Financial Watchdog Jax: DLP Capital Questions Put Gateway Jax Under New Scrutiny

John Hawley

Sep 13, 2026

The Development Divide Part VI

Jacksonville has already committed nearly $100 million in incentives to the first phase of Gateway Jax, one of the largest redevelopment efforts underway Downtown.

Now one of Gateway Jax’s principal financial partners, St. Augustine-based DLP Capital, is facing a sustained series of public allegations from Barry Minkow, a convicted fraudster who today publishes financial-fraud investigations under the One Minute on Fraud banner.

That history makes Minkow an unusual—and deeply complicated source. It also means his conclusions should not simply be repeated as fact. The more important question for Jacksonville is whether the public records and financial documents he is pointing toward raise issues worth independently examining before taxpayers are asked to support additional Gateway development. Increasingly, some of them do.

Why DLP Capital Matters to Gateway Jax

DLP isn't a distant lender with a small interest in the project.

DLP founder Don Wenner told the Jacksonville Daily Record in 2023 that DLP Capital and JWB Real Estate Capital owned Gateway Jax 50-50. Wenner said DLP would serve as the primary lender and provide two-thirds of the equity, with JWB supplying the remaining third.

Jacksonville's own Downtown Investment Authority records continue to show the relationship. A December 2025 DIA staff report identifies DLP Capital Partners as manager of DTJ Fund LLC, an owner entity involved in Gateway's N7 project. It also identifies DLP Jax Ventures LLC as a manager of Gateway Companies LLC, with DLP Capital Partners managing DLP Jax Ventures. In other words, scrutiny of DLP matters to Jacksonville because DLP is embedded in Gateway's ownership and financing structure.

Jacksonville Has Already Committed $98.58 Million

Jacksonville City Council previously approved approximately $98.58 million in incentives for Gateway's first four Pearl Square blocks. DIA records break that into approximately $38.946 million in completion grants and up to $59.628 million in REV grants, supporting a minimum private capital investment of about $373.7 million.

That does not mean Jacksonville has already written Gateway a $98.58 million check. Much of the package depends on construction, completion and future tax performance. But Gateway has subsequently pursued additional public assistance.

For the Publix-anchored N7 project, DIA considered incentives reaching $49.662 million, including a $28.25 million completion grant and as much as $21.412 million in REV assistance. That makes the financial strength of Gateway's private partners a legitimate taxpayer issue.

Who Is Financial Watchdog Barry Minkow?

Anyone evaluating Minkow's claims should understand his background.

Minkow became infamous through the ZZZZ Best fraud case of the 1980s and later served prison time. Years after reinventing himself as a fraud investigator, he was convicted again after disseminating false allegations involving homebuilder Lennar while trading in its securities. That history is not incidental.

It means The 101 Report is not treating Minkow's allegations as established findings, and Jacksonville officials shouldn't either. DLP has also publicly rejected his accusations. In a May 2025 statement circulated to investors, the company called Minkow's claims false, inflammatory and misleading and emphasized his criminal history. The appropriate response is therefore neither belief nor dismissal. It is verification.

What Minkow Is Alleging About DLP Capital

Minkow's reporting has increasingly focused on three areas: leverage, property valuation and cash flow.

In July, he published an analysis claiming that recorded debt across a portfolio of DLP-related multifamily properties totaled approximately $1.766 billion against $1.873 billion in what he characterized as demonstrable property value, producing a 94.3% loan-to-value ratio. Including certain future-advance provisions, he calculated 106%.

Those are Minkow's calculations, not findings by a regulator or court.

And there is an important limitation: some of his comparisons rely on values established through property-tax litigation or tax proceedings. A tax value is not automatically equivalent to a lender's appraisal, market value or investment valuation.

The same caution applies to his analysis of two Houston properties refinanced with a $118 million loan. Minkow calculates an LTV near 96% using court-established values of approximately $123 million.

The arithmetic can be checked.

The harder question is whether those are the appropriate valuation figures to use. That is precisely why lender appraisals, audited financial statements and complete loan records matter more than competing claims.

A New SEC Filing Raises Independent Questions

The strongest development may have nothing to do with Minkow personally.

On Aug. 26, a proposed DLP Access Fund filed an amended registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The fund would invest substantially all of its assets in private funds sponsored by DLP Capital.

The filing does not accuse DLP of wrongdoing. But its risk disclosures independently identify several issues relevant to Minkow's criticisms. The prospectus says valuations of underlying real-estate assets and loans involve substantial judgment, are generally determined by or at the direction of DLP Capital and may differ from prices ultimately realized in a sale.

It also says DLP controls or influences the underlying funds' valuations, distribution policies and redemption terms, creating potential conflicts of interest. And it describes substantial liquidity limitations, including circumstances in which withdrawals can be delayed, restricted or otherwise unavailable when desired.

Those disclosures do not validate Minkow's broader allegations. They do independently establish that valuation judgment, liquidity, sponsor concentration and conflicts are material investment risks within the DLP fund structure.

Jacksonville Did Perform Financial Underwriting

It would be inaccurate to suggest Jacksonville approved Gateway incentives without financial analysis.

DIA's N7 records include development costs, projected rents, operating income, debt assumptions, developer equity, tax projections and public return-on-investment calculations.

The proposed agreement even required at least $49.662 million in qualifying developer equity before payment of a completion grant. That is meaningful taxpayer protection. The more precise question is different:

Did Jacksonville underwrite the project—or also the financial partners behind it?

The public records reviewed by The 101 Report provide extensive detail about project economics.

What is far less visible is whether Jacksonville separately examined DLP Capital's broader liquidity, leverage, fund-level obligations, valuation procedures or ability to continue providing Gateway equity and debt if financial conditions deteriorated.

That doesn't mean such due diligence wasn't performed.

It means the publicly available records reviewed for this article don't establish its extent.

What Jacksonville Should Ask Before Approving More Gateway Incentives

Jacksonville doesn't need to decide whether Barry Minkow is trustworthy. Officials can ask for the documents.

Has DIA or the City reviewed current audited financial statements for the Gateway partners? Has it examined DLP's liquidity and leverage? Does it know which DLP funds are supplying Gateway debt and equity? Has anything changed since the original $98.58 million incentive package was approved? And have officials reviewed the new SEC filing and its risk disclosures?

Those aren't accusations.

They're underwriting questions.

Financial Watchdog Jax: Follow the Documents

Minkow's history gives Jacksonville every reason to scrutinize what he says.

It also gives Jacksonville no reason to ignore independently verifiable documents simply because he found them first.

DLP disputes his conclusions. No SEC enforcement action identified in this review accuses DLP Capital of the financial misconduct Minkow alleges. But the Gateway relationship is real. Jacksonville's $98.58 million incentive commitment is real. The proposed additional incentives are real. And the new SEC-filed risk disclosures are real.

The question for Jacksonville taxpayers is therefore narrower—and more important:

Before Jacksonville commits more public money to Gateway Jax, has anyone underwriting the deal for taxpayers independently examined the financial condition of the private partners supplying its capital?

That is the question Financial Watchdog Jax should keep asking.