At the forefront was the contentious negotiation process with BU Town Center, which presented two financial proposals: a phased closing totaling $50 million and a single closing of $45 million. A significant concern for some council members was the phased approach, which involved five separate closings. This method was criticized for potentially not delivering the anticipated revenue and leaving the county with less attractive, harder-to-develop parcels. The phased closing structure was deemed unacceptable by some members, who emphasized that the county must ensure it receives the best return on investment and job creation opportunities.

The council’s discussion revealed a clear divide on how to proceed with the deal. One council member stated that they would not support any contract unless it guaranteed jobs paying above $60,000. This sentiment was echoed by others who underscored the importance of job creation and maximizing revenue for the community. The need for a strategic plan that aligns with the county’s long-term interests was a recurring theme, with members expressing the necessity for a unified stance before engaging further in negotiations.

The debate also touched on the potential involvement of outside representatives in the negotiation process. While some council members doubted the necessity of additional negotiators, given the existing legal feedback, others suggested that their presence could ensure a more thorough and informed negotiation process.

A proposed $62 million deal with DR Horton also came under scrutiny. Concerns were raised about whether the county would lose control over future developments and if the contract terms would truly benefit the community. The emphasis on obtaining an appraisal to determine the “highest and best value” for the land was suggested as a critical step before committing to any agreement. This approach was framed as essential to safeguarding the quality of life for residents and ensuring that past decisions positively impact future generations.

Council members acknowledged the need for transparency and fairness in negotiations, expressing a desire to avoid terms that could later subject them to criticism.

In addition to the primary focus on the development deals, the conversation also addressed procedural aspects of the negotiations. A proposal was made to redline the existing $45 million proposal. The council also discussed the possibility of extending negotiations by 30 days to foster better collaboration and understanding among members.