Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEOPW OMNI CRA 2000-03-13 MinutesCITY MIAMI * • INLO�E' Oi2�TF � CRA MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON MARCH 13, 2000 PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Walter J. Foeman/City Clerk INDEX MINUTES OF CRA MEETING March 13, 2000 ITEM NO. SUBJECT LEGISLATION 1. MARTIN Z. MARGULIES DONATION OF 3/13/00 OVERTOWN YOUTH TECHNOLOGY CENTER TO SEOPW/CRA BE CONSTRUCTED IN GIBSON PARK. [SEE R-00-I I SECTION # 171 2-8 2. DISCUSS PROPOSED MARLINS STADIUM IN 3/13/00 BICENTENNIAL PARK DISCUSSION 9-21 3. SUPPORT BY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT 3/13/00 AGENCY (CRA) FOR CITY OF MIAMI'S SEOPW/CRA DEVELOPERS SUMMIT 2000; FURTHER M-00-12 DESIGNATING THE CRA DIRECTOR OF OMNI/CRA STRATEGIC PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TO M-00-10 PARTICIPATE IN THE STEERING COMMITTEE. 22-23 4. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 3/13/00 AGENDA AND SUPPORTIVE BACKUP MATERIALS SEOPW/CRA RELATED TO CRA MEETINGS TO BE M-00-13 DISTRIBUTED TO BOARD MEMBERS AT LEAST OMNI/CRA FIVE DAYS PRIOR TO SAID MEETINGS. M-00-11 24-25 5. DISCUSS CRA FY 2000 BUDGET — REQUEST 3/13/00 AGNEDA TO HAVE FINANCIAL REPORT. DISCUSSION 26-27 6. DISCUSS KPMG AUDIT OF CRA RECORDS — 3/13/00 PARKING REVENUES OWED TO CRA BY CITY — DISCUSSION RECORDS IN POOR CONDITION. 28-36 7. UPDATE OF FOOD FRANCHISE IN THIRD AVENUE 3/13/00 BUSINESS CORRIDOR - CRIME PROBLEMS IN DISCUSSION AREA. 37-40 8. UPDATE OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH 3/13/00 MDTA REGARDING AIR RIGHTS AT OVERTOWN DISCUSSION METRORAIL STATION. 41 9. REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") TO 3/13/00 RETAIN A CIVIL ENGINEERING FIRM IN SEOPW/CRA CONNECTION WITH PARKS PROJECTS AND R-00-14 OTHER VARIOUS PROJECTS. OMNI/CRA R-00-12 42-45 10. EMINENT DOMAIN IN CONNECTION WITH 3/13/00 PROJECTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. SEOPW/CRA R-00-15 OMNI/CRA R-00-13 46-48 11. REPORT FOR PRE -APPROVED LAND/PROPERTY 3/13/00 ACQUISITIONS - PROBLEMS WITH DISPLACING DISCUSSION FAMILIES. 49-52 12. HEALTH CARE BENEFITS TO THE EMPLOYEES OF 3/13/00 THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SEOPW/CRA ("CRA"). R-00-16 OMNI/CRA R-00-14 13. 1. REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") TO 3/13/00 RETAIN THE GENERAL CONSULTANT TO SEOPW/CRA PROVIDE DESIGN, PLANNING AND RELATED R-00-17 SERVICES FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE OMNI/CRA REDEVELOPMENT AREA; R-00-15 2. LIST OF ALL OF THE APARTMENTS THAT HAVE SEOPW/CRA BEEN SUBSIDIZED USING SECTION 8 FUNDS FOR R-00-18 THE LAST 15 YEARS AND PUT SAME ON A MAP; OMNI/CRA 3. BERMELLO, AJAMIL & PARTNERS ("BA"), INC. R-00-16 TO COMPLETE ALL TASKS COMMENCED PRIOR SEOPW/CRA TO MAY 30, 2000 UNDER ITS EXISTING R-00-19 CONTRACT WITH THE CRA; OMNI/CRA 4. REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") TO R-00-17 RETAIN GENERAL LAND PLANNING AND SEOPW/CRA DEVELOPMENT USE CONSULTANT OF NATIONAL R-00-20 PROMINENCE FOR PREPARATION OF AMENDED 55-70 AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND ADJACENT STUDY AREAS; 5. REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") FOR THE SELECTION OF A DEVELOPER FOR THE JOB CREATION PLAZA PORTION OF THE THIRD AVENUE BUSINESS CORRIDOR PROJECT. 14. HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP (HK), AS LEGAL 3/13/00 COUNSEL TO THE CRA, TO PURSUE LEGISLATION SEPOW /CRA TO CREATE A SALES TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT R-00-21 IN ORDER TO EXPEDITE THE ELIMINATION OF OMNI/CRA BLIGHT AND SLUMS WITHIN THE R-00-18 REDEVELOPMENT AREA. 71-75 15. 1. PROVIDE HISTORY OF TAX INCREMENT 3/13/00 PAYMENTS MADE TO SOUTHEAST DISCUSSION OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DISTRICT. 76-78 2. CRA ADMINISTRATION TO HAVE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THE INTERNET. [SEE SECTION # 181. 16. STUDY PROBLEMS REGARDING ROADBLOCKS 3/13/00 TO BUSINESS IN THE OMNI AREA. DISCUSSION 78-80 17. COMMENTS REGARDING DONATION OF YOUTH 3/13/00 TECHNOLOGY CENTER IN OVERTOWN [SEE DISCUSSION SECTION 4 1 ] 81 18. COMMENTS REGARDING NOTIFICATION OF CRA 3/13/00 MEETINGS AND AVAILABILITY OF AGENDA ON DISCUSSION TIMELY BASIS [SEE SECTION 4 15] 82 19. DETERMINING WHETHER THE CRA COULD 3/13/00 LEASE OUT FORMER FIRE STATION NO. 2 ON DISCUSSION MIAMI AVENUE AND 14TH STREET (PERFORMING 83-85 ARTS CENTER AREA). 20. BRIEFLY DISCUSS SALES TAX INCREMENT 3/13/00 DISTRICT AND NETWORK AREA POINT (NAP). DISCUSSION 86 21. UPDATE OF CAMILLUS HOUSE - BLIGHT 3/13/00 DISCUSSION 87 22. UPDATE REGARDING FUNDING OF STATE OF 3/13/00 FLORIDA LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE. DISCUSSION 88 23. DISCUSS 3 MP ORDINANCE, PLANS, MIAMI 3/13/00 MILLENIUM - TIMES SQUARE PROJECT. DISCUSSION 89 24. UPDATE OF MARGARET PACE PARK 3/13/00 DISCUSSION 90-91 25. APPROVING HIRING OF JEANETTE THOMPSON, 3/13/00 SECRETARY/STENOGRAPHER, CHELSA ARSCOTT, SEOPW/CRA EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT, RHONDA WALSH, R-00-22 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT, MARSHATTA OMNI/CRA HARRIS, RECEPTIONIST/COMPUTER WORD R-00-19 PROCESSOR, GEORGE HOWARD, ASSISTANT 92-94 COORDINATOR, YUL ALLEN, EMPOWERMENT ZONE LIAISON/BUSINESS SPECIALIST-SEOPW. 26. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT 3/13/00 OF OFF-STREET PARKING OF CITY OF MIAMI SEOPW/CRA ("DOSP") FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PARKING LOTS R-00-23 FOR THE THIRD AVENUE BUSINESS CORRIDOR 95-96 PROJECT AND ADDITIONAL PARKING LOTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. 27. DISCUSS OMNI COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 3/13/00 DISCUSSION 97-99 28. LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE MIAMI-DADE 3/13/00 TRANSIT AUTHORITY ("MDTA") FOR PARKING SEOPW/CRA BETWEEN 2ND AVENUE AND 3" AVENUE ON THE R-00-24 NORTH SIDE OF I ITH STREET. 100-101 29. UPDATE REGARDING SAWYER'S WALK 3/13/00 PROPOSAL. DISCUSSION 102 30. UPDATE RE REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL OF 3/13/00 LYRIC VILLAGE HOUSING JOINT VENTURE (ST. DISCUSSION JOHNS CDC AND RELATED HOUSING INC.) 103 31. DISCUSS/DEFER CONSIDERATION OF WHITE 3/13/00 PAPER SETTING FORTH BLACK OWNERSHIP DISCUSSION EQUITY AND REDEVELOPMENT PARTICIPATION 104 PROGRAM. 32. WAIVE COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND AWARD 3/13/00 CONTRACT TO THE GREATER MIAMI SERVICES SEOPW/CRA CORPS IN CONNECTION WITH VEGETATIVE R-00-25 CUTTING AND CLEAN UP OF THE CRA OWNED SEOPW/CRA LOTS AND CERTAIN RIGHT-OF-WAYS OF THE R-00-26 OVERTOWN SUB -AREA (SOUTHEAST 105-108 OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DISTRICT) OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA ($96,000). 33. AMEND THE CRA BUDGET LINE ITEM AMOUNT 3/13/00 ALLOCATED FOR GENERAL LEGAL SERVICES SEOPW/CRA PROVIDED BY HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP TO R-00-27 $175,000. OMNI/CRA R-00-20 109-112 34. AMEND THE CRA BUDGET TO INCLUDE AN 3/13/00 ADDITIONAL BUDGET LINE ITEM AMOUNT OF SEOPW/CRA $75,000 IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURSUIT OF R-00-28 LEGISLATION TO CREATE A SALES TAX OMNI/CRA INCREMENT DISTRICT FOR THE PROVISION OF R-00-21 LEGAL SERVICES BY HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP. 113-114 35. RETROACTIVELY APPROVING THE LEASE 3/13/00 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY SEOPW/CRA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") AND IOS R-00-29 CAPITAL, INC. FOR THE LEASE OF A OMNI/CRA PHOTOCOPIER MACHINE. R-00-22 115 36. UPDATE REGARDING STATUS OF INTERLOCAL 3/13/00 AGREEMENT. DISCUSSION 116-122 MINUTES OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST and OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AREAS On the 13t' day of March 2000, the Board of Directors of the Southeast Overtown/Park West and Omni Redevelopment Areas of the City of Miami met at the Wyndham Hotel Orange Bowl Room, 1601 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida. The meeting was called to order at 5:04 p.m., by Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr., with the following Board Members found to be present: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. ABSENT: Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort ALSO PRESENT: Richard Judy, Director Strategic Planning, CRA Robert Tyler, Director, Operations Administration & Development, CRA Donald Warshaw, City Manager, City of Miami Carlos Gimenez, Assistant City Manager, City of Miami Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney, City of Miami Walter Foeman, City Clerk, City of Miami Sylvia Lowman, Chief Deputy Clerk, City of Miami Chairman Teele: Let us salute the flag and have a silent prayer. The Attorney is what we're looking for, so if you would give us the pledge of allegiance. NOTE FOR THE RECORD: The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Board Member Winton. Chairman Teele: We'll just stand in place with a silent prayer. Amen. It's my understanding — what about the attorney? Dick Judy (Executive Director, CRA): He said he'd be here at 6 o'clock. Chairman Teele: Isn't there a lady, Natalie? Is she here? The attorney. What time is the attorney going to be here? CRA 3/13/00 (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECORD) Chairman Teele: Well, the City Attorney is the formal attorney so -- Ma'am, all right. We're going to call the meeting to order. We realize that several Board Members have other obligations and would like to leave at a reasonably early amount of time. Let me welcome those of you that are from the Omni or the Overtown/Park West areas to this meeting. And so that we can move forward, unless there is an objection, what I'm going to do is ask — so that we don't take up any action items without the Attorney, and a maximum number of Board Members being present, we'd like to start with the update that was provided this morning by Mr. Judy and the consultants regarding the Miami Heat item. Now, what item is that? Unidentified Speaker: Miami Marlins. Board Member Winton: The Marlins. Chairman Teele: The Marlins. What item is that? Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk, City of Miami): Item 12. Chairman Teele: Item Number 12. That item is not an action item. It's an information item, and it's a good way to expend time without wasting time. (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECORD) Dick Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Where would you like it? Over here? Chairman Teele: That's fine right there. Just make sure that the Manager and everybody can see it. (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECORD) 1. MARTIN Z. MARGULIES' DONATION OF OVERTOWN YOUTH TECHNOLOGY CENTER TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN GIBSON PARK. [See Section #17] NOTE FOR THE RECORD: Board Member Sanchez entered the meeting room at 5:15 p.m. Chairman Teele: I've just been passed a note, Dick, just — why don't — would you just hold this? I know that Mr. Margulies is here and he doesn't have a lot of time. And Mr. Margulies, we want to be respectful of persons making contributions. So it's Item Number 17. And I'm aware that you've requested that we take this item up first, and we'll be happy to do so, unless there is an objection. It's a resolution authorizing the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) to enter into a memorandum of understanding. We probably will not vote on it right after your presentation, waiting for other Board Members. But if you would like to come forward now, we'd be happy to do it. And we respect the fact that you're on a very tight schedule. Ronald Fieldstone: (Inaudible) if you don't mind. 2 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: Yes. Mr. Fieldstone: (Inaudible). Chairman Teele: We all are aware, but I think it's always helpful to have a little bit of background, yes. Welcome, Mr. Margulies. Martin Margulies: Good afternoon. The project is a youth facility in Overtown, which is a goal of mine. Primarily one of the main reasons is that very little is given to the Overtown community. And I felt that being a fortunate individual in this community that I would do something significant. The facility is approximately seventeen to eighteen thousand square feet. The emphasis will be on life style for these young children from ages nine through 15, after school facility from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock at night. There will be a bus going around the Overtown neighborhood picking up the children. There will be mentoring of the parents or guardians for these children, so that they can utilize the facility. There will be approximately an 8,000 foot athletic facility. Basketball, gym, and it will be enough for a league with little children of nine and ten years old, as well as the older kids will have full court. There will be an exercise room, locker room, showers, a computer center, an arts and crafts facility, ballrooms, a stage. We're going to be teaching these kids about check writing, about abuses of credit cards, about politics. Start them early so they can get into the network, and they'll know what Government is. And we're going to bring in professional black citizens who will be their role models, so to speak, so they'll come and — like the firemen and airline people, and bankers, and lawyers, and people from all walks of life. So they'll talk to these children, and these children will see that they might have a future ahead of them. The idea, someone said, was to teach these kids to look for a management position at Burger King rather than just hashing out French fries all their life. So this is a very worthy thing with me, and I know it's going to be a national model. I'm fortunate to have struck a cord with Alonzo Mourning. He will be raising funds for this facility in terms of the operation, only. And he'll be putting this under his Summer Groove auspices. Alonzo and I just had a two-hour meeting on Wednesday. I think, after last night, I think I should have a meeting with him every week, you know. He had a great night out there. So he's going to be raising the money, along with myself, the board of directors, board of trustees, who will be primarily black citizens, attorneys or — Already, I've gotten three attorneys on this board, as well as Alonzo. And I'm looking for younger people who will perpetuate this facility. The funds to build the facilities are secured by my foundation. I will not be raising a penny to build it. The facility will cost approximately two and a half to three million dollars ($3,000,000). There will be a bond posted as the term in the lease specifies, so that will be complete. It will be under a five-year lease with five-year options. Essentially, I've met with the Overtown Advisory Board, and they're very, very excited about this. And I must admit to you, there was a little apprehension, because over the years, so many people have come into this area and promised something, and not delivered. But we're going to deliver this. And from the time we get approval from this Board, it will be approximately five months, and we will have the plans finished by that time. And when the plans are finished, we will start construction, because we don't need any financing. We've also met with Reverend Nevin, the church next door. We feel that the church is a very powerful force in this community, and we will make the facility available to some of his kids, who he does daycare for. And essentially, that's it. We think it's going to be a terrific thing for Overtown, and eventually, we hope that the whole area, with all the help that the City will probably give, will be redeveloped into a real community. Other than that, Chairman, I don't have anything else to say. And that's basically it. 3 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Fieldstone: Let me just make a few comments. Mr. Bloom — I don't know, Mr. Chairman, if you received the draft proposal resolution. Does everybody have that? Mr. Judy: Yes. Mr. Fieldstone: I don't know if everybody — that's been circulated to everyone. And Mr. Bloom was gracious enough to take our comments into account, and I think, Mr. Margulies, I'll comment that one — there was just one part about it that was kind of confusing, the name. And I don't know — we don't know who picked the name, because the name had changed from a youth center to a technology center. And Marty, maybe you want to comment on that. Mr. Margulies: Well, we felt that the facility should be called the Overtown Youth Center. Chairman Teele: I'll be the name that you want. We won't argue about that. It'll be the name you want. Mr. Margulies: OK. Because "facility" sounds too much like an institution. Chairman Teele: The only issue — and again, until the Attorney comes, we won't act on the resolution. Mr. Judy: As you well — I talked with you about the name will be included in the development agreement. Whatever you decide, they'll put there. We just used some wording here that was the work of the day. That was — everybody was talking about the technology aspect of this. And of course, you're playing a major role in that area. But I think you and I talked about it being the Overtown Youth Center, if you recall. And we're in accord there. But in — and in that regard, we did mention the fact that we would — in effect, in the development agreement, we would have those understandings where you're to meet your responsibilities. Mr. Fieldstone: Thank you. One final comment. Is it clear in the resolution — and I realize this Board doesn't speak for the City of Miami, per se, right? This is an advisory board? Mr. Judy: Absolutely. Chairman Teele: We don't speak — and that's the issue that I want to get to, is that this agreement has got to be a tri-party agreement. It cannot be a — we have a relationship with the City relating to the redevelopment area, which is a very small area, which this happens to fall in on the capital activities. However, the main issues that I think we have to really be concerned with are the issues that the Parks Department will have to weigh in on, and they'll — Mr. Fieldstone: Well, they — as you know, they've been actively involved in the planning process, and we've been working with them. So. Chairman Teele: But when we get down to do an agreement, they've got to be in — the City has got to be a signatory, because the one thing, you know, that Mr. — that has been raised appropriately, and that is Overtown is full of promises. The problem with a promise like this, unlike the ones that say Miami -Dade or some of these other people that have come in and made huge promises and walked away is that once this facility gets built, it's a part of the operating budget of the Parks Department. And we — you know, 4 CRA 3/13/00 and I'm encouraged by all of the words about the fundraising and the activities, and all of that. But I think the Parks Department is going to have to, and the Manager will have to be involved in the agreement as it relates to that aspect of it and -- the budget and putting together a budget and agreeing on the budget and the other issues that are there. So. Mr. Fieldstone: One item that maybe we'd like it clarified in the resolution, though. What we believe was promised — Marty, you can comment on this — was that the City was going to provide adequate police protection, because they police the area anyways. And I think that was one item — Chairman Teele: Well, I would urge you to start out by defining what "adequate" is, because the word "adequate" is a meaningless word in this context. I mean, those are the kinds of things that we're going to have to work through, police protection. Certainly they can't — the City cannot provide greater police protection for this facility than other facilities. And -- Mr. Fieldstone: Comparable. I think the concept was just whatever they would do for their own facility they would provide for this, understanding that the operations of this facility are being independently funded. The City is not being asked to fund the operating costs of the facility. Chairman Teele: Well, I mean, I think we have the elements of everything to agree on. I think the real issue is going to be to get a concept agreement today, and then get the City and the CRA and yourselves to sit down and agree on everything. Contrary, counsel, to anything else, in a worst -case scenario, which is what we have to plan for, if the facility is on a City property, unlike — like any other facility it — the City has a liability and a responsibility. And if for whatever reasons, God forbid, the funding would not be there to operate this facility, that's what we've got to basically make sure that the City is covered on. So — and we've had a number of situations like that, too. So that is the agreement. The only issue that I had from the very beginning, and I continue to raise that issue, is the issue of the open space there that is used by Optimist football. The Parks Department has preliminarily indicated that this facility will not interfere with the Optimist football or the Optimist activities that are going on there. And that's what I'm going to be looking, for that to be, you know, put in writing, as I've asked them to do. So I think, you know, you're right on track and off to the races. And Commissioner Sanchez or Regalado or Winton, are there questions or comments? Mr. Fieldstone: Yeah, we would appreciate — in other words, we understand tonight you will — the CRA will vote on the resolution. Chairman Teele: In concept, we will vote on a resolution. But my discomfort with the resolution is not the resolution, but the fact that the resolution has got to be a tri-party agreement. That is, the City, the CRA and — Mr. Fieldstone: Is this — does tonight — assuming the resolution passes, is that official approval by the CRA, which is then taken to the City Commission next? Chairman Teele: Well, it would go to the City Manager. But what we would do is we would — at the end of the day, this resolution would be good as far as it goes, but the resolution that you would be looking for would be a resolution from the City Commission that will have all three parties signing one document. 5 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Fieldstone: And could you just briefly, for everybody's benefit, since you're the expert on this, tell us the mechanics of how that's going to work and the time? Chairman Teele: Well, I'm not the expert on that, but I can tell you the Parks Department is strongly in support of the project, the Manager is strongly in support of the project, and assuming the Legal Department can insure that all of the legal issues are dealt with — I mean, this is, candidly, no different from what the Marlins are asking us for, either. I mean, let's just be — you know, this is City -owned land, and we're putting a facility on it, which, while it will appear to be private or privately endowed, the situation we have to be concerned about is if the funding isn't there at any given point in time. And so we're just going to have to work through that with the attorneys. Mr. Margulies: On January 61h or 7th — I'm not sure of the date — but we met with the Parks Department, and we met with -- the Legal Department has — is the one that wrote this lease. And we met with the architectural consultant to the City. So, we think we've gone through all the meetings. And we were urging them to get moving on this thing, because we want to get moving on it and get it done. And it seems like everybody is on track, and let's — let's go ahead and do it and get it over with. And it's going to take me about eight to nine months to build it after a four or five -month time limit on the plans, getting all the engineering and structural, mechanical, so forth. I must emphasize that this is going to be a first class facility. It's not going to be just a place full of concrete block, and let the kids go in. My name is attached to this, and I want to make sure that it's a first class facility. There will be very good landscaping. From my background, for those of you who don't know, I'm a luxury condominium developer, and have been in South Florida for 35 years. And some of the projects I built are Grove Isle, and the recent completion of the Grand Bay Towers on Key Biscayne. And so essentially, I'm not a politician, and I'm not a guy that wastes a lot of time. I'd like to see this thing get going. And as I mentioned to you, we're looking for your cooperation, and so far, so good. Board Member Sanchez: So move the resolution. Mr. Margulies: Thank you very much. Board Member Regalado: I'll second for — but I have a question, Mr. Margulies. I — you say that this will be for technical training for kids, and vocational training. Could that use that as sort of a meeting place for sports? What I'm saying is the Optimist Club is one of the best organizations throughout the City, and they have a football field which part will be taken by the building, right? No? Mr. Margulies: The site is on the corner. We've spoken to the gentleman who runs the Optimist Program. I'm sorry, but I don't remember his name. Mr. Judy, you — you know, the gentleman that was at our meeting, runs the football program? Mr. Judy: Hammond? Hammond, yeah. Mr. Margulies: Yeah. I mean, this is not interfering at all with any — Mr. Judy: That's not — we have done that work. It is not interfering with anything. Everybody is in harmony with the space for that facility. 6 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Margulies: There's no interference. And it's — while the sports are critically important to these kids, the idea of this is not everybody is going to be Alonzo Mourning. The idea is there are more attorneys that we can try and develop and more life style people and careers. So it's a mixture of a lifestyle facility, as well as a sports facility to give these kids a little recreation, as well. I don't know if that answers your question, Commissioner. Board Member Regalado: Yeah, it does. Yes. Mr. Margulies: Thank you. Chairman Teele: All right. On the motion with the understanding, again, that this motion and resolution will have to be — and that it will be up to the City Manager and the City Attorney to bring it forward. But it will have to be a tri-party agreement, and not a two—party agreement. All those in favor, signify by the sign of "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right. 7 CRA 3/13/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-11 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO PROCEED WITH (I) NEGOTIATIONS WITH MARTIN Z. MARGULIES REGARDING THE DONATION OF A YOUTH TECHNOLOGY CENTER (THE "OVERTOWN YOUTH TECHNOLOGY CENTER") TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN GIBSON PARK; (ii) THE NEGOTIATION OF A LEASE BETWEEN THE CRA AND A NOT -FOR -PROFIT ORGANIZATION TO OPERATE THE OVERTOWN YOUTH TECHNOLOGY CENTER; AND (iii) NEGOTIATING A LEASE WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI (THE "CITY") FOR THE USE OF A PORTION OF GIBSON PARK FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN OVERTOWN YOUTH TECHNOLOGY CENTER. (Here follows the body of the 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: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Teele: Thank you again, and we appreciate your efforts. Mr. Margulies: I look forward to cutting the ribbon. 8 CRA 3/13/00 2. DISCUSS PROPOSED MARLINS STADIUM IN BICENTENNIAL PARK. Chairman Teele: All right. Dick, you want to proceed with that other item, while we wait for Mr. Gort? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Yes. If I could pass Chairman Teele: I'm going to give him the mike. Let somebody on staff do that. Mr. Judy: Yes. We're passing out -- As you may recall, one of the responsibilities that the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) Commission Board requested that we look at appropriate sites for the ballpark in the Park West area. We also looked, I must say, in the Overtown area, also. And we teamed with, of course, our general consultant, B&A (Bermello, Ajamil and Partners), and got together and developed a program as you requested. And what I'll ask is for Alfredo to go through our slides to give you the approach and the methodology we used in making the determination of where we thought — in fact, where the only site is available in Park West. And I want to say that the approach to this was a neutral position. We're just bringing the facts together, where there's a possibility. There's still the challenge of whether that is the appropriate place, and those are questions that will be considered by the City of Miami as you — with that type of, I guess, hat on. But I'm going to introduce Alfredo here to go through the slide program. And also, I've passed out — I wanted to show you the comparison analysis that we have for the ballpark in the park, and also the comparison to the site that we have developed in the Park West area so you can see all of those differences. Alfredo Sanchez: Thank you, Dick. For the record, my name is Alfredo Sanchez. I'm an architect/urban designer with Bermello,Ajamil and Partners. And we're B&A. We're the general consultants on planning to the CRA. We were asked to look at establishing a site within the Park West area for evaluating it for the location of the Marlins Ballpark. And the first drawing you see here is a drawing that identifies development constraints. Park West is an area of about 70 acres, and there's some development constraints that have to be respected in designing a site for the area. Number one, maintaining the north/south traffic on Northeast Second Avenue, First Avenue and Miami Avenue, and keeping traffic on Eighth Street open to allow the traffic to bleed out. Additionally, we have the railroad track, the existing apartment buildings and a (unintelligible) plant to be — that serves the Miami Arena, plus the Metrorail Station. In that context, we required an area of approximately 15.6 acres to locate the ballpark. The area that we designed is a site that is bordered on the south by Eighth Street, on the north by 1 It Street, on the west by Northeast First Avenue and on the east by Northeast Second Avenue. The only way to generate the site is to be able to bend Northeast First Avenue starting at Sixth Street, and then bring it back to I Ith Street, so we keep this important artery flowing out of the downtown Miami open, because it allow access into 1-95 to travel west and north. So this is a frank artery in designing the site. The site has place for a 1500-car parking garage. We keep Northwest IOth Avenue — lOth Street — I'm sorry — open all the way. We pedestrianize for the pedestrian traffic can use it, and we orient a small plaza towards the west. Down in the lower blocks, we'll have to remove a number of properties, as well as in the upper blocks. I have an aerial photo here that — well, the — let me show you the aerial. This is basically how it would sit on the site. We would have to also keep an area that we called it optional open to allow the views of the stadium, as requested by the Marlins into the waterfront area. So basically, this is the site. We eliminate — Chairman Teele: What's the waterfront area? The slip? 9 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Sanchez: Well one of them, when they were talking — when they were talking about locating the stadium in Bicentennial Park, an important element that they mentioned was being able to look out and see the cruise ships and the water. At this height — this facility is about 280 feet high. I don't know exactly how high the camera is for people, but they'll be high enough to be able to pan out and see the cruise ships, and the water, and the bay, and the slips, of course. This is a plan — And by the way, we — I want to make it very clear, we also worked with John Lindsay and the City of Miami in developing this project. On the sheet that you saw passed out, there are a number of cost estimates regarding condemnation. I will get into those, or if you want to talk to them, John. But it was a joint effort between the City of Miami, the CRA and the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). And now we'll get into that. This is the takings of the properties that have to be done. We basically have to condemn 19.12 acres of — Chairman Teele: How many? Mr. Sanchez: Nineteen point twelve acres of privately held land to be able to locate this facility. Additionally, we have to vacate 4.67 acres of right-of-way, and 2.31 acres optional along Biscayne Boulevard. This is the composition of the final site. The final site, the area dedicated to the facility proper will be approximately 16.4 acres. The rest of the area will be dedicated as open space, approximately 4.4 acres. The realigned Northeast First Avenue is about 2.95 acres. And we have the view corridor of 2.35 acres. As part of this effort, the City of Miami calculated the cost of the land to be condemned. We have a value. And if I can refer to the piece of paper that I handed you, the total assessed value of the land in Park West is 16.1 million, a cost of approximately twenty-one dollars ($21) per square foot. The City's estimated market value is about 32.3 million. And the market value amounts to about forty-two ($42) a square foot. We also calculated the predevelopment costs, as far as the infrastructure improvements for this configuration. And we figured it, and it's in your package on the small one, and it's five point five million dollars ($5.5 million) to relocate the infrastructure and to build a new road without demolition costs. And those will be taken up as part of building the facility. The City's calculated cost does not include the location, professional fees, transactional court costs and a seller's market. For these reasons, and if you look at a lot of the condemnation proceedings that go on, it's estimated that approximately, it's about two times what the estimated value we have, which is approximately 32.3 million to condemn the property. The use of quick take, this procedure is not likely basically because of a lot of the changes in the law, the financial exposure that would be required, and the escrow requirements and the time frame of approximately one year to be able to condemn the property. And this — also WRT, the other consultant for the DDA, presented this evaluation matrix where they addressed the site fit of the two sites, both Bicentennial Park and Park West, the fiscal impacts and the tax loss in condemning these properties would be at thirty-eight thousand dollars ($38,000) a year at present, and — Chairman Teele: How much? Mr. Sanchez: Thirty-eight thousand, at present. That's for the tax loss. And the CRA tax increment loss is two hundred and forty-two thousand dollars ($242,000) a year. So it would add up to two hundred and eighty thousand dollars ($280,000) a year. And it would — so that's the amount that would be taken by this scheme. Access in parking was also looked at for the two facilities, and the benefits for these of — and adverse impacts of both locating it on Park West and on Bicentennial Park. And if I may go through some of those, the Bicentennial Park site, the City of Miami, of course, loses no taxes. The CRA tax increment loss is zero, and the contributions from the Marlins towards development of the balance of the park 10 CRA 3/13/00 improvements, which is something that they mentioned. As far as roadway capacity, there is adequate roadway capacity on both sites. The areas traffic flow may be improved for port -related reasons, and is part of a larger study, and it affects both sites. There's additional signalization needed for both sites, both Bicentennial and the Park West site. And they're both in close proximity to the Metro Mover, but the Metrorail is more — in more proximity to the Park West site. And an important element of any of the schemes will have to be pedestrian improvements to allow access from the Metrorail to the facility. The location of a ballpark in downtown Miami will add to the critical mass of downtown activities, and it will reduce — the location of the site will reduce the Park West frontage and essentially reduce Park West to West Biscayne frontage. It will create a space in both properties that is only used about — that is dead for 280 days out of the year. It will consume land on this site that could be used for redevelopment as opposed to the one in Bicentennial Park. And basically, there's a question of whether there is compatibility between the residential area and the ballpark use, as far as the noise. But that's a question that I think (unintelligible) from the Miami Arena, and the residential houses survived. So this is the study presented this morning. It was presented as an evaluation, in other words, for the DDA Board looking at this, at these two sites. John, would you like to add anything to it? John Lindsay: (Inaudible, speaking off microphone.) Chairman Teele: Before you do, now, Commissioner Gort and the DDA have been fully briefed on everything? Mr. Sanchez: Absolutely. This morning, there was a full presentation on behalf of the CRA -- Mr. Lindsay: Right. Mr. Sanchez: And the DDA, WRT, and B&A and Mr. — Chairman Teele: And was WRT, which is the DDA's consultant — Mr. Sanchez: Right. Chairman Teele: Were they in agreement? Were there any areas where your presentation WRT's were not in agreement? Mr. Sanchez: At this stage of the presentation, what we have done is to be able to bring forth a viable site within Park West for the purposes of evaluation, basically evaluating the fiscal impacts of and the costs associated with one of the sites. There was not a discussion as to whether we were in agreement this morning, but it was just a factual recount of what had been found as far as the site required and the fiscal impacts, and the cost. Chairman Teele: Now, my question is, does WRT — does WRT have any professional disagreements from anything that you have stated on this site? Mr. Sanchez: I personally think if you look at the evaluation here, the site fit, the cost timetables, direct fiscal impacts, I think these are questions that I think we all agree on, as far as being very factual. 11 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: Yeah. Mr. Sanchez: Personally, I agree on, as far as being very factual and very straightforward. There is no question of what it will cost to do this facility as to what it will cost to do the other facility. In regards to the areas on access parking, catalytic benefits, and adverse impacts, and intangibles, I think that these are things that are — that can be discussed, and I don't think that it's — they're very subjective. I don't think — I don't agree with some of them. I think as far as what the sites will do, they could — they could be either way taken. I mean, there's some values to locating on this site and there's some values to locating on the Bicentennial Park site, not necessarily — not necessarily what is being presented, and the last two, I think are open to subjective evaluation. I think the crucial matters here are, number one, the time frame; number two, the cost to acquire this property; and number three, what can develop in this property, in Park West long-term, as opposed to locating it on Bicentennial Park. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado: Yes. I have a question and a comment. By reading this, everyone who reads this will see that Bicentennial is the ideal place to build it. I said that if you read the pros and the cons, and the good and the bad, Bicentennial will be the ideal place to build it. But my question — and because Park West seems to have a lot of problems in terms of whatever you say here, and there is no problem at all in Bicentennial. So I don't know if that is a subliminal idea that you're trying to — Mr. Sanchez: No, no, no, not at all. Board Member Regalado: OK. Mr. Sanchez: I think what I was trying to get at is, number one that if you look at the site fit — OK? — Definitely, to be able to do the Park West site, we have to condemn 32 properties. OK? I mean, that's a reality. There is nothing to be condemned on Bicentennial Park. Board Member Regalado: No, I understand that. Mr. Sanchez: Right. And if you look at costs and timetable, these are pretty straightforward. I mean, the fact is that you do have to condemn again, you have a cost, OK? You have a market value that you have to deal with, whereas the Bicentennial property is owned by the City of Miami already. If you look at the direct fiscal impacts, that's pretty straightforward. I mean, you are losing tax revenue by locating it on Park West. OK? If you look at Bicentennial Park, it does not pay taxes now, so — and definitely, that's not an issue. I think when it breaks down is when you get into the access in parking and the catalytic benefits, subjective things. And I think it also has to deal with what will best serve the community as far as locating it on any of the sites and what will be a deal breaker for this as far as the Marlins. And I think that's something that has to be clearly defined. Board Member Regalado: But my question here is, on the premises, you say the new stadium opens in 2003, groundbreaking 2001. Mr. Sanchez: Right. 12 CRA 3/13/00 Board Member Regalado: So that's the general timetable. Mr. Sanchez: That's the premises that were established by the Marlins. Board Member Regalado: If they were to go to Park West, however, you say here in the last line ballpark construction could likely not begin until 2002. Mr. Sanchez: Right. Board Member Regalado: Which would that mean that the ballpark will not be able to open in 2003? Mr. Sanchez: No, it would take longer. You're talking about putting it — Board Member Regalado: That's what I'm saying. Mr. Sanchez: Right, two years longer. Board Member Regalado: That's what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that in the general premises, which refers to both sites — Mr. Sanchez: Right. Board Member Regalado: -- it's a different date. That date refers to Bicentennial, I'm sure, instead of Park West. Mr. Sanchez: The one in 2002? Board Member Regalado: Yes. Mr. Sanchez: That refers to Park West. First of all, I did not prepare this piece of paper. As part of the team effort, we only developed the site and established the site for further evaluation. That was our mandate in this study. But definitely, what they're saying is that construction will begin in 2002 and the stadium on Bicentennial Park will be concluded in 2003. So you would add two years. Basically, you would put another two years, to 2004, for the stadium in Park West to be operational. Board Member Regalado: Yes. Mr. Sanchez: That is what the paper is saying. Board Member Regalado: That was my question, basically, it's in the general premises, and it's different in both areas. Mr. Sanchez: Right. Board Member Regalado: Right. 13 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Sanchez: Right. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Sanchez: No comments whatsoever. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton -- Let me see if I can understand two or three things. Number one; is this the only feasible site? Mr. Sanchez: Yes, sir. This is the only feasible site within the Park West area. Chairman Teele: At some point, at some other date, could you give me a list of other sites that were looked at and dismissed, and the reason why? Mr. Sanchez: OK. As part of the — Chairman Teele: At another date. Mr. Sanchez: Right. Chairman Teele: I mean, I'll take your word for the fact — Mr. Sanchez: Within Park West? Chairman Teele: Within Park West. Mr. Sanchez: Right. Chairman Teele: Let me ask you this: Was the existing arena considered as a site? Mr. Sanchez: Yes, sir, it was. But the problem is that it would not fit the facility. You need, as I said 16 point acres — 16.4 acres. Even this — if you cannot -- You can very clearly see, this is to scale. This will not fit in this site. And we have the limiting factor of these two large towers. Chairman Teele: But what about if you used the arena as a part of it, and then took in other lands around it? Mr. Sanchez: No, because — Chairman Teele: It doesn't work? Mr. Sanchez: It doesn't work, sir. Let me just go back — (UNINTELLIGIBLE COMMENT NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECORD) 14 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Sanchez: Let me go back to -- this drawing, I think, shows it more clearly. What you have is you have the railroad track — OK? — Which has to be kept open to access to the Port of Miami. And that is one form determinant, one development constraint that I defined clearly at the beginning of the exercise. Otherwise, you have to erase the facility, and it becomes extremely expensive, almost prohibitive to be able to do that. Even if you do that, there is not enough room in here to locate the facility and do it adequately. You don't have the area to be able to do so. So that — we did look at that site. We also looked — initially, we also looked at a site up here in this corner, OK? And once again, it was not a very adequate site to be able to locate the facility. You would have to basically go over to the end, and the traffic access into this area became really a nightmare. Chairman Teele: Well, you indicated some number, but you didn't put those numbers in context. You said in the tax increment, it would cost, as I heard you say, two hundred and forty thousand dollars ($240,000)? Mr. Sanchez: Two hundred and forty-two thousand dollars ($242,000), sir. Chairman Teele: Did anyone tell you what the increment was for last year? Mr. Sanchez: No, sir. I did not prepare this. Board Member Winton: Who did? Mr. Sanchez: (Inaudible). Chairman Teele: Is there anybody here that knows what the increment was for last year? Mr. Lindsay: I believe we have — John Lindsay, from the City of Miami. Most of the facts and figures here were put together by our Real Estate and Economic Development Team. Chairman Teele: No, I'm saying what the actual increment was. Is Charlayne here? Mr. Judy: Yes, she's here. Chairman Teele: What was the increment for last year? Charlayne Thompkins (Director, Fiscal Operations, CRA): The increment for Southeast Overtown/Park West or Omni? Which one? Chairman Teele: Southeast Overtown/Park West. Ms. Thompkins: Three hundred fifty-five thousand, forty-eight by the City and seventeen thousand, one- o-three by the County. Chairman Teele: That was the increment? Ms. Thompkins: That's the increment. 15 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: For last year or this year? Ms. Thompkins: That's for this year. Chairman Teele: The last year's increment. Mr. Judy: I couldn't hear. Was that combined, Southeast Overtown and Park West, though? Chairman Teele: I think she was giving City and County. Board Member Winton: Yes. She gave it for the whole area. Ms. Thompkins: City and County. (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECORD) Chairman Teele: Yeah, but see, the point I was trying to get is that last year's increment was less than a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) or right at a hundred and some thousand dollars. So when you start talking about — I mean, you know, this is a point that I've tried — that every — I've always started these Board meetings is that the CRA, the tax increment which is the cornerstone of the funding which should be the funding for the Redevelopment Authorities, as opposed to these other funds that we look at is in a negative cash flow before we hire any person. The overall cost of the Redevelopment Authority, based on what has happened over the last 20 years, is in a negative cash flow. So right now, we're projecting the increment at about three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) this year, for the current year. But if you're talking about taking out two hundred and forty-eight thousand dollars ($248,000) out of the increment, you can see what you're talking about, the impact. So I just think those numbers need to have a little bit more — as this presentation gets refined — those numbers need to have a little bit more relevance to what the real world is, because two hundred and forty-eight thousand may sound like a lot of money, or may not sound like a lot of money. But if it's two hundred and forty-eight thousand out of three hundred thousand or three -fifty, it's a pretty big whack. And I guess to some extent, the concern that I have — because, see, I really thought that this arena could be built — this stadium could be built closer to the old arena, in that context. I mean, I'm not an architect or a planner, or — nearer to 395. But if it can't be done, then we have a real problem, particularly if we're going to buy into the assumption that we've got to maintain the north/south — the north/south thoroughfares, which feed downtown to 395. And that's where the importance of Northeast First and Second are, because personally, I was hoping -- as I said to the consultant, why do we have to do it? And I've heard from the Florida DOT (Department of Transportation) and everybody else when I asked that question -- I guess it was considered a dumb question. But the fact of the matter is, is that if you accept all of the parameters that are being given to us, the parameters, especially from the Florida DOT, that those roads, those north/south grids which are at Northeast First and Northeast Second have to be kept open, and if you accept the premise that you need 14 acres, 14 to 17 acres, you just have a problem finding the shoe print. I mean it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out if you're going to keep First and Second Street open, and you're going to try to plop down something for 14 to 17 acres, you got a real problem fitting it in. That's the problem that I have with this. So without getting into the fact that I totally reject — I want to just be on the record — I don't accept any of the economic numbers that are costs for — that have been recited here today. I mean, I'm not 16 CRA 3/13/00 quarreling. I don't accept those numbers. And I think Tom Post wouldn't accept those numbers, given the fact that he just sold land within the last two weeks for double the numbers that you all are talking about. Board Member Winton: That was on Biscayne Boulevard. Chairman Teele: But we're not talking about Biscayne Boulevard. Board Member Regalado: Right. Chairman Teele: The area where he talked about, I think you said forty dollars ($40) a square foot? Mr. Judy: Forty-two. Chairman Teele: Forty-two dollars ($42) a square foot? Mr. Judy: Right. Could I — Commissioner, may I add something then? Chairman Teele: I mean but we're talking forty-two dollars ($42) a square foot along First and Second Avenues, right? Mr. Judy: Correct. Chairman Teele: And I'm telling you, you can go to the public record and see that a man just sold land for double that within the last two weeks. Mr. Judy: Right. Chairman Teele: So, I'm just saying on record, I hear you, I mean, you know, and I'm not quarreling about it. I don't accept those numbers as being real world numbers, particularly when the City or the CRA starts talking about eminent domain. The numbers go. If the experience of what happened in Metrorail, and Overtown, and what has happened all over the City of Miami on the transit is any experience, these numbers have been four times what were the last selling numbers. So we need to be very careful about that. Mr. Judy: Can I add one thing in that that did come up this morning? And I'd like to share it with the group. Based on Miami Economic Associates' assumptions, they took our City's estimated market value for the Park West site of 32.3 million and you double that. So that knocks it up to 64.6 million. Chairman Teele: Say that again? Mr. Judy: Based on Miami Economic Associates' estimate, they doubled what we estimated the market value of that to be, which we estimated it at 32.3, which knocks this up to 64.6. Chairman Teele: They took it up to 60? Mr. Judy: Right. 17 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: And I say it's around 80. Mr. Judy: Right. Chairman Teele: So somewhere between 30 and 80 is where it is. Mr. Judy: Right. If you factor in the optional property here, which we estimated the value to be 16 million, you double that, you're now talking — Chairman Teele: How much were you estimating that a square foot? Mr. Judy: That one, I don't have the dollar figures. We figured that property estimated at 16 million. But if you took Miami Economic Associates' assumption, which is multiply it by two, that adds another thirty- two million dollars ($32,000,000). And now you're up to 96 million. You factor in the infrastructure changes at five million, the demolition at just under two and — Chairman Teele: I would defer — Mr. Judy: -- you're over a hundred million. Chairman Teele: Yeah. I mean somewhere between sixty and a hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) is the cost of land assemblage. Mr. Judy: Right. The predevelopment costs, correct. Chairman Teele: Predevelopment costs. Mr. Judy: Right. Chairman Teele: And I will defer to Commissioner Winton on these numbers, because this is more his business, I think, than anybody else on here. But I will tell you right now, the numbers that the Development Office had been using and the assumptions on the Marlin — on the Bicentennial have appraised that land or had that land at like a hundred and fifty dollars ($150) a square foot. Is that the number? Mr. Judy: Well, for Bicentennial, we were figuring at 65 a square foot. That was based on the appraisal at Parrot Jungle. Chairman Teele: At sixty-five dollars ($65) a square foot. Mr. Judy: And that's low. I'll acknowledge that. Chairman Teele: No, no, no, no. But folks, I mean, you know, and this is a problem. And this kind of mentality, or this kind of thinking weaves its way right in through all of the things that we're doing. Watson Island, everywhere. If the land on Biscayne Boulevard which is selling now for a hundred and 18 CRA 3/13/00 seventy-five to two hundred dollars ($200) a square foot on Biscayne Boulevard is worth two hundred dollars ($200) a square foot, the land on Bicentennial is worth a little bit more, I would think. And the actual numbers are two hundred dollars ($200) a square foot along Biscayne Boulevard right now. So I mean, you know, this gets to Commissioner Regalado's point, is that some of these assumptions really need to be carefully combed through, because it doesn't make sense for us to look at an assumption that Bicentennial is worth a hundred and sixty-five dollars ($165) a square foot when we all know it's worth at least two hundred, two hundred fifty dollars ($250) a square foot. So I guess it's going to get down to one thing, and that is at some point, the decision, I guess, is going to be: Do we want Marlin baseball downtown? And then, the question is going to wind up being: Where and at what price? But we don't have to make that decision today. Commissioner Winton. Board Member Winton: When you look at the plan here, I think there's another fundamental question that we have to answer, and that is what we think the long range plan for Park West would be, because it's clear that if you put the stadium here, that's right in the dead set center of Park West. And that will dramatically reduce the options for future development on the contiguous sites around there. So — Chairman Teele: Because of the footprint? Is that what you're saying? Board Member Winton: Well, not only the footprint, but there's certain business segments. You can't build quality housing, obviously, anywhere near this stadium. So if Park West — and I know a number of the plans that we've all looked at over the course of the last year or so have called for significant housing development in Park West as a major add -on to our greater downtown area. And you're not going to get significant housing built around — near this stadium. It's going to have to go several blocks away. So you're going to change the complexity of Park West forever. Now, maybe from a policy standpoint, that's something we'd choose to do. But it certainly is something we have to look at before that kind of decision is made. Chairman Teele: I obviously agree with you. The only thing that I think we have to be very careful about in all of this is private property. I mean the City of Miami owns the Bicentennial site. We can plan that. But I think even in the context of the Redevelopment Authority, we have to be very careful in speaking for what property owners are going to do with their site. I believe that if the Marlins stadium were to be built, particularly if it were built in Park West, I think what you would have is the same thing you have in Baltimore. You'd wind up with three or four hotels right around it. And in Baltimore, you can literally go from at least three different hotels directly into the ballpark. And that was sort of what I was envisioning. I mean, I don't — the housing aspects of Park West, in my judgment, at the rate dirt is selling, is just gone out the window. I mean the dirt — the cost of dirt right now is such that it's going to be very difficult to make housing work in Park West. Board Member Winton: But that's not the thing. We've seen — this country has seen land speculators go down in flames over and over and over again. And what's going on along Biscayne Boulevard and Park West is pure unadulterated land speculation. And that doesn't mean that any of those people are going to make any profit. If there isn't a demand for the products that can afford two hundred dollar ($200) a square foot land, then the product isn't going to get built, and the taxes are going to be nice and high on two hundred dollar ($200) a square foot land. And you may have speculators holding that land for the next 15 years trying to get that big thing built, whatever that big thing is. And you may end up with two or three of them building the same big thing at the same time, and then they all go belly up together. So — 19 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: Well I don't — Board Member Winton: But just because they're paying those prices for some of the land doesn't preclude other kinds of development for the land that isn't — has not hit those kind of prices. Board Member Winton: Commissioner Winton, I agree with you. But the point I want to pause on and appeal to Mr. Lindsay, and the Manager, and to Ms. Henry is the problem that we have had in Park West ever since Bayside was built, and that is, the land values went right up, skyrocketed right up Biscayne Boulevard all the way up to the Howard Johnson. I think everybody knows that. I wasn't even here. I was in Washington. The problem that I have with all of this is the City is receiving and has been receiving the taxes on that land at a fraction of what it is selling for. In other words, we have been — we have been — the County and the City have allowed the property owners to literally say the money is worth one thing, and pay taxes on a totally different value in the Park West area, in particular. And if you pull the appraised values of the property in this area, if you pull the appraised value of the property, I would be willing to bet you anything, Johnny, on any parcel you look at in the last year that it is paying about one fifth — it is being appraised at about one fifth of what it's selling for. And that's on us. I mean, that has nothing to do with anything other than the fact that somewhere along the line, between the CRA and then the — the City hired a consultant to sort of work with the County Property Appraiser's Office. But we need to make sure that the land values that we get our tax dollars collected on all of this — if you call it speculation, speculation — but whoever owns the property needs to be paying us full property values based upon what the sales are. And I think that's the most important thing that will determine whether this is speculation or whether it's solid. Board Member Winton: Well, building will determine whether it's solid. Chairman Teele: Paying those taxes will, too, I can tell you that. Board Member Winton: That's right. Mr. Sanchez: If I may add, Mr. Winton, you're totally correct; it's a policy decision. And I think one thing we haven't spoken about is what are the alternate uses for the Bicentennial Park site, because we all agree that the Bicentennial Park is in dire straits. It doesn't really function as a park, and most likely will never function as a park, because it's very, very isolated. So what will happen to Bicentennial Park in the long term, and what alternate use could you have if you were to locate the facility on Park West? It's a very important question that needs to be answered and looked at. And it's a policy decision, also, as to how downtown will expand, and what uses can Park West attract without creating substantial investment, converting it into a residential area. It's — you know, it's a very important policy question that has to be looked at. And perhaps we can make land more valuable in the rest of downtown (unintelligible). Chairman Teele: Well, this is an update. And I think the really important thing is that Mr. Judy and the consultants need to meet with each Commissioner or each Board Member in this regard. The one thing that I hope to do is to insure that Commissioners and Board Members have information that's helpful to them. There seems to be a little bit of a sense that all of the assumptions are eschewed a bit toward Bicentennial. And I would hope that as a matter of policy, if there is any assumption or site that any Board Member would want to explore and to fully develop that the staff would undertake to do that, and 20 CRA 3/13/00 then to present us with a cost at the end of it, because I think one of the things that we cannot do is we cannot let four thousand dollars ($4,000) worth of planning, you know, drive a three hundred million dollar ($300,000,000) decision that we're going — a lack of planning. And so if Commissioner — particularly, I know that the Chairman of the Bayfront Trust, Commissioner Sanchez has had some concerns, and others, and I certainly would like to look at one other site, but I don't want to get into that now. John. Mr. Lindsay: All right. Commissioner, I can assure you that the staff will work with you on that. We've been working very, very closely with DDA, CRA, the various consultants, compiling the data, the factoids, taking notice, based on assessed values, appraisals. The one thing that we can't always determine is the market. And the information that we've compiled to this point, we can forward that to the Commissioners, as well, individually. We've just been working through Commissioner Gort and the DDA Baseball Selection Committee. But the information is out there, and we can forward that to you, as well. Chairman Teele: Further questions? Further comments? If not, we'll return to the Agenda. I'm hoping that Commissioner Gort is going to be here for the action items. 21 CRA 3/13/00 M 3. SUPPORT BY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR CITY OF MIAMI'S DEVELOPERS SUMMIT 2000; FURTHER DESIGNATING THE CRA DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE STEERING COMMITTEE. Chairman Teele: Could we go to Item Number 2, Commissioner Sanchez? The Developer Summit 2000, which you have — Board Member Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you know, we are developing the Miami Development Summit 2000, and we are seeking the support of everyone, including the Administration on this project. As we all know, the City of Miami is one of the most vibrant cities in the world. And (unintelligible) the magical City with a comprehensive development plan would have wide appeal as a place to live, and come invest, here in Miami. The City of Miami Development Summit would allow our magical City to showcase a lot of the redevelopment sites and development sites, in an effort to attract not only local, but also international developers and present them with the many development opportunities which exist within our community. We have broadened our base to include not only developers, but venture capital firms, also real estate investment trusts, and also mortgage bankers, and et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, to participate in this summit. I truly believe that there is no better time than now. As you know, the City has overcome a sixty-eight million dollar ($68,000,000) deficit, and we are financially stable again. And this project basically cannot continue to sit on the shelf. It's something that needs to be done to bring this to the next level. We have joined efforts — well, we're trying to join efforts and get the support of the legislative body, which is the Commission, also the Administration, the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), the DDA (Downtown Development Authority), the ITB, which is the International Trade Board, and the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce, the Beacon Council, and any other party that wishes to participate in this summit. We are in the process of organizing a steering committee. We have been contacted by many private companies and sectors in our community that want to assist the City in underwriting most of this event. So we ask that the CRA support us and would put somebody in the — or recommend somebody for the steering committee, which we have plans for sometime next month to meet and select a steering committee. Chairman Teele: Motion by Commissioner Sanchez requesting that the CRA support and designate an appropriate official. Board Member Winton: Second. Chairman Teele: Moved and seconded. The appropriate official would be the Director of Strategic Planning, inserted in the resolution. Is there further discussion? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right. 22 CRA 3/13/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-12 OMNI/CRA 00-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) SUPPORTING THE CITY OF MIAMI'S DEVELOPERS SUMMIT 2000; AND FURTHER DESIGNATING THE DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CRA TO PARTICIPATE IN THE STEERING COMMITTEE IN CONNECTION WITH THE SUMMIT. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Teele: And obviously, Commissioner Sanchez, to the extent that we can support in administrative costs, mailings or whatever, you know, we'd be willing to carry out that responsibility, along with the DDA, I'm sure. 23 CRA 3/13/00 4. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA AND SUPPORTIVE BACKUP MATERIALS RELATED TO CRA MEETINGS TO BE DISTRIBUTED TO BOARD MEMBERS AT LEAST FIVE DAYS PRIOR TO SAID MEETINGS. Chairman Teele: All right. Next items are the reports. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may. This — the Agenda is a voluminous Agenda, and a complicated one. We have — you know, we received the Agenda better than last time. We received it a couple of days, but we — I would ask that a motion be put that the Agenda for the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) have a five-day ruling, just like it does in the City. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Sanchez that the CRA Agenda be subject to the five-day rule procedures. Board Member Winton: Second. Chairman Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Winton. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? Board Member Sanchez: Also, Mr. Chairman, to have proper backup material. With 27 items — if you look at the City of Miami's Agenda, with close to 50 items, we are given a book, about seven inches of backup material. So we ask that also backup material be included in the agenda. Chairman Teele: With that included in the motion? Board Member Sanchez: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: All right. It's included in the motion that you just gave. Board Member Sanchez: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: Five days with backup. All right. 24 CRA 3/13/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-13 OMNI/CRA 00-11 A MOTION STIPULATING THAT THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) AGENDA AND SUPPORTIVE BACKUP MATERIALS RELATED TO CRA MEETINGS BE DISTRIBUTED TO BOARD MEMBERS AT LEAST FIVE DAYS PRIOR TO SAID MEETINGS. Upon being seconded by Board Member Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Teele: All right. If — I guess, Commissioner Sanchez, I've always taken the position, even in the County, if any member is not ready to vote on an item, so long as that's not for dilatory or just delaying purposes, by unanimous consent, that item should not be taken up unless it's time sensitive and an emergency. I would also add, just for the record, that the majority of the items that are on this Agenda were deferred from the last meeting at your request. Board Member Sanchez: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: And so candidly, the notice provision on those items would be about 45 days or 30 some days, not the four days that you're discussing. But in any event, if there's any item that you would like to defer at any time, I've always taken the position and will always take the position — Board Member Sanchez: I have no items to take out of the Agenda. However, you must understand that we are part-time Commissioners, and, you know, I have to work and — and, you know, sometimes you're going to make decisions, we are. Responsible decisions are being made here. I'm ready to move on all 27 items, but I think a five-day ruling is quite appropriate. Chairman Teele: And I agree. And without objection, it has passed. 25 CRA 3/13/00 M 5. DISCUSS CRA FY 2000 BUDGET — REQUEST AGENDA TO HAVE FINANCIAL REPORT. Chairman Teele: OK. The items that are here now are informational items, update items. Update on the FY 2000 budget. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Mr. Chairman, I'd like to call our Director of Fiscal Operations to give us that update. It shouldn't be too much. We made some adjustments in positions and — come up for a (unintelligible). Charlanyne Thompkins (Director, Fiscal Operations, CRA): Charlayne Thompkins, Director of — Mr. Tyler: The mike is not on. Ms. Thompkins: Charlayne Thompkins, Director of Fiscal Operations for the CRA. Before you is the revised budget with all of the funding sources, and the expenditures. And the essential changes to the budget is the sixty thousand dollar ($60,000) amendment that was made by Commissioner Teele during the budget time to help the City balance the budget. And we have included an additional twenty-eight hundred dollars ($2800) for recalculation of TIF (Tax Increment Funding) monies. So essentially, the budget has been reduced by fifty-seven thousand dollars ($57,000). The other item that you would find in the detail includes a position for the Administrative Assistant. Mr. Tyler: And I think we made some adjustments to cover my position, as well. Ms. Thompkins: Yes. All of those are incorporated in that report. Chairman Teele: All right. Again, this is a report item. It is always on the Agenda. The budget is always on the Agenda, and it should always be on the Agenda, I think, as we go through the process. And there is no action required, but it is something I think we need to become more focused on, not only at the CRA, but in the City, as well. Ms. Thompkins: The last item that we had the last time was on the financial report, and they are also available. Chairman Teele: The financial report? Ms. Thompkins: Yes. Chairman Teele: All right. Would somebody pass those out, please? Ms. Thompkins: As of February 29tn Chairman Teele: That's what I asked for. And Commissioner Sanchez, it's my intent that these reports will be passed out at every Board meeting so that we can take up the report of the last report being passed out at any given time. In other words, when we come back to the next meeting, this report should be one that — that if there are any real questions, we should, you know, focus on at that time. 26 CRA 3/13/00 Board Member Sanchez: Why wouldn't it be included in the — as the backup material? Chairman Teele: Well, a report — the way I would envision it, you'll always be one month behind. And so it could be — in other words, if we were to meet in April, in all likelihood, you would not have March's statement available. This is as of March — February 291". So, I mean, this is — Board Member Sanchez: It's a month behind. Chairman Teele: It's not a month behind. This is really on line now by — well, you're an accountant, so I don't want to get into that. But it's pretty fast, by my standards, to have it. I mean, two weeks lag is not what we get, you know. But the point is, is that at least within 30 to 40 days, we should have a report. So in every Agenda kit should be a report. Now, whether it's the March report or the February report, but a report should be forwarded. Board Member Winton: And I think what the Commissioner is simply asking for is the last available report, whatever that is. Chairman Teele: Whatever that is, exactly. 27 CRA 3/13/00 6. DISCUSS KPMG AUDIT OF CRA RECORDS — PARKING REVENUES OWED TO CRA BY CITY — RECORDS IN POOR CONDITON. Chairman Teele: All right. Now, we have a series of very issues that I would like for KPMG — we have the — to come forward on. Is KPMG — Charlayne, you want to introduce the KPMG? Charlayne Thompkins: All right. Chairman Teele: By way of background, Commissioner Winton, the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) has taken the position, and I strongly support it, is that the auditors for the CRA and the City are the same, in effect. The City selects the auditors for the City, and we piggyback on that. And I think that's a very good procedure. However, if the auditors have a situation where they have a conflict -- and they could very well be entering into a conflict area -- there's going to be some — they will have some ethical or professional issues that they would have to deal with, which may require at some point that we get out our auditor. But I think the preferable course of action is to have the same auditors. Board Member Winton: And we do a full audit; is that correct? Chairman Teele: A full audit. A full audit. And again, I'm sure you have read, you know, in the newspapers, as I have that, you know, that -- the CRA's finances, et cetera. Just understand this: Unlike — unlike the Bayfront Trust, I assume, the CRA does not write — does not have a checkbook. And I have always taken the position that we should not have a checkbook. The question of who the fiduciary is, however, is a separate issue, because if the City is going to start writing checks and making charges into an account without a City resolution or a Board resolution, clearly, we don't need that as a fiduciary. I mean, you know, you wouldn't have a bank that goes into your checking account and starts writing checks. And — and there are any number — I mean, you could use the Florida DOT (Department of Transportation) in that this is a State — under State law. You could use the Florida DOT, for example, or the Expressway Authority as a fiduciary. I don't want a checkbook. I don't want the CRA in the business of writing checks. And I think if the City and the CRA can have a relationship that's based on good fiscal principles and solid accounting and finance techniques, yes. But the concern that I have is if the City at any point writes a check on a CRA book without a resolution, we have a major problem -- a major problem -- because that's just not the way financing works. So — in particular, since we're the board of both, and if we don't authorize a check on either board, I mean, you know, we -- we have a conflict of interest in some ways, but let's just get into this with KPMG. Board Member Winton: How do you pay for office supplies? The City — you have to have a resolution from us to buy office supplies? Chairman Teele: Well, office supplies — office supplies are in the budget. Once the budget is approved, we enter into long-term contracts. For example, we buy our supplies from vendors that have been approved. So one of the things that we've tried to do at the CRA is use piggyback contracts where we approve two or three vendors or a vendor — and I think, for example, in the last Board meeting, we were approving or in this one, we were approving some Xerox expenses. Board Member Winton: Right. 28 CRA 3/13/00 Vice Chairman Gort: In this one. Chairman Teele: OK. In this one. I mean, they have to be approved, in other words. Ms. Thompkins: Any expenses that exceed forty-five hundred do come before the Board. Board Member Sanchez: So they follow the procurement (unintelligible) in the City. Board Member Winton: Well, but the point here being made was — or at least that I heard, and maybe I just didn't understand. That's why I asked the question — is that the CRA doesn't have a checkbook, and the City can't write any checks without a resolution. Chairman Teele: The City is our fiduciary. And what they do is they write checks based upon written instructions or resolutions from the Board. Board Member Winton: One or the other. Chairman Teele: One or the other. I mean, the same as a bank. So, please, would you introduce the auditors? Ms. Thompkins: OK. Our auditors are from KPMG, and we have this evening Donovan McGinle and Ken Deon as the auditors that have — are going to express an opinion regarding our September 30t , '99 financial statements. Just to preface, we just had a brief conversation about the readiness of the statements, and as we agreed, that next Friday, we would basically be able to issue the statements, pending the outcome of expenditures and receivables that have yet to have been located or booked on the financial statements. And this affects both the City as well as the CRA. So they're holding theirs as well as ours. But this is the financial statement at this point in time. Chairman Teele: Have those been passed out to the Board? Ms. Thompkins: No, they — we're going to do that right now for you. Board Member Winton: Is the Management letter in this? Unidentified Speaker: (Inaudible comments). Board Member Winton: And when does — Unidentified Speaker: That will be forthcoming. Ken Deon: OK. My name is Ken Deon. I was the audit — partner on the audit of the City of Miami CRA this year. And I'm going to talk a little bit about what our responsibilities are under the audit of CRA, talk a little bit about the highlights. Obviously, we're not going to go into detail with you on the results from the audit this year, because you're just getting it for the first time. But I would assume that at the next meeting when we finally issue the reports, we can go over them in detail with you, and which would include the discussion of the Management letter. Essentially, our responsibility under generally accepted 29 CRA 3/13/00 auditing standards is to plan and perform an audit of the financial statements, which really are — the financial statements are the representations of the CRA. They're your financial statements. Our responsibility is to conduct an audit to provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements are materially correct or materially not misstated, either by error or by fraud. And that's really what we do. As a part of the audit, we also look at your internal control systems to obtain an understanding of the system, the internal accounting and administrative controls; not to render an opinion on your systems, but really to provide operational improvements and recommendations that actually help us to become more efficient in the audit approach. Our overall objective is obviously to express an opinion on the fair presentation of the financial statements. And actually, when you look at a set of financial statements, that's really our property. That's the only thing we have. Everything else is the CRA's or the entities. On results this year, we completed the — essentially all the fieldwork about around the end of January. It was January 2 1 " this year. Other than one open item right now, everything has been completed. There were some project expenditures incurred in the prior years that were recorded on the City of Miami's — actually, it was in other special revenue funds that through research this year and some detailed testing, it was identified that those expenditures were — should have been on the books of the CRA. At this point in the finances you have, those expenditures have been reflected as a — basically a prior period. Chairman Teele: What's the magnitude of those expenses? Mr. Deon: Four hundred and nineteen thousand dollars ($419,000). The deal is, with the way we understand is that you may be able to receive some sort of reimbursement from the Federal CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) Program. And that's the research that's going on now at the City level to basically offset those expenditures on the CRA's financial records. Board Member Regalado: For the record, who authorized that? Who authorized that? Unidentified Speaker: (Inaudible comments). Mr. Deon: It's cumulative. Unidentified Speaker: (Inaudible comments). Chairman Teele: Yeah, but see, I have a problem with that. I mean, you all are going to have to come in here and lay these out to the CRA Board, and then you're going to have to go to the City Commission and lay them out. You all cannot just start adjusting accounts, particularly in that we're in a —in an Oversight Board situation, because if those expenses have been paid -- and they had to have been paid — Donovan McGinley: That's correct. Chairman Teele: Then what, in effect, you're doing is you're back -charging us and releasing the dollars. Those dollars are — let me tell you why. Those dollars, once you back -charge us, those dollars go into a fund, which is outside of the reach of the City and the City Commission, except for very limited purposes under our agreement with the Oversight Board. So I would much rather you bring the charges before the CRA Board and before the City Commission, and we determine whether or not we want to recognize those expenses as City expenses at that time, because it doesn't do us any good to go back and give the City money — OK? And then have those funds go into a reserve account, you know, that can only be used 30 CRA 3/13/00 for "A," "B," "C," "X," "Y," "Z," with the approval of the Oversight Board. And that's what I think a lot of people around here have never understood, you know. And that's what, you know, Mr. Beatty kept saying, is if you save money at the end of the year, you don't get to spend it or to start over under the contracts that we have with the Over — that goes into a reserve account. So in effect, what you're doing now is you're going to hit us for expenses in '95, or '94, or '93, or '96, or whenever they occurred. And I think they just need to be itemized, and we need to determine what is the best way to handle this as a recommendation from the CRA, and what it -- And the City Commission will have the — the Manager, and the Commission and the Mayor will have the ultimate decision on how those expenses will be recognized. Mr. Deon: I would agree with you, Commissioner, but I just — we're not hitting you with back -charges. These are projects that were recorded on the City of Miami's books that — based on reviews, supporting documentation, and I believe, you know, approved resolutions that they were actually CRA projects, (inaudible). Mr. McGinley: That's correct. Board Member Winton: Well I think -- Bertha Henry (Assistant City Manager, City of Miami): I do agree to that extent, but I have also cautioned them to — Chairman Teele: Excuse me, excuse me, excuse me. Commissioners always take precedence. Commissioner Winton. Board Member Winton: I'm sorry; I didn't mean to do that. Ms. Henry: I'm so sorry. I was answering his question. Board Member Winton: I think that the point that the Chairman made is the right point. Otherwise, we're all going to sit here and discuss something that we don't have any data on. We need to see the line item expenses so that we understand what we're really dealing with, and otherwise, it's going to be really difficult. Mr. Deon: I agree with you. We will provide or Management will provide that support on those project expnitures to you. Ms. Henry: As well as what we're actually looking for is the revenues that were associated in those prior years, and that's the key, is where are the revenues when those were paid, as well as — and the other item is the debt service, if handled precisely as this expenditure is. And that's what we're asking them. Where are the revenues that were associated with those dollar amounts, as opposed to taking them out of our accounts all of a sudden this year. And that's what the issue is regarding the statement. Chairman Teele: But they haven't been taken out of the account, have they? Ms. Henry: They have been taken out of the account. 31 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: Well, see, that's the point. That's not an audit issue. You didn't -- Did you take them out of the account? Mr. Deon: No, we didn't. Chairman Teele: Then who took them out of the account? The Finance Department of the City? Ms. Henry: I imagine our fiduciaries did. But they are out of the account. Chairman Teele: Well, I mean, that was a whole issue that we debated and discussed with the Oversight Board, and we had an agreement that there would be no more going in, taking money out of accounts without a written resolution or written permission, et cetera. This is exactly what got this City in trouble. And once you start taking money out of accounts without documentation, then there is no end to it. I mean, maybe you're right. Maybe the City's right. But let's at least have this thing brought forward in a documented way where we don't have self-help rule on this. Otherwise, I don't have any confidence in the fiduciary relationship. Ms. Henry did you want to -- I'm not at all trying to draw this into a long — please. Bertha Henry: I understand that. Chairman Teele: Bertha Henry. Ms. Henry: I'm sorry. Bertha Henry, Assistant City Manager. As you all well know, we have been involved in a reconciliation of these funds from — for over a year. And what you're now beginning to see is the results of that. For this particular project, the expenses have gone back to like 1995. I — I can't really at this point address who specifically authorized other than a purchase requisition or some sort of expense that's been tied to those projects were submitted and they were paid. Our audit at this point, unfortunately, that amount is considered immaterial to the overall City. The project is still in the hole by that amount, but if the City Commission, through the research that will take place over the next couple of days chooses to make that whole, then we'll make that whole in the current year. But right now, it's expenses that were charged through '98. They're there, and it's just a matter of trying to find the revenue sources. We had provided, it's my knowledge, to the CRA the delineation of what those expenses were. Chairman Teele: Ms. Henry. Board Member Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton. Board Member Winton: I think what the Chairman is saying, and frankly, it seems logical to me, and I don't pretend to understand all of this. Y'all seem to have a language going here all your own, and I'm new at this CRA business. So I don't understand these intricacies. But what he's saying is — I think what he's saying is that — is that if — and apparently there were dollars transferred from CRA accounts back to City accounts. Ms. Henry: No, that's not the issue. 32 CRA 3/13/00 Board Member Winton: OK. So explain then — I'm sorry, my apology. What's your name again? Chairman Teele: Before you do — Board Member Winton: Explain, Charlayne. Chairman Teele: Mr. — Commissioner Winton — and I don't really don't want to get bogged down on this — I commend you for reconciliation. I think that's the right thing to do. Where you have to draw the line, the big bright line is as a fiduciary, you don't have the right to take money out of an account or to charge an account just because you're the fiduciary, just like a bank doesn't have the right, without your authority, to go into your account and take the money. In other words, if you all are coming up with these charges that go back to '95 — and I commend you, et cetera — we should put them down. We should write them. You should either bring them to the CRA staff and ask them how they would like to handle it, or take it to the City Commission. But under no circumstances do you have the right to go in and start charging accounts. And that's what I'm responding to, only that; not anything that you've said, Ms. Henry, but only the fact that if the accounts have been debited — because this is exactly what -- You know, when I was a Commissioner, a County Commissioner reading what was going on in the City, this is exactly what was going on. And when I first came into the CRA, I saw documents where on one date, an account had three million dollars ($3,000,000) in it, the next month, it had six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) in it, and the next month, it had two point one million. And there was no paperwork, nothing. I mean, somebody was moving money around. And I don't want to get into that, though. The only thing that I'm saying is, is that it was my understanding that we had an agreement that the Budget Department and the Finance Department would no longer charge any accounts on this year end and this retroactive without creating a document and coming in and getting approval to do that. And that's the only thing I'm saying. Reconciliation, I agree with. OK. So we need to get the details of that. And I assume that some of this is going to involve — Commissioner Winton, just so that you are very, very, very clear, this is very new to the City. I mean, the City and the CRA never had a distinction. In other words, I think it's fair to say, and I think the auditors would agree that there was a — that the CRA staff was City staff, and, in fact, they were City Management, and they moved money around back and forth. And that wasn't necessarily wrong. I'm not making a criticism of it. It just didn't allow for good record keeping and records, and maybe that's the issue, that there's money missing, which we need — you know, which is what the real issue is going to be, is the amount of money that has been alleged that's missing, the forty million dollars ($40,000,000). Ms. Henry: Well, just a point of clarification. Earlier, there was a question about whether or not our audit was completed. Our audit, the general fund with the rest of the City's audit is completed. And at this point, if we are found to be liable for those expenses, they will come about as an adjustment in this year, but they will not materially affect the 1999 statements. So I wanted to clarify that for you. Chairman Teele: But Bertha, see, the problem is this: It won't materially affect the City, but it does materially affect the CRA. That's the problem with it. Ms. Henry: Right. That's the point I wanted to make, that it's a four hundred thousand dollar ($400,000) expense coming out of a two million dollar ($2,000,000) account, and that is material for us. It is not material for them. And this presentation is on the CRA's financial statements and not on the City's 33 CRA 3/13/00 financial statements. So that's why we need to clear those items up as far as monies that have been taken out for debt service, as well as for these expenditures. The tune of them comes to — it's roughly nine hundred thousand in one account, and four hundred in the other, and that's material for our books and records, and we feel that it's necessary for us to locate any revenues that may be associated with those expense items. Board Member Winton: But the process that's going on right now is that you all are looking for those connections there so that you will have real information that has both parts of the — both parts of the ledger there that we can look at, at whatever our next meeting is; is that correct? Chairman Teele: That's correct. Board Member Winton: All right. Chairman Teele: Questions on the Management letter. Commissioner Winton, I know that you have some expertise along with Commissioner Sanchez. Are there any specific instructions that you all would like to give the auditors on the Management letter, to cover or address certain areas? Commissioner Sanchez? Board Member Sanchez: No. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton? Board Member Winton: Just make sure it's a thorough Management letter. You know, the audits that have been done in and around the City of Miami historically, as you all read in the newspaper, haven't exactly been sterling. And I am counting on your firm to do an outstanding job, and we don't leave stuff out. We need to understand what the positives are in all of our agencies and our City. We also want to understand very clearly what the negatives are. And whatever responsibilities you all have in that regard, we need to make sure that the things that do apply to the Management letter, that they all get in, that nothing — if there's gray areas, put them in. Don't leave them out. NOTE FOR THE RECORD: Vice Chairman Gort entered the Board Meeting at 6:25 p.m. Chairman Teele: We've been joined by Commissioner Gort. We're on the item relating to the report of the auditors that -- essentially KPMG Management letter. There are three areas that I would appreciate if you would address. First and foremost are the revenues that are missing from the CRA's books. The parking revenues going back for the four — the same period of time that you're going back now, the same four or five years. That is the parking revenues that have been paid to the City on behalf of the CRA. And I think you've got a City Attorney's opinion that those funds legally are funds of the CRA. The secondary is the six million dollar ($6,000,000) transfer where the six million dollars ($6,000,000) was taken in terms of the CRA, the land. And it was my understanding, just so that everybody is on record, when we met on this issue, I agreed, as Chairman of the CRA, to support dropping the six million dollars ($6,000,000), but to recognize it in exchange for what I thought the Cit had agreed to do, or what they had agreed to do — that is the Budget Director and the Finance Director — to take over the bond. In other words, there is an outstanding bond which was issued — it's very vague on how it was issued and who issued it. I think you know what I'm talking about. But that's when everything was commingled. And I 34 CRA 3/13/00 said, well, we'll drop the bond issue, because there's a three hundred thousand dollar ($300,000) guaranteed entitlement. I think that's using — what's the three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000)? It's the — Ms. Henry: Florida entitlement. Chairman Teele: It's a Florida entitlement. And I said, you know, you all take the three hundred thousand and take the bond, and we'll drop the six million dollars ($6,000,000). But there's six million dollars ($6,000,000) that's owed to the CRA by the City, which you have the City Attorney's opinion on. And the proceeds of those monies, of course, were used to do some things that, you know, predate me. And then the other area is the whole issue of the missing funds. And I think it's very, very important at some point that the issues of the forty million dollars ($40,000,000), which have been recorded in the press, and, you know, these huge headlines that's really had a very, you know, negative impact on the CRA, that that be specifically addressed in this audit, you know. And I mean, you know, the chapter and verse, because we need to determine if funds are missing, and what those funds were, and where they went. Finally, the fourth thing is this: The CRA and the City — and it's very unclear who did what at certain points — entered into a series of very small agreements, such as land lease deals where every now and then, the Attorney asked me if I'll put on the Agenda, and last year, we had on the Agenda twice to — what's the term? — to allow the transfer by — there's a legal term. It's not abating the rent, but to -- You know the building right next to the Arena? And you all did — the City did a transfer or something, and we had to, in effect, to — Vice Chairman Gort: We financed it. Chairman Teele: But we waived it. But it's another word for that. But we waived the rent. We need to get a list of all of these transactions that belong to the CRA. One church owes us some money, et cetera, you know. And nobody wants to go out and knock an old lady out of her house, or a church out of their money, I mean, you know, but we at least need to recognize it. And then if we take an action, you know, we need to take some action. But these things become problems, because there's very little records that have been properly maintained that I would hope that the financial statement of this year, we would just take our time and do as much as necessary to get a full and accurate picture of the lots there that Mr. Weitzel has. They're supposed to be paying rent payments on that. There's a series of transactions that only come up when there's time to do a legal deal, and they are not recorded in our financial statement. And I would hope that — and I realize this is going to cost money, but the problem is, is that -- this has not been done in the past — that we would take our time and document every debt and every obligation, and to do an assessment as to where they stand. And if that's going to require an adjustment, then we need to come back and make the adjustment in terms of the fees for services. But I think it's really important that we have a clean and a full and comprehensive financial report, which the CRA has never really had, to be very candid. Commissioner Winton, Commissioner Gort, are there no other questions? Did you all have any other statement, any questions? Mr. Deon: Not right now, Commissioner. Chairman Teele: And I really would appreciate it if you would work closely with the Management and the Manager on clearing these issues. 35 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Deon: And we will get back to you. Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Deon: Thank you. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort was there any item that you wanted to take up? And we appreciate you being here. We heard a briefing from Mr. Judy and the consultants regarding the — the briefing that was given this morning. And there were some concerns. If you wanted to make any comment on that, we'd appreciate it. Vice Chairman Gort: Mainly, what we're doing is we're having the different individuals make the different presentations. A lot of questions have come up from the first meeting. Those questions, hopefully, we'll be able to answer at the next one, and we'll be able to come back to you with the — I don't know what the Board is going to suggest, if they're going to come out with specific recommendations, but they're going to come out and give you all the information that we have received for the Commissioners to make the decision. We feel all questions will be answered. There's some more — a lot of other questions that were asked before were answered today, but there's still some more questions that need to be answered. Chairman Teele: Well, Commissioner Sanchez I guess, and myself do have some concerns. It just seems that the premise that are contained here give us some — very few options. Board Member Regalado: There are no few options. There's only one option. Bicentennial Park — Board Member Sanchez: Well, Mr. Chairman, this is — Board Member Regalado: -- if you read that document. Board Member Sanchez: This is an issue we could argue all day, or study all day, or — Board Member Winton: Or argue all day. Board Member Sanchez: Or argue all day. Chairman Teele: All right. Next item is the approval of the — why don't we defer that item? We'll put it out there and let everybody look at it. An organizational chart, CRA organizational chart. 36 CRA 3/13/00 7. UPDATE OF FOOD FRANCHISE IN THIRD AVENUE BUSINESS CORRIDOR — CRIME PROBLEMS IN AREA. Chairman Teele: Update on the status of the food franchise on Third Avenue. Commissioner Winton, I realize that you have been briefed on this item. I want to give you one bit of background. In '96, the County and the City worked closely on the empowerment zone application. And that application process, it was really very detailed, and, I mean, it was almost block by block, sort of a census kind of approach. The overwhelming priority that came out of Overtown was not housing, which was really to my surprise, particularly given the fact that the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) has spent about 80 percent of its time, and energy and money on housing activities. The overwhelming activity that the community wanted was job creation projects, and particularly to be a part of the mainstream community. And one of the things — and this is contained in the '96 empowerment zone application, not the subsequent '98. One of the things that was very, very clear from the community was that Overtown is treated very, very differently from every other part of the City. It's the only major community that doesn't have access to fast food, things that we all take for granted. So one of the things in community meetings that the CRA Board — this is the first Board meeting that I went to -- made a commitment, is that we would work to put a fast food franchise in Overtown. And this has been going on now at least two years. I think we made that commitment in January two years ago, in the first community meeting. And then we had a town hall meeting, and that was, again, the number one issue, was access to business opportunities and — such as food franchises, et cetera. This has languished, and it's continuing to languish, and we'd like to get an update. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration and Development, CRA): Mr. Chairman, we have a draft RFP (Request for Proposals) ready for that, and I'd like to get Chairman Teele: Is it an RFP? Mr. Tyler: Actually, it's an RFQ (Request for Qualifications). I'm sorry. It's a Request for Qualifications. Dick, do you want to? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Yes. We're waiting on two — in fact, we have decided to go ahead with — you've approved us, first of all, with the RFQ. Chairman Teele: That was done a year ago. Mr. Judy: Yes. Now, that's before my time. Board Member Sanchez: And why an RFQ? Why not an RFP? Mr. Judy: Well, it — Chairman Teele: Because — Mr. Judy: It's a mixed RFQ/RFP. Board Member Sanchez: Then why not an RFQ/RFP? You can't have a mix. 37 CRA 3-/13/00 Mr. Judy: I'm saying the Request for Qualifications, in the realm of the RFQ, you're also — you're also, in effect, defining in there for qualifications the proposal or the type of facility that we want. That was the point that I meant. Board Member Sanchez: But if it's -- the specific project should be an RFP, not an RFQ. Chairman Teele: Well, I think given the history of Overtown, and given the fact that, quite candidly, there is a goal of trying to encourage minority participation, and given the fact that in an RFP, it's strictly going to be a cost issue, given an RFQ gives you the opportunity to select the most qualified person, and then to work the issue of price and the other issues gives the — I think -- the community the kind of safeguard that this Commission and the CRA Board have repeatedly said, is that we're going to try to ensure that the residents of Overtown have an opportunity, as well as the traditional residents of Overtown have had an opportunity. But again, we voted on this over a year ago. And if you would like to have it reviewed, we can have a memorandum given as to the advantages of an RFP or the disadvantages, et cetera. Board Member Sanchez: Well, I would like it to be reviewed reference the RFQ and RFP. Chairman Teele: All right. Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Vice Chairman Gort: Let me ask you a question. Is the intention — the intent is to bring fast food like — you're talking about McDonald, Burger King? Chairman Teele: Pizza Hut. Vice Chairman Gort: Pizza Hut. Any of those? Chairman Teele: Yes. Vice Chairman Gort: Now, if we have an RFQ, and RFP, do we have — what do we have that we can give to these individuals? Chairman Teele: I don't understand "what do we have?" Vice Chairman Gort: OK. If you have an RFQ, it's because you have a specific project, specific piece of land that we own or property that we're going to give to — we're going to make part of the process, or we just want to bring someone in here? Because I think we might be able to expedite it a little bit. Each one of those associations or major fast food chains, they have associations for African -American, Hispanic that own, already own and operate this type of facility. Why don't we try to go directly to them and see if we could — Chairman Teele: That's exactly what the RFQ does. 38 CRA 3-/13/00 ON Vice Chairman Gort: Is that what you're going to do? Chairman Teele: It requires — it requires, as I recall, that the operator must have had at least a year or two years experience. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Chairman Teele: I mean, the whole issue here is the location, to be very candid with you, is a dog location. It will not have a drive -up window, which is going to rule out 80 percent of the franchises. But it's a part of a planning process that involves creating a job creation plaza. The biggest problem — I mean, you know, and I don't know why we want to make this difficult — is the fact that the market has not put a fast food in Overtown. I mean, you know, the market generally dictates what happens. So this is going to obviously have to be subsidized in some way, whether it be the land, or the building, or whatever. But I think it's important to understand that franchises generally do not locate within one mile, two miles. Each one has a different criteria of each other. Overtown, by circumstance, is caught in a valley. Less than one mile to the west is the largest food franchise court in Dade County, which is the Jackson Hospital Court. In fact, the most successful franchises in Dade County are in that Jackson Court. That's right off of 141" Street and I01h Avenue. Going four blocks to the east, or five blocks to the east, you have Biscayne Boulevard, which has a whole series of franchises. So what you wind up with is Overtown is sandwiched between these two mega -locations, and you just don't have that kind of opportunity. We believe, to be very candid with you, that it is going to be — we've talked to at least three different franchisers. We don't want to deal with franchisers. We want to deal with franchisees. Vice Chairman Gort: Right. Chairman Teele: At least three franchisers have looked at the locations and said it's very difficult to put a franchise in Overtown, but yet they recognize that the community should have the same kind of services. The people who live in Overtown do not go to Jackson. Board Member Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: To the court. So the theory that you don't have a franchise within two miles of each other just doesn't hold up there. It's another long story about Overtown, and why Overtown is the way it is, through no fault of its own, but just through the kinds of economies that are around it. I think it's important to give Commissioner Sanchez what he wants, which is an explanation on this, but this is a very difficult process. And as you know, as we've been briefed, the whole idea is to create a job creation plaza, and using the franchise sort of as a pioneer to go forward and to do that. The number one issue that every franchiser says — and it's very interesting, Mr. Margulies just said the same thing — is security. Is security. It's the number one, number two, and number three thing. The estimates of the cost of adequate security for this franchise will be approximately how much? Dick, how much did we estimate the — Mr. Tyler: Five hundred. It was around there, five hundred. Chairman Teele: Five hundred what? 39 CRA 3-/13/00 M Mr. Tyler: Thousand. I'm sorry. Chairman Teele: For what? Mr. Tyler: I thought you were asking about improvements to — Chairman Teele: No, the security. Mr. Judy: Oh, OK. Chairman Teele: The cost of an armed security City of Miami police, which is normal in these kind of facilities, is upwards of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) a year. And that's what it's going to take. I mean, you are not going to have a fast food franchise in Overtown without security. And it depends on how many hours a day you're going to have it. That's going to be the question. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, you are so right that the perception of security is the main issue. You know that there was a Burger King in Flagler and 101h Avenue that was the first Burger King ever to close because of crime problems and — in the country. And that was four or five years ago when the situation in East Little Havana was very difficult. Now, they are opening new franchises. But Don Warshaw, I think, remembers that. But I do remember as a journalist doing several stories, because that was the first time, ever, that a franchise closed because of security problems. And when they left, they said that they did it not because they didn't have clients, but because it was a security risk. Chairman Teele: The area that has been designated is, Don, Second Avenue — it's Third Avenue, but it's Second Avenue and Second — Second and 12t . You know, that's where we have the — I mean, we've got right in that corner at least three houses or three apartment buildings that are repeated areas for swat and drug suppression areas. And the only way we're going to take back these neighborhoods is we've got to do something positive. So it's something that I think that's important. Dick, if you've got the lead on this to brief Commissioner Sanchez, and don't move forward until he's satisfied. Mr. Judy: I think that I should that, because he makes a good point. The point we're making here is this RFQ, this is a very complex negotiation. Chairman Teele: It is. Mr. Judy: It cannot be done to, what we say, a proposal from the perspective of two to one, in terms of percentage, so forth. You follow me? It is in effect — what we do inside the RFQ is we define what we want from the person, this — what we call the respondent to the RFQ. So we outline this, and also, all of the subsidies, if you want to call that, all assistance that we can give, and we give them a definition of everything we possibly can. And then we look at the qualifications and their ability to provide the best service. Board Member Sanchez: We'll talk about it later. Mr. Judy: I think I owe that to you. 40 CRA 3-/13/00 8. UPDATE OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH MDTA REGARDING AIR RIGHTS AT OVERTOWN METRORAIL STATION. Chairman Teele: All right. Update on the Interlocal Agreement between the Overtown Metrorail Station. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Yes. We have — I have met with Mr. Alvarez, Dennis Alvarez. We discussed in length a — agreement to meet. We've discussed in details the interest that the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) has in the property. We also mentioned the fact the City has the zoning power. And as you well know, that property now is not zoned. We also — Chairman Teele: The City does not have the zoning power. So we need to — but that, we can discuss that. But the City — Mr. Judy: Yes, it does. Chairman Teele: The City does not have zoning power over Metrorail Stations. Board Member Sanchez: The City does not have it. It's the County. Chairman Teele: The County pre — has a pre-empting status. But in any event, we're having discussions. Mr. Judy: Yes, sir. We made a point that we also — the CRA does have an interest in the property. Chairman Teele: Well, the fact of the matter is that I'm being advised now that at least two developers have gone to the County and said they would like to do it now. Mr. Judy: Yes. Chairman Teele: This is a site where they put it out for bid, no one bid on it, and it just languishes there. Mr. Judy: I want to make a point that that property is within phase one of the development plan of the CRA. There is jurisdictional rights on the part of the CRA in regards to the use of that property and the air rights, in terms of the Interlocal Agreement between the City and the County. 41 CRA 3/13/00 9. REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") TO RETAIN A CIVIL ENGINEERING FIRM IN CONNECTION WITH PARKS PROJECTS AND OTHER VARIOUS PROJECTS. Chairman Teele: All right. Motion for an RFQ (Request for Qualifications) for the civil engineering and related projects. Moved by Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado: Move. Chairman Teele: Seconded — Board Member Sanchez: Which one is that one? Chairman Teele: Number 4. Board Member Regalado: Number 4. Chairman Teele: Seconded — is there objection? All those in favor — Board Member Winton: I have a question. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton. Board Member Winton: I'm sorry. The last part of it says service in connection with parks and other various projects within the Community Redevelopment Area. Is this going to be just kind of an open- ended thing? Chairman Teele: Yes. Board Member Winton: And if — Chairman Teele: Miscellaneous. It's called — should be called a miscellaneous fund. Board Member Winton: OK. So it isn't just parks. It's a whole host of things. Chairman Teele: No, it's a whole host of things. Board Member Winton: When you look at — and my apologies for kind of skipping around here. But when you go to the second page and some of the Agenda items in 8, there are similar resolutions. Different kind of services in some instances, but I can't tell for sure if it's truly different kind of services. Chairman Teele: Truly, they're different. Board Member Winton: Well, the concern that I have — And by the way, just so you understand, Mr. Chairman, I'm not — the last thing I want to do is — I agree with you 100 percent. We need to do — take positive, aggressive steps to get Overtown redeveloped. And I'm going to do everything that I can to help assure that happens. However, as the policymaking body, I also want to make sure that we take the 42 CRA 3/13/00 appropriate steps to accomplish our objective, and don't find ourselves spending money that doesn't need to be spent, which we could spend on other kinds of things, or heading down the wrong path. And in this whole RFP (Request for Proposals) and RFQ business for consulting services — and that's the subject here that we're talking about — I guess I'm concerned because there's all of these various parts. And what I can't visualize by reading this Agenda is what the strategic or master plan is. Now, there is an Agenda item in 8 that is for consulting services for a master plan for the CRA Redevelopment Area. And frankly, I'm not sure I understand how we hire these other consultants to do incremental pieces of something if they're not incremental pieces that are tied to a master plan. So I think clearly, we need — and you're asking for authorization for the development of a master plan which becomes the road map for doing a whole bunch of these miscellaneous things. And I think that's really very appropriate as a first step. I'm just — I can't visualize, and maybe — you've been involved with this much longer than I and maybe — Chairman Teele: I haven't been here but two years. Don't say "much longer." You know, I'm just trying to work this. Board Member Winton: I understand. And I'm just struggling, visualizing putting these consultants in these bits and pieces to the appropriate task, if we don't have a master plan that guides them. Chairman Teele: All right. Let me see if I can help you. On this item, this is a — this is a traditional miscellaneous civil engineering contract. Normally, you have — at Dade County, we would have at least 12 of these just standing by for projects. This project is going to be oriented toward the Safe Neighborhood Bond Projects, where we have at least five different parks, where we have five different parks within the boundaries where the money is actually in trouble now. I mean, we're working -- and the Parks Department and Public Works Department I think are doing an outstanding job — to move these projects forward. The context of this is that the civil engineering and related services actually gives you something more like a construction manager to make sure that the things that are being done are done properly, so we don't get into the position that we see, say, with water and sewer in the County. In other words, you've got to have somebody there to make sure what you said is going to be done will be done properly. This project has nothing to do with a master plan. This has to do with implementing projects that have already been approved. In the Parks Department alone, we have about — what? — two million dollars ($2,000,000) worth of projects within the redevelopment boundary. Gibson Park is a million? Board Member Regalado: A million or so, Margaret Pace. Chairman Teele: Well, Margaret Pace is a — actually, that's a two — it's a two point five, two point seven million dollar ($2.7 million) project. Board Member Regalado: Right. Chairman Teele: This project, we got the planner already. They've done the work. Now, the next phase is to go out and either hire a contractor or a construction manager to do that. This is the person who will be doing, inspecting and putting those kinds of documents together. But essentially, we have at least five or six projects that are separate. The largest project to date that has been approved is the Third Avenue Improvement Project, which is a three million dollar ($3,000,000), which this would also support. So this is the engineering support. Before we had planners. That's all we've had, is a general planner. And I 43 CRA 3/13/00 RM specifically would not allow for other activities until we did do planning. And I think it's not fair to talk about the planning process strictly in the context of the general plan. Chairman Teele: -- as I think is humanly possible. And it started out in very, very disarray with everybody going a lone way. But that's a plan. That plan has got to be implemented. Board Member Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: We've done the same thing with Gibson Park. We've done the same thing on elements of the Third Avenue Business Corridor. We've done the same thing at Dorsey Park. This project will support the implementation, if you will, of those projects. Board Member Winton: When we — and if we approve this RFQ, the actual expenditure to the consultant, does that come back before us again? Chairman Teele: Yes. Board Member Winton: OK. Chairman Teele: The approve — yeah. The RFQ. The selection even comes back for approval, before you even get to expenditures. So the problem is, is that we were supposed to have done this actually back in October, and we're way behind now, especially as it relates to the Third Avenue Plan. Board Member Winton: You answered my question. Thank you. Chairman Teele: We have a motion, a second. Is there objection? All those -- Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk, City of Miami): I need a seconder, Mr. Chairman. Board Member Winton: I'll second. Chairman Teele: All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed have the same right. 44 CRA 3/13/00 M The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-14 OMNI/CRA 00-12 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO PROCEED WITH AN EXPEDITED REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") TO RETAIN A CIVIL ENGINEERING FIRM TO PROVIDE MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL ENGINEERING AND RELATED SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH PARKS PROJECTS AND OTHER VARIOUS PROJECTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 45 CRA 3/13/00 0 10. EMINENT DOMAIN IN CONNECTION WITH PROJECTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. Chairman Teele: Now, I don't understand. Commissioners, regarding the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) request to the City Commission for the powers of eminent domain, I thought that power was inherent. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): No. Chairman Teele: It's not inherent? Mr. Judy: No. Chairman Teele: So we're requesting that — Mr. Judy: We have to go to the governing body, and that would be — would be the City at this point, or it could be the County, depending upon the Interlocal Agreement. Chairman Teele: All right. So you're saying now that we need to solidify our rights in this regard. Mr. Judy: That's right. That's appropriate. Chairman Teele: So this will basically come before the City Commission. Mr. Judy: That's correct. Chairman Teele: With the policy determinations, and you all will work with Planning and everybody on that. All right. So — Mr. Judy: It's appropriate that this Board tell us that it's OK, because, see, that's a power that, as you well know, is not used recklessly. Board Member Sanchez: Well, I have a problem with that on this issue, and the reason is because of the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) overlapping the CRA. You know, one of the concerns that I have is does it kick the CDBG funds out of compliance? I asked — one of the things that I asked that I have not gotten is a list of the inventory of lots and properties that might fall under the eminent domain. And being that that area may fall under the CDBG, and people have the right to seek Federal assistance to restore their homes (inaudible). Chairman Teele: Commissioner, I think it's important that we keep our CRA hat on. If there is going to be a CDBG issue, then that's where the City Commissioners should weigh in. But right now, this is a CRA action, saying on behalf of the CRA, we're going to the City to seek to — and then all of the issues that you are raising would have to be flushed out by the City staff at that point, relating to the CDBG. The CRA does not get CDBG funds directly from the Federal Government. So that's where that issue would be. It's a City issue, not a CRA issue. All right. Motion and a second. 46 CRA 3/13/00 Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Discussion. Board Member Regalado: I will move the item, but I just want to say that in keeping with both hats that we have to wear, with the CRA hat, it is important -- I've sat on this Board for almost four years now, and there's always a plan, and there's always a promise. And unless and until we show at least that there is the will to take drastic action to eliminate the blight and the rundown houses and buildings in Overtown, people just won't believe that. We were discussing just now a few minutes ago, you know, whether we should request — what should we request for any food franchise to come to this area, and what we will ask them. Well, the thing is that we have to beg them to come to Overtown, because no one -- You know, if you offer Burger King or McDonald a site right across Miami International Airport on LeJeune, they will fight for it. But no one — and that's a fact — no one wants to come with a franchise food store to a place that does not have, because of planning and security reasons, a drive -way window, or have this difficulty and these perceptions. So I will move the item and other issues will — could be discussed before the City Commission. But unless we send a message that this Board is willing to eminent -domain property to demolish and build, people just won't believe all the promises and all the plans that we for so many years have said here. So, I'll move the item. Board Member Sanchez: Under blight and some conditions, yes, without a doubt. Chairman Teele: All right. Is there a second? Board Member Winton: I'll second it. Chairman Teele: All right. Discussion. Mr. — I think it's very, very clear that we try to understand what we're trying to do here. First of all, the CRA has rarely functioned as a Board. I mean, I can tell you the first time it ever met as a Board. It met because I, as Chairman of the County Commission demanded that the City of Miami stop treating the Overtown area — because, remember, this Development Authority is a joint County/City Authority in the creation of it. And they had never even had a board meeting for 12 years. They had City Commission meetings. They would take up CRA items as a part of the City Commission, not even going into a board. And that's sort of how it operated for the better part of 12 years. Eminent domain is the one thing that makes the CRA different from the City of Miami in everything that we do. The CRA has the power to eminent domain for a development purpose. The City can only eminent domain for a municipal purpose. There is a world of difference between those two things. What we're saying now is this: We need to establish legally — this is all — this is not eminent- domaining anybody's property. Every piece of property that would be proposed to eminent-domained will have to come back individually with lawyers and reports, et cetera, et cetera. But the CRA has never even gotten its records straight as having this authority, which is a point Commissioner Regalado is making. This is simply saying to the City Commission, we are requesting that you confirm our right to do eminent domain. Now, I want to just say one thing. I have looked at every parcel of land in Overtown. In virtually every block, there are lands that have been acquired by developers or persons for no clear reason other than to hold up any development going on there. When you got people that have got — one person who has got a strip of land in the center land lot in four blocks on Third Avenue and four blocks on Second Avenue. I don't even want to ask the staff to go negotiate with those people, because I can tell you, any negotiation is going to turn into a he said/she said. And the easiest and the most intelligent thing 47 CRA 3/13/00 to do is to quick -take it, and let the court hear the case. Because remember, in eminent domain, the matter goes to a court, and a Judge makes that decision. And so the purpose of the eminent domain is strictly to be able to carry out the development plan in an orderly manner without having to deal with speculators in a way that, quite frankly, would get bad press and bad discussion. Further discussion? All those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Winton: Aye. Board Member Regalado: Aye. Vice Chairman Gort: Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right. Board Member Sanchez: One "no." The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-15 OMNI/CRA 00-13 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO USE THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN IN CONNECTION WITH PROJECTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None 48 CRA 3/13/00 11. REPORT FOR PRE -APPROVED LAND/PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS —PROBLEMS WITH DISPLACING FAMILIES. Chairman Teele: All right. Report and timetable for land acquisition. I think, given Commissioner Sanchez' concern, let's table this item, and then let's brief him directly on that. Dick Judy — I'm sorry — Mr. Winton. Board Member Winton: Mr. Chairman, you're going to table 6, but the question that I wrote, and I hope that all of us get the answers is, which certain property, and for what reason? So that we have that information — Chairman Teele: Do you have that information written out? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): It's in the package. There's a map that gives you every one of them. Board Member Sanchez: But Mr. Chairman, if I just may, one minute. I requested a list of properties and vacant lots in the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). I've never received it. Board Member Winton: It's not in my packet. Chairman Teele: When did you request it? Board Member Sanchez: I sent a memo requesting it. I should have brought the memo today, but I did send a memo requesting that with other items that I never received. Chairman Teele: All right. I'm going to instruct the staff to — Board Member Sanchez: This is the concern that I have. Now, if properties that are owned — that are owned by people trying to make money, fine. But, you know, when you have a family that's lived in a house and there — I believe there's a few, just a few properties that people have lived there all their life. Their children have been raised there. They have the fondest memories of their life. To come on board and have these people, through the court system, which they will probably get fair market value. But if they decide that they don't want to sell, for whatever reason, they have that. See, what I see is — Chairman Teele: Hold on. Before you — Mr. Judy: We don't have one piece of property -- Chairman Teele: Do you have any property that's developed? Mr. Judy: No. Chairman Teele: There's not one piece of — everything that we're talking about is undeveloped land, vacant. Nothing's on it. 49 CRA 3/13/00 k., . Mr. Judy: Right, yes. Chairman Teele: So. Board Member Sanchez: If I would have had that inventory that I requested, the sheet with the inventories of property, then I wouldn't be making this argument. Chairman Teele: OK. All right. Well, the sheet is in the packet. It's contained as a map there. But there needs to be a specific memo from someone, Mr. Judy, to Commissioner Sanchez. And I'd appreciate it if we can get that to him within the next two days, please. Mr. Judy: All right. Chairman Teele: Please. Board Member Regalado: So what is the property? Where is the property? Chairman Teele: The property is all along — Mr. Judy? Mr. Judy: Yes, we have a map there. Chairman Teele: Well, just tell him where it is. Mr. Judy: Well, it's on the — mainly off of Third Avenue. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Off of Third Avenue, mostly, for — Mr. Judy: Most of it. Chairman Teele: Mostly for? Mr. Tyler: Parking lots. Board Member Sanchez: But is it here? Chairman Teele: It's right there. Mr. Judy: It's right there. There it is. Chairman Teele: Why don't you come by and walk us through it. Mr. Judy: All right. 50 CRA 3/13/00 Board Member Sanchez: Listen, if -- and don't, don't be offended, but if we would have gotten information pertaining to a lot of these backup materials, then I wouldn't be making these questions here. But I'm making decisions; you know, resolutions that just were given to me — Chairman Teele: Commissioner, this information was passed out in three meetings, the same lot, the same — the same map was passed out in October. It listed it. And it's — I mean, you know, and I — I agree that you have a right for information. But that same map was published in October. In fact, it was briefed before the Commission, and it shows each parcel that is there to be acquired. But again, you're entitled to that information, and you're entitled to a written memorandum in response to your memorandum, and you'll get that within 24 — 48 hours, I hope. Board Member Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton. Board Member Winton: I would just suggest, however, that, you know, I'm looking at this map, and the Third Avenue Corridor. In fact, I went to the CRA offices, and I've had a number of good conversations with your staff. But it is helpful when — Chairman Teele: Our staff. Our staff. Board Member Winton: Oops. Our staff. It would be real helpful, though, when we deal with each of these sites -- I think if we're going to do eminent domain, we really need to have a site -specific package that deals with all of the issues relative to the site. Chairman Teele: And I agree with you, and I can tell you this: This is simply to put everybody on notice. This is not a request to eminent domain anything, but simply to take one step moving toward that. We don't even have the authority at this point, and the attorneys that researched this, they're saying that the City never granted to the CRA the proper legal resolutions that are necessary. Board Member Winton: But in our Agenda, it says resolution authorizing the CRA to acquire by eminent domain certain property. So when you read that you get the -- Chairman Teele: No, no. No, it doesn't. Board Member Winton: -- you get the impression that — Chairman Teele: This says a resolution requesting that the City grant to the CRA. We don't even — Board Member Winton: In 6? MR. Tyler: There's another updated version of it. Board Member Winton: OK. Chairman Teele: Number 5. OK. Well, obviously, 6 can't happen without 5. 51 CRA 3/13/00 Board Member Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: So we're a long way away from being at 6, but we're taking the steps. I should also make you aware, Commissioner Winton, since this is your district, that there has been some request — and I'm going to specifically ask that Commissioner Winton and Commissioner Regalado specifically be briefed on the issues relating to the requests for eminent domain that are coming forward in the Omni area. And I think these are going to be tricky, but I think it's certainly something we're going to have to look at. So, Mr. Judy, I hope you heard me on that. Mr. Judy: Yes, sir? I'm sorry, I did not. Chairman Teele: And I said I would specifically request that Mr. Regalado, as Chairman of the Economic Development Committee, and Commissioner Winton, as the District Commissioner be briefed on the requests that are emanating from the Omni area for us to look at eminent domain powers. Mr. Judy: They are. Chairman Teele: OK. So you will brief Commissioner Winton and Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Winton: On specific sites, right? Chairman Teele: On specific sites, right. All right. Number 7 is a reso. — Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Vice Chairman Gort: I would like also, if possible — I think it's important to understand in order — and we've been working on this for a long time. In order to attract developers to this area, you have to offer technical and economic incentives. And I think this is what we're trying to do. What I would like is — as I looked at the map, and there was a couple of pieces in here that had several questions, several suggestions I would like to give to -- I'd like for staff to meet with, particularly the one on 14" and 3`d Chairman Teele: Fourteenth and Third? Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah. Mm-hmm. I have some questions on that. Chairman Teele: All right. Commissioner Gort has some questions on 14th and Third. He'd like the staff to get with him. Mr. Judy: Yep. Chairman Teele: All right. 52 CRA 3/13/00 12. HEALTH CARE BENEFITS TO THE EMPLOYEES OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA"). Chairman Teele: All right. On Number 7, authorization to provide health benefits. This is authority that was approved in the budget a year ago. Is there a motion? Board Member Sanchez: So move. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Regalado: Second. Chairman Teele: Seconded. Is there discussion? Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? Vice Chairman Gort: I have a question. Chairman Teele: Yes. Vice Chairman Gort: If we approved the budget, do we have to even bring this item? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): The contract. Chairman Teele: It's approved in the budget, but it's a specific contract. In an abundance of caution, we bring all contracts back if it has a value of more than $4500. And that's what I've been asking that they do. And I realize it may make things look longer. But I'm not sure that it has to, necessarily, because this is not the City. But again, we've tried to adopt the rules and the procedures in the City wherever possible. 53 CRA 3/13/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-16 OMNI/CRA 00-14 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO PROVIDE HEALTH CARE BENEFITS TO THE EMPLOYEES OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") AS DESCRIBED ON EXHIBIT "A." (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: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. 54 CRA 3/13/00 13. A) REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") TO RETAIN A GENERAL CONSULTANT TO PROVIDE DESIGN, PLANNING AND RELATED SERVICES FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA; B) LIST OF ALL OF THE APARTMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBSIDIZED USING SECTION 8 FUNDS FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS AND PUT SAME ON A MAP; C) BERMELLO, AJAMIL & PARTNERS ("B&A"), INC. TO COMPLETE ALL TASKS COMMENCED PRIOR TO MAY 30, 2000 UNDER ITS EXISTING CONTRACT WITH THE CRA; D) REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") TO RETAIN GENERAL LAND PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT USE CONSULTANT OF NATIONAL PROMINENCE FOR PREPARATION OF AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND ADJACENT STUDY AREAS; E) REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") FOR THE SELECTION OF A DEVELOPER FOR THE JOB CREATION PLAZA PORTION OF THE THIRD AVENUE BUSINESS CORRIDOR PROJECT. Chairman Teele: All right. Now, this is the area that Commissioner Winton has expressed some concern in. Commissioner Winton, if I could just try to take all of this and put it together. Right now, the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) has operated under — first of all, the philosophy that the CRA entered into when I became Chairman is that we were going to downsize staffing. In that regard, we went from a staff budget of over a million dollars ($1,000,000) to a staff budget of less than a hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) for a two-year period of time. And the reason was the same thing, Commissioner Winton, that you talked about, is that without a plan, why are we spending money? Why do we have the staff? So you'll note that -- And we need to provide — I would like to have a chart, Charlayne, that shows the administrative staff budget of the CRA for the previous four years, and then for the last year or two, so that the Board can see where we've been with the staff. But the administrative staff was approximately one point two to one point three million dollars ($1.3 million). We took it all the way down to around a hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) for staffing. And what we said we would do is we would engage in a planning process. And in that regard, we went out and we selected a general architect planner off of the City bid list, which was Bermello Ajamil two years ago. And they basically have been involved in extensive planning in the entire area. But this is not master planning. This is planning as it relates to specific projects and things that the CRA had been engaged in, and things that the community asked them to look at. For example, when we started out with the park here, it was a one — actually, it was a six hundred thousand dollar ($600,000) park. That is Margaret Pace Park, which immediately went to one point three million dollars ($1.3 million). And we spent -- the planners had an entire team of people that worked with the Omni Advisory Board. And I must say, you know, the Omni Advisory Board is special. I mean, they have some real professionals that know what they want and it went through a very detailed process. There were committees, there were subcommittees, there were subcommittees of committees. And we figured out a way over a period of time to bring together a plan. Now, the good news is that we have a consensus on it. The bad new is we don't have the money for it. But we have agreed to fund it — phase it. As one example of something that — whether you have a general master plan or not, that park is here, it needs work, as an example. We engaged in the same kind of process in Overtown, particularly as it relates to the Third Avenue Corridor Project and bringing in professionals from around the country, indeed, professionals even from the Bahamas to engage in a planning process as it relates to what's there and what needs to be improved. That process has been done by the general consultant. And that consultant contract, which was a two-year contract -- a three-year contract, we're bringing it to a close, not Because of any — and we hope that Bermello Ajamil will reapply 55 CRA 3/13/00 — but just because we think it's time to go out for a new bid and to have the next phase of a general consulting planning process. And so what we're asking is that we — indeed, we're asking that — we're informing Bermello Ajamil and the Board that every project that they have not started before May 30tn, they will not be allowed to undertake any further projects, and to present all necessary documentations, including change orders and anything to — it's a sort of an omnibus cleanup for everybody to get everything done. Bermello Ajamil did a lot of activities, particularly on task orders as it relates to various assignments that had been given by the City Commission or the Board. And we want to make sure that all those things get lined up. So "B" is a cleanup provision. "A" basically says that we're going to go out with a new RFP (Request for Proposals) for a new general consultant, not to the — again, not that Bermello Ajamil cannot apply — but for a new contract — let me put it that way. And that's what "A" and "B" represent. "C," on the other hand, represents something totally different, and that is this thing that we keep talking about in Commission meeting, and that is a general consultant for the entire redevelopment area to work with the DDA (Downtown Development Authority), to work with the Bayfront Trust, to work with the City of Miami. And that is the master plan for the area. And that — we would anticipate that the master plan may take two years to do — Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): We'll move it. Chairman Teele: -- or a year and a half to do, and — say again, Dick? Mr. Judy: We're going to move it fast. This is a driver of — Chairman Teele: Well, I understand that. But the one thing I don't want to do is move past the public. Mr. Judy: We're not going to do that. We're not going to Chairman Teele: And I want to make sure that the — that every neighborhood and every area that's affected has the opportunity to do that. And I also want to make sure that the general consultant works closely with the DDA and the Bayfront Trust Board — Mr. Judy: It's in your resolution. It's included. Chairman Teele: -- in doing that. That's the way this is set up. Now, the question is, you know, do we want to do this, or do we want to ask Bayfront Trust to come up with money and join us in doing it, or DDA? What I thought we'd do is we'd at least put the thing in motion, and then try to get everybody to buy in through a process. But my view is, is that no matter how fast it's done, if it doesn't have all of the stake holders involved, it's not going to be an effective -- And it should also include the Port of Miami, people, because the port has more to do with the way this — Mr. Judy: That's in another resolution. Chairman Teele: Yeah. So I wanted to make it very, very clear that those three items were all interrelated, but that's sort of how they come together. 56 CRA 3/13/00 Board Member Sanchez: They're all interrelated to the master plan. In other words, they're all going to work to create the master plan. Are they going to provide service to create the master plan? Chairman Teele: Under "C." "C" is the master plan. Yes. Board Member Sanchez: Correct. Chairman Teele: 8-C. And I think the real issue on 8-C is, how do we get the buy -in, and how do we sit down with the City of Miami? How do we sit down with Dade County? How do we sit down with the DDA and the Omni? Because, you know, we keep talking about this. We had a long discussion at the last meeting. But somewhere along the line, it's got to happen. And to be very candid with you, I really don't care if it's done by the CRA or by a committee, to be very candid with you. The fact is it has got to develop. It's got to be done. The fact is, is the State law requires that the CRA be the master of the redevelopment under the so-called plan. So that's sort of where "C" is, 8-C is. Board Member Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Board Member Winton: Then since we're kind of looking at all of these as a group, which I think, frankly, is absolutely appropriate, explain then how "E" and "F" tie into it. I understand "D," and how it fits separately, but I don't understand if we're doing — if we're doing "C," which I think is the most important one there, these -- the cleanup kind of deal that allows you to start over. "A" gives you the ability to have just a general consultant to provide design and planning related services, which I'm not sure how they're going to do that if you don't have a master plan. Oh, you're saying that "E" is now off? Well, I have an old — Vice Chairman Gort: Yes. "E" is off. "E" is off. Board Member Winton: I don't have an updated Agenda. So how about "F," then? Is that still on? Chairman Teele: "F" is still on, but let's just defer "F." Let's just stay focused on these three, because these are planning — the three of them are planning activities. "F" is an implementation activity. (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS) Board Member Winton: Yeah, absolutely. And I — and I really don't see how you implement if you don't have a plan. So. Chairman Teele: Yeah, but see, this is the point. There — whether we have a plan or not, we have life now. And there are things that have to be done now. There are things that are on the table that simply have to be done. I mean, whether we have a plan or not, we've got a series of issues relating to — for example, in Park West, trying to get those stations reopened, the Metrorail Station, the Metro Mover Stations reopened, and how we're going to interact with the kinds of activities we want there. The activity relating to the 3MD or whatever that thing is called, the — what is it called? 57 CRA 3/13/00 Robert Tyler (Director, Operation, Administration & Development, CRA): Miami 3MP Ordinance. Chairman Teele: The 3MP Ordinance, where we're looking at trying to create the kind of activity in the Park West area that is going to make it so that the Marlins do want to be in Park West. So there are a series of activities. We cannot just wait. We've got Safe Neighborhood Bond money that we've got to spend. We've got a plan, and much of the plan, quite frankly, is going to be in the Park West/Omni/Downtown/Port of Miami area. And we also have the area of Overtown, which is unique, and not really going to be — Board Member Winton: I understand. I think then, just so we're all on the same page here, what I think I'm understanding is that staff feels they need access to resources for things that are ongoing today, and for things we're doing in the future, and there's some sequencing that has to fit in all of this. Now, if we, as the policymaking body, are approving the right to get these RFPs and RFQs (Requests for Qualifications) out, it still doesn't authorize spending money on any of these consultants, and we get another shot at that. Chairman Teele: No. It doesn't even approve — it doesn't even select them. Board Member Winton: Right. OK. Chairman Teele: They got to come back to be selected. Board Member Winton: Right. OK. Chairman Teele: But it's a process. And I think that's a very important point. When we downsized the staff, we made the decision that we were going to use entities and organizations, as opposed to hiring staff. Because I think one of the — one of the big problems that we have in government is we always go out and hire people. The first thing somebody wants to do in government is hire some people. Well, the fact of the matter is, is that what we really need are the services. And hiring people may be the right thing to do, or buying it and saying at the end of the day, thank you very much, good-bye. And so in the area of housing, which, quite frankly, the CRA in the past spent 60 to 80 percent of its money, we contracted that service. In other words, the staff expert at the CRA is not an employee of the CRA, but it is a consultant. That is the Greater Miami Neighborhoods. And we pay them to be our consultant. So if they're going to go meet with Saint John's, or with BAME (Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church), if we have a meeting with BAME, we send them to those kinds of activities. And that's why we made an intentional decision to use consultants, rather than staffing. And I think when you see the dollar amount that we're spending for staff in the past versus now, it will come a little bit clearer. Board Member Winton: I understand it. And one last point, because it seems to be this may be the only appropriate place to bring it up, and that is the focus of our energies. And this goes back partially to the question we were talking about relative to the fast food franchise. You know, there is — and we hit on it just briefly but we didn't really talk about it. There is a real reason why the franchisees and/or franchisers haven't come into the neighborhood. It's an economic/security issue. It's economics and security. And I've spent a fair amount of time driving around in Overtown in the last two or three months, and I've hit all of the streets — I think all of the streets — as you have. And there are two — what I'm going to call, for 58 CRA 3/13/00 lack of a better term — hot zones in Overtown. And those hot zones I am describing of little zones of bad, bad activity. Chairman Teele: Wow! Board Member Winton: And we don't — and I think they're probably outside the CRA boundaries. But if we don't have a plan to solve that problem, this stuff is wasted money and wasted energy, because the bad guys are so close that you can't ever attract the kind of long-term stable business and job generation stuff that we're trying to attract if we can't provide a better overall environment. Never mind the poor citizens that have to put up with all this junk. So I hope that in some fashion or another that this Board, even though some of those zones may be outside our CRA boundary, we get the City — and I guess it is going to have to be the City — to help kick off a process to solve the problems with two things: Those criminal hot zones, one; and two, the second one, are all of the abandoned vacant apartment buildings that are in Overtown that do nothing but continue to attract the wrong kind of thing. It sends the wrong message. It attracts the bad guys, all kinds of things. And if — you could just imagine if we had all of those abandoned apartment buildings occupied by good citizens, the impact that that would have from an economic buying standpoint that could fuel additional business coming into the neighborhood, and it could be significant. So I hope we do that. Chairman Teele: Amen. But let me just say this very clearly, Commissioner Winton. The CRA only has jurisdiction — Board Member Winton: I understand. Chairman Teele: -- over less than 20 percent of Overtown, and less than five percent of the residents of Overtown. The vast majority of Overtown, contrary to what you may read in the paper, is outside of the CRA. However, we have the nexus to Park West. And if the development is going to happen, it's going to happen through the boundaries of the CRA. And I want to make one very important point in this regard. There is no shortage of money that has been put into Overtown by the City of Miami and, quote, the CRA, over the last 15 years. There is no shortage of money. Not less than forty million dollars ($40,000,000) of funds have been put into the Overtown area, and largely through the CRA. The problem, Johnny, is most of the money went to subsidize what has become the rule in Overtown of absentee property owners who do these so-called Section 8 deals. And if you look you — I can show you fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) of money that has gone, quote, for Overtown, and all of that money goes in the hands of developers, none of whom live in Overtown. One, only one was an African -American. That was the Urban League, to my knowledge, and one was a co-op. But all of it goes outside of that, and most of it is absolutely disgraceful. And my view is, we should not try to fix up those old buildings, most of which will never meet code, because of the way they were built, and the era and the time they were built. They will never meet code. And so I've encouraged the City, the Manager to bulldoze the buildings, and not to — and to rebuild in there, as opposed to trying to fix them up, because that's what the City has done for the last 15 years. And I really wish that the Development Office would get the list of Section 8's that have been done over the last 20 years, 15 years, and make it available to the Commission, Mr. Manager. Board Member Winton: And put them on a map so we can — 59 CRA 3/13/00 M Chairman Teele: And put them on a map, and show who the owners were, and the location, and the amount of money. And that's what's so distorts — so when we start talking about the amount of CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) money, and then people say, "Oh, look, but you all have already gotten too much money." That money went physically in that area, but it went in the pockets of people who basically were used to warehouse poverty. And there is no question, huge amounts of CDBG Section 8 dollars have gone into Overtown, huge amounts, forty, fifty million dollars ($50,000,000). But it has gone primarily -- Every political campaign manager for every Mayor of this City has had a Section 8 deal in Overtown, and most of the Commissioners. And if you think I'm kidding — INAUDIBLE COMMENTS Board Member Regalado: No, you're not. Chairman Teele: -- well, you didn't run for Mayor. But every candidate for Mayor, every candidate for Mayor for the last three terms, campaign manager has gotten a Section 8 deal in Overtown. And if you go to those buildings now, they're nothing but ghetto traps. Mr. Tyler: Right. Right. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, for your information, there are 30,000 apartments that are getting subsidized that are getting subsidized from Section 8 in Miami -Dade County. A third, more than a third in the City of Miami, and most of them in Little Havana and Overtown. And — Chairman Teele: And they don't meet code. That's what's so bad. Board Member Regalado: And they don't meet code. Not only that, not only that, let me tell you, the City has been fighting on my request with a Section 8 building in the Shenandoah area, Southwest 24tn Street, right between my district and your district. It falls in my district, on this side. But the thing is that apparently, some guy who is very well connected has that building, owns that building, and it has a number of violations. The City can do so much, because it can only go around, but not inside the building. And this is the problem that we have in Overtown. I've seen that building inside. Board Member Winton: Doesn't the County have the right to inspect inside? Board Member Regalado: No. The County has the duty to inspect that site. Board Member Winton: All right. Well, both — right. Board Member Regalado: But they don't. Chairman Teele: The County is one of the biggest -- abandoned buildings that don't meet code, that are in disrepair in the entire Overtown area. In fact, if you look at what the County has done in terms of their rights -of -way, of Metrorail, Metrorail and the area of housing, they would be the single biggest violator, by far, of everything. Overgrown lots, trash, all kinds of issues. 60 CRA 3/13/00 im Board Member Winton: It seems to me, though, that if we're going to get that — and I certainly agree. I accept what you're saying at face value as fact. Then what we need to do, I think, is what you suggested earlier. Let's get a list, let's get a map, let's put a team of people together, and let's go visit with the County. And we can turn the heat up on all of these property owners. We just have to have a plan, a plan that you can look at daily, that you can measure success from, and we monitor it. And I guess this is outside the purview of the CRA, so I guess I need to bring this up at a City Commission meeting. Chairman Teele: At a City Commission meeting. Board Member Winton: Or in a meeting with the Manager when I meet with him. Chairman Teele: I really think it's more of a purview of the City to negotiate with the County, as opposed to the CRA to be involved in that. Board Member Winton: Well, we're work on that. Chairman Teele: All right. So on 8-A and "B," motion on 8-A and "B," or 8-A. Vice Chairman Gort: Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Gort, seconded by Commissioner Regalado. Is there discussion? All in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-17 OMNI/CRA 00-15 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO PROCEED WITH A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") TO RETAIN THE GENERAL CONSULTANT TO PROVIDE MISCELLANEOUS DESIGN, PLANNING AND RELATED SERVICES UNDER A TWO- YEAR CONTRACT WITH TWO ONE-YEAR RENEWAL OPTIONS IN CONNECTION WITH PROJECTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. 61 CRA 3/13/00 (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: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: 8-13, which is serving notice to close out the contract with the existing — Board Member Sanchez: So move. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Winton: Second. Chairman Teele: Second by Commissioner Winton. Is there discussion? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? 62 CRA 3/13/00 M The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-18 OMNI/CRA 00-16 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO DIRECT BERMELLO, AJAMIL & PARTNERS ("BA"), INC. TO COMPLETE ALL TASKS COMMENCED PRIOR TO MAY 30, 2000 UNDER ITS EXISTING CONTRACT WITH THE CRA AND INSTRUCTING THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION TO PREPARE ANY NECESSARY CONTRACT EXTENSION AND CHANGE ORDERS WITH RESPECT TO THE CONTRACT WITH BA FOR PRESENTMENT TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AT THE NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING. (Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: 8-C is the general master plan. Board Member Winton: Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton. Board Member Sanchez: Second. Chairman Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. I would only say this on this: We should not move forward with this until we have a memorandum of understanding, and a buy -in between — among all of the appropriate agencies, specifically the port and the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). And that doesn't mean if we don't get it, we won't go forward. But we ought to at least try to bring everybody to the table. The City of Miami, very important. And I would hope that the City of Miami, a 63 CRA 3/13/00 representative of the City would chair the selection committee once we put it together. And Mr. Manager, it's really important, really, on all of these contracts, on all these proposals that you cooperate with us, and give us City staff that can be a part of the selection process. I think it's a little late once we select somebody. We need -- on all of these RFP's, RFQs, I would like to see appropriate City staff representation. But that's got to come through the Manager, and I wanted to say that with your support, Mr. Manager. On the motion, is it understood? How much is the budget for this going to be? Now, this is all conditioned on the five-year plan that we've approved, so let's be real clear. When we start talking about money, the five million dollars ($5,000,000) a year for five years that is being committed, this is how the money is being spent. So this is not like — even though — what's the budget for something like this, realistically? Terry, what's the real budget for a master plan like this? Board Member Sanchez: For a master plan? Depends on the area. Chairman Teele: Well, you know what the area is. I mean, ha, ha, we've been talking about that for the last hour. Unidentified Speaker: (Inaudible) Omni. I'd say Park West, about two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) Omni, about a hundred and fifty. Alfredo Sanchez: Park West, about two hundred thousand, just about; Omni, about a hundred and fifty; Overtown, maybe about seventy-five to a hundred thousand. Mr. Judy: Surprisingly, the issue is more in the Overtown area. Chairman Teele: Well, what's the amount of money we're talking about, roughly? Mr. Judy: Five hundred thousand. Chairman Teele: OK. So I want everybody to understand. I mean, you know, it's important. We're not approving the expenditure. We're not approving even doing this yet. What we're approving at this point is the creation of a process for a master plan. But it's going to cost at least a half a million dollars to do this. And this is what I think we've been all calling for, when we talk about the money that is in the budget for the CRA. So that five million dollars ($5,000,000), there's five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) right there, going for a master plan for the entire area. But it's something that the City — I think we all know we have never really planned this community. Commissioner. Board Member Winton: Or any other. Vice Chairman Gort: Question. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Vice Chairman Gort: We all know and we've participated in a few of the charettes and things like that, that have taken place in Overtown. Do we have that at the CRA, also, so that could be added to the plan and for the people to look at it? 64 CRA 3/13/00 61 Mr. Judy: It's going to be a tool — Vice Chairman Gort: It's going to be part of the master plan. Mr. Judy: It's going to be a vision tool -- Vice Chairman Gort: And you're going to pool all that together. Great. Mr. Judy: -- from all of the communities that will move into the master planning process, because it's not — it is very valuable. Chairman Teele: The thing that really frightens me, and I want to be very clear. I think ultimately, Mr. Bloom, this is going to have to be a joint RFQ from the City and the CRA, ultimately, because, you know, this issue about not working outside of the area. You see, you can't plan a third of Overtown. Richard Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Right. Chairman Teele: OK? You cannot plan — or a fourth of Overtown, which is all we have. You cannot do a master plan for Park West and downtown without including the Port of Miami. Mr. Bloom: That's right. Chairman Teele: I mean, because right now, the biggest problem in Park West is the trucks. Mr. Bloom: Right. Chairman Teele: And you know, so I think at the end of the day, Mr. Manager, this is going to have to be a joint RFP. But let's start with the memorandums of agreement, and do it, because if it's beyond the boundaries of the CRA, we can't do it, but the City can. So I think — Mr. Judy: Mr. Chairman, let me explain something, if I can. Under the CRA, Part 163, there's one thing that the CRA can do outside of its boundaries, and that does inaudible Redevelopment Plan. You can go in the study area outside of it. So we can move into those areas. Chairman Teele: Well, I stand corrected. Mr. Judy: And we intend — we intend to do it. Chairman Teele: I stand corrected. But I still think it would be helpful if they would join us. Mr. Judy: Our plan is, in effect, to work as a team with the City, Downtown Development, the Port. Chairman Teele: OK. So we will get a memorandum of understanding and all that. 65 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Judy: All of this is the way we're going to move forward with. Now, of course, we have to sit down. I have to talk -- start talking with John, and there is some conversation. We're waiting for an approval of a resolution to move forward with this, and then we'll start to bring those issues together. Chairman Teele: On the motion, all those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-19 OMNI/CRA 00-17 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO PROCEED WITH A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") TO RETAIN THE SERVICES OF A GENERAL LAND PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT USE CONSULTANT OF NATIONAL PROMINENCE FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND ADJACENT STUDY AREAS. (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: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Board Member Sanchez: Now, let me ask you something. How long would it take? Mr. Judy: Well — Board Member Sanchez: A master plan. (Inaudible) half a million dollars (inaudible). 66 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: All right. Dick, how long will it take? Mr. Judy: One year, most, at the most. And I want to say this to you all. I've done a lot of master planning in my time. And I'm talking about billion of dollars. And there's — one of the biggest rackets that we have is these lengthy, long-term master plans. Board Member Sanchez: Now, did the old CRA have a master plan? Mr. Judy: I'm sorry, that's the way I think. And we're going to drive this thing and get it done. I'm sick and tired of all these demographics and stuff that you just throw them all away, and nobody ever looks at them again. What we're trying to do is get living documents that's going to be a master plan, and it's going to have a system where as we move along, we may be able to come in here and start beginning the implementation, because we're going to be in — deeply in development, folks. We're moving this thing. We're going to start developing in this whole area. We're going after a lot of things, so we all have to work as a team and keep this thing functioning. Board Member Sanchez: Well, I agree, working on a team. I just would feel very comfortable if we had a master plan to be, you know, funding all these, all these things. Mr. Judy: That's what we're doing. We have — keep in mind, under the law, we have a redevelopment plan. That is really the master plan for these areas. And the point — all we're saying is it's time to restate it, since 1982 — Chairman Teele: The plan was put together in ' 80. Board Member Sanchez: So there is an old CRA master plan. Chairman Teele: Yeah. Mr. Judy: We have to have one. Chairman Teele: You have to -- You can't operate the CRA without a plan. Mr. Judy: I want you to understand, this CRA, we can't do anything that's not in the redevelopment plan. Board Member Winton: Well, that plan is a joke. Mr. Judy: It's crazy. It has to be redone. Chairman Teele: '82, yeah. Board Member Winton: It's a joke. Mr. Judy: And let me say this to you. The Omni CRA Redevelopment Plan — I just want you all to know this — your redevelopment plan in the Omni is not that far off. There's not a lot to do in that area. That's why, when we start talking about throwing money around, we have to start to look at the Omni area, the 67 CRA 3/13/00 Overtown area, the Park West area, and bring these things together, so we have an idea of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). Maybe we can do it for four hundred. Vice Chairman Gort: Three hundred. Mr. Judy: Right. Board Member Sanchez: Two hundred. It'll be an open bid, anyway. Mr. Judy: To be frank with you, we probably could do it for three to two. Board Member Regalado: Oh? Board Member Sanchez: Well, I'm going to request from the Chair that you sit down with me and educate me on a lot of these issues. Mr. Judy: I said I would. Board Member Sanchez: Because, let me tell you, there's a lot of things here I don't quite understand yet. Chairman Teele: There's a lot of things in here none of us understand. I mean, the City -- This process has not — I mean has never really been open, like we're doing it now. And I mean, just from a financial point of view, you go back and look at the financial reports. You will see that we're cutting new ground here. But I think it's important to understand that the CRA -- we call this the CRA — we actually have two separate legal bodies. And even that, we're doing a little bit wrong. But it's all right. The Omni CRA is one board, one body. The Overtown/Park West is a second body. And it's not like one board for both. It's two separate boards of the same people. And when we talk about this master plan, though, we are talking about a comprehensive master plan that will tie all of this together. Now, there will have to be a restated plan in the Omni and a restated plan in the Overtown/Park West. But this general plan will exceed the boundaries of both areas. It will actually deal with downtown. It will deal — Mr. Judy: But we're going to be working with the City. To be frank with you, the City in many ways is the driver of the redevelopment plan, because we have to go to them for final approval and to the County, to be frank with you. So there's a whole huge team effort here. And what we've done over the years, for 15 years, we've not, in effect, been consistent with our responsibilities as a CRA in regard to modifying the restated trust. So we're beginning this now. Chairman Teele: All right. The final item in this Agenda on this section that I want to ask to take up is the developer for the job creation plaza. Johnny, in the context of the fast food franchise, the planner sat down with the community. This goes back 18 months. And there's a book that you've got that outlines that plan. This is sort of a micro -plan. And the area there on the corner of 121h Street, where there's an open area there, where the old WMBM Radio Station, that is where the job — that's where the fast food franchise will be. Behind that, which was City -owned land, which we're still waiting on the City Attorney to give us a deed on — actually, it's not City -owned land. It was a cooperative. It was a cooperative. The 242 Cooperative, which was bulldozed down by the CRA, with support of the Management. It's to be a job creation plaza, which, in effect, is like a little strip mall. And it will be the first planned commercial 68 CRA 3/13/00 0 activity, really, there in Overtown. And that was the plan that was submitted and approved over a year ago. And that's the so-called Third Avenue Business Corridor approach. In other words, right now, if somebody comes to Miami, we want them to be able to go down Third Avenue and see the folk life village, and see the park there where — what is that? — Gibson Park, to be able to go have lunch or breakfast in one of the restaurants in the area — Two Guys Restaurant — you know. And so that's the whole concept of creating a business corridor, which, in effect, was the history of Third Avenue. Actually, Second Avenue was more of the business corridor than Third Avenue. Second Avenue was the really hot corridor and Third Avenue was a secondary, because there were so many churches on it. But Third Avenue does have three of the most — of the old historical churches there, Saint John, Greater Bethel and Mount Zion. Greater Bethel is actually a little bit off. So it gives you a full flavor of Overtown without having to get into the massive redevelopment. And that's what this is about. What we — what the staff is recommending is that we go out and select a developer for the job creation plaza. As you know, in the budget, the plaza is estimated to be about a two point one to two point five million dollar ($2.5 million), in effect, little strip mall that will be set behind the franchise with a foyer or open plaza in the front. Roberto — I mean there was a very interesting comment that the planner said in discussing that as a — what do you call them? — the Central American — what do you it? Plaza. And he was saying that — what is it? -- every country in Central America has a plaza. That's why they have revolutions. And I said, well, I don't know if we want a plaza in Overtown. But it would be a plaza, in effect there. Board Member Winton: Who are the tenants that are going to go into the plaza part of it? Chairman Teele: There are a number of people that -- That's part of why we would select a developer, to be a part of the selection of the tenants. But we've had people from radio communications to African — African apparel and sales. I mean we — every time we talk to people -- There was one guy who was manufacturing donuts who wanted to be there. I mean, the problem is, is that when you go out and you hold a hearing and a discussion on this, two years ago, you know, 18 months ago, the market sort of shifts. But that's what — one of the things the developer would be a part of, going out, helping to select the tenants. But again, let me just be very brutally honest. The goal is to try to give African -Americans the opportunity to have a business place where they can do business, as well as anyone else who wants to do business, whether they're African -American or not. But clearly, there is a stated goal of trying to get African -Americans involved in the business activity of Overtown. Board Member Winton: Now, when we approve the — which Agenda item is this, by the way? Chairman Teele: 8-D. Resolution authorizing — proceed with RFQ for the selection of a developer for the job creation plaza. Board Member Winton: I don't have any other questions. Vice Chairman Gort: All this has to come back to us? Chairman Teele: All right. It has to come back, Commissioner. Motion by Commissioner Winton, second by Commissioner Regalado. Is there any objection? All those in favor? The Board (Collectively): Aye. 69 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: Opposed? The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-20 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO PROCEED WITH A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") FOR THE SELECTION OF A DEVELOPER FOR THE JOB CREATION PLAZA PORTION OF THE THIRD AVENUE BUSINESS CORRIDOR PROJECT WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. (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: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: All right. We're going to delete "E" and "F" and go to 9. 70 CRA 3/13/00 14. HOLLAND & KNIGHT, LLP (HK), AS LEGAL COUNSEL TAX INCREMENT TO THE CRA, TO PURSUE LEGISLATION TO CREATE A SALES DISTRICT IN ORDER TO EXPEDITE THE ELIMINATION OF BLIGHT AND SLUMS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. Chairman Teele: Authorizing legislation. Board Member Sanchez: Reference — what is this? Explain this to me. Chairman Teele: All right. Two years ago — a year ago, in the legislative packet, which you represented us in, in Tallahassee, the number one priority of the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) was this item, the passing of a sales tax increment. This is a carryover of last year. Board Member Sanchez: Based on what? Chairman Teele: What do you mean? Board Member Sanchez: What are you taxing? What increment? Chairman Teele: Well, you're not taxing anything. What — right now all — the CRA — redevelopment authorities in Florida gain their revenue from the increment of the ad valorem taxes. This would propose a new concept in State law that would allow for a sales tax increment that would, in effect, allow for the sales tax after the base year, the increment above that to stay with the Redevelopment Authority. Right now, those taxes go to the State of Florida. Board Member Sanchez: Sales tax on what? Chairman Teele: On anything. Vice Chairman Gort: Whatever you sell in that area. Chairman Teele: Whatever you sell. Board Member Sanchez: Sales in the area? Chairman Teele: Yeah. Whatever sold in the area. State Budget Director is looking at the fiscal impact. Bloom, you might — or Dick. And we have support of associated industries. The And it is a very, very high threshold to qualify. Mr. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Yeah, it's a tie, 30 — it's 50, and 30 and 15 percent. Chairman Teele: What does that mean? Fifty percent unemployment? Mr. Judy: Yeah. Chairman Teele: No. 71 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Judy: Wait a minute. Let me get it here. Chairman Teele: It's tied to the levels of unemployment and tied to the number of households under — qualifying as poverty. And it's based upon census tract. And essentially, we don't think that there are more than three or four zones in the State that would qualify. Board Member Sanchez: What are those three zones? Chairman Teele: One is in Jacksonville, and one is in Orlando. Board Member Sanchez: That's two. Where's the third one? Chairman Teele: I don't know. Mr. Judy: Ours. Chairman Teele: Ours. Board Member Winton: Overtown. Mr. Judy: I think we're the driver. That makes it difficult in a lot of ways, and yet, it's to our advantage. Chairman Teele: So in effect, it's simply legislation that would allow -- Look, the fact is this: The CRA, when it was created in ' 82, ' 83, was expected to be generating a million to two to three million dollars ($3,000,000) in tax increments. Right now, we're generating three hundred thousand this year, which is the largest amount that it has generated in the last ten years, I believe, three hundred thousand. It got up as high as three hundred thousand, I believe, in ' 87. And Charlayne, it really would be good if we could get a history of the tax increment, you know, from the very beginning for the Omni — for the Overtown/Park West area. But by any standard, this Tax Increment District has not succeeded as a district, in terms of stimulating redevelopment. This is why what happens in Park West, especially, is so important. This is one of the reasons why we're doing everything we can by promoting the notion of clubs, promoting the Time Square Project, anything that can move property values up. And I heard Commissioner Winton very clearly. Anything we can do to sustain the speculation accrues to the benefit of the Redevelopment Authority. In other words, every increase in property value means an increase increase in revenue to the CRA. We get our money primarily from -- by law -- primarily from the Redevelopment Authority, redevelopment tax increment. Because the redevelopment has not moved forward, the City has supported this traditionally from the general fund and from CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funding. But ideally, and a part of what — the plan that we passed two years ago is that the CRA would have five years to get its act together. And if it doesn't get its act together in five years, it would be abolished. In other words, that was the five million dollars ($5,000,000) a year for five years as a boost to get the redevelopment activities going. One of the issues, Johnny, is that housing generates about 15 percent of what commercial development generates for redevelopment activities. So in many ways, if the CRA is going to function in the future, it's got to be involved in commercial development, as well as housing. In other words, because of homestead exemptions, because of the way housing — it's about 15 percent of what commercial -- You look at the area, you know, where we looked at behind the Sawyer's Walk. The housing numbers — we actually did a study or Erdal Donmez did a study. The housing numbers were 15 72 CRA 3/13/00 percent of what commercial would have done. So it's on the Board of the CRA to keep the fire on the staff, to understand that if this redevelopment does not survive in the Omni — in the Overtown/Park West area, there will not be a CRA, nor should there be a CRA if we cannot create and turn around the development. The problem in Omni is totally different, and that's this: The City Commission has given away all of the development dollars, so no matter how well we succeed, we're only going to help the Performing Arts Center up to a threshold. I — but for all practical purposes, for the next seven years, 100 percent of the money in redevelopment from the Omni is going to go to the County. Board Member Winton: Then after it reaches a threshold, we get money in? Chairman Teele: After you — we reach a threshold. And don't hold me to the number. Mr. Judy: A million, four thirty. Chairman Teele: Huh? Mr. Judy: About a million, four hundred thousand. Chairman Teele: About a million four. Once it gets up to a million four, annually, annually. Board Member Winton: That's not — that's not a tough number. Chairman Teele: That's what they say. Board Member Winton: It's a tough number right now, given the fact that you don't have — but you build two inaudible buildings there, and you're getting pretty damn close. Chairman Teele: Well, that's why we believe — Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Vice Chairman Gort: When I walked in here, when I was elected, this was already in. And my understanding was at all times that this was done at the request of the residents in this area. Chairman Teele: Yes. Vice Chairman Gort: That was my understanding. Chairman Teele: It was. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. That's why the City Commission approved it. Chairman Teele: The City Commission approved this at the strong request of the Omni Advisory Board. The Omni Advisory Board. But that does not mean it was right. And it was not right. And one of the 73 CRA 3/13/00 things that I would like to ask, Commissioner — did Commissioner Sanchez leave? One of the things that I was going to ask -- Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Sanchez: Sanchez? I'm right here. Chairman Teele: I mean Commissioner Regalado. — is that we've got to look at — we've got to look at some ways — we've got to look at some ways to make the Omni District viable in the interim, Johnny. I mean, because, you know, right now, it's like all for one. And so whatever we do in Overtown, we're trying to do in the Omni. But the truth of the matter is, you know, as time goes on, that's just going to wear thin. Because if we're spending all of our energies generating dollars over here, and we get nothing back, I mean, you know, we can't pay for one staff person for the CRA to support Omni. Now, we're going to do it. I'm talking about out of the Tax Increment District. We're going to do it out of the CDBG funds. We're going to do it from wherever we can get. But we've got to think creatively about how we can generate dollars for the CRA in the Omni area in the short term. And in that regard, I was going to make a recommendation at the end of the meeting. But on the job creation plaza — I mean on the Tax Increment District, is there objection to trying to get some of the money that the State is now collecting and keeping it here? Vice Chairman Gort: Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Gort, seconded by — Board Member Regalado: Second. Chairman Teele: -- Commissioner Regalado. Any objection? All those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Regalado: Aye. Board Member Winton: Aye. Vice Chairman Gort: Aye. Chairman Teele: Opposed? 74 CRA 3/13/00 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-21 OMNI/CRA 00-18 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") AND HOLLAND & KNIGHT, LLP (HK), AS LEGAL COUNSEL TO THE CRA, TO PURSUE LEGISLATION TO CREATE A SALES TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT IN ORDER TO EXPEDITE THE ELIMINATION OF BLIGHT AND SLUMS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. (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: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None 75 CRA 3/13/00 15. A) PROVIDE HISTORY OF TAX INCREMENT PAYMENTS MADE TO SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DISTRICT B) CRA ADMINISTRATION TO HAVE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THE INTERNET [SEE SECTION #18]. Chairman Teele: Let me do this. Let me take the public, anybody from the public that has any item, because it is long, and I don't want the public to be -- I know Mr. Joseph has an item, and Mr. Post, you're a distinguished property owner, and we appreciate you being here. Tom Post: I just had one request, and that is, if you're going to make the package available to your fellow Commissioners five days ahead of time — even the Clerk's Office this afternoon doesn't have a full package. We'd request that you make a package available at City Hall at least five days ahead of time, and at the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) Office five days ahead of time, with all the attachments to it. Chairman Teele: I'll go a step further. I'm going to direct the Director to make this packet available on the internet beginning the next meeting. And I don't want to hear any "ifs," "ands," and "buts." I want this available on the internet at least five says before, the entire Agenda. Can you all do that? Kelsey, can you all get that accomplished? I mean the City doesn't do it, we — and that's a very good point. We need to make the information available, and we need to make it available on the Internet at an address. Mr. Post: Well, there's some attachments, or maps or something that are not — Chairman Teele: All of that can be posted on the internet. Mr. Post: OK. Second thing, I know you're talking a lot about a new restaurant for Park West and Overtown. I don't want you to forget about People's Barbecue that's over there. I got there fairly frequently. You know, on both sides of that facility — and the people there are trying to do something — are two abandoned, burned out apartment complexes. And I think Mr. Winton and Commissioner Teele are on the right idea. I would really encourage you to get that survey done, and get something done to help out what you've got much more than helping out people who will come in the future. Thank you. Chairman Teele: Mr. Post, let me commend you for your remarks. There's one issue. Not only do we have an obligation to People's Barbecue, in that the CRA somehow was involved in the construction and issues associated with it, the problem is that People's Barbecue technically is outside of the boundary of the CRA. And we have tried to deal with that issue. We've got a series of issues. In fact — Mr. Post: I think you've got the Manager here, and you are the Commission, so I think probably he's listening to you. Board Member Winton: We'll bring it up. Chairman Teele: We'll bring it up in the Commission meeting. But I do think, you know, that what is in front of People's Barbecue and on the side of it is a disgrace. And it's a disgrace, really, to Overtown and the City of Miami. 76 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Post: It's awful. Board Member Winton: It's awful. Chairman Teele: And somebody ought to go in there and condemn the building. We're talking about that building coming right out — Unidentified Speaker: Yeah. Board Member Winton: It's a terrible thing. It's been there forever. Chairman Teele: And they want big money for it. They want huge dollars for it. Board Member Winton: I'll tell you what you can give them. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Can I speak on that property? Chairman Teele: That property is outside of the boundaries. Mr. Judy: I realize that, but it's going to be in our study under the new restatement, and we can adjust the boundaries on an implementation basis when we feel it's necessary. Chairman Teele: With the approval of the City Commission. Board Member Winton: Hopefully, we have the problem solved long before the study gets done. Chairman Teele: Hopefully. Mr. Judy: I just said that we would do a — 77 CRA 3/13/00 16. STUDY PROBLEMS REGARDING ROADBLOCKS TO BUSINESS IN THE OMNI AREA. Chairman Teele: Mr. Joseph. Fred Joseph: CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) Chair and CRA members, I circulated a draft of something that really ought to waken you up and really make you very angry. If you want to bring to bear and ask people to come in, and you want the CRA to tear down some items, and help fund people coming in, or help find people that will, we hear you've got an entrepreneur that dared to try to come in on private land, on land that was selling for pennies on the Bebe Rebozo property. It ups your tax base from pennies to eighteen dollars ($18) a square. Then when they tried to decide to come in, every obstacle the City could possibly put in their way was put in their way, even to our fine Police Department advising them very strongly that they were fools to do it. Then after advising them of that and telling them what the couldn't do, the Zoning or the City departments told them they couldn't put fencing up, they couldn't bring a hundred thousand to two hundred thousand dollar ($200,000) motor coaches in the area and park them on lots that were notoriously parking lots, and used car lots. And you got a — these are not people with — you know, derelict or want to sleep in those motor coaches. These are businesses that leave out of there every day, go out among your streets, pay your permits, pay your taxes, brought this tax base to this property up two or three hundred percent, want to pay a good, fair lease so this man can pay his taxes that his new property value is going to be at. And every obstacle whatsoever the City has put in their way, that other hat you wear — Chairman Teele: Well, we ain't wearing it today. Mr. Joseph: It's very discouraging when the Omni Advisory Board, people like myself and Ms. Kluger and everybody else in that area are trying and begging people to come in and buy these properties — buy them -- not your area of expertise of giving them away so somebody will come in. I'm talking about physically buying them and putting them back in tax rolls. You got properties you allow — the same thing this concern asked to have, non-profit, non-profit property owners are allowed to do. Non -tax based property owners are allowed to do things you're telling a person with a tax base they're not allowed to do. Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Joseph — Mr. Joseph: Can I circulate this to any member that doesn't have this? Chairman Teele: We have this. Mr. Joseph, can I ask that Mr. Tyler sit down with you and write a memo to the Board of recommendations? And we would expressly direct the CRA staff to work with the City staff and to come before the City Commission, if they believe it to be appropriate, to complain on behalf of the residents or the Omni as to what we can do to cure. I think what we need, though, is we need the staff to sit down and work with you on it. But one of the things that I want to say to Mr. Tyler and the staff is that just like we expect the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Offices to come to City Commission meetings and present problems and solutions that we need to be aware of, we expect the CRA staff, on matters such as this — if you are in agreement, if you are in agreement — to come to the City of Miami Commission and to work with the City Manager's staff to try to solve these problems before they come up. And I think the real issue is we've got to maintain liaison with the Omni Advisory Board, so that these matters don't come up like out of the -- Now, Hilda, are you still the liaison for the — who is the liaison for the Omni Advisory Board? 78 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Joseph: Hilda and Hammond. Chairman Teele: Hilda and Hammond? Mr. Joseph: Yes. Chairman Teele: So — OK. So we need to make sure, Hilda and Hammond, and everybody that you all work with them so that they don't feel this sense of frustration that they can't get anything done. Mr. Joseph: Well, the only big real frustration is when private entrepreneurs come in, and this, when you start discouraging them and they're ready to put their money where their mouth is, not go out and look for Burger King, or Pizza Hut or somebody, a pie in the sky, because of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) on their budget to — for security. I had to, at the Grand Double Tree, post our extra — I only have a five and a half million -dollar budget, because we had so many areas of backdoor problems. Our security staff is enormous because of it, which you're aware of. You — you know the area. Commissioner Winton will be visiting with me soon, I hope, to see it. We pay that security, and obviously, we pass it on to our clients. But, you know, here is a man that's willing to come from New York down, come across from Miami Beach, where he's paying good rent and do the same thing for Miami Beach that he's going to do here, and send these hundred thousand dollar motor coaches out every single day, and spend money in our City, our City, to have — Chairman Teele: It's a theater production company. Mr. Joseph: It's a theater production company. And, I mean, you know, they're good jobs. They keep our City and our people working. Chairman Teele: Fred, I don't think there — I don't think you have any disagreement -- We don't understand. We need to get our staff to be a little bit more proactive with you and to understand these issues so that when they come up, they can act on them immediately. And so what I'm asking — and I understand that a memo has been sent to the Manage on this, and that Ms. Castro, Patty Castro has been working on behalf of the Manager to resolve the issue. But again, I think it's important that on matters of economic redevelopment in the Omni area that the CRA staff at the working level work closely enough with you on a daily basis that we can short-circuit these problems so that they don't have to come before the Board. But we will get this before the City Commission. And I'm going to request, Bob, that you come before the City Commission at the next Commission meeting with a report on this, either as a pocket item or request to get on the Agenda, so we can try to get it resolved. Mr. Joseph: Well, I'll be happy to share with you the facts that this lease was signed, and for four solid months, we have not been able to get compliance, to be able to — Chairman Teele: Well, I can tell you one thing. Razor wire is just not something that is encouraged. Mr. Joseph: I totally agree with you, except you allowed it at the eating shelter. I mean, I agree — nobody's disagreeing. 79 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: They have barbed wire around a school right there in Overtown on Third Avenue, Douglas School. Mr. Joseph: Right. Chairman Teele: And somebody needs to get with somebody and remove it. You cannot have barbed wire in these areas. And we — and just because one agency is doing it doesn't mean it's right. And the City should not allow anybody to put razor wire up, and if other people do, we need to get it down. But there's a way we can proactively look at it, and we'll — we promise you we'll look at it with you. Mr. Joseph: We appreciate that, because the Police Department said if you park your motor coach there, it's going to be stripped overnight, and you're a fool. Chairman Teele: Well, you know, I just — Fred, I just want to say one thing. To my knowledge, the CRA has not given away anything. And I mean, I heard that throwaway line. And I just want to, you know — to my — since I've been here, we've not — Mr. Joseph: I didn't say give away in that nature. I'm saying if we bull down something and you now own it, we're giving away a tax base. So that's the only thing that I'm referring to. Chairman Teele: You're right. Mr. Joseph: This gentleman happened to have bought two or three cents a square foot — Chairman Teele: You're right. I'm sorry I brought it up. You're 100 percent right. Mr. Joseph: And now, it's eighteen dollars ($18) a square foot, and it could be sixty dollars ($60) a square foot if — Chairman Teele: And we need the property — we need property taxes. Mr. Joseph: And all we're asking, that entrepreneurs are trying to come in and do it. Chairman Teele: All right. 80 CRA 3/13/00 17. COMMENTS REGARDING DONATION OF YOUTH TECHNOLOGY CENTER IN OVERTOWN [SEE SECTION #1]. Chairman Teele: All right, sir. Ma'am? Sir? Bill Mosley: I'm Bill Mosley, BAME (Bethel African Methodist Episcopal) Development Corporation and Greater Bethel. I have a question on Item 17. I'm not sure what that is about, because we at Bethel and BAME are about to open up a computer lab in the church on the grounds. Chairman Teele: That was a — let me just tell you. That was a presentation. I'm sorry you weren't here. The first presentation was by Mr. Margulies. It's the — it should not be called "Technology." It should be called "Youth Lab" -- "Youth Center." Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Overtown Youth Center. Chairman Teele: And it's the Overtown Youth Center, and it's going to be on the corner of 14th Street and Third Avenue. And it's the donation of two and a half million dollars by Mr. Margulies. All he's asking is the City provide the land. And the City has apparently agreed to do that. The CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) is coordinating construction of activities in the CRA boundaries. So it has nothing to do with technology. Mr. Mosley: Very good. Thank you. 81 CRA 3/13/00 18. COMMENTS REGARDING NOTIFICATION OF CRA MEETINGS AND AVAILABILITY OF AGENDA ON TIMELY BASIS [SEE SECTION #15] Eleanor Kluger: Most of you know me already. Eleanor Kluger, Omni Advisory Board. I just want to commend this Board, to say that they are moving along tremendously. This is what we've been waiting for. Commissioner Teele, I think this is what we really need here, is movement and not just talking and going to meetings. And the Omni is very proud of you for doing this. We do have one comment, though, that Tom Post raised, which was notification. The last two meetings now, I had no idea there was a meeting here, nor did I have any idea that there was an Agenda or anything you were going to discuss. And I'm most happy if you would give me the complete package, and I would notify the members. As it is, I sent out at least 25 invitations to this meeting tonight. I did that over the weekend when I found out that there was a meeting on Friday afternoon. And I think we deserve, being property owners, taxpayers, notification. And I think that we would be very helpful in this process, because all of us want the same thing, it looks like, and that's to build a great City, and a great downtown, and to get people, Code Enforcement going on, get the County aware that we're going to make this City hum and take its rightful place, something it hasn't done in the past 20 years. And I commend you and thank you. Chairman Teele: Ms. Kluger, thank you very much. And I know that Commissioner Winton is getting a flavor for the fact that the Omni Advisory Board is not just another board on paper. They have very, very active members, and committees, and subcommittees, and they can be extremely to the point. And the good thing about them is they all are stakeholders. They all pay property taxes, and they're here not just to talk, but to see some action. 82 CRA 3/13/00 19. DETERMINING WHETHER THE CRA COULD LEASE OUT FORMER FIRE STATION NO. 2 ON MIAMI AVENUE AND 14TH STREET (PERFORMING ARTS CENTER AREA) Chairman Teele: Where is Commissioner Winton? Commissioner Regalado, there is one thing that I wanted to request, and I'm glad the Manager is here. The CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) has a very real problem in generating dollars in the Omni area; I think we know. I'm going to ask Commissioner Regalado to make a report back to either the CRA or the City in the economic development issue. There is one area — and here's Commissioner Winton. Commissioner Plummer attempted at least on three occasions to put the fire station on Miami Avenue and 14th Street out to bid for sale, and I blocked it on all three occasions for the reason that I believe that the area, which is right next to the Performing Arts Center, is prime for redevelopment. And why should we sell it now? Because we'll never get our value. I know that the people at Big Time Productions have complained vociferously now about that. And I was going to ask Commissioner Winton and Commissioner Regalado through the economic development activity to determine — to look at that and determine whether or not the CRA could make that fire station as a project for which we could gain control over it and go out with a bid to lease it out, and get revenues from a lease payment. I am not going to be in favor of the City selling it, because I think with the Performing Arts Center, we'll never get our value for it. But I don't think it makes sense to let that thing sit there as a blight, an eyesore in the community. And it is within the redevelopment area. I know the City has proposed very strongly to sell it, so they can't have an objection to transferring it. I mean, they don't have a use for it. And it just seems to me that one way we can begin to try to develop some revenue stream for the Omni part of the Redevelopment Authority would be from rent payments from that, since it appears to be something that is very much in high demand. And Commissioner Winton, I wondered how you would look at that and Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado: Absolutely. Board Member Winton: I guess I have -- One, I'm not very big on public sector entities getting involved in private sector work. And redevelopments of buildings is a tricky deal. Chairman Teele: No, no, no. You didn't hear what I said. That ain't what I said. I agree. But what you would do is we would seek to transfer the control of that from the City now to the CRA. The CRA would then go out and put out a bid. Board Member Winton: For a developer. Chairman Teele: For the development. Board Member Winton: Oh. Chairman Teele: Now, I'm not — Board Member Winton: All right. Chairman Teele: I think the City — the CRA should not try to do these development deals, but I -- See, I don't think we can ever get a fair market value for that piece of property, because the value of that property is going to go up every year. 83 CRA 3/13/00 Board Member Winton: But — well, and there's — philosophically, I'm — I guess I'm on the opposite side of you in that regard, because the fact of the matter is that when you calculate returns, revenue today is worth a lot more than revenue downstream. And the question is, how long do you wait? How long is too long? And when you get into these waiting games, things happen. Things like recessions occur. Chairman Teele: That's why I'm asking you to look at it. Board Member Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: And I'm asking that Economic Development Committee that we set up to look at it, because I think there are going to be some merits on either side of the equation. But the one thing I do think is that the City, it must -- We plan to paint the building, to fix it up and do all of that, the CRA, without regard to the fact that the City owns it, because it's all the same hat in the end. But the fact is, is that that area — that building is a blight on the area. Board Member Winton: Absolutely. Chairman Teele: And it could generate dollars. Now, the real economic issue is, is the Government better off selling it, or is the Government better off leasing it? And I think that's just something that, you know, everybody can look at. Board Member Winton: Well, off the top, it seems to me that an RFP (Request for Proposals) for a developer wouldn't take that long to get out. And there's a reasonable test, so we could do that as a test. If we get a qualified developer with a good plan, then we can — I think that your idea is a good one to test. If we don't get a qualified developer, then the answer is you sell it. Chairman Teele: And that's sort of where I come from, exactly. So — but I think it's something to look at. But one of the things I'm trying to look at is how do we generate dollars for the CRA for the Omni area? Because at this point, everything that we do for Omni, we're literally taking it from another pot to do it. And we have to continue our efforts for the Omni. Board Member Winton: Well, do we have to transfer ownership before an RFP goes out, or can the City send out this RFP? Chairman Teele: The City could send out the RFP. The City could send out the RFP, but the question is, is where is the revenue going to go? I'm looking at ways to create — Board Member Winton: Well, we would want to work with the City, because this is in the Omni Redevelopment Area, right? Chairman Teele: It's in the redevelopment area. Board Member Winton: So I think we would want to work with the City to get the RFP out, and then — because it makes sense for the tax increment, and in this case, there won't be — let's see. Because it's still going to be City -owned land lease, so there won't be real estate tax there. 84 CRA 3/13/00 M Chairman Teele: There won't be any real estate — Board Member Winton: So I think we would want to work with the City to get the revenue to come into the CRA District, from my personal viewpoint. But I think philosophically that's how I feel about it. But I would like to see the City then — we'll take whatever steps we can to get an RFP out as soon as we can to test that market. And if that market is good then we can get a plan, and move it. But if it isn't, we can very quickly go to the point of sale, because you're right, that's a big blight on an area that has some real potential right now. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado: No, I just — Commissioner Winton, we had that, I think, the same problem with other properties, and we never get the three bids. And then it falls through the cracks and -- For instance — and then you have the — you have the question of being historic. So it's very difficult for the City to — to — Board Member Winton: But that's my point. If it's difficult for Government to get it done — Chairman Teele: Then get out of the way. Board Member Winton: -- then sell it. Board Member Regalado: Exactly. Board Member Winton: End of story. But I think that in this particular instance, with this particular property, I think it's worth the effort of testing the RFP process, because it is a good vehicle to get some revenue for the Omni Tax Increment District. If we're successful, hallelujah. If it doesn't work — Chairman Teele: Move it. Board Member Winton: -- we know what the answer is and we go to sale. Chairman Teele: All right. 85 CRA 3/13/00 Mm 20. BRIEFLY DISCUSS SALES TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT AND NETWORK AREA POINT (NAP). Chairman Teele: Could we briefly move through the rest of this Agenda now? Number 10 is an update on the legislative items. The Sales Tax District we've heard from. The NAP (Network Area Point). Is Paul Lambert here? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): No. Chairman Teele: That is moving forward. Once we announced that we were looking at it, every City in the southeast jumped on it, and it's turned into a really ugly mess now, with some cities in Palm Beach and everywhere else wanting the NAP. I had a meeting Sunday on the NAP. The Camillus. Board Member Winton: Anything we can do on the NAP? Chairman Teele: No. The report is due out this week. The Camillus House, Dick? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): We're helping them in regard to legislation in the State for funding for moving. And I've had meetings with the board of directors; the executive staff in terms of what their interest is in regard to let's cooperate together. I believe that they're open, obviously, and Mr. Chairman, you've had numerous discussions along this line, too. And we think the major move right now is to try to help with legislation in the State of Florida, for funding to make this move. 86 CRA 3/13/00 21. UPDATE OF CAMILLUS HOUSE. Chairman Teele: All right. Representative Rudy Garcia has introduced a bill. I think what we need to do and what I would like to do is to advise the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) Board that I am going to ask for a Sunshine Law meeting with Commissioner Winton and the Mayor, and to attempt to bring to the CRA and the Commission within the next 30 days a comprehensive "A" to "Z" plan regarding the Camillus House. Board Member Winton: Good. Chairman Teele: I think, you know, that this thing again is the number one blight on the CRA. It has held property values down. The problem has been repeatedly if you announce that you're going to move the Camillus House, you immediately get five district Commissioners saying, "Don't move it into my district." And I mean, I think the City of Miami has attempted on at least three real occasions to move it, only to be overwhelmed by the hundreds of people that come down on the location that you're going to move it into. I think the time has come that we have to move on it. There's been a lot of discussions. There is a gentlemen's agreement, if you will, ladies, between Brother Paul and his successor and myself on this. The problem is that the economics of the area have radically changed. And you know what happens on gentlemen's agreement. Even with — well, they're Brothers. When it's money involved, the gentlemen all leave the room, and you're down to just the bare knuckles site. So the area — the agreement that they had made in principle about what they would sell it for has gone out the window. Again, it's a question of the property values going up so rapidly in the area. And I think it's time that we move forward with a plan to move the Camillus House, and I think it's important that we get the Mayor or the Manager and the District Commission involved in this. If you look at our budget for the last three years, the number one budget item in the budget book of the CRA has been the Camillus House. And I would just encourage you to look at that item, that we have always recognized that the Camillus House singularly has held the property values down in the area, and remembering that our number one goal is to move property values. So, it's time to move forward on that. 87 CRA 3/13/00 22. UPDATE REGARDING FUNDING OF STATE OF FLORIDA LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE. Chairman Teele: The area of funding, are we going to put in for a State grant? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): They are putting in legislation. Board Member Winton: Say again? Mr. Judy: They are putting in legislation for it. Chairman Teele: All right. So there will be a request for State funding. 88 CRA 3/13/00 23. DISCUSS 3 MP ORDINANCE, PLANS, MIAMI MILLENNIUM — TIMES SQUARE PROJECT. Chairman Teele: The 3MP, Item Number 11. 3MP Means Miami Millennium Media Project. Miami Millennium Media Project, commonly referred to as Miami's Times Square. The idea is to pick a time that is convenient for Board Members to go to Times Square. No overnights. Overnights are on your own — Dutch treat on overnights — the first week of April or the third week of April, depending up on availability. And we'll work with everyone's staff. And the goal, of course, is to understand, you know, just exactly how the Times Square project can fit into Park West, the Park West area. I am very concerned, you know, that the Times Square Project will help to strengthen the value and the activity in the area. And I think there are a lot of reasons that we should want to promote something like this. It has been referred to the Urban Development — what is that thing? The Urban — what's it? — UD — Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): UDR (Urban Development Review). Chairman Teele: UDR. Board Member Winton: Urban Development Review Chairman Teele: Review Board, among other places. And so it's making its way around. But the goal is, is to create in a two -block, three -block, four — a four -block area between 7th Street and 395 along Biscayne Boulevard a Times Square sort of thing, like you see with the Today Show, you know, with the backdrop, and all of the signage, and lighting, and all of that. And it is something that is well received by the potential club owners and people that are looking to redevelop that area. All right. Mr. Judy: And the status of it, as you well know, we did a — let's say a restated ordinance and it's being reviewed. And we're meeting again Thursday to move forward in terms of the final draft. Chairman Teele: It's been approved for first reading. By the way, it — the way it's envisioned, just so that it's very clear, it will be a major source of revenue for the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), for the way we're trying to envision this. And it would be strictly voluntary with the property owners, but it would generate revenue, as we envision it. The CRA would be the developer of the project, and it's a very creative concept where we actually are making — we're being a developer on land we don't even own. So. Mr. Judy: It's like a concession at the airport. Chairman Teele: OK. 89 CRA 3/13/00 4. UPDATE OF MARGARET PACE PARK. Chairman Teele: We've heard the report on the Marlin Park. Update on Margaret Pace Park. Tere, anything new? Tere Garcia: Yes. On the date that — Chairman Teele: Tere Garcia. Ms. Garcia: Oh, I'm sorry. Tere Garcia, Bermello, Ajamil and Partners. Do I have to give my address? Unidentified Speaker: Yes. Ms. Garcia: 2601 South Bayshore. On March 8t", we met with the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) staff, and Parks Department staff, Director Ruder and Maria Perez to go over the 80 percent construction documents, architecture, civil landscape architecture, electrical. They gave us final comments and approved the plans. And we are moving to complete these construction documents for March 31 ", at which time then, perhaps with — as to the CRA and the City need to decide how that's going to be going out to bid. And the construction schedule will depend on that. As you mentioned before, this is a plan that has been done in phases. And items on the first phase are the items that need to be — that are required by the Safe Neighborhood Parks bond issue and the Fine Grant, which is what the monies are available for. Chairman Teele: All right. Questions? Comments? All right. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): My comment is that we're going to start moving forward with the Interlocal Agreement in regard to the relationship between the City and CRA. It's necessary and legally required. Chairman Teele: OK. Ms. Garcia: Director Ruder — Board Member Sanchez: (Inaudible comments). Mr. Judy: Well, we're just getting the space now. The timing for that is with the Interlocal Agreement. Yeah, this is another one. This is a cooperative Agreement for this particular purpose of constructing the Margaret Pace Park. Chairman Teele: How much Safe Neighborhood bond money is in this project? Ms. Garcia: Eight hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($850,000) plus a hundred and sixty thousand dollars ($160,000), plus or minus of a Florida In -Land Navigation Grant. Chairman Teele: All right. Questions? 90 CRA 3/13/00 Board Member Sanchez: How much are you requesting in that grant? Chairman Teele: What grant? Board Member Sanchez: The Intake — the In -Land. Ms. Garcia: We already did. Chairman Teele: We already have that. Ms. Garcia: We did that last year. Board Member Sanchez: You already got all that? How much did you get? Ms. Garcia: We got about a hundred and sixty thousand, because they will only fund items that deal with the shoreline. Board Member Sanchez: OK. Chairman Teele: Further comments? All right. 91 CRA 3/13/00 25. APPROVING HIRING OF JEANETTE THOMPSON, SECRETARY/STENOGRAPHER; CHELSA ARSCOTT, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT; RHONDA WALSH, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT; MARSHATTA HARRIS, RECEPTIONIST/COMPUTER WORD PROCESSOR; GEORGE HOWARD, ASSISTANT COORDINATOR; YUL ALLEN, EMPOWERMENT ZONE LIAISON/BUSINESS SPECIALIST-SEOPW. Chairman Teele: A resolution authorizing the hiring of employees retroactively. We granted Mr. Tyler the authority to move forward and to advise us in this meeting. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Two of the employees are — one is being moved to a full-time status, Chelsa Arscott and — Chairman Teele: From a three/fourth? Mr. Tyler: Yes, from three-quarter time to — and also share to full-time CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Jeanette Thompson, also. Chairman Teele: Jeanette, why don't you stand up, please. All right. Just so everybody knows her. Mr. Tyler: And the others are all new hires that we would ask the Board to consider. Board Member Sanchez: How many current employees do you have already? Mr. Tyler: Six. Board Member Sanchez: Six. Chairman Teele: All right. Board Member Winton: How many new hires? I didn't get that. Mr. Tyler: The new hires are two clerical positions, and a receptionist at seven dollars and something an hour and a — I'm sorry — and an administrative assistant at ten dollars ($10) an hour, and an assistant coordinator for the field. Board Member Winton: Did we already approve a budget? Mr. Tyler: Yes. Board Member Winton: And so are these in the budget? Mr. Tyler: Yes. Board Member Winton: Oh. Vice Chairman Gort: You have your Finance Director over there raising her hands. 92 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Tyler: Charlayne? Charlayne Thompkins: I just need clarification on the full-time positions. You have the executive assistant position being four days with the CRA and one day with the City. Chairman Teele: No, that's being changed. Ms. Thompkins: Oh, OK. Chairman Teele: That's what he said. He's changing that to five days with the CRA. Mr. Tyler: I'm asking for her full-time now. Ms. Thompkins: OK. The budget that you have before you does not reflect five days. It only has four days for that line item. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): So amend it. Chairman Teele: All right. It will be amended to that. Mr. Tyler: So (unintelligible) budget it will be the additional day. Chairman Teele: All right. Would you move it? Moved by Commissioner Regalado. Is there any objection? Seconded by Commissioner Gort. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board "Collectively): Aye. 93 CRA 3/13/00 M The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-22 OMNI/CRA 00-19 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE HIRING OF JEANETTE THOMPSON AS A FULL-TIME CONTRACT EMPLOYEE OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") AND TO ACT IN THE POSITION OF SECRETARY/STENOGRAPHER; CHELSA ARSCOTT AS A FULL-TIME CONTRACT EMPLOYEE OF THE CRA TO ACT IN THE POSITION OF EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT; RHONDA WALSH AS A PART- TIME CONTRACT EMPLOYEE OF THE CRA TO ACT IN THE POSITION OF ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT; MARSHATTA HARRIS AS A PART- TIME CONTRACT EMPLOYEE OF THE CRA TO ACT IN THE POSITION OF RECEPTIONIST/COMPUTER WORD PROCESSOR; GEORGE HOWARD AS A FULL-TIME CONTRACT EMPLOYEE OF THE CRA TO ACT IN THE POSITION OF ASSISTANT COORDINATOR AND YUL ALLEN AS A FULL-TIME CONTRACT EMPLOYEE OF THE CRA TO ACT IN THE POSITION OF EMPOWERMENT ZONE LIAISON/BUSINESS SPECIALIST- SEOPW. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: And again, one of the things — one of the things to remember is that we need to get a chart that shows the number of people in the budget historically, because we're now back into moving the CRA into an action mode. 94 CRA 3/13/00 26. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING OF CITY OF MIAMI ("DOSP") FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PARKING LOTS FOR THE THIRD AVENUE BUSINESS CORRIDOR PROJECT AND ADDITIONAL PARKING LOTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. Chairman Teele: A resolution authorizing the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) — Jesus, we've had this resolution four times — three times. We've already approved this. We need to do it again? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Which one? Board Member Winton: Which one? Chairman Teele: Number 15, to enter into an agreement with Off -Street Parking for the construction of the parking lot -- Is this on the Third Avenue Business Corridor? All right. Well, it's been approved twice but — Mr. Judy: Now we have the Agreement attached to it. Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Judy: And they have to have it, so it's going to their board. It's just part of the bureaucracy. Chairman Teele: All right, all right. Government to Government. Motion, please. Vice Chairman Gort: Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Gort. Board Member Regalado: Second. Chairman Teele: By Regalado. All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed? 95 CRA 3/13/00 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-23 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO ENTER INTO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING OF THE CITY OF MIAMI ("DOSP") FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF PARKING LOTS FOR THE THIRD AVENUE BUSINESS CORRIDOR PROJECT AND ADDITIONAL PARKING LOTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconed by Board Member Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: We'll drop Number 16 for the time being, and come back. 17 has been taken up. 96 CRA 3/13/00 27. DISCUSS OMNI COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. Chairman Teele: Would you explain Number 18, please. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): This is a request for — let me just — I'm not sure if I can read it, but there's a request for development in the Omni area. Dick, this is a project you're working on? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Yes. That's the redevelopment of two blocks. I think we have the — Board Member Sanchez: In this package? Mr. Judy: Yeah. Chairman Teele: This is a — let me do this. I'm going to pull this item for the purpose of this. This item is extremely complex, and I will never let something go through that the Board does not — is not fully apprised of. This item is also going to require a memorandum. And I think Commissioner Winton needs to be thoroughly briefed on this item, if you've not been. Are you thoroughly briefed on this? Board Member Winton: If it's the one I'm thinking. But if it's the one — what's the boundaries on this one? Mr. Judy: Before, you called on the boundaries. It's the block between 19th Street and — Board Member Winton: And Biscayne Boulevard to the bay. Mr. Judy: Yeah. Board Member Winton: Yeah. Chairman Teele: Have you been briefed? Board Member Winton: Yes. Mr. Judy: It's very time sensitive. If we move, it's a —it's a major, major development and it's just -- Board Member Sanchez: No, no, 18, we'll defer 18. I request to defer. Chairman Teele: Well, this is what I'm going to do, is I'm going to call a special Board meeting at the next City Commission meeting at 11:30 or right after that, Commissioner Regalado, just so that everybody is aware. But we need a memorandum on this. Let me tell you what my concern is on this. I think this is an example of what we need to be doing. This is very important. It needs to be done. But this needs to be done with total transparency, so that it does not appear that we're doing something that we're not doing, or that we are doing something that we are not doing. And the point is this: This involves a request from a developer that has a holdout on a slither of land that is stopping a project that would probably be thirty, 97 CRA 3/13/00 forty, fifty million dollars ($50,000,000). It has never been used by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) before in Miami. It is well known throughout the State. Is that right, Mr. Bloom? It is not something that's special throughout the State. Redevelopment authorities, sophisticated Redevelopment authorities have done this repeatedly; is that correct? William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Correct. Chairman Teele: But it has never been done by this CRA. Mr. Bloom: Correct. Chairman Teele: OK. So the point is, is that I want to make sure that everybody is fully disclosed. I want to make sure the Manager is disclosed, the Mayor has knowledge of it, and we need to make the rounds in briefing everyone. And I think it's very, very important. Now, the thing that concerns me is the transparency between an RFP (Request for Proposals) and not being in a preselection mode, because if we have, for example, zoning requests coming up by a particular developer to rezone to do the development and we're doing an RFP, I want to make sure that it's not something that's arguably a preselection. And I don't know how to get around that. You follow what I'm saying, Bill? So I want very, very — transparency in what we're doing here. But this essentially is a request by a developer to assist him in the redevelopment of an area that has a slither that's a hold -out. And it should be done, and it can be done, and it has been done, but it's never been done in the City of Miami. And knowing how things work around here, it could wind up being something that a news story gets written that has a totally unintended consequence. So I want to make sure that it's very clear to everybody with memos and documentation, et cetera. And when is the next Commission meeting? Unidentified Speaker: The 23`d Chairman Teele: The 23rd. And what we will do is we'll call a Commission meeting, say, for 2 o'clock, or 20 minutes before whenever the Chairman decides to reconvene. We'll have to set it, Johnny, say — Vice Chairman Gort: We have to get with (inaudible), see what time Walter is (inaudible). Chairman Teele: But tentatively, we'll set it for 2 o'clock on the Thursday — Mr. Judy: Next Thursday? Chairman Teele: No. A week from Thursday, the 23`d. OK? And I apologize, Dick, but I just think it's important that every Board Member knows exactly — Mr. Judy: It's sort of to learn the things we can do and that we could have been doing for 20 years. Board Member Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: Right. Mr. Judy: That's interesting. 98 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: And I really would like for a legal opinion to be a part of this, as well. Mr. Judy: We have it. Chairman Teele: OK. All right. And I think it's important that Commissioner Winton — because this is his district. Mr. Judy: He called me on it. I explained it to him, and I gave him a briefing on it. Chairman Teele: All right. OK. Mr. Judy: From the Agenda. It was in the Agenda. Chairman Teele: I apologize. 99 CRA 3/13/00 28. LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE MIAMI-DADE TRANSIT AUTHORITY ("MDTA") FOR PARKING BETWEEN 2ND AVENUE AND 3RD AVENUE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 11T" STREET. Chairman Teele: A resolution authorizing the CRA (Community Redevelopment Authority) to enter into a lease agreement with the Miami -Dade Transportation Authority for parking between 2nd Avenue and 3`d Avenue and 11 th Street. Vice Chairman Gort: Move it. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): That's very — it's critical for the development — Vice Chairman Gort: Move it. Board Member Regalado: Second. Mr. Judy: -- make it redevelopment by the private sector. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner — Board Member Winton: Second. Chairman Teele: -- Gort. Seconded by Commissioner Winton. All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-24 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") TO NEGOTIATE A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE MIAMI-DADE TRANSIT AUTHORITY ("MDTA") FOR PARKING BETWEEN 2ND AVENUE AND 3RD AVENUE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF I ITH STREET. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 100 CRA 3/13/00 Upon being seconded by Board Member Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 101 CRA 3/13/00 29. UPDATE REGARDING SAWYER'S WALK PROPOSAL. Chairman Teele: Update on Sawyer's Walk. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): I sent the letter, like you said, and told them that they have no rights and power. We haven't heard from them. Chairman Teele: How much time did we give them to respond? Mr. Judy: Sixty days. Vice Chairman Gort: There's so much land in there, it's unbelievable. Chairman Teele: OK. Does everyone understand that this is the Sawyer's Walk issue? Board Member Winton: Yes. Chairman Teele: And that this is a purported termination of or at least clarification of the termination of the development rights that were never really granted? Mr. Judy: Right. They never had them. Chairman Teele: But this has been going on now for how many years? Mr. Judy: Well, since 19 — Chairman Teele: I think it's since '87. Vice Chairman Gort: Way before I came in, for sure. Chairman Teele: Is that — Mr. Judy: Sawyer, yeah. Chairman Teele: -- ' 87? Mr. Judy: ' 87. Chairman Teele: And we're just trying to clean it up and — Mr. Judy: We have to. We just have to do it. We have massive amounts of development opportunities that just have been held up for years. Chairman Teele: All right. CRA 3/13/00 102 ". 30. UPDATE RE REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL OF LYRIC VILLAGE HOUSING JOINT VENTURE (ST. JOHN'S CDC AND RELATED HOUSING, INC.) Chairman Teele: Is there anyone here from Saint John's Development Corporation? Is there a brief update on the Saint John's CDC (Community Development Corporation)? With the notice being complained about, I'm very hesitant to take up anything that could be considered that we did something without people being aware of it. Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman? Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Gort: In looking at the overpass that we have within Overtown — and I was talking to the Manager the other day — not only in Overtown, but throughout the City of Miami, somehow, there's so much land, and I was wondering if there's — that we should look in to see what kind of use we can give to those lands. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): That's what we're trying to do, is get it unencumbered. Vice Chairman Gort: We're doing the parking lot in there, because that's what we need there. But there's other areas that I'd like to see, because you can really improve the area by beautifying or doing something. DOT (Department of Transportation) is not doing it. Mr. Judy: Sure. Trying to get control of it. Vice Chairman Gort: They're not maintaining it. They don't have a budget. So we need to look into that, and we need to improve those areas. And if we can maximize and use it, we should. Chairman Teele: I couldn't agree with you more. And I think one of the things that we've been asking for is a design standard on fencing and — that would be unique to Overtown. And I think if we could hurry up and get that before us. You know, fencing doesn't have to look like hurricane barbed wire fence. I mean, you know, and part of the thing that detracts is the way we've allowed the DOT to fence the area. So again, Mr. Tyler, we're looking for you to move that forward at the next opportunity. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): It's moving as we speak. Chairman Teele: All right. 103 CRA 3/13/00 31. DISCUSS/DEFER CONSIDERATION OF WHITE PAPER SETTING FORTH BLACK OWNERSHIP EQUITY AND REDEVELOPMENT PARTICIPATION PROGRAM. Chairman Teele: The next item is a resolution approving of white paper. Basically, the white paper simply states that wherever possible, we're going to try to preserve the historical ownership of land. Is that right? And we're going to do everything within our legal power when we take property that — Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Or if we're using it within a proposal. We don't have to be taking it. The owners — the black owners of that were going to have the opportunity to participate in an equity basis and/or if they own more than 51 percent of the property, then they can be developers. So we give them, in each of these -- this policy will be applied on each individual project, rather than a general policy, because the economics of every project is different. It's very difficult to go into a complex white paper, position paper on a general basis. It's rather to lay an outline and then do it on a project basis, and it comes back to you people. Chairman Teele: The City of Miami has had a policy similar to this since 1982, when it started the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), but it has never had a policy. One of the things we asked for is a written policy. For example, on all of the RFP's (Requests for Proposals) that have gone out, like the Sawyer's Walk Project, it gave to the original property owners greater rights in its proposal, in any bid that was submitted. And therefore, you know, the Sawyers were, quite frankly, very successful, because all of that land that Poinciana Park is on now — Poinciana Village and the land behind it was owned by the Sawyers, and, quite frankly, taken or acquired by the City of Miami, the CRA, for redevelopment purposes. So what we're trying to do is to get a document that basically provides for more of a legislative policy framework. Mr. Judy: Some direction, yeah. Chairman Teele: An overlap. This, itself, has no meaning, except as it relates to a particular piece of land that it may be applied to. Board Member Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton. Board Member Winton: I have probably half a dozen questions in this. Chairman Teele: Let's defer that for the next meeting. Board Member Winton: Yeah, could I? I was wondering if it's time sensitive. Chairman Teele: It can be deferred till the next meeting. Board Member Winton: Thank you. Chairman Teele: Without objection. 104 CRA 3/13/00 32. WAIVE COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND AWARD CONTRACT TO THE GREATER MIAMI SERVICES CORPS IN CONNECTION WITH VEGETATIVE CUTTING AND CLEAN-UP OF THE CRA OWNED LOTS AND CERTAIN RIGHTS -OF -WAY OF THE OVERTOWN SUB -AREA (SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DISTRICT) OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA ($96,000). Chairman Teele: Report to the Board. The Greater Miami Service Corps. And again, I will tell you, you know, we approved this a year ago. The Greater Miami Service Corps is a County -sponsored agency that goes out, picks up children in — 17, 18, sort of like the Job Corps — and they give them formal classroom instructions, and then they put them to work in environmental areas. And the airport has always had a team. The School Board has always had a team. It's an expensive team by — this is not just hiring four dollar ($4) an hour, five dollar ($5) an hour people. This is an investment in helping the kids to learn, go to school and learn good employment principles. And it is the kind of way that gives you, in effect, a cadre of people -- What is a team, six people or ten? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Ten. Chairman Teele: Ten people that will be up doing environmental work in the area. One of the number one problems that we hear from people like Mr. Post is how the City doesn't police the area in Park West. Well, with this team, these people will be out cleaning up the area. But they'll be doing more than just cleaning up. We also will be helping them with their training. Board Member Winton: Is that in the budget? Chairman Teele: It's in the budget. Board Member Winton: Move it. Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Chairman Teele: Moved and seconded. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed? 105 CRA 3/13/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-25 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") TO RETAIN THE GREATER MIAMI SERVICES CORPS ON A NON-COMPETITIVE BASIS IN CONNECTION WITH VEGETATIVE CUTTING AND CLEAN-UP OF LOTS OWNED BY THE CRA AND CERTAIN RIGHTS -OF -WAY IN THE OVERTOWN SUB -AREA OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA FOR A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS AND EXTENDED PERIODS AT A COST OF $96,000 PER CLEAN-UP TEAM. (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: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): The issue there is the competitive bidding on the contract. That would be over forty-five hundred dollars ($4500). Chairman Teele: Well, let me tell you something. This should not even be a contract. This should be a cooperative agreement. This should be a cooperative agreement. Vice Chairman Gort: Sure. It's a program adopted by the City. Chairman Teele: It's a program that has been adopted, and I don't know why — you know, this thing has gone round and round. This is a cooperative agreement by any standard, shape or form. Now, if we have returned it as a contract, that's one thing. But every governmental body — it's a cooperative service agreement. That's what it should be. And the Federal regulations provide for cooperative agreements between Government and universities, and certain other institutions that are providing a service. 106 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Bloom: It's not for profit. In our interpretation of this, we followed — these are the City's procurement policies, even though they are inaudible, director of the CRA would recommend to the Board that it is in the best interest of the Board and the City to be waived, and that there is a two -third majority, then it can be approved on that basis. Chairman Teele: So the motion would be to waive competitive bidding and to award the contract. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): It is a contract, though. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Under a cooperative services agreement. Vice Chairman Gort: An emergency. Mr. Judy: And it's a contract. This is a non-profit operation. It is not a government entity. Chairman Teele: Is there a motion? Vice Chairman Gort: Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton — I mean Commissioner Gort. Seconded by Commissioner Winton as stated. Guys, I'm telling you, you know, this thing is — we're becoming tied up in our own bureaucracy now. If you go out and you get all of those County agreements, every County department, I'd be willing to bet you there's -- none of them are done as a bid waiver. This is a cooperative agreement that does not require a bid waiver. But in an abundance of caution, let's do it. Mr. Bloom: Mr. Chairman, just a point of order. I checked with the County Attorney's Office — Board Member Winton: I can't hear you. Mr. Bloom: (Inaudible.) Chairman Teele: Then I stand corrected again. Board Member Winton: I couldn't hear what he said. Chairman Teele: He said — Mr. Judy: That's the point we're making in doing it. It's so easy to do it right. Chairman Teele: He said that in the past, the County has done it always as a bid waiver, and this is the way that they have done it, with a two-thirds vote. And they have a number of these contracts out, right? Mr. Bloom: (Inaudible.) Chairman Teele: OK. 107 CRA 3/13/00 Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Chairman Teele: All right. So we have a motion and a second. All those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Regalado: Aye. Board Member Winton: Aye. Vice Chairman Gort: Aye. Chairman Teele: Aye. Those opposed? Board Member Sanchez: One opposed. Chairman Teele: One opposed. All right. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA R-00-26 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") TO WAIVE COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND TO AWARD A CONTRACT TO THE GREATER MIAMI SERVICES CORPS ON A NON-COMPETITIVE BASIS IN CONNECTION WITH VEGETATIVE CUTTING AND CLEAN-UP OF LOTS OWNED BY THE CRA AND CERTAIN RIGHTS -OF -WAY IN THE OVERTOWN SUB -AREA OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA FOR A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS AND EXTENDED PERIODS AT A COST OF $96,000 PER CLEAN-UP TEAM. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None 108 CRA 3/13/00 33. AMEND THE CRA BUDGET LINE ITEM AMOUNT ALLOCATED FOR GENERAL LEGAL SERVICES PROVIDED BY HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP TO $175,000. Chairman Teele: All right. Number 24. You want to explain what we're doing here, Mr. Judy? Board Member Regalado: Yes. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Yes. We're increasing the budget item for general services from our lawyer. Board Member Winton: From what to what? I mean from what to — Mr. Judy: From one hundred thousand to one hundred and seventy-five thousand. Board Member Winton: From one hundred? Mr. Judy: To a hundred and seventy-five thousand. Chairman Teele: Well I think it's very — look, look, let me just tell you — Vice Chairman Gort: Is it being done in two resolutions, or are you talking about different figures? The total is going to be an additional seventy-five thousand. Mr. Judy: It'd be another resolution for — Vice Chairman Gort: So it'd be a total of a hundred and seventy-five. Mr. Judy: Yes, sir, right. Vice Chairman Gort: So it's not going to be a hundred and seventy-five plus seventy-five. Mr. Judy: That's right, sir. Chairman Teele: Look, this is the problem -- and you're going to have this problem come right back when the accountants come back in two months. You're going to raise their amount. We are going through a clean-up process. We're dealing with contracts from 1987 that nobody has dealt with. These people were awarded. There's never been any documentation. We have a series of actions, all of which go back at least seven to ten years that we're asking the attorney to deal with. I will say I make a point of not calling, because I know, you know, as a lawyer, lawyers charge for their services. I've reviewed the bill. The bills are reasonable. Their fees are very reasonable. But we have a lot of cleaning up to do here. And this is not over until we get control of the properties that have been forwarded. Vice Chairman Gort: It's two different phases. Chairman Teele: We're in two different phases. 109 CRA 3/13/00 Board Member Winton: Is this -- When I was looking at the resolution, it says there a resolution for a seventy-five thousand dollar ($75,000) increase in — Chairman Teele: Number 25. Vice Chairman Gort: It's not a fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) increase. Board Member Winton: Yeah. It's twenty — it's seventy-five thousand in each CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) District is what the resolutions say, isn't it? Vice Chairman Gort: It's a total of a hundred and fifty thousand — twenty-five thousand. Board Member Winton: No, it's — William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Commissioner, the seventy-five thousand dollars is one for the sales tax legislation. Board Member Winton: Right, which is separate. Mr. Bloom: Which is separate. Board Member Winton: Yes. Mr. Bloom: So that's seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) just for what is perceived to be the cost to work the legislation through the legislature. The second is to increase the line item for general legal services (inaudible), as the Chairman stated, cleaning up old — Board Member Winton: To which CRA, though? When I got handed resolutions, there is a resolution for the Overtown/Park West -- Chairman Teele: This is primarily — it's primarily -- Board Member Winton: -- and a separate resolution for Omni. Chairman Teele: It's primarily for the Overtown/Park West. Board Member Winton: So is it a one — is it one seventy-five thousand dollar ($75,000) pad? Mr. Bloom: Yes, sir. Mr. Judy: Yes. Board Member Winton: Not two of them. OK. Chairman Teele: Motion by Commissioner — 110 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Judy: Is this on the seventy-five? Chairman Teele: This is on Item Number — Mr. Judy: Twenty-four. Chairman Teele: -- twenty-four. Mr. Judy: On the seventy-five thousand? Vice Chairman Gort: Twenty-four, yes. Mr. Judy: OK. We have to amend that to state that it is for both the Omni and the Southeast Overtown/Park West area. The Commissioner is correct. We missed that. We had it on all the others. Mr. Bloom: (Inaudible) seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000). Chairman Teele: All right. As amended, is there a motion, please? Board Member Winton: Well, I want to make sure I understand what he thinks is said there. Chairman Teele: What he's saying is that — is that to amend this to reflect that the resolutions relate jointly to the Overtown, and not separately for each one. Board Member Winton: Right. Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Chairman Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Gort. Objection? All in favor say "aye." Board Member Regalado: Aye. Board Member Winton: Aye. Vice Chairman Gort: Aye. Chairman Teele: Aye. Opposed? Board Member Sanchez: One opposed. Chairman Teele: Record one "no" vote. Board Member Winton: One no. 111 CRA 3/13/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-27 OMNI/CRA 00-20 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO AMEND THE CRA BUDGET LINE ITEM AMOUNT ALLOCATED FOR GENERAL LEGAL SERVICES PROVIDED BY HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP TO $175,000. (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: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None 112 CRA 3/13/00 34. AMEND THE CRA BUDGET TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL BUDGET LINE ITEM AMOUNT OF $751000 IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURSUIT OF LEGISLATION TO CREATE A SALES TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FOR THE PROVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES BY HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP. Chairman Teele: On Item 24 — 25, a motion. Moved by — moved by — Vice Chairman Gort: This is — this motion is to go ahead and to do the legislation, put the package together. Chairman Teele: Exactly. Vice Chairman Gort: Tax increment, sales increment. Chairman Teele: Exactly. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Gort. Seconded by Commissioner? Board Member Regalado: Second. Chairman Teele: Regalado. All those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Regalado: Aye. Board Member Winton: Aye. Vice Chairman Gort: Aye. Chairman Teele: Aye. All opposed? Board Member Sanchez: One opposed. Chairman Teele: All right. 113 CRA 3/13/00 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-28 OMNI/CRA 00-21 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO AMEND THE CRA BUDGET TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL BUDGET LINE ITEM AMOUNT OF $75,000 IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURSUIT OF LEGISLATION TO CREATE A SALES TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FOR THE PROVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES BY HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP. (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: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None 114 CRA 3/13/00 35. RETROACTIVELY APPROVING THE LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") AND IOS CAPITAL, INC. FOR THE LEASE OF A PHOTOCOPIER MACHINE. Chairman Teele: Item Number 26, a resolution approving the lease agreement between the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) for photocopiers, et cetera. Motion? Board Member Sanchez: So move. Chairman Teele: Moved. Is there a second? Board Member Winton: Second. Chairman Teele: Second. All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-29 OMNI/CRA 00-22 A RESOLUTION RETROACTIVELY APPROVING THE LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") AND IOS CAPITAL, INC. FOR THE LEASE OF A PHOTOCOPIER MACHINE. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 115 CRA 3/13/00 36. UPDATE REGARDING STATUS OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. Chairman Teele: All right. The final item is the item relating to the Interlocal Agreement, and the funding, and all of those other issues. And I'm going to just ask simply, has the Interlocal Agreement been prepared, Mr. Attorney, Mr. City Attorney? Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney, City of Miami): Yes, sir. In fact, Mr. Judy signed off on it and the City Clerk signed off, attesting to the signature, and I will sit down with the City Manager tomorrow. It's in a form where I will be able to initial off. Mr. Bloom has already initialed off. Chairman Teele: Has this -- Is this the Agreement that is in conformance with what Mr. Beatty — Mr. — the Manager and myself agreed on? Mr. Vilarello: Generally, yes. It still does have to go back to the Oversight Board for approval. Chairman Teele: Is this Agreement satisfactory to the Community Development Director? Mr. Vilarello: We have gotten all of Ms. Warren's comments, Ms. Henry's comments, and I believe we've incorporated most of those comments. I would like to have — give them an opportunity to make sure that we've, in fact, incorporated those comments, but I'm quite comfortable that we have. Chairman Teele: But the Agreement has been executed properly by the Executive Director? Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: All right. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): And that's on an interim basis. We have 90 days to look at this and bring some other facts into play. Chairman Teele: No, hold, hold, hold it. No, no, no. This is going to be the Agreement. Now, what happens after that, you can change anything any time. Mr. Judy: That's what I was saying. That's right. Chairman Teele: But let's don't tie those two things together. Mr. Judy: I didn't. I just said — Chairman Teele: This is the only Agreement that's on the table. Mr. Judy: That's correct. Chairman Teele: All right. Please, so — Board Member Winton: Mr. Chairman, what are we talking about? 116 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Judy: The Interlocal Agreement. Chairman Teele: The Interlocal Agreement, which has become a major drama for some reason. I've never understood what the drama is. I've never understood what the issue is. But the thing is this: The City — Board Member Winton: Is it the Omni or — Chairman Teele: This is both. The City of Miami and the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) have never had a formalized Agreement. They've functioned for all these years, but they've never had an Agreement. For some reason, it has become of great importance that there be an Agreement. I fully agree. We've reached an accord on the Agreement. I thought we had an Agreement written up. Apparently, it wasn't written up, and it has had an implication as it relates to the City basically saying they cannot release funding, they cannot release dollars, they cannot release this, other than basic operating dollars, until there is an Agreement. And I've said, don't play games, sign the Agreement, give them whatever Agreement. I've not even read it, so -- to show you how greatly I attach to it. We've got enough lawyers reading and writing Agreements, because the City Attorney was responsible for doing it. Now, the big issue has been the funding for the CRA, which has been voted upon by this Commission, by the City Commission, has been held up. As you know, as a part of the five-year plan for the Community Development funding, and as a part of the overall Agreement with the Oversight Board, the Oversight Board strongly supported the notion that the CRA would be given the funding to operate and develop a full plan. And apparently, that has created — and people have started to call me saying, well, you know, this person is upset, that person is upset. And it's very simple. The Commission has voted that twenty- five million dollars ($25,000,000), five million dollars ($5,000,000) a year will go to the CRA, beginning this past year, October. None of that has been drawn down. In addition, there is an obligation of approximately three million dollars ($3,000,000). And at some point — and this is not the place to debate it. I think the place to debate it is with the City Commission — the issue is going to be whether or not we're going to move forward with the redevelopment in accordance with the Agreements that we have submitted in the Federal Government. Having said all of that, you know, personalities and whatever need to get checked. I think the CRA has cause for funding of about six million dollars ($6,000,000), which I have said, you know, based upon the agreements that had been made previously by the Finance Director and the Budget Director, which included that the bond indebtedness, which was sort of issued by the City but put on the CRA's books would be removed. That was removed last year. Now, I've been advised that it's been charged back this year, which was the early on discussion. We agreed, I agreed and the Commission agreed, I thought, that given the fact that the six million dollars ($6,000,000) was improperly diverted that we would just waive all of that, move the bond indebtedness over to the City's books, which there had been an agreement on, and that we would begin to wipe the slate clean. And at some point — it's a City issue, not a CRA issue, because it's the City who's got to decide this, not the CRA. But I want the CRA members to understand that these are the two issues on the table. The six million dollars ($6,000,000) and the bonds, which were supposed to be moved from the CRA's books to the City books -- and they've been paid by the City for the last two years, by the way, and now they're being back -charged. And I think it's important that we get an agreement that the CRA waived its rights to the six million dollars ($6,000,000). The City agrees to pay the bonds. These are bonds that were issued back in '87, or '86 or, '84 or whenever. And the other issue relates to the five million dollars ($5,000,000) a year, plus the other issues. Mr. Bloom. 117 CRA 3/13/00 William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that (inaudible). Chairman Teele: Yeah, but see, I don't want to get into -- How can I fight -- You know, it's going to be very awkward for us to fight ourselves. I mean, as long as this Board is the City Commission and the Board — I recognize that there are legal rights. And what I've said repeatedly is I have no interest in playing that out. If the City would agree to take the bonds, which arguably were the City bonds all along, then we could execute an agreement that basically releases the City on the six million dollars ($6,000,000), because it's, quote, dollars for dollars at that point. I know that there are some issues that the lawyers are going to say that I'm wrong on. And I respect you, Mr. Bloom, as our counsel. Board Member Winton: Mr. Chairman, I don't understand anything about the -- This has come up now twice today. I didn't understand it the first time, and I don't understand it now. And it's sounding like, at least at this point that I can't determine whether or not there are signed agreements that settle these issues or not. Chairman Teele: There are no signed agreements. Board Member Winton: So if there aren't signed agreements, and there's some issue that involves this Board, it seems to me that we have to — don't we have to make some sort of decision? Chairman Teele: Well I -- What I don't want to do, and I've said to the Manager repeatedly, I think these decisions should be debated by the City Commission, where you have the benefit of hearing the Manager's side — Vice Chairman Gort: And everybody's side. Chairman Teele: -- and all side 3 at one time, because ultimately, the City Commission has to make the decision, not the CRA. But it affects the CRA in that it is our books, and we are fiduciaries. And that's what Mr. Bloom is saying. I can't give up our right to six million dollars ($6,000,000), which I've said a hundred times I'm willing to do unilaterally, because it's not mine to give up. But given the fact that there are dollars on both sides of the coin, of the table on this thing — Vice Chairman Gort: It's a tradeoff. Chairman Teele: -- we need to try to trade it off and clean it up. The last thing the City needs now is more financial mess in the newspapers. Board Member Winton: Well, yeah. And I heard Commissioner Gort say it's a tradeoff. But frankly, I don't have any idea if it's a tradeoff or not a tradeoff. I'm — I don't — I'm clueless about this. Chairman Teele: Well, take comfort in this: I was not here when any of it was done. Board Member Winton: Right. 118 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: Most of the Commission was not here when any of it was done. Vice Chairman Gort: Right. Board Member Regalado: All of them were not. Chairman Teele: Huh? Board Member Regalado: All of them were not. Chairman Teele: You were here. Board Member Regalado: No, I wasn't. Chairman Teele: You were here on the six million dollars ($6,000,000). Board Member Regalado: Oh, yeah, oh, yeah. (LAUGHTER) Chairman Teele: So it's just something that I think is better if the CRA staff or the counsel, really, the counsel should take the lead. The City Attorney is our Attorney. And he sort of has both hats to wear, although we have special counsel who is responsible. But I think it's important for the City Attorney, for Mr. Bloom and the Finance people to come in and brief you individually. And it's my understanding that we're going to try to have a full discussion on this in April in the City Commission meeting. And I just wanted to try to get that. But I don't want to try to have the issue out, because I think it puts the Manager in an unfair position, and he really wasn't here when most of it was done, either. (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECORD) Chairman Teele: No, ma'am. That's a different — we're talking about a different entity. We're talking now about an Interlocal Agreement between the CRA and the City of Miami on how we're going to operate. And that has never been done. There's — it's sort — look at it as a memorandum of understanding. Board Member Sanchez: Move to adjourn. Mr. Judy: But we have to approve -- We need to approve the Agreement. Chairman Teele: Which Agreement? Mr. Judy: The Interlocal Agreement we have, so we can continue. Mr. Vilarello: That's already been approved. Mr. Judy: OK. 119 CRA 3/13/00 Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, the six million dollars ($6,000,000) issue on a transfer of the property under MSEA (Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority) is not addressed by this Interlocal Agreement. Chairman Teele: I understand that. Mr. Vilarello: However, the debt service is. And Mr. Bloom and I are trying to be -- very carefully letting him advise the CRA Board, and I will advise the City Commission. And my review of this Agreement, so that you understand clearly, has been clearly to protect the interests of the City. With regard to that issue, you should discuss with Mr. Bloom how that's addressed. Mr. Bloom: The Interlocal Agreement provides — Chairman Teele: We can't hear you. Mr. Bloom: The Interlocal Agreement clearly provides that the CRA is responsible for the debt, and the City, if it so decides, would pay any shortfall if the CRA funds are not adequate, as determined by the City Commission, to pay the debt. Mr. Vilarello: Now, the City has been picking up the shortfall for all these years. However, the TIF (Tax Increment Funding) funds are the funds that are pledged to this debt service. Chairman Teele: But as you know, the City — the CRA has not had sufficient -- Vice Chairman Gort: Right. Chairman Teele: -- TIF funds to do it. I mean, first of all, -let's start from this: The CRA is dead broke, and we always need to understand that. It cannot afford one staff person. And without the City of Miami's support, the CRA does not exist. OK? We're in a negative cash flow by at least a million dollars ($1,000,000) a year, from the very beginning. Board Member Winton: How are we paying for all this stuff that we're sending RFP's (Requests for Proposals) out on? Chairman Teele: Because it's funded by the Community Development Block Grant funding. Vice Chairman Gort: CDBG funds. Chairman Teele: CDBG funds. Board Member Winton: Has the — do we have those funds? Chairman Teele: Yes. And it has been funded that way for the last -- That's why I keep talking about this whole issue of the redevelopment, and getting these Tax Increment Districts, and moving on the Camillus House, because unless and until we move the TIF, you know, we're going to be a drain on the City of 120 CRA 3/13/00 Miami's Community Development finance, which, in effect, affects all of the districts in the City. And that has been the challenge, and that is the problem. Vice Chairman Gort: We have a motion on the floor. Chairman Teele: So I think it's very sobering, again, to understand that this is really not Monopoly money. This is real money. And but for the support of the City of Miami through the general fund and through the Community Development fund, there would be no CRA. Board Member Winton: Mr. Chairman, I would like to, maybe at our next CRA meeting, then, have a presentation from staff that kind of walks us through the budget. You're saying we're broke. And now I looked at something here that talked — showed a revenue side of twenty-two million, or thirty-one million or some big number. I don't know which one. Chairman Teele: That is the budget that has been approved by the CRA, and has been approved by the City of Miami Commission. Vice Chairman Gort: That's the next five years budget. Chairman Teele: That's a five-year plan budget. There's an ordinance. There is a document and — but it's all subject to availability -- Board Member Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: -- in the budget. Now, there are reserves. For example, when I was at the County, I gave the CRA — what was it? — a million or two million dollars ($2,000,000)? — a payment in lieu of taxes. But that money is all gone now. Inaudible Comments Chairman Teele: No, it was a million -five. And so that sort of — the CRA has cash in accounts. The CRA has a two million dollar ($2,000,000) on the bonds that are now before the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) for a headquarters building. I mean, those are commitments that were made five years ago, seven years ago, and those cash reserves continue to be there. But for operating purposes, Johnny — those are capital — but for operating purposes, the CRA operates based solely upon the ability of the City of Miami to say that we want to continue with the redevelopment and a redevelopment plan. And in many ways, you know, that's why the County moved so quickly to get those bonds out, because if we were to disestablish the CRA, then those bonds would have never been able to be issued. So they ran in and locked us in on that for the Performing Arts Center. But I think it's very helpful to have that policy discussion. And maybe we need to have very few items on the next meeting, and have some discussion items in which the Commission and the — I mean the staff can deal with it, because again, we get the same problem with City Commission meetings. We never have enough time to discuss the things. And maybe we can invite the Manager or we could have a joint meeting with the CRA and the City — that would be a novelty — and advertise it as such as our next meeting. Board Member Winton: Maybe that's a good idea. 121 CRA 3/13/00 Chairman Teele: All right. And we could wear both hats. Vice Chairman Gort: We could have a special meeting one day at one time. Chairman Teele: Sure, a joint meeting. All right. Is there any further -- Mr. Manager, did you have anything that you wanted to add or subtract or — Donald Warshaw (Interim City Manager, City of Miami): No, other than the issue of the City Commission having final say, I think that (inaudible) how much money is available (inaudible) access to those dollars. Chairman Teele: All right. Thank you. All right. Motion to adjourn by Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Regalado: Second. Chairman Teele: You're not going to vote "no"? Board Member Sanchez: No. Chairman Teele: All those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Sanchez: I was tricked on that one. The Board (Collectively): Aye. The following motion was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-30 OMNI/CRA 00-23 A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) MEETING FOR THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST AND OMNI DISTRICTS. 122 CRA 3/13/00 Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Johnny Winton Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Chairman Arthur Teele NAYS: None ABSENT: None 123 CRA 3/13/00 There being no further business to come before the Community Redevelopment Agency for the Southeast Overtown/Park West and Omni Districts, the meeting was adjourned at 9:07 p.m. ATTEST: WALTER J. FOEMAN, City Clerk JOSEFINA ARGUDIN, Assistant City Clerk ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR., Chairman (S E A L) 124 CRA 3/13/00