Today and throughout the week, CNBC will air highlights of the profile on Mr. R. Donahue Peebles
as part of their “I Am American Business” series. CNBC pays tribute to
some of the country's most dynamic and successful individuals who
represent inspiring examples of business leadership and integrity.
These entrepreneurs and executives set the standard for creativity, leadership and management excellence. Mr. Peebles joins business tycoons like Sumner Redstone, Jack Welch and Donald Trump to discuss the tactics he has used in becoming the most successful African-American real estate developer in the country.
The segment focuses on Mr. Peebles’ tenacious business philosophy, the foundation and evolution of his success as well as the details of select projects in Washington, DC and South Florida including the development of South Florida's premiere luxury condominium, The Residences at The Bath Club, and the opening of the first African-American luxury beach resort in the country, The Royal Palm Hotel.
To view the entire segment, please visit http://www.cnbc.com/id/27956367
Thank you,
Kendall Pryles
Communications Director
Submitted by Jim Wagner
52 comments:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/34692069?flvFile=resources/dPeebles/Iam-DonPeebles-Clip4NEW.flv
He talks about buying "unentitled land". Sound familiar?
Anonymous...
What's your point?
Risk taking, entrepreneurial capitalists built our great country.
Socialist parasites, like our Council and their sycophants are taking it down one city at a time.
"Make your money when you buy. Doing nothing else after buying, you'll get that benefit. No value creation enhancement, no entitlement, no construction, no nothing. You've made that money."
He bought the quarry without entitlements, then tried to persuade, cajole, and bully to get the entitlements that the property needed to realize his vision. His comments in the video make it clear that it's part of his plan, to buy land cheap because it doesn't have the necessary entitlements, then to get them and make a bundle.
Nonsense. This was a lost economic and cultural vision for Pacifica. The land was cheap because there were problems (you're probably part of the problem).
"problems" = "without entitlements"
His business practice, as he himself spelled out on the video, is to buy properties without entitlements. Persuading, cajoling, bullying are just tactics to get entitlements. As he said, he gets things cheap, and tries to turn a profit. His mention of entitlements was particularly interesting. I can't see that kind of candor as something that would have helped him persuade the voters to buy into his economic and cultural vision.
Oh, and his vision? Profit. Watch his videos and see if there's anything else there he shows an interest in.
Pro-L Pacificans saw something they wanted, but unless it was profit, Peebles doesn't seem to share their dreams.
Seriously, Kathy, you don't know me, so I don't know why you're making this about me, but if it helps, I had nothing to do with the quarry property and the "problems" you refer to that made it cheap for him to buy.
What "entitlements" are you talking about?
I see nothing wrong with "profits". I support "profits". I will never hold it against anyone who wants to make a "profit". Having said that, what other way is there to motivate people to work hard? Can someone come up with another idea? I'd like to hear it.
No, I'm definitely with you on this Kathleen-- win, win. We're going to be friends yet.
Peebles Corporation did preliminary research, included local considerations, and proposed a wonderful project.
The reason an accomplished developer Corporation makes a profit is because they propose a project, assemble a team, carry it though agency review, build it. At the same time they take all the risk. Then, we benefit in services and tax revenue, and isn't that the desired "free market" result?
Anonymouse.......
Profit bad, welfare good, Pacifica broke.
High five!
Entitlements, for example, the right to build residential housing on land not zoned for residential housing. He bought land without residential development rights.
Who's saying profit is bad? The "economic and cultural vision" you mentioned above does not appear to be part of what drives him. He certainly fostered the vision among locals to get to his desired profit, but it sounds like there's this notion that the vision was shared, and his video makes it clear that profit is the vision.
Peebles spent a lot of money trying to get his "vision" approved through the electorate. It would still have had to go through all the other hoops to make a project work. Our City Council would have had the opportunity to be a part of a great project. I still believe that Peebles would have built what he said. I do not believe that I am naive or easily manipulated. Of course, he is a businessman and talks pretty good...but I believed that he was looking forward to a first class project in the Quarry. Those up to 355 homes were single family homes, condo type homes and live/work units. It would have been awesome.
Awesome because?
What drove Don Peebles here was producing a quality project. That was clear from everything we knew of him, choosing his team, the preliminary studies, his track record.
The concept was an urban village, mixed-use, LEED Platinum, smart cities are doing this. As Lois said "it would have been awesome", but Mike described the current city leadership position: "profit bad, welfare good, Pacifica broke, high five". No vision from 7 year city council, Cal Hinton was the exception. This was an opportunity to something really good for Pacifica, and city council and their friends blew it off. Its time for them to go.
Awesome. LEED Platinum, golf course improvement connecting services with the hotel, even regional competitive tournaments, Don Peebles had connections and desire to do that. A fun village and a cleaned-up area with walking paths, a movie theater, shops, coffee areas, a square, populated because synergy with condos, apartments, some houses further away, location for city Hall and 21 century Library, aquatic center, lots of open space, ocean side, something to do, some highway improvement (which is better than the current none), redevelopment city tax revenue (85 cents on the tax dollar for the redevelopment duration) so other neglected city infrastructure could be addressed. And, look at the area restaurants and hotel/motels and other businesses exist in that area, good for conferences, good for recreation. Classy, good for the people of Pacifica, and a destination for others.
Anonymous said: "Who's saying profit is bad?"
Ummm, that would be you.
No that would not be me, except in the twisted or confused brain of some one else. Let's assume you have some problems reading. Try re-reading what Mike described and I repeated as the current city leadership position: "profit bad, welfare good, Pacifica broke, high five".
This should be a much better city, but 7 year city council has worked hard with "friends" to give away our productive land, thwart business interest and development, and keep our city poor, while city infrastructure and what should constitute "the good of the people" has been neglected.
I don't think Anonymoose was referring to you, Kathy.
I voted for Peebles Plan. Although, I didn't like all the houses, I voted for it anyway, just to show that people here in Pacifica envision progress, instead of stagnant pipes, squatters, dry dead weeds, feral cats eating snakes, poor schools, dying small business community that everyone sees day in and day out. Yeah, I voted for progress. Who wouldn't?
I wrote "Who's saying profit is bad?" In our culture, that means, "You misunderstood me. I didn't say that, but apparently you want to put words into my mouth."
Kathy, when you talk favorably about the team Peebles assembled, I don't know about who that was. Are you talking about his business team, or locals, or both?
Some of what you describe my family already enjoys in Pacifica, like great walking trails, coffee shops, the libraries, open space.
The golf course is a blue collar course, and that makes it special, but that doesn't sound like it would drive hotel stays at the kind of hotel he was talking about.
I never did understand how all that was supposed to happen and somehow not make the worst traffic in Pacifica even worse. Wider and wider and you get Santa Monica, but the school is the real tough issue for how you might improve Hwy 1, and there was nothing to deal with the school.
My children are always trying to leave Pacifica for lack of indoor activities. It would be nice if we had more indoor activities. My family currently does all outdoor activities , out of Pacifica. I see lots of people walking at the malls. Not many people on Pacifica trails. I look everyday. I used to hike all over Pacifica, until I was harassed by haters and squatters. Too many rules for a responsible citizen like me and then no rules for the bums. Traffic? Is not as bad as you make it out to be. It is only bad for a very short time and only in school season. Oh and sunny blue sky days, is there a lot of cars on the road, other than that, traffic is not Santa Cruz Mission Rd. I think I may stop paying my taxes until I get some results. I will stop spending money in this town and not pay my property taxes. Good idea? or bad? Who's with me?
Regarding Peebles and the golf course...one of the things he said he wanted to do if Measure L passed was to talk to SF about taking over management of the course so it could be upgraded. The upgraded course would then attract people to his hotel.
Of course, since this would involve profit to both Peebles, San Francisco, and any businesses that might have benefited from golfers coming here, it would have been vigorously opposed. Profits would just be so un-Pacifica.
As an aside, I can't help but notice that people who supported Peebles' plan are confident enough to put their names behind their statements, while those opposed to him are afraid to identify themselves. Are the no-growthers finally starting to become embarrassed at the amount of damage they've done to the city by reflexively opposing every development that gets proposed?
Haters and squatters? Call the police.
Bad traffic? Yeah, it's only for brief periods, but those brief periods hit me and lots of other people every day going to and returning from work (as well as the parents shuttling kids to and from school).
Malls are fine (I guess). But Kathy praised open space and walking paths, which we like, too, and use all the time already.
As to your personal response, things are bad so make them worse? Seriously? Are you really this unhappy living here?
Nice inference work there, Steve.
Or projection.
Pacifica is a sliver on the coast, a little traffic in short spurts? Deal with it. I do. Use the bathroom before you leave, start your day earlier, jeezus, do I have to spell it out for you? Or do you need a gov agent too? I love open space, but not when it chases people like me out, and then gangbangers set up meth labs and kill each other. It's nice to wake up and hear about one of our own local kids hanging themselves in a tree, don't get me started. Too much open space unsupervised because of lack of funds going to bloated gov pensions. Don't get me started!!!!!! I see no results from paying taxes haven't for years. Let's bring down the WHOLE SYSTEM and start new. Vote ALL NO GROWTH/NO PROGRESS PEOPLE OUT OF OFFICE.
Kathleen Rogan's hiking experience in Pacifica is the opposite of mine. I've lived here for 35 years. I've hiked all over Pacifica. I'm on local trails almost every day. I see more and more people on the trails all the time. Especially on the weekends, several trails are very busy. I have never been harassed by "haters and squatters." I don't even know what a squatter is, unless that means a homeless person. There are a few of them, but not many. Mostly they live in their vehicles and not out on the trails.
It would have been "awesome" because people would have lived and worked in the Quarry. They would have walked to the show, library, coffee shops - no driving. There would have been new jobs for locals without the commute to SF or the peninsula.
I cannot say I was unhappy in Pacifica because I was there for 30+ years and have enjoyed (and continue to enjoy) many lasting friendships. I am unhappy with the direction that Pacifica has gone since the people of Pacifica voted to let someone develop their property on Mori Point but the "no growth" crowd took care of that in the 70's with their lawsuits. I continue to have a stake in what happens in Pacifica because I still own property there and still have hope that the citizenry will wake up and seek a new direction.
meth labs? on Mori Point or out in the quarry or out around the golf course? Isn't that what we were talking about?
Killing people? What?
Somehow you've turned teen suicide, a problem in just about every community (e.g., stepping in front of Caltrain), into some hate of people who enjoy Pacifica's open spaces?
Absolutely bizarre.
Lois, people walk to the two libraries already. People walk to the coffee shops already. A nice town center, of course, would be nice, but we're not actually missing out on these two kinds of places to walk to.
You say "what happens in Pacifica because I still own property there". Do you live somewhere else? No problem with that, but wondering if the walkable amenities Pacifica currently has aren't on your radar.
Coffee shops, random sampling: Chit-chat cafe, Fog City Java, Starbucks, Bay City Coffee, Cafe Keluna, Cafe Pacifica, Ocean Side Cafe, Pacific Java Cafe, P-Town Coffee, and more.
yeah, let's all go hang out at the coffee shops. Whoopeee!
Anonymous, Kathy thinks 60%+ unproductive "open space" is way too much for any viable city. No real business parks here, limited recreation, basic commerce only, not even a dog park paid for by the city.
Imagine "saving 100% of Mori Point" in the geographical heart of what should be this city for unproductive "open space", look at the property 1/3 would have been good for that along the coast. Peebles Corporation development plan included about 45-50% total open space as I recall, which would have added to the charm of the area, and some walking paths to make you happy.
7 year city council blocked improved development in West Sharp Park, not once but 3x at least. Little gets done here, thanks to them and their "no growth" friends-- they don't serve the needs of this city except as baby-sitting figure heads; they have worked against economic and financial solutions, they need to go.
So, in the absence of solutions, there is spin. Only recently has city council dropped the "our city is cutting edge" mantra, while "our environment is our economy" continues. Everything is relative, if we lived in the stone age these descriptions might apply. Of course we live in a major metropolitan area, and this city is way behind, and carries a big debt, and has neglected infrastructure (not even city hall is ADA compliant).
City council solutions? You pay. Fortunately Measure D to add a city sales tax failed, no matter, they never get the message. Here's the solution two council meetings back for inadequate roads in Pacifica: if your street was originally County (from 51 years ago) you pay to update and fix.
Anonymous, it really necessary to live in a third world city with an inadequate highway running through it to make you happy? Highway mitigation and improvement is part of the developer requirement and was part of expertise and multiple studied done by Peebles Corporation to build the property (part of the project team).
PS: Kathleen, good to protest, but do pay your taxes on time, otherwise penalties apply (not good for you).
Peebles 50% open space wouldn't be new open space. It'd be 50% less than is out there now. It's an interesting way to position down as up. It wouldn't add to the charm of the area in any meaningful sense from the point of view of those who enjoy walking/hiking in open space. OK, maybe being able to stop and grab a cup of coffee, visit an aquarium, or catch a movie while out for a walk, that might be a nice option. But really, less is not more.
As to "You pay", do you want a dog park or not? When you complain "not even a dog park paid for by the city," who do you have in mind to pay for it?
What highway mitigation did the project team propose?
Anonymouse.....
Do your homework. The "no growthers" have completely destroyed Pacifica's economy while they feed you a line of bull about all of our beautiful trails and open space. It is possible to have both but they are dishonest about their true mission. NO GROWTH AT ANY COST.
The amount of debt our city carries, the degree of hostility they show towards any developer and their complete inability to capitalize on any investment in our town is criminal.
The end result is; Pacifica is broken and the taxpayers are forced to subsidize the faux environmentalists' selfish lifestyle.
Anonymous, Peebles preliminary studies included and highway mitigation included an over/underpass alternative to widening, similar to Manor as I recall.
One year ago (12-08) city council approved paying $100,000 out of our city general fund (our money) to build San Pedro walking trail; in the Spring more than half that amount was spent to fund a bike trail. Some people utilize these trails, some don't.
Compare to: The city provided some study money for an off-lease dog park, but funding and maintenance would be a volunteer citizen effort, similar to "Little Brown Church, 21st Library, and most other citizen amenities. About 17-20% of people in Pacifica own dogs, dogs need exercise, and there are safety issue with free-running dogs (better to provide designated areas).
Doesn't is seem to you that something is wrong with catering to certain "pet" projects, while essentially ignoring others?
Since about 17-22% of people own dogs in this city, how about the city spending 100,000 to build a few off-leash dog parks, and maintain them. Trails and flaky biodiesel experiments get funding, "Little Brown Church", moving forward with a 21st Library forward, undergrounding overhead wires for safety, fixing and updating the sewage system, making city hall ADA compliant and efficient as in build a new property).
the city probably spent in total $500,000 over 4 years to paste together a biodiesel factory connected to our WWTP plant, partnered with a flaky vendor, stupid studies for projects not happening, 2 EIRS for Beach Front City Hall, etc., ect.
17-20% of citizens in this community have dogs and would like an off-leash dog park. Those involved POOCH are constantly raising money to try to achieve. Where's is the city? Dog owners are citizens
Oops, the bottom part of this was draft, not intended for posting. Working-out an idea and left the cutting-room copy on the text. Learning curve, sorry.
Mike, a more clever insult would be to call me Ananimus.
I'd rather call you by your real name.
Why don't you grow a pair and come out of hiding.
Who knows we might all be able to work together and turn Pacifica into a real
"slice of heaven by the sea".
You don't know the first thing about me, much less my reasons for not putting my name on this. You want to make this about me?
I've been interested in getting people's opinions and thoughts on what they're interested in achieving, and trying to understand how they imagine things working.
"Grow a pair"
"Come out of hiding"
These are intended to engender working together? or perhaps to drive a deeper wedge, allowing even greater satisfaction in fuming and fomenting discontent with the city we both claim to care for?
I've got a lot of positive ideas about the city and its potential. And I'm interested in working with people to help things overall get better. I'm not at all shy in identifying things that are broken, things that could be improved. But I'm not ok with throwing the city and various people into a wood chipper to get my way.
Good outcomes take people of good will taking an honest look at hard realities. But hostility doesn't help in taking an honest look, nor in getting people to work together.
This lecture probably won't help, either, but your supposed invitation to work together was disingenuous, at best. At a minimum, a civil response seemed worth offering.
Finally, a real post from Anonymous. Thanks
Hope to meet the real you some day.
You're not the only one who cares deeply about this city brother, I'm just not willing to tolerate the bullshit that this Council throws around any more.
Fire purifies the metal.
Anonymous, I think your "concerned citizen" routine, working and thinking together about real issues is FAKE.
In this city, you're either see the issues and are for change, as in fixing the multiple year city deterioration, or not. And, so far nothing substantial is coming from you, waste of time.
Sincere? Get a name, and talk. Yes, so far you can post as anonymous, but where is it written that there is carte blanche welcoming for hidden people with obscure comments.
Wow, Kathy, are you running for Judge Roy Bean's seat?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument toward the person" or "argument against the person") is an argument which links the validity of a premise to an irrelevant characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.
Example: The person's name and whether or not they signed it.
"Tactics"; the right word.
Mr Peebles is back in DC. He's a smart man and of course knows that turf well as he started out there.
That's the only place where property values are soaring because all the money's being printed there, and all the stealing is being directed from there.
What happens when unemployment reaches 30%?
We will all be on welfare and the "government" will take care of us.
What happens when a meteorite hits earth?
Not sure where we are going with this one...but if a meteorite hits earth and it is destroyed...I will go see God.
It depends on what God is. Some will reincarnate, others will follow what the earth allows. The animals will follow, these which have no belief system will also see "God".
Is that a Clintonian response like "It all depends,' said the president, 'on what the meaning of the word 'is' is." As I do not understand a thing you just said, Kathy, "others will follow what the earth allows" I will desist.
Maybe looking at God is the same as looking back to the beginning of the universe in astronomy terms. You subscribe to a belief system, as do others who have a different view of what "God" might actually be or constitute, or not.
In the end, our bodies return to the earth.
Again, talking about a whole different thing. We are much more than a "body". I agree that my body will be dust - no problem with that. I believe there is so much more than this body.
Lois, half agreement I guess.
Post a Comment