Investor/Developer RFP Proposal Review Committee Meeting
October 13, 2009
Committee Members
Alice Murray, Mike Carter, John White, David Robinson and Jan Lloyd
Other
Gene Engle (USFP Board Member), Pete Karamitsanis (I.C.)
Dr. Murray opened the meeting and thanked the committee members for their time and attention to the proposals submitted. She stated this meeting would be to narrow down proposals to a short-list and then meet again to go over these short-list firms to ultimately make a recommendation to Dr. Goodman and Dr. Genshaft.
Gene Engle stated that this process for Investor/Developer is new to the USF system and how important this process is as a whole.
16 proposals were received.
# 1
Deep/Broad
Analytical
Experience
Proposed team w/FL experience
Should be financing-focused
¾ Options
*direct debt
*indirect debt
*not for profit
*master lease w/fees
Frank – cash flow issues (short term)
Looking for financing/support from USFP
Experience w/both types of facilities
Not offering developer equity for fee developed proposal
Hiring developer
USFP back stops
# 2
Track record w/USF
Lot of experience – LEED projects
Core list of questions
Discussed tax exempt bonds
U.G.A
Good qualifications
No new ideas – financing
Not clear about options offered – looking for more definitive suggestions
Looks to act as financial advisor following additional meetings
Overall project plan seems reasonable
No discussion about developer equity – more fee developer
#3
No for profit methodology
BABS
Tax exempt Bonds – financing
Understand different Universities – used/needed different vehicles
Very comprehensive – residential mgmt; parking svc; staffing
Got the concept of whole campus rather than just this project
Light on team description
Offered good suggestions on financing alternatives
Proposing to be fee developer
Master lease w/guaranty
Higher level of immediate commitment
#4
Design/build
Developer
No funding/options
#5
Broad understanding of Poly
No specific recommendation of financing options
Review assets – we have the land
Analyze revenue streams
Will provide developer equity
# 6
Breadth of proposal coverage of prior projects including investment themselves
Owner/developer – at risk
Partner
Fee developer/purchaser
Worked with Starchitects
Every project involves unique financing structure
Got whole mission of Poly’s growth possibilities
One of the top proposals
Got the idea/hedging specific options (partner/purchaser)
Mentioned CRA/TIF
# 7
Master lease w/fees – entire package
Bring equity
Have the bank that would do the financing
Most straight forward
Seemed comprehensive
Bringing everything to the table
Would support operational $$
Model may be based on fees beyond what we change
Different from other proposals
Level of commitment
Liked Q&A
Don’t see depicted of what happens if we don’t meet the terms of the proforma
# 8
Master lease w/fees
References from projects
Sell them ‘physical asset’ – we don’t have one
Their exposure is set in stone
Not sure about tax advantages
# 9
Good group of options
But advisory only
Mentioned 4-5 strategies
Liked matrix
Advisory only
Naming rights
Pre-paid college plan mention
Not developer
Advisory services
# 10
Diverse project experience
Set up – not for profit
30K beds on campus; 50K off campus
Good details for both facilities
Committed to BAB or other TE Bonds
Bring equity to project
Identified best options for each facility
Comprehensive in approach
Good list of projects
Really “get” the residential life component
Good reputation
Managing 30K beds
# 11
Single finance option
Fee for development svcs and program mgmt
R.L. Master Lease
Projection may be optimistic
# 12
A/E Group
BAB as methodology
Didn’t get anything out of proposal
Limited higher education experience
Single proposal
# 13
Got wellness/education concept
Understood financing model needs
Several options discussed
Developer at risk
Opportunity for direct/indirect debt/BABS
Master lease w/fees
126 other student housing projects
Other experience w/rehab & medical (wellness center)
Not clear if they are investing in project
Fee developed
# 14
Fee developer – quotes fees
Have done minor equity
Offered numerous options
TE Bonds/BABS/Developer at risk
Limited higher education experience
# 15
Best written executive summary
Focused on higher education
Understand integration of Wellness Center
TE Bonds/Developer at Risk/BAB
Finance 100% cost
Will bring equity
Financing arm of developer
Master lease
# 16
Got ‘Big Picture’ A – Z
Experience w/residence halls and health centers
Master lease w/fees
Non-recourse financing 1.2 debt coverage
Recurring financing 1.0 debt coverage
Pledge of all revenues (both facilities)
No equity participation
Tpa Based
Comprehensive
Good experience for this project
They were listening and listed critical issues
Refer to central management plan for housing
15#6KUD
14#7MANTRA
13#10PLACE PROPERTIES
13#15TUFF
13#16UHS
11#9NEWMARK
11#14TRAMMEL
10#3COLLEGIATE
9#2CARTER
9#13SIGNET
8#1CAPSTONE
8#11PFIC
6#5IMG
6#8NATIONAL
5#4HASKELL
5#12RGA
Each proposal was rated 1 – 2 -3 with 1 being the lowest.
The three items that need to be reviewed when the committee reconvenes on November 3rd from 8:30 – 11:30am are below:
- Identify the primary objectives/goals for USFP’s projects.
1a.Get references from each firm (Geralyn will have these available at 11/3 meeting).
- Review each of the five with regard to how each of these identify with the objectives/goals in #1.
- Identify those who should be interviewed.
3a.Develop questions.