Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEOPW OMNI CRA 1998-05-14 Minutesa CITY OF MIAMI NGORN�ORATED � 'k I� 96 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON MAY 14, 1998 PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Walter J. Foeman/City Clerk INDEX MINUTES OF CRA MEETING MAY 1491998 ITEM NO. SUBJECT LEGISLATION 1. CHAIRMAN TEELE CREDITS THE DOWNTOWN 5/14/98 DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ITS CHAIRMAN, BOARD DISCUSSION MEMBER GORT, FOR NEGOTIATIONS TO RETAIN WTVJ, 3 CHANNEL 6, IN MIAMI -- CHAIRMAN TEELE INDICATES THAT HOLLAND AND KNIGHT CONTINUES TO SERVE AS COUNSEL TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT BOARD -- PRESENTATION OF HILDA TEJERA AS NEW DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. 2. (A) PRESENTATION BY ERDAL DONMEZ: BACKGROUND 5/14/98 INFORMATION REGARDING DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS OF CITY SEOPW/CRA PARCELS KNOWN AS BLOCKS 45,55 AND 56. M 98-6 (B) APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE TRANSFER OF RIGHTS AND 3-13 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAWYER'S WALK, LTD. AND SOUTHPORT CO. AND MC SQUARED PARTNERS, COLLECTIVELY KNOWN AS MCMC JOINT VENTURE WITH RESPECT TO THREE PARCELS IN CITY KNOWN AS BLOCKS 45,55 AND 56 IN OVERTOWN. 3. APPOINT BOARD MEMBER GORT AS VICE CHAIRMAN OF 5/14/98 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA). SEOPW/CRA M 98-7 14-15 4. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRMAN TEELE ON COLLECTIVE 5/14/98 EFFORTS OF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND DISCUSSION THE JOINT VENTURE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MEDIA 15-16 CENTER IN PARCEL KNOWN AS BLOCKS 45, 55 AND 56 - DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO REMOVE POLICE LOTS WITH IMPOUNDED CARS FROM AREA. 5. STIPULATE THAT APPROVAL IN PRINCIPLE OF 5/14/98 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAWYER'S WALK, SEOPW/CRA LTD. AND SOUT 4PORT CO. AND THE MCMC JOINT M 98-8 VENTURE, FOR BLOCKS 45, 55 AND 56, EXPIRES IN 180 DAYS 16-18 IF NO LEASE AGREEMENT OR DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS PRESENTED TO THE CITY WITHIN THAT TIME FRAME. MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 140' day of May, 1998, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, met at its OMNI Community Redevelopment Agency meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida, in regular session. The meeting was called to order at 12:08 p.m., by Presiding Officer/Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (hereinafter referred to as Chairman Teele), with the following board members found to be present: ALSO PRESENT: Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Hilda Tejera, Executive Director Robert Friedman, CRA Attorney Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk Maria J. Argudin, Assistant City Clerk ABSENT: Board Member Humberto Hernandez Chairman Teele: Is Mr. Friedman here? Board Member Plummer: Huh? Chairman Teele: Mr. Mayor, are you ready to start? Board Member Plummer: He's out of here. He's not... Chairman Teele: Yes, I know. I understand but are you going to, please, join us in this? Please? Before we start, can we stand and have a moment of silent prayer, particularly, in honor of Margaret Douglas, who has passed away this morning, but, I think, the most appropriate memory that we could give is the answer she would always give to people who would thank her for saving the Everglades and her response was always, "it hasn't been saved yet." [Note For The Record: Moment of silent prayer: Margaret Douglas passing -- thanks for saving the Everglades.] Chairman Teele: Mr. Mayor, members of the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), is the May 14, 1998 13 Manager present? Mr. Attorney, thank you very much for being present. Is the Manager or his representative present? Is there anyone here representing the Manager? Board Member Plummer: The indication to me this morning, that they were not a part of CRA and would not be here. They were in the building earlier but they, obviously, left. Mr. Robert Friedman: Commissioner, I did speak with the Manager this morning and he, as Commissioner Plummer indicated, he did not know that he was needed here today. Chairman Teele: Well, in the memorandum that I issued clearly establishes that intertwining relationship with the Manager and ... and that anything that is done by the CRA must be subsequently approved by the Commission, the City Attorney, and the Manager and ultimately by the Mayor. I think we can certainly move forward in an expeditious manner, if we're not doing everything two and three times. So, in that regard, if the Manager can arrange to have someone here or Mr. Attorney, if you would take notes as relates to the Manager and we appreciate your being here. As you know, this emergency Board of Directors meeting has been called by the Southeast Overtown/Park West Omni Redevelopment District for the specific purpose of considering the agreements as it relates to the three tracts of land that are currently in the CRA district in southeast Overtown. I don't want to be labor the point, but I think the CRA should give great credit, not only to its staff but to the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) and to Commissioner Gort, who has stayed very closely involved in the project and the CRA ... as Chairman of the CRA and as a Commissioner, particularly, where this area resides, I have become much more knowledgeable of the importance of the redeveloping of Overtown/Park West area in conjunction not only with the Omni but also with the DDA and Commissioner Gort, I want to thank you and your staff for staying closely abreast. By way of background and just so that the board is clear and we're moving forward on the same set of facts, when I was appointed Chairman of the CRA, the law firm that represented the CRA was Holland and Knight and that law firm continues to represent Holland and Knight in the person of Mr. Robert Friedman, who is here. It's my understanding, Mr. Friedman, that your firm has represented Holland and Knight has represented the CRA pretty much since its inception, is that convect? Mr. Friedman: That's correct. Chairman Teele: And you have been the principal attorney? Mr. Friedman: That's correct. Chairman Teele: And I would like to report to the CRA board that Mr. Friedman and his associates at Holland and Knight have not only been extremely competent but they've been extremely professional and responsive and, Mr. Mayor, I particularly wanted you to be aware of that. Subsequent to my arrival at the CRA, the executive director resigned and this board approved a resolution that approved the hiring of an administrator and at ... an intreg... an executive director and other staffing would be ... as a part of a so-called contracting out concept, which we have not moved to. As you know, the administrator of the CRA is Hilda Tejera, who is acting interim executive director. This may be the first time since Hilda has formally assumed that responsibility, but I think, Mr. Mayor, it is important that we involve women in our senior management positions, particularly competent people, and Miss. Tejera has performed, not only in an outstanding manner, but she has worked diligently to keep everybody informed, I believe, as to the activities; has taken any number of activities associated with this and been very responsive and so, Miss. Tejera, I want to thank you publicly for your response. I know that you've worked with most of the Commissioners before. I know Commissioner Regalado has expressed his pleasure publicly about your performance.... 2 May 14, 1998 Board Member Regalado: Absolutely. I've worked with her for many years and I will tell you that you made the right choice. Chairman Teele: And I know that the Mayor has a relationship ... a working relationship with Miss. Tejera and I just ... Mr. Mayor, hope that ... that she doesn't need to find a job ... another job. I hope you'll be satisfied with Miss. Tejera because she's... Mayor Carollo: We are. She's a good employee. itiVl%il 1 rulx-f ITS CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBER GORT, FOR NEGOTIATIONS TO RETAIN WTVJ, CHANNEL 6, IN MIAMI -- CHAIRMAN TEELE INDICATES THAT HOLLAND AND KNIGHT CONTINUES TO SERVE AS COUNSEL TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT BOARD -- PRESENTATION OF HILDA TEJERA AS NEW DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. Chairman Teele: With the, Mr. Mayor, the issue that is before us is the Channel 6 and the other related issues. I think it would be very helpful if there was a little bit of background presented by Mr. Erdal because, I think, if we don't understand the history of the parcel, it could be very confusing. And, Mr. Erdal, from the time the Mary Elizabeth Hotel, which is the site of this property, the City acquired it through the CRA or independently, and why don't you just bring us up from that point of view. But, I think, it's important that you know that the property was once a part or even the center piece of historic Overtown and the business and commerce of Overtown. Mr. Erdal, who is very well-known to you. REGARDING DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS OF CITY PARCELS KNOWN AS BLOCKS " " AND 56. (B) APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE TRANSFER OF RIGHTS AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAWYER'S WALK, LTD. AND SOUTHPORT CO. AND MC SQUARED PARTNERS, COLLECTIVELY KNOWN AS MCMC JOINT VENTURE WITH RESPECT TO THREE PARCELS IN CITY KNOWN AS BLOCKS 45, 55 AND 56 IN OVERTOWN. Mr. Erdal Donmez: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Erdal Donmez. I'm a development coordinator with the Community Redevelopment Agency. My tenure with the City goes back to 1984 and I have been working with Southeast Overtown/Park West Inner Projects since 1988. I guess a lot of people retired and left and I'm one of the few left, Tina, but historical information about the project area. The three block areas we're talking about, Blocks 55, 45 and 56 were acquired with ... among other funds, principally with the funds, you know, from the Federal Government under the transit dollars dedicated for the Metro -Rail area. The three blocks area is what you're looking at is approximately 7.5 acres. It was awarded to a development company called Circa, Barnes, Sawyer's back in 1987. But that particular firm couldn't initiate the developments. The City decided to sever its ties with the firm and, subsequently, the firm turned around and sued the City. Back in ... back in 1991, the... Chairman Teele: Just to complete that, the firm was successful and received two million dollars ($2,000,000) from the City of Miami, even though that firm did not, in my judgment, grow a blade of grass as a development. Mr. Donmez: And that was the only firm which has made money in that area so far. While we May 14, 1998 were going through litigation, we were instructed to issue an RFP (Request For Proposal) for the same three blocks. Mr. Ted Weizzel is the principal developer and part of the Indian River Communities Corporation, along with Mr. and Mrs. Sawyer, who were the principal property owners in the area, decided to put together a development package and responded to our RFP and their proposal was to own the proposals submitted at the time. The City Commission decided to approve the proposal but, while we were going through the litigation, the project would be on hold because it was ... there was a very little chance that any banks would loan on that property so long as there was a litigation. The litigation lasted for about six years and in 1996...I believe it was August, 1996... the City finally decided to comply with the court order and paid Bill Wilson two point five million dollars ($2,500,000) and, at the same time, the property became free and clear for redevelopment. Mr. Ted Weizzel and his partners have been talking to a number of developers to develop the site. Their idea was really concentrating on residential developments, you know, with instant retail. But, at the same time, since 1991, market conditions have changed. They were considering mix -use, you know, developments. Really, any viable alternative, you know, presented to this developer and would pursue on that. About two weeks ago, we heard about NBC (National Broadcasting Corporation) wanting to stay in Miami but, by the parent General Electric pushing them or decided to, you know, move the station to by in Broward County. It's our understanding that NBC is interested in staying in Miami. That's their objective, but, at the same time, they have to work with the parent company, which has found a site in Miramar. The City of Miramar prepared a package of...which, I guess, it's worth in the neighborhood of eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) to lure the station to move up there. We've been in touch with a number of well-known developers in town, principally Mr. Johnny Winton, who is really no stranger to us. He's been in Miami for many years and he's been serving in Downtown Development Authority for many years. Another partner is Seth Gordon. I guess, needless to say, Seth is Mr. Miami and he's part of this development team and there is also another gentleman called Mr. Hellerin, who was the Chairman of the board for the Winthrop Corporation, which ended up buying the former Centrust Tower from the FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corp). The idea is, the joint venture was trying to acquire a site near Miami Arena in the Park West site and they pretty much agreed on a price with the property owner, somewhere around 16, 17 dollars ($17.00), but the price started creeping up as they got closer and closer to committing the deal, so, at the same time, I guess it's difficult to pass by in the area of Miami Arena and not to see these vacancies in three blocks. So, they inquired about the availability of these three blocks. I think they contacted the City Manager first and Asset Management Department notified the Manager's office that city... city ... CRA, which holds deed for these parcels. That's how we became involved in the process. The fact of the matter is, the CRA owns the property but, at the same time, back in 1991, we awarded certain rights to this development team, principally headed by Ted Weizzel and Indian River Investment Communities. We have an RFP still in effect and it has terms and conditions, which we have to adhere to. Our answer to joint venture was, as far as we're concerned, there is a development entity out there. There is nothing preventing the new venture talking to the existing developer. If they can entertain a new development program and we will sit down and discuss and that's what we have right now. The joint ventures would like to acquire the development interest of Sawyer's Walk, Ltd. at a price they negotiated in and among themselves. This is a two party private ... you know, negotiations and private agreement. But, for the sake of keeping NBC as an anchor/tenant at the site and convincing NBC management that we are ratifying, approving, and encouraging NBC to stay in town and they need our ratification of an agreement negotiated between them. So, that's why we're here. There's one other thing. You know, we made it very clear. If this deal goes through, you will have opportunities to act on the development program and long-term lease agreements, among other, you know, agreements. We want to make sure that Indian River Investment Development Team, which also develops the Poinciana Village Condominiums, invest a portion or necessary funding in the Poinciana Village Development so that the project is also completed at the same time or, you know, at tandem. That's the objective of the CRA. 4 May 14, 1998 Chairman Teele: I think that's a good point to pause because, I think, it's important that the CRA members clear any questions about that before we go into this issue. Because... Board Member Plummer: Yeah, I've got questions. Chairman Teele: ... it's not as simple as he's explained it and there are a lot of issues that probably should be discussed but I don't want to bring up any that no other member has. Board Member Plummer: Is ... isn't Indian River the group that came back to this Commission for like four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) as a grant, as a gift, because they didn't know how to do business and they did less than they were supposed to? And now you're asking me to join hands with a group that couldn't do before and the tract record is they're not going to be able to do it now? I'd also... [Note For The Record: Board Member Carollo exited the meeting at approximately 12:24 P.M.] Chairman Teele: No, no. No, no. We're not asking you to do that at all. What we're asking you to do is, simply to ratify in principle, in principle ... I'm not prepared to ratify the agreement. Ratify in principal the transfer of the development right, which was granted by the City of Miami in 1996, to Indian River, to a new development team. Board Member Plummer: All right. I understand that fully, but my question is, you know, we look to the future based on history. I don't know, for the record right now, what vested rights they had in 1991. You're saying they had some vested rights. Was there a stipulation as to how long those vested rights lasted? Chairman Teele: No. And a lot of this is going to hinge, quite frankly, on the CRA Board of Directors and the CRA staff. Unfortunately, and this is really to my horror and shock, when I was elected as Chairman of the CRA, I asked the same question. There has been absolutely no requirements placed on the successful bidder since August of '96, and the successful bidder won when? Mr. Donmez: July of 1991. ChairmanTeele: OK. In July of'91. So, just understand what happened. In'87, you awarded to a company called Circa Sawyer. Board Member Plummer: I remember. I was here. Chairman Teele: Circa, then, said the City and the CRA failed to do a series of things that frustrated their development. Board Member Plummer: I remember. Chairman Teele: The City said you're crazy. This is ridiculous. We're not going ... we're not going to pay you a dollar and not only that, we're going to transfer your development rights. So, we went out with another RFP in'91. In'91 Mr. Weizzel's group won the RFP. The litigation was going on. The court came back and said, ah-ha, City, CRA, you're wrong. You didn't do everything that was required. You did frustrate the developer. You owe two point five million dollars ($2,500,000), OK? So, we paid two point five million dollars ($2,500,000). That all cleared up in August of'96. 5 May 14, 1998 In December of '97, when I took over as Chairman of the CRA, I asked the question that you're asking: What have we done to require them to move forward? The answer is, nothing. Right now Mr. Weizzel and his group have a development, have a letter, a memo ... a resolution from the City of Miami. That's all they have, a naked resolution. But that resolution... Board Member Plummer: What does it say? Chairman Teele: Say again? Board Member Plummer: What does the resolution say? Chairman Teele: It says, you're hereby granted the authority and the exclusive right to develop these three parcels of land. Board Member Plummer: That's... Chairman Teele: Now, what should have happened is the question. Board Member Plummer: But there is no time limit on it. Chairman Teele: No time limit. What should have happened, the City, the CRA, and the developer should have come back with a contract or a development plan, OK? That's when all of these agreements are ironed out. And until there's a development plan or a development... is there a term of art that they use, Erdal? Mr. Donmez: Item sorry, sir? Chairman Teele: A development plan, which, in effect, is a contract. Is that the instrument that you would... Mr. Friedman: Mr. Chairman, would you let me read from the resolution? That might help to clarify. Mr. Donmez: Yeah. Mr. Friedman: This is resolution number 91-509 of the City Commission. Section number one says that Sawyer's Walk, Ltd., is hereby selected in principle as the successful proposer for the development of City -owned blocks 45, 55, and 56, located in the Southeast Overtown/Park West Community Redevelopment District, subject to the said proposer producing sufficient evidence to demonstrate, prior to the approval of the lease agreement, its financial capability to successfully undertake and complete the planning and design, construction, leasing, and management of residential and commercial uses on said blocks 45, 46, and 56. Section two, "The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to negotiate a lease agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney with said proposer for the development of those blocks." Section three, "The said negotiated agreement is required to comply with the City's minority procurement ordinance requirements and other relevant laws and to include, but not be limited to the following terms and conditions," and, then, there are several terms and conditions. Board Member Plummer: Well, wait a minute. I'm not a lawyer. That doesn't ... it doesn't mean diddly. Mr. Friedman: Well... 6 May 14, 1998 Board Member Plummer: In principle means just that. That, to me, is not a vested interest. In principle is what we're talking about doing today. Is what Art is asking us to consider today. That's not a vested interest, is it? Mr. Friedman: We believe... Board Member Plummer: You believe what? Mr. Friedman: That there are some rights that the developer has... Board Member Plummer: In principle. Mr. Friedman: In...in... in some shape or form. Board Member Plummer: Such as? Mr. Friedman: The right to negotiate with the City in good faith. Board Member Plummer: But, when is it going to take place? Mr. Donmez: Mr. Chairman? Board Member Plummer: But, again, I don't understand, Art... Mr. Donmez: Mr. Chairman? Let me.... Board Member Plummer: I don't think they have any vested rights. Chairman Teele: That's your opinion. I happen to have a similar view but with a totally different... with a totally different way of getting there. The problem is this, I believe, let me just say two things, just so everybody's on notice. Mr. Weizzel has engaged an attorney. Board Member Plummer: Good. Chairman Teele: OK. Board Member Plummer: We've got plenty of them. Chairman Teele: Mr. Weizzel's attorney is the same attorney that represented Circa, OK? Now, I happen to believe that we may be able to win, but I happen to believe that there will be no decision by a court on this matter for at least 24 months and probably 36 months. And I don't think there's any lawyer, whether it be the City Attorney or outside counsel that would opine that a decision on this matter that would give the City the authority to act as if we are the exclusive owner and grant anything could be cleared within less than a year. Board Member Plummer: Yeah. But, Art, in my opinion, I don't think that we should make money for Mr. Weizzel and West Indies or the Sawyer's, when they don't have any right to make money. Now, again, if we allow them to transfer these rights, which I say they don't have, and this deal doesn't go through, where are we? Chairman Teele: Well, where we are right now, anyway. 7 May 14, 1998 0. Board Member Plummer: No. Well, you're saying in principle. But now, to me, in principle gives no vested right. Chairman Teele: OK. Let's ... lefs agree with that. The question becomes this, Commissioner, do we want ... there's one other thing that you should know. Hilda Tejera... Miss. Tejera and her staff have begin an orderly process of perfecting the type of issue that you're raising, that is, a month ago Miss Tejera sent the development team a letter advising them of the resolution. Giving them 60 days or whatever normal period of time would be cure, to present. We're doing this, she's doing this under the advice of counsel. Normally, in this type of process you could expect a minimum of 180 days before we would even be back in a position to talk about taking a legal action. I think it's very clear that Ted Weizzel and his group have lost not less than two point five million dollars ($2,500,000) on the Poinciana Village, which is the fourth parcel. Board Member Plummer: Its a disaster. Chairman Teele: And I think the real question that you've got to ask yourself and the real question that a court would ask itself, why did the City Commission give Indian River the right to develop three parcels, when they hadn't done the first parcel? So, I mean, I think you need ... we need to look at this thing totally and look at it the way an outside party is going to look at it. One of the main objections that Weizzel has had ... and there's a series of letters ... is the impoundment lot. And I got to tell you, when you look at the things that they have asked the City to cure from prostitution, drug sales, from all of this, you know, you can say that's a part of doing business in the City of Miami, but I can tell you that there is a prima facie case that Mr. Weizzel can present that the City and the CRA have not kept up all of its ends of the deal. I don't believe they could succeed in any way, shape, or form. But I think there's a lot more here than is being discussed now. Board Member Plummer: I have one final question. I think one final. How does this relate to trying to save WTVJ? Chairman Teele: Very simple. What we're proposing to do is simply to ratify the private agreement between Mr. Weizzel and Mr. Winton's group, in principle, to allow them to transfer the development rights and place on Mr. Winton and his group the difference... the responsibility of coming forth and doing everything in that resolution that Mr. Friedman just read. Board Member Plummer: Can we avoid the word "in principle" and say only if a deal is consummated? I mean, because... Chairman Teele: Well... Board Member Plummer: ... if we're ... we're talking that in principle gave Weizzel a vested interest Board Member Gort: J L, my understanding is, they've got to come back to us and everything's got to be approved by us. Board Member Plummer: No, no, no, no, no. Excuse me, Willie. You're telling me that, potentially, that the word "in principle" to Weizzel gives them some vested interest? I disagree but the lawyer says he thinks they might have something. I think he's wrong, but he's the lawyer. Now, if I'm going to give Winston... Winton "in principle", that gives him a vested right, which I'm not going to do. Chairman Teele: Commissioner, if that makes you comfortable, I'm sure we can come to terms to May 14, 1998 drop the word "in principle" but let me tell you this. I don't think... Board Member Plummer: A concluded deal. Chairman Teele: ... the word "in principle" is what gives them the right. What gives them the right is you gave out an RFP. You ... you issued an RFP. Board Member Plummer: Right. Chairman Teele: They responded. They won. And whether it said "in principle" or not or whether it just says, we hereby ... we hereby recognize you as the only successful legal bidder, they won that right in principle or in reality at that point and time. Board Member Plummer: And our mistake was not putting a drop dead date. That was our mistake. Chairman Teele: Absolutely. Among others, that was clearly our mistake. Commissioner Gort. But let me just say this before you do. Commissioner, I think it's very important that you understand the deal. What's driving the deal at this moment is Channel 6, OK? But let's just take one step back. What's the business of the City of Miami and what is the business of the CRA? What's our core business? Board Member Plummer: To develop. Chairman Teele: Our core business is to develop for revenues, tax increment revenues. We are the Board of Directors of a tax increment district, which is negative to date. It is nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000) negative. That is, we have more debt annually to the tune of nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000) than we take in in the tax increment. This development, as proposed, which includes Channel 6, would bring in about seven hundred and fifty to nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000) a year fully billed out. Channel 6... the Channel 6 portion of it is ten million dollars ($10,000,000), ten to twelve million dollars ($12,000,000). The full development is sixty million dollars ($60,000,000), so I don't ... I want to just put on the record that, while Channel 6 is important and it's what's driving the time line, the overall development is about six times the Channel 6 piece of this. Board Member Plummer: Dumb question: Why would Channel 6 deal with Winton when they could deal with Weizzel? Chairman Teele: They could, except for the fact that all they want is literally one sixth of the property and they could never put the deal together because their cost for dirty... Commissioner Gort, please don't leave. Please don't leave, Commissioner. Board Member Gort: If it's going to be a debate between the two of you and we're not going to participate... I'll shut up. Chairman Teele: I apologize. Commissioner Gort, the answer to your question is, they only want one sixth of a deal and this is about six sixth of the deal. Commissioner Gort. I apologize. Board Member Gort: J.L., my problem is, unfortunately, I was not aware this meeting was going to take place. I know the importance of the meeting. That's why I came here today. You know, I'm not that bright, I'm not that smart, and I'm not an attorney, so my question is very simple. My understanding is, these individuals, we gave them the right to develop this property in 1996. They 9 May 14, 1998 have not come up with any plan. This transaction here is an agreement between the two individuals to come up with one and come back to us with a plan to be developed. Am I correct? That's my understanding of this transaction put in simple words. Is that what's taking place in here? And simple, what we accepted is the two individual private enterprises get together, come up with a proposal that's got to come back to us and it's got to be approved by us. Mr. Donmez: That's correct, sir. Board Member Gort: And, then, we can apply all the things and rectify some of the mistakes that we made in 1996, like putting a time span on all those things to ... is that my understanding of the... Chairman Teele: You're correct, Commissioner. Board Member Gort: OK. I'm ready to make a motion to move. We've been working on this for a long time. Park West Overtown has been in DDA since 20 years ago. We have not been able to develop because we have not had people to go there willing to develop. Now we finally got somebody to do it. I'm ready to make a motion to.... Chairman Teele: Motion by Commissioner Gort to approve the ... to approve on behalf of the CRA moving forward with the transfer of the development right. Board Member Regalado: I second the motion. Board Member Plummer: Under the motion, I would like to have it amended to read that if there is no deal consummated with NBC, there is no deal. Chairman Teele: I would not vote for that but ... I mean, you're entitled to the motion. Board Member Plummer: OK. Chairman Teele: Because the NBC piece is ... is one ... is one sixth of the deal. Board Member Plummer: I understand that. Chairman Teele: It's the thing that's moved the time line, but it's one sixth of the deal. Is there a second to Commissioner Plummer's... is there a second to Commissioner Plummer's amendment? Board Member Regalado: I ... well, I did second Willie's motion but I got a question. If we start this process, do we have ... not a guarantee but at least a ... some idea that Channel 6 would consider not taking any action until this situation is resolved? Chairman Teele: This may be a good point to introduce, Mr. Winton. Mr. Winton, Johnny Winton, welcome. Mr. Johnny Winton: Thank you. I need to read my name into the record? Board Member Plummer: Of course. Mr. Winton: My name is Johnny Winton. Address is 150 Southeast 2nd Avenue, Miami, Florida. Board Member Gort: You're pretty loud for one building, so go ahead. 10 May 14, 1998 Mr. Winton: I'm sorry. Commissioner Regalado, I'm sorry, I didn't understand your question Board Member Regalado: If we approve this, in principle or in concept, do we have not a guarantee but at least some idea that Channel 6 would not make a move to Broward until they are able to ascertain whatever deal you can offer or the City can help. Because, as I'm told, also will be participants eventually in the deal. So, what I'm trying to find out is whether we could retain NBC or at least they don't make a decision. Mr. Winton: I understand the question. And, please understand, this is a real estate transaction and, unfortunately, in my business, there is no deal done until everybody signed off. So that's important to understand. But, in direct answer to your question, this appears to be the last opportunity we have for the City of Miami to keep NBC in the City of Miami. Yes, they have a sincere interest. Will they do this deal unequivocally? We don't know that. None of us will until they sign on the bottom line. But their interest is clearly this. They have a major telephone conference call going on right now between GE (General Electric), NBC, New York, and NBC locally, talking about their schedule and they're on a time schedule and are expecting a phone call back from me this afternoon updating them on the decision of this board. Board Member Regalado: Well... Board Member Gort: That's another ... I'm sorry. Board Member Regalado: No. I'm ... I just want to say that we, as a City, we have a responsibility for several reasons but historic reasons, being the principle one, WTVJ used to be Channel 4, it was the only and the first TV station that broadcasted in South Florida and has been part of a history of the City of Miami and now we only have one, another TV station, Channel 10, and all of the TV stations in our area, they sign off with the name Miami. So, I would ... I would think that we need to do whatever is necessary to keep TVJ. Mind you, that this is a good deal for the City in terms of jobs and all that, but from the image point of view ... and I will tell you something else. I know something about TV and I would tell you that for TVJ to move to Miramar, it would be very difficult for them because the satellite trucks now can be signals anywhere, but you don't have the possibility of editing and if you're going to report events on the Miami Arena, on the Dade County Government, the City of Miami Government, Downtown Miami or Coconut Grove, you're going to have to drive with your truck to edit for at least an hour to Miramar, not only in the rush hour. So I would think that TVJ is also considering the technical aspect of this, not only the fact that they are in Miami but I will tell you that I am sure that they understand that from the technical point of view, from the proximity of where news are happening ... I mean, there was a fire today in Miramar, so that would be the only thing that they could cover. So, I think that it's important that the City team stresses that ... I'm sure that they know but my ... my question is, if we go ahead with this, you know, will this mean we'll stop their... Mr. Winton: It does not guarantee anything. Board Member Regalado: I know. Mr. Winton: But, as I said, it does give us the only opportunity, remaining opportunity we have to keep them in the City. Board Member Gort: Gentlemen, I think there's two things we've got to look at: We can go the way J.L. was stating a little before. We could take the developers and ask them ... take them to court. We could take two years in doing this and you have three parcels of land standing there by itself. I think we have the opportunity for the first time, in a long time, for somebody to come with a 11 May 14, 1998 million dollar ($1,000,000) project. I'd like to ask a question, call the question. Chairman Teele: Call the question. On the motion... Mr. Friedman: Before you go on, I'd like to mention that there's a modification to the proposed amendment that's in your package that I would like to make. Simply, to change the reference in the resolution to "developer rights" to just "rights", without specifically referring to them as developing rights and to make that change throughout the resolution. Chairman Teele: Without objection. Would you state the motion, Mr. Attorney, the way you would like to hear it, Commissioner Gort's motion? Mr. Friedman: OK. This would be a resolution to approve, in principle, an agreement between Sawyer's Walk, Ltd., and Southport Company, and MC Squared Partners, collectively known as the MCMC Joint Venture relating to certain rights with respect to three parcels in the City of Miami known as blocks 45, 55, and 56. Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Clerk... Board Member Plummer: Without spelling out the certain rights. Chairman Teele: Mr. Clerk, would you call the roll? Mr. Donmez: Mr. Chairman... Mr. Friedman: There's one other change. I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. At the end of section two, we would like to delete the last phrase, which begins "and subject to confirmation from the City Attorney." We don't...I don't ... I ... as your attorney, I don't believe that that last phrase has any relevance to this and we'd like to drop it. Board Member Plummer: What's wrong with it? Mr. Friedman: It just is... Board Member Plummer: Second person looking at it? You got a problem with that? Mr. Friedman: Well... Board Member Gort: Our attorney does. Board Member Plummer: OK. I hear you. [Note For The Record: Board Member Hernandez entered the meeting at approximately 12:29 p.m.]. Board Member Hernandez: I have a question just, Art, for you. Chairman Teele: Question by Commissioner Hernandez. Commissioner Hernandez. Board Member Hernandez: Chairman Teele, I don't know if you've covered this at the beginning. My question is a simple one. A hundred percent of the revenues created by the lease and/or the taxes will stay within the district? 12 May 14, 1998 Chairman Teele: They ... the hundred percent of the tax increment stays within the district, which would be billed out about 75... seven hundred to fifty thousand dollars. Board Member Plummer: Annually. Board Member Hernandez: All right. Chairman Teele: Call the roll, please. The following motion was introduced by Board Member Gort, who moved its adoption: SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 98-6 A MOTION APPROVING IN PRINCIPLE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAWYERS WALK, LTD. AND SOUTHPORT CO. AND MC SQUARED PARTNERS, COLLECTIVELY KNOWN AS THE MCMC JOINT VENTURE, RELATING TO CERTAIN RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO THREE PARCELS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI KNOWN AS "BLOCKS 45,55 AND 56." Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board member Humberto Hernandez Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. ABSENT: None. Board Member Plummer: I have stated for the record I'd do anything in God's green earth to keep WTVJ/Channel 6 here. I think this ... what we're doing here today just muddy's the water, makes more money for somebody else, and I ... unless it's stipulated that deal is made or not, it is a dead issue. I can't vote for it, so I have to vote negatively. Board Member Hernandez: Chairman Teele. Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Board Member Plummer: We adjourned? Chairman Teele: In just a moment. Board Member Plummer: Oh. 13 May 14, 1998 3. APPOINT BOARD MEMBER GORT AS VICE CHAIRMAN OF COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA). Chairman Teele: Commissioner Hernandez. Board Member Hernandez: Yes, I'd like to be recognized. Chairman Teele: Yes. Board Member Hernandez: Because of what happened in the last meeting, there was the unavailability of the Chairman at the point and time when we had a problem in conducting a meeting, I would like to, if you would accept, appoint Commissioner Willie Gort as Vice Chairman... Chairman Teele: Second the motion on the... Board Member Hernandez: ...on the CRA. Board Member Plummer: I'm sorry, I didn't hear the motion. Board Member Hernandez: Appoint Willie Gort as Vice Chairman of the CRA. Board Member Plummer: Second the motion. Chairman Teele: All those in favor, say "aye." The Board Members (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those oppose? The following motion was introduced by Board Member Hernandez, who moved its adoption: SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 98-7 A MOTION APPOINTING BOARD MEMBER WIFREDO GORT AS THE VICE CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR BOTH THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DISTRICT AND THE OMNI DISTRICT. 14 May 14, 1998 Upon being seconded by Board Member Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board member Humberto Hernandez Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 4. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRMAN TEELE ON COLLECTIVE EFFORTS OF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE JOINT VENTURE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MEDIA CENTER IN PARCEL KNOWN AS BLOCKS 45, 55 AND 56 - DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO REMOVE POLICE LOTS WITH IMPOUNDED CARS FROM AREA. Chairman Teele: Mr. Winton. Mr. Winton: May I address the board one more time? The City of Miami is taking ... taken a lot of blows in the last couple of years. We've been ... our development team has been involved in this process of trying to put this deal together to save WTVJ and to build a much bigger media communication facility in the downtown area. And I think it's important that you understand the commitment that a number ... a very significant number of people within the City have made to this process in the last two weeks. The opportunity to move this project to the sites that we're talking about came about six o'clock Friday evening, 13 days ago only. This is a very complicated deal. We talked to, over the course of the ... and we have talked to Chairman ... to Commissioner Teele earlier in that week. Over the weekend, we talked to Commissioner Gort. We called the City Manager's Office. The City Manager got his team working on the whole thing. We got the CR... Commissioner Teele got the CRA involved and we've been working with the staff from the county; with your staff from the City Manager's Office; colon, with Hilda's staff at the CRA, non stop for 13 days and I can tell you in most of these processes the business community feels that, when you're trying to get these things done, there are a lot of obstructionists around telling you why something can't be done. We have walked through this entire process in 13 short days, in a very complicated deal, with everyone in the public sector working their rear ends off to make something positive happen from this. So, I wanted to publicly thank everyone for their help. I think they've done a great job. Board Member Gort: Well, I'm going to ask you for a favor. Would you write a letter to the Wall Street Journal? Let them know. When you go to the Chamber of Commerce meetings, let them know that the City is willing and the City's friendly and wants to bring business to downtown Miami. Board Member Plummer: Can I ask a question? Mr. Winton: I absolutely will? Board Member Plummer: Mr. Winton? 15 May 14, 1998 Mr. Winton: Yes, sir. Board Member Plummer: If we transfer the lease right to you and your group, do we have any idea what your agreement is between your group and WTVJ? Do we have any idea? Mr. Winton: Well, we don't have that deal worked out with WTVJ. Board Member Plummer: But I'm saying... Mr. Winton: But I'm assuming you would. Chairman Teele: At that time, we will know. But I can tell you what the deal's going to be. The deal's real simple. WTVJ is prepared to pay one point two million dollars ($1,200,000) for dirt, for land in Miramar or wherever. In effect, the Winton Group is going to build it for ... going to charge them one point two million dollars ($1,200,000) for their portion of the land, try to build their development, which is a ten million dollar ($10,000,000) development. Mr. Winton: Or they may develop it. Who knows at this point. Chairman Teele: Or they may develop it. The key is, is to try to put together a critical mass that goes forward and builds a real communications post -video, post -production facility that has recording and all of that, and that's what Miami Beach is working on right now. Board Member Plummer: There's one other important thing. Very important. Are you finished, Mr. Chairman? Are you finished? Chairman Teele: Commissioner Hernandez? Board Member Hernandez: I'm finished. Chairman Teele: Commissioner. Board Member Plummer: Would you like to wish our Chairman a happy birthday? It's his birthday. Would you like to wish our Chairman a happy birthday? Chairman Teele: Well, the happiest birthday... well, the happiest birthday I could get and I want to note the presence of Christina, the Assistant Manager, representing the Manager, is if you all would continue to work with the Police Department, to meet the requirements of removing the impoundment lots to more appropriate locations in the area. 5. STIPULATE THAT APPROVAL IN PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAWYER'S WALK, LTD. AND SOUTHPORT CO. AND THE MCMC JOINT VENTURE, FOR BLOCKS 45, 55 AND 56, EXPIRES IN 180 DAYS IF NO LEASE AGREEMENT OR DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS PRESENTED TO THE CITY WITHIN THAT TIME FRAME. Chairman Teele: Mr. Winston, I feel obligated because, again, I don't want to say this to be damaging and create a debate, but it is important that there be participation from the Overtown community and that there be an opportunity for African Americans that have lived in that area to be a part of this development and I know you all are taking that under advisement. I want to say that on the record and I want to further say to Commissioner Plummer and the members of the CRA board, I will not support this ultimately if there is not a full release from the Weizzel Group to the 16 May 14, 1998 CRA and the City of Miami no matter how, you know, disinterested we may appear to be, it is required that there be a full release because I do not want another Circa Sawyer kind of activity where the City gets sued after the fact, so I just want to be on the record on that. Board Member Plummer: Art, the thing again, are we compounding another mistake on a first mistake? Is there a time limit to this deal? Chairman Teele: I... Board Member Plummer: It seems like to me... Chairman Teele: I think there should be ... Commissioner, if you would like a motion that this deal expires within a hundred... Board Member Plummer: Six months? Chairman Teele: A hundred and why days... Board Member Plummer: Whatever. Chairman Teele: ... if there is not a lease agreement presented to this City of Miami Board Member Plummer: Six months is fine. But we ... we screwed up again in the first instance by not putting a drop dead date. Chairman Teele: Is there any objection to 180 days? Board Member Plummer: Can I... Chairman Teele: Erdal? Mr. Donmez: Commissioner, the agreement has built in, you know, schedule with dates... Chairman Teele: But that's... that's between the two of them. Mr. Donmez: Yes. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Plummer's right. Board Member Regalado: Second. Chairman Teele: Motion that this resolution shall expire in 180 days, if a lease agreement and development plan are not presented back to this board for approval. Seconded by Commissioner Regalado. Objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board Members (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? 17 May 14, 1998 CIM The following motion was introduced by Board Member Plummer, who moved its adoption: SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 98-8 A MOTION STIPULATING THAT THE APPROVAL IN PRINCIPLE BY THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) OF PROPOSED AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAWYER'S WALK, LTD. AND SOUTHPORT CO. AND MC SQUARED PARTNERS (MCMC JOINT VENTURE) RELATING TO CERTAIN RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO THREE PARCELS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI KNOWN AS "BLOCKS 45, 55 AND 56, EXPIRES IN 180 DAYS FROM TODAY IF THERE IS NO DEAL PRESENTED TO THE CITY OF MIAMI BY SAID PARTIES. Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board member Joe Sanchez Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Board Member Plummer: I move we adjourn. Chairman Teele: Without objection. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 12:54 P.M. ATTEST: Walter J. Foeman CITY CLERK Maria J. Argudin ASSISTANT CITY CLERK ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR. CHAIRMAN 18 May 14, 1998