implant was told they hoped to have it in place by May and Purefoy was told “It is anticipated that an LOI for an at-risk operator will be in place prior to the May election.” 

Whistleblower Questions: Why is the city putting this project and proposition on the ballot for May, when it is incomplete? The city wants residents to “TRUST THEM” … NEWSFLASH FRISCO: WE DON’T TRUST YOU!  You have given us no reason to trust you based on previous projects.  Maybe instead of saying the city saying we hope, we anticipate, we want they need to say we have confirmed, we have signed contracts, we will once you have put the project together in its entirety.  Right now, you are asking residents to vote blindly on items that are not final and cannot guarantee for your own personal shit’s and giggles.

When our whistleblower asked city staff about the “phasing” of this project we were told the city plans to update the FAQ’s and will not be going forward with that option.  Then George Purefoy posted “The consultants at the open house for the Arts Project told me that the current plan is to hold construction costs to $200,000,000 or less, hold fees for design to $70,000,000 or less and go forward with bidding and make whatever changes are needed to hold costs to no more than $270,000,000 for the project.”   Whistleblower wants to know HOW WILL YOU GUARANTEE THAT? IS IT WRITING? ARE THE DEALS INKED AND LOCKED IN?

When our whistleblower asked about cost escalation contingencies and parking from city staff we got a lot of hum, uh, oh, well, look at this big photo.  However, George Purefoys updated comments after the open house read, “City staff:  It doesn’t appear that cost escalation and/or contingencies are included in the numbers above.  As should’ve been part of Gena’s explanation, the project budget is still in the rough order of magnitude stage. Our public presentations have stated a project budget up to an estimated $340 million. The direction to date is to plan for a budget that does not exceed $300 million. The project budget incorporates standard percentages for contingencies, cost escalations, and soft costs. As our project planning progresses the costs will be refined as the concept design aligns with a project budget not exceeding $300 million. The soft cost calculation of 35% should be applied to the escalated construction costs, and contingencies should be included as well.” Whistleblowers, until the city finalizes an RFP, signs an actual deal (NOT A LETTER OF INTENT) for Broadway, and has guaranteed cash in the bank from donors…someone will be holding the bag if things go south. 

On the same Smart Frisco post in response to George Purefoy’s statements, local businessman Jason Young responded.  Young said “Based on my meetings with some of the players (including private donors). I know of at minimum $50 million ready to go from private folks.”

Mr. Young, what meetings have you had with city leadership and what role do you play in these discussions regarding the FCFA? Are you willing to be it all on your own words that you know “of a minimum of $50 million ready to go by private donors?” Where is the money, Mr. Young? They could donate now or sign commitment letters. Better yet they could put the money in a trust for good faith to help voters feel better about voting for this. Instead, why are we being asked to blindly trust our city leaders and you that, these donors and plans exist. Once again, we ask who will end up holding the bag if those donors you claim “are ready to go” don’t come through.  WHO WILL IT BE?  FRISCO RESIDENTS?  If something falls through the cracks, we will HAVE TO SUBSIDIZE IT!  Lastly, to the city how in the hell do you NOT INCLUDE cost escalations and contingencies in the numbers WHEN YOU ARE ASKING RESIDENTS TO VOTE ON IT? 

Parking: As for parking, we were told they were looking at options, however Purefoy was told that the current estimated need is 1300 parking spaces and the cost for this is included in the not to exceed $200,000,000 construction budget. Structured parking is preferred and if adequate private funding comes in, the structured parking will be constructed, rather than surface parking.” 

Purefoy was also told at the open house that the local arts groups will have approximately 50% of the use of the small theater.  However, the city’s FAQ states “Prosper ISD is anticipated to be the predominant user of the Community Hall.”  It just happens to leave off the percentage of that use and we were told they would have 80% of the use of the small theater.  WHICH ONE IS IT?  WHY ARE THE ANSWERS NOT CONSISTENT?

We are glad to see George Purefoy speak out!  While we have not agreed with every decision he made as City Manager we do agree on this that the burden and risk far outweigh the benefits to resident’s long term. In our next blog we are going to share with you the thoughts by Will Sowell, Brian Livingston and Shona Sowell who just announced she is running for Mayor. Stay Tuned