Dear Sir or Madam,
I have continued to read about the project and I have found some problems in the most recent study by Davenport.
Please note their first assumption on page 3 of the report. It reads as follows: "All Non-Ballpark (i.e. Retail, Residential, Hotel, Office, Parking, etc.) improvements will be privately financed by the Developer." Underneath this, they repeat, underline, and emphasize their first assumption: "No allowances have been made with respect to development incentives."
Their second assumption contains the first mistake made in the compilation of their report. They appear to have misunderstood the 2009 ERA report. Davenport's study states:
"In conducting our analysis, Davenport has extrapolated the following assumptions from the original 2009 Era Report: