Summary: On January 30, 2013, at 4:35 p.m.―less than 90 minutes before the Monroe County Legislature’s Ways and Means Committee was slated to discuss the purchase of property at Kodak for MCC’s downtown campus―WinnCompanies emailed a new, eleventh-hour proposal for MCC to remain at the Sibley Building. A complete review of the proposal reveals significant flaws.

PROBLEMS WITH THE WINN PROPOSAL:

1. The cost to purchase the proposed space in the Sibley Building is significantly higher than purchasing property at Kodak.
• The purchase price per square foot at the Sibley Building is five times that of the purchase price at Kodak.
§ Sibley Building: $7.6 million for 275,000 gross square feet ($27.64/sq.ft.)
§ Kodak property: $2.99 million for 561,951 gross square feet ($5.34/sq.ft.)

• State regulations require that a property purchase be supported by two real estate appraisals and SUNY requires the purchase price be the lower of the two appraisals. There are no independent appraisals to validate the purchase price put forth by Winn.

• With considerable assistance from local taxpayers and the City of Rochester, Winn purchased the entire Sibley complex of about one million square feet for a mere fraction of the price that Winn is suggesting taxpayers pay to buy back one-quarter of that space.

2. Winn’s selection of a private developer to renovate the Sibley Building ignores state law.
• New York State law requires the county to use a procurement process to select the contractor in public projects. Those contracts require, among other things, the payment of prevailing wage. It appears none of these requirements are accounted for in the new Winn proposal. Adherence to these legal requirements is something SUNY is adamant about.

3. A comparison of Winn’s 2011 and 2013 proposals raises serious, unanswered questions regarding the basis of its budget numbers.
• WinnCompanies’ last formal proposal to MCC was in October 2011, following many months of meetings and conversations about the possibility of MCC remaining at the Sibley Building. The purchase price in the 2011 and 2013 proposals is the same: $7.6 million. Yet, without explanation, Winn has lowered construction costs from $62 million to $44 million, a reduction of $18 million.

There are only two possible explanations and both are unacceptable: either Winn has eliminated the payment of prevailing wages or the scope of the project has been significantly reduced.