Fort Myers officials accept staff recommendation to issue default notice for McCollum Hall redevelopment

Fort Myers officials voted to accept staff's recommendation to issue a notice of default and terminate the redevelopment agreement for McCollum Hall, city attorney staff said, after the developer missed multiple contract milestones and acknowledged an inability to secure project financing.

Attorney Clifford Shepherd said the recommended termination rests on several contract provisions. "They have missed a couple of important milestones under the agreement, and by not insignificant amounts of time," Shepherd said, and cited failures to commence construction and to provide financing commitments under the redevelopment agreement's termination provisions.

The vote to accept staff's recommendation was moved by Commissioner Burson and seconded by Commissioner Banc and passed after a voice vote. No roll-call vote or tally by name was recorded in the meeting transcript.

Why this matters: McCollum Hall is a long-delayed redevelopment project in the Dunbar neighborhood. Public commenters and the developer have framed the dispute around funding and community stewardship; city staff said the contract allows termination when key milestones or financing commitments are not met.

Public comment and developer response Miles Alexander III, identifying himself as principal of Alexander Goshen (a partnership with Goshen and Cornerstone), said he and his partners had sought a reimbursement grant and later asked to withdraw a $4,200,000 request. "We simply ask for reimbursement grant," Alexander said. He told the council he believes the Dunbar community has been "overlooked and undervalued" and said he felt the council and staff had treated his group unfairly.

A second commenter, Kayon Henderson, identified the project as a matter of community history and equity. "McCollum Hall is not just bricks and mortar. It's the heartbeat of African American history in Fort Myers," Henderson said, urging urgency and partnership from the city.

Contract provisions and financing Shepherd told the council the recommended termination cites multiple provisions of the redevelopment contract, including the provisions referenced in the meeting as Articles "8 1 1" and "8 6 1 b," which the attorney described as addressing failure to commence construction and failure to provide final design documents or financing commitments. Shepherd said the contract provision tied to financing permits termination without a cure period, whereas the provision tied to failure to begin construction would generally trigger a 30-day notice to cure.

Commissioner Darla Bond asked for clarification about the city's previously discussed $4.2 million and whether that funding was meant to be a drawdown reimbursement. Bond also asked whether the developer needed the $4.2 million to secure private financing; Shepherd replied that he had seen admissions in the project record that the developer had been unable to obtain traditional commercial financing despite multiple efforts.

Council direction and next steps After the vote, an unidentified commissioner said the project is not stopped and that the city and the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) remain committed to completing the project, adding that the city had committed CRA dollars to move the work forward. The transcript does not record further details on amounts, timing, or specific next steps.

The action taken at the meeting is a procedural step authorized by the redevelopment agreement and does not by itself specify a replacement developer or a construction schedule. The contract language cited by the city attorney allows immediate termination based on financing defaults; if termination proceeds, the contract's provisions would determine next steps for the property and any reprocurement or remediation.

Community context Speakers at the meeting tied McCollum Hall to the Dunbar neighborhood's history and expressed concern about displacement and the character of future redevelopment. The meeting transcript records calls from community members for respect, urgency and partnership as the city and CRA decide how to proceed.

Details not specified in the meeting record include a final vote tally by member name, the precise charter or ordinance numbers governing CRA funding commitments, and any timeline or dollar amounts for the city's stated commitment to provide CRA funding to complete the project.