Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEOPW-CRA-2000-06-26 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI CRA MEETING MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON JUKE 26, 2000 PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Walter J. Foeman/City Clerk 0 ITEM NO. INDEX MINUTES OF CRA MEETING DUNE 26, 2000 SUBJECT 1. PROPOSE CRA TO PURCHASE CAMILLUS VOTING CONFLICT — VICE CHAIR WINTON (See #3) 2, DEFER CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT BETWEEN CRA AND CITY RELATED TO DISPUTE INVOLVING ANNUAL PAYMENT OF $300,000 BY CITY IN CONNECTION WITH [ 1 ] SERIES 1990 SPECIAL OBLIGATION DEBT ISSUED ON BEHALF OF CRA; [2] PARKING REVENUES COLLECTED BY CONTRACTOR FOR PROPERTY OWNED BY CRA ADJACENT TO MIAMI ARENA; [3] PAYMENT OF $559,522 TO SUPPORT CRA FOR 1997 THROUGH 1999 AND [4] CLAIMS CRA HAS AGAINST CITY WITH RESPECT TO LAND DEEDED TO CITY AND LATER SOLD TO MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY FOR MIAMI ARENA. LEGISLATION 6/26/00 DISCUSSION 2 6/26/00 SEOPW/CRA M-00-55 3-4 0 3. (A) (1) PROPOSE LETTER OF INTENT BETWEEN CRA AND CAMILLUS HOUSE; (2) AUTHORIZE CRA TO PURCHASE CAMILLUS HOUSE AT PRICE EQUAL TO APPRAISED VALUE DETERMINED BY MAI APPRAISAL, $2,400,000.00; (3) AUTHORIZE CRA TO CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS OF PROPERTY, $20,000.00 AND; AUTHORIZE CRA TO EXPEND $2,400,000.00 TO PURCHASE CAMILLUS HOUSE UTILIZING $1,000,000.00 IN HOPWA FUNDS AND $1,400,000.00 IN CDBG FUNDS. (See #1) (B) BOARD MEMBER REGALADO STATED IT SHOULD BE CITY'S PARKS DEPARTMENT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO STAFF MARGARET PACE PARK; STATED NEED FOR SECURITY AND PERSONNEL TO ENSURE SAFETY OF PARK, STIPULATED TO INCLUDE RESTROOMS IN FIRST PHASE OR AT LATEST, SECOND PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION. (See #1) (C) MANAGER STATES HE SUPPORTS CONCEPT BUT NOT PROCESS IN CONNECTION WITH PROPOSED PURCHASE OF CAMILLUS HOUSE; FURTHER STATING CAMILLUS HOUSE ACQUISITION SHOULD GO THROUGH NORMAL CDBG PROCESS (See #1). 4. (A) (1) AUTHORIZE CRA TO PROCEED WITH RFP FOR SELECTION OF CONTRACTOR TO CONSTRUCT PHASE I (A) AND I (B) IMPROVEMENTS OF MARGARET PACE PARK IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLANS PREPARED BY BERMELLO, AJAMIL & PARTNERS, INC., SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT AND CONTRACT TO BE PRESENTED TO BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR APPROVAL, AND (2) APPROVE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR PHASE II IMPROVEMENTS OF MARGARET PACE PARK. (B) BOARD MEMBER REGALADO STATED IT SHOULD BE CITY' S PARKS DEPARTMENT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO STAFF MARGARET PACE PARK; STATED NEED FOR SECURITY AND PERSONNEL TO ENSURE SAFETY OF PARK, STIPULATED TO INCLUDE RESTROOMS IN FIRST PHASE OR AT LATEST, SECOND PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION. 6/26/00 SEOPW/CRA R-00-56 5-16 6/26/00 OMNI/CRA R-00-35 17-24 5. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO FUNDING 6/26/00 AGREEMENT WITH CITY REGARDING FUNDING FOR SEOPW/CRA R-00-57 VARIOUS PROJECTS WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT AREA OMNI/CRA R-00 36 25-26 IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED CRA BUDGET. 6. DISCUSSION ON REPORT FROM MARCH 13, 2000 CRA 6/26/00 BOARD MEETING REGARDING STATUS OF DISCUSSION ALTERNATIVE SITES FOR MARLINS PARK. 27 7. DIRECT DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PLANNING TO 6/26/00 NEGOTIATE LEASE WITH FDOT TO LEASE TO CPA SEOPW/CRA R-00-58 LAND UNDER I-395 FROM BISCAYNE BOULEVARD UP 28-29 TO NW 3RD AVENUE, $1.00 PER YEAR FOR PURPOSE OF ALLOWING CRA TO CARRY OUT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, INCLUDING PARKING AND STORAGE OF MOVIE PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT. 8. INSTRUCT CRA ADMINISTRATION TO REQUEST OF 6/26/00 CONSULTANT FOR TECHNOLOGY CENTER OF THE SEOPW/CRA M-00-59 AMERICAS, MR. PAUL LAMBERT, TO MAKE HIS 30-33 NOTES PRESENTATION BEFORE CRA BOARD ON THIS SAME DATE AVAILABLE TO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (DDA); REQUEST THAT MR. LAMBERT FULLY COOPERATE WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF DDA AT CRA' S EXPENSE. 9. DISCUSSION REGARDING COORDINATION OF WATER 6/26/00 MAINS, CAPACITY OF WATER AND SEWER LINES TO DISCUSSION SERVICE NAP AND SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT IN 34-39 PARK WEST SUBAREA OF REDEVELOPMENT AREA, AND IMPACT FEES FOR WATER AND SEWER CONNECTION (WASH). 10. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT WITH 6/26/00 METRIC ENGINEERING, INC., TO PROVIDE DESIGN SEOPW/CRA R-00-60 AND ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO 40-43 CONSTRUCTION OF PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT 9Tx STREET MALL WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT AREA, $89,520.00, AND AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF CRA. 11. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT WITH 6/26/00 C.A.P. ENGINEERING CONSULTANT, INC. TO PROVIDE SEOPW/CRA R-00-61 ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO 44-50 CONSTRUCTION ON PARCELS P-1, P-5 AND P-7 WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT AREA, $40,000.00, AND AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF CRA. 12. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO AMENDMENT TO 6/26/00 EXTEND EXISTING AGREEMENT WITH GREATER SEOPW/CRA R-00-62 MIAMI NEIGHBORHOODS, INC., FOR ONE ADDITIONAL 51-54 YEAR, $75,000 PER YEAR. 13. AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, 6/26/00 ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT TO SEOPW/CRA R-00-63 NEGOTIATE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR 55-61 CONSTRUCTION OF HUD 202 HOUSING FACILITY FOR ELDERLY AT PARCEL P-I - JUBILEE PROJECT. 14. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO LEASES AT 6/26/00 MARKET RATES WITH LANDOWNERS OF PARCELS P-1 SEOPW/CRA R-00-64 THROUGH P-6 AND M-2 TO ALLOW CRA TO UTILIZE 62-64 PROPERTIES ON INTERIM BASIS PENDING COMPLETION OF ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS OR RESOLUTION OF TITLE ISSUES. 15. (A) AUTHORIZE CRA TO IMPLEMENT POLICY OF 6/26/00 COMMERCIAL REVITALIZATION SUPPLEMENTAL SEOPW/CRA R-00-65 SEOPW/CRA M-00-66 GRANT PROGRAM. 66-73 (B) DEFER CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED EXPENDITURE OF $420,000 IN GRANTS WITH RESPECT TO GRANT PROGRAM, TO A SPECIAL MEETING OF CRA TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY, JUNE 29, 2000 BEGINNING 2 P.M., IN CITY HALL CHAMBERS. 16. AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, 6/26/00 ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT TO SEOPW/CPA R-00-67 PARTICIPATE IN LEGISTAR PROGRAM, A OMNI/CRA R-00-37 74 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM BEING IMPLEMENTED BY OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK TO FACILITATE TRACKING OF RESOLUTIONS AND STORING OF INFORMATION. 17. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO GRANT 6/26/00 SEOPAGREEMENT TO GRANT FUNDS TO ST. JOHN'S CDC, 75-76 CRA R-00-68 5-76 $50,000.00. 18. (A) AUTHORIZE CRA TO FILE DECLARATORY 6/26/00 JUDGEMENT ACTION WITH RESPECT TO SAWYER'S SEOPW/CRAR-00-69 SEOPW/CRA R-00-70 WALK PROJECT. 77-80 (B) AUTHORIZE CRA TO FILE DECLARATORY JUDGEMENT ACTION WITH RESPECT TO LYRIC VILLAGE PROJECT. 19. DISCUSSION ON STATUS OF POINCIANA VILLAGE 6126100 PHASE IV AND STATUS OF LEGAL RIGHTS OF DISCUSSION 81-84 POINCIANA VILLAGE. 20. AUTHORIZE CRA TO RETAIN KATZ, CUTTER, 6/26/00 HAIGLER, ALDERMAN, BRYAN AND YON TO SEOPW/CRA R-00-71 PERFORM LOBBYING SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO OMNI/CRA R-00-38 85-87 FEDERAL AGENCIES AND CONGRESS ON APPROPRIATION REQUESTS AND LEGISLATION; $50,000.00. 21. INDEMNIFY ACTIONS OF DIRECTOR OF FISCAL 6/26/00 OPERATIONS, NAMELY, MS. CHARLAYNE SEOPW/CRA R-00-72 DURING TENURE AT CRA, RELATING TO OMNTHOMPKINS, 88-94 CRA R-00-39 8-94 USE OF HER SOCIAL SECURITY AND/OR FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER IN CAPACITY IN WHICH SHE SIGNED CRA'S APPLICATION TO FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER; STIPULATING THAT MS. THOMPKINS HAS NOT BEEN DIRECTOR OF FISCAL OPERATIONS OF CRA SINCE MAY 19, 2000, IS NO LONGER RESPONSIBLE FOR SAID POSITION, AND HER NAME SHOULD BE REMOVED. 22. PROPOSED CDBG FUNDING AGREEMENT TO BE 6/26/00 INCLUDED IN SPECIAL MEETING OF CRA ON JUKE 29, DISCUSSION 95-96 2000. 23. ADMINISTRATION OF CRA TO WORK WITH CITY'S 6/26/00 CULTURAL AND FINE ARTS BOARD TO DESIGNATE SEOPW/CRA R-00-73 ARTISTS, PARTICIPATE IN "ARTISTS IN RESIDENCE 97-98 PROGRAM," THROUGHOUT CITY, URGE CRA TO SEEK PRIVATE DONATIONS TO FUND "ARTIST IN RESIDENCE PROGRAM" THROUGHOUT CITY. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST and OMNI DISTRICTS On the 26th day of June, 2000, the Board of Directors of the Community Redevelopment Agency for the Southeast Overtown/Park West and Omni Districts of the City of Miami met at the Lyric Theater, 819 Northwest Second Avenue, Miami, Florida. The meeting was called to order at 5:28 p.m. by Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr., with the following Board Members found to be present: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. ALSO PRESENT: Carlos A. Gimenez, City Manager, City of Miami Frank Rollason, Assistant City Manager -Operations, City of Miami Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney, City of Miami Ilene Temchin, Assistant City Attorney, City of Miami Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk, City of Miami Sylvia Lowman, Assistant City Clerk, City of Miami Gwendolyn C. Warren, Director, Community Development, City of Miami John Jackson, Director, Public Works, City of Miami Genaro Iglesias, Chief of Staff, City Manager's Office, City of Miami Ana Gelabert, Director, Planning & Zoning, City of Miami Albert Ruder, Director, Parks & Recreation, City of Miami Richard Judy, Executive Director, CRA Robert Tyler, Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA Chairman Teele: We will begin with a silent prayer followed by the pledge of allegiance, and then we will hear directly from the Camillus House. Would you please stand for a silent prayer? NOTE FOR THE RECORD: At this point, a silent prayer was had, followed by the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Chairman Teele: Mr. Clerk, would you call the roll, please. Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call. Board Member Sanchez. CRA 6/26/00 Board Member Sanchez: Here. Mr. Foeman: Board Member Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Here. Mr. Foeman: Board Member Gort. Board Member Gort: Here. Mr. Foeman: Board Member Regalado. Board Member Regalado: Here. Mr. Foeman: Chairman Teele. Chairman Teele: Present. Ladies and gentlemen, the Southeast Overtown/Park West and the Omni Redevelopment Area Board of Directors meetings of the City of Miami Redevelopment Authority are called to order. This meeting is taking place in the historic Lyric Theater located at 819 Northwest 2nd Avenue. And I should take a moment to acknowledge the presence of Dr. Dorothy Fields, the founder of the Black Archives, and who has graciously consented to allow us to meet for one of the first times, really, in Overtown proper. It's a real honor. We expect to have at least two of our meetings each year in Overtown, as well as we will be meeting In Park West, as well as in the Omni areas. Without delaying the meeting, we'll recognize Dr. Fields a little bit later, and we will go directly to the agenda. I would note the presence of the City Manager, and Assistant Managers and a number of Department Directors. And at any point, Mr. Manager, you want to, stop the proceeding and make comments or give us advice, as well as the Attorney. I apologize about the seating arrangements here. You know we're — it's pretty dark back here, too. But in any event, we welcome you here. 1. PROPOSE CRA TO PURCHASE CAMILLUS HOUSE; VOTING CONFLICT -VICE CHAIRMAN WINTON (See #3). Chairman Teele: As you know, the first item is the item involving an ongoing action by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) regarding the Camillus House. Commissioner, Mr. Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, I have to recuse myself. I have a conflict on this issue. I've spoken to the City Attorney, and I have to step out. Chairman Teele: All right. 2 CRA 6/26/00 2. DEFER CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT BETWEEN CRA AND CITY RELATED TO DISPUTE INVOLVING ANNUAL PAYMENT OF $300,000 BY CITY IN CONNECTION WITH: [1] SERIES 1990 SPECIAL OBLIGATION DEBT ISSUED ON BEHALF OF CRA; [2] PARKING REVENUES COLLECTED BY CONTRACTOR FOR PROPERTY OWNED BY CRA ADJACENT TO MIAMI ARENA; [3] PAYMENT OF $559,522 TO SUPPORT CRA FOR 1997 THROUGH 1999 AND [4] CLAIMS CRA HAS AGAINST CITY WITH RESPECT TO LAND DEEDED TO CITY AND LATER SOLD TO MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY FOR MIAMI ARENA. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, before we go on, I'd like to ask one item be deferred. That's Item 4 under Finance and Administration. And I would like to direct both Attorneys, the City Attorney and the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) Attorney to have a written legal opinion from both Attorneys reference being legally binded under Florida Statute 163. Chairman Teele: I didn't hear you. You'd like to defer what item? Board Member Sanchez: Number 4 under the Finance and Administration. And I would like to ask both Attorneys, both the City and the CRA, to provide me with a written opinion reference being legally binded under Florida Statute 163, which is the CRA. Chairman Teele: Without objection, motion by Commissioner Sanchez to defer Item 4, which approves the terms and settlements between the CRA and the City, requesting a legal opinion. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? Motion by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by the Chair. 3 CRA 6/26/00 The following motion was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-55 A MOTION TO DEFER CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEM 4 (PROPOSED SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY [CRA] AND THE CITY OF MIAMI RELATED TO DISPUTE INVOLVING ANNUAL PAYMENT OF $300,000 PER YEAR BY THE CITY IN CONNECTION WITH: [ 1 ] SERIES 1990 SPECIAL OBLIGATION DEBT ISSUED ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY [CRA]; [2] PARKING REVENUES COLLECTED BY A CONTRACTOR FOR PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CRA ADJACENT TO MIAMI ARENA WHICH REVENUES WERE PAID TO THE CITY AND NOT TO THE CRA; [3] PAYMENT OF $559,522 TO SUPPORT THE CRA FOR 1997 THROUGH 1999, WHICH WERE NOT TRANSFERRED TO THE CRA; AND [4] CLAIMS CRA HAS AGAINST THE CITY WITH RESPECT TO LAND DEEDED TO THE CITY AND LATER SOLD TO MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY FOR MIAMI ARENA). Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: Vice Chairman Johnny Winton 4 CRA 6/26/00 3. (A) (1) APPROVE LETTER OF INTENT BETWEEN CRA AND CAMILLUS HOUSE; (2) AUTHORIZE CRA TO PURCHASE CAMILLUS HOUSE AT PRICE EQUAL TO APPRAISED VALUE DETERMINED BY MAI APPRAISAL, $2,400,000.00; (3) AUTHORIZE CRA TO CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS OF PROPERTY, $20,000.00; (4) AUTHORIZE CRA TO EXPEND $2,400,000.00 TO PURCHASE CAMILLUS HOUSE UTILIZING $1,000,000.00 IN HOPWA FUNDS AND $1,400,000.00 IN CDBG FUNDS (See #1). (B) BOARD MEMBER SANCHEZ INDICATES HIS SUPPORT FOR CLEANUP OF OVERTOWN BUT DOES NOT SUPPORT FUNDS BEING TRANSFERRED FROM N.W. 3RD AVENUE BUSINESS CORRIDOR TO BE USED FOR PARK WEST AREA — BOARD MEMBER GORT STATES THAT MISSION OF SAID FACILITY SHOULD BE NOT ONLY TO FEED HOMELESS BUT GIVE THEM ADEQUATE SKILLS TO ASSIMILATE INTO SOCIETY (See Section 1). (C) MANAGER STATES HE SUPPORTS CONCEPT BUT NOT PROCESS IN CONNECTION WITH PROPOSED PURCHASE OF CAMILLUS HOUSE; FURTHER STATING CAMILLUS HOUSE ACQUISITION SHOULD GO THROUGH NORMAL CDBG PROCESS (See Section 1). Chairman Teele: All right. This item, of course, has been on the agenda. It was on the agenda for some time. It really needs no thorough discussion. It's been 20 years in the making. The item is the relocation of the Camillus House with a plan. At this time, the Commission or the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) was asked to name, pursuant to the resolution in the last meeting, persons to serve on a committee to raise funds. Commissioner Regalado is the Vice Chairman of that committee as designated by the CRA. The Camillus House will name a Chair and other Vice Chair. And without further ado, Dale, I'm going to ask you to come forward and to give us the benefit of giving the CRA Board the full benefit of the processes that have taken place with your board, which has gone on, I guess, for about 90 days, and to let us know where we are today. Dale Simpson (Executive Director, Camillus House): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, I'm Dale Simpson. I'm the Executive Director at Camillus House. Chairman Teele: Pull it up a little, Dale. NOTE FOR THE RECORD: William Bloom entered the meeting at 5:33 p.m. Mr. Simpson: That's it. I guess I'll lean over. Board Member Regalado: Just grab it. Grab it with your hands. Board Member Gort: Just pull it out. Board Member Regalado: Right. Mr. Simpson: OK. During the last 90 days, we have been in continuing discussions regarding the purchase and acquisition of the property at 726 Northeast lst Avenue where Camillus House has been located for 40 years, with the CRA. The board was presented this approximately 60 days ago, the Board of Camillus House, in which they then turned a letter of intent over to our corporate legal counsel, who 5 CRA 6/26/00 has reviewed it and met with Mr. Bloom, representing the CRA. And they have agreed to go forward with this process, which would evolve into a purchase and sale agreement at some time in the very near future, as well as participation in the ultimate fund-raising and process to relocate Camillus House. This is ideally to be done in the next two years, although it's a very complex process, resiting a facility such as Camillus House. It is, at best, complicated and more than likely, troublesome to allay the fears of whatever community we get closer to, and to work with them to develop a very credible force to help the community and not to detract from any part of the community that we locate at. That's a process that is actually started with some community leaders and continues, and continues yesterday, and today and tomorrow. The Board of Camillus House will appoint its chairperson, Roger Soman and — Chairman Teele: Who? Mr. Simpson: Roger Soman and Bob Dickenson to be their co-chair in the fund-raising effort to relocate Camillus House. Chairman Teele: Could you just put on the record who those two gentleman are, please? Mr. Simpson: Roger Soman is a retired investment banker. He's been associated with Camillus House for over 15 years. Bob Dickenson is the President of Carnival Cruiselines. They have both been involved for many, many years with Camillus House, as well as being active in charitable work in the City of Miami for many years. Is there anything else I could elaborate on for you? Chairman Teele: Staff, please weigh in. I know that both Bob Tyler and Dick Judy have been directly involved. Dick has gone to most of the meetings. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Yes. Obviously, the purchase agreement has been executed. We are in the process of surveying and meeting all the other requirements for -- within the next 30 days, as you well know — for finalizing the transaction. And everything is going along, in terms of the survey, environmental phase one. And the appraisal has been done. Excuse me. A letter of intent, purchase agreement, subject to — we're in agreement with the purchase agreement. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Mr. Chair, the staff is recommending that the Board adopt the attached resolution. Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Bloom, would you like to just read the resolution into the record so that it's clear. William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): OK. (Inaudible) resolved approving a letter of intent between the CRA and Camillus House, being authorized from the CRA to enter into a contract, a purchase contract with Camillus House at a purchase price equal to the appraised value as determined by an MIA (Member of Appraisers Institute) appraiser, prepared by an appraiser on the City of Miami's approved list at a cost not to exceed two million, four hundred thousand dollars ($2,400,000); authorizing the CRA to conduct due diligent investigations of the property, including, without limitation, surveys, appraisals, environmental and other tests and studies deemed necessary by the Director of Strategic Planning at a cost not to exceed twenty thousand dollars ($20,000), and authorizing the CRA to expend up to two million, 6 CRA 6/26/00 four hundred thousand dollars ($2,400,000) to purchase Camillus House, utilizing one million dollars ($1,000,000) from the — Chairman Teele: That's got to be amended. Mr. Bloom: I was going to — I believe it's from the TIF (Tax Increment Funding) funds, and one million, four hundred thousand dollars ($1,400,000) from the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds, as opposed to what's in the package. Chairman Teele: From TIF funds and CDBG funds that are available? Mr. Bloom: Right. Chairman Teele: Is there a motion by --- Board Member Sanchez: I have some questions. Chairman Teele: Yeah. Let's get a motion by Commissioner Regalado and second by the Chair. Discussion. Board Member Sanchez: For discussion. Mr. Chairman, we won't be using any HOPWA (Housing Opportunity for Persons with AIDS) money; is that correct? Chairman Teele: Say again? Board Member Sanchez: Will we be using any HOPWA money? Chairman Teele: No. Board Member Sanchez: We will not be using any HOPWA money? OK. Under —I have a couple of questions pertaining to the legal aspect. One is under Florida Statute 166.045, which is any property in excess of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) requires two appraisals; is that correct, Mr. Attorney? Mr. Bloom: Yes.. Board Member Sanchez: That is worth — could you get back with me on that? Mr. Bloom: Yes. Board Member Sanchez: And also, on the property itself, I have a lot of questions pertaining to the agreements put forth in this resolution. And one is the property that we're acquiring, the one million dollars ($1,000,000) coming out of the CDBG, where is that money coming from? Chairman Teele: It's coming from — Board Member Sanchez: Executive Director. 7 CRA 6/26/00 Mr. Tyler: It's coming from the CDBG funds that were apportioned in the CDBG reapportion meeting. Board Member Sanchez: And that was part of the 3rd Street Corridor? Mr. Tyler: No, sir. We -- Staff has sent a letter to Community Development requesting that those be allocated for the five million dollars ($5,000,000) that were due, leaving a balance of — we picked up two million of the five million that were due in that meeting, and we're asking that the three million be dedicated to the five to complete that, leaving three million on the 3rd Avenue still due. Board Member Sanchez: Was any of that money that was transferred over or reallocated to this part taken away from the 3rd Street Corridor? Mr. Tyler: Yes. I believe the original allocation was dedicated to the Northwest Historic Business Corridor, the Third Avenue Corridor. And what we're asking is that that be rededicated to be credited toward the five, to complete the five million and leave three million still due on the 3rd Avenue Corridor. Board Member Sanchez: Well, I am very concerned about taking money away from the 3rd Street Corridor. I think that all the Commissioners up here have made it very clear that we are looking to doing everything we can to improve the conditions in Overtown. And the residents of Overtown continue to think that improvements are going to be made. And this money is being transferred over to Park West, which I agree to some points, to cleaning up and cleaning Camillus House. However, the conditions set forth in this agreement I am very concerned with. And one of them is on Number 12, on the lease, which basically, we will purchase the land for two point four million dollars ($2.4 million), and they would be — they would have access to lease the property for five years, or until they're able to find a suitable site to move out. However, on the repurchasing option, if they do not find a suitable site in two years, they would be able to buy the property back for the same amount of money. And that's not including some of the technical assistance that we're providing fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) for. So I am for doing everything we can to clean up the Park West area. But, I mean, I believe that we are over -obligating the CRA to make all these commitments. And basically, in the long run, you know, I am very concerned with this deal. I don't — I'm not going to support it. And, you know, I want you to know that I have some concerns with it. Chairman Teele: All right. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort, Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Gort: There's a couple of questions that I have. Let's face it, when the Southeast Overtown/Park West ideas came out way back, ten or 15 years ago, there was a good chance that we were going to bring progress to the whole northeast section and northwest section of the City of Miami. And unfortunately, the one thing that stopped our progress was Camillus House. So I believe it's very important that we do something with Camillus House. I think the development that should have been done ten years ago has been held up by them. However, I have a couple of questions, and my questions, my concern is the following: If they're going to have the option to stay there for five years, I don't see 8 CRA 6/26/00 any improvement taking place for five years, number one. Number two, if we have any expenditure -- we don't know what the condition of the buildings are. If we take over, we have certain liability, and we might have to spend some money within the fixing of the building and the — what do you call that? -- the asbestos or anything that we find in the building that we have to work on, those are expenditures that we're going to have. And at the same time, as you stated before, Mr. Chairman, the appraisal will continue to increase within that area with all the development that is going to be taking place. I don't think it's fair for them to come back and buy it at the same price, when we paid them for -- At one time, we could have bought the property for one point two million dollars ($1.2 million). Now they're asking for two point four, because the appraised value has gone up. And I think we should have the same right. And my last question is, if we purchase this building, and we own it? Is it our intent later on to sell it back at a higher value and create something with building in that area, or is it for the province of the CRA to maintain? Chairman Teele: Those are very good questions, Commissioner Gort. Let me see if I can try to explain. First of all, the Camillus House probably could have been purchased for fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) by the City when this process began. In fact, the Camillus House probably could have been purchased free if the City had just gone ahead and had the courage at the time that these issues came forth repeatedly. The fact of the matter is, is that Camillus House has a board of directors of very distinguished individuals in the private sector who want this to be a business transaction, as we do. We have agreed to acquire the property for them for the appraised value, utilizing at least two appraisals and two appraisers. One was undertaken by the CRA. The other was undertaken by our housing consultant, independent of that. So that issue has been already addressed. The fact that the CRA is giving the Camillus House, in effect, five years to build a new building is a way, quite candidly, for the CRA to lock in the purchase price. If we were to wait until they build a new building and then undertake to buy it from them, I can assure you that the price would be at least a million dollars ($1,000,000) more, based upon what has happened to the NAP (Network Area Point), what has happened to the technology center. These appraisals were made really before any announcements had been made regarding the NAP. As you know, the first building, which will begin construction within 45 days, the Center for the Americas is directly next door. And the prices that we're paying are somewhat less or just about the same as the partnership is paying for the land that they're building the center for — the technology center on. So we have no liability at all. In other words, they will occupy the building. The reason to do it this way is if we -- The other way to do it is to do nothing, let them build the building, assist them and let the prices go up, and then pay it two years from now. It's going to take three years to raise the money and build the building, a minimum of three years. We're giving them five years. But at the same time, it should be very clear that we are committing to be a partner with them in helping them to find the funds, and to raise money, and to use our best efforts, as is set forth in Chapter 163 to facilitate the removal of this condition in Overtown/Park West. So essentially, the answer to your question is, number one, there is no liability associated with them being in the building. They're still responsible for maintaining the building. They will continue to operate the building within the Code, within the compliance. Number two; the issue of buying the building back is a way of creating what is called a standstill relationship. In other words, if they don't do anything and we don't do anything, that's called a standstill position that, they're in. For them to buy the building back from us for what it costs puts us in a standstill position. Obviously, if they purchase land at another location, that land will appreciate, and we'll have the right to buy that land. Essentially, it's viewed — and the Attorney, perhaps, can help me — but it's a normal transaction in which both parties — neither party is put in an adverse position by both parties standing still. The real issue here is this: If the CRA were to buy the land from them at the completion of the construction when they're ready to move out, I think we can say to an 9 CRA 6/26/00 absolute certainty that the price will be at least a million dollars ($1,000,000) over the three years, at the rate of increase that we've seen over the last two years. Now, the rate may not be the same, but I think this is a very, very important first step. I think the most important thing has not been said, and that is we are offering ourselves as partners with the Camillus House, as the CRA is a partner in the NAP. Our role is not to be a government agency, and we don't need to think like government officials in this context. Our role is to facilitate development or redevelopment. And in that role, we're becoming a partner with the Camillus House by assisting them in fund-raising, and assisting them in relocating in terms of fund- raising, and providing financial assistance. Our lobbyist, the lobbyist that we will be engaging will be working with them to help them find appropriations. I've had several conversations with the Homeless Trust. As you know, Alvah Chapman is recovering very well, and we pray for his speedy recovery. But he is very interested in meeting with us. The Camillus House to date has never received any funding from the Homeless Trust. And yet, the City of Miami is the largest contributor of dollars to the Homeless Trust. And so there's a whole series of things that we can do. It should be put on the record that the cost of a new Camillus House state of the art is going to be at least six million dollars ($6,000,000) plus the land cost, which is going to be at least two million dollars ($2,000,000). And under this agreement, 100 percent of the funds that we expend must be used to purchase either land or placed in trust for the cost of rebuilding. So in effect, we're just doing what the government is going to wind up doing anyway. And when you realize that government is spending literally fifteen to twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) a year for homeless facilities, it's time that the City spent some money to deal with the most important homeless facility that has had a negative impact on development in the City of Miami, and that's the Camillus House. I'd like to respond, if I could, very quickly, to one of the comments that's been made about the 3rd Avenue Business Corridor Project, and what I'm sure is not an effort to appeal to neighborhoods, at all. When the CRA was set up, I didn't fully understand the dialogue, but I did follow it very closely. Park West and Overtown are married. They're married forever, as long as there is a Tax Increment District. What happens in Park West directly affects what happens in Overtown and the reverse, because it's one Tax Increment District. To the extent that we can remove the Camillus House and increase the property values in Overtown, it means that the tax increment funding, available dollars for Overtown is also dramatically improved. So unlike the Omni Tax Increment District, which is sort of a stand-alone, anything that we can do in Park West is going to help Overtown, and conversely, anything that we can do in Overtown to increase property values is going to work in Park West. So Commissioner Gort, I hope that I've answered your questions. Board Member Gort: The last question. If we do purchase this property, if we're successful, what are we going to do with the property? Are we going to try to sell it back, or Chairman Teele: Well, I can tell you this: Without prejudicing where we are and what we would do, it would be my strong recommendation that we bulldoze the property as soon as they leave. I mean, that is clearly not the highest and best use. It is a negative. And the removal of the Camillus House as a — I don't mean to be offensive to Mr. Simpson. That's their home. That's their heart. Board Member Gort: He inherited all the problems. Chairman Teele: But the removal of the Camillus House is clearly going to be the best way to redevelop that property. When you consider the fact that right next door, you have, in effect, a fifty million dollar ($50,000,000) building that is literally 30, 45 days from groundbreaking, it doesn't make sense to talk about a two point four million dollar ($2.4 million) facility when, in fact, that facility next door, the dirt 10 CRA 6/26/00 could very well yield a sixty to seventy to eighty million dollar ($80,000,000) facility. So that would be my strong recommendation, is that we would work with developers to redevelop that property. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman, one last question. I apologize, because I was away, and I just got back yesterday, and I didn't have a chance to go through this. But during the five-year period or whatever period we decide to have on there, I'd like to see it as short as possible, that that could be worked out. It was not part of the agreement. Are they going to be paying rent to the CRA or is it going to be rent-free? Chairman Teele: It's rent-free. It will be rent-free. Remember, the Camillus House, like most of your other CDC's (Community Development Corporations) get most of their money either from government, or from foundations or from private donations. And it's not something that we're in this to try to make a dollar. We're in this to try to redevelop the property. If the Camillus House is able to leave, if we're able to redevelop it, the bottom line for us is going to be somewhere between three to four to five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) a year in new dollars coming in, in the tax increment district. So we're a partner with them in this. Our goal — I think the Camillus House would like to be out of there within two and a half to three years as a time frame. The five years is just sufficient time in case there's a problem with zoning or a problem with environment or a problem with fund-raising, to give them time. But I'm confident that we can have the Camillus House out of there in three years if we move forward aggressively and not have a lot of governmental delays. Board Member Gort: Maybe a year and a half? Chairman Teele: It would take about a year and a half to build the building. We're looking at some congressional appropriations, if we can tag something onto the labor appropriations bill that's moving through now. The Camillus House is very much involved in job training and veterans funding is in there. I've talked to a couple of congressmen to date to see if we can tag something onto that. You know, we're going to — I think Mike Abrams is here. He's going to Washington tomorrow, awaiting the outcome. Is Mike Abrams here? Board Member Gort: He's probably somewhere in the back. Chairman Teele: Awaiting the outcome of this, he's going to be going to Washington tomorrow to meet with Congresswoman Carrie Meek and others. We're going to move very quickly on this program if we can get it going. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman, my last statement is, since we're going to be a partner, are we going to have the ability to work together and have some say-so in the future planning? Because one of the things is that the City of Miami has come a long way in dealing with the homeless. And first of all, when we took the action to allow the homeless shelter to be established within the City of Miami, I mean, that took a large hearing, and there was a lot of people there, and it took a lot of courage for some of us who voted in favor of that. But we saw the future of it. And we also came back with the Pottinger case. We came out to an agreement, because the City of Miami came out with a comprehensive plan on how to deal with the homeless population and how to work with the social service agencies in providing services to these clients. What I would like to see is — and to me, the biggest problem Camillus had in the past is it was just a Band-Aid treatment. Feed the people and that's it, not to worry about it. I personally would like to see a comprehensive plan where we can try to help these individuals, where we can bring them 11 CRA 6/26/00 back, not only to feed them, but to give them some kind of training, teach and work with them, and bring them back as members of the society. Mr. Simpson: I couldn't agree more, Commissioner Gort. The current strategy and philosophy of Camillus House is not for Band-Aid solutions. Band-Aid solutions don't provide dignity to people. Training them to work again, getting them back into the labor market, getting them into appropriate housing, getting them back as taxpayers is what we're doing. And that's the focus. It's housing and jobs. We will help people while they're at the bottom of their cycle, no question about that. We're not going to stop feeding people. But that's not where we're placing our emphasis. Our emphasis is on -- Our goal, the board's goal is to eliminate homelessness in Miami through our actions and through working with the rest of the continuum. We've worked closely with the Homeless Assistance Center and with the City of Miami. Lydia Garcia is a regular visitor with me. We talk about our strategies dealing with the issues, and want to make this City a much better place to live for everybody, starting with the homeless people. We'd love to see nobody sleeping on the street in this City. Board Member Gort: That's the same thing that I would like to see. And let's face it. We have a lot of the problems in that population, a large percentage are mentally ill individuals that need the assistance from the State and from the County. And I think we should go into that, and particularly the alcoholics and the drug addicts. These are the people we need to work with. Mr. Simpson: Absolutely. Board Member Gort: Thank you. I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado: When this Board directed me at the last meeting to contact people in order to raise funds for the possible new building of Camillus House, I did speak to many people. Some of the people were skeptical and said, well, is that for real? And the other people were really enthusiastic, and they immediately said that they were ready, not even only to raise some funds, but to contact people in order to set in motion a series of studies to invest in that area. I think -- I'm not an expert. Johnny is an expert in real estate. But I think that real estate is more or less like the stock market. It reacts to good news, not only to facts. Good news drives the market up and down, and of course, the real estate business. And when people, some of these people that I talked to heard that Camillus House was moving out of the area, they were really enthusiastic. And, you know, we don't mean to say that Camillus House is an obstacle. But the problem is that it's something that has to be done. It's something that needs to be somewhere. But if we want a comprehensive redevelopment plan for that area, that would be a problem for the people there, you know. So I really think that we should move forward from this. Even if we want to move forward on a three-year timetable or a five-year timetable, but I'm sure that if we say there is no more than five years, you know, you've got to look somewhere after five years, then a lot of people will be able to make long-term plans for the area. And I'm sure that already, people are doing that. So, you know, whatever happens in five years, I think that you must understand that it's the will of this Board that we should look for other areas for Camillus House in order to have a complete development plan in that area. So Mr. Chairman, I think that there are many unanswered questions. I would only say that — and it's one of the concerns that was raised by Board Member Gort, you know, during the time that they are there, if there is a problem with the building that they should take care of it, because, I mean then this is a Board 12 CRA 6/26/00 that — an Agency that works with a fixed budget, and then we'll have this problem of going after some funds for repairs and stuff. So I think rent-free is a deal that we should do, because it is something that works for the community and in the community, but the Camillus House Agency should understand that they're going to have to take responsibility for anything that needs to be done to that building. So I don't know if that — Chairman Teele: Dale, would you put your response to that on the record, please. Board Member Gort: Let me ask another question before you respond. I don't know if this would work or not or if it's part of the negotiations you have done, but can we make it that after three years, maybe — I know we have some real good Board of Directors there. But in the private sector, you create incentives to expedite things. Can we put in there that after three years, if they have not come to bought the land, they would have to pay the rent or something like that? Mr. Simpson: I'm sure we can work the details of that out. Board Member Gort: Make it five dollars ($5) a year instead of one ($1) or something like that. Mr. Simpson: The Camillus House has no interest in taking advantage of the City. All right? And as far as maintaining the property under a free lease, I would gladly do that. We have to do that now, and would continue to do that as long as we occupy the dwelling. Our intentions are long before that period to have identified the property, the plan that we would move to, so that our intentions should be very clear. There's — we're not real estate investors. We're a social service agency. We have to have a place to provide our services. Board Member Gort: Now, my understanding in reading today's article, according to the article today, you already have a site that you're working on? Mr. Simpson: We have a number of sites that — Chairman Teele: Let me, if I may. I've been very careful not to engage in any discussion with site, and let me just put this on the record. The delays, if there are going to be any delays, are going to be with the City of Miami Commission. Let me say it again, because the Commission of the City of Miami is going to have to approve any site. And it's either going to have to be a rezoning or a special use exception or something. And the one thing that we have said, counsel has been privy; we will not discuss sites with them, because we have to approve any site. And our position has been don't discuss sites with us. To the extent that any Board Member would like to do that, you're free to do it, I would assume on the record, if the Attorney would allow it. But I think it's a gray area that you're getting into where you could wind up not being able to participate fully on a zoning issue. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman, I understand that. I don't want to discuss any specific site. My discussion is I know you're working on it, so something should be done to expedite this transfer. Thank you. Chairman Teele: Would you put— go right ahead. 13 CRA 6/26/00 Board Member Sanchez: No, I'll yield to you. Chairman Teele: No. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may. The CRA's goal is to relocate the Camillus House, try to clean up Park West, and move for redevelopment, and clean up the area, and fix it up and move forward. Now, we can provide assistance in many ways. We can provide assistance with CDBG, technical assistance, we could help with grants. Of course, we're going to have to help with the assistance of zoning changes. And those are things that we're willing to assist in. But looking at the deal that's put forth here — and once again, I want to bring out the concerns that I have. In the five years that you'll be there, which you will rent for rent-free, within two years, if you do not find a suitable site — and we're not going to get into the issue of sites — you will buy the property back for the same amount. So therefore, the City doesn't make any — you know, any interest of any kind. So the concern that I have is that these are the types of generous deals in the past that led this City to almost bankruptcy. And I am for charitable organizations, and I am willing to assist you in any way further that the City can. But to over -obligate the CRA — and this is over -obligating the CRA with the funds that are available — is the concern that I have. Another question that I would have is, Mr. City Manager, do you support this? Does the Administration support this? Carlos A. Gimenez (City Manager): I'll answer it two ways. Yes, we support the concept. However, we have some problems with the process. Board Member Sanchez: With the process? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. And the problem with the process is that we believe that the plans should be submitted so that it can go through the normal CDBG process to make sure it's an eligible activity. And if it turns out that it's not an eligible activity — because you're using CDBG funds. Board Member Gort: What do you mean "the plan"? Mr. Gimenez: A plan should be submitted for the use of the CDBG funds to make sure it's eligible for that money. Board Member Sanchez: And they have not done that? Mr. Gimenez: From what I understand, no, that hasn't been done yet. So that needs to happen. Also, another concern is that if you are expecting some kind of a profit from the sale of the property after this transpires, that could be looked at as program income, and it may have to go back, you know, into the Feds. Board Member Sanchez: OK. Thank you. So, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: All right. Let me just say this very clearly. This is the first time since I've been at a CRA meeting that a Manager has been asked and offered an opinion about an independent agency. The CRA, we happen to be Commissioners, but when we're here, we're not Commissioners. We are CRA Board Members. And the CRA is an independent agency. To the extent that the funding is legally a 14 CRA 6/26/00 question, the lawyers, both the City Attorney and our counsel, Bill Bloom will respond to that. Whether or not the funds are eligible, I can tell you on the record that I've discussed the matter with the Assistant Secretary of HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) in depth, and that is why the HOPWA funds are not used. They not only are available, but they encourage the use of CD (Community Development) funds for housing. In fact, Secretary Cuomo has made homeless the highest priority of CD funds since he has been secretary. And I'm just really shocked and amazed that a Manager person would offer a professional opinion regarding the use of CD funds for a homeless facility. But in any event, once the funds — once the Board acts, it's up to the staff to work through. The funds cannot be released, because the City is the fiduciary, and if there's any problems with the funding availability, the City has both a Budget Office and a Program Office that will be able to flag that. I think it's very important that the CRA be an independent agency, and not be another governmental agency, or otherwise, I think you run afoul to Chapter 1623, which brings to mind one of the issues that I've always maintained, is that the CRA should have non -governmental board members, as well. Further questions? If not, Mr. Clerk, call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-56 A RESOLUTION I) APPROVING THE LETTER OF INTENT BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") AND CAMILLUS HOUSE, INC. (THE "LETTER OF INTENT"), WHICH LETTER OF INTENT IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "A" HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, II) AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS CAMILLUS HOUSE (THE "PROPERTY") IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE FORM OF EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, AT A PURCHASE PRICE EQUAL TO THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY DETERMINED BY A MAI APPRAISAL PREPARED BY AN APPRAISER ON THE CITY OF MIAMI'S APPROVED LIST (THE "MAI APPRAISAL"), AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $2,400,000.00, III) AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO CONDUCT DUE DILIGENCE INVESTIGATIONS OF THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SURVEY, APPRAISAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER TESTS AND STUDIES DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE DIRECTOROF STARATEGIC PLANNING (THE "DUE DILIGENCE INVESTIGATIONS"), AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $20,000.00, SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS, AND IV) AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO EXPEND UP TO $2,400,000.00 TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY, SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILTY OF FUNDS, UTILIZING UP TO $1,000,000.00 IN TIF FUNDS, AND UP TO $1,400,000.00 IN CDBG FUNDS. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 15 CRA 6/26/00 Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None. ABSTAINED: Vice Chairman Johnny Winton COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL: Board Member Gort: This has to come back to the Commission is my understanding? Chairman Teele: Yes. 16 CRA 6/26/00 4. (A) (1) AUTHORIZE CRA TO PROCEED WITH RFP FOR SELECTION OF CONTRACTOR TO CONSTRUCT PHASE I (A) AND 1(B) IMPROVEMENTS OF MARGARET PACE PARK IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLANS PREPARED BY BERMELLO, AJAMIL & PARTNERS, INC., SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT AND CONTRACT TO BE PRESENTED TO BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR APPROVAL; (2) APPROVE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR PHASE II IMPROVEMENTS OF MARGARET PACE PARK. (B) BOARD MEMBER REGALADO STATED IT SHOULD BE CITY'S PARKS DEPARTMENT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO STAFF MARGARET PACE PARK; STATED NEED FOR SECUIRTY AND PERSONNEL TO ENSURE SAFETY OF PARK, STIPULATED TO INCLUDE RESTROOMS IN FIRST PHASE OR AT LATEST, SECOND PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION. Chairman Teele: All right. The next item is the Margaret Pace Park item. Commissioners, this item is one — would someone get Commissioner Winton? — this is one that has been briefed fully. And I'm very pleased that Commissioner Winton held a workshop with the members of the Omni Advisory Board. Ms. Kruger, it's a pleasure always to see you here. Mr. Judy, would you like to give us a fast briefing, so that we can move forward on this item. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Yes. Mr. Chairman, we have our... Are you OK? Tere Garcia: If I may, before they set up. Tere Garcia with Bermello, Ajamil and Partners. We have prepared a PowerPoint presentation that we used for a meeting with the Omni Advisory Board. It will be on this wall, on the white wall, on the sidewall, be projected on the side wall. We still have some outstanding issues with the Omni Advisory Board. We're having an additional meeting tomorrow, too, and we believe that consensus will be achieved on minor — on some issues, so that then it can proceed to bid. The program for this park was established based on the Omni Advisory Board Program that was submitted to us, and there had been since then and prior to that several community meetings to discuss all the items in the park. I'm going to let Elizabeth Newland go very quickly through the different items that is there. Elizabeth Newland: Just while we're getting set up, we've put together a PowerPoint show, and it shows most of the elements that we have in the park, however all of them are not included. This gives you an overall look at the park. Included in the program are tennis courts, volleyball courts, soccer fields, a cricket pitch, several entrance plazas along Bayshore Drive, essential plaza space and pergola that is on the access with 191h Street that goes right out to the water. Again, there is a path that circulates around the entire park for walking, for a vita course, and also for access by vehicles for security purposes. We've broken the development of the park into several phases, which include the infrastructure in the first phase, which is the water, electric and storm water, just to give you an idea of some of the elements and the cost related to those and how the — The concept with the park is to get all the infrastructure in Phase I(A), so that as funds become available in the future, different park elements that aren't included in I(B) can be added at that time. A big part of the Phase I (A) budget is shoreline stabilization, which has been achieved. The cost for that is being covered through a Florida Inland Navigation District grant. Here is the breakdown of Phase 1(A) for the park, roughly six hundred and thirteen thousand dollars ($613,000) of infrastructure. Phase I (B) goes into the above ground elements of the park, which included in that are the soccer fields, the two tennis courts, the entrance pergola, walkways, all the entrance plazas along Bayshore Drive. And basically, at Phase l(B), at the completion of that phase, the park would be ready for operation, and everything that is not built on that's projected for a later phase would be grass so that it 17 CRA 6/26/00 would be--- The park would be perceived as being completely finished, even though there were some elements for open air providing shade and picnic tables would be located under those. And they're all very open and high visibility. And again, the remaining Phase II budget is eight hundred and seventy- eight thousand with a total budget for the park of two point nine. Ms. Garcia: Phase II is unfunded. The idea and the direction of the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) to us was obviously, this is a very important park for the City of Miami, not only for the Omni area, but for the entire City. We believe that it will be, the development of it will be a catalyst for redevelopment of the Omni area, and this will become an entrance to this area. But the Phase II, it's a long-range planning for a park, and as funds become available or the community might make any changes, those changes can always be incorporated in that Phase II. Any questions? Board Member Regalado: I have a question. What is it to do on the shoreline? Is it a walkway or what? Ms. Garcia: It's a vita course and walkway all throughout the shoreline. This also has one of the things -- we worked with the Police Department and with safety through environmental design, so even police cars could go in there to monitor the park. Board Member Regalado: OK. Is it a fence? It's fenced in? Ms. Garcia: No, it is not fenced. Board Member Regalado: It's not fenced. So people will be able to fish from there? Ms. Garcia: Well, it's very low. The shoreline right — it's very shallow. Board Member Regalado: But they do fish now? Ms. Garcia: Then there's nothing to stop anybody from doing it, but it is very, very shallow. Board Member Regalado: OK. What is there to demolish? I saw demolition, twenty thousand dollars ($20,000). What is there to demolish? Ms. Newland: There's some existing lighting and existing infrastructure in the park that is not suitable to be reused in the other phases, so that has to be demolished. Board Member Regalado: So it's the lighting, because the structure — Ms. Newland: No structure. Board Member Regalado: There isn't any there. Ms. Newland: No. There's some remnants of an old vita course, but that's about it. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. 18 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Board Member Gort: I'm sorry, because I missed that, but the restroom, is that in Phase I or Phase II? Ms. Newland: It's Phase II. Board Member Gort: So Phase I has been — what are your plans for Phase II, the timeline? Ms. Garcia: Well, because it's a long-range plan for this park, in reality, the timing of it is as funds become available. The CRA and the Omni Advisory Board have been working together to search for additional funds, but Phase II at this moment is unfunded. Board Member Gort: What I'd like to recommend as possible to try to secure the funds as soon as possible for the restrooms, because I think the restroom is a must in any park that is going to be utilized for a long time. Ms. Garcia: One of the — Board Member Gort: That no longer is going to be a passive park. After you finish this, it's going to be a very active park with activities taking place. Ms. Garcia: One of the beauties of this phasing plan and that Phase II is that everything will be bid and everything will be permitted at once. And then as funds become available — all Phase II doesn't have to become available at once. Pieces of it can become available, and then those pieces can be built. Board Member Gort: Thank you. Chairman Teele: Mr. Vice Chairman, I know that you've held a workshop with the Omni Advisory Board. I know Ms. Eleanor Kluger and others are here. Ms. Kluger — Mr. Chairman, how would you like to proceed? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, if the Omni Advisory Board has anything that they would like to add, Eleanor, I think it'd be a great time to add anything that you think might have been left out. Eleanor Kluger: I just would like to thank the CRA, and especially Dick Judy for working so hard on our park. This is something that the Omni Advisory Board three years ago said that the funds from the development, our tax increment dollars should go toward a park or Margaret Pace Park, rather than to scatter small amounts of money throughout the Omni area. And we thought that this would be one thing that everybody in the whole community could enjoy, and something that has needed to be done, you know, for the loss. I don't know how many years we just had vacant ground out there. So it's very, very rewarding to see what B&A (Bermello & Ajamil) has designed for us. There are a few other modifications that we want to look at, and for that reason, we have scheduled a Tuesday meeting tomorrow night over at the Marriott Hotel to have a closer look at some of the things that concern the Omni Advisory Board that we were not able to discuss at the meeting with Commissioner Winton. Commissioner Winton mainly talked about — at that meeting, we mainly talked about where the placement of the basketball field should be, and to make sure that any noise from any of the areas would not affect 19 CRA 6/26/00 the residents of the area, and to make sure that Edgewater got the much needed basketball courts that they had been requesting. So that part is already taken care of with Johnny Winton's meeting. And the rest are similar concerns where the Omni people wanted to look closer at the vita course and at the waterfront that you had mentioned, and we wanted to look closer at the volleyball courts and the tennis courts. And so after that meeting, I'm sure we can come to complete agreement. And our idea is to move forward as fast as we can and build that park. And we hope that we would send RFP's (Requests for Proposals) out for it in July, and maybe even September, you might see some movement of ground happening. And so I thank all of you that have put in efforts to this for the last two and a half years that we've been planning. And I do thank the Parks Department for saying that we should have — and Albert Ruder — a master plan. And that's how this all started with our bond money first, and what to do with bond money, and then the community got involved. And we said first, before we just throw up lighting, or throw up a kiddy park or something that we should have a master plan and really do it up right, and I think we have. Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you, Eleanor. And just a couple of comments. One being that I want to thank the Omni Advisory Board and the staff of the CRA. I think that they have created something really magnificent here. And essentially, the attitude was, we've got a great piece of public land there that serves as a not very good example of a public park today. And the community and the CRA staff made a decision that what they wanted to do was develop a master plan for a great, great park in our City. And, yes, there are still some details regarding some of the phasing elements that need to be worked out between staff and the Omni Advisory Board, and that, those details will get ironed out. But what we've created here is a master plan that even though we don't have all of the funding for it today, we've looked at a grander vision here, and we have something to shoot at that is going to be absolutely wonderful for our community. And the key here is putting — the next key is putting together all the funding over time to get this entire great park that we need. But the beauty of it was the design to allow for phasing of this park, so that we can work at getting the additional funding and end up with another jewel in our community. So my thank you to both the Omni Advisory Board and the staff of the CRA. Chairman Teele: All right. Commissioner Gort. Board Member Gort: Putting a Park Advisory Board together, one of the things that we discussed and talked about is trying to get individuals to adopt parks. And this park, if we can get someone to sponsor specific — can we get a sponsorship? Would the Omni have any objection to that? For example, the bathroom, I think is something you need immediately, because if you're going to have people walking through there, playing basketball, they will need the facility. If we can find somebody to sponsor that, would there be any problem in getting them to pay for it? Chairman Teele: Well, the sponsor of this park has — I'm surprised the Manager didn't jump up on that. The sponsor of this park is the CRA. This park was a one point two million dollar ($1.2 million) park when it came to me. When I was elected, we were talking about a one point two million dollar ($1.2 million) park. This is a three million dollar ($3,000,000) park. And of course, I am 100 percent committed to this three million dollar ($3,000,000) park, because it goes through a neighborhood process. But again, the CRA role — we're not the City of Miami who's sitting here. We're the sponsors of this park. We're doing this for the benefit of the City. In other words, we're going to take one point two million dollars ($1.2 million) of CRA money of TIF (Tax Increment Funding) funds, which is 100 percent of all of the money that we have for the entire Omni area, and we're going to put it in this park for the benefit of the City of Miami. We're not going to charge a rent. We're not going to charge anything. 20 CRA 6/26/00 We're just going to do this for free, because this is the right thing to do. It will do more to redevelop the property values around this than anything that I can think of we can do. A first class park is going to bring about redevelopment. And I know that Mr. Hollow, who is building a building is not here tonight, but he has worked with Phil Yaffe and his staff have been very much a part of this, as have all of the other residents, the aiders and the others. And the community is just thrilled about what's going to happen here. So in a way, Commissioner Gort, the CRA is adopting this park. And that's — and I mean, don't see us as the City. That's the point I'm trying to say. We're adopting it. We're putting up one point two million dollars ($1.2 million). We also have said that we will loan the City of Miami the park money as necessary to get it completed through the Phase I. I think we have — what? — three hundred thousand, three hundred fifty thousand dollars ($350,000) of Safe Neighborhood Bond — how much Safe Neighborhood Bond money? Unidentified Speaker: Right around three hundred thousand. Ms. Garcia: Three hundred thousand. Chairman Teele: So three hundred thousand Safe Neighborhood Bond money, and we have some State — Ms. Garcia: One sixty-five of find money. Chairman Teele: One sixty-five of the State find money for water improvement. And the rest of it's the CRA, pretty much. And we're going to continue to work through this process. And we're committed through Phase I (A) and I (B). And — Board Member Gort: The answer is yes. Chairman Teele: The answer is yes. The CRA is the sponsor of this. And we're looking for co-sponsors. Commissioner Gort — I mean Commissioner Regalado and then Ms. Kluger. Board Member Regalado: Although this is a joint project, the CRA and City of Miami, it should be made clear that it is the Parks Department's responsibility to staff the park, but not only that. There are two issues here that I think are important. As soon — first of all, now, every Saturday, we all know — and Sunday — everybody uses that park for soccer practice and all that. Board Member Gort: Oh, I know that. Board Member Regalado: When construction starts, they will try to keep using that park for the same purpose or other purpose. And I think that we should make clear the need for either security or park employees to at least take care of — Board Member Gort: Park rangers. Yeah... Board Member Regalado: Yeah. Park rangers, because the problem is that you're going to have construction. You are not going to have construction on Saturday and Sunday, but you are going to have people. You can't fence the park in, so you got to have people that will be taking care of the security and the safety of the people who would be going to the park during the construction. So I don't know if that 21 CRA 6/26/00 would be a responsibility of the construction company or if that would be a responsibility of the City of Miami. But certainly, I'm telling you that even if you have construction going on, people will still be coming back to that park to play, either at night when it's summer, or during the weekends when there is no construction going on. And the second issue is, you know, Board Member Gort, Commissioner Gort is right. The restroom should be on the first phase. And the reason is that people would go to the park no matter what, and they will need to use the restroom. If they don't have it, they will contribute to the blight of the park, as we know it. So I think that this Board should be on record saying that we should have the restrooms at least working on the first phase or at the latest on the first step of the second phase. Thank you. Ms. Garcia: Can we have the lights back on, please? Chairman Teele: All right. Ms. Kluger. Ms. Kluger: In my thank you's, I didn't give Commissioner Teele the biggest thank you, and I do thank you. Chairman Teele: Thank you. Ms. Kluger: But it's going to be a beautiful park. And the reason we're not wanting to put structures into the park right now is anybody that has lived around the park knows that most of the residents that live in the apartments around there do not use the park, because it has been a hangout for vagrants. And we want to see how we can — we want to bring back people to the park. We really don't use the park, the Omni people and the residents around the neighborhood. The people that use the park are people that play soccer that come from the County area or that are outside of the City area, and also the cricket people. We have been inclusive of everybody that has been using the park. We don't want to hurt anybody. And that's one reason we have not even fenced the park or even thought about fencing the park. We want it to be open for everyone. But structures are something that we have a problem with, because the area is not built up. And we have a lot of vagrants that keep us from using the park. So if we have a building, they break into it if it's not guarded and supervised or locked up, especially in the evening. So we wanted to see how it goes. And hopefully, there will be enough money quickly to do Phase II. And at one time, there was three phases, and we were nervous that it would be ten years before we saw all of this. But at this point, we think that the majority of what we need is in the first phases, and only the second phase is mainly the structures and things that we are nervous about, because it is not a heavily used park at this point. And we don't have that many people in the Omni area, but we're hoping this will now attract everybody from the City to come use it, and then we won't have a problem of the vagrants outweighing the amount of people that use it. Board Member Gort: Are you ready to make a motion? Commissioner Winton, is there a motion? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. I would like to move — let me get myself organized. Board Member Regalado: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. 22 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: On the motion, is there discussion? All those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed, say "no." The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. OMNI/CRA 00-35 A RESOLUTION I) AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") TO PROCEED WITH AN RFP FOR THE SELECTION OF A GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO CONSTUCT THE PHASE I (A) AND I (B) IMPROVEMENTS OF MARGRET PACE PARK, CONSISTING OF DEMOLITION, SHORELINE STABILIZATION, SITE GRADING, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, WATER SYSTEMS, SANITARY SYSTEMS, ELECTRIC SYSTEMS, SITE PAVING AND WALLS, PERGOLA, TENNIS COURTS, VOLLEYBALL COURTS, BASKETBALL COURT AND PAVILLION, VITA COURSE, SECURITY BUILDING, SITE LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS PREAPARED BY BERMELLO, AJAMIL&PARTNERS, INC. ("BA") PURSUANT TO THE PLANS DATED APRIL 21, 2000, PROJECT NO. 9999.400 ( THE "PLANS"), WITH THE SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT AND THE CONTRACT WITH SUCH SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT TO BE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR APPROVAL, AND II) APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR THE PHASE II IMPROVEMWNTS OF MARGARET PACE PARK, CONSISTING OF SITE PAVING, PLAY EQUIPMENT, RESTROOMS,A RECREATION PAVILLION, SITE FURNITURE, LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION, PURSUANT TO THE PLANS. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 23 CRA 6/26/00 Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 24 CRA 6/26/00 5. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH CITY REGARDING FUNDING FOR VARIOUS PROJECTS WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED CRA BUDGET. Chairman Teele: Number 4 has been deferred. On Number 5, this is authorizing the CRA to enter into funding agreements with the City for various projects. Is there a motion by the Vice Chairman authorizing the CRA to enter into funding agreements with the City? Vice Chairman Winton: So move. Chairman Teele: Second. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Gort: Aye. Board Member Regalado: Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Aye. Chairman Teele: Aye. Those opposed have the same right. Board Member Sanchez: One no. Chairman Teele: "No" is recorded. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-57 OMNI/CRA 00-36 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO ENTER INTO A FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI (THE "CITY"), TO FUND VARIOUS PROJECTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA, WHICH FUNDING AGREEMENT IS TO BE EXECUTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT (THE "DIRECTOR"). (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 25 CRA 6/26/00 Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None 26 CRA 6/26/00 6. DISCUSSION ON REPORT FROM MARCH 13, 2000 CRA BOARD MEETING REGARDING STATUS OF ALTERNATIVE SITES FOR MARLINS PARK. Chairman Teele: Item Number 6, let's temporarily pass, so that we can try to get through the agenda. I would note that there is a public hearing tomorrow at 11 a.m. in the C.O.W. (Committee of the Whole) Room. Commissioner Regalado's Economic Development Committee of the City of Miami will be hearing a detailed report on the — from the Director of Strategic Planning on the alternate sites of the Marlin Park. This resolution that is before us would simply accept his report without comment or concurrence, and direct the Director of Strategic Planning to forward the report to the Manager for review and appropriate action. If we could temporarily pass that for the time being. There is a lot of detail in that report, and I'm just not certain, given the time constraints, the best way to handle it. I certainly don't want anyone to think that the report — the details are buried in the report. But the final — the action by the CRA is simply to pass the report without comment or concurrence to the City Manager. If we could temporarily pass it. 27 CRA 6/26/00 7. DIRECT DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PLANNING TO NEGOTIATE LEASE WITH FDOT TO LEASE TO CRA LAND UNDER I-395 FROM BISCAYNE BOULEVARD UP TO N.W. 3' AVENUE, $1.00 PER YEAR FOR PURPOSE OF ALLOWING CRA TO CARRY OUT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, INCLUDING PARKING AND STORAGE OF MOVIE PROJECTION EQUIPMENT. Chairman Teele: I'd ask for Resolution Number 7, which is regarding parking. Board Member Sanchez: So move. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Sanchez. Seconded by the Chair. Is there "unreadiness"? All those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed? The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-58 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PLANNING (THE "DIRECTOR") TO NEGOTIATE A LEASE WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ("FDOT") TO LEASE TO THE CRA THE LAND UNDER 1-395 FROM BISCAYNE BOULEVARD UP TO N.W. 3RD AVENUE, AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $1.00 PER YEAR, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING THE CRA TO CARRY OUT THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, RELATING TO PARKING AND STORAGE OF MOVIE PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT, WHICH LEASE SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR APPROVAL. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 28 CRA 6/26/00 Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 29 CRA 6/26/00 8. INSTRUCT CRA ADMINISTRATION TO REQUEST OF CONSULTANT FOR TECHNOLOGY CENTER OF THE AMERICAS, MR. PAUL LAMBERT, TO MAKE HIS NOTES PRESENTATION BEFORE CRA BOARD ON THIS SAME DATE AVAILABLE TO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (DDA); REQUEST THAT MR. LAMBERT FULLY COOPERATE WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF DDA AT CRA'S EXPENSE. Chairman Teele: Is there anyone here from the Terremark joint venture that is giving an update? Mr. Director, how are you handling this item? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): We anticipated someone from Terremark today. If you — Chairman Teele: Would someone please go out — the voices really — the acoustics are so good in here. Aaron, would you go out there and just ask everybody to kind of hold it down, please, please. Thank you. Mr. Tyler: We anticipated — I'm sorry. Board Member Gort: Sounds like it's (inaudible). Chairman Teele: It sounds like it's behind us. Board Member Gort: Yeah. Mr. Tyler: Mr. Chairman, we're expecting the folks from Terremark. Chairman Teele: Well, I would just like to note that the Manager has responded. I mean, everywhere I go, people are saying how they can't believe how well the City of Miami is responding. And, I mean, it is making the rounds through Tallahassee right now that the City of Miami has got its act together. And Mr. Manager, I want to express my appreciation. I know that you've got one Assistant Manager in the Department. But everywhere, even in the private sector, people are talking about how responsive the City has been, and I want to commend you in working with us. Our role has been to commit to support the NAP (Network Area Point) through the providing of a one-time grant assistance and other actions to assist in the redevelopment of the Center of the Americas. What needs to be very clear -- we have not been briefed on it — is that the NAP announcement, which was made here in this room at the Lyric Theater about a week ago represents a second building. And so the first building is the Center of the Americas. The NAP building, which has not been sited, nor has the development team been put together necessarily on that is a second building. And the first building is now being budgeted right at fifty to sixty million dollars ($60,000,000). So we understand. So things are moving very quickly in this area, and we need to stay in close contact. Mr. Tyler, you have the rest of this? We need your update on the enhancements in Park West, Item Number 9; is that right? Mr. Tyler: Yes, that's correct. Board Member Sanchez: You skipped 8? Chairman Teele: Eight is an update, which is — there is no — there is no new information on the update. 30 CRA 6/26/00 Board Member Sanchez: OK. Chairman Teele: Mr. Wallace, I know — Mr. Paul Lambert, I know, is here. Paul, where are you? Can you give us a very, very brief update? Have you been able to get into the NAP up in Maze West yet? Come right up and just put your name and address on the record. Mr. Lambert is our consultant. He's been working on the NAP with us since — when? — September/ October? Paul Lambert: That's right. Chairman Teele: He made his report in December/January, but he's been engaged on the NAP since September/October. Mr. Lambert: My name is Paul Lambert, with the firm of Lambert Advisory, 2601 South Bayshore Drive, Miami. We actually as of last week, was able to gain access into what's called the Maze NAP in Washington, right outside of Washington, D.C., Tyson's Corner, Virginia, in that area. Indeed, the NAP, itself, was not — is not as large a facility as we initially envisioned. It's actually on the order of about ten — maybe eight or ten thousand square feet in total space, the facility, itself. What's of more consequence is what's happened around the NAP. Immediately around the NAP, within a mile radius or mile circle, there's been about nine point six million square feet of office space. Chairman Teele: How many? Mr. Lambert: Nine point six million square feet of office space developed over the past ten to fifteen years. Most of that space is traditional office, but it also includes a lot of technology space. About six to seven million of that space is really the technology. The space leases for about twenty to twenty-two dollars ($22) per square foot. And those buildings now are selling on the order of a hundred and fifty dollars ($150) per square foot, to just give you some perspective of how enhanced values may come from the development of a similar facility within Miami. The one thing that is happening with these NAP facilities is that they have become much more dispersed. The technology companies that are — that used to locate immediately surrounding the NAP can now locate much more distant than they previously did. And so the location of those firms which need to be — who are users of these NAP facilities are actually not always now immediately around the facility itself, but are within 20, 30, 40 miles of the facility, as long as they're along major cable lines, high speed fiber optic lines that typically here, that would be running up and down rail lines. So we're still continuing with our analysis, and we'll have more update in the near future. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Board Member Gort: I would like, if possible, whenever you have all your statistics -- In my last meeting of the DDA (Downtown Development Authority), several of the property owners within downtown were asking how beneficiary really the NAP can be. Their understanding is some of them have built rental facilities to a lot of these companies. My understanding is they do get a lot of square footage, but most of the operations are from one or two persons. In other words, job creation is not there. So whatever information you can give me on that, I would appreciate it. And if we can make a presentation at the next DDA board meeting, I would appreciate it. 31 CRA 6/26/00 Mr. Lambert: If you don't mind, I'll just answer that question very fast, because we did speak with the Fairfax County Economic Development folks. There are in those nine point six million square feet, there's actually around seven to eight thousand workers within the space. They're not all — and that's largely because those buildings are not in -kind. They're mostly high tech. workers. It's not particularly related to NAP -related operations or switching operations. But still, there is a major push within that space (inaudible). Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman, if we could get a -- Chairman Teele: Without objection, motion by Commissioner Gort requesting that the consultant make all of his notes and a presentation available to the DDA, and that you are authorized to fully cooperate at the CRA's expense with all the requirements of the DDA. Second the motion by Commissioner Gort. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed? The following motion was introduced by Board Member Gort, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-59 A RESOLUTION I) AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") TO REQUEST THAT THE CONSULTANT FOR THE TECHNOLOGY CENTER OF THE AMERICAS, PAUL LAMBERT ("CONSULTANT"), MAKE ALL OF HIS NOTES AND PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF THE DIRECTORS OF THE CRA (THE "NOTES") AVAILABLE TO THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ("DDA"), AND II AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO REQUEST THAT THE CONSULTANT COOPERATE FULLY WITH THE DDA AT THE SOLE COST AND EXPENSE OF THE CRA. 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 Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 32 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: So would you work with Patty and Commissioner Gort, the Chairman of the DDA? Board Member Gort: Thank you. Mr. Lambert: Thank you. 33 CRA 6/26/00 9. DISCUSSION REGARDING COORDINATION OF WATER MAINS, CAPACITY OF WATER AND SEWER LINES TO SERVICE NAP AND SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT IN PARK WEST SUB -AREA OF REDEVELOPMENT AREA, AND IMPACT FEES FOR WATER AND SEWER CONNECTION (WASH). Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Mr. Chairman and Board, in our updates regarding Park West, we wanted to consider the coordination of the water mains, the street lighting, entertainment district and Times Square. In terms of the water main, we intended to hear from Dade County Water and Sewer Department. Bill Graham called me and said that they're contending with it. Chairman Teele: We understand why they're not here. Mr. Tyler: Yes. So in lieu of that, I'd like to ask our consultant, Tere Garcia, to come and update us on the water and sewer part. And we'll plan for Public Works to comment right after that on street lighting, if it's OK. Chairman Teele: Let's be very brief, because it's not an action item. But the one concern that we've heard from everybody that's in that area that's tried to open up clubs is that there is not enough water capacity. In fact, there is one club that's using a garden hose across the street to get water in. And so the question is, what can we do to facilitate that? I mean, that's, you know, 101 of what CRA's are supposed to be doing, is building infrastructure to help development. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to add to that, if possible, one of the biggest problems also is that when they go to pull their permit from the Water Department, they're asked that the main be -- Right now, there's an existing — I don't know if it's four inches or five inches, or something like that? Mr. Tyler: It's eight inches. Board Member Gort: Eight inches. And they're requested to put it to 12 inches. Mr. Tyler: Yes, sir. Board Member Gort: And the problem is they have to bring it in the middle of the block. They have to bring it all the way down from the other side, and that's a very large expense. And that has kept a lot of development from that area. So somehow, I think, Mr. Chairman, maybe we should contact also the Commissioner from the County responsible for that district and maybe — Chairman Teele: Ferrer, uh-huh. I agree. And again, I think there is no better expenditure of dollars, especially from the TIF (Tax Increment Funding) than to put in the infrastructure to pave the way for development. But Tere, where are we on this? And do you have a solution? Tere Garcia: There's two, not one. The Miami -Dade Water and Sewer Department does not — builds their facilities as development comes along. So it's a developer -paid infrastructure expense. When there is a oversize request, they give the developer credit. But that is the only mechanism that Miami -Dade Water and Sewer Department has to fund this infrastructure. If the CRA — then there's two options. Obviously, 34 CRA 6/26/00 if you look at the Park West area -wide, as far as what is needed for water and sewer, a projection can be made based on the development that is expected, and there's two ways to do it. Either the CRA funds it by giving the money to the Miami -Dade Water and Sewer Department and they would design and build, or the CRA would act as a developer, and then would go to the Miami -Dade Water and Sewer. They would give their requirements. The CRA would build them and fund them. The Miami -Dade Water and Sewer Department — I'm the messenger here — they did a very quick analysis of water needs in the area. And the infrastructure, if the first option is taken where you give the funds to the utility company, they would come to about five million dollars ($5,000,000). When a developer builds it and designs it, it's a lot cheaper. So that number would turn into about three million dollars ($3,000,000). And that's for that area of the Park West, which includes the entertainment center. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, this is sort of your area of expertise. It just seems to me that at least in the area where we've, you know, worked with the Planning Department to create these — what is it? Eleven clubs? Is it eleven or nine? Whatever the number is. Ana, what's the number? Board Member Gort: With the acoustics, you don't need the mike. Chairman Teele: With the acoustics, you certainly hear everything everybody is saying. Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning, City of Miami): I believe the entertainment district on Park West allows between nine to twelve clubs. That whole area, which is the area south of I-395 all the way to 71". And there's the other one north of I-395 that I believe the number was five. So there's two numbers. I think the area that Tere was referring to is the area that it would be south of I-395. Chairman Teele: Did you all look at the water infrastructure when we made those — Ms. Gelabert: No, we did not. We were looking as to — as a Planning District. We did not. Board Member Gort: That used to be the old port, and it used to be a lot of — many other warehouses in there, so the water pipes should have been there from the beginning, I mean. Chairman Teele: Tell the Water Department that. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. And don't — Chairman Teele: Look, this is the same Water Department that wanted to charge us money for Hadley Park, where you got Olympic swimming pool capacity with a little park and little clubhouse, and they wanted to charge sixty thousand dollars ($60,000). Vice Chairman Winton: What percentage of impact fees the developers pay in the City of Miami goes to the County? Don't part of the impact fees that developers pay go to the County? Ms. Garcia: What the developer pays the utility is a connection charge. So there's two charges to a developer. There is the infrastructure itself, which then they donate to the Miami -Dade Water and Sewer Department, which is the County and which is whatever is required. And if it's bigger, they give them a credit, and then everybody pays a little piece of that, and it goes back to the developer. Or/and on top, 35 CRA 6/26/00 there's connection charges for water and sewer, and those are based upon the gallons of water that the facility uses at seven dollars ($7) for both. Vice Chairman Winton: But part of the impact fee calculation doesn't include — Ms. Garcia: No. Vice Chairman Winton: The impact fees are designed for infrastructure improvements, but it doesn't have anything to do with the water (inaudible)? Ms. Garcia: No. The impact fees include roadways, parks, police, fire. Vice Chairman Winton: All right. Board Member Gort: Well, my understanding was the impact fee — and I'm not an attorney, but I did some of the research on this — could be utilized for any of the expansion necessary and capital improvement. Wouldn't this water and sewer be a part of the improvement? Ms. Garcia: No. The utilities, the water and sewer facilities do not become part of that formula. It is pay as you go. Board Member Gort: But they don't consider it part of the infrastructure? Ms. Garcia: They are technically, yes. They are infrastructure, but they are not included — Chairman Teele: But they're not paid to the CRA. They're not — they're City dollars as opposed to CRA dollars. Board Member Gort: No, I understand, but the County gets the impact fee, and so does the — Vice Chairman Winton: City. Board Member Gort: -- the City. Chairman Teele: City. Board Member Gort: There should be some impact fee in there that might be (inaudible). Ms. Garcia: The impact fees that the County receives is roadways within the County, and the County collects roadway impact fees unless you're in a DRI (Development Regional Impact) area, and then the City collects those fees. Chairman Teele: I've been — go ahead. Vice Chairman Winton: So Tere, you said that in order to upgrade the infrastructure, it's going to be five million dollars ($5,000,000) (inaudible). 36 CRA 6/26/00 Board Member Gort: (Inaudible Comments). Ms. Garcia: That is if the utility itself designs and builds the needed infrastructure. Vice Chairman Winton: And do we know that their estimate of infrastructure need matches what we think is going to happen long-term in the community, or did they just make them up, you know? Ms. Garcia: No. There is — Using the planning data that Ana expressed here, there was a very, very rough calculation of what water mains would be needed, what size of water mains. The utility — the water infrastructure there is very old, and most of those lines are very small. As far as sewer, that would only — that would be a projection of square footage and what type of uses would go into that area. It's a little bit harder to calculate. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, if you say that if the private sector does it, as opposed to the County estimate, the County estimate of five million dollars ($5,000,000) — is that me? — five million dollars ($5,000,000), you know, the — if the private sector does it, what's it going to be? Four million dollars ($4,000,000). I mean it's not going to drop that — Ms. Garcia: No, it's about half. Vice Chairman Winton: Is it? Ms. Garcia: Right. And in this case, the CRA, because it's in the area, would act as the developer. So they would design and build, and then turn over. Chairman Teele: Would it cost us two and a half million or five million? Ms. Garcia: Two and a half. Board Member Gort: Two and a half. Ms. Garcia: If you are the developer. And remember that these are very, very rough estimates. Board Member Gort: Question. Ms. Garcia: There's not a — you know, a detailed analysis that has been done, but an order of magnitude. Board Member Gort: If the CRA is to finance the infrastructure to take place, as the developments come on board and the new business comes on board, we can charge them for that expenditure and we recoup the funds. Ms. Garcia: Sure. Board Member Gort: What we need is someone to put the money up front. 37 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: I don't know. We'd have to talk to our Attorney. We would have to create a program; it would appear, to recoup our money. But there is a way to do that. But let's just hear from the Manager's office here, because they — Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager, City of Miami): Frank Rollason. Let me make a couple observations that maybe are contrary to what is being relayed to you here, but at least what our experience has been in the Building Department. One is, is that the County gives you an estimate on what it will cost to do "X," and they tell the developer, you can go out and do it or you can have us do it. When the developers have gone to the County and said, go ahead and do it, the County won't do it at the price that they quote them at, because they find that the price to actually bring these mains in is considerably more than what the County's estimate has been. Now, this is what's happened all along Brickell where the developers there at — we're talking about Barkley's Financial Center and J.W. Marriott have tried then to tell the County, go ahead and bring in the line. If you say you can do it for "X" amount, go ahead and do it. They back off and say, well, we're not going to do it at that price. So I'm not so sure that you're going to find that these costs to bring these lines in are going to be a lot less when it's done by the developer. The second thing that's happening with these clubs is, is that because of the value in that district, the people that own these warehouses are no longer willing to sell these warehouses. They are leasing them. Chairman Teele: Right. Mr. Rollason: And they're leasing them at five to seven-year rentals. Chairman Teele: Right. Mr. Rollason: And what happens is the recovery for those first initial clubs that come in to try to bring in the main is way beyond what they can absorb at this time. Plus as the other clubs come on line between point A and point B, you're down here a line. And now people start coming along the way. They're supposed to pay their fair share of what that portion is. But WASA (Miami -Dade Water and Sewer Authority) does not take the position that they are going to do the collection of that to get it back to that original developer. And you start getting into a problem when this person that's down the line has put this money out for this main to go six blocks wants to now have to follow up to try to get their money. And to me, a way to look at it is to try to get the infrastructure put in place with water and sewer to make the area attractive to where the people will come and do the development, and not have this hanging over their head. Now, you know, maybe there's a way to collect it back. But to me, we put that stuff in, and then the people say, hey, I want to go there, because I've already got these utilities and — Vice Chairman Winton: Novel idea. That sounds like government's job to me. Government doing infrastructure improvements so that the private sector can do what they do best. Chairman Teele: Develop it. Board Member Gort: Right. Chairman Teele: One hundred percent, right. Vice Chairman Winton: That's exactly right. That's what government needs to do. 38 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: And that's one of the reasons that this item is on our agenda, because the best investment of the CRA is not trying to give a company necessarily a grant to locate here. Our best use of dollars, in my opinion, is for us to build out the infrastructure. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: And make it easier for them to come in. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: So I mean, what we really need is we need for the staff to work with the consultants in the City and the County and come up with a plan, and give us some more direction, listening to what Commissioner Winton and Commissioner Gort have had to add to this. Vice Chairman Winton: And include in that plan an analysis or a process that will allow us to recover, just like water and sewer does, recover the capital cost that the City imposes on a project -by -project basis, because there's no reason why we can't. Water and Sewer does it now. So at some later point, we could decide as an organization that we don't — that that is government's function, and we're not going to charge people. But I think that at least initially, we need to understand how we could recover our capital investment on a developer -by -developer, site -by -site basis. Ms. Garcia: Commissioner, that is very like tax increment, the Tax Increment District. That's exactly. It's a utility district where you can do that. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Do we need a -- Chairman Teele: Well, I don't think we need a motion. What we need is the Attorneys and everybody to sit down and come up with something. We've batted this around. Vice Chairman Winton: And bring it back. Chairman Teele: Yeah. OK. On the Times Square, let me just say this, so we can get into the action item. I've learned that this Times Square thing is pretty complicated, and Mr. Manager, on this one, I am going to be asking the City staff to guide us. I'd take to note that lights are not a substitute for nature's beautiful vistas. So your Planning Department has done a lot of research. They're spending a lot of time. This is sort of — I want to go slow at this point. It's a lot more complicated than I thought. But I think the real opportunity is it provides the opportunity to create a destination as well as revenue to the CRA. 39 CRA 6/26/00 10. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT WITH METRIC ENGINEERING, INC., TO PROVIDE DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO CONSTRUCTION OF PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT 9TH STREET MALL WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT AREA, $89,520.00, AND AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF CRA. Chairman Teele: Mr. Director, you have Item 10-A? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration and Development, CRA): Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: A resolution authorizing the CRA to enter into a contract with Metric? A motion. Moved by Commissioner Regalado. Seconded by the Chair. Is there objection? All those in favor — Board Member Sanchez: Discussion. One, is it appropriated funds from within the CRA budget? Is that coming from the CRA budget? Chairman Teele: Yes. Mr. Tyler: Yes, it is. Vice Chairman Winton: Under what branch? Chairman Teele: The memo that I have says CD (Community Development) funds, Account Number 689005.05590, et cetera. It's in the memo. Board Member Sanchez: Was this put out for an RFP (Request for Proposals)? Chairman Teele: It was done, an RFP, by the City of Miami. It's selected off of a City competitive bid list. Board Member Sanchez: OK. Mr. Tyler: Should I explain? Board Member Sanchez: Please. Please do. Mr. Tyler: Metric, who I think is here today, was selected by the County to do the street improvements from up to as far west as 2r'd Avenue. And we've asked in this resolution that the Board allow us to continue on into 3rd Avenue, piggybacking on the same contractor who has a contract with the City and has the (inaudible) in the contract to allow this funding (inaudible). So we're trying to continue with the same design firm, the same engineer who looked at it originally. Board Member Sanchez: But professional service on every project that goes out, I mean, you have to put it out for an RFP. You just can't continue to use the same company to do all the sidewalk repairs, all the street repairs. And that's the concern that I have, I mean. 40 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: Yeah, but he didn't — look, first of all, Metric was selected by the County to do a component of this. Secondarily, the CRA selected Metric from a competitively bid list by the City. The City goes out every year and does bids. We're drawing off of a City contract from a competitive bid. So the answer to your question is — Board Member Sanchez: Is yes. Chairman Teele: -- yes. Board Member Sanchez: OK. Chairman Teele: And that's the reason why you have miscellaneous bids, so that every agency doesn't have to go out for a bid every time there is. The advantage, what he's citing about the County is we have what the unit cost is going to be, because it was done on a single bid by them. On the motion, is there — Commissioner Winton? Vice Chairman Winton: Could I ask? I have a request, future request for all of these expense items. What I want to make sure of is that we are real organized in how we're spending our money. So in this one, when I looked at this, it says CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds, so I understood generally where it was coming from. And then it says this account number, which I didn't have any clue what that meant. But we have different sources of revenue in the CRA. And what I would like to see is when we have these cost items here that in this paragraph, we have the amount that you're talking about, that it's CDBG, but it says specifically which CDBG fund it's coming out of, whether it's from this one or this one, whether it's from some other fund. And in addition to that, make sure that it also says that it is a part of the approved budget, so that we see those things, and then the triggers are all answered and it's easier to deal with these on a very quick basis. And the only thing I'm trying to do is set up a process so that we're just clean as a whistle from an accounting and an accountability standpoint, and we know exactly where the money is coming from, exactly how it got there and what we're doing with it. So that's what I'm looking for here. Board Member Sanchez: In other words, to see if the funds are eligible? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that, too. Chairman Teele: To see if the funds are what? Vice Chairman Winton: Eligible. Board Member Sanchez: Eligible. Vice Chairman Winton: And that's, you know, I think that's a good thought there, too, because CDBG funding can't be used for just everything, so we need to make sure those component parts are in here. And that's all I'm trying to do here so that — when we have each of these. Board Member Gort: (Inaudible comments) what the master plan is going to do for the district. So in the backup material, if you could put that process. Also, what part of the master plan this will do (inaudible). 41 CRA 6/26/00 Mr. Tyler: OK. Board Member Gort: Thank you. Chairman Teele: On the motion, all those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-60 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH METRIC ENGINEERING, INC. ("METRIC"), AN ENGINEERING FIRM ON THE CITY OF MIAMI'S APPROVED LIST, TO PROVIDE DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT THE 9TH STREET MALL WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA (THE "CR.A/METRIC CONTRACT"), ON THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS CONTAINED IN THAT CERTAIN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES), DATED JANUARY 4, 2000, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND METRIC (THE "CITY/METRIC CONTRACT"), WHICH CITY/METRIC CONTRACT IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "A" HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, AT A TOTAL COST NOT TO EXCEED $89,520.00 SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF CDBG FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT NO. 689005.055012.4.750, AND 11) AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT (THE "DIRECTOR") TO EXECUTE THE CRA/METRIC CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CRA. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 42 CRA 6/26/00 Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 43 CRA 6/26/00 11. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT WITH C.A.P. ENGINEERING CONSULTANT, INC. TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO CONSTRUCTION ON PARCELS P-1, P-5 AND P-7 WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT AREA, $40,000.00, AND AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF CRA. Chairman Teele: On 10-13, which is an authorization to enter into a contract with CAP, an engineering firm that was selected by the City list. Board Member Sanchez: I have a question on PZ-7. I thought we only had PZ-6. Where did 7 come from? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): PZ-7 — Board Member Sanchez: It's parking lot 7, right? Mr. Tyler: Parking Lot 7 is actually — Board Member Sanchez: I'm sorry; I'm sorry, P-7, P-7. I only thought that we had P-1 through P-6. Where did 7 come from? Mr. Tyler: P-7 is actually right next door to the Lyric, property already owned by the CRA. Board Member Sanchez: Was that included in the plan before? I think you only went to 6. I've never seen the 7. Chairman Teele: It is on City — it is on CRA-owned land, and it is the parking lot for this facility. Of all of the "P's," it's the one that we need most of all, because there's no parking here. And people -- we're the biggest violators right now of the City parking issues. The parking lot is an illegal parking lot as we have right here. This is the parking lot right here on 8th Street. Vice Chairman Winton: The one right next to the Lyric. Chairman Teele: And it's a part of the budget plan to enhance the Lyric Theater by providing parking and an alleyway. Board Member Sanchez: I didn't see 7. Mr. Tyler: But not a part of the 3ra — Chairman Teele: It's not a part of the 3ra Avenue Business Corridor, which has 1 through 6. Board Member Sanchez: Is it a part of your budget? Chairman Teele: It's a part of the budget. 44 CRA 6/26/00 Mr. Tyler: Yes. Board Member Sanchez: You have a copy of the budget? Board Member Gort: We're trying to move on with this. Chairman Teele: Let's talk about 10-B. Board Member Regalado: The parking lot, the parking lot. Board Member Gort: I thought he was talking about 7. Chairman Teele: He's talking about parking lot number 7. Board Member Gort: Oh. Board Member Regalado: P-7. It's the parking lot next to this theater, a part of the CRA that belongs to the theater. Board Member Sanchez: Where is it in the budget? Chairman Teele: The parking lot next to here is land owned by the CRA. It is within the CRA boundary, and it is our land. Because P-1 through 6 is a part of the 3id Avenue Business Corridor. This is not on Third Avenue. This is 71h Avenue. So when we approved the parking lots for the aid Avenue Business Corridor, this parking lot was not approved. This was approved as a part of the Lyric Theater budget proposal, which includes building a parking lot and alleyways. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, the only reason why I bring it up is it's the first time that I see P- 7. I've never seen P-7. I saw P-1 through 6 in your budget. I don't know if it's applied to your first budget, but it's the first time I see the P-7. Chairman Teele: It's in the budget, just like the Camillus House has always been in the budget. When you approved the Camillus House budget, you approved three point four million dollars ($3.4 million) for the construction — for the acquisition of the Camillus House in September. Board Member Sanchez: But it didn't have those conditions on it. Chairman Teele: No, it didn't have those conditions. But I'm just saying you -- If the issue is the budget, I'm telling you, it's in the budget. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, on this parking lot next to the theater, is there any short-term or long-term plans to fix it? Because there is no parking lot. Chairman Teele: That's what we're trying to do right this minute. And Commissioner Sanchez is raising a question about P-7. P-7 is the parking lot for this theater. 45 CRA 6/26/00 Board Member Regalado: So it would be P-7. OK. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Sanchez: Let me tell you what my concerns are. We're here without a budget. We continue to appropriate funds that we don't know if it — Chairman Teele: Excuse me. What was that you just said? Board Member Sanchez: We're going to — we continue to — Chairman Teele: You said we're here without a budget? Board Member Sanchez: I don't see a budget with me. I haven't been given — they haven't given me a budget. Chairman Teele: Commissioner, you have approved not only one budget, you've approved two budgets — Board Member Sanchez: With modifications. And they continue to change with modifications, don't they? Chairman Teele: Every budget changes. Board Member Sanchez: Well — Chairman Teele: But we haven't changed this budget. This is a part of the original five million dollars ($5,000,000) -- this is a part of the original three million dollars ($3,000,000). Now, listen. The problem with this whole thing is this: The City voted to provide three million dollars ($3,000,000) in FY'99. We're here in FY'00, getting ready to go to FY'01, and the City still hasn't released that three million dollars ($3,000,000). These funds for these parking lots through P-7 — excluding P-7 — were supposed to have been done a year ago. The funds still haven't arrived from the City of Miami. These were a part of the 3`d Avenue Business Corridor Plan that you're talking about. The reason that we had to move the dollars around is because with the Camillus House activity coming forward, it was in the budget. It's not a budget problem. It is a funding problem. And the City, wearing the City Commission hat, has refused to provide the funding for the CRA, to the extent that we could carry out the budget. The budget is funded at eight million dollars ($8,000,000) of capital. To date, we've only received five million dollars ($5,000,000) of capital. So that's what the problem is. But the budget is there. Your budget has an eight million dollar ($8,000,000) capital for this year, for which you only have five million dollars ($5,000,000). All of these items are in the budget. There is no problem with the budget. The problem is with the available funds. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, then, that really drives to the heart of the prior issue that I was talking about. It seems to me it's just like my business. I mean, I may have a plan that I'm going to generate eight million dollars ($8,000,000) in this particular year, but if I'm in the middle of the year and it looks 46 CRA 6/26/00 like I'm only going to generate five, I can't spend the eight that I originally planned. And I can't figure out from any of this how much money we have versus how much money we don't have. Chairman Teele: Well, I'll tell you what, Commissioner. If that's your concern, if we can get through this agenda, we will have a special meeting and deal with nothing but budget and finance issues because -- Board Member Sanchez: So move. That's what we need. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, that's good. Chairman Teele: Because, you know, the problem is this: Then dollars are there, the budgets are there. You know, it's a question not of budget. It's a question of available dollars. I mean, all these things about eligibilities and all of that, those are not even issues. I mean, the issue that the Manager — I mean, this comes totally out of left field about a building not being available, a homeless building not being available for CD (Community Development) eligible. I mean, you know, but we can do the eligibility issues, as well. The fact of the matter is, is that what we're dealing with now is dilatory issues. And I mean, I'm prepared to deal with that. But the simple fact of the matter is, is that P-7 has never been in the budget as P-7. It's in the budget as support for the Lyric Theater. And it just seems to me a little bit sanctimonious to question the Lyric Theater funding when we're all parking here illegally on an illegal parking lot, you know, and we've been doing that for the last five years. And you know what? This is land that the CRA owns. This isn't City -owned land. This is Lyric Theater. This is CRA-owned land. So it seems to me the thing we could do is move P-7 if you don't move anything else, because we're the owners of P-7. On the others, we're trying to buy the land. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I'm not sure if those comments were directed at me or not. Chairman Teele: No, sir. They were directed at Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Sanchez: And if I may. The only thing that I bring out is to identify that I've never seen P-7. And if you have it for one thing and then you bring it out as a parking lot, then it's a concern to me. I haven't seen it in the budget, and that's why I brought it out to my attention — to your attention. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez, if you read the budget as it relates to the Lyric Theater, it talks about constructing parking lots and building an alleyway. It's not designated as P-7, but it is a parking lot. You're objecting, in effect, to four thousand dollars ($4,000), which could be done as a miscellaneous — (INAUDIBLE COMMENT NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECORD) Chairman Teele: No, that's how much it's going to cost to design this. This is not even the cost of construction. Board Member Sanchez: I'm not objecting to anything. I'm just saying that P-7 is — being a parking lot, you had P-1 through P-6 which — Chairman Teele: In the 3Td Avenue Business Corridor. 47 CRA 6/26/00 Board Member Sanchez: I know that — Chairman Teele: That's a different program. Board Member Sanchez: I understand. Chairman Teele: OK. Board Member Sanchez: And I was aware. And now, you're bringing P-7, which was never in the budget under P-7. It was on something else. Chairman Teele: On 10-13, is there any objection? All those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Gort: Aye. Board Member Regalado: Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Aye. Chairman Teele: Aye. Opposed? Board Member Sanchez: No. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: One "no" vote. Commissioner Regalado. 48 CRA 6/26/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA R-00-61 A RESOLUTION: I) AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH C.A.P. ENGINEERING CONSULTANT, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION ("CAP"), AN ENGINEERING FIRM ON THE CITY OF MIAMI'S APPROVED LIST, TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO THE CONSTRUCTION ON PARCELS P-1, P-5 AND P-7 WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA (THE "CRA/CAP CONTRACT"), ON THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS CONTAINED IN THAT CERTAIN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES), DATED DECEMBER 6, 1999, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND CAP (THE "CITY/CAP CONTRACT"), WHICH CITY/CAP CONTRACT IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "A" HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, AT A TOTAL COST NOT TO EXCEED $40,000.00 SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF GENERAL FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT NO. 689004.055011.4.193; AND II) AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT (THE "DIRECTOR") TO EXECUTE THE CRA/CAP CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CRA. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None. Board Member Regalado: Now that we've voted on this issue, the issue of parking lots, I think it — I just want to remind the members of this Board of the early years that I served. I remember that when I first attended the first CRA meeting back in 1996, all that we discussed was CDBG money for housing projects, CDBG money or different funds for housing projects. And I have to tell you that I am really happy that we're discussing now in these meetings that we all had in the past months projects that have to do with infrastructure, for there cannot be any progress without infrastructure. And what this area needs is 49 CRA 6/26/00 infrastructure. Parking lots, sidewalks, corridors. If we don't start construction on the infrastructure, we will never be able to redevelop this area. So I think that I have to congratulate the Board and the staff, because of this new philosophy of working on the infrastructure and having in the back burner housing and other big projects. I would rather be discussing construction of parking lots, and sidewalks and streets than funding for housing projects. I just wanted to say that, because I think it's a difference that I've noticed in the past year or two. Chairman Teele: Well, in a way, I'm sort of glad you said it, and in a way, I'm sort of sad you said it, because the next item is Greater Miami Neighborhoods. And Gus, why don't you come up now. 50 CRA 6/26/00 12. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO AMENDMENT TO EXTEND EXISTING AGREEMENT WITH GREATER MIAMI NEIGHBORHOODS, INC. FOR ONE ADDITIONAL YEAR, $75,000 PER YEAR. Chairman Teele: Let me just say very briefly, when I took over the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), everything that Tomas Regalado has just said was true. The CRA was totally consumed, 99 percent in housing activities, and had been consumed in housing activities over the last 20 years, since the `80s, when this started. I made a decision after conferring with the Manager and Herb Bailey that the CRA would be involved in infrastructure to the extent that we could, in business development and job creation, and that we would contract with the most recognized agency to provide the housing staff support. So when we restructured the CRA, we hired as our staff for housing -- The entire CRA staff before was housing, primarily. We hired as our staff support for housing Greater Miami Neighborhoods. Greater Miami Neighborhoods has an annual contract. They carry out — they are our housing arm, if you will. They carry out the technical assistance with the CDC's (Community Development Corporations), and they serve on the staff of the CRA, in effect. They come to all of the Board meetings — I mean all of the staff meetings. And so you won't find staff on the CRA with the housing expertise. What we did is we bought what literally would cost us a million dollars ($1,000,000), we bought a contract or in effect a grant to Greater Miami Neighborhoods to serve as the staff to the CRA in the area of housing. And that's what's the next item. Gus Dominguez is the Executive Director of Greater Miami Neighborhoods. And as you know, they have one of the most distinguished boards of primarily banking officials and other developers on their board. Commissioner Gort. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to have to step out of this because I might have a conflict in the future. So I want to make sure — Chairman Teele: What? Board Member Gort: The next item. The one thing that I stated before, which I think is very important, we approved the master plan. We approved the funds to it, and we're going to implement the master plan according to availability. I think it's very important when you, staff, when you bring this to us — once again, that's why I requested it — make sure that whenever you have a request for funding, you apply it to the master plan and to the specific project that would go with the master plan so people have a better understanding of it. Vice Chairman Winton: In speaking to availability — Board Member Gort: We all approved this a long time ago. We went through this budget, and we approved all the — the master plan items. Chairman Teele: Right. Board Member Gort: So let's make sure we do that when we follow up on our paperwork. Chairman Teele: Gus, welcome. And you are our housing expert. And I would hope that the Members of the Board individually have the opportunity to visit your offices. They're in the Little Havana area. And I don't think there's any question that Greater Miami Neighborhoods is one of the premier housing 51 CRA 6/26/00 consultants. You all are consultants to many cities across the State, as well. I was very pleased to learn that you all were consultants, I think, to Saint Petersburg; is that right? Gus Dominguez: Yes. We're managing their (inaudible) program. Chairman Teele: The City Attorney over there — Mr. Dominguez: (Inaudible) Housing Authority. Chairman Teele: The City Attorney up there was giving you all a lot of praises in a Florida Bar meeting the other day. Mr. Dominguez: Thank you, Commissioner. We've been working on the acquisitions, helping the CRA come up with the values and appraisals on the acquisition of the parking lots on the 3rd Avenue Corridor. At this point, basically, all of our work has been done in that regard. The major obstacle that we found is the condition of title on these properties. Chairman Teele: The condition of what? Mr. Dominguez: Of the titles, property titles and ownership. And it's going to take a major enterprise to clear those titles. And we may have to — you know, I think Bill Bloom can elaborate on what kinds of problems he's found in trying to clean up the titles to these properties. And in a number of properties, also, we have found totally unwilling sellers. We basically have been told, "Come and get us through eminent domain," because they feel that they will get the maximum amount of money for those properties. Nevertheless, when we have found willing buyers, we just need, I think at this point, to clear those titles. And it's just a matter of time. And if worse comes to worst, we just have to file quiet title actions in Circuit Court and it'll take another 90 days to clear that up. Chairman Teele: All right. Your contract is up this year, and the Director is recommending renewal. The contract is a four thousand dollar ($4,000) a month contract, as I recall, plus expenses, plus task orders. I know that we draw down on at least four different people — Tannenbaum, Clara, yourself and others. And again, I just commend you all for working with us. I know we've got some exciting news we want to talk about right after this, but Mr. Manager — Mr. Director, you're recommending approval of the continuation of their contract? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Yes, sir, I am. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, I hope that — and this is something similar that I've said to some of the — and I know this is different business, but within the City. And if you all are the housing expert, I hope that during this next year, if this contract is renewed that we're really talking about the results that you've brought to the table in terms of real housing developed, and not — and no disrespect here, but it seems to me that this issue of figuring out title problems, I know we pay Holland and Knight an awful lot of money. I know that we've paid Bermello, Ajamil an awful lot of money on this 3rdAvenue Business Corridor. So I'm struggling here a bit understanding why Greater Miami Neighborhoods is eating up seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) a year focused on the kind of issues that didn't end up getting us housing. 52 CRA 6/26/00 William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Commissioner, to respond to the issue of title, what's happening is Greater Miami Neighborhoods, on behalf of the CRA has been negotiating purchasing agreements with various lot owners to acquire the P-1's through P-6's and the other special sites. The problem has been once we go to contract, we end up with various title issues because there's a lot of estates involved where the estates aren't properly handled, and there are a lot of errors that can't be located. Vice Chairman Winton: Let me tell you, I can't hear with this microphone, so my apologies. So did you tell me that they spent a great deal of their time helping negotiate contracts to purchase the land? Is that what you said? Mr. Bloom: Part of their task has been to negotiate purchase agreements with the property owners, and they do due diligence on behalf of the CRA, they coordinate the surveys and the environmental reports, doing the inspections of the property. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, OK. Mr. Bloom: And then they'll have — Holland and Knight will perform the title services. And that's where we're coming up with difficulties. Even though the investigation has gone well, the contract has been signed; the seller isn't in a position that can make good marketable and assurable title to the CRA. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. That makes much more sense to me. Thank you. Chairman Teele: Motion? Vice Chairman Winton: So move. Chairman Teele: Second. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed? The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-62 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDMENT WITH GREATER MIAMI NEIGHBORHOODS, INC. ("GMN") TO EXTEND THE EXISTING AGREEMENT WITH GMN FOR ONE ADDITIONAL YEAR, AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $75,000.00 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 53 CRA 6/26/00 Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: Board Member Wifredo Gort Chairman Teele: I didn't want to get into this. Johnny, housing, it is the most frustrating thing that I've dealt with. And I don't mean at all to make light, but after being here for about nine months, I recognized that housing is something that you've really got to be very patient. It's hard to see, it is hard to see results. And I agree with you on the results issue. But we haven't been fair in the context to Greater Miami, because I think one of the things they need to present at every Board Meeting, because they really are not doing development. They are staff to us. In other words, we could go out and hire two housing experts on his staff. What we've done is instead of — we've contracted them as staff. Everything that deals with Poinciana Village — I know that I see the owner — all of the things that led up to the opening of that and the last phase which we just did the grand opening about four months ago at Poinciana, they were very much involved in. We get proposals every month from somebody about housing activities that have to be evaluated. They're the ones that go out and evaluate all of the various housing activities. And so I think, you know, one of the things is that maybe Greater Miami Neighborhood's reports, monthly reports and quarterly reports need also to be circulated to the Board Members. And I think it's very important, also, that the Board Members be given a briefing at Greater Miami Neighborhood's house of the things that are underway. But again, I think that the Vice Chairman's remarks are appropriate. And I think we should develop some tasks, some specific tasks that we want to see accomplished so the next year, we can evaluate them based on that. 54 CRA 6/26/00 13. AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT TO NEGOTIATE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF HUD 202 HOUSING FACILITY FOR ELDERLY AT PARCEL P-1 — JUBILEE PROJECT. Chairman Teele: The next item is a very exciting item, and Mr. Director or Gus, how do you all want to proceed? Gus? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): We're going to bring forward — go ahead. Gus Dominguez: On the proposal from Jubilee Housing CDC elderly housing project on a site on P Avenue or off P Avenue and 131h Street. Bermello and Ajamil have done an (Community Development Corporation) to develop a Section 202 analysis of the proposed plan that Jubilee gave the agency, and we consulted on both the feasibility and the siting that have been proposed, and we concur, absolutely, with Bermello's report. And I think Alfredo Sanchez can elaborate a lot more on why we made the recommendations that we have. Chairman Teele: This is the recommendation on the — Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, I can't see that. Chairman Teele: Doug, have you been introduced? Before we do all of this about you, let's at least introduce you. Ladies and gentlemen, Members of the Board, Jubilee has approached me. I referred it to the CRA. They have received a grant from Washington for approximately six million dollars ($6,000,000) for an elderly housing component. It was designated in another area. They came to the CRA and asked us would we like to work with them on it. We referred it again to Greater Miami Neighborhoods and to the consultant. And this is the consultant's report coming back, saying what they view as the opportunities and the concerns of the Jubilee request. And pending that, then we will hear from Jubilee. Doug, why don't you all introduce yourselves for the record to the Board? Doug Mayer: My name is Doug Mayer, and I'm Director of Development for Jubilee Community Development. Frank Gudorf. I'm Frank Gudorf. I'm the Executive Director of Jubilee Community Development. Chairman Teele: Thank you. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, question. Is this a public housing or a Section 8, low-income? What is it, this building? Mr. Mayer: 202 is a special program for HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development), and basically, it provides affordable housing for very low-income elderly. So it's -- basically the low-income person pays no more than one third of their income for the housing, and then the balance is made up by the Federal Government. 55 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: What's the average rent — I mean what's the average payment that an elderly would make? Mr. Mayer: It could be as low as a hundred dollars ($100) a month for their unit that they would pay, and then the balance would be filled in by the Federal Government. Board Member Regalado: Would this be operated by Miami -Dade County? Mr. Mayer: This would be operated by an entity that would be created. When you do 202, you have to set up a separate 501(c)(3) entity to operate it. And Jubilee has an arrangement with the Urban League to operate this property. Board Member Regalado: The reason I asked this, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board is that we keep getting complaints of the conditions of many HUD buildings that are managed by the County. And, you know, this will be a — Mr. Mayer: This would not be a County -operated facility. Board Member Regalado: OK. Mr. Mayer: This would be privately operated. Board Member Regalado: Thank you very much. Chairman Teele: OK. Alfredo, could you run through this real quickly for us, so we know just what we're talking about? Alfredo Sanchez: For the record, my name is Alfredo Sanchez of Bermello, Ajamil and Partners. The site is located at 13th Street and Northwest 2nd Court. That's the site we have been looking at and evaluated. Chairman Teele: It's commonly referred to as P-1, as well. Mr. Sanchez: Absolutely. And actually, this part is P-1. This part has never been really dealt with. The site — one of — a number of issues with developing the site. Number one is property ownership. The CRA owns the parcels illustrated in pink. There's a parcel located right in the middle here that is not owned by the CRA. And most of this property here, all this property is owned by Saint John's Church. So that's an issue with developing the property. Another issue is the 30-foot existing right-of-way on Northwest Second Court, which requires it be expanded to 50 feet, which will put a demand on the site to the east. Vice Chairman Winton: Does that road go through? Mr. Sanchez: I'm sorry? Vice Chairman Winton: Does that go under the overpass? Chairman Teele: No. 56 CRA 6/26/00 Mr. Sanchez: I'm sorry; I didn't hear you. Chairman Teele: That road is one block long. It goes from — Mr. Sanchez: One block long, right. Chairman Teele: It goes from 131h Street and it dead -ends at 14t" Mr. Sanchez: Right. It ends right here against the expressway right-of-way. Chairman Teele: At 395. Mr. Sanchez: So we evaluated what initially was proposed, which was a project that looked at turning — creating a high-rise building turn with a private road. We feel that this will put a limit to the development options for the area. It had a substantial amount of commercial along the edge. And we came back after our evaluation and looked at a number of options. Option number one, taking a very simple attitude towards the development and locating the building on the present — this one parcel, R-3. This has a lot of constraints regarding the R-3 and regarding the FAR (Floor Area Ratio) demand and the parking demand, and being able to site the building. We also looked at another option, which is basically doing a townhouse development with this scheme, locating the building here. We still have those problems. Our recommended development option, which would entail land acquisition is to locate the building on the west side of Northwest 2nd Court, acquiring the parcel in the middle, providing a parking area, and then coming in with a townhouse development along the east side of 2°dCourt, to be able to pick up the expanded right-of-way, to provide a buffer to the existing lower — low-rise housing here, and to be able to connect also the site, the proposed building with the church facility in an easier manner. I think the site is ideally suited for this, because it has the church next to it. It will provide activity for the neighborhood. It will create the redevelopment environment that I think we want with this type of facility. Chairman Teele: Where is the church exactly? Mr. Sanchez: The church is exactly — may I have the aerial, please? Right over here, over here. Chairman Teele: Right where your existing building is, just go straight across the street. Mr. Sanchez: Right. This is where we're proposing the building. The church is right here. So we could be very easy to create a pedestrian connection to the church from the site. Vice Chairman Winton: And it's a high-rise building? Mr. Sanchez: The building as presented will have 70 units. They're basically efficiencies — and correct me — one bedrooms. And we would take about a seven to eight -story building to be able to locate it in this site. There is no — there's a 120-foot height requirement in the C-1. The property is in the process of being rezoned to C-1. It went through the first reading. So the site can accommodate the property, but it will require additional acquisitions. 57 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: All right. Doug, did you want to make a very brief presentation, just tell us a little bit about what it is? We're going to have to leave very shortly. Mr. Gudorf: If you wouldn't mind, I'll take care of that. One thing I just wanted to mention, and I know it's been alluded to in the past is that the — Chairman Teele: State your name and address again for the record. Mr. Gudorf: Yeah. Frank Gudorf. I'm the Executive Director of Jubilee Community Development Corporation. 742 Northwest 12th Avenue. The six million dollars ($6,000,000) was awarded to Jubilee by the Federal Government in, I believe, September of last year for this particular project, 71 units, Section 202 elderly project on a site, which was not originally in the CRA District. That site is no longer available to us, and we had been in discussions with the CRA staff to move the development to the CRA District. We are under some very compelling time constraints here, because since we had lost the original site, HUD is requiring that we identify a new site and get site control on a new site, I think, by the end of September, if I'm not mistaken, of this year, at which point, we lose the six million dollars ($6,000,000). This is all Federal money. This is not County money, City money. This is all Federal dollars. It would be a real shame, I think, both from the perspective of the City and the perspective of Jubilee to lose these dollars. So we, you know, we want to and we would like to site this facility in the CRA District, but we do have some time constraints. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, a couple of concerns that I have. And frankly, I'm excited that you all are looking, but there's a coupe of issues that I hope that you take into consideration. One is I'm not overly thrilled by the height that you're looking at for this project, particularly in that neighborhood. We don't have high-rise development in that area at all. And so you're going to kind of stick this thing up there that's going to be sticking up above everything else, and I don't think it's going to be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. And contrary to some belief at the moment, I am convinced that under Commissioner Teele's guidance here and with the support of the City Commission, we're going to make Overtown a thriving community again. And I would hate to see us develop something that really isn't in character with the — in keeping with the character of the neighborhood, one. Number two, the architectural features that you ultimately choose, most high-rise elderly, low-income elderly housing that I've seen in the County looks terrible. And you can design architectural features on these buildings that make the project look warm and neighborly, and attractive. And I hope that you — so my view here is two things I want you to look at. One is the height of this building. I think that's a concern. And the other is the architectural features that you choose to use on the finished product is going to be very important. Chairman Teele: All right. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner. Board Member Gort: What I'd like to add is that (inaudible) so we could be able to build affordable houses in Brickell. We have a building called Brickell West. And if you look at it — and I agree with 58 CRA 6/26/00 Commissioner Winton — if you look at the architecture and the color, that made a lot of difference in that whole area. It made an impact. So this building, although I know Commissioner Winton is worried about the height, I personally think this is backing up onto the expressway, so I really don't have that much of a problem with the height. But the architecture and landscaping that goes with it, I think is very important. Mr. Dominguez: Mr. Chairman, if I may answer. It might be possible to lower the building height if the project were to get an allowable variance on the parking lot. The City has a provision for elderly housing where you can cut the parking requirements in half for elderly housing. So that would be — potentially, you can expand. Vice Chairman Winton: That would give you more landmass to change that building. Mr. Dominguez: Right. And then you could lower eventually the number of floors. The other issue that you were referring to on the — sort of the character of the neighborhood. I think that could solve, you know, most of that problem. The architectural design would necessitate probably getting an additional funding source. The problem with the HUD 202 grant is what they call the Cost Containment Guidelines, which basically forces any developer, no matter who it is, to build a box, because that's what HUD will fund. There is a bid now — before HUD was very reluctant to allow any other funding source to come into a project like this. I believe that since last year, they have been now more amenable to accepting other funding sources, such as City home funds or County sur-tax or some of that. I know that Kodak has been able to get some of that funding to enhance the architectural features of their new projects. Board Member Gort: OK. Chairman Teele: All right. On the motion, do we have a motion to — the resolution really doesn't state — Board Member Gort: What would be the participation of the — Chairman Teele: OK. The participation of the CRA simply would be at this point to provide the land for the development, which is certainly one of the best things that we can do, in that we had designated this land to be a parking lot, anyway. And so with this land, we're leveraging six million dollars ($6,000,0000) of development, but more importantly, elderly housing. I think that Commissioner Winton's point needs to be codified in the resolution, however. So the resolution as stated is authorizing the Director of Operations and Development to negotiate a development agreement for the construction of a 202 facility on P-1, at P-1, which development agreement shall be presented to the Board in July for approval. And prior to it coming to this Board, it should go before the Overtown Advisory Board for their considerations, as well as the comments of Commissioners Winton, Gort and myself. Is there a motion to that effect? Vice Chairman Winton: The last part about the comments is going to get woven into the resolution? Chairman Teele: Exactly. That's exactly right. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So move. 59 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: Moved, and seconded by Commissioner Gort. Is there discussion? This is a tight timetable. We're on vacation in August, so we're not going to come back and deal with this in August. So if you need it in September, you got to work this out in July is what we're saying. And we're going to be looking to staff to work with you and the legal to work with you on this. Vice Chairman Winton: For the record, how many years does this property have to be maintained low- income elderly? Mr. Gudorf. I believe it's 20 years. I would — excuse me — have to look at our agreement with HUD. Vice Chairman Winton: I thought it was a long period. I just wanted to make — Mr. Gudorf: It's a minimum of 20 years. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Thank you. Chairman Teele: Is that resolution satisfactory to you all? Does that give you enough to work with us on? Mr. Gudorf: And I would like to concur with what Gus said about the height and the architectural features. We would be more than happy to, you know, to work with the CRA on both of those issues. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Chairman Teele: Is there objection? Board Member Sanchez: And that would come back to this Board for approval? (INAUDIBLE COMMENT NOT INCLUDED IN THE REOCRD) Chairman Teele: All those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed, say "nay." 60 CRA 6/26/00 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-63 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT (THE "DIRECTOR") OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO NEGOTIATE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE HUD 202 HOUSING FACILITY FOR THE ELDERLY AT PARCEL P-1, WHICH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SHALL BE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR APPROVAL. (Here follow body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: Board Member Tomas Regalado 61 CRA 6/26/00 14. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO LEASES AT MARKET RATES WITH LANDOWNERS OF PARCELS P-1 THROUGH P-6 AND M-2 TO ALLOW CRA TO UTILIZE PROPERTIES ON INTERIM BASIS PENDING COMPLETION OF ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS OR RESOLUTION OF TITLE ISSUES. Chairman Teele: All right. See, 12 is authorizing market rate rents for the payment of P-1 through 6. That's the issue of title, the issues that have been addressed already. Is there a motion? A motion to build parking lots. Where the titles are clouded, we'll enter into a market rate rental agreement with them for the purpose of facilitating the construction. Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Sanchez: Can the executive director motion to provide us with a list of the owners of the property and the addresses? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Yes. If the Board desires, yes. Vice Chairman Winton: Move for purposes of discussion. Chairman Teele: Moved. Seconded. Discussion. Vice Chairman Winton: Just a point of clarification here. When you said the — I'm not sure I understand the market rent — the market rate lease business here. What are you talking about? William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): (Inaudible) some background. These are properties where typically because of estate issues; we have not been able to acquire the properties. They're either unidentified errors, the estate wasn't properly closed. Vice Chairman Winton: So we'll lease them as opposed to buying? Mr. Bloom: So the concept is that we will enter into a five-year lease. Vice Chairman Winton: How long? Mr. Bloom: Five years. The earlier of the time we're able to acquire the property or five years. The rent will be predicated on the value of the property CRA has, will have a current appraisal of the property, because that was what was used to negotiate the purchase price in the first place. The issue, really, that's presented to the Board is more of a risk issue in that because we — you know, we don't have everyone who is — has an ownership interest in the property signing the lease. So theoretically, they can come back later and say, well, this lease is invalid. We're not going to sell the property. Vice Chairman Winton: Right, right. Mr. Bloom: And since we're not improving the property beyond a parking lot, we feel that it's not a real risk to the Board in proceeding on this basis. So this enables us to proceed now. 62 CRA 6/26/00 Vice Chairman Winton: And your explanation makes a lot of sense to me. The concept makes a lot of sense. As I look at this, though, I can't tell — I am clueless on the cost. So when I look at this market rental rate, I can't tell from this whether we're going to pay somebody ten thousand dollars ($10,000) a month, or a million dollars ($1,000,000) a month or twenty-five dollars ($25) a month. And so some way or another, Bob, we got to — Chairman Teele: The going rate for all of the residential lots in Overtown is about twelve thousand dollars ($12,000). Vice Chairman Winton: But the point here is that it ought to be here so that we don't have to -- Board Member Gort: Public information. Vice Chairman Winton: -- we don't even have to ask the question. We just see it, or a range, or whatever it is you could give us that gives us some guidance. Mr. Bloom: The market rate rent is typically — you know, it's a cap rate, based upon — Vice Chairman Winton: Right, right, right, I understand. Mr. Bloom: All right. And so if you could give us the guidance on what you feel, whether it's a ten percent cap on market value, so if the property is worth sixty thousand dollars ($60,000), we have an appraisal of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000), we would pay annual rent based upon that ten percent cap rate. And that's how we come to that rate. Vice Chairman Winton: All right. Board Member Gort: Question. Vice Chairman Winton: That makes sense. Board Member Gort: This is not my area of expertise. Can this be applied as a lease purchase agreement with the rent being paid to the — assessed to the property, if we do buy it, that we credit that towards the purchase price? Mr. Bloom: We can attempt to negotiate that. Chairman Teele: As amended, as amended. Look, the issue here is that all of the owners of the property are willing to sell. The lawyers cannot give us a clear title. So, I mean, you know, it could be a third cousin who is in Alaska that doesn't even know about this, based upon some right, and quite candidly, it's very expensive when you look at the value of these properties, which are less than twelve thousand dollars ($12,000). But we've got to do this the right way. And your point is well taken. The staff should give more instruction. Board Member Sanchez: Let's put a cap on it. 63 CRA 6/26/00 Vice Chairman Winton: And I like the cap, Bill, your idea on a capitalization rate. So will a capitalization rate not to exceed ten percent tie your hands on these lease deals? That's a pretty good rate of return in today's market. Mr. Tyler: In some cases, we've got some people who believe that they can get three times an appraisal rate. And so that will be the case. But I think we can deal with that on a case -by -case basis. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, what's the timing? Are we under a crucial time frame here? Mr. Tyler: It's just that we'll be stagnant if we're waiting for a clear title. Vice Chairman Winton: No, no. What I'm asking here is that if we give you the authorization to negotiate a lease not to exceed five years — and Bill, you said these have all been appraised, right? Chairman Teele: Every one of them have been appraised. Vice Chairman Winton: All the properties have been appraised. So if we give you authorization to negotiate at a maximum ten percent capitalization rate, payments to the lesser and you run into a problem with somebody that wants more, can't that come back before us again? Mr. Bloom: Absolutely. Vice Chairman Winton: So we can make an individual decision? Board Member Regalado: Yeah. Board Member Gort: But at the same time, with the amendment, that money — the payments for the rent to be recognized as a part of the deal. Mr. Tyler: Credited towards — Vice Chairman Winton: If you can negotiate that. Mr. Tyler: Yes. Chairman Teele: As amended, all those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Sanchez: As amended, yes. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 64 CRA 6/26/00 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-64 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO ENTER INTO LEASES AT MARKET RATES WITH THE LANDOWNERS OF PARCELS P-1 THROUGH P-7 AND M-2 (THE "PARCELS"), WITH ANNUAL RENTS NOT TO EXCEED 10% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE OF EACH SUCH PARCEL, TO ALLOW THE CRA TO UTILIZE THE PARCELS ON AN INTERIM BASIS PENDING THE COMPLETION OF ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS OR THE RESOLUTION OF TITLE ISSUES WHICH DELAY THE ABILITY OF THE CRA TO AQUIRE THE PARCELS. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: Board Member Tomas Regalado 65 CRA 6/26/00 15. (A) AUTHORIZE CRA TO00 IMPLEMENT POLICY OF COMMERCIAL REVITALIZATION SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT PROGRAM. (B) DEFER CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED EXPENDITURE OF $420,000 IN GRANTS WITH RESPECT TO GRANT PROGRAM TO A SPECIAL MEETING OF CRA TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY, JUNE 29, 2000, BEGINNING AT 2 P.M., IN THE CITY HALL CHAMBERS. Chairman Teele: All right. Number 13 is a resolution to implement the Commercial Revitalization Supplemental Grant Program, and authorizing the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) to expend four hundred and ten thousand dollars ($410,000). William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): (Inaudible Comment). This is a resolution to approve the concept of the grant program. Board Member Sanchez: It's a grant concept, right? Grant? Vice Chairman Winton: Move for purposes of discussion. Chairman Teele: Moved and seconded. Vice Chairman Winton: Could you all bring me up to date and up to speed on this? I'm not clear in terms of what this is doing at all. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): The CRA is proposing what we're calling the Supplementary Grant Program, and we go through the competitive process that MMAP (Metro -Miami Action Plan) has used, or else the City or the County. So the persons who are eligible under these particular grants are persons who have already competitively pre -qualified for an initial grant from either MMAP, or the City or County, another funding agency. Vice Chairman Winton: What's MMAP? Chairman Teele: Metro Action. Dade County Metro Action Plan. Mr. Tyler: Miami Action Plan. Chairman Teele: M-MAP. Vice Chairman Winton: Are these grants for businesses or — Chairman Teele: Yes. Mr. Tyler: Along the 3Td Avenue Business Corridor. Chairman Teele: These are all on 3rd Avenue. Mr. Tyler: Yes, sir. 66 CRA 6/26/00 Vice Chairman Winton: And so what we're doing here is — Board Member Sanchez: Authorizing its use. Vice Chairman Winton: -- is authorizing, setting aside the funding to set this up or — Board Member Sanchez: No. Chairman Teele: No. What you have is two things here. You have a policy directive creating the program. And then you have a resolution authorizing the expenditure of — attached resolution — a grant of two hundred and fifty thousand to Jackson's Soul Food in the 3rd Avenue Business. These funds are to be supplemented by matching funds of at least 20 percent for a total project cost, further requiring that the grantee retain a certified architect at the grantee's expense. And the second is an amount not to exceed a hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) to Two Guys Restaurant in the 3rd Avenue Business Corridor, subject to these funds being matched by at least 20 percent for a total cost of a hundred and eighty thousand dollars ($180,000). And grant funds of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) to Just Right Barbershop in the 3rd Avenue Corridor, subject to a match of 80 percent for a total cost of not to exceed a hundred and twenty thousand dollars ($120,000). And what you have here, just so that everybody is clear, is you have Metro Action — MMAP getting Federal dollars, giving each of these businesses grants. The CRA staff went in and assessed each of the businesses, primarily the two restaurants and determined that the funds that they're getting are not nearly adequate to meet City Code. These grant funds will actually round out the competitive process, make each of these, Two Guys Restaurant and Jackson's Soul Food meet Code and will, in effect, be a part of the 3rd Avenue Business Corridor. I think what's really important, just so that everybody seems to be a little bit vague on the budget, is that we're proposing to build a three to four million dollar ($4,000,000) on 3rd Avenue in year `03, which will be two years from now. It's not fair to these businesses that are there struggling or they're doing what they can do for us to then come in with a state of the art mall, if you will, and undermine them. So what we're trying to do is give them a good one and a half year head start in helping them, because they're not going to qualify for anything out of the job plaza that we have designated in our budget. So in effect, the resolution is to approve the policy. The policy is the CRA Commercial Supplemental Grant Program. It requires that anyone under these programs must have been selected either by the Federally -funded MMAP Program, or the City of Miami or Dade County. And it provides specific funding for those three agencies to the tune of four hundred and ten thousand dollars ($410,000), subject to the conditions that the funds be matched by at least 20 percent in both cases or in two cases, and 80 percent in the third case. Vice Chairman Winton: See, I think these are, again, part of the processes that a CRA ought to be involved with in helping revitalize this area. The thing that I'm terribly nervous about in this regard is that it seems to me that from a Board standpoint, we ought to be seeing what the plans are, what the end result is, what we're really doing with two hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($250,000). So that a part of the presentation ought to be we're going to spend two hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($250,000), and here's all the things we're doing that make this business do — whatever it is or whatever. And from where I'm sitting, I don't get that. I'm just getting this thing that says, well, we're going to spend two hundred and fifty — Chairman Teele: It clearly is a reasonable request, and I would ask that we defer this and give this presentation maybe this Thursday at 2 o'clock before Commission meeting if that's convenient, because 67 CRA 6/26/00 the one thing I think that we should do is we should not hold these businesses back in this context. Staff has been working with them, I think, for the better part of a year? Mr. Tyler: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: With the various individual businesses. The reports are that thick, and I think each Board Member should have them. Werner's reports et cetera. What bothers me, to be very candid — I'm going to put it on the table — we just approved seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) for Terremark for business development. Nobody says a damn word. You get down to minority businesses, and it really is a lot of concern. But I think given the history of what has happened in this community, everybody should be comfortable before you vote on anything. And I have no objections for more information. I just happen to have gone through all of the businesses on 2°dAvenue, 3rd Avenue. I know each one from the pool hall to the barbershops on 2°dand 3rd Avenue. And it's not fair that I have the information and the rest of the Board doesn't have it. But I would only say that I really do think that commercial revitalization is something that we've got to be concerned about. We've got to be concerned about business revitalization, and to the extent that we need more information, I think it's fair that anybody ask for that and have an informed vote. The fact that, one, Jackson Soul Food is committed to double the number of employees, going from 12 to 24 is something that should be on the record. Vice Chairman Winton: Right, right. Chairman Teele: And nobody knows that unless you're reading internal documents the way I'm doing. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: The comment about the difference between Terremark and these black -owned restaurants, I did receive, because you invited me, a complete presentation on what this NAP (Network Area Point) would be before I made any decision about a dollar. Chairman Teele: But Johnny, we don't know how one dollar ($1) of that seven fifty is going to be spent. I don't know. You don't know. I'm taking NAP at their word. I'm taking the staff at their word. But they have not given us a plan on how they're going to spend one dollar ($1), just for the record. And business development in Park West, to me, is just as important as in Overtown, and vice -versa. And I stand by my statement. We don't have one detail on how the seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) of the NAP -- of the Center for the Americas is going to be spent. Vice Chairman Winton: Actually, we haven't made — and it's our decision to make, not theirs — we haven't made the decision on how we're going to deliver that seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($750,000). It isn't them. It's us. Chairman Teele: It's us, that's right. 68 CRA 6/26/00 Vice Chairman Winton: So we still have work to do before that becomes a reality. So that's the reason I'm comfortable where I am relative to that, and the only reason why I'm asking these same questions. I'm not trying — Chairman Teele: And I am very comfortable, because I feel that every Board Member should have information. Johnny, I know you're not trying to be dilatory as one Board Member is. I mean, I don't mind saying that, because the fact of the matter is, is that a lot of frustration is out there in the Overtown community. The idea of saying that I'm taking money from the 3rd Avenue Business Corridor and putting it into Park West is race baiting. And it's very offensive. And I've had to sit here from the very beginning of this Board meeting and just sort of try to be a good Chairman. But the fact of the matter is that those statements are extremely racially dividing, the fact that I'm proposing to put money in the Camillus House, as opposed to the 3rd Avenue — which I am doing, and it's a true statement. But the fact of the matter is the need is greater right now at the Camillus House to do this. So we all have things that we have to work through on this, and I think we all have a right to be collegial, and to ask for information for the furtherance of the program. And I respect that your request is not to be dilatory. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Board Member Gort: You were not here when the People's Barbecue went through the process. I was. And Richard Cooper is sitting here, and he can tell you they've had a lot of problems in getting their deal done. The one thing that I would like to suggest is — and I don't have any problem in funding this Corridor, because I think it's very important. Economic development depends on the small businesses. But what I'd like to see, if possible, is to make sure that these individuals would not have the same problems that People's Barbecue had. And you can go and talk to the owners of People's Barbecue, and they can tell you all the problems they had through the funding, through the architecture and all that. We have to learn from that experience to make sure we don't have that happen again. At the same time, I think, if possible, part of the things that we should as the CRA to make sure these individuals become very successful, help them work through a business plan. Help them work through their marketing plan to make sure that once it's built, they become very successful. I think Johnny has been there and he's had breakfast there a couple of times. I've taken him there. Vice Chairman Winton: More than once. Chairman Teele: More than once, yes. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Board Member Gort: And this is what we need to do. We need to make the business attractive enough so it will serve just about anyone within Dade County. So as part of the help and the economic help, I think there's a great need for technical assistance, also. There's plenty of agencies within Dade County that were willing to sit down and provide that technical assistance. I think the CRA should be responsible to make sure that these individuals are successful. 69 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort, on the second point, these agencies, these three businesses were selected by the County, which is MMAP and the Federal process. And in that way, we're cooperating with them. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: So a lot of the discussion — I mean, everybody has sort of been in the queue for more than a year on the MMAP process. And what we're saying is that we see some shortfalls, and we do want the businesses on the 3rd Avenue Corridor not to have shortfalls. As amazing as it is, these businesses will not meet Code once the MMAP funding is completed. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: One of the reasons that one of the businesses is required to have their own architect is specifically because of the People's Barbecue. And I think, you know, for those who don't know, the People's Barbecue is probably one of the darkest shadows that the CRA and the City have ever been involved in. And it has never been rectified. It is not rectified now. And it's one of the things that I'm going to be talking about Thursday on the supplemental agenda, about how we can begin to deal with that. So we have taken it to heart. I think Erdal Donmez has been very helpful in insuring — and one of the reasons we're asking that an architect be there is we have learned from People's Barbecue on that. Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I hope you don't get offended because I disagree with you. Chairman Teele: No, I don't. Board Member Sanchez: And I think that each Commissioner up here holds fiduciary responsibility. And although there's a shield to protect us from liability, that shield could easily be broken if we don't follow rules and regulations. And my concern is that I want to make sure that we follow our rules and regulations. And I don't want to move so fast. I do not have the experience that you have, and I want to insure that when we come to this meeting, I want to be well prepared. And in many occasions, I've voted against you on a lot of issues. And it's not you. It's just that I'm not well informed of the issues. The budget or the agenda continues to get there five days. It's improved a little, but not enough time. Of course, we continue to get — five days. We continue to get updates. You get the agenda, you get here and you get updated on it. So in many ways, 1 come up here and we're not prepared, and I will not vote on issues that I think could come back and discredit my name or this CRA Board, and that is the concern that I have. I want to make it very clear. I want to help Overtown, and I want to help you do what you want to do out here. And I think we all owe it to our community. But I'm not going to vote on issues that I am not well prepared, and issues that do not come with well background material. If I do not feel comfortable, I'm going to vote no. Chairman Teele: And I respect that, Commissioner, and I will never object to you voting no or asking for a delay. Indeed, I support that. But I take deep offense to your comments that you object to us moving funds off of the 3rd Avenue Business Corridor — Board Member Sanchez: And I do object to it. 70 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: Well, you do. And I, knowing that I represent the 3rd Avenue Business Corridor, and I don't represent the area in Park West, but I'm trying to be a good Chairman. If I were a person who only cared about my district I — Board Member Sanchez: I hope you're not referring to me. Chairman Teele: I'm not referring to you unless it fits. Board Member Sanchez: No, it doesn't fit. Chairman Teele: Then I'm not referring to you. Board Member Sanchez: OK. Chairman Teele: But if I were a Commissioner only referring to my district, I would never have offered to move the funds from the 3rdAvenue Business Corridor. But what I take deep offense to is the racial implications that you made in the very beginning of the meeting that you object to the money being moved from 3rdAvenue, because those people deserve it, and we had promised them that, and moving it over to Park West, because that's unnecessary. We're here in Over -town. There is no intent on my part to offend anyone in Overtown. The simple fact of the matter is, is that the 3rdAvenue Business Corridor is one plan. The five-year, five million dollars ($5,000,000) is a second plan. And the twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000), if the City had made the money available for the five million dollars ($5,000,000), there wouldn't be any need to do this. I don't take any great — I take tremendous discomfort in taking money out of the district that I represent and putting it in another district for the purpose of doing the Camillus House thing. But the Camillus House thing has languished for some 12 to 15 years. And the simple fact of the matter is if we can take the Camillus House out of the equation, we can accelerate the Tax Increment Funding that would be available for the district I represent, as well as the district that Commissioner Winton represents. So, I mean, you know, we're here. There's a lot of people that I represent here. And, I mean, you're not going to win any points by making that kind of statement. And so the truth of the matter is, is it a deeply offensive statement that you've made. Board Member Sanchez: Well, I don't think it's offensive. I just think that it's inappropriate to move funds without having community input. You did not talk to the Oversight Advisory Committee. I'm sure they wouldn't allow you to move those funds. You moved it. I disagree with you. I disagree with the purchase of Camillus House on the terms that is under that contract. I think it's a poor deal. Those deals, similar to that in the past, have led the City to near bankruptcy. And I think out of due respect, you should respect my opinion. I don't place the race card game. You brought it out that I made it a racial offense. I don't think so, Mr. Teele. I have the utmost respect for you, but I certainly regret you making those statements. Chairman Teele: Well, I regret you making the statement. And all that I am saying to you is this: The Camillus House is not a for -profit organization. The fact of the matter is, is if this Commission, if this CRA and the Commission voted to give the Camillus House ten million dollars ($10,000,000) tomorrow or Thursday, it would be one of the smartest things we could do if we had the money, because that ten million dollars ($10,000,000) will open the door to hundreds of millions of dollars of development in the 71 CRA 6/26/00 Tax Increment District. The City has an obligation to provide for the homeless. We're spending literally tens of millions of dollars a year for homeless and homeless assistance issues. And I think it is an appropriate expenditure of funds. And I deeply regret that you don't. Board Member Sanchez: Well, that's the beauty of a democracy, to disagree with each other. Chairman Teele: The motion to defer on the item to Thursday at 2 o'clock, please. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner — Board Member Sanchez: Second. Chairman Teele: Seconded. Is there further objections? All those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed? The following resolution and motion were introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved their adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-65 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO APPROVE THE POLICY OF A COMMERCIAL REVITALIZATION SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT PROGRAM (THE "GRANT PROGRAM") AS DESCRIBED ON EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 72 CRA 6/26/00 The following motion was introduced Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-66 A MOTION TO DEFER CONSIDERATION OF ITEM 13-ii (PROPOSED EXPENDITURE OF $420,000 IN GRANTS WITH RESPECT TO THE GRANT PROGRAM, WHICH INDIVIDUAL GRANTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CRA BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR APPROVAL) TO A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CRA TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY, JUNE 29, 2000 BEGINNING 2 P.M. IN CITY HALL CHAMBERS. Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution and motion were passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: Next item, please. 73 CRA 6/26/00 16. AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN LEGISTAR PROGRAM, A MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM BEING IMPLEMENTED BY OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK TO FACILITATE TRACKING OF RESOLUTIONS AND STORING OF INFORMATION. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Mr. Chairman, the next item is a resolution authorizing the Director of Operations, Administration and Development to participate in the upcoming Legistar Program. Vice Chairman Winton: So move. Chairman Teele: Second. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-67 OMNI/ CRA 00-37 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT (THE "DIRECTOR") OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO PARTICIPATE IN THE LEGISTAR PROGRAM, A MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM BEING IMPLEMENTED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK TO FACILITATE THE TRACKING OF RESOLUTIONS AND THE STORING OF INFORMATION. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 74 CRA 6/26/00 17. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO GRANT AGREEMENT TO GRANT FUNDS TO ST. JOHN'S CDC; $50,000.00 Chairman Teele: Seventeen. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Sixteen and seventeen are resolutions. Sixteen is a resolution authorizing — Vice Chairman Winton: What happened to fifteen? Chairman Teele: What happened to fifteen? Mr. Tyler: I'm sorry. Fifteen is a resolution authorizing the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) to enter into a grant agreement granting the funds to Saint John's CDC (Community Development Corporation) in an amount not to exceed fifty thousand. Chairman Teele: And that grant is for what activities? Commercial activities? Mr. Tyler: Yes, sir. These are — we've proposed and entertained an agreement with Saint John's that would make them our economic development arm, much as Greater Miami Neighborhoods is for housing. Chairman Teele: Right. Motion? Board Member Regalado: Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Regalado. Seconded by — Board Member Gort: Second. Chairman Teele: -- Commissioner Gort. All those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Regalado: Aye. Board Member Gort: Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Aye. Chairman Teele: Aye. Those opposed have the same right. Board Member Sanchez: No. 75 CRA 6/26/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-68 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO ENTER INTO A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH ST. JOHN'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ("ST. JOHN'S CDC") IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $50,000.00 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Board Member Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: INone 76 CRA 6/26/00 18. (A) AUTHORIZE CRA TO FILE DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACTION WITH RESPECT TO SAWYER'S WALK PROJECT. (B) AUTHORIZE CRA TO FILE DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACTION WITH RESPECT TO LYRIC VILLAGE PROJECT. Chairman Teele: Motion -- On 16 and 17. Mr. Attorney, you want to explain what we're talking about here? William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Yes, Commissioner. With respect to the Saint John's CDC (Community Development Corporation) -- with respect to Sawyer's Walk Project and the Lyric Village Development Project, the City— the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) previously issued RFP's (Requests for Proposals), in both instances, there is a developer who was selected. Chairman Teele: What year was this? Mr. Bloom: I believe the Sawyer's Walk was in 1997? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): '87. Mr. Bloom: '87. That in both instances, while there was a respondent selected, there was never a lease entered into between the selected respondent and the Community Redevelopment Agency. With respect to Lyric Village, their joint venture partner dropped out of the transaction, and so while the documents were drawn, the transaction was never consummated. With respect to the Sawyer's Walk Project, over the years, there have been various attempts to bring in NBC-6 is one example — to move forward with that project. But the project has never moved forward. There's never been a lease negotiated with the CRA. And based upon the research that we've performed, we've concluded that both respondents do not have any rights to proceed and the CRA is in a position to move forward with other (inaudible) developments. With respect to the Sawyer's Walk Project, we have noticed the developer that we felt they had no rights. Their lawyer responded, claiming they felt they had rights to proceed with the development. So based on consultations we've had with the City Attorney's Office, we feel the best course of action and the most prudent course of action for the CRA is to bring a declaratory judgment action, so that a court can determine whether the developer has any rights or not, or whether we can proceed, thereby avoiding any potential damage claims against the CRA for terminating a developer who purportedly had rights. The Sawyer's Walk Project is three City blocks that is just west of the Overtown Metrorail Station. And the Lyric Village — Chairman Teele: Right where we are now. Everything behind us and to our right. Mr. Attorney, have you had an opportunity — it's been represented that you've — have you reviewed this course of action? Do you have objection? Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney, City of Miami): No objection, Commissioner. Vice Chairman Winton: And just so I'm crystal clear here, because you answered the question, but I want to be crystal clear here. The course of action, which is a declaratory judgment, that course of action was chosen because a judge will make the determination as to whether or not we have the right to take this, to reclaim this property. Is that what you're saying? 77 CRA 6/26/00 Mr. Bloom: It's our intention by the declaratory judgment action to assert that we have no obligations to any third party developers with respect to the property. Vice Chairman Winton: And so the judge will rule on that. And if the judge rules that there is potential liability, then what happens? Mr. Bloom: Then we would continue to fight with the developer over that issue or enter into — Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Mr. Bloom: -- contract contemplated by the original RFP. Vice Chairman Winton: So this really clears the whole question up without getting us in a — Mr. Bloom: The intent is to clarify the outstanding issue that's been sitting there -- Vice Chairman Winton: For a long time. Mr. Bloom: -- being collected for a long period of time without exposing the CRA to potential liability. Vice Chairman Winton: I move this. Mr. Bloom: (Inaudible). Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton. Seconded by the Chair. Look, it was my understanding that this was going to not be necessary, and there were meetings being held. Then a letter came through that made some very strong assertions that there were rights. And we asked the City Attorney and our counsel to confer. One of the concerns we have is what's the best way to limit any liability claims or damages claims? And I think this is a very clear way to do that. This is something, quite frankly, that predates all of us. And I don't think that this should be with prejudice to either developer, and I just want to put that on the record. We've got our obligation to clear the title, and to clear the rights and obligations, and both developers are free to do what they have to do. As Commissioner Sanchez says, it's America. Board Member Sanchez: That's right. Chairman Teele: All right. Further discussion on the declaratory action? Mr. Weitzel, it's not a public hearing, but you're always welcome and recognized to be heard. Ted Weitzel: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I couldn't hear what Mr. Bloom was saying, that was the problem. I heard what Board Member Winton was saying, but I couldn't really hear his response to (inaudible). Could you just tell me again what you said, so I understand what's going on? Mr. Bloom: Yes. We're asking the Board to approve proceeding with the declaratory judgment action to determine the rights of the CRA and you as a developer with respect to those properties. 78 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: On the motion — Mr. Weitzel: But we'll get our chance to state our position? Mr. Bloom: Right. Chairman Teele: Yeah. Commissioner Gort is present. All those in favor — well, we'll let him come through the door at least. All those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Mr. Bloom: Yes. Chairman Teele: All those in favor — do you want separate motions on each one? The first one was 16, on Sawyer's Walk. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-69 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO FILE A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACTION WITH RESPECT TO THE SAWYER' S WALK PROJECT. (Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Board Member Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: The next one, 17, is on Lyric Village. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Same issue, right? Mr. Bloom: Yes. 79 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gort. All those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed? The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-70 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO FILE A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACTION WITH RESPECT TO THE LYRIC VILLAGE PROJECT. (Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Board Member Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 80 CRA 6/26/00 19. DISCUSSION ON STATUS OF POINCIANA VILLAGE PHASE IV AND STATUS OF LEGAL RIGHTS OF POINCIANA VILLAGE. Chairman Teele: The next item is the status of Poinciana Phase IV and the status of the legal rights of Poinciana Village. Mr. Attorney. William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): And this is a two -fold issue. Chairman Teele: Eighteen. Mr. Bloom: Approximately a year ago, we did an amendment to the Poinciana Development lease where we gave additional time to Poinciana Village to develop Phase III and do its additional units there. And we drew some bright lines in that lease amendment as to when the developer had to come up with its financing package, when they had to get their building permits and break ground with respect to Phase IV of Poinciana Village, or that would not be added to their lease. So at this point, we're just proceeding in accordance with that amendment to the lease. The developer has, I believe, until September of this year to obtain its financing for that Phase IV, which I believe is 93 or 97 units. Ted Weitzel: Ninety-one. Mr. Bloom: Ninety-one units. Mr. Weitzel: Are you ready for discussion? Chairman Teele: Discussion if you'd like to, please. It relates to you. Ted Weitzel. Give your address. Mr. Weitzel: Ted Weitzel, Poinciana Village. I believe as Mr. Bloom stated, it's correct. We have received a commitment, a tentative commitment letter from Sun Trust that we passed on to the Board about 30 days ago, and we're waiting for the Board to respond so we can move forward. Chairman Teele: Which board? Mr. Weitzel: Your Board, the CRA Board. Vice Chairman Winton: What do we have to do? I don't have 18 in my packet. Chairman Teele: Say that again? Mr. Weitzel: We received a tentative commitment from Sun Trust for the financing for Phase IV, which is 91 units. Vice Chairman Winton: That's great. Mr. Weitzel: We submitted it to the CRA about a month ago, to Mr. Tyler. There is a condition on presales, and a package was presented to you about six months ago by (inaudible) Associates saying they wanted to handle the presales. They had like 300 pre -qualified people. So we submitted it to you, asking 81 CRA 6/26/00 for you to talk again to the realtor board to see if that's a real scenario or not, so we can proceed, without them or with them. That's what we're waiting on right now. Vice Chairman Winton: You have to have approval from us to figure out who markets your property? Mr. Weitzel: No, no. I mean, it was suggested to us that we should work with this realtor's board. And so we asked you — I mean, is this a real deal? Can we rely on this presale requirement.... Chairman Teele: I can answer that. The answer is no, you cannot rely on the "realtist" for the purpose of a commitment letter in carrying that out. What we have said repeatedly is that we, the CRA, will augment any efforts that you take. But we're not going to get on the line with you and be responsible for the development with you. Specifically — Vice Chairman Winton: Or marketing. Chairman Teele: Or marketing. Specifically, the CRA submitted a proposal to the City for — a proposal very much like the MMAP (Metro -Miami Action Plan) proposal, which the realtists have been involved in. I believe that the realtists could be very, very efficient and helpful to you. And that contract -- that grant was approved 18 months ago, but we still don't have a contract from the City on that. And it's very much like the — it's identical to the MMAP proposal or the MMAP plan in which the realtists were used for homeownership, where they would go out and help you find people that are interested in moving in. But we would not take the responsibility of meeting one of the terms and conditions in your letter in that we have a different role. We're willing to work with you, clearly, but not to be a co -developer in that regard where we're obliged under the terms of the commitment letter to pre -sell the units, even though we're willing to make those resources available, as soon as they become available to the CRA. Mr. Weitzel: Now, my understanding was, if I'm correct, that the City was going to work with — under the MMAP Program to help guarantee (inaudible). That was our understanding. Chairman Teele: No. What we have said is that the City — the City has a grant request in. That grant request was approved by the City Commission 18 months ago. That grant, in effect, is identical to a grant that the County entered into with MMAP, in which MMAP contracted with the South Florida Board of Realtists. I met with the South Florida Board of Realtists and brought the president of the South Florida Board of Realtists to your office. Mr. Weitzel: Right. Chairman Teele: They are very excited and eager about doing it. You know, they believe that if they have the contract or the cooperative agreement, in effect, from the CRA, they could be very helpful to you. But what I'm suggesting to you is that I don't think the CRA wants to oblige itself and obligate itself in a legal sense, as would be required by your bank commitment letter. What we've said repeatedly is that we will augment you and we will support you, and we will continue with that, as we've done in Poinciana III, I know, where we went all the way to Palm Beach to work out problems with Florida Power and Light. I mean, we're willing to go any mile to get it done, but we're not willing to be legally committed to the sales of units. 82 CRA 6/26/00 n Mr. Weitzel: I would like to get an answer back from our letter so I can go back to (inaudible). Chairman Teele: I don't know what the letter is, but you just got the answer. The letter is no, we will not be legally obliged under your Sun Trust commitment. To the extent that we can provide support to you in meeting that commitment, we'll be happy to work with you. Mr. Weitzel: OK. Chairman Teele: You all should answer the letter, and the legal should have a say-so in the approval, please. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): The timing was — that's exactly what happened. It became more of a legal issue than an operations issue at that point. Chairman Teele: Yeah. The other thing is this, is that once your lawyers sent letters to our lawyer, we're sort of in a position where we can't talk to you anymore, except in this context. Board Member Gort: Lawyers to lawyers. Chairman Teele: Huh? Board Member Gort: Lawyers to lawyers. Chairman Teele: Lawyers to lawyers. Once your lawyer sent Mr. Bloom the letter that they sent on the issues — and I realize these are two separate partnerships, in effect. The staff became, I guess, properly worried about entering into letter writings with you except through the lawyers. Mr. Weitzel: OK, that's fine. Chairman Teele: I'm sorry, Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: So now that I'm thoroughly confused, is there an action we have to take on 18? Mr. Bloom: No. Vice Chairman Winton: No? It's just information. Chairman Teele: They have until when? September what? Mr. Weitzel: September 15th or something. I don't — Vice Chairman Winton: To do what, Ted? Chairman Teele: To begin Phase IV. Mr. Weitzel: (Inaudible) commitment in place of that, to finalize the (inaudible). 83 CRA 6/26/00 Vice Chairman Winton: And so the Sun Trust letter is part of the loan commitment, except it's got some conditions that we're not willing to meet; is that correct? Mr. Bloom: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Chairman Teele: So you're still (inaudible). Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, right. Mr. Weitzel: The only one condition is the problem of pre -sale. That's going to (inaudible). Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So you'll have to go back and renegotiate that part with Sun Trust? Mr. Weitzel: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. 84 CRA 6/26/00 20. AUTHORIZE CRA TO RETAIN KATZ, CUTTER, HAIGLER, ALDERMAN, BRYAN AND YON TO PERFORM LOBBYING SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO FEDERAL AGENCIES AND CONGRESS ON APPROPRIATION REQUESTS AND LEGISLATION, $50,000.00 Chairman Teele: All right. The final item on the agenda. There is one other item relating to a personnel matter that needs to be at least given some direction, and that is the item relating to the Katz, Cutter lobbying service. Again, Katz, Cutter is the City of Miami lobbyist. The purpose of this is primarily to assist in Washington in carrying out our commitment to seek to get Federal funding for the Camillus House. Candidly, I'm going to do everything that I can and I hope each of us — I know Commissioner Regalado is going to be coordinating the private sector fundraising. Between the Camillus House and us, we've got to come up with about six to eight million dollars ($8,000,000). I mean that's what it's really going to cost to get this thing done. And there's a lot of federal money available. We've just got to go out here and earmark it. And this resolution is designed for a one-year contract to get some assistance in that area. Commissioner Regalado, would you move it? Board Member Regalado: Yes, I certainly will. Chairman Teele: Moved. Board Member Gort: Second, second. Chairman Teele: Mike Abrams is here. You're a partner or a member of the firm of Katz Cutter. It's been seconded by Commissioner Gort. Board Member Gort: Now, my understanding is these are the same people that we hired for the City of Miami, so what we're doing is — Board Member Sanchez: No, it's not the same lobbying firm. Chairman Teele: Would you come and give your name and address for the record, Mr. Abrams, please. Mike Abrams: Yes. Mike Abrams, 2999 Northeast 191" Street, Aventura, Florida. Commissioners — Board Member Sanchez: Morning, Mike. Mr. Abrams: Good to see you. Our firm is one of the consortium of firms that represent the City at the State, and we're also one of two firms that represent the City in Washington, on appropriations requests. We were selected through a competitive process to do that. And this would be outside the scope of our services that we provide to the City in Washington. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Regalado: Mike — Mr. Abrams: I hope that answers your question. 85 CRA 6/26/00 Board Member Regalado: Excuse me. What is it that you think you can bring to the CRA on the issue of Camillus House? Mr. Abrams: Well, you know, as you probably know, Commissioner, there are a variety of ways to seek Federal appropriations. One is through the agencies. The other is through a direct earmark in the appropriations bill as we try to do in the State, and we have this past session in the State. We will, with Commissioner Teele, and you and others, we will seek both channels in Washington. We're fairly far along in the appropriations process this year, but we do think there's still discretionary money available in HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) that will, you know, that can be earmarked for this purpose. I think it would be way premature for me to put an amount or an estimate on that. Board Member Sanchez: Mike, why don't you provide us with a mission statement? Mr. Abrams: I beg your pardon? Board Member Sanchez: A mission statement from your firm, what you could obtain for us. Put together a mission statement. Mr. Abrams: A mission? Board Member Sanchez: Statement or scope. Mr. Abarams: I'm sorry, I just don't — Board Member Sanchez: Basically, the services you're going to provide and put forth something in writing for us. Mr. Abrams: Oh, yeah, we would be glad to. In this instance, you know, we get charged by the City before the State legislative session and before the Federal session with a list of, you know, projects that, you know, and goals that we're to achieve. And in fact, on the Federal lobbying contract, you'll be getting a report, I think, at your July meeting in terms of the status of those appropriations processes. As I understand it by the resolution as it relates to the CRA, our specific mission would be to achieve funding for the Camillus House Project. Board Member Gort: Homeless fund. Mr. Abrams: But, you know, the scope of services would be outlined in the contract, I presume, that we engage with the CRA. Chairman Teele: On the motion, all those in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed? 86 CRA 6/26/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-71 OMNI/CRA 00-38 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") TO RETAIN KATZ, CUTTER, HAIGLER, ALDERMAN, BRYANT AND YON TO PERFORM LOBBYING SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO FEDERAL AGENCIES AND CONGRESS ON APPROPRIATION REQUESTS AND LEGISLATION IN CONNECTION WITH PROJECTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA, FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $50,000, SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS. (Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Board Member Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None `� ' -I1KIT 11 21. INDEMNIFY ACTIONS OF DIRECTOR OF FISCAL OPERATIONS, NAMELY, MS. CHARLAYNE THOMPKINS, DURING TENURE AT CRA, RELATING TO USE OF HER SOCIAL SECURITY AND/OR FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER IN CAPACITY IN WHICH SHE SIGNED CRA'S APPLICATION TO FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER; STIPULATING THAT MS. THOMPKINS HAS NOT BEEN DIRECTOR OF FISCAL OPERATIONS OF CRA SINCE MAY 19, 2000, IS NO LONGER RESPONSIBLE FOR SAID POSITION, AND HER NAME SHOULD BE REMOVED. Chairman Teele: Now, there's a matter that I'm a little bit embarrassed. It's involving a personnel matter, which, quite frankly, the Director — Mr. Tyler, where is your Comptroller? Is he here? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development): Yes, he is. Brian Hankerson, could you come forward? Chairman Teele: Mr. Hankerson, Ms. Thompkins, who was the Fiscal Director for the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) left. There's a series of issues, which you all need to give us a written report on. I had hoped that you all could handle this matter informally, and not have a written report. But since there have been things in writing, I guess, by Ms. Thompkins, it's fine. The one area that has been raised is Ms. Thompkins has indicated that she used her own tax I.D. number or Social Security number for the purpose of clarifying the CRA's tax- exempt status. And I think that the Board should pass a resolution, right here, right now, indemnifying her from any — Board Member Sanchez: Offer it as a resolution. Chairman Teele: -- as it relates to that. As it relates to the matters internal, as it relates to the authority to expend money and the request that you all have to reimburse certain dollars, I think we should petition that, ask the external auditor and the attorneys to meet with her and give us a report on that. And if — unless some Board Member has a different view. Board Member Sanchez: I have a resolution I'd like to put forth, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: All right. Board Member Sanchez: Resolution ratifying actions of the Director of Fiscal Operation and indemnifying the Director of Fiscal Operation from the IRS (Internal Revenue Service). Chairman Teele: Second the motion? Board Member Gort: I'll second it. Chairman Teele: As it relates to the actions taken relating to -- actions taken relating to her Social Security; not actions taken relating to her as a Fiscal Director. Board Member Sanchez: Why doesn't she address the mike and address the Board? 88 CRA 6/26/00 Charlayne Thompkins: Good evening. Charlayne Thompkins, past Director of Fiscal Operations. And I proposed — I have proposed for the CRA Board, based on correspondence that I've received and unresolved issues that it could be better handled if we do it through a resolution by the Board, simply ratifying the actions that were taken during my tenure in terms of authorizing expenditures or approving expenditures that the Board — that the CRA had incurred. And I did this on behalf of the CRA, and the City of Miami did act on those expenditures. You have been provided with financial reports, and all of those expenditures in there were based on those approvals, as well as the tax matter. It is not about tax-exempt status. It is simply a Federal I.D. number that was applied for, for the CRA. And the tax-exempt status does need to be applied for. I am on there, and I am seeking to — if I have to remove it, fine. There isn't anyone else on there, but I do need ratification for continued use of that Federal identification number. Chairman Teele: Mr. Bloom? William Bloom, Esq. (CRA Legal Counsel): As far as the tax I.D. number that was provided, the CRA should immediately take the necessary steps to obtain its own tax I.D. number and then substitute that number for the number that was submitted previously by Charlayne. Chairman Teele: Mr. Hankerson, would you clarify that for us, please? Brian Hankerson (CRA Comptroller): Yes. On the form, it asks us for — the CRA apply for its own tax I.D. number. And when any organization applies for a tax I.D. number, someone has to be noted as the responsible party. Charlayne was the responsible party at that time, and she had given her name and her I.D. number. The CRA is not — Chairman Teele: Who did you all list as the responsible party now? Because I saw my name on it. Mr. Hankerson: I'm not aware that there's been any correspondence that I'm aware of with the IRS that would have changed the responsible party. Mr. Tyler: Mr. Chairman, your name was on the original application submitted by Ms. Thompkins. Ms. Thompkins: No, it wasn't. Mr. Hankerson: His name was on it. However, her Social Security number — Mr. Tyler: Not as the responsible party but — Mr. Hankerson: Yeah. Mr. Tyler: -- on the — as — Chairman Teele: Do we have a tax I.D. number now? Mr. Tyler: Yes, you have a tax I.D. number, separate and distinct for the CRA. It's just in association with the I.D. number -- 89 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: I think we need to separate these issues. One issue relates to the tax I.D. number. I don't think there is any question that Ms. Thompkins and myself should be provided indemnification for the use of our names and numbers, to the extent that they were used. I saw my name on the form. When I asked for it, on the original form, it said: "Responsible person, Arthur Teele." I was unaware, but I don't object, I mean. But I — all I'm asking for is that Ms. Thompkins be given an indemnification resolution for the use of her Social Security number to the extent that it was. And I think that's very clear. As it relates to all of the actions that she took, I think that's the issue that triggered all of this, where the staff has asked that she reimburse the agency for certain dollars, which, candidly, I don't know why we did. I mean, I think some kind of acknowledgement that she spent the money would be satisfactory. However, to ratify all of the actions taken, I don't think any lawyer would recommend that, unless you know what you're ratifying, what all of the actions that are being taken. Mr. Bloom: Commissioner, to speak to your points, on the Social Security number, to the extent — it's like when you file your tax return, and your tax number — Board Member Gort: I'm sorry. You have to speak into the mike. We can't — I couldn't hear you. Mr. Bloom: Can you hear me now? Board Member Gort: Yes. Mr. Bloom: OK. To the extent — this is like a — when you file your tax return. Your accountant will put his name and his address. Chairman Teele: Exactly. Mr. Bloom: Put his Social Security number on your return, just to show the responsible party. I think what you're asking the Board to do is to indemnify her in the capacity in which she signed that application. Chairman Teele: I would so — Commissioner Sanchez, would you move that, as explained by the lawyer? Board Member Sanchez: Can you explain that again? Mr. Bloom: To the extent that she filed an application with the IRS, and we're applying for our tax I.D., and in that application process, she was — identified herself as the responsible party — all right? — during the scope of her employment. But with respect to that activity, that we would indemnify her for any loss or damages as a result of that. Board Member Gort: That's not what's being asked here. Chairman Teele: Well, that's one thing that's being asked. Mr. Bloom: That's one thing. 90 CRA 6/26/00 Board Member Gort: No, but my understanding is we're being asked — they don't want any payment to her. Is that what they want to do is to make sure that they're no longer on the paper? They're not longer responsible, and that her number is no longer Board Member Sanchez: After May the 19th, 2000, when she resigned. Chairman Teele: As modified. Board Member Sanchez: Right. Chairman Teele: As modified by what Commissioner Gort just said. Would you move that, Commissioner Sanchez? Board Member Sanchez: Charlayne, do you feel comfortable with it? Ms. Thompkins: I feel comfortable with being removed as a Director that has the responsibility. It is not just an ancillary type of action. They must have a responsible person, be it the principal officers, or just a Board Chairperson. And because we did not have that, we did try to submit Commissioner Teele's name, but we did not have his Social Security number, and that's the only reason mine went on there. Chairman Teele: That would have got you audited, for sure. Ms. Thompkins: It is more than just ancillary. He's not on there at all. And I am on there, and I do want to be indemnified, as well as removed. Chairman Teele: Well, that's what Commissioner Gort just said. So that's the motion. Board Member Sanchez: So move. Board Member Gort: Second. Board Member Sanchez: As amended by — Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Board Member Sanchez: -- Commissioner Gort. Chairman Teele: Without objection, all those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed? 91 CRA 6/26/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-72 OMNFCRA 00-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") TO I) INDEMNIFY CHARLAYNE THOMPKINS, AS DIRECTOR OF FISCAL OPERATIONS, DURING HER TENURE AT THE CRA, RELATING TO THE USE OF HER SOCIAL SECURITY AND/OR FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER IN CONNECTION WITH THE CRA'S APPLICATION TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR A TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER AND II) TO FURTHER STIPULATE THAT CHARLAYNE THOMPKINS HAS NOT BEEN DIRECTOR OF FISCAL OPERATIONS OF THE CRA SINCE MAY 19, 2000 AND IS NO LONGER RESPONSIBLE FOR SAID POSITION, AND THEREFORE, HER NAME SHOULD BE REMOVED. Upon being seconded by Board Member Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Gort Board Member Regalado Board Member Sanchez Vice Chairman Winton Chairman Teele NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: Now, as it relates to all actions that she took, what I would ask is that the external auditor sit down with Ms. Thompkins and the Comptroller, and come back with a written report. And we will remove her from all actions that the external auditor has agreed on. Now, the biggest issues — and I'm going to be very honest with you. You know I — I don't think this should be here. I wish you all could have worked this out. You know, the issues relating to the travel and this, and travel in August -- Have you all made arrangements for the travel that was prepaid for her in August? Wasn't there — didn't you all say there was travel prepaid for — Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman, I hate to cut you off, but that matter should have never been here. Chairman Teele: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely right. 92 CRA 6/26/00 Board Member Gort: That's something that should have been taken care of. We should not be dealing with personnel problems. Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely. Chairman Teele: And it still should be. Vice Chairman Winton: It should not be. Chairman Teele: I don't think — I don't think Tyler brought it here. So, I mean, I think the real issue here is that this matter needs to be resolved by the external auditors, and the Comptroller, and the lawyers, to the extent — and you all need to resolve this before it gets here, or come forth with a resolution that clearly finds liability. But let's clear it up, please. Vice Chairman Winton: Or if we haven't done a good job from a staff standpoint, we're going to be sued. And I don't think we want that, either. So there's — as far as I'm concerned, there's great motivation here to get everybody on the same wavelength. I'm thinking the external auditor looking at these issues to determine whether or not — to determine, frankly, who's right and who's wrong, because somebody here is right and somebody is wrong. Chairman Teele: Somebody's right and somebody's wrong. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. This is one of — Chairman Teele: And the Board isn't going to determine who's right and who's wrong. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. We don't have the information. Ms. Thompkins: Excuse me, if I just may. I think what we're asking for is there is a procedure that was done by me which approved expenditures. Once the invoices were received -- I think I got a letter saying "numerous." It was not "numerous." It was 100 percent. All invoices that were incurred and to be paid by the City had my signature on it. And that's all we're asking for you to ratify at this point, and to be aware of. In the event that you're not aware of it, I want to bring it in the open, let you know that all of the expenditures were approved by me that went over to the City in the Finance Department. And that's the only action we're talking about. An audit would prove something else. But we need for you to know, if staff was not aware, that I did approve expenditures in my capacity as Director of Fiscal Operations. And that's the only action that I'm saying. It was apparent that someone was not aware that that was happening, and I'm here to share with you that whatever wasn't happening, you need to be aware of it. I'm here to disclose that to you, to make it known to you, and that the City relied on it. And therefore, at this particular point, we need to ratify that. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Bloom. Mr. Bloom: (Inaudible.) Chairman Teele: That's not common? 93 CRA 6/26/00 Mr. Bloom: It's not. Chairman Teele: All right. Well, the matter will be referred to the external auditor. And to the extent that you, Mr. Bloom and the City Attorney can develop a resolution, but let's don't wait until the Board meeting. Let's get on this — Vice Chairman Winton: Now. Chairman Teele: -- like starting tomorrow, please. Vice Chairman Winton: Who is the external auditor? Chairman Teele: Who's the external auditor? KPMG. 94 CRA 6/26/00 22. PROPOSED CDBG FUNDING AGREEMENT TO BE INCLUDED IN SPECIAL MEETING OF CRA ON JUNE 29, 2000. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Sanchez: If I may for just — I know you inquired about a special meeting pertaining to the budget. Just to clear the smoke, I, as a Board Member, would feel much comfortable if somehow in that meeting, the budget meeting, we are able to come together with a funding agreement that's acceptable to the City of Miami and the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). So therefore, the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds that come from the City that are going to be utilized by the CRA, the City of Miami CDBG looks at it and make sure that we don't — we aren't in violation of HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) regulations and we fall within the guidelines, so we don't — make sure that we don't throw the City of Miami out of compliance with HUD. That is one of the biggest concerns that I have here, that we continue to put funds, and sooner or later, we may or may not get reimbursed from HUD. So that would alleviate the — Chairman Teele: What is your request? Board Member Sanchez: My request is that the CRA, when we meet at the special meeting, that we come to an agreement with the City of Miami and the CRA reference a funding agreement. Chairman Teele: I don't have any objections. But just understand this: You can't be the City and the CRA in the same meeting. You're going to either be the CRA, or you're going to be the City. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I understand that. Chairman Teele: OK. Board Member Sanchez: I clearly understand that. I will feel more comfortable if the City CDBG received a — our budget or a budget plan, so they could review it, and have the Legal Department also review it, and make sure as an additional filter that we do not violate Federal guidelines. Chairman Teele: I tell you what, I'll go a step further. Why don't we have a City Commission meeting on this, not a CRA meeting, because the City Commission is for the decision — and let's bring in Federal HUD, because the Assistant Secretary has committed personally to coming down and giving us the benefit of at least a day in the City to go through all of this, because a lot of this is not hocus-pocus. A lot of this is just plain old student government 100. And the reg's are real clear. And the reg's, you know, are available to everyone. They're on the Internet. Chairman Teele: It's an embarrassment. So I think the best way to do this is to deal with this in the City Commission venue and try to get the agreements done that way. And I would certainly support, if Chairman Gort would allow for a special meeting on that to be done. I mean whether it's the -- Board Member Gort: I'm for it. 95 CRA 6/26/00 Chairman Teele: But we can't meet as the CRA and the City Commission, unless two want to be Commissioners and three want to be CRA. Board Member Gort: We can do the CRA meeting and immediately, right after, we can do the Commission meeting right after the CRA meeting. That's no problem. Chairman Teele: This coming Thursday? Board Member Gort: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: All right. Board Member Gort: I think most of the questions will be clarified during the CRA meeting, and then we as the Commission can either ratify or not. Chairman Teele: All right. 96 CRA 6/26/00 23. ADMINISTRATION OF CRA TO WORK WITH CITY'S CULTURAL AND FINE ARTS BOARD TO DESIGNATE ARTISTS, PARTICIPATE IN "ARTISTS IN RESIDENCE PROGRAM," THROUGHOUT CITY, URGE CRA TO SEEK PRIVATE DONATIONS TO FUND "ARTIST IN RESIDENCE PROGRAM" THROUGHOUT CITY. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, before we leave, I'd just like to bring out a direction to the Administration. And this, I am doing it after visiting the Dorsey House. And I'd like to present a motion so the Administration of the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) will work with the Cultural and Fine Arts Board of the City to designate Artist in Residence Programs in different areas of the City. What you've done in the Dorsey House with the Artist in Residence is something that we should do throughout the City, and urging, also, the CRA to seek private donations to fund the Artist in Residence Program throughout the City. So that would be my motion, because I think that with the experience and — Board Member Gort: This is your earlier pocket item? Board Member Regalado: Huh? Chairman Teele: It's his pocket item. Board Member Regalado: It is. I'm telling you, I'm telling you — Vice Chairman Winton: There's no money for that, right? Board Member Gort: Second. Chairman Teele: Second the motion by the Chair. Look, for those of you that did not go by the Dorsey House today, Tomas was genuinely moved, I think, Commissioner Regalado, by the energy of having artists and having historic buildings preserved, and making them functional. Again, I would like to present our artist in residence, Mr. Ernest King, who is going to be the resident of the Dorsey House. The CRA is renting the house from the Black Archives Foundation. And as you know, Mr. King has been doing his art on the streets without the benefit of any cover. He now will be living in the house, and will hopefully be producing great art of this community. And what Commissioner Regalado is saying is that the CRA should make itself available to work with the Commission. That he has established the — what is it? — Fine Arts and Culture Commission? Board Member Regalado: Yes. Chairman Teele: In establishing Artist in Residence Programs throughout the City where appropriate. And I think that's an appropriate directive, and I know Hilda and the Director will do it. Is there objection to the motion? Mr. King, again, we want to congratulate you. All those in favor? Board Member Sanchez: Any money involved? Board Member Regalado: Just for the — Chairman Teele: (Inaudible) volunteer. 97 CRA 6/26/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-73 A RESOLUTION OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") I) TO DIRECT THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CRA TO WORK WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI CULTURAL AND FINE ARTS BOARD TO DESIGNATE ARTISTS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE "ARTISTS IN RESIDENCE PROGRAM," THROUGHOUT THE CITY THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA SIMILARLY TO THE PROGRAM CURRENTLY IN EXISTENCE AT THE DORSEY HOUSE AND, II) TO URGE THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CRA TO SEEK PRIVATE DONATIONS TO FUND THE "ARTIST IN RESIDENCE PROGRAM" THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AREA. Upon being seconded by Chairman Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Board Member Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Board Member Regalado: Just one second for the Administration to communicate with the firm that we just hired and just ask them to give us a list of the different cultural foundations in Washington that could be available, approached for funding for the Cultural and Fine Arts Board. Board Member Sanchez: That would be part of the — Chairman Teele: Thank you all very much, and we really appreciate the public coming out. And the Overtown Advisory Board and the Omni Board thank you again. 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 8:40 p.m. 98 CRA 6/26/00 ATTEST: WALTER J. FOEMAN City Clerk SYLVIA LOWMAN Assistant City Clerk ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR. Chairman (SEAL) 99 CRA 6/26/00