Gaylord pulls out of Chula Vista

[GoUSC]

Everything I have read stated pretty clearly the Union wanted Gaylord to only hire Union Members.

[GoUSC]

Everything I have read stated pretty clearly the Union wanted Gaylord to only hire Union Members.

[PerryChase]

Gaylord was never obligated to hire union labor only. They feared “disuption” and lawsuits if they didn’t. If Gaylord does everything by the book, and if Chula Vista residents truly support the project, then Gaylord has nothing to fear.

I think it’s just a cop out of the project during a downturn. Blame the unions now to strenghten your negotiating position when the project gets revived in 10 years.

If the project is so great, why aren’t development companies from all over the USA bidding for it? In that case, Chula Vista should have no problem finding a replacement builder.

The Chula Vista bayfront sounds like a stale real estate listing with no buyers. If a 2/2 in Downtown SD drops to $350k, then one in Chula Vista is worth no more than $250k. There’s still plenty of buildable land in Downtown SD and 6000 condos are coming. Who’s gonna buy in Chula Vista?

[PerryChase]

Gaylord was never obligated to hire union labor only. They feared “disuption” and lawsuits if they didn’t. If Gaylord does everything by the book, and if Chula Vista residents truly support the project, then Gaylord has nothing to fear.

I think it’s just a cop out of the project during a downturn. Blame the unions now to strenghten your negotiating position when the project gets revived in 10 years.

If the project is so great, why aren’t development companies from all over the USA bidding for it? In that case, Chula Vista should have no problem finding a replacement builder.

The Chula Vista bayfront sounds like a stale real estate listing with no buyers. If a 2/2 in Downtown SD drops to $350k, then one in Chula Vista is worth no more than $250k. There’s still plenty of buildable land in Downtown SD and 6000 condos are coming. Who’s gonna buy in Chula Vista?

[drunkle]

union workers make what, 25/hour? the contractor bills what, 100/hr?

non union make what, 15/hour? if that? the contractor bills what, 100/hr?

why do you hate americans?

[drunkle]

union workers make what, 25/hour? the contractor bills what, 100/hr?

non union make what, 15/hour? if that? the contractor bills what, 100/hr?

why do you hate americans?

[GoUSC]

PerryChase,

The Union told Gaylord that they either sign an agreement obligating Gaylord to ONLY use Unionized Labor or if they didn’t the Union would sue Gaylord during the EIR process and do anything in their power to stop the project. Gaylord had already agreed to pay Union Labor wages but were refusing to be required to limit their bidding pool to only 20% of the contractor labor force in San Diego.

Also I am sure another developer will be found but you are forgetting the 2+ years of work Gaylord has invested in this project and worked with the City. A whole new agreement will have to be drafted, negotiated, etc. This will take years.

And those of you who are quoting it has to do with the current economic situation, this project would not be completed for YEARS. Whatever economic situation we see today will be at least partially corrected by then. Gaylord has a history of tacking big complex projects and has completely may successful ones. They just weren’t willing to fall prey to the Unions and called the Union bluff.

[GoUSC]

PerryChase,

The Union told Gaylord that they either sign an agreement obligating Gaylord to ONLY use Unionized Labor or if they didn’t the Union would sue Gaylord during the EIR process and do anything in their power to stop the project. Gaylord had already agreed to pay Union Labor wages but were refusing to be required to limit their bidding pool to only 20% of the contractor labor force in San Diego.

Also I am sure another developer will be found but you are forgetting the 2+ years of work Gaylord has invested in this project and worked with the City. A whole new agreement will have to be drafted, negotiated, etc. This will take years.

And those of you who are quoting it has to do with the current economic situation, this project would not be completed for YEARS. Whatever economic situation we see today will be at least partially corrected by then. Gaylord has a history of tacking big complex projects and has completely may successful ones. They just weren’t willing to fall prey to the Unions and called the Union bluff.

[PerryChase]

If all the ducks are in a row for Gaylord, why then do they have to fear the unions threats of lawsuits? Just proceed and ignore them.

With 6000 condos coming to Downtown SD in the next few years, and a possibility to build 30,000 more, I don’t think that Chula Vista has a chance for a long while.

Gaylord is saying that using all union labor will add $50 to $75 million. So standing up to the union, incurring any delays and defending lawsuits might cost $10 – $20 million at most. In a billion dollar project, that’s small potatoes.

I’m not defending the union but if the profits are there, then the project will get built one way or another.

[PerryChase]

If all the ducks are in a row for Gaylord, why then do they have to fear the unions threats of lawsuits? Just proceed and ignore them.

With 6000 condos coming to Downtown SD in the next few years, and a possibility to build 30,000 more, I don’t think that Chula Vista has a chance for a long while.

Gaylord is saying that using all union labor will add $50 to $75 million. So standing up to the union, incurring any delays and defending lawsuits might cost $10 – $20 million at most. In a billion dollar project, that’s small potatoes.

I’m not defending the union but if the profits are there, then the project will get built one way or another.

[El Jefe]

Under normal circumstances I would tend to agree. You could easily move ahead under the “proceed and ignore” policy. The unions would sue and Gaylord would likely prevail in court

Unfortunately the game changes DRAMATICALLY when there is litigation against the EIS. All the union has to do is find 1 vernal pool created by their own tire tracks, or a single burrowing owl nest and the whole thing can get VERY MESSY. Everyone knows that if someone looks hard enough they will find at least 1 endangered/protected species on a coastal site that size, and in a worst case scenario, Gaylord could be required to purchase a similar property (location, size) to relocate all endangered species and deed the property to be held as open space indefinately.

All the support in the world from the city of Chulajuana wouldn’t do Gaylord a bit of good if the Unions challenged the EIR in court and dragged the State/Fed EPA into it.

Unless the city was willing to accept ALL responsibility and liability for producing a clean EIR on the site, on the first mention of challenging the EIR, walking away was clearly the best exit strategy for Gaylord.

[El Jefe]

Under normal circumstances I would tend to agree. You could easily move ahead under the “proceed and ignore” policy. The unions would sue and Gaylord would likely prevail in court

Unfortunately the game changes DRAMATICALLY when there is litigation against the EIS. All the union has to do is find 1 vernal pool created by their own tire tracks, or a single burrowing owl nest and the whole thing can get VERY MESSY. Everyone knows that if someone looks hard enough they will find at least 1 endangered/protected species on a coastal site that size, and in a worst case scenario, Gaylord could be required to purchase a similar property (location, size) to relocate all endangered species and deed the property to be held as open space indefinately.

All the support in the world from the city of Chulajuana wouldn’t do Gaylord a bit of good if the Unions challenged the EIR in court and dragged the State/Fed EPA into it.

Unless the city was willing to accept ALL responsibility and liability for producing a clean EIR on the site, on the first mention of challenging the EIR, walking away was clearly the best exit strategy for Gaylord.

[GoUSC]

PerryChase…

It doesn’t work like that when it comes to EIR’s. $10 to $20 million? It could end up costing Gaylord much more than that in time, legal fees, consultant fees etc. I do this stuff for a living and the risks are not easy to quantify.

[GoUSC]

PerryChase…

It doesn’t work like that when it comes to EIR’s. $10 to $20 million? It could end up costing Gaylord much more than that in time, legal fees, consultant fees etc. I do this stuff for a living and the risks are not easy to quantify.

[PerryChase]

Like I said I’m not defending the union. But I’m generally suspicious of large public/private partnerships where the public is subsidizing private profits. Cost overuns generally run to 100% of the original estimate. Developers often times go back to the politicians many times to re-negotiate better deals after the fact (see the Padres and the Chargers).

Here Gaylord is saying that a 5% to 7.5% of the project killed the whole thing. Give me a break. There’s more to it and blaming the union is the red herring. The real estate market changed and Gaylord wanted Chula Vista to give more.

Citizens are not feeling so flush these days so there’s little stomach for more give-away of public assets. Think about it. Chula Vista residents are plain middle class. They’d be stupid to let their tax dollars support a luxury bayfront development so that outsiders can come in and flip.

[Author]

Posts