December 16, 2010

Nick K story

Nick details in his story today that the City has set a deadline on Pharmasphere at the end of next month.  Pharmaspehre needs to show that they have the financing in place to get this project going.   That is a move in the right direction, but why even give them until the next month.   Wasn't that the purpose of the initial 2 year LDA that expired September 1st?     When Pharmasphere submits letters of interest from various banks, what do we do then?

It has been long enough, lets just rebid the parcel and Pharmasphere can resubmit a proposal.  Nick goes on to detail there are concerns on this project amongst "city officials and South Worcester residents."   Nick what about from a local blogger and businessman, who has been complaining about this for over two years--me??  

Nick, do me one favor can you help me find an answer to this question..  I believe the City of Worcester took the 2.8 million HUD loan on behalf of Pharmasphere last year--who is paying the interest on that loan.   Even at 5% that is $140K per year in interest!!!

Good to see something is finally happening on this.    Now when is someone going to put a deadline on Mason-Winfield??


Jahn said...

T&G says all Pharma has to do is demonstrate the "capability" to get the project going by the end of next month. It does not say they have to actually get it started and of course any 1st semester law school student would ask what exactly does demonstate the capablity mean?

And If city does try to pull the plug on it (which they wont)then it's a trip to courthouse and that ties it up another 2 yrs plus.

I am convinced that Someone with power & influence has their greasy littel paws in this deal.

Let us also not forget there is another LDA sitting up in the Castel Park Piedmont St area that has also been hanging fire since 2005. Nothing has happen there either as far as what was proposed in the original RFP which was low income housing. Not sure if the dev'er ever took title to property or least it aint all overgrown with weeds and dumped on with illegally placed fill.............which is a 300$ per day fine.............and Worc. Common Grd has the cahonnes to rat out private landlords when they so much as have 2 blades of grass in excess of 12 inches. So will Pharma be allowed to grow reefer on their site in excess of 12 inches?

Bill Randell said...


I understand what you are thinking but you are wrong on this one. Pharmasphere was awarded the RFP in January 2008.

A LDA ( Land Disposition Agreement) was signed in September , 2008, which gave them two years (this past September) to take title to the property. If during that time, the City of Worcester had tried to take the property away then you are right.

The LDA has expired. Never mind the end of next month, this RFP should have been issued the day the LDA expired.

Pharmasphere has no recourse against the city and keep resubmit their proposal with the next RFP.


Jahn said...

BIll, if Pharamsphere is serious about this project they will fight to keep it. Just the strong possiblity of a law suit, with or w/o a basis, would be enough to make Worcester back off. If they are not serious they will walk away with probably zero damages to themselves

Also, I think you have to keep in mind, these RFP's and LDA's usually can be extended by agreement of teh parties. SO Phara just ask for another 6 months extension and probaly will get it.

What is really missing here, the winning bidder on these land acquisition deals should be req'd to post a performance bond, which is insurance that they will perform under the tersm of their contractual obligations and if they do not perform, the bonding co. gets whacked.

In the private sector all sizeable commercial projects have performance bonds b/c contractors & dev'ers can and do get in over their heads. Granted Pharam is not a contractor, but they are still in the position of having to perform by constructng a buiilding and generating 50 jobs.

Have you ever driven up RTE 128 in Waltham these last 3-4 years? See the bridge project at Winter St and 128? Ever wonder why no work has been done on it? The GC (Roads Corp) went bust. End result, 3-4 yrs later a new contractor has been called in and the bonding company has had to step up to the plate.

Worc should just thank their lucky stars that Roads Corp didnt go bust on their section of Rte 146 15 years ago.