Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEOPW OMNI CRA 1998-09-22 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. DATE October 7, 1998 F Community Redevelopment Agency Board SUBJECT JFter Minutes and Revised Clerk Report of CRA Meeting of September 22, FROi !�✓ REFERENCES1998 8oe ENCLOSURES City Clerk Minutes and Legislation Enclosed please find copies of minutes and revised Clerk's -Report of CRA meeting of September 22,1998. As in the past, whenever this office is requested by any one member of the CRA Board to do a special transcript, we also distribute said material to the rest of the board members for informational purposes. WJF:sl c: Honorable Members of the CRA Donald Warshaw, City Manager Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney Hilda Tejera, Executive Director, CRA William Bloom, CRA Board Attorney CITY OF MIAMI OMNI/CRA MI N UT E S OF MEETING HELD ON September 22, 1998 PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Walter A Foeman/City Clerk ITEM NO. I -I 07�/_ MINUTES OF OMNI COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING SEPTEMBER 22,1998 SUBJECT LEGISLATION 1. ESTABLISH ORDER OF THE DAY FOR COMMUNITY 9/22/98 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY / SOUTHEAST DISCUSSION OVERTOWN/PARK WEST AND OMNI REDEVELOPMENT 1-2 DISTRICTS. 2. (A) CLARIFICATION REGARDING TWO THOUSAND 9/22/98 DOLLAR PER UNIT DISCOUNT OFFERED BY SEOPW/CRA R 98- DEVELOPER FOR CITY EMPLOYEES IN CONNECTION 21 WITH PURCHASE/RENTAL OF CONDOMINIUM OR 2-12 RENTAL APARTMENTS WITHIN THE POINCIANA VILLAGE PROJECT AREA LOCATED ON BLOCK 46 OF SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. (B) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BY COMMISSIONER PLUMMER THAT PAGES 14 THROUGH 17 OF THE LOAN AGREEMENT WERE MISSING; FURTHER EXPLANATION TO THE COMMISSION THAT HE WAS ABLE TO OBTAIN INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE PACKET, WHICH WAS FORWARDED TO HIM FROM TED WEITZEL (ATTORNEY FOR POINCIANA VILLAGE OF MIAMI, LTD.) AND DELIVERED TO WILLIAM BLOOM (HOLLAND AND KNIGHT) FOR HIS REVIEW. (C) COMMISSIONER PLUMMER EXPRESSES CONCERN FOR THE PROTECTION OF WILLIAM SAWYER AS IT PERTAINS TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND POINCIANA VILLAGE OF MIAMI, LTD. (D) CHAIRMAN TEELE ACKNOWLEDGES KEY COUNSEL AND PARTIES INVOLVED WITH THE AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE AGREEMENT. (E) CLARIFICATION REGARDING THE NEW PARTNERSHIP OF POINCIANA VILLAGE, WHICH IS COMPRISED OF POINCIANA VILLAGE OF MIAMI AS GENERAL PARTNER AND FANNIE MAE AS ITS LIMITED PARTNER. (F) ESTABLISHMENT OF A FINAL DATE (WITHIN 20 BUSINESS DAYS FROM THE DATE APPROVED) IN WHICH POINCIANA VILLAGE OF MIAMI, LTD. MUST EXECUTE THE AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE AGREEMENT, WHICH WAS TO BE RATIFIED AND APPROVED BY THE CRA BOARD, SUBJECT TO DELAYS, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DEFINED IN LEASE AGREEMENT. (G) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF HISTORICAL LAND VALUE DESIGNATED FOR POINCIANA VILLAGE PROJECT; FURTHER DIRECTING CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO MAKE WILLIAM AND BERNICE SAWYER FINANCIALLY WHOLE, RESULTING FROM CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS ON SAID PROPERTY NEEDED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN PARCELS IN CONNECTION WITH THE POINCIANA VILLAGE PROJECT. (H) REQUEST BY CRA ATTORNEY FOR POINCIANA VILLAGE PROJECT, WILLIAM BLOOM, TO HAVE ATTORNEY SUSSMAN CLARIFY AND REFUTE ALLEGATIONS REGARDING LACK OF PERFORMANCE BY THE CRA RESULTING FROM ALLEGED DELAYS. (I) RATIFY APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST LEASE AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND POINCIANA VILLAGE OF MIAMI, LTD., PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE CRA. 3. TEMPORARILY TABLE PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO 9/22/98 APPROVE COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DISCUSSION CRA AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 12 IN CONNECTION WITH FUNDING BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CRA. 4. APPROVE ASSIGNMENT OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS 9/22/98 WITH RESPECT TO 24 UNITS TO BE COMPLETED TO A SEOPW/CRA R 98- NEW PARTNERSHIP, NAMELY, POINCIANA VILLAGE, 22 LTD. 13-14 5. BRIEF DISCUSSION REGARDING FINANCIAL 9/22/98 CONDITION OF POINCIANA VILLAGE PROJECT DISCUSSION (INCLUDING PARTNERSHIP, GENERAL PARTNER, 14-15 LIMITED PARTNER AND CREDITORS). 6. CONTINUE DISCUSSION REGARDING COOPERATION 9/22/98 AGREEMENT BETWEEN CRA AND THE DEPARTMENT SEOPW/CRA R 98- OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. 23 15-18 7. APPROVE PROPOSED RESOLUTION REGARDING 9/22/98 COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CRA AND SEOPW/CRA R 98- THE CITY OF MIAMI CONCERNING CERTAIN CAPITAL 24 PROJECTS FOR DESIGNATED PUBLIC PARKS WITHIN 18-22 THE CITY, WHICH WILL BE ADMINISTERED BY CRA. 8. STATUS REPORT REGARDING INTERLOCAL 9/22/98 AGREEMENT - DISCUSS AND DEFER STATUS REPORT DISCUSSION REGARDING INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO CREATE 23-25 OMNI TAX INCREMENT TRUST FUND. 9. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ISSUE REQUEST FOR 9/22/98 QUALIFICATIONS, REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND/OR SEOPW/CRA R 98- BIDS TO SECURE SERVICES FOR LANDSCAPE 25 ARCHITECTURE, MISCELLANEOUS FENCE OMNI/CRA R 98-6 CONSTRUCTION, MISCELLANEOUS CONSTRUCTION 25-26 MANAGEMENT AND ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH SPECIALIZATION IN HISTORIC PROPERTIES. 10. COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONER PLUMMER 9/22/98 REGARDING HIS PLEA TO THE PUBLIC TO WRITE IN DISCUSSION THEIR OPINIONS CONCERNING SERVICES PROVIDED 26-27 BY MIAMI TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. 11. DEFER APPROVAL OF CRA BOARD MINUTES. 9/22/98 DISCUSSION 27 MINUTES OF OMNI COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OF THE BOARD MEMBERS OF MIANII, FLORIDA On the 22nd day of September, 1998, the Board of Directors of the Community Redevelopment Agency met at its regular meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida in regular session. The meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m. by Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr., with the following board members found to be present: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member J.L. Plummer, Jr. Board Member Joe Sanchez ALSO PRESENT: Hilda Tejera, Executive Director William Bloom, CRA Attorney Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk Maria J. Argudin, Assistant City Clerk Chairman Teele: Can we all stand for a moment of silent prayer? And I would hope that you would keep Hurricane George in your prayers. 1. ESTABLISH ORDER OF THE DAY FOR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY / SOUTHEAST OVERTOWNJPARK WEST AND OMNI REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS. Chairman Teele: This is a meeting of the Community Redevelopment Authority of the Southeast Overtown/Park West and Omni Redevelopment Districts. The time is now 6:07 p.m.. The date is Tuesday, September 22nd, 1998. This meeting was called primarily for the purpose of satisfying Commissioner Plummer's concerns and those of the CRA Board regarding certain matters relating to the development and the closing of the Poinciana Village. The item is Item Number IA, B and C. The CRA is represented by Erdal ... help me with your last name, Erdal, even though I work with you all day every day. Mr. Erdal Donmez (Attorney for Community Redevelopment Agency): It's Donmez, Commissioner. Chairman Teele: Donmez? Mr. Donmez: Yes. Chairman Teele: Who is the ... who's standing in ... Development Coordinator who's standing in for the... Mr. Donmez: I'm standing on behalf of Hilda Tejera, whose mother happens to be very ill, and she's at the hospital, and she couldn't be here. Chairman Teele: And the CRA is represented by our continuous counsel, Holland and Knight, represented by Mr. Friedman and City Attorney staff is ... City Manager staff is present, I believe, and the City Attorney is acting on behalf of...Mr. Maxwell's acting on behalf of the City Attorney, who has followed the matter very closely. Mr. Clerk, was this meeting noticed and advertised properly? September 22, 1998 Mr. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Yes, it was. Chairman Teele: OK. Commissioner Plummer, we'll yield to the City Attorney, if it's all right with you, or however you would like to proceed on the first item. Board Member Plummer: Sir, you can do what you wish. I would first like to thank Mr. Bloom, who provided me with all of the documents which I asked for, and I had the opportunity, through the weekend, to go through a great number of questions I had, I've already spoken to him about. Most of them are resolved. And counsel for Poinciana Village, whether or not you wish for me to put them onto the record or not is up - - but my comments are satisfied, that this protection had been built in through the loans of both the bank and through Fannie Mae. So, if you want me to put my comments again on the record, I'll be happy to but it's... Chairman Teele: I think it would be helpful if you put generally... Board Member Plummer: All right, sure. Chairman Teele: Just so that there's sufficient to show that you're ... that this was an action that was taken. OFFERED BY DEVELOPER FOR CITY EMPLOYEES IN CONNECTION WITH PURCHASE/RENTAL OF CONDOMINIUM OR RENTAL APARTMENTS WITHIN THE POINCIANA VILLAGE PROJECT AREA LOCATED ON BLOCK 46 OF SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. (B) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BY COMMISSIONER PLUMIVIER THAT PAGES 14 THROUGH 17 OF THE LOAN AGREEMENT WERE MISSING; FURTHER EXPLANATION TO THE COMMISSION THAT HE WAS ABLE TO OBTAIN INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE PACKET, WHICH WAS FORWARDED TO HIM FROM TED WEITZEL (ATTORNEY FOR POINCIANA VILLAGE OF MIAMI, LTD.) AND DELIVERED TO WILLIAM BLOOM (HOLLAND AND KNIGHT) FOR HIS REVIEW. (C) COMMISSIONER PLUMMER EXPRESSES CONCERN FOR THE PROTECTION OF WILLIAM SAWYER AS IT PERTAINS TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND POINCIANA VILLAGE OF MIAMI, LTD. (D) CHAIRMAN TEELE ACKNOWLEDGES KEY COUNSEL AND PARTIES INVOLVED WITH THE AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE AGREEMENT. (E) CLARIFICATION REGARDING THE NEW PARTNERSHIP OF POINCIANA VILLAGE, WHICH IS COMPRISED OF POINCIANA VILLAGE OF MIAMI AS GENERAL PARTNER AND FANNIE MAE AS ITS LIMITED PARTNER (F) ESTABLISHMENT OF A FINAL DATE (WITHIN 20 BUSINESS DAYS FROM THE DATE APPROVED) IN WHICH POINCIANA VILLAGE OF MIAMI, LTD. MUST EXECUTE THE AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE AGREEMENT, WHICH WAS TO BE RATIFIED AND APPROVED BY THE CRA BOARD, SUBJECT TO DELAYS, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DEFINED IN LEASE AGREEMENT. (G) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF HISTORICAL LAND VALUE DESIGNATED FOR POINCIANA VILLAGE PROJECT; FURTHER DIRECTING CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO MAKE WILLIAM AND BERNICE SAWYER FINANCIALLY WHOLE, RESULTING FROM CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS ON SAID PROPERTY NEEDED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN PARCELS IN CONNECTION WITH THE POINCIANA VILLAGE PROJECT. (IT) REQUEST BY CRA ATTORNEY FOR POINCIANA VILLAGE PROJECT, WILLIAM BLOOM, TO HAVE ATTORNEY SUSSMAN CLARIFY AND REFUTE ALLEGATIONS REGARDING LACK OF PERFORMANCE BY THE CRA RESULTING FROM ALLEGED DELAYS. (I) RATIFY APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST LEASE AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND POINCIANA VILLAGE OF MIAMI, LTD., PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE CRA. Board Member Plummer: All right, sir. The first comment that I had was in reference to the Amen date. There had to be an Amen date, and I am told that that, Mr. Bloom, is 265 days. You had a chance to check that? 2 September 22, 1998 Mr. William Bloom: The project... Chairman Teele: Your name and title for the record. I didn't introduce you. Mr. Bloom: My name is William R. Bloom. I'm with Holland and Knight. The amendment provides that the construction of the 24 units must commence within 60 days from the date the amendment is executed by all parties, and it must be completed within 245 days from the date of the... Board Member Plummer: That's the 24 units? Mr. Bloom: Twenty-four units. Board Member Plummer: All right. And the other units, the condo units? Mr. Bloom: The condo units ... the 91 units, which will either be condominium units, hotel or an extended stay facility, or a combination thereof, they must obtain a building permit within 30 months from the date of the agreement, and they must complete construction within 24 months after obtaining the building permit. Board Member Plummer: All right. Mr. Bloom: The key issue that... Board Member Plummer: That was one of my concerns... I'm sorry. Mr. Bloom: The key, Commissioner, is, it's all based upon the date the amendment has been executed. At this point... Board Member Plummer: And that was the next ... Mr. Chairman, it was my, I guess, false impression that, at the previous CRA meeting, that a document was approved spelling out timeframes. I was very much surprised to find that, that document had never been signed so, in effect, the time did not start running. Where I thought there had been a 14 to 15 day, which there had to be a commitment to the bank, it was of no value because the document which I thought had been signed was not. The next item of concern that I had was the rent that was due to the CRA and clarification as to using that for city employees. A second part of that question is, what happens if, in fact, the city employees do not utilize the 50 percent of the rent money that is due? Mr. Bloom: If the city employees do not take advantage of the two thousand dollar ($2,000) per unit discount that's been offered by the developer, then the developer will be forgiven its obligation with respect to the past due rent. Board Member Plummer: So, the potential is, he can be forgiven for the full sixty-five thousand? Mr. Bloom: That's correct. Board Member Plummer: OK. The other part was, in fact, that in the document... Chairman Teele: Excuse me, Commissioner. May I just on that point? Board Member Plummer: Sure. Chairman Teele: How far back do these rents go? Mr. Bloom: Nineteen eighty-nine, Commissioner. Chairman Teele: OK. So, I think it's important that the record reflect that the sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) reflects rents that are arrears since 1989, and this will bring that ... this will dispose of that issue in September 22, 1998 that manner. Board Member Plummer: The next question I had was one of the document, which was given to me and that's been clarified, of the loan agreement, pages 14 through 17 were not there, and it was covered in another area. Another area that I had was in reference to Mr. Sawyer. I have seen the gentleman so many times here. The man, of course, is elderly, and I was concerned that he was going to be protected and not, in any way, shape or form be stepped out as a stepchild. I wanted to make sure of that, and I've been given by counsel as to ... our counsel that, in fact, he is protected and he will amount ... the amount of money that he had. The next item that I had was in fact... Chairman Teele: Commissioner Plummer? Board Member Plummer: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: On that point, let me say this because there's been several people that have raised the question. It might be helpful if we just got everybody... establish everybody on the record on your side, Mr. Friedman. We have Mr. Bloom, who is not with ... who is with Holland and Knight, but here in the capacity as special counsel to the CRA. And would you introduce the other counsel for ... special counsel for the CRA? Mr. Bloom: Elizabeth McBride, also with Holland and Knight. Chairman Teele: All right. Ma'am, would you just step forward so every ... so the record is clear here. OK. So, when the bills come in, I want everybody to know that this is not a favorite relationship. There's a lot of people working on this. At the same time, I think it's appropriate if we establish on the record the representation of Mr. Weitzel, and then we'll conclude by establishing on the point that Commissioner Plummer was on. Counsel, would you come forth and... Mr. William Sussman: Thank you, sir. My name is William Sussman. I'm the attorney for Poinciana Village III and Poinciana Village of Miami, Limited, and also for TedWeitzel and Mr. Horace Davis. Chairman Teele: And they both are present? Mr. Sussman: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: Also, the Chair recognizes the presence of Mrs. Sawyer, who is the distinguished lady there in the hat, in the ... who just raised her hand, and she is a limited partner and was a part of the RFP (Request For Proposal), which Commissioner Plummer has expressed some concern about. If I may, I just want to get this on the record. Would you read into the record the Sawyer's obligations or the Sawyer's financial commitment on this project? Because I don't think that Commissioner Plummer's statement as ... I'm concerned about Commissioner Plummer's statement being misleading to the public. Mr. Bloom: The Sawyers made an initial capital contribution to the partnership of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000). In addition, they made a loan to the partnership of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000). Interest has been accruing on those amounts since August, I believe, of 1993. And it's my understanding that the Sawyers are currently owed approximately five hundred and fifteen thousand dollars ($515,000). I think it would be appropriate for Mr. Sussman to explain the consent that he's obtained from the Sawyers and what payments are currently being made to the Sawyers. Chairman Teele: I think it's important that the CRA understand that this is a three hundred and fifty thousand dollar ($350,000) cash commitment, a five hundred thousand dollar ($500,000) actual obligation. Because one of my concerns, and I will state it on the record, if we were to start talking about wiping out the project and wiping ... I mean, we're wiping out a lot of people here, and I just want that to be clearly understood by the Board as we consider this application. Mr. Sussman: Thank you, sir. Mr. and Mrs. Sawyer, Sawyer Development Corp. is a limited partner in Poinciana Village of Miami. They have been represented by a Robert Setchen, who is representing them on 4 September 22, 1998 a pro bono basis. Mr. Setchen and I have negotiated for some time, and have reached complete agreement on how the rights of Mr. and Mrs. Sawyer are to be addressed. As a result of that agreement, Mr. and Mrs. Sawyer... actually, Mrs. Sawyer is going to be executing a consent in the form that he and I have agreed to. The consent has not yet been executed. It is arranged that I'm going to be at Mrs. Sawyer's house tomorrow at 10 a.m... between 10 and 10:30. I had sent all of the documents up to Mr. Setchen. He had reviewed and initialed them and Federal Expressed them to Mrs. Sawyer, so she has those documents in her home now. That has been confirmed. I'll be going tomorrow to supervise the execution of those documents. Board Member Plummer: We're showing a change in partnership or ... excuse me. A change in name from Poinciana Village to Poinciana III or II. Mr. Sussman: Sir, that's not completely correct. We have two limited partnerships. The limited partnership that you've been dealing with to date is Poinciana Village of Miami, Limited. Board Member Plummer: Right. Mr. Sussman: A new limited partnership has been formed. The general partner of the new ... excuse me. The name of the new limited partnership is Poinciana Village III, so we have a second limited partnership. Board Member Plummer: Are the Sawyers involvement in that? Mr. Sussman: Only as limited partners of the general partner. To be specific, the general partner of the new limited partnership is Poinciana Village of Miami. The limited partner of Poinciana Village III, the new limited partnership, is Fannie Mae. Board Member Plummer: OK. Mr ... if I you want me to continue, Mr. Teele? Mr. Bloom: If I could clarify that. Chairman Teele: Please, Commissioner Plummer. Did you want to add something on that? Mr. Bloom: I wanted to clarify a little bit. Basically, what's happened is, Poinciana Village of Miami, Limited used to have a hundred percent interest in the development. Now, with respect to these 24 units, their interest in the new partnership is 51 percent, with Fannie Mae having a 49 percent interest. Board Member Plummer: Is the now Village II1, is that limited to the 24 units, or is it the 24 and the 91? Mr. Bloom: My understanding, it's limited to the 24 at this time. Board Member Plummer: Well, I'll ask the question of counsel. Mr. Sussman: Mr. Bloom is correct. The new limited partnership, Poinciana Village III, has an interest only in the completion of the 24 units. There will be an assignment of lease ... a partial assignment of leasehold interest executed by the parties. The 91 units, when Poinciana Village of Miami gets rights to them, will be solely in Poinciana Village of Miami. Poinciana Village III will have no rights in it. Board Member Plummer: So, they're not divesting that at all? Mr. Sussman: That's correct, sir. Board Member Plummer: And the loans that are presently through Nation's Bank of a million five hundred fifty thousand are for the 24 units only? Mr. Sussman: That is correct. And those ... the obligors on that will be Poinciana Village II1. Board Member Plummer: All right. September 22, 1998 Mr. Bloom: Commissioner, again, further clarify. Poinciana Village of Miami, Limited has encumbered its future development rights with respect to the 91 units. Board Member Plummer: Yeah. Mr. Bloom: But only obtain the rights to the extent that Poinciana Village of Miami, Limited has those rights and so, if the requirements of the amendment are not complied with, and Poinciana Village loses those rights, then the lender has no security in those 91 units. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman, my final ... well, excuse me. There was another question. Because I found another name, and I did not know the new partner, and I did not know his background or his ability to be involved, and his 50 percent partner. And I'm assuming that Fannie Mae and Nation's Bank have clarified that he does have what he says he has. Mr. Sussman: Oh, yes. Board Member Plummer: Partner of being a partner. I don't know the gentleman, so I can't speak to it. Chairman Teele: Who is that gentleman? Who are you talking about? Mr. Sussman: Mr. Davis, Horace Davis. Board Member Plummer: He is the new partner? Mr. Sussman: No, he's not new. He's been involved in Poinciana Village of Miami... Board Member Plummer: But he's in the new Village III? Mr. Sussman: No, sir. There are only two partners in Poinciana Village III, the general partner, which is Poinciana Village of Miami, the first limited partnership. Board Member Plummer: Right. Mr. Sussman: And the limited partner, which is Fannie Mae. Board Member Plummer: OK. Mr. Chairman, my final was, after reading the documents taken care of and, as I always was concerned, was in default. I have no further to put onto the record, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: All right. Do you have... Commissioner Gort? Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman, I have one question. All of this was in front of us way back and we tried to do something to help this. My question is, when this contract was originally signed, my understanding is, they did not have any limited time. It was up. Board Member Plummer: It wasn't signed. Chairman Teele: This contract ... are you talking about the last CRA meeting? Vice Chairman Gort: No, I'm talking about the original contract. Chairman Teele: The original contract goes back to'89, doesn't it? Vice Chairman Gort: I understand. Board Member Plummer: Ten years. Chairman Teele: The answer to your question is, there have never been realistic or legally binding 6 September 22, 1998 timetables and milestones in this particular partnership. If I may take that one step further. We have gone back and started with the three block parcel that we talked about for Channel 6. We started with that. We've gone back and put in very realistic timetables on everything and then we've come forward with the 91 unit high rise, which had some timetables in, we're sort of constrained by that. They have, I think, two years, as I recall. But we're in the process of trying to back into all the timetables and have milestones in addition to timetables. Board Member Plummer: That's two and -a -half. Two and -a -half years. Chairman Teele: Two and -a -half years. Vice Chairman Gort: I just wanted to make sure we put that on the record. Chairman Teele: Yes. Board Member Plummer: Now, my final that I have ... I'm sorry to say final, final, but it is the final. Are we going to put in this a provision that these agreements in the new documents have to be signed within five days, 10 days, a drop dead date, so that we know that, in fact, the documents are signed, and I'm not going to be traveling now 60 days thinking that the timeframes have gone by the board? I would assume, whatever is a reasonable period of time ... he's meeting tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock. That's pretty quick. Chairman Teele: Let me ask this. And I'm going to tell you something that I've learned a lot about in this development. And I must say, this is a very complicated... and the reasons for these delays of over ... almost 10 years now are meaningful, and some may rest with the developer, some may rest with the City but a lot of it has to do with the fact that inner city development is difficult, but in Miami there's a special problem, and that's hurricanes. We are now in a position where they legally cannot close this document because of insurance requirements because... Mr. Sussman: Excuse me, sir. We ... Mr. Weitzel has made some magic and we ... if the bank can close tomorrow... Chairman Teele: You all have the insurance under escrow? Mr. Sussman: Yes, sir. Is that correct? Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: OK. What is a realistic timeframe by which Commissioner Plummer is requesting that you all close this ... that you all be required to execute the documents, whether you close or not? And if you don't execute, the language would be that the offer is withdrawn and the... Board Member Plummer: Null and void. Chairman Teele: And everything is null and void, or the lawyers will give us the right language, but I need to know what's a realistic timeframe for you all to execute. Now, I assume executing, in your mind, is assuming that you're going to close at the bank. But this ... but Commissioner Plummer's question relates not to whether you close at the bank, but whether or not you execute. Mr. Sussman: I understand, sir. We had a ... Mr. Bloom and I had a conference call this afternoon with the attorney for Nation's Bank, the lead lender, and it was his opinion that on or before 1:00 Thursday we would be in a position to close. However, with the hurricane coming, I'm concerned. Board Member Plummer: Counsel, I am not trying to set the time. If it's 10 days, it's fine. If it's 15 days, it's fine. You want 30 days? That's fine. But the only way that clock starts running is the day those documents are signed and executed. Now... Mr. Donmez: Commissioner? Board Member Plummer: I don't think 30 days is out of the question in any way, shape or form. September 22, 1998 Chairman Teele: Erdal? Mr. Donmez: We would like to suggest 10 working days. Ten business days from today. Board Member Plummer: That's fine. That's fine. I have no problem with that. Mr. Donmez: The developer feels pretty comfortable that they're getting ready to close. In the event the hurricane comes to Miami, then we will add on, you know, a few more days but ... or revisit the issue. But if there are no hurricane threats, 10 business days from today. Board Member Plummer: Well, you cover yourself under hazards also, so don't worry about that. Mr. Donmez: Yeah. Chairman Teele: All right. Staff is recommending 10 working days. Mr. Sussman: May we have a moment, please, sir? Chairman Teele: Sure. One of the things that I'm going to ask staff to do and to work with the Community Development staff is that, I think it needs to be put on the record that this land is land that was once the property of the Sawyers. I think, when the city went out with the RFP back in the 19... initially in 80... in the early 80s, and then again in the late 80s, a lot of the language talked about the previous landowners. It was a site of the Mary Elizabeth Hotel in the general proximity, one of the center piece of this community for 40 or 50 years. It was a part of the history of this city and I think it's most unfortunate that this city and the CRA have provided what was viewed to be an opportunity that is turned into being, I think, less than an opportunity for the Sawyers, and I would hope that the CRA staff and the Community Development staff would seek a way to make the Sawyers whole, at least as to the funds that they have put into this project within the Community Development regulations and laws, and all of the restrictions. So,Erdal, I hope you all are listening and Madam Manager, I hope you are listening. I can't see you but I suppose you're there. Madam Manager? Ms. Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): Are you speaking to me? Chairman Teele: Yes, ma'am. Aren't you the Assistant Manager? Ms. Bianchino: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: Would you just come forward and introduce yourself, please? Ms. Bianchino: Dena Bianchino, Assistant City Manager. Chairman Teele: I hope you all would take that to heart because I think, if you go back and look at the documents that started back in the early 80s and Commissioner Plummer would be the institutional member, it basically provided for a preference for opportunity for the previous landowners, and this was land that was a part of, I guess, the bond initiatives and the 108s to do urban renewal and urban revitalization. We took the land, if you will. We acquired it from this family with the understanding that we would give first preference to the land owners to be a part of the redevelopment. It's very clear to me that the Sawyers have not had an opportunity here. They've had something that is tantamount to less than an opportunity. Ms. Bianchino: We'll review it in light of the Federal guidelines. We'll be happy to do that. Chairman Teele: Thank you. Mr. Sussman: I've consulted with Mr. Davis and Mr. Weitzel. There's no one that wants to close this transaction more quickly and more urgently than those two gentlemen. Two things have to happen. Three. The Commission has to approve the project this evening. Number two, Mrs. Sawyer has to sign the consent that we've agreed to, every line, every word. Number three, the bank, the lead bank of the five bank 8 September 22, 1998 consortium, has to set a closing date. Mr. Bloom was on the phone with me this afternoon, as I said, where we tried to set a closing date. We don't know if something is going to come up in the next four or five hours, or four or five days. That the bank will say, wait a minute. We misplaced a number. We have to review this. That happened as recently as two days ago. They changed their numbers. Chairman Teele: All right. But we need a number of days that everybody can find everything that's missing. Mr. Sussman: We would request 20 working days, subject to delays caused by the hurricane. For instance... Chairman Teele: I think that's agreeable. Commissioner Plummer, can you agree... Board Member Plummer: I have no problem with that. Chairman Teele: I mean, we want to work this out, too. We're not going to hard time you. OK. Board Member Plummer: But fully acknowledging on the podium that, in 20 days, if it is not completed, that this agreement passed here this evening is null and void. Understood? Mr. Sussman: It was 20 working days, sir... Board Member Plummer: Twenty working days. Mr. Sussman: Is what I requested. Chairman Teele: Twenty working days, plus accommodation for any disruption based upon the hurricane, that is, if the banks are closed two days, then you'll add two more days. If the banks are closed four days, then you'll add four more days. Mr. Sussman: Well, the only thing I can think of...I'm not trying to put road blocks. We very much appreciate the fact that everyone has come this evening to help get this settled. We appreciate that. If the project is damaged and the banks require repairs before they'll close... Chairman Teele: We'll take that under advisement. Mr. Sussman: Thank you, sir. Chairman Teele: Subject to ... and subject to damage by the hurricane, necessitating a restructuring of the agreement. Mr. Sussman: Thank you very much. Chairman Teele: Is that fair, Commissioner Plummer? Board Member Plummer: That's fair with me. Chairman Teele: Would counsel state... Board Member Plummer: Just understood, the timeframe starts tomorrow morning at nine o'clock. Chairman Teele: Would counsel state the motion? Mr. Bloom: Before I state the motion, If I can just make one comment? Chairman Teele: Please. Mr. Bloom: There's been allegations going back and forth between the developer and the CRA regarding 9 September 22, 1998 delays in the closing and since the developer has just made a statement that they're concerned about additional delays that the bank may cause, I think it's important for the developer to state on the record that ... to the extent they've said in the past they believe the CRA has delayed the closing, that they should state at this point that the CRA has fully performed and has not delayed the closing. So, they don't meet the 20-day working day timeframe, we don't have an issue with them claiming the CRA was the reason they were unable to close. Chairman Teele: I think that's imminently correct. Is that agreeable to you, counsel? Mr. Sussman: We would not want to be in a position of waiving any rights that have accrued to this date; however, certainly, as of this evening, we appreciate the action that has been suggested. We agree with it and we want to proceed. Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me? Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Vice Chairman Gort: I'm not an attorney. I don't think I understood his answer. Chairman Teele: I didn't either. Vice Chairman Gort: Come back again. Mr. Sussman: I was trying to be President Clinton and I can't do it. Board Member Plummer: Sounds like he just killed the 20 days, but go ahead. Vice Chairman Gort: No, no, no. I want to make sure. Because when I have two attorneys that's speaking and one asking for something, the other says he can't do it, ifs ... I got problem with that. I think this is something ... my understanding is, I inherited this, and so have all of us inherited this. Mr. Sussman: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Gort: We have tried to fix it since we've been here, and I think we've been very patient. We tried to work with you, and now I think our attorneys are trying to defend ourselves in asking you to make a commitment. We're making a commitment ourselves. Mr. Sussman: We are ready to make a commitment to close in 20 working days. I think Mr. Bloom knows it's our intent to try and close tomorrow or the day after. Vice Chairman Gort: No, but my understanding is, what he requested of you, for you all to state, that any delay will not be because of the CRA. Because we are here today ... I'm supposed to be driving to the Keys and I'm here taking care of this matter because we want to get it done. Mr. Sussman: We thank you and I understand. Certainly, any delays that are caused from this point forward are not the responsibility of the City. This city is acting in good faith and we appreciate that and I'm glad to put that on the record. Board Member Plummer: That's not the question. The question was very clear. To this date, are you willing to go on the record ... Mr. Bloom, repeat it again. Mr. Bloom: What I'm referring to, since the last ... the June 30th CRA Board Meeting, where they approved ... the Board approved the amendment to the lease and the form of the releases. All right, it's the belief of the CRA that we have not caused any delays in the loan closing, but the reason the loan has not closed have been with other factors unrelated to actions by the CRA, other than in essence, the last week when Commissioner Plummer requested that we review the matter because it's been more than 60 days since the CRA board had taken action and the loan still had not closed. 10 September 22, 1998 Mr. Sussman: Since June 30th and except for the ... with the exception that you mentioned, yes, sir, we are in a agreement, the City has not caused a delay. Chairman Teele: It doesn't matter really whether they agree or disagree with it. It's on the record. We're clear on it. I mean, the only time this is going to come ... it would be helpful if you would agree to it, obviously, but we're going to take the motion as framed by the City Attorney, or the special counsel, to the CRA, and we're going to hold you to that. And it's very clear, I think, on the record that the CRA board is not holding up this closing. Counsel, do you agree, please? Mr. Sussman: Forgive me, Mr. Commissioner. I was speaking with Mr. Weitzel and I'm not sure what... Chairman Teele: The issue hadn't changed. We want you to agree that the City ... the CRA and the City of Miami have not delayed the closing as of this moment and that, basically, if you don't close between now and the 20 days, it's not our fault, with the exception of the hurricane. Look, the documents haven't changed; the land hadn't changed; the money hasn't changed, so, I mean, if you could close yesterday, you could close tomorrow and that's what we're saying. Mr. Sussman: Since June 30th, certainly the City has done nothing to delay us, with the exception of the request for Commissioner Plummer for more information. If that... Commissioner Plummer, and I'm not suggesting that you didn't have the right to request that, sir, but if that request had not been made, we would be closed now, both the consent ... and the bank was ready to close and the consent had ... and the attorney representing Mrs. Sawyer was ready to allow her to sign. But because of the delays... Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman, I have no qualms. As a City Commissioner, I think, at any time, I have the right to ask for my intelligent vote to be predicated on information supplied to me and without it, then I have that right to ask for a delay until it is provided and, as I showed you here, it was as requested, and it was time ready. So, as far as I'm concerned, Commissioner Plummer has not got a problem. Chairman Teele: Come forward. Well ... and I think ifs ... I think your request and the request of any Commissioner to request information and time to evaluate and cast an informed vote is always appropriate and represents a deliberate, thoughtful action. Mrs. Sawyer, you're going to have to come to the podium, please. I realize that you're very, very impaired. If some fine gentleman could help her there, it would be helpful. I'm not sure... Board Member Plummer: Is there a handheld mike there, Mr. Bloom, that she can sit down and you could give her... Ms. Bernice Sawyer: No, I don't have to sit down. I can stand once I get started. Board Member Plummer: Oh, OK. Mrs. Sawyer: Oh, you have to give your name, don't you? Chairman Teele: Yes, ma'am. Your name and address, please. Mrs. Sawyer: Bernice Sawyer, 201 Northwest 7th Street. I just wanted to thank all of the members of the Commission, and the others who took time out of their busy schedule to try to help us. We needed the help and I'm glad we've been able to receive it. Thank you very, very much. Chairman Teele: Thank you, Mrs. Sawyer, for your statement on the record. All right. Mr ... are there any other comments? If not, counsel would you state the motion and I'm ... please. Mr. Bloom: I believe the motion is for the board to ratify the approval of the amendment to the lease, which was approved by the CRA board at the June 30th meeting, subject to the requirement that the ... that Poinciana Village of Miami, Limited execute the amendment within 20 business days from the date hereof, subject to extension as a result of unavoidable delays as defined in the lease. 11 September 22, 1998 Chairman Teele: All right. Is there a motion, please? Vice Chairman Gort: Move it. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort moves it. Board Member Regalado: Second. Chairman Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Regalado. Is there further discussion? All those in favor, say "aye." Those oppose have the same right. The Board Members (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved its adoption: SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO.98-21 A RESOLUTION (subject matter: to ratify approval of the amendment to lease agreement which was approved by the CRA board at the June 30, 1998 CRA meeting, subject to requirement that Poinciana Village of Miami Ltd. Execute the amendment within 20 business days from the date hereof, subject to extension as a result of unavoidable delays as defined in the lease). (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Arthur J. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 3. TEMPORARILY TABLE PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO APPROVE COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CRA AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT IN CONNECTION WITH FUNDING BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CRA. Chairman Teele: The next two items are resolutions that merely provide a codification of the previous actions of the City Commission. In effect, it uses the form of a cooperation agreement, which is what the Federal Government... it's the same as an interlocal agreement and it merely codifies the previous decisions made by the Commission on a ... on other matters. This agreement authorizes the executive director of the CRA to meet with the Manager and the directors of the respected departments, both Parks and Community Development, and to work out an agreement that is acceptable to both the Manager and the executive director of the CRA. 12 September 22, 1998 4. APPROVE ASSIGNMENT OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO 24 UNITS TO BE COMPLETED TO A NEW PARTNERSHIP, NAMELY, POINCIANA VILLAGE, LTD. Board Member Plummer: Excuse me. I'm missing ... was IA, B and C? Chairman Teele: Well... Board Member Plummer: On my agenda, I thought we were taking one at a time. Chairman Teele: I thought that... Board Member Plummer: Because "A" was what I thought was... Chairman Teele: I apologize. Is there ... Mr. Attorney, do you need an action on "B" and "C"? Mr. Donmez: We should. Chairman Teele: Yes, OK. Would you state the motion on "B"? Mr. Donmez: To approve the assignment of the development rights with respect to the 24 units to be completed to the new partnership, as we described, Poinciana Village III, Limited, which is composed of Poinciana Village Miami, Limited as its general partner and Fannie Mae as its limited partner. Board Member Plummer: And, for the record, as I indicated before, I was pleased to see Fannie Mae involved. One more eye looking over the holder. Chairman Teele: Would you move it? Board Member Plummer: Sure. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Plummer. Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Chairman Teele: Second by Commissioner Gort. All those in favor ... is there discussion? I've read this? All those in favor, say "aye." Those oppose have the same. The Board Members (Collectively): Aye. 13 September 22, 1998 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Plummer, who moved its adoption: SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO.98-22 A RESOLUTION (subject matter: to approve the assignment of development rights with respect to 24 units to be completed to a new partnership, Poinciana Village III, Ltd., which is composed of Poinciana Village of Miami, Ltd. as its general partner and Fannie Mae, as its limited partner). (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Arthur J. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 5. BRIEF DISCUSSION REGARDING FINANCIAL CONDITION OF POINCIANA VILLAGE PROJECT (INCLUDING PARTNERSHIP, GENERAL PARTNER, LIMITED PARTNER AND CREDITORS). Board Member Plummer: Now, in "C," Mr. Chairman, you're ... we're being asked here to... Chairman Teele: No. It's strictly informational. Board Member Plummer: Item C? Chairman Teele: Yes. Board Member Plummer: OK. Chairman Teele: Strictly ... I mean, that's, in effect, the essence of -the request was to get and to understand the financial arrangements and what have you, and I think counsel has gone through that, along with staff, and I think they've done an outstanding job, and I think Mr ... counsel for Mr. Weitzel has been very helpful in bringing forth that documentation. Board Member Plummer: OK. Chairman Teele: All right. On two and three is to approve a... Mr. Sussman: Sir, thank you. Chairman Teele: Thank you. Mr. Sussman: We, again, thank the members of the committee ... of the Commission for being here this evening and we hope... 14 September 22, 1998 Board Member Plummer: I only have one last request of you, sir. Mr. Sussman: Yes, sir. Board Member Plummer: Please cut the grass. Mr. Sussman: I will see that it's taken care of. 6. CONTINUE DISCUSSION REGARDING COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN CRA AND THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. Chairman Teele: Thank you, Commissioner Plummer. On Items 2 and 3, this is the cooperative agreement, which is the same as an interlocal agreement, by Florida Law. And, basically, it authorizes the executive director of the CRA to negotiate an agreement with the Manager relating to Community Development and Parks. Let me tell you why this is important. The CRA has never had an agreement with Community Development and I think that is unfortunate, even though there's been funds developed. Normally, because the City of Miami employees are very much involved with community ... CRA, I am deeply concerned about the audit implications related to administration, and I think it would just be prudent if there were an agreement, the same way there is with all of the other grantees, even though it's sort of city to city, but it's really not because the CRA is a separate entity, and this merely conforms to what the Federal regulations require relating to where governments do business with governments and not -for -profits. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman, I would assume what we are saying, we're giving you the right to negotiate with the Manager but, yet, to come back to this board for full approval? Chairman Teele: I would rather, if you want to do it that way, that we give that right to the executive director to come back to the Commission board for approval. Board Member Plummer: Well, that's... Ms. Bianchino: Commissioner Plummer, can I clarify... Board Member Plummer: All I'm saying is that, whatever the negotiated rights - and I don't know what's going to be negotiated or what will be the final negotiation - in my two boards that I presently sit on, the Chairman may be the negotiator, but he brings it back and has a recommendation to the board for the board to approve. Chairman Teele: Commissioner, I mean, since we wear both hats, I'd hate for it to come back to the CRA and the City. But let me just say this, no other grantee that has this document has had to have their agreements ratified. When we're giving money to CODEC under the Community Development process, we have the grant process and we authorize the Manager to execute those grants. And what you're doing now... Board Member Plummer: After we approve them. Chairman Teele: No. Those grants are executed. Those grants have been executed. When we give money to the Urban League under the Community Development process, or Little Havana Activity Center, those grants ... we authorize the Manager to enter into those agreements and execute them and they do not come back here. Board Member Plummer: All right. Chairman Teele: I don't mind this coming back here, but I don't want it to come back here and to the City Commission. Board Member Plummer: So, if I have a shot at either point ... so I know what is the final negotiation, is all I'm looking for, whether it's sitting in this chair with one hat or sitting in this chair with another hat. That's all I'm saying, sir. 15 September 22, 1998 Chairman Teele: All right, then, it will come back to the CRA for ratification. Board Member Plummer: So be it. Ms. Bianchino: Wait, excuse me, excuse me. Board Member Plummer: Hello. Chairman Teele: What are you saying, Miss... Ms. Dena Bianchino: I'd like to just give you the Administration's point of view on this and I think... Chairman Teele: Well, I asked you three times today, does the administration have a point of view? You all told me no, that you just monitor everything. Ms. Bianchino: No. Well, I think... Board Member Plummer: Can I stop you, please? I don't need to know tonight the Administration's point of view. Chairman Teele: Negotiate. Board Member Plummer: All right. That's what they're... Ms. Bianchino: No. Board Member Plummer: ...going to send you back to negotiate if there is an negotiation. If there cannot be a negotiation, I'm sure it's going to come back here. Ms. Bianchino: No. The only point I wanted to make, and it's what Chairman Teele had stated, is that this agreement, once it's negotiated, must be approved by the City Commission, not the CRA. I mean, it must be... Chairman Teele: Well, I don't care ... if you want it to come to the City Commission, fine, but the only thing I'm going to say is, we're going to do that this year, but next year the CRA is going to be treated the same way as Little Activity... Little Havana Activity Center, orCODEC or the Urban League, or anybody else. I don't think it's fair to start ... because what it winds up doing, it just adds another 30 days of delays to program implementation. And, I mean, I've got problems in ... all over the place where people are expecting activities to begin. So, we'll do it this year because there's been no agreements in the past. But the fact of the matter is, the way it's always been, J.L. is, we just get a budget code and we start spending money, and there has been no agreement for 10 years with the CRA and the City. So, I'm willing to say, let's bring it back to the City so that we have a good form and all of that and all of that but in the future, the agreement should be treated the same way as all of the other agencies that get funds from Community Development. Board Member Plummer: Arthur, I don't care where. Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort, Commissioner Plummer. Vice Chairman Gort: I want you to correct me because I might be wrong on my perceptions but my understanding is, anytime CODEC, Urban League or Little Havana want something, they have to come in front of us and we have to approve it. If we don't approve it, they don't get it. Chairman Teele: Commissioner... 16 September 22, 1998 Vice Chairman Gort: Am I wrong in my perception? Chairman Teele: Commissioner, you're right. And the CRA has done the same thing. Everything in these grants, with exception of the parks activities, have been approved by the City Commission. Vice Chairman Gort: Then it's been approved. Then, if it's been approved, there's no reason coming back here. Chairman Teele: Well ... but let's take it back for form, if no other reason, because we've never done it before, so that we can all agree on the form. Because our lawyers, the CRA lawyers, have drafted this. The City Attorneys haven't really reviewed it fully and all of that and we can all agree on a form and then, after that, for the next 10 years we'll be able to do it differently. Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman, ever since I've come here, since a lot of us are working very closely together, I've requested in advance of the administration to set up standards, and I think that's something you've been saying since you got here. Once we have those standards, you have to apply those standards to everybody, and nobody can deviate from those standards. I think we've had standards in the past, how we approved all this. I want to make sure we do ... we are following the same standards with everybody. Chairman Teele: And I agree. I do think that this is different in that we've had no agreements in the past, and I just left a group -I mean, I just -people from St. Johns are here. They just expressed some of the same concerns about the fact that we really don't have agreements very effectively over the years in Community Development with these. What we do is, we give them grants, but the contract compliance is very, very vague. Davis, Bacon. I mean, all of these things that are supposed to be complied with is very, very vague, and I think the management is working now to tighten that process, and this is sort of the first round of that. But I would hope, Madam Manager, that next year, when the CD process goes through and the Commission acts, and the Commission grants the Manager the authority to enter into agreements with all of the grant recipients, that the CRA would be treated in the same way as the other grant recipients. That's all that Commissioner Gort and I both are saying. Ms. Bianchino: Whatever the Law Department tells us is the right way to do it. Chairman Teele: That's a great answer. Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Mr. Maxwell: Just for the record, as you pointed out, that you are initiating a new process - the board would be and the agreements before you now deal with agreements between the CRA, and they point out agreements between the CRA and a department of the city, which is not something a department can do, as you pointed out. Chairman Teele: It's the Manager. Mr. Maxwell: You talk about the City itself and the Manager. And it would be required to come back to the Commission because the Manager cannot enter in an agreement unilaterally without Commission approval. So, this particular time, you do have that two step process that can be alleviated in the... eliminated rather in the future by giving the Manager that authority. Chairman Teele: Then the motion, if you would, Commissioner Gort, would be to adopt Item 2, granting the CRA Executive Director the authority to negotiate, and requiring that the matter be presented through the City Commission for approval. Mr. Maxwell: And the agreements would be between the CRA and the City. Chairman Teele: And the City, yes. 17 September 22, 1998 Vice Chairman Gort: I don't have any problem with that. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Gort. Seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. All those in favor, say "aye." Those oppose? The Board Members (Collectively): Yes. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved its adoption: SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO.98-23 A RESOLUTION (subject matter: to authorize an agreement between the Community Redevelopment Agency and the City of Miami Department of Community Development for the Community Redevelopment Agency to provide program management, technical assistance, project administration, planning, development and other services necessary to complete CDBG funded projects in the Omni Redevelopment Area and the Southeast Overtown/park West Redevelopment Area, subject to City Commission Approval. Modify: grant the CRA Executive Director the authority to negotiate, and require that the matter be presented through the City Commission for approval). (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Arthur J. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Teele: The same motion by Commissioner Gort on Item 3. Seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. Discussion? All those in favor, say "aye." Those oppose have the same right. The Board Members (Collectively): Aye. 7. APPROVE PROPOSED RESOLUTION REGARDING COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CRA AND THE CITY OF MIAMI CONCERNING CERTAIN CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR DESIGNATED PUBLIC PARKS WITHIN THE CITY, WHICH WILL BE ADMINISTERED BY CRA. Chairman Teele: And then we have a very... Board Member Plummer: Woa, woa, woa, woa, woa, woa. Let's slow down on three. This is the CRA in reference to parks. Is this from the parks bond issue? Chairman Teele: This... Board Member Plummer: All right. Mr. Teele? 18 September 22, 1998 Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Board Member Plummer: Let me inform you, sir, as gently and tenderly as I can. I am getting badgered from two directions. I am getting badgered from north of Pace Park. Pace Park? What's the big park there? Chairman Teele: Pace... Margaret Pace Park. Board Member Plummer: OK. I am getting badgered from the north of that park of how they would like to see the money spent, and I am getting badgered from the south of that park that they're not in favor. Now, most everywhere else that I have dealt within my district, for example Virrick Park, we had a committee, and that committee met and that committee was the ones who recommended to the City Commission what they wanted to do. I'm merely stating to you, sir, for the record, that a cooperation agreement between the CRA and the City of Miami of the projects of the bond issue, which is for parks, which is, to my knowledge, the only capital money we've got right now for parks... Chairman Teele: Commissioner, this is very limited. There's a list of parks back there. It's limited only to the parks that are in the CRA jurisdictions. The CRA... Board Member Plummer: Pace is in there. Chairman Teele: Pace is one of them. The CRA staff ..and I'm sorry Terry isn't here ... has probably had not less than 10 meetings with community organizations in the Grand on this park issue. This thing is so time intensive... Board Member Plummer: I agree. Chairman Teele: ...that the Parks Department really would prefer that we do it, since we're working with them anyway. And I'll tell you a secret. There's not going to be enough money in the bond issue to do what either group wants to do and we, as a CRA, are probably going to have to recommend using tax increment dollars, which are proper, to round out that park. So, rather than trying to bifurcate the process, the Parks Department is working totally with us. But this thing is well down the road. I mean, Mrs.Kruger and... Board Member Plummer: OK. I'm just merely stating for the record... Chairman Teele: Right. Board Member Plummer: ...that there is a diversity of opinion, depending on which side of the park you're on. Chairman Teele: It's more than that. Board Member Plummer: OK. Chairman Teele: There's diversity even within groups. Board Member Plummer: And I'm just ... for the record, I don't want to skip over this without making it clear that there is that diversity. There is a difference of opinion, and it is almost 180 degrees different between the two. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado, if I could, just on that point. We have already agreed that there will have to be a public hearing before a master plan is adopted on that park and the CRA ... this board then would be in a position to have that public hearing in the area, in the CRA area, that is, over there at the Grand, to try to rationalize this issue. It's a very important issue. Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado: I, like J.L., Mr. Chairman and all the members of the Commission, have been involved in the process of the Parks Department, and I will tell you, J.L., that we have a situation with the 19 September 22, 1998 parks bond committee. Every time that Al Ruder and Terry and myself, we get abused, the City does, because we're dragging the feet and we're delaying projects. And I will tell you something that just happened the other day. We were almost at the brink of losing a lot of money on Shenandoah because the neighbors wanted to do so many things and, fortunately, they accepted one of my proposals to build a sidewalk instead of a tennis court but the meeting started around two and ended at eight, and there was no agreement. And, so, I will caution you guys because I think we're going to lose the money. I don't know why we have this weak situation with the parks bonds committee and Mr. Adomo but, you know, he thinks that the City is not doing its job. Board Member Plummer: I think you've got a problem? Virrick Park had seven hundred thousand dollars ($700,000). In the first presentation they made to me, as the District Commissioner, was three and -a -half million dollars ($3,500,000). Board Member Regalado: I ... you know, I think ... and I will tell you, on Margaret Pace Park, whatever the City does, whatever CRA does, you're still going to have the people - the Peruvians are playing soccer on Saturday afternoon. The Jamaicans playing hockey on Sunday morning. I mean - and - because they are there. There's no way that they ... we can get them out of there, so we're going to have to accommodate that. And let me tell you, that group of soccer comes all the way from South Dade. Chairman Teele: Comes from South Dade. But the point is this, this matter has been staffed with the Public Works Department and the Parks Department. They all agree that the fastest way to move these projects through - because, particularly, the place that they have to go to to get some consensus is the board that we set up, we, the City, set up, which is the Omni Advisory Board, which is the official advisory board for this area. The CRA works with them every month. We staff all of their meetings. The Parks Department doesn't staff the meetings, and this is an example of how we can move these projects ahead. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman, I'm merely stating for the record of the concern expressed to me by the constituents of both the north and the south of Pace Park. Chairman Teele: It's a big problem. Board Member Plummer: I have... Chairman Teele: And it's not enough money. J.L.? Board Member Plummer: It is a problem, and I just didn't want to jump over Item 3, and brush it aside without having a notation made on the record as to the problem existing. Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Vice Chairman Gort: You know, I got a lot of questions. As you all know, I just got off a plane about an hour and -a -half ago, I may not be all here, so I could ask a lot of questions. Now, my understanding is, when we talked about the bonds ... parks for bond, the project list was presented with the different parks and the amount of monies we allocated to each park. Board Member Plummer: That's correct. Vice Chairman Gort: Am I correct? That's still on? Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Gort: So, there's no problem with that? Now, what we're discussing here today is the administration of the CRA ... possibility of administration certain parks within certain areas? Chairman Teele: Yeah. They're attached... 20 September 22, 1998 Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Is that what it is? Chairman Teele: There's Attachment A. But it's strictly the parks in the CRA jurisdiction. Vice Chairman Gort: No, I understand. Now, my understanding is, what I'm hearing from J.L. is that there are different groups and different neighborhood associations, they have different beliefs on how the parks should be used. Board Member Plummer: Absolutely. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Chairman Teele: Absolutely. Vice Chairman Gort: Let me tell you something. Let's go back when we had a lot of problem with Domino Park about 10 years ago, and the only reason we were able to alleviate that problem and fix the Domino Park, we let the private sector, or a nonprofit run it and they're doing a great job. And although they're doing a very good job, we see people come in here and saying they're not happy with it, some of the people. There's no way we can please everyone. But I think if we have a plan to carry on and we had the right people to make sure that that plan gets done, we should go ahead and try to do it. You done a hell of a job in Bayfront Park, and you, yourself, know, when we first established that, it has not been easy. I mean, different people want to do different things with Bayfront Park. Board Member Plummer: OK. Again, I'm not trying to put a stumbling block. I'm just saying... Chairman Teele: But there's got to be ... but J.L's right. There has got to be a public hearing... J.L., let's all agree that there must be a public hearing on the master plan of the Margaret Pace Park. And why don't you ... why don't ... once we adopt this, if that motion pass, why don't you then move that the CRA is instructed to present a master plan after all of the neighborhood and community meetings have been held? Board Member Plummer: I will so adopt that in. Chairman Teele: OK. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I will caution you to include in the motion that there is a timetable for the funds that ... you know, you may lose the funds if you do not comply on certain parts on certain dates. And, you know, I think that we are on a very strict timetable. You also have to remember - and I would include... Board Member Plummer: Where did this come from? Board Member Plummer: From me. It's a request for proposals, for bids. It's not a... Board Member Regalado: I would include too, the fact the money, that it's available, because people are going to ask for things that are not possible with the money that has been allocated. Chairman Teele: The critical thing is that we must move forward, and I think we have to establish a sense of time. And, Commissioner Plummer, the one thing that I really would ask, specifically, for you to do is, if you would sort of be a committee, a subcommittee, of one on this ... no, no, no. Because this is a... Board Member Plummer: Me and my big mouth. Chairman Teele: Well ... but it's also one hundred percent in your district, and I think, you know, the staff and the process... because there are two committees. There's a subcommittee that, I think ... what's the guy with Mr. Hollo? Mr... 21 September 22, 1998 Board Member Plummer: Yaffa. Chairman Teele: ...Yaffa is chairing that is doing nothing but this park. So, I would appreciate it if you would serve as a committee of one to sort of oversee this Pace Park issue. Board Member Plummer: I will be happy to, sir, because, you know it's my district. My only choice. Chairman Teele: All right. On the motion... Board Member Plummer: So, I just would like to make an amendment to Item Number 3. Chairman Teele: All right. It's moved by Commissioner Gort. I'm sorry, by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner Gort. And what's the amendment, Commissioner? Board Member Plummer: The amendment would be that there has to be a public hearing prior to any definite plans for Pace Park or any other park in the CRA district. Chairman Teele: And that the master plan should be submitted within 90 days? Board Member Plummer: That's fine. Board Member Regalado: I'll second. Chairman Teele: To get Commissioner Regalado happy. OK. Board Member Plummer: OK. The Board Members (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Plummer, who moved its adoption: SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO.98-24 A RESOLUTION (subject matter: authorizing an agreement between the Community Redevelopment Agency and the City of Miami Department of Parks and Recreation for the Community Redevelopment Agency to provide program management, technical assistance, project administration, planning, development and other services necessary to complete park projects in the OMNI redevelopment area and the Southeast Overtown/Park West redevelopment area— MODIFY: to have a public hearing prior to master plan adopted on Margaret Pace Park). (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Arthur J. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 22 September 22, 1998 8. STATUS REPORT REGARDING INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT — DISCUSS AND DEFER STATUS REPORT REGARDING INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO CREATE OMNI TAX INCREMENT TRUST FUND. Chairman Teele: Now, on Item Number 4, the Manager has asked that the item be deferred, is that right, Madam Manager? Ms. Bianchino: Yes, sir. The Manager will be reporting back on this issue by the end of October. Chairman Teele: I would ask, specifically, that the budget office confer informally with each of the Commissioners prior to the 28th budget meeting, so that any resolutions or actions related to those funds being moved into an escrow account or a limitation account that have been held be thoroughly understood before Monday, the 28th. Board Member Plummer: What funds? That the County... Chairman Teele: We're talking about tax increment funds. Board Member Plummer: I understand. Chairman Teele: J.L., the County still has not entered into an interlocal agreement. Board Member Plummer: OK. But I'm asking, are they into a trust fund, or are they going to be transferred.... Chairman Teele: There is no trust fund if you don't have the interlocal agreement. That's the problem. Mr. Donmez: Commissioner, if I may, we do have an interlocal agreement. Board Member Plummer: Absolutely, we do. Chairman Teele: But not with specific specifications relating to their funds being put up. Mr. Donmez: Well, when the County... Board Member Plummer: Yes, we do. Mr. Donmez: When the County set up the Omni Redevelopment District, it concurrently established a trust fund. Board Member Plummer: That's right. Mr. Donmez: And by resolution an interlocal agreement transferred the CRA rights and as well as the trust fund to the City. Chairman Teele: Where is this County money? Mr. Donmez: Well... Chairman Teele: Where is the County money? Mr. Donmez: Before coming here, Commissioner, I spoke to Michael Springs. The County... Chairman Teele: In the mail, right? For the last four years the check is in the mail. And my position is ... not to get into this tonight, but to get the management fully to brief each Commissioner ... because if the money is not here on Monday, the 28th, that money's going to come out of that fund and we're going to start from 23 September 22, 1998 scratch. Board Member Plummer: Yeah, but the point ... Arthur, before you were over here and you were over there... Chairman Teele: It was a horrible deal. Board Member Plummer: All right. Chairman Teele: Don't blame me. Board Member Plummer: Hey, no, I'm not blaming you. All right. But let me tell you something. I sat through those meetings that were wicked and wild. Chairman Teele: And mean. Board Member Plummer: And mean is correct, all right. Chairman Teele: And Joe Gersten was saying dah, dah, dah, dah, dah. Board Member Plummer: And let me tell you, leverage and masks and guns were used. First they tried to hold us up for money for the homeless, OK. Then they did hold us up for money for the Performing Arts. Chairman Teele: That's right. Board Member Plummer: And I want to tell you something, with what we knew ... and I don't think you're going to get an answer from the Budget Department of the City of Miami, because they don't really know today where all of the ... for example, was it the Grand or the Plaza? Which one was being turned into condominiums? Mr. Donmez: It was the Grand. Board Member Plummer: OK. And that was going to reduce by twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) homestead exemption on each one of those units the amount of ad valorem taxation that was going to be developed, and it was going to be significant, and it did, in fact ... the one question that I had and never got an answer for was, was that from year to year an aggregate number that continued to add to the minimum annual guarantee that we had to give to the County, because it was not going to get that amount of money that we agreed to give them. So they said OK, if you don't give that amount of money ... and I don't remember the numbers today but the record... Chairman Teele: Two million. Mr. Donmez: One point four million dollars ($1,400,000), Commissioner. The County... Board Member Plummer: We're not going to get that amount. Mr. Donmez: The County... Chairman Teele: J.L., right now, the whole thing is yielding about seven hundred and fifty ... seven twenty- five. We have a guarantee of up to one point four million, is what he's saying. Board Member Plummer: Huh? Chairman Teele: The problem with this deal is the management needs to analyze this deal. Board Member Plummer: No. Mr. Donmez: One point four million for each year, Commissioner, up to one point four million. 24 September 22, 1998 Board Member Plummer: That is our commitment up to one point four. Mr. Donmez: That's correct. Board Member Plummer: We are drawing seven, which is about 50 percent of that, and it's going to go down from there. Now, if I'm wrong, please correct me. Chairman Teele: Can I tell you something? You're not drawing seven. You're not drawing anything. You're just putting up your part and, to me, that's not a good deal when you're putting up your money and the other side's not putting up anything. But Commissioner Gort has the floor. Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chair my understanding is, in going back, I was assigned to work with the County and tried to expedite the contract or the agreement, and my understanding was, once we had signed the agreement, we're supposed to ... and I remember ... but I think your figures about seven hundred... seven hundred and fifty thousand was the same figure that was used that we're ... and the reason we did it before January is so we can get it in the next year, and I think that was done in'97. Chairman Teele: Look, when I was Chairman of the Commission, we agreed ... this is a horrible deal for the City. Let me start out by saying that. Let me also start out by saying that the deal that is before us was under my sponsorship, in that I was the District Commissioner on the County side, and it was a horrible deal for the City then, but I was on the other side of the fence, OK? Now, let me just say this, so that it's clear, the County has been promising to make their payments into this fund since 1993 and, as late as 1996, there was a commitment that the money was coming next week. Board Member Plummer: Yeah. Chairman Teele: To date —and I know for a fact that Hilda has taken people to dinner; she's taken people to lunch; she's gone to their offices; she's done everything that any person could be asked to do to try to get Bill Johnson and Michael Springs to come forward with the money and all we hear is, "next week." And my position is, if, by October...if, by September 30th, we don't have the money, the money that we have deposited needs to come out of that account and we need to make some other arrangements. But the Manager needs to understand that he doesn't have until September 30th, Madam Manager. He's got until Monday, September 28th. Because we've got to Take a decision before the end of the fiscal year. The matter is deferred. And the only other issue, if you will, that the management is asking for is a resolution to authorize the CRA to issue bids or proposals or request for qualifications for the services that are in contemplated under the year - and that process normally takes 90 days or whatever - and it will come back to the CRA before any bid award. 9. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ISSUE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS, REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND/OR BIDS TO SECURE SERVICES FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, MISCELLANEOUS FENCE CONSTRUCTION, MISCELLANEOUS CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH SPECIALIZATION IN HISTORIC PROPERTIES. Board Member Plummer: And let the record reflect that everyone are to be under the gun on their particular category. For example, landscape architects shall not come back with anything to exceed a hundred and fifty thousand; miscellaneous fence management not to exceed nine hundred thousand; architectural and engineering not to exceed a hundred and twenty thousand. You can come in less, but don't come back with something in excess of that or you are null and void. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Regalado. Seconded by... Vice Chairman Gort: Plummer. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Plummer. Discussion? All those in favor, say "aye." Those oppose? 25 September 22, 1998 The Board Members (Collectively): Aye. following resolutions were introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved their adoption: SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO.98-25 OMNI/CRA RESOLUTION NO.98-6 A RESOLUTION (subject matter: authorizing the Community Redevelopment Agency to issue: request for qualifications, request for proposals, and/or bids to secure services for: landscape architecture [not to exceed $150,000]; miscellaneous fence construction, miscellaneous construction management [not to exceed $900,0001; and architectural/engineering services with specialization in historic properties [not to exceed $120,000]). (Here follows body of the resolutions, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Plummer, the resolutions were passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Arthur J. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Teele: Further matters to come before the CRA, Commissioner Gort? Vice Chairman Gort: No. 10. COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONER PLUMMER REGARDING HIS PLEA TO THE PUBLIC TO WRITE IN THEIR OPINIONS CONCERNING SERVICES PROVIDED BY MIAMI TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. Board Member Plummer: I just want to make one comment. Shut up. Board Member Sanchez: Try to use a lot of local businesses. Chairman Teele: Local... Board Member Plummer: I want everybody to listening to this TV camera to write us, the Commissioners, before Monday, giving us their opinion of TCI Cable. The address is 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, 33133, and we solicit your opinion relating to cable in Miami, the City thereof, of TCI. I would like to hear from the citizens. Chairman Teele: Is that to... Board Member Regalado: J.L., you're not on Candid Camera. You're not on camera. This is not live and in color. Board Member Plummer: Excuse me. I just said what it is. Board Member Regalado: But let me tell, now that we are on the record, I am hoping that TCI will give us 26 September 22, 1998 the details of the changes that they will be making... 11. DEFER APPROVAL OF CRA BOARD MINUTES. Chairman Teele: Of the CRA meetings of June 30th and September 14th are available. We'll take them up for ratification at the next meeting. Motion to adjourn? Board Member Plummer: Always in order. Chairman Teele: So moved and seconded. Meeting adjourned. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 7:07 P.M. ATTEST: Walter J. Foeman CITY CLERK Maria J. Argudin ASSISTANT CITY CLERK JOE CAROLLO MAYOR (SEAL) 27 September 22, 1998