By Jack Z. Smith
Star-Telegram Commentary
When the Fort Worth City Council voted 5-4 Tuesday against a proposed agreement with Ross Perot Jr. that would free up his Circle T Ranch for development, it was a bitter pill for the wealthy businessman to swallow.
After all, he's long been used to having his way at City Hall.
That was borne out by Perot lieutenant Rick Patterson, who said he was in "shock" after the council vote.
"In 13 years, this has never happened to us," he said.
That's pretty much true. Perot has made untold millions as a developer in the booming Alliance area of far north Fort Worth. And on numerous occasions, the city has granted huge tax breaks or made other concessions to grease his lucrative deals.
Think Texas Motor Speedway. Federal Express. Intel. Nokia. You get the picture.
For the most part, it's been an effective public-private partnership between Perot and the city. It has helped make Perot even richer and has produced jobs and tax revenue for Fort Worth. But the relationship has been strained somewhat by Perot's sometimes pushy, high-pressure approach to dealing with the city. As one Fort Worth official who has dealt with the Perot team said last week, "They're our friends when they need us."
Now Fort Worth is standing up to Ross the Hoss, and he doesn't like it one bit. Like Patterson said, this just isn't the way it's been done.
Mayor Kenneth Barr, supported by council members Becky Haskin, Cathy Hirt, Chuck Silcox and Jeff Wentworth, voted against Perot's proposal that the city give up its legal fight with Westlake for Jurisdiction over his 2,500-acre ranch in exchange for a $6 million commitment from Perot that includes helping fund a new job training center in southeast Fort Worth and providing land in the Alliance area for a potential aviation development.
Perot, in making this offer, should not be confused with the late Mother Teresa. If Fort Worth agrees to drop its legal fight with Westlake, that would pave the way for Perot to make a fresh new heap of millions by selling part of the ranch to Fidelity Investments for a big new corporate campus. Westlake Mayor Scott Bradley also would make a nifty profit, approaching $10 million, for selling his Paigebrooke Farm property to Fidelity.
The five council members who voted Tuesday against Perot had solid reasons for doing so.
Some simply viewed his offer as inadequate, given that the Circle T is the potential site of $3 billion in development over the next 20 years and could be a huge tax bonanza for Fort Worth. That's a lot to give up, even if Westlake appears to have the edge in its court fight with Fort Worth for jurisdiction over the ranch.
Wentworth wisely questioned why Fort Worth should accept Perot's offer without first reaching an agreement about the terms under which the city would provide water to the Circle T. Fort Worth is the most logical supplier of water to the ranch.
"I don't know how much water they're going to need when fully developed, but I'm assuming it's a considerable amount," Wentworth said. "In my opinion...to not address this issue is not good business from the city of Fort Worth's standpoint."
Wentworth's concern is particularly relevant because Fort Worth's supplying of water to the Circle T could make the ranch site a stronger competitor with Fort Worth's Alliance area for future economic development.
As Silcox aptly put it, "It's in direct competition with us. Why should we give them our bullets to shoot us with?"
Here's an example of what he's talking about: Perot and an out-of-state developer once were jointly planning for a new regional shopping center to be built at a Perot-owned site on Interstate 35W in the Alliance area. But they later decided that the Circle T is the best location for it.
Despite Tuesday's 5-4 vote, negotiations between Fort Worth and Perot are continuing and there's still a good chance they will reach a deal on the Circle T. In fact, the issue is again on tomorrow's City Council agenda.
Fortunately, a slim council majority is resisting pressure from Perot and attempting to make sure they strike a good deal for the 500,000 residents of Fort Worth. Let's hope the council has the resolve to maintain that stance.