Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Annie Whitmire Theater Lease topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents, councilors press for changes to proposed lease for Annie Whitmire theatre; item moved to discussion

5500132 · July 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At the July 16 Davenport City Council Committee of the Whole meeting, residents and Junior Theatre volunteers urged more consultation and warned the proposed lease with AW Holdings LLC could leave the city liable for major maintenance costs. Council moved the item off consent for further discussion.

Davenport City Council Committee of the Whole members heard more than an hour of public comment on Wednesday about a proposed lease for the former Chapel Theater building on the Annie Whitmire campus, with residents and leaders of Junior Theatre Inc. saying they were not properly notified and raising alarms about lease terms that would shift maintenance and utility costs to the city.

The concerns focused on a draft lease that, as quoted by residents, would require the city to pay for major repairs and utilities for the theater and related buildings, and to seek the landlord's permission for certain uses. "I believe this is malfeasance and misuse of taxpayer money," said Judith Lee, a Second Ward resident, who told council members Junior Theatre Inc. had not been consulted about the plat and lease that affect the theater.

Nicole Sabotsky, a Junior Theatre Inc. board member, told the council the nonprofit supports having a permanent performance space but said the board first learned of the lease late. "Our board is in support of the proposed lease, as provided in the meeting agenda packet," Sabotsky said, describing the organization as a small, largely volunteer operation that provides scholarships, sets and costumes and free public shows.

Other residents pressed detail-by-detail objections to the contract language. One speaker highlighted sections that they said required the city, as tenant, to pay for a boiler replacement, roof and windows and said the landlord would determine the city’s "proportionate share" of utilities. Another speaker warned that the lease’s indemnification language and responsibility for structural repairs could expose taxpayers if someone were injured.

Council members asked staff several procedural and legal questions and asked for more information. Alderman Ben Lynch moved to place the finance agenda items on the consent agenda but to remove the lease (finance item 2) for discussion; the motion was seconded and carried. Alderman Gripp reminded colleagues that the city, not the developer, had requested a temporary arrangement to ensure Junior Theatre could perform while other campus work proceeds.

City attorney and staff said the lease had been negotiated between the city's legal department and the developer, and staff advised the council that the property tax treatment would be reviewed by the assessor and recorded to preserve the city’s potential exemption for an entertainment venue.

Council and members of the public also discussed a related community-development item: a final plat for a five‑lot Wood Myer Subdivision and a conveyance of Lot 6 related to the theatre and lease. Judith Lee asked that the plat be tabled until Junior Theatre Inc. is fully involved and the lease is vetted.

The council did not vote to approve the lease Wednesday; members directed staff to return with additional information about tax treatment, estimated repair and maintenance costs (including the boiler), insurance/indemnity language, and options for whether the city could or should acquire and retain the theatre rather than leasing it. The matter was placed on discussion for the next meeting.

Council members and members of the public urged clearer communication and stronger contractual language to protect the city and the nonprofit's operations while preserving the historic campus.

Ending: Officials said they would return with a more detailed financial and legal analysis, including projected five‑year maintenance estimates and clearer allocations for utilities and liability, before any final vote.