The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSEOPW-CRA-2000-05-22-Discussion Item 3005,'17.2000 I4ED 14:13 FAX 3053724646 February 21, 2000 SENT VIA MAIL AND FAx Mr. Ted H. Weitzel President Indian River Investment Communities 200 N.W. 70, Street Miami, Florida 33130 001.'001 900 e �•' 9�ecayne .i COMMUNITY o�;ead REDEVELOPMENT A G E N c Y ,fey RE: RPP • r ;theZdevelopm ht rii 6d Pe e of Blocks -48, .55`; ind 56 in the S.E. Overti3Wol 4rk"West Coinmunity Redevelopment Pirea'`, Dear Mr. Wettiel: The �CkA`Board pia;; preliiaa decided ;' ., i13z. ,not td!exercise��fs option t'o enter into a coni=ab' with;Sa^yer's Walk t)Jtd.` to zed w p Blocks"5 anc '° the S.E. OveA".' ll? k W e elo st 56. ,e .Goza,M,unik3'- ft- &t,6tt b en�A3ea. `I?his i based upon+ > �cisioii R•as al o on ;:�...., � a'leg pxru 'that.Sawyer'Q�,�LY'a1.k�Lt��'�nps not Have any pr`o�e'ctable property 'intexes�"i�zecleve pp; l area;:aa '; at1he:lCity has tie right tn't ecide not to enter int'o ��a contract wi Sawyer's Wad; 7,td. everi'though iL. was Cho' 6h as the recommehded proposdi in the above identified •'I• d ? �� ',�.,`' A ;' h.+ a AccordiilgIyshouid you wish to present -any legal arguiiients to the"•eontrary please do so within the next sixty days: -Should }"du have a o, Questions ori'kish to .. w discuss this nia4er'ii4sko not hesitate;io: contact the ulitlersi ried;' �' S1T1CCi'�Ij�^your§ ICit f1Vlilimi Co unit Redev '.. �, y, p ment Agency cc: CRA Board MIA1 4J02606 vl s�, 43C M,am; Flonoe 33131 Tel. (305) 575-4 e4 -aK 37-4646 -q;:5Cj5xV1 SEI _! OPW / C�tA I MAY 17 2020 15:26 3253724646 PAGE.61 UNITED STATES -. LOS ANG ELES WHITE � CASE ASIA MIAMI NEWYORK LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ALMATY PALO ALTO WAS HINGTON, D.0 FIRST UNION FINANCIAL ANKARA BANGKOK CENTER BOMBAY EUROPE 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD HANOI '10 CHI BRATISLAVA MINH CITY BRUSSELS MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131-2352 HONG KONG JAKARTA BUDAPEST FRANKFORT H ELSINKI TELEPHONE: (I - 305) 37 1 -2700 SINGAPORE TOKYO ISTANBUL FACSIMILE: (1-305)358-5744 LONDON Moscow DIRECT DIAL: 995-5261 MIDDLE EAST _ PARIS BAHRAIN PRAGUE JEDDAH STOCKHOLM RIYADH WARSAW AFRICA JOHANNESBURG E C E I V E D LATIN AMERICA r ,� MEXICO CITY SAO PAULO Fcr-IVctj May 12, 2000 O P If Richard H. Judy Executive Director Community Redevelopment Agency 300 Biscayne Boulevard Way, Suite 430 Miami, Florida 33131 Re: RFP for the Unified Redevelopment of Blocks 45, 55 and 56 in the Southeast Overtown/Park West Community Redevelopment Area Dear Mr. Judy: Our firm represents Indian River Investment Communities and Sawyers Walk Ltd., the latter of which is the successful proposer for the redevelopment of the project referenced above. We are writing in response to your letter of February 21, 2000 in which you indicated that the CRA Board has "preli.-ninarily" decided not to exercise its "Option" to enter into a contract vdth Sawyers Walk Ltd. to redevelop blocks 45, 55 and 56 in the Southeast Overtown/Park West Community Redevelopment area. Your letter indicated that the decision was based upon a legal opinion that Sawyers Walk Ltd. does not have any protectable property interest to redevelop this area and that the city has the right to decide not to enter into a contract with Sawyers Walk Ltd. even though it was chosen as the recommended proposer in the above identified RFP. Your letter concluded by inviting Sawyers Walk to present any legal arguments to the contrary. We are extremely puzzled by your letter and by the position taken by the CRA. We certainly do not understand what you mean when you say the CRA Board has "preliminarily" decided not to exercise its option. We don't know what you mean by preliminarily nor do we know what you are referring to when you say option. As far as we understand it, there is a D ; srlj 5=02i t SEOPWICRA B' WHITE & CASE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP Richard H. Judy Page 2 contract between Sawyers Walk Ltd. and the City of Miami pursuant to which the City of Miami is absolutely obligated to enter into a lease agreement with Sawyers Walk for the above - referenced property consistent with the business terms set out in the City's request for proposal and Sawyers Walk's response thereto. Moreover, pursuant to Fla. Stat. §163.398, the power to make and execute contracts for the disposal of property under community redevelopment programs is reserved to the City of Miami, not to the CRA. Finally, even if there is no contract, there is a sufficient understanding under state law that Sawyers Walk has rights in the property such that it does have a protectable property interest. In its RFP, the City of Miami invited the public to submit proposals for the redevelopment of the above blocks and promised that the City of Miami would cause the City Manager to negotiate a lease with the successful proposer. Sawyers Walk duly submitted its proposal for the development of blocks 45, 55 and 56 and proposed to enter into a lease with business terms similar to these in its affiliate's lease covering the adjacent Poinciana Village project. By resolution dated July 11, 1991, the City determined Sawyers Walk to be the successful proposer and directed the City Manager to negotiate a lease with Sawyers Walk. Thereafter, and at the request of the City, Sawyers Walk agreed to postpone the leasing of blocks 45, 55 and 56 until Sawyers Walks' affiliate could complete the first three phases of the Poinciana Village project, a condition which was not included in the RFP. Sawyers Walk then proceeded through its affiliate to pour thousands of hours and millions of dollars into the Poinciana Village project while the City dangled the lease on blocks 45, 46 and 55 as a carrot. Now that Phases 1, 2 and 3 of Poinciana Village are completed and Phase 4 is about to commence, the CRA unilaterally indicated that there is no obligation to enter into a lease with Sawyers Walk. The reality is that the City has a contractual or other legal obligation to negotiate a lease with Sawyers Walk. The City's failure to negotiate in good faith will be a breach of its obligations. In support of this, we call your attention to the case of Schloesser v. Dill 383 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1980). ' - It seems that the City never gets tired of playi_*ig political games with these parcels of land. The last time the City awarded development rights to these parcels to a developer, the City refused to enter into a lease with the developer until he had lined up his financing and then failed to cooperate in the closing of the financing. The suit alleged that what the City was really doing was trying to steer the property to a new developer who was of course politically better connected with the powers that be. That effort cost the City $2.6 million. If the City tries it again, I am confident that justice again will prevail and I would imagine that the news media would find it rather interesting that the City has not learned its lesson from its prior experience on these blocks. SBOPWI e WHITE & CASEr LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP Richard H. Judy Page 3 In closing, I urge that reason prevail and that the City Manager negotiate with Sawyers Walk the terms of the lease for the above property as was promised in the request for proposal and was ordered by the resolution of the City Commission dated July 11, 1991. Sincerely, CCK:jIp Charles C. Kline D; 5rOS-5� SE®PW l CRP t_