Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEOPW OMNI CRA 2000-07-24 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI CRA MEETING MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON JULY 24, 2000 PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Walter J. Foeman/City Clerk INDEX MINUTES OF CRA MEETING JULY 24, 2000 ITEM NO. SUBJECT LEGISLATION 1. 7/24/00 (A) TABLE CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH CITY PERTAINING TO CERTAIN SEOPW/CRA R-00-75 OMNI/CRA R-00-40 PAYMENTS BEING MADE TO CITY INSTEAD OF CRA, 1-10 ETC. (See Section 2) (B) DIRECT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF CRA TO OBTAIN GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR CRA BOARD OFFICERS AND ITS DIRECTORS. (C) DEFER CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF FY' 2000 BUDGET AND FY' 2001 BUDGETS FOR SEOPW/CRA AND OMNI/CRA. 2. APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH CITY PERTAINING TO 7/24/00 CERTAIN PAYMENTS BEING MADE TO CITY INSTEAD SEOPW/CRA R-00-76 OF CRA, CERTAIN FUNDS NOT BEING TRANSFERRED 11-1z TO CRA FROM CITY, AND PAYMENT FOR LAND DEEDED TO CITY; APPROVE CITY MAKING ALL ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS ON CITY'S SPECIAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 1990; ACCEPT PAYMENT FROM CITY OF CERTAIN FUNDS APPROPRIATED BY CITY TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT CRA IN FISCAL YEARS 1997 THROUGH 1999; AGREE TO WAIVE ANY CLAIMS CRA MAY HAVE AGAINST CITY FOR CERTAIN PARKING REVENUES FROM PROPERTY OWNED BY CRA ADJACENT TO MIAMI ARENA AND PAID TO CITY; AGREE TO WAIVE ANY CLAIMS CRA MAY HAVE AGAINST CITY WITH RESPECT TO LAND DEEDED BY CRA TO CITY AND SOLD TO MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY ON WHICH IS LOCATED AMERICAN AIRLINES ARENA. 3. TABLE CONSIDERATION TO INDEMNIFY, 7/24/00 CHARLAYNE THOMPKINS FROM ANY TAX LIABILITY DISUSSION 13 (See Sections 15 & 17). 4. DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF INTERLOCAL 7/24/00 AGREEMENT. DISCUSSION 14 5. AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO MOVE FORWARD 7/24/00 WITH CITY AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ON BEHALF SEOPW/CRA R-00-77 OF CRA TO SEEK POWERS OF EMINENT DOMAIN FOR 15-23 UNIMPROVED PROPERTIES WITHIN SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DISTRICT. 6. DISCUSSION - REPORT REGARDING USE OF EMINENT 7/24/00 DOMAIN WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT DISCUSSION 24-25 348 NE 20TH TERRACE. 7. APPROVE SELECTION OF CIVIL-CADD (THE CIVIL 7/24/00 ENGINEER) TO PERFORM CIVIL ENGINEERING WORK SEOPW/CRA R-00-78 AND AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT 26-31 WITH CIVIL ENGINEER. 8. (A) CONSIDERATION OF "ADOPT -A -PARK" PROGRAM 7/24/00 FOR MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING OF AREAS SEOPW/CRA R-00-79 SEOPW/CRA R-00-80 BENEATH EXPRESSWAYS. 32-40 (B) AUTHORIZE CRA TO INITIATE PROCESS TO EXTEND BOUNDARIES OF REDEVELOPMENT AREA TO INCLUDE CERTAIN LAND BENEATH 195, 395 AND I- 95, TO INCLUDE PARCEL P-6. (C) APPROVE AIR SPACE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CRA AND FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT). 9. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO TEAMING 7/24/oo AGREEMENT WITH ST. JOHN' S COMMUNITY SEOPW/CRA R-00-81 DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. 41-44 10. DEFERRED - PROPOSED AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT 7/24/00 ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT TO WHICH CARRFOUR IS DISCUSSION PURCHASER WITH RESPECT TO PURCHASE OF 45-46 APARTMENT BUILDINGS LOCATED NEXT TO PEOPLE'S BARBECUE RESTAURANT. 11. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO INTERLOCAL 7/24/00 AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF MIAMI WITH RESPECT OMNI/CRA R-00-41 47-49 TO MARGARET PACE PARK. 12. (A) AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO ASSIGNMENT OF 7/24/00 LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN J.J. KELLY CHARTER SEOPW/CRA R-00-82 SEOPW/CRA R-00-83 BUS SERVICE CO. 50-61 (B) CRA ADMINISTRATION AND CRA COUNSEL TO ISSUE RFP [WITH INVITATION TO DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING TO PARTICIPATE IN RFP PROCESS] FOR MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT TO OPERATE PARKING SERVICES USING LOTS AROUND OLD ARENA AND HAVE SHUTTLE SERVICE TO AMERICAN AIRLINES ARENA DURING HEAT BASKETBALL SEASON, BEGINNING LATE SEPTEMBER. 13. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO LEASE 7/24/00 AGREEMENTS WITH LANDOWNERS OF PARCEL P-1 SEOPW/CRA R-00-84 62-63 THROUGH P-6 AND M-2, PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL RENTS NOT TO EXCEED 10% OF APPRAISED VALUE OF SUCH PARCELS. 14. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ISSUE RFQ FOR SALE OF 7/24/00 PROPERTY [14TH ST NEAR 395 EXPRESSWAY] TO SEOPW/CRA R-00-85 DEVELOP ELDERLY HOUSING PROJECT ON 64-65 PROPERTY. 15. RECONSIDER AND RESCIND PRIOR MOTION 7/24/00 (OMNI/CRA M-00-39 AND SEOPW/CRA M-00-72) PASSED SEOPW/CPA M-00-86 ON JUNE 26, 2000 WHICH HAD INDEMNIFIED ACTIONS OMNI/CRA M-00-42 66-68 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 (See Sections 3 & 17). 16. DISCUSSION REGARDING UPDATE ON KPMG ADUIT. 17. CRA TO INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS CHARLAYNE THOMPKINS FROM ANY TAX LIABILITY AS RESULT OF MS. THOMPKINS FILING SS-4 TAX FORMS ON BEHALF OF CRA ON WHICH TAX FORMS MS. THOMPKINS WAS LISTED ON LINE 7 AS RESPONSIBLE PARTY AND PROVIDED HER OWN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER (See Sections 3 & 15). 7/24/00 DISCUSSION 69-70 7/24/00 SEOPW/CRA R-00-87 OMNI/CRA R-00-43 71-72 18. CRA ADMINISTRATION TO WORK CLOSELY WITH CITY PARKS DEPARTMENT TO PURSUE PROGRAM TO INCLUDE COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY IN INNER CITY PARKS AND TO MEET WITH DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN CONNECTION WITH ANCILLARY SERVICES RELATED TO COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY TO BE PROVIDED IN CITY PARKS (DIGITAL DIVIDE). 7/24/00 SEOPW/CRA M-00-88 OMNI/CRA M-00-44 73-77 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST AND OMNI DISTRICTS On the 24"' day of July 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 Old Miami Arena, VIP Room, 701 Arena Boulevard, Miami, Florida. The meeting was called to order at 5:09 p.m. by Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr., with the following Board Members found to be present: Board Member Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. 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 Robert Nachlinger, Assistant City Manager -Finance & Administration, City of Miami Genaro "Chip" Iglesias, Chief of Staff, City Manager's Office, City of Miami Alejandro Vilarello, 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 Albert Ruder, Director, Parks & Recreation, City of Miami John Jackson, Director, Public Works, City of Miami Richard H. Judy, Director, Strategic Planning, CRA Robert Tyler, Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA Nathalie Legagneur, Legal Counsel, CRA Hilda Tej era, Administrator, CRA Hammond Noriega, Overtown Advisory Board Liaison/Project Coordinator, CRA Chairman Teele: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, with your permission, we'd like to stand for a silent invocation, followed by the pledge, and then we will bring the meeting to order. CRA 7/24/00 Note for the Record: A silent invocation was had, after which, Chairman Teele led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. Chairman Teele: Mr. Clerk, would you call the roll, please. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call. Board Member Regalado. Board Member Regalado: Yes. Mr. Foeman: Vice Chairman Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Mr. Foeman: Chairman Teele. Chairman Teele: Yes. We have a quorum. 2 CRA 7/24/00 1. (A) TABLE CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH CITY PERTAINING TO CERTAIN PAYMENTS BEING MADE TO CITY INSTEAD OF CRA, ETC (See Section 2). (B) DIRECT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF CRA TO OBTAIN GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR CRA BOARD OFFICERS AND ITS DIRECTORS. (C) DEFER CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF FY' 2000 BUDGET AND FY' 2001 BUDGETS FOR SEOPW/CRA AND OMNI/CRA. Chairman Teele: In deference to Commissioner Winton — I'm sorry — to Commissioner Sanchez, who is not here, we'll temporarily skip over Item 1. He had requested it be deferred. And we will — is KPMG (Klynveld, Peat, Marwick, Goerdeler) present, or the Comptroller? Brian, would you come forward and would you begin a discussion regarding the budget. Note for the Record: Board Member Gort entered the meeting at 5:11 p.m. Chairman Teele: We're temporarily passing number 1 and 2, and — Brian Hankerson (Comptroller, CRA): Good afternoon. I'm Brian Hankerson, Comptroller. Chairman Teele: Mr. Hankerson, it may be better if you take the mike and just have a seat. And in the future, let's make sure that we at least have a podium. Mr. Hankerson: I'm the Comptroller for the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), 300 Biscayne Boulevard Way, here to present the year 2000 modified budget, and the proposed 2001 budget for the Community Redevelopment Agency. What you should have in your packages are the budgets. And you will note, first of all, that these budgets are presented slightly different than they have been in the past. Based on advice from legal counsel, it is most appropriate to segregate the budget into two areas -- the Omni Trust Fund and Southeast Overtown/Park West Trust Fund. The structure of the budget is such that the first section will indicate the anticipated funding sources in a sufficient amount of detail, hopefully, that we can identify what those funding sources are. Then there's a summary of the expenditures that will draw down on those funding sources. Subsequent to that is — and let me back up and say you'll have one of those type of analyses for Southeast Overtown/Park West, the year 2000 modified, as well as Omni, the year 2000, modified. And then you will have that same format, the year 2001 proposed for the Southeast Overtown/Park West and for the Omni. After that -- and I think that's in Section 7 of the package that you have -- you'll have the funding detail. That funding detail schedules out the various positions that are incorporated in this budget, as well as the line item operating costs that are incorporated in this budget. And then subsequent to that, you'll have the detailed projects related to the budget for the adopted 2000 budget, as well as the modified and the proposed 2001. Something you should note is that the operating expenses, the payroll and the operating expenses are annual reoccurring expenses. So the budgets that you see are annual in number. The capital projects dollars that you see there are a cumulative number. So each year that number -- you'll see that number grow year and year by what's being appropriated for that particular year or through that particular year. I'm not sure, Chairman, how much detail we want to go into, or if there are any specific questions that you all might want to pose. CRA 7/24/00 Chairman Teele: My intent, subject to the Board's decision, is to present the budget and to act on it in September as a formal budget action, giving the Board Members an opportunity to meet with you individually if they desire to, or to have further discussions now or in the September meeting. But it was our hope that we could flush out the concerns, the issues, and give the staff at least an additional 30 days to make any budget adjustments that are necessary. Commissioner, Mr. Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: From my perspective, that's outstanding, because I spent time over the weekend trying to go through this budget, and it's clear that somebody has spent a lot of time preparing it and there's a lot of detail, but I think I was apparently a little slow, because there just were too many parts of this that I couldn't get, I couldn't sort through and figure out on my own. So I was hoping that there would be an opportunity to meet with staff and go through this. Mr. Hankerson: Sure. Vice Chairman Winton: So this is perfect for me. Chairman Teele: I have three or four concerns. I'm sorry, Commissioner Gort. Board Member Gort: Go ahead. (Inaudible). Chairman Teele: I have three or four concerns. The first and the most important concern is that this Board, and certainly, the Chair directed last year that for purposes of the TIF (Tax Increment Fund) funding, the tax increment funding -- and Mr. Attorney, I need you to monitor this as well as the Manager and the Assistant Manager for Finance -- the TIF resolution should be a separate resolution. And the TIF resolution, in my judgment, that goes to the City and the County should include only those matters relating to TIF. I think you all need to seek a deferral of the item before the County Commission tomorrow. And I think you need to sit down with the City Attorney, as well as with the Manager's Budget Director or the -- I'm sorry -- the Assistant Manager for Finance and Budget -- and clarify this. Right now, the way this has been presented -- and I specifically asked that this not be done -- the entire budget of the CRA is before the County Commission for approval on the agenda that I saw, and the agenda that has been published, the seventeen million dollar ($17,000,000) budget. That budget should not be before the County Commission for approval. The only portion of the budget that should be for approval is the tax increment funds. And this is what's important. Under the Interlocal Agreements between the City and the County -- the only real Interlocal Agreement that matters. These others are operating agreements. But the Master Interlocal Agreement that creates the Redevelopment Authority for the Omni and for Overtown/Park West, the County must approve the expenditures of the TIF and the City must approve the expenditures of the TIF. And that is normal. They do that in all of these budgets. However, given the way our Redevelopment Authority has been structured, the TIF funding, which is the heart of redevelopment authorities, is just a small portion of our budget. So in effect, we are providing to the County the right to approve, or modify or reject CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds that are coming exclusively from the City, funding relating to other costs that are coming exclusively from the City. And Mr. Attorney, I think that opens the door to a lot of mischief and a lot of misunderstanding. And so I saw the documents. I saw the documents that were submitted by the CRA. They have attached the documents that were submitted by the CRA. It's my hope that those documents were submitted for information purposes. But the only thing that is before them is the tax increment. And I think it's very, 4 CRA 7/24/00 very important, I think it's very, very important that in our budget documents, we segregate the TIF funding from all of the other fundings within the two districts. In other words, we have two districts; Southeast Overtown and we have the Omni. I think legally, the whole issue that everybody tries to keep us focused on is there is no legal entity called the CRA. That's the point. The legal entity is the Southeast Overtown/Park West Tax Authority -- District and the Omni Tax Increment District. The districts are the two legal entities that are created. There is no such legal entity known as the CRA. And I can understand how those budgets got forwarded, but I don't understand how those budgets -- Because once you ask them to approve it, then they're going to ask next year to approve it. And in effect, in effect, we're asking them now to approve essentially what is City funding. You know, the ideal thing would be if the County were matching the City funding, and then you'd have a basis. But that's a whole other story. Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Chairman, what we've asked, we have a memorandum going to the County Commissioners to ask that that item be deferred, and maybe we could seek a legal opinion from both the County Attorney and our City Attorney on the County's ability or inability to approve and/or disapprove our entire budget, versus just TIF funds. Chairman Teele: I think it makes a big -- I think it's a monumental kind of issue. That's the first issue. The second issue, of course, relates to -- well, let me yield. Commissioner Sanchez has come in. We're on the budget and having some discussion about that. Further discussions on the budget? Note for the Record: Board Member Sanchez entered the meeting at 5:19 p.m. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may address a couple of issues on the budget. If we could go to 6 on the budget, and we are reviewing the budget, number 6. And I just have a question for the finances. The prior year carryover and reimbursement, the Omni -- the Interlocal Agreement with the County states that we could only have one point two million dollars ($1.2 million). Why do we have one point nine? Chairman Teele: Well, let me clarify. The Interlocal Agreement doesn't say that at all. What the Interlocal Agreement says is that the first one point two million dollars ($1.2 million) will remain with the CRA. And after that, 100 percent of the funding goes to the -- to service the debt for the Performing Arts Center. Board Member Sanchez: It was my understanding that we were only allowed to one half of one point two. I could be wrong. I'm just clarifying what I thought was the Agreement. ChairmanTeele: That's absolutely not what the Agreement says. What the Agreement says is that the first one point two million dollars ($1.2 million) of Tax Increment Funds will be retained by the CRA. One hundred percent of subsequent Tax Increment Funds will be paid over to the County for the service of the debt up to a certain amount of money. I believe it's eight hundred and -- is it one point four? (Unidentified Speaker): (Inaudible Comments). Chairman Teele: One point four thirty. Board Member Sanchez: OK. 5 CRA 7/24/00 Mr. Hankerson: And actually, one point five million did come out of that one point nine to be paid -- one point five million did come out of that to be paid -- what -- the way this budget is structured is all the revenue or potential revenue is shown up top, and all the potential expenses are shown at the bottom. So even though the -- the TIF money that's going to the County, it's flowing through. Board Member Sanchez: No, I am aware that we paid the County one point five million dollars ($1.5 million), reference the Interlocal Agreement on that. Mr. Hankerson: Right. Board Member Sanchez: And that was one of the things that I saw on this budget and the previous budget that had not been changed, but it is corrected now. Also, just another question on 7. One page 3 of 5, the budget justification. The enhancement and property assessment options to improve value in the vicinity of Camillus House, FY 2000, we have three hundred and fifty. FY 2000 modified is three fifty. And then we go to FY 2001 estimated two point two million dollars ($2.2 million). Where did those funds come from? Chairman Teele: The number that you're looking at is not funds. It's a budget, and it comes from the previous -- it comes from the current five-year budget that has been approved by both the City and the CRA for the last two years. Board Member Sanchez: But where are those -- those funds are allocated from where, specifically? Mr. Hankerson: If you would look back on page -- actually, it's Section -- I think it might be Section 3. It's titled SEOP Trust Fund Fiscal Year 2001. Board Member Gort: Page 3 of -- Mr. Hankerson: No, I think it's Section 3 in your binder. Vice Chairman Winton: Must be 4. Mr. Hankerson: Yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: 2001 you said? Mr. Hankerson: 2001. It should have said 2001 SEOP. Mr. Hankerson: OK. I might have the numbers wrong. If you -- Vice Chairman Winton: It's in Section 5. Mr. Hankerson: Section 5. I'm sorry. 6 CRA 7/24/00 Board Member Sanchez: Section 5? 2001. Mr. Hankerson: Right. You'll see on that, the top section of that schedule, there are a number of various revenue sources, from TIF funds to parking revenues to City support to prior year carryover. There's an accumulation of well over two to three million dollars ($3,000,000) outside of the CDBG money that's been appropriated there that will address projects such as the one you questioned. Board Member Sanchez: Which are? Mr. Hankerson: I'm sorry? Board Member Sanchez: Which are? Where do -- On the budget -- Mr. Hankerson: If you'll start with the column that says FY 2001 Estimate. Board Member Sanchez: OK. Mr. Hankerson: The first two items, that's nine hundred and forty thousand of Southeast Overtown TIF money. Then you have another hundred and fifty thousand of what we're estimating to be permitting and development fees. And then as -- you can go down each line item, and it will identify the potential revenue sources that are more unrestricted, versus the type that are more restricted with the CDBG type funding. Board Member Sanchez: What is this here? Chairman Teele: That's just a compendium. Board Member Sanchez: What portion is this? Chairman Teele: That's a compendium. Same thing. Board Member Sanchez: Is this additional information on the budget? Chairman Teele: No. There's no additional information on the budget. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, it might be useful, because both Commissioner Gort and Commissioner Sanchez came in after I -- after you made the comment about what the process was going to be here on the budget, and that's probably useful information to both of them. Chairman Teele: Well, I was -- the observation that I've made is that I think budget documents should be given maximum review. I note that at least one agency passed the budgets out and forced a vote within a matter of minutes in the Bayfront Trust Board meeting recently. But I think that it's very important that the Board Members have an opportunity to absorb. So as I've said, I think it's important that we vote on this budget in September and not today necessarily. Board Member Sanchez: I agree with you. 7 CRA 7/24/00 Chairman Teele: But I think it's important that it be flushed out, and that no one be forced to vote on a budget before they're ready to within the time frame. Board Member Sanchez: Has anybody made a motion to defer? Chairman Teele: No. We don't want to defer. We want to discuss it, Commissioner. Board Member Sanchez: Oh, OK. Vice Chairman Winton: And then we'll each get a chance to meet with staff any time we want to, to go over any questions we have. Chairman Teele: And staff will be available to meet with each person, exactly. Vice Chairman Winton: Because, Commissioner Sanchez, as I said early on, there were a lot of things that I just simply didn't understand. You know, I'm not used to reading this format. So it was going to be very helpful to me to spend some time with staff during the course of the month of August, so I could get all of my questions answered. Chairman Teele: Sure. Further discussion on the budget, please? Commissioner. Board Member Gort: I only have one question. You show the special revenue bond of two million dollars ($2,000,000). Is that funds that are there? You're showing it as revenue. And I will have a lot of questions. I want to sit down with you, because I have a lot of questions I'm going to come up with. Mr. Hankerson: That's the -- Board Member Gort: 1995 special revenue bond. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: That's the MRC building bond. And we're bringing those bonds for the CRA forward, as related to the original bond indenture, made two million dollars ($2,000,000) available for the CRA for office building. Vice Chairman Winton: Try that on me -- Board Member Gort: But that was -- wasn't that -- were those funds used, or they have not been used? Chairman Teele: No. No. Those funds can't be used. The bond indenture, itself, limits, specifically limits the use of those funds. That two million dollars ($2,000,000) has been carried over for three years since I've been here. And we've verified with Finance that the funds are there. If the funds aren't there, we got a serious problem. I mean not "we." The City would have a serious problem. But the funds are there. 8 CRA 7/24/00 Vice Chairman Winton: Well, how do we access them? I mean, how does the CRA access them? Chairman Teele: The funds -- when the bond was done in 1995, a part of the bond was a two million dollar ($2,000,000) line item for the CRA. That's the use of the bonds specifically for office building. And just like when you do a bond for a police station or a fire station, and you're limited for that use. It's restricted, to use the correct term, for that use. OK? Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I have one more question, one more question I'd like to ask. Nowhere in thisdbudget did I see officer and Director, general liability insurance. Are we required to have that? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): General liability? Board Member Sanchez: Executive director, yes, sir. Commissioner Winton: Officers and directors. Board Member Sanchez: Officers, director and general liability insurance. Mr. Tyler: Not that I'm aware of. Not that I'm aware of. Board Member Sanchez: OK. I would like to make a motion directing you to obtain officer, and director general liability insurance for this agency. So move. Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, would you like to opine before we vote on it? It sounds like a good idea, I would think, unless there is -- Board Member Gort: (Inaudible Comments). Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): The only -- the first question was, "Was it required?" No, it's not. But certainly, it's a reasonable expenditure of funds to acquire that kind of coverage for the Board and its officers. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Teele: Without objection, all those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. 9 CRA 7/24/00 The following motion was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-75 OMNI/CRA 00-40 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY REDVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT ("DOAD") TO OBTAIN GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR THE OFFICERS AND THE DIRECTORS OF THE CRA. Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, 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. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: All right. Then if there are no further discussions on the budget, items 3, 4 and 5, we'll move that those items be deferred and will be taken up as the first order of business at the next Board meeting. Note for the Record: At this point, agenda items 3, 4 and 5 were deferred to the next scheduled CRA Board Meeting. 10 CRA 7/24/00 2. APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH CITY PERTAINING TO CERTAIN PAYMENTS BEING MADE TO CITY INSTEAD OF CRA, CERTAIN FUNDS NOT BEING TRANSFERRED TO CRA FROM CITY, AND PAYMENT FOR LAND DEEDED TO CITY; APPROVE CITY MAKING ALL ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS ON CITY'S SPECIAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 1990; ACCEPT PAYMENT FROM CITY OF CERTAIN FUNDS APPROPRIATED BY CITY TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT CRA IN FISCAL YEARS 1997 THROUGH 1999; AGREE TO WAIVE ANY CLAIMS CRA MAY HAVE AGAINST CITY FOR CERTAIN PARKING REVENUES FROM PROPERTY OWNED BY CRA ADJACENT TO MIAMI ARENA AND PAID TO CITY; AGREE TO WAIVE ANY CLAIMS CRA MAY HAVE AGAINST CITY WITH RESPECT TO LAND DEEDED BY CRA TO CITY AND SOLD TO MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY ON WHICH IS LOCATED AMERICAN AIRLINES ARENA. Chairman Teele: Now that Commissioner Sanchez is here, out of courtesy to you, sir, I deferred item number 1. Item Number I is the heart and soul of the CRA's (Community Redevelopment Agency's) financial arrangements. The opinion has been issued and rendered. I hope it's satisfactory to you. Board Member Sanchez: Yes, sir. I have requested to meet with Attorney Bloom, and we will meet in the next couple of days. Chairman Teele: All right. Is there a motion to adopt item number 1? Board Member Regalado: So move. Chairman Teele: Second? Board Member Sanchez: Excuse me. I'll second it for discussion. I had one question on 1. This is just who -- who obtains -- who assumes the responsibilities of the 108? Chairman Teele: The 108, under the agreement that issued the 108 was issued by the City of Miami. It was issued by the City of Miami. It is issued by the City of Miami. And it is the responsibility of the City of Miami. Board Member Sanchez: OK. Chairman Teele: Further discussion? All those in favor of the item, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed, say "no." 11 CRA 7/24/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-76 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") PERTAINING TO CERTAIN PAYMENTS BEING MADE TO THE CITY INSTEAD OF THE AGENCY, CERTAIN FUNDS NOT BEING TRANSFERRED TO THE CRA FROM THE CITY, AND PAYMENT FOR LAND DEEDED TO THE CITY; MAKING FINDINGS; APPROVING THE CITY MAKING ALL ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS ON THE CITY'S SPECIAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 1990; APPROVING AND ACCEPTING PAYMENT FROM THE CITY OF CERTAIN FUNDS APPROPRIATED BY THE CITY TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT THE CRA IN FISCAL YEARS 1997 THROUGH 1999; AGREEING TO WAIVE ANY CLAIMS THE CRA MAY HAVE AGAINST THE CITY FOR CERTAIN PARKING REVENUES FROM PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CRA ADJACENT TO THE MIAMI ARENA AND PAID TO THE CITY; AGREEING TO WAIVE ANY CLAIMS THE CRA MAY HAVE AGAINST THE CITY WITH RESPECT TO LAND DEEDED BY THE CRA TO THE CITY AND THEN SOLD TO THE MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY ON WHICH IS LOCATED THE MIAMI ARENA; AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION AND EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FORMALIZING THE TERMS OF THIS RESOLUTION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None 12 CRA 7/24/00 3. TABLE CONSIDERATION TO INDEMNIFY CHARLAYNE THOMPKINS FROM ANY TAX LIABILITY (See Sections 15 & 17). Chairman Teele: All right. Item number 6. Could we temporarily pass that? Is Mr. Bloom going to come here with the Agreement, or you have it? Nathalie Legagneur (Legal Counsel, CRA): I have it. Chairman Teele: Mr. Bloom was supposed to be bringing forth an agreement. Note for the Record: At this point, agenda item 6 was temporarily tabled. 13 7/24/00 4. DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. Chairman Teele: All right. Item number 7, 8 and 9. Mr. Judy. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): The Interlocal Agreement is well underway. The restatement we worked with both -- met with the City Attorney this week and sat with another one of the attorneys on the 291". We should have it for September. Chairman Teele: All right. I think it's very important that the recast Interlocal Agreement be done, and I'm really pleased that the Manager is not only present, but his two Assistant Managers are present. And welcome to all of the City employees. We're not accustomed to this level of support, and it's very helpful. On the Interlocal Agreement, I really do think that the Finance, Assistant Manager for Finance and we need to really hammer this out, because at this point, all of the issues are financial and structural, and not so much operational. And there's just been a total spirit of cooperation. And Mr. Manager, I really appreciate the professionalism of the team that you've put together. This Interlocal has gone back and forth now, as you know, for three years, two years. And the truth of the matter is the Interlocal Agree -- the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) and the City never functioned with an Interlocal Agreement, which is part of the challenge or the problem. I don't want to say it's a problem. Clearly, the Interlocal Agreement or a memorandum of agreement, or some document would have been useful in a lot of the issues that have gone on for the last twelve years would be resolved. And those issues, quite candidly, are as much legal as they are procedural. So we need your support, Mr. Attorney, in working with us. 14 CRA 7/24/00 5. AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH CITY AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ON BEHALF OF CRA TO SEEK POWERS OF EMINENT DOMAIN FOR UNIMPROVED PROPERTIES WITHIN SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DISTRICT. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Judy, number 8, eminent domain. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): The resolutions, Mr. Attorney -- where is he? We have the resolutions. Everybody's been -- agreed on them for (inaudible) by the City to the County. I think our lawyer has them. I had it. It's been done about three weeks ago. Chairman Teele: All right. Let's just review where we are, because, again, one of the problems that we're having, Dick, is that these things keep going round and round and round. Now, item number 8 is not in the book; is that right? Vice Chairman Winton: Correct. Chairman Teele: We don't have anything from you on this. Mr. Judy: Oh, yes. I sent it to him. Chairman Teele: Well, it's not in the book. Vice Chairman Winton: It's not in our books. Chairman Teele: But that's not really important. Let's be very clear what we're talking about. And I note there is a lady that's here in the audience. I cannot call her name, but she represents a person selling land to the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Did I see you? Ma'am, would you just come forth and identify yourself, please? Because -- Annie Wooden: My name is Annie Wooden. I represent Ms. Susie Simmons, who has property in Overtown, 247 and 229. And I understand you want to use them for parking lots. Chairman Teele: You understand what? Ms. Wooden: You want to use the land for parking space, a parking lot. Chairman Teele: Yes. Ms. Wooden: It has been rezoned, one of the lots. 229 is in the process, I guess, of being rezoned commercial. The other lot is zoned commercial. Chairman Teele: And let me explain to you and to the Board again, and to the public what the problem is. Dealing in the inner City, especially the traditionally -- areas where minorities live, there are a series of issues that cloud title, just to put it very, very simply. The parcel that you represent is a parcel, I believe, that has cousins, et cetera that were involved. And while the owner represents that she has the legal 15 CRA 7/24/00 authority to bind, the title company will not give us a clear title. We have a willing seller here who is willing to sell at the price you've stated, is that right? Ms. Wooden: They have a contract, a stated price. Chairman Teele: A contract. And you have a willing purchaser. What we have is a bunch of legal issues that totally frustrate both the seller and the purchaser. In other words, on behalf of the CRA, I'm frustrated. The seller, it took this seller -- not the lady that's here, but -- Ms. Wooden: I represent Ms. Simmons. Chairman Teele: -- that you represent her -- some years to decide to sell this land. I mean, this was a very, very serious decision that she undertook. But once she undertook to sell the land, she wants to sell the land and get it over with. And she's -- the seller is incurring costs, et cetera. Now, one of the things that Mr. Bloom has explained to us, our lawyer, is that one of the ways or the most efficient way that he recommended to do this was to get eminent domain authority to that you have, in effect, a clear title. This is true of scattered parcels -- we're not talking about anybody's buildings or anybody's land that is improved. We're just talking about unimproved lots that have been there as they are for over 20, 30, 40, 50 years in some cases. And so the question becomes, Mr. Attorney, you know, how do we solve this problem, and what are you all going to do to help us get this matter resolved? Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): What apparently should be on your Agenda is a resolution and a form that would go to the County Commission, asking the County Commission to authorize eminent domain powers, followed by a resolution approved by the City Commission to the same effect. Those are the two procedural steps that need to take place. Chairman Teele: We have asked repeatedly for your office and Mr. Judy to work that out. Now, if you need -- Mr. Vilarello: It's been at least a month since I've approved the resolution, so I don't know why they're not on the agenda. But I don't prepare your agenda. Chairman Teele: Well, what -- are you saying that you need our authority? I mean, we've already resolved to ask that this go forward. If you would like for us to resolve again, I mean -- Mr. Vilarello: I don't know why Mr. Bloom asked for that item to be on this agenda again. The County Commission must pass the resolution. If the resolution has already been adopted by this Board, then it merely needs to be brought before the County Commission in the appropriate way for their authorization, and then subsequent to that, a resolution of the City Commission. Both those resolutions I've seen in their final form for quite some time. Chairman Teele: All right. Is there a motion to authorize the City Attorney to move forward with the City and the County on behalf of the CRA to seek specifically the powers enumerated for eminent domain for these type of facilities, specifically -- or these type of properties -- specifically unimproved properties? 16 CRA 7/24/00 Mr. Vilarello: The resolution, of course, would not limit any particular -- Chairman Teele: I understand. Vice Chairman Winton: And I'm not sure we want it to, do we? Mr. Vilarello: No. Vice Chairman Winton: I wouldn't think. Chairman Teele: Well, as it has been stated by the City Attorney, would you so move at least so we can -- Vice Chairman Winton: I would move it. Chairman Teele: Moved. And seconded? Board Member Regalado: I'll second it. Just a question. How are we going to lobby the County just to get on the agenda? Because it's very difficult to get on the agenda in the County. And then they won't have any meetings in August. They'll be back in September. Chairman Teele: September is budget month. Nobody wants to be bothered with external issues. Note for the Record: CRA Counsel William Bloom entered the meeting at 5:41 p.m. Board Member Regalado: Right, right, that's what I'm saying. September is out. So we need to have some kind of commitment in order to get on their agenda. I don't know -- Chairman Teele: The most efficient way to get something on the agenda in the County -- Board Member Regalado: Through a Commissioner. Chairman Teele: -- is really through the County Attorney, believe it or not. Board Member Regalado: Or -- Chairman Teele: I mean, a Commissioner can always put something on. But I think what we have to do is we -- you know, I'll take it up with Commissioner Carey -- there's no conflict there -- and Commissioner -- what's his name? Board Member Sanchez: Barreiro. Chairman Teele: Barreiro, which has a large part of Overtown, as well. But I guess the point here is we have a seller who's a little bit -- wants to know where we are and where we're going, Bill. And -- Bill, we have a seller here again who has those three lots. They've entered into a contract. They're very frustrated that we've not proceeded with this. I'm aware of at least two ways to do this. Eminent domain clearly is going to have to be done for some other reasons but -- because as you know, there are transactions that 17 CRA 7/24/00 have taken place in the past that I am not comfortable recommending to this Board, as I've said before. So, I mean, I just want to put that on the record. And I think the only way to clear those transactions is to take them before a judge and let a magistrate determine them. But we need to solve the seller's problem here. William Bloom (CRA Counsel): With respect -- I'm not sure which lots we're talking about. Chairman Teele: We're talking about the three lots on -- Ms. Wooden: 247, and 229 and 231 belongs to Ms. Spann. Just two belong to Ms. Simmons. Chairman Teele: That's the lady in Jacksonville. Ms. Wooden: Yes. Chairman Teele: We've heard from her before. Ms. Wooden: Yes, the lady in Jacksonville. Mr. Bloom: With respect to all three lots, there's issues with respect to estate matters that have -- Chairman Teele: Speak into the mike, Bill. Mr. Bloom: There are issues with respect to estate matters that have to be resolved before you're able to deliver good, marketable title. We will provide you tomorrow morning with the list with respect to all three lots, what those requirements are and -- Chairman Teele: I don't think that's fair. Ms. Wooden: Ms. Simmons is not concerned about 231. That belongs to a cousin. Now, those two lots of hers were quitclaimed over from all the heirs to Ms. Simmons. And I think Mr. Tyler has a letter there that states if a title run is done, it will -- you will see that those lots owned -- Chairman Teele: Mr. Bloom could you all meet with -- could you all meet tonight and let's resolve this issue? Mr. Bloom: Absolutely. Ms. Wooden: And Mr. Tyler has the letter. I gave him a Xeroxed copy of it. Mr. Bloom: Right. The issue is -- Ms. Wooden: By the attorney. Chairman Teele: I think, Bill, in all honesty, I think it's very important that we don't put back on the seller the responsibilities that clearly are going to be expensive, both in terms of cost and time. You 18 CRA 7/24/00 know, you have a seller who's trying to maximize the dollars out of this. You know, we need to cooperate. This is a unique problem in the inner City. The reason the inner City looks the way it does when you look at the CLUC (County Land Usage Code) 90s and all of that is because you have these kinds of problems. And we need to develop an approach. If we're going to be the redevelopment agency, we need to develop a redevelopment approach to this. Mr. Bloom: The approach that -- We met with Greater Miami Neighborhoods last week before you were contacted. And what we were proposing is, number one, get together with you, explain what's the issues that our title company has come up with, so we can try to come up with a mechanism for solving those problems, and at the same time, enter into a lease with those properties so the CRA will take responsibility for the property and make sure there's no more liens filed with respect to the property, and you'll have some cash flow from the property while we collectively try to resolve the issues. Ms. Wooden: Ms. Simmons doesn't want to do it that way. She would like for the City just to purchase her lots. Mr. Bloom: Then we'll be happy to meet with you or Ms. Simmons and explain to her what the issues are. Ms. Wooden: I have her phone number, and you can call her. Chairman Teele: I've asked this question repeatedly, and I still -- I'm an attorney, but I still don't understand the following: I know all lawyers like to insure that the documents are right. We have a defective title. Why can't we close on the defective title and then we clear the title? Mr. Bloom: You can. It's just then you bear the risk -- Chairman Teele: I mean, you know, if we were building a building, I could understand this. But we're talking about essentially just leveling the ground, creating the ambience for the community, and we're not going to put improvements on it, other than parking surface structure. Where is the risk? Ms. Wooden: I would like to know what blemish you see on her property? Mr. Bloom: I'll give it to you this evening. Ms. Wooden: I was asked for that, and I have not seen it yet, because due to -- I mean, I was with her and her attorney when the properties were quitclaimed over to her. The attorney sent Ms. Simmons a letter stating that. Chairman Teele: Do you have a memo on that other thing? Ms. Wooden: If a title run was done, it would show that those properties belong to her and her only. Now, what blemish are they talking about? Mr. Bloom: I'll be happy to show you this evening what the blemishes are. 19 CRA 7/24/00 Ms. Wooden: I'd appreciate it. Mr. Bloom: As far as the Commissioner is concerned, the Commission -- the CRA Board has the right to purchase property subject to title defects. The risk that you take is you may end up paying for the same property twice, because the people you are paying the money to may not, in fact, be the people who rightfully own the property. You may find out that while a lawyer was hired in the past to clear up title problems and get quitclaim deeds that they didn't get all the quitclaim deeds from all the right people, and you may find that the person who they didn't get the deed from is going to hold you up and say, pay me again. That's always -- Chairman Teele: Then why can't you take, close and file an equity procedure to clear cloud? Mr. Bloom: You can file -- you can close. You can file the clear title action, and you may still find that the deed you got was from someone who didn't own the property and you establish -- Chairman Teele: But the action by the court -- Mr. Bloom: All a quiet title action does is create -- is judiciously establish the rights the various parties have in and to the title. So the fact that you obtained a deed from someone who didn't own good title of the property, what that quiet title will establish is that you don't own the property. It's not like an eminent domain action where at the end of the day, you'll get a judgment and you will own the property. Chairman Teele: Clearly, eminent domain is the preferable way to go. But I'm saying in this particular case, I would ask that you just consider it and see if you think that those issues are such that they raise to that. Mr. Bloom: That's fine, sir. Ms. Wooden: Thank you. Chairman Teele: Thank you very much. And right after the meeting, Mr. Bloom will meet with you again. We have -- Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Now, the Board's approved in concept this whole process of the 3rd Avenue Business Corridor, but as we begin to purchase land, will we not see information regarding the proposed purchase prior to the closing, such as whatever appraisals have been done, and the price we're paying and that kind of stuff? Chairman Teele: You have -- all that information has been presented twice. We can present it again. Vice Chairman Winton: To the Board? 20 CRA 7/24/00 Chairman Teele: To the Board. It was presented 18 months ago when the original decision was made. It was presented about nine months ago, and we can ask Greater Miami Neighborhood to request to update that. The problem that we've had, just so that you know, is that we've wound up paying for appraisals twice now, because under the procedures that we're following -- and we don't have to follow these procedures, but we've said we will follow these procedures -- you need an appraisal that is up to date. But, see, this is the problem. I mean, this is all a lot of legal exercise in gymnastics. A piece of property, unimproved, in Overtown costs -- and there's somebody who can sit up and tell you within two percent exactly what it's going to cost. I mean, we've looked it up, vacant properties. Is Mr. Tanenbaum here? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, Mr. Chairman, what might work then is when staff meets with me to go over budget, maybe they can just bring that information. I don't want to bother the whole Board about this. Chairman Teele: Mr. Tanenbaum, would you just come forward and just establish, just so that everybody knows that we're not dealing with a sliding scale here now. We're dealing with something that, quite candidly, has been flat for the last ten years. Your name. Bob Tanenbaum: Bob Tanenbaum, and I work with Greater Miami Neighborhoods. Can you hear me? Chairman Teele: Yes. Mr. Tanenbaum: Essentially, we have a due diligence process that every parcel that's been brought to our attention goes through. The process involves getting an appraisal, phase one environmental audits. We have appraisals for these properties. Contracts were prepared based on these appraisals within the parameters. The appraisals seem to be fairly consistent for all the different properties in the neighborhood. Chairman Teele: Is it eight dollars ($8) or twelve? What's the -- Mr. Tanenbaum: I don't recall things in terms of square foot. These properties typically have a value range of somewhere between fifteen and eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000). Chairman Teele: Per lot? Mr. Tanenbaum: Per lot, yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: How big are the lots? Never mind. I'll just get with -- Mr. Tyler: (Inaudible) seven or eight dollars ($8) on a mean average. Chairman Teele: My recollection is the high number is about eight dollars ($8), eight fifty. Vice Chairman Winton: Got it. Thank you. Chairman Teele: But in the past -- and this is one of the things that -- I don't want to get into what's not on the table. In the past, the CRA has paid as much as thirty and forty dollars ($40) per square foot. 21 CRA 7/24/00 We're around the eight dollar ($8) per square foot basis, and that's where the comparables and all these things become something that, you know, we want to just look at very closely. Thank you Mr. Tanenbaum. And as you know, the Greater Miami Neighborhoods is under contract and serves as an extension of the CRA staff on matters related to land acquisition and housing. They are our housing staff. In other words, one of the things you'll look at, when you look at the budget, unlike the previous CRA, which had a staff that was predominantly housing, we've contracted out our housing staff, and the CRA staff here is primarily business specialists and business assistants, et cetera. Thank you, Mr. Tanenbaum. We have a motion and a second. The motion was relating to the City Attorney moving forward before the City Commission and the County Commission to expedite the eminent domain resolutions. Is there further unreadiness? All those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Regalado: Aye Board Member Gort: Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Aye. Chairman Teele: Aye. Those opposed -- Board Member Sanchez: No. Chairman Teele: -- say "no." And your "no" is noted. Board Member Sanchez: No. Chairman Teele: All right. The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-77 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY OF THE CITY OF MIAMI (THE "CITY ATTORNEY"), ON BEHALF OF THE CRA, TO PROCEED WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI (THE "CITY") AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY (THE "COUNTY") IN SEEKING THE AUTHORITY TO USE THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN WITH RESPECT TO UNIMPROVED PROPERTIES WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. 22 CRA 7/24/00 Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None 23 CRA 7/24/00 6. DISCUSSION -- REPORT REGARDING USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 348 NE 20TH TERRACE. Chairman Teele: All right. And then we have the issue of 340 Northeast 20th Terrace. Mr. Judy. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): That's the section of Omni (inaudible). Chairman Teele: You have to take the mike. Mr. Judy: Bill, I think you're going to have to explain that we have a legal issue here. Chairman Teele: Is this the part, the low -- the vacant parcel? William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): This is the lot assemblage where there is one lot where the developer has not been able to acquire that lot, which is delaying their development. We've looked at the issue. The problem that we have is the property is outside the redevelopment district. Vice Chairman Winton: Ooh. Mr. Bloom: And so the only way to resolve that issue would be to expand the boundaries of the redevelopment district. With respect to the -- Chairman Teele: Can the City do that? Can the City do it? Mr. Bloom: It involves a public hearing. It involves City and County action. Chairman Teele: No, but listen. No. Can the City do the eminent domain -- they can't do it, because that's for a redevelopment purpose. Vice Chairman Winton: They couldn't do it for a private developer, probably. Mr. Bloom: Right. They wouldn't have, say, the broad powers that the CRA has, as far as the eminent domain and making it available for development. Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Bloom: Now, I raised it at this time because there is another item on the agenda regarding adjusting the CRA boundary. Board Member Sanchez: Is it item 12? Mr. Bloom: No. (UNINTELLIGIBLE COMMENTS NOT INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD) 24 CRA 7/24/00 Mr. Bloom: We're not in a position to act on it unless the boundaries of the CRA are first adjusted. That's the problem. Chairman Teele: I'm not prepared to recommend that at this time. Board Member Sanchez: I believe we're missing 18 and what are the -- we're missing the page, at least I am. Board Member Regalado: It's -- Board Member Sanchez: No, no, no. Board Member Regalado: Oh, yeah, you're missing it. Mr. Bloom: It may be in the supplemental. Hopefully, it was delivered, Brian. And that deals with -- there's been ongoing issues with respect to 195 and 395 and 95 as they run through the redevelopment areas. And the way the boundaries of both CRA's are drawn, the lands lying under 395 and under 195 which create the neighborhood blight are not included in the redevelopment district. Chairman Teele: That was just dumb from the very beginning. Mr. Bloom: Absolutely. Chairman Teele: I mean, the biggest blight you leave out. Mr. Bloom: That's correct. And therefore, that resolution would be proposing we amend the boundaries to include the lands under 195 -- Chairman Teele: All right. Well, let's wait till we get to that, and let's let Mr. Sanchez do what he's got to do. 25 CRA 7/24/00 7. APPROVE SELECTION OF CIVIL CADD (THE CIVIL ENGINEER) TO PERFORM CIVIL ENGINEERING WORK AND AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT WITH CIVIL ENGINEER. Chairman Teele: All right, number 10. Board Member Sanchez: So move. Chairman Teele: Excuse me. Go ahead, Mr. Tyler. Let's establish on the record what's going on here. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): The Board authorized us to go out with an RFP (Request for Proposals) and we, with the cooperation of the City Manager, assembled a Technical Review Committee who short-listed four firms. Those four firms did presentations. And your latest supplemental has the scoring of those four firms from the Selection Committee. And I mentioned the names on my memorandum, as well. We're going forward with the recommendation of the highest ranked firm, which was Civil Cadd. Chairman Teele: The chairman of the committee was Jason De Castro? Mr. Tyler: That's correct. He was -- Chairman Teele: And he's a business owner in Omni? Mr. Tyler: He's a business owner in Omni. That's correct. Chairman Teele: All right. And the County had a Public Works representative? Mr. Tyler: That's correct, also. Chairman Teele: The City Public Works representative was there? Parks? Mr. Tyler: Yes. And he's here today. Chairman Teele: And one representative of the Redevelopment Authority. Mr. Tyler: That's correct. Chairman Teele: So of the voting members, only one person was a CRA employee? Mr. Tyler: That's correct. Chairman Teele: And two were outside people, non -governmental. Mr. Tyler: Yes, private sector. Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: All right. Moved by Commissioner Sanchez. 26 CRA 7/24/00 Board Member Gort: Second for discussion. Chairman Teele: Seconded for discussion. Board Member Gort: My understanding -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- those contracts are set for three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) a year. My understanding is there was a structured fee that was there. The inspector was thirty dollars ($30) an hour. Was that part of this contract, or am I reading the wrong contract? Mr. Tyler: That may be another contract. We don't have -- We're going to enter into negotiations with this firm. Board Member Gort: This one said negotiations. Which is the one I read? Mr. Tyler: I believe that may have been the Cap contract or -- Chairman Teele: The Cap. Board Member Gort: My understanding is it was up to three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000), but there was -- and that was -- William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Commissioner, the draft contract that's in your package is similar to the Cap contract. It provides up to three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000). It's all based upon work orders. Board Member Gort: Right. Mr. Bloom: So that for each job, the CRA goes to the contractor, gets the price, and then they agree on a price. There are price schedules for what they get to charge on an hourly rate. Board Member Gort: So we need to find -- those prior schedules will be according to the principle, the administration will select the work and determine more or less how many hours it would take, so we'll know in specifics. Mr. Bloom: They will -- Board Member Gort: OK. Mr. Bloom: For each time there is a task given, they'll do that negotiation. Board Member Gort: Right. So, I read the right contract. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, one other point. You made reference early on in the meeting that you are happy that there were so many City staff people here, and were pleased that the CRA staff and City staff are working together on a number of things. I've had the great displeasure, I guess is the best 27 CRA 7/24/00 way to say it, of having to meet with a whole bunch of Community Development CDC's in the last day or two, many -- most of them in my district who didn't get funded this go around. And the non -funding really related to principally a couple of things. One primary thing was disallowable expenses. So I'm hoping that as we move forward here with whatever we do that the CRA staff is communicating directly with City staff to make sure that we don't -- that the CRA doesn't get on the wrong side of this fence as it relates to allowable and disallowable expenses and that we're tracking that very, very carefully. Chairman Teele: That's a very good point. But let me again remind the Board that the fiduciary for the CRA is the City. So it's a little bit different situation. You know, that's something that everybody sort of plays around with. But what we need to be very clear on is that the City -- the CRA, unlike Bayfront Trust and unlike others does not write its own checks. All checks of the CRA are written by the City Finance Department. And there is a -- there is -- so what you wind up with is a redundant system of finance and budget of the CRA approving something, sending it to the City where the Finance Department and Budget Department approve it again. Hopefully, that will not -- I mean, you know, hopefully, hopefully, that system is cured. And that was one of the things that I was very, very keen on, is that the CRA would not, as long as I'm chairing it, would not write its own checks. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, it seems to me that we might want to set some specific directive here, because, you know, we've seen, even in -- you know, the City, just the City, itself, never mind an outside organization here, the City, itself, sometimes I've seen breakdowns in communication where somebody thought somebody was doing something, and someone else thought something else. So maybe, as a Board, we ought to create a more specific set of directions here as it relates to those kinds of things, so that ultimately, you know, somebody has got to be accountable. And frankly, from this Board's standpoint, we want to make sure that the staff of the CRA is accountable. Chairman Teele: CRA is accountable. Vice Chairman Winton: And so that they need to create that direct linkage to make sure that somebody on the City side doesn't let this slip by. Chairman Teele: KPMG (Klynveld, Peat, Marwick, Goerdeler), which is here now, is writing an internal procedure. And I will ask them again to take note of your comments on that, so that that procedure is very, very clarified. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Chairman Teele: On the motion. Mr. Attorney, what's the motion? Board Member Gort: To recommend -- Mr. Bloom: This is a resolution authorizing the selection of -- what's the name, Mr. Tyler? Mr. Tyler: Civil Cadd Engineering. 28 CRA 7/24/00 Mr. Bloom: -- Civil Cadd Engineering, pursuant to the Request for Qualifications to be retained by the CRA, subject to the availability of funds from account number 689005.055012.4.750, and authorizing the CRA to enter into a contract with that company in the form that's substantially attached to the resolution. Chairman Teele: All right. Board Member Sanchez: Which company is this? Chairman Teele: Civil Cadd. Mr. Tyler: Civil Cadd Engineering, Inc. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: At the last meeting, I requested that when we put in this account number that we also spell out in English what the account is, because these account numbers mean absolutely zero to me. I mean, it's just a whole bunch of numbers. So I would hope that -- Chairman Teele: Yeah. And I'm going to tell you something. You can't do it on this account unless you list all the accounts, because if Civil Cadd is working on a CD, a Community Development project, it'll be one account. If they're working on a TIF (Tax Increment Fund) account, it'll be something totally different. And I was trying to -- The way this bid document went out and was approved by the Board is inconsistent with what Mr. Bloom said, and I just want it clarified on the record. This was a three hundred plus thousand dollar for three years -- Mr. Tyler: One year -- with two one-year options. Chairman Teele: -- with two one-year options, with two one-year options, with the full amount of the contract being bid out, with no proviso that any of the funds beyond the first year must be spent. So it's a lot different from what was said. It's not a three hundred thousand dollar ($300,000) a year contract. The way the bid document went out, it was three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) for the first year with no proviso that the second- or third -year options would go forward. But if they do go forward, it would aggregate not more than nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000) or whatever it is. And that gives you the flexibility not to work based upon a calendar year, but to work upon a project basis. So the contract could be extinguished in two years, or it could be extinguished in three years, or it could theoretically be extinguished in one year. That's highly unlikely. But it is a three hundred thousand dollar ($300,000) plus contract for the first year with two one-year options. All right. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman, my understanding is in 10 being the best, 1 being the worst in the rating, according to what I'm looking at? Mr. Tyler: No. The scoring system, if that's what you're referring to -- Board Member Gort: Right. Mr. Tyler: -- is 4, 4 is the highest number. 29 CRA 7/24/00 Vice Chairman Winton: So how do you read this? Mr. Tyler: I'm sorry. Let me see what you got. Oh, OK. Board Member Gort: (Inaudible) score, (inaudible) has got 84.5. Mr. Tyler: No. We initially received ten proposals, and those are just the ten submitters. Board Member Gort: Right. Mr. Tyler: And the four that have scores by them are the four firms that were short-listed, and those are the scores that they -- Board Member Gort: OK, I got you. Chairman Teele: Yeah. Actually, the score should not have been shown for the first one, because it was really a short -listing process. Board Member Gort: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, OK. Chairman Teele: The first scores don't matter. What they did is they just selected the four firms that went forward, and the only scores that mattered were the second scores, which were the ones they presented. All right. On the motion, is there further discussion? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed, say "no." 30 CRA 7/24/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-78 A RESOLUTION OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") I) APPROVING THE SELECTION OF CIVIL CADD (THE "CIVIL ENGINEER"), PURSUANT TO A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFP"), TO PERFORM MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL ENGINEERING WORK SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT NO. 689005.055012.4.750, AND II) AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE CIVIL ENGINEER IN THE FORM OF EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. (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 Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None 31 CRA 7/24/00 8. (A) CONSIDERATION OF "ADOPT -A -PARK' PROGRAM FOR MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING OF AREAS BENEATH EXPRESSWAYS. (B) AUTHORIZE CRA TO INITIATE PROCESS TO EXTEND BOUNDARIES OF REDEVELOPMENT AREA TO INCLUDE CERTAIN LAND BENEATH 195, 395 AND I-95, TO INCLUDE PARCEL P-6. (C) APPROVE AIR SPACE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CRA AND FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT). Chairman Teele: Number 11. We have representatives of the DOT (Department of Transportation) here. I'd like to ask them to come forth and at least put their names on the record, please. Board Member Regalado: Is this number I I or number 10? Chairman Teele: Eleven. We just did number 10. John Martinez: John Martinez with the Department of Transportation and Bob Cochrane. Board Member Regalado: It's here, number 10. Board Member Sanchez: The air space? They're messed up. They're messed up. Board Member Regalado: Oh, OK. Vice Chairman Winton: No, you got to go to this one. It's different. Yeah, this book is different than that one. Board Member Regalado: OK. Chairman Teele: Welcome. And I know that we're going to have a lot of discussions regarding 395 and 95 on Thursday at the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization). I know that Commissioner Winton and his committee have had a lot of concerns. As you know, the core issue that we're concerned about is the elevation of 395 and the conditions that it creates. And we appreciate very much -- I would hope that you would express to Secretary Abreu the fact that the CRA is grateful that you took the time to come out tonight, and that you all have been working so closely with us in establishing this. Essentially, it's my understanding that you have no objections at this point to a 30-day agreement regarding our rights. Robert Cochrane, Jr.: That is correct. Chairman Teele: All right. OK. Thank you very much. Did you want to say anything else? You want to give us a preview of what Mr. Abreu is going to say on this Thursday meeting? Is he going to endorse the tunnel or the -- Mr. Martinez: I would never guess as to what Mr. Abreu is going to say. 32 CRA 7/24/00 Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I've got a question for the FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) executives. DOT has been always very gracious to help the City run whenever we have a request. And recently, we requested some cleaning under the bypass of Coral Way near Brickell, and it was done. My question is, whose responsibility is the cleaning of -- For instance, when you turn on Biscayne Boulevard, that area that is enclosed by a fence and that -- that could be a little park. Is that the DOT or the City's responsibility to clean? Mr. Cochrane: The areas that have not been leased previously to the Off -Street Parking would be DOT's responsibility. Those areas, which have been leased in the past, are the responsibility of the lessee. Board Member Regalado: So if we identify those areas who have not been leased, then we just need to tell you. Mr. Cochrane: Correct. Board Member Regalado: And you send a crew to clean that area. Mr. Cochrane: That's correct. Board Member Regalado: But whose fence is that? Is it DOT? Is it -- ? Mr. Cochrane: Yes. The fence was installed by DOT some time ago. Board Member Regalado: OK. And the other that I have is, who owns the land right by the McArthur Expressway, under the McArthur Expressway near -- on Watson Island, near the Parrot Jungle site, that huge area? Has that -- is that the area that had been leased to Parrot Jungle, or just part of it? Mr. Cochrane: To the best of my knowledge -- and this is not conclusive -- some of it is owned by DOT. That which is within the corridor of the McArthur Causeway is owned by DOT. But the land you're referring to on either side of the overpass or the bridge, I don't believe all of that is owned by DOT. I'd have to look at the right-of-way maps to get a conclusive answer on that one. Board Member Regalado: So if the City were to do something, it would have to go to DOT in terms of lease or use? Mr. Cochrane: I think we could at least help you identify what DOT owns. Board Member Regalado: OK. Thank you. William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Commissioners, as I alluded to before, the issue with respect to the air rights underneath 195 or 395 or I-95 is that those lands all lie outside of the CRA boundaries, even though they basically cause the problems that required the CRA in the first place. And therefore, the CRA is not in a position to legally go into a lease with FDOT for these spaces to develop storage or a parking lot until the boundaries are modified, as I alluded to in the amendment. 33 CRA 7/24/00 Chairman Teele: Well, hold on one minute. In other words, we have the Omni -- let's just focus on 395. We have the Omni and we have everything right up to -- because of the way the agreement was drafted. Mr. Bloom: The agreement was drafted. One of the boundaries for the Omni is 395. However, the description refers to specific plat and subdivisions, and it's all plat and subdivisions identified in that list, which are within the boundaries of 395, the FEC (Florida East Coast) Railroad Track. I think it's Northeast 20th Terrace or 20th Street and Biscayne Bay. And so that excludes 395. Chairman Teele: Wait, wait, wait, but hold it. Hold it. Commissioner Regalado, Commissioner Gort, Commissioner Teele. Board Member Regalado: OK. Just if, when you leave the Omni and you go west, you drive only a block and a half, and you have the site that we were just discussing now. Would that fall into the CRA boundary? Mr. Bloom: If it's under 395. Board Member Regalado: It's under 395. Mr. Bloom: No, it does not. Board Member Regalado: So what's the boundary? Mr. Bloom: The boundary is -- the legal description lists -- it draws a line; it draws a box. Board Member Gort: The north side. Mr. Bloom: And within that box, these plats -- and then it lists the plats -- are within the boundary. So it doesn't include the land underneath 395. It doesn't include the FEC right-of-way, but it includes only those platted subdivisions that are in the box they drew by pointing to the FEC, the 395 and Biscayne Bay. Board Member Regalado: The reason I asked, Mr. Chairman, is because the mission of this agency is development. There cannot be any development when you have eyesores close to your core of development. And if you drive by there, you have a problem. I have a problem driving by there, because of the filth that is being accumulated there. And it's either we do something, the City -- and I'm sure that DOT will do it. I have no doubt in my mind, because we requested from DOT a cleanup in Coral Way, and they did it right away. But my concern is they're going to come and do it, but the problem of the homeless problem and the population that drives and throws garbage there will continue to create an eyesore in that area, which is crucial for redevelopment. And that is my issue. The issue is that you don't -- you need to have the area cleaned and painted in order to attract development. And that's why I think that it's either an issue that has to be addressed by the City, by the CRA, DOT, you know, the National Guard, whatever. But it is important -- 34 CRA 7/24/00 Board Member Regalado: No, Willy, it is important. It's so important, because, I mean, if you are visiting the Omni area and if you are an investor, the only way out for you to go to Broward and Palm Beach is through that street. There's no other way. And you will see the filth. Chairman Teele: Well, and the problem -- Board Member Gort: Commissioner. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort. Board Member Gort: Commissioner Regalado, let me tell you, my experience is -- and through the Omni Committee who has worked quite a bit with DOT. And DOT, they love to clean it up, they love to beautify it, but unfortunately, it's not in their budget. So, they can't do it. Now, my question to you is -- And the idea of the National Guard, let me tell you, they get together on weekends, it's not a bad idea. Maybe we can get them to do some of the work that needs to be done. My question is can we -- Board Member Regalado: Willy, DOT use prisoners. They just trimmed the trees with prisoners in Coral Way. Board Member Gort: Can't we go ahead and lease, even though it's outside of our district, if DOT agreed to lease to us? Mr. Bloom: No, because (inaudible) the lease would FDOT would require the CRA to spend money, and the CRA is not allowed to spend money outside of its district. I mean, I think the important thing -- you know, this is, you know, going through documentation and finding errors that were made in the past. And the most prudent thing the Board can do is correct those errors so the CRA is set up so it works properly, so we can deal with the blight underneath 395 and 195 and 95, to deal with the entryways to the CRA, so when you get off of 95 that you're able to deal with those areas. Board Member Gort: We might be able to do that combination with the Downtown Development Authority. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort, members, one of the things that we have tried to focus on, at least since I've been here, is this whole issue of "What is slum and blight?" Blight is the conditions that exist underneath 95 and 395, both in the Omni areas, in the Park West areas and in the Overtown areas. The fact that our primary mission is redevelopment and the removal of slum and blight, and the fact that the primary obstacle or the primary instigator of slum and blight, clearly, one of the most is the elevated structures of 395 and 95, shows just, you know, the frailty of the structure of the CRA and how it was set up. One of the things that we asked initially in setting up the office of plans was primarily to get somebody out of the day-to-day operation and to literally sit down -- if you go back and look at the resolution -- and work through the tremendous mistakes that have been -- that have evolved in setting up of the CRA. To me, it's incredulous that we would be responsible for redeveloping on either side -- I mean on either side of 395. And for first -- Board Member Gort: The worst part. 35 CRA 7/24/00 Chairman Teele: -- no one to be able to figure out a way that we can solve the problem, because I got to tell you, I believe that we could ask the City of Miami to enter into the agreement on our behalf, I mean, if that's the issue. (INAUDIBLE COMMENT NOT INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD) Commissioner Teele: Well, you know, that's your opinion. I'm giving my opinion. I believe that the City of Miami could enter into the same agreement that we're asking for if we ask them to. The question becomes the expenditure of money. Dollars are fundable. To the extent that we take money and get money -- I know that we don't get nearly the money that, say, some organizations get in terms of the general funding from the City coffers. But to the extent we get any money, we could ask that that money be reimbursed or redirected back. I mean, the fact of the matter is, is rather than getting caught up on legal mumbo jumbo, we really ought to stay focused, I believe, on how we can best legally and properly carry out our mission of redevelopment. And we all recognize that the 395/95 issue is a serious issue. So Mr. Bloom, I'm not sure what you're asking or you're saying. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Bloom: Well, I'm suggesting that we consider the Resolution Number 18 in the package, which is to proceed to seek an amendment to the boundaries of the CRA, to add these areas that should have been added, which would also include -- I think it's Parcel P-6, which is the entryway where you exit 95 and turn into -- by People's Barbecue -- to the boundary so you can do your entryway into the redevelopment areas, because that's the proper way it should be done. There's a provision under the statute to accomplish that, because it is clearly a blighted area. We don't believe the time frame should be that long. And while that's in process, there's no reason why we can't have negotiations with FDOT about what can be done under the expressways, whether they're going to be responsible for drainage and fences or lighting and what we would be constructing, so the planning can -- Vice Chairman Winton: Can go on. Mr. Bloom: -- can go forward during this time period. Board Member Gort: OK. Chairman Teele: Motion by Commissioner Winton regarding the discussion by the City Attorney relating to 18, which is directly related to the item we're on now. Is there a second? Board Member Gort: Second. Chairman Teele: Is there further discussion? Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Sanchez: And that is for 18, Mr. Chairman? Chairman Teele: Yes. Board Member Sanchez: OK. Well, since -- are we discussing 18 or are we discussing this item now? 36 CRA 7/24/00 Chairman Teele: Well, they're both the same. They're both interrelated. Board Member Sanchez: Well, let me just elaborate a little bit and throw my two cents in. One is it's very clear that the CRA has rules and regulations. It cannot go outside of its boundaries. The attorney for the CRA has made it very clear that we will not be in compliance with the rules and regulations. So therefore, on the item that's being discussed now, I would want -- either move to defer or move to deny the resolution, and then go to item number 18, which I could support if we could agree on it. Chairman Teele: Item number 18 is the only motion on the table. Board Member Sanchez: OK. Which is? Board Member Regalado: The boundaries. Chairman Teele: The one you said you could support. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Board Member Sanchez: Which is to study it and make -- Mr. Bloom: Which is the resolution authorizing the CRA to initiate the process to extend the boundaries. Board Member Sanchez: OK. Chairman Teele: On item number 18, further discussion? Mr. Clerk, call the roll, please. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-79 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO INITIATE THE PROCESS TO EXTEND THE BOUNDARIES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA TO INCLUDE THAT CERTAIN LAND BENEATH 195, 395 AND I-95, WHICH LAND IS ADJACENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA, AND TO INCLUDE PARCEL P-6, WHICH PARCEL IS DESCRIBED ON EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. (Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 37 CRA 7/24/00 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 Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Yes. Board Member Regalado: On the discussion, not -- well, I guess it's related, anyway -- but on the discussion that we were having on the situation under the expressways, how long would this process to correct the boundaries take, Mr. Attorney? Mr. Bloom: It's probably about 120-day process, although you have to take into account August is coming up, so there won't be a whole lot of activity during that month. But I'll be able to circulate to all the Board Members a memo that will set forth the proposed dates later this week. Board Member Regalado: OK. The reason I'm asking is because of the following: The City of Miami has drafted a policy of Adopt -A -Park. And although that has not been yet put in place, I'm sure that because of the committee, the Park Committee has not met regularly. But I think that either through the City or through CRA, when we correct the boundaries, we should move in a direction of using some of this area to be dedicated as park, where people will be adopting that park, and the reason is very simple. There's a lot of private companies, a lot of restaurants or hotels that would gladly pay for the keeping and landscaping in small areas under 95, and just with the condition that -- and this happens throughout the County and throughout the state -- they could advertise their name. So, you know, it would be at no cost either to CRA or to the City. Furthermore, there are areas that could be used as either basketball courts for teenagers of the area. We need to have a traffic light, of course, right in front of the opening of that area. And that also could be sponsored by private enterprise. So, Mr. Chairman, the reason I ask is because I would like to, if eventually this area will fall into the CRA, to start working on a plan in order to create such a program under the expressways, I-95, 395. Chairman Teele: All right. And we'll take that under advisement and ask the Planning Director to work with that along with the Parks Department. Certainly, one of the challenges that we have, I think, under with 395 is the demand that we're creating, quite candidly, as it relates to the nightclub district and the -- something we'll be talking about in a lot of detail in October and November, which is the movie or -- what is it? What's the district going to be called? The media and entertainment -- not the district, but the overlay that we're going to come back and ask for. And one of the problems with the overlay is certainly 38 CRA 7/24/00 going to be the fact that we need areas, not really for parking, but we need areas for storage if we're going to create our goal, which is to create, in effect, a Universal Studios without walls kind of thing. So 395 becomes a part of that infrastructure, perhaps. The other issue that I brought up earlier, and that is that the district secretary, Mr. Abreu will be presenting on Thursday in detail and asking for, I think, a change in the direction of the state and the County for the last 30 years relating to 395. And I'm not -- I certainly don't want to speak for Mr. Abreu, but, you know, we have been -- I have been asking him to look at building a tunnel, or look at building a grand boulevard as ways to remove the 395/95 situation. So that is going to be front and center. And I know there's going to be a lot of interest in that on this coming Thursday. But obviously, if you build a grand boulevard or a tunnel, there will be no more of any of this. So we're talking clearly about a transitional use of three to five to seven years, depending upon the five- year plan approved by the County Commission and the MPO. All right. On item number 11, in light of item number 18, I'm not certain that we need to approve the agreement since you're opining -- Are you opining that we can't approve number 11 or we can? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): You can. Board Member Gort: Yes, you can. Mr. Judy: Subject to, subject to. Chairman Teele: Subject to. Is there a motion? Board Member Gort: Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Gort. Seconded by the Chair. All those in favor, say "aye." Board Member Gort: Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Aye. Board Member Regalado: Aye. Chairman Teele: Aye. All those opposed? Board Member Sanchez: One "no." Chairman Teele: One "no." 39 CRA 7/24/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Gort, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-80 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") APPROVING THE AIRSPACE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CRA AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ("FDOT") ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBIT "A" AND MADE A PART HEREOF (THE "AIRSPACE AGREEMENT"). (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 Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L.Winton NAYS: Board Member Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None Board Member Gort: Following on the idea that Commissioner Regalado has, I think you should go ahead and start working on it right away, because DOT is looking forward to have someone take over the responsibility, because they don't have the funds, from my understanding, to maintain those. So if you can come up with some idea before we can come up with the expansion of the boundaries, you could probably get some other agencies to go ahead and sponsor it in the meantime, and then pass it over to the CRA once it gets done. Chairman Teele: All right. Board Member Gort: OK. Chairman Teele: Now, number 18 also included the gateways, right? Because that's very important. I mean, we've been talking about the gateways now for the last 18 months, and we've really got to move forward on that. 40 CRA 7/24/00 9. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO TEAMING AGREEMENT WITH ST. JOHN'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. Chairman Teele: All right. Item number 12. This has been before us before. Why is it back again? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Only to authorize us to go into the agreement. Chairman Teele: Well, what did we approve before? Mr. Tyler: The funding. Chairman Teele: All right. So we approved the funding, but not the agreement. This is to approve the agreement. Mr. Tyler: Yes. Board Member Gort: Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Gort. Seconded by the Chair. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed? Board Member Sanchez: Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: One quick question. Chairman Teele: Are you "no"? Board Member Sanchez: No, no, I said "yes." As long as it's in the CRA boundaries. 41 CRA 7/24/00 following resolution was introduced by Board Member Gort, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-81 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") TO ENTER INTO A TEAMING AGREEMENT WITH ST. JOHN' S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ("ST. JOHN'S CDC") IN THE FORM OF EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF (THE "TEAMING AGREEMENT"), SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT NO. 689005.055012.4.750. (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 Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None Vice Chairman Winton: It's back to this number thing. I thought about the answer that I got for a moment, and I said maybe you could put the English part, the accounts on this instead of just numbers. Chairman Teele: Well, you can do it for this one. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, but there was a number on the other one up here. So I was thinking, now, if there's a number, then there must be some description of the number. So any time there's a number, there should be some description that fits it. Is that right? Chairman Teele: Yeah. What's the description of this funding source? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): TIF (Tax Increment Fund). Vice Chairman Winton: All right. And that would be -- that would -- I'll quit bugging you on this. Mr. Tyler: It's at the bottom. 42 CRA 7/24/00 Chairman Teele: All right, TIF Fund. Mr. Tyler: Of the memorandum. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, OK. Chairman Teele: Item number 13. You see, one of the concerns that I have is -- Mr. Attorney, we're on item number 13. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if we may move, just to clarify the opinion on the attorney, is -- number 12, does it fall in the boundaries of the CRA? Chairman Teele: St. John's CDC (Community Development Corporation)? Board Member Sanchez: No, no, no. The People's Barbecue. I have -- mine says 13. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Yes. William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Thirteen is outside the boundaries of the CRA. Chairman Teele: Wait, wait, wait. Hold it. Board Member Sanchez: Well, see, my things are -- I don't know if it's like everybody else's. Mr. Bloom: The St. John's matter that was just voted on was -- this deals with -- Chairman Teele: Excuse me, Mr. Bloom. Item number 10 relates to civil engineering. Board Member Sanchez: No, I -- Vice Chairman Winton: No, you got -- you're looking in the notebook. You got to throw that out and get -- you got to use this one, Joe. There you go. Because they're different. Chairman Teele: Item number 11, which you just debated at length and voted "no" on relates to the airspace. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, on the record on that one, anything -- and I want to make it on the record. Anything that falls outside of the CRA boundary, I vote no. Chairman Teele: Item number 12 -- so noted -- relates to St. John's CDC. It's been moved and approved. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Where are we now? Did we just do 12? 43 CRA 7/24/00 Mr. Bloom: It was 12. It was -- Chairman Teele: That's item 12. We approved it once before. Vice Chairman Winton: All right. 44 CRA 7/24/00 10. DEFERRED -- PROPOSED AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT TO WHICH CARRFOUR IS PURCHASER WITH RESPECT TO PURCHASE OF APARTMENT BUILDINGS LOCATED NEXT TO PEOPLE'S BARBECUE RESTAURANT. Chairman Teele: Item number 13 relates to an assignment of a contract for Carrfour for purchase of the People's Barbeque Restaurant. Look -- Vice Chairman Winton: Explain that, would you? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): It's the property next to the restaurant. Chairman Teele: OK. Mr. Bloom, would you like to make a statement on this one? William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Yes. This is the entryway property, P-6. Chairman Teele: The gateway. Mr. Bloom: The gateway property to the CRA. However, it is currently outside the boundary of the CRA, number one. Number two; the contract that is being proposed to be assigned to the CRA is outside the inspection period. And the Carrfour, who is the contract purchaser, did not do any inspections to the property for environmental contamination, and therefore, neither has Greater Miami Neighborhoods on behalf of the CRA, because it was outside the district. And therefore, we would be taking assignment of a contract where we would be immediately at risk for the deposit without having done the due diligence. And we aren't legally able to spend the money, because it's outside our boundaries. Chairman Teele: Well, you know, let -- I would ask that the item be deferred. I'll bring it up before the City Commission. But, you know, Mr. Attorney, Mr. City Attorney, what we need to do is we don't need to get caught up in "legalese." If this, number one, is a gateway, the idea is going to be to create an ambience of vegetation, flowers, perhaps a monument to some great person. We're not talking about building a building. We're talking about gateway. So, I mean, it's fine to talk about environmental issues. That's fine, in terms of Hornbook Law. But in terms of the application of what we're talking about, I have some concerns with that. Number two; the City and the CRA are working for the same thing. In fact, the Planning Department has been asked -- I asked the Planning Department to take the lead, and the Commission agreed, on the whole issue of gateways. This is designed to be a gateway. We briefed this as a gateway 18 months ago. We're talking now about the area when you come off of 95 and you come down to 8th Street. The matter that you see immediately to your right, which are horribly looking derelict buildings, which have no -- absolutely no quality of life application, short of millions of dollars. There is no way you can bring those buildings into conformity to City Code. And there is absolutely no way that that can be done. And that is not what people should see when they come into Overtown. Right now, what people see when they come into Overtown -- there are more people coming into Overtown off of 95, getting off on that ramp that stops there on 8th Street where they're going to the old -- to this Arena on 8th Street, or they're keeping straight, going downtown, is they see that look. And that's not the look that we should try to embrace and to accomplish. Now, the mission is not for the CRA to do everything. The mission is for the CRA to lead the redevelopment, ideally, in the private sector. In cases where the private sector doesn't do it with the City, and if the City can't do it for whatever reason, then we do it. The proper 45 CRA 7/24/00 resolution, Mr. Attorney, for you, for my pocket item on Monday will be for the City of Miami to assume the assignment and to seek reimbursement from the CRA, if necessary, to carry out the purpose of the gateway. And, I mean, whether or not -- you know, we can't spend money on the gateway, but we can darn sure give the City of Miami our money back or some of their money back to carry out a specific redevelopment purpose. So it's six in one hand and half a dozen in the other. But it's no need for us to all sit here and wring our hands. I mean, the issue is we either want to have a gateway into Overtown that is reflective of a beautiful community, a vibrant community, or we want to continue to show a derelict community. And I'm simply saying that whether we do it as the CRA, or whether the City of Miami under the leadership of our Manager, or whether we go to a CDC (Community Development Corporation) to do it through the City is really immaterial. What we're interested in is not the credits and the kudos, but getting the job done. So I'd be very pleased, Mr. Attorney, if you would prepare that for my signature as a pocket item, that the City assume that and seek reimbursements from the CRA for the purpose of doing the gateway, in conjunction with the Planning Department, the Building Department and those other departments. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: You've come up with some interesting alternatives to solving this problem, and I think that's part of what our role is. I think you've explained it perfectly, that there's really a team approach here between the City, the CRA, and if need be, local organizations, private sector, whomever, and I think that that thought process you walked us through was absolutely correct. I do, however, want to continue to encourage, though, as painful as it may be to us sometimes, encourage those out there looking out for our best interest, like Mr. Bloom just did. You know, we do have to make sure we do all of these things in the right way, technically the right way. And sometimes, we might have to use a little more brainpower to figure out how we're going to get it done. But being protected is something that I'm very, very thankful for, and hope that they continue to point those kinds of things out to us, so that it forces us to figure out sometimes other ways to get these things done. Chairman Teele: And I couldn't agree with you more. OK. So item number 13 is deferred. Note for the Record: At this point, agenda item number 13 was deferred. 46 CRA 7/24/00 11. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER INTO INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF MIAMI WITH RESPECT TO MARGARET PACE PARK. Chairman Teele: Item number 14, the resolution regarding the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Miami and the Margaret Pace Park. Board Member Sanchez: So move. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Gort -- I'm sorry. Board Member Sanchez: Sanchez. Chairman Teele: Excuse me. Moved by Commissioner Winton. I'm going to respect his district. Seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. Discussion on the Margaret Pace Park. I think we need to be very, very clear on this issue, because I received a letter from an organization recently, and it just shows, I think, maybe we're not making things very clear. When the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) assumed the responsibility of working for the Parks Department -- and in this relationship, Mr. Manager, we are working for you. In other words, the City Parks Department has responsibility for Margaret Pace Park and continues to have that responsibility. They had approximately -- and Mr. Director, correct me on the numbers. You all had about three hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($350,000). How much of Safe Neighborhood Bond money? Albert Ruder (Director, Parks, City of Miami): Three hundred from Safe Neighborhoods. Chairman Teele: We had three hundred thousand from Safe Neighborhood Bond money. And then we began the process with our consultants, our general consultants, Bermello, Ajamil and others who worked with trying to develop other sources of funding, including a Fine Grant, an Inland Waterway Grant, et cetera. When we got down to reasonably understanding what this project is, there was no way that this project could be done for less than a million and a half dollars. The CRA agreed at that time that we would expend 100 percent of all of our fund balances in the Omni to support this project, because we felt that this was the most important project that could be brought forth, both in terms of redevelopment of the community and in terms of our number one mission, which is enhancing property values in that area. In that regard, we began a process with the community, and the project went from one point five million to approximately three million dollars ($3,000,000). So right now, we're looking at a three million dollar project that we're committed to doing as a part of our redevelopment efforts in this area. And the park, itself, will be for the City Parks Department. In other words, we're going to take redevelopment funds. We're going to take money out of our redevelopment funds and put into the Margaret Pace Park. That's essentially what the purpose of the fund is for, is to do things that will stimulate the redevelopment of the area. We believe that this will have a dramatic impact on property values in the area, and the quality of life, particularly with the new project that Mr. Hollow (phonetic) is building there right around 18th Street and Bayside and -- Unidentified Speaker: Bayshore. Chairman Teele: Bayshore. Is it Bayshore Drive? 47 CRA 7/24/00 Unidentified Speaker: Yes. Chairman Teele: And we recognize, however, that this park is a park that will be a Citywide park, and it is a park that is trying to balance the competing interests. And we've had very good -- outstanding support from the Parks staff and the neighborhood process, as well. And I just wanted to report that to you, Mr. Manager, because one of our problems is that every nine months or so, it seems that we have to start all over, updating everybody. But I think this is going to be an issue. Now, let me tell you where this becomes very important to the public. This park budget is one -- now is three million dollars ($3,000,000). We are showing that we are going to do this park over the next five years at the three million dollar ($3,000,000) level in our five-year plan at the full amount, I believe, of the money. I think it was perhaps in our budget for two point five million. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Two point two. Chairman Teele: Two point two. Chairman Teele: -- very, very clear to the public that these funds will not be expended this year. We're going to phase this park, and we're going to do it as funds become available. And we are committing to a time line to get the park completed. And what's that time line? Mr. Tyler: Twelve months. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that's only Phase I. Chairman Teele: For the first phase. Mr. Tyler: Yes, that's -- Chairman Teele: For Phase I. But for the total park of three million dollars ($3,000,000), Mr. Judy? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): Funding -- We're going to let the whole contract, and as funds are available, then we'll release it. And that's what our program is, and that's -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, the real answer is that until all the funds are identified, there'isn't a clear time line for completion. Chairman Teele: Right. Mr. Judy: Right. Chairman Teele: And I just wanted to be very clear with the public that we are committed to the park. It is a dollar amount we've quantified, I think, very well, and we're going to work to get the funds. And any dollars that we can generate in the Omni area, we're going to make it available. In addition, the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) dollars that we have our five-year commitment of twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) for, from the very time the ordinance itself makes those funds, portions of those funds available for the CRA in all of the areas. So we're not ruling out using CD (Community 48 CRA 7/24/00 Development) funds for the park, as well. I just want to be very clear about that to everyone. All right? Is there objection? Further discussion? All those in favor of the Margaret Pace Park, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. OMNI/CRA 00-41 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") TO ENTER INTO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI (THE "CITY"), WITH RESPECT TO MARGARET PACE PARK, IN THE FORM OF EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF (THE "INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT"). (Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None 49 CRA 7/24/00 12. (A) AUTHORIZE CRA TO ENTER ITO ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN J.J. KELLY CHARTER BUS SERVICE CO. (B) CRA ADMINISTRATION AND CRA COUNSEL TO ISSUE RFP [WITH INVITATION TO DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING TO PARTICIPATE IN RFP PROCESS] FOR MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT TO OPERATE PARKING SERVICES USING LOTS AROUND OLD ARENA AND HAVE SHUTTLE SERVICE TO AMERICAN AIRLINES ARENA DURING HEAT BASKETBALL SEASON, BEGINNING LATE SEPTEMBER. Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Attorney, Mr. Manager, you want to -- Mr. Director, you want to bring us up to date on this J.J. Kelly thing? Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): Yes, sir. We're asking the Board to authorize the CRA to enter into -- actually to accept assignment of the agreement with -- of a current agreement between J.J. Kelly and that the -- J.J. Kelly and the Heat. Chairman Teele: I want to be very transparent, very clear. J.J. Kelly is a bus company that operates in Park West. They have a one-year agreement left with a company, whether it be the Miami Heat, or Calor, or whomever -- Mr. Tyler: Calor. Chairman Teele: Huh? Vice Chairman Winton: Calor. Chairman Teele: -- Calor for the parking of buses on a lot. The lot is going to be used in conjunction with the NAP (Network Area Point). OK? In other words, we are working now to facilitate the redevelopment of the Park West area, or the Park West/Overtown area, and in doing so; we will assume the conditions of the terms of that, which essentially is one year. Is that right? Mr. Tyler: I think there's a balance of close to two years left. Chairman Teele: Two years left. And we are accepting responsibility for helping them to find a place. Did you all identify a place for them that is acceptable to J.J. Kelly? Mr. Tyler: Yes. We have identified the southern portion of a lot that the CRA owns on 7ch and Northwest 2nd Chairman Teele: OK. And everybody is in agreement with that? Mr. Tyler: Yes. Chairman Teele: OK. And the income that that will generate will be approximately how much money? Mr. Tyler: Approximately seven thousand a month, or eighty-four thousand for the year. 50 CRA 7/24/00 Board Member Sanchez: Eighty-four thousand a year. Mr. Tyler: Yes. Chairman Teele: All right. And those dollars are reflected in the new budget as income under rental proceedings. OK. Is there further discussion on the item? Board Member Regalado: Question, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado: Calor will be the Miami Heat Company? Chairman Teele: Yes. William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Calor Development is a partnership that's owned by the same principals that own Miami Heat. Board Member Regalado: The only question is, has the staff explored with Calor or the Heat the possibility of using this area parking lot here -- Chairman Teele: That's what we're talking about. Board Member Regalado: Right, yeah, but I mean during the season, because they're going to share that with the NAP. I'm talking about this Arena, this area parking lot. Remember that we requested a study about the upcoming season and the possibility of having a shuttle and a satellite parking here? Chairman Teele: Well, I think part of the problem that we have here is this agreement doesn't go to that. But I think, you know, what you're bringing up is extremely timely, and that is simply this -- I don't know why it's not on the agenda. We requested it be on the agenda -- the existing contract between the -- Mr. Attorney, you need to listen to this, please. The existing contract between the CRA and Off -Street Parking expired on June 30th, I think, of this year. The CRA is receiving in rents approximately seventy- five thousand dollars ($75,000) a year, total. This one transaction alone is going to pay us seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000), which, in effect, is a parking transaction. We need to go out for bid, for re -bid or we need to have some discussion with the City Attorney. I know there's a series of issues that we're looking at which I want to, you know, visit with you on, Mr. Attorney, City Attorney. But it's very, very important that we maximize our revenue. Now, what Commissioner Regalado is saying, what everybody that's looked in the area has said, and that is there's no reason why -- the people want cheap parking at the Arena -- why we don't provide them five dollar ($5) parking and do a shuttle, perhaps. I mean, you know, there's a series of things that we could look at in that context. And I would like to entertain that with Commissioner Regalado after we dispose of the matter that's before us, which is the J.J. Kelly, the assignment of the J.J. Kelly lease. Vice Chairman Winton: Is there no cost in -- The lease is being assigned to the CRA? So isn't there a (inaudible) cost associated with that? 51 CRA 7/24/00 Mr. Bloom: The idea is to modify the lease, to change the legal description to the new parcel, because J.J. Kelly uses a very small amount of office space, and it's basically just parking for their buses. It's a storage lot. Vice Chairman Winton: So this is a net gain for the CRA, this entire package. Chairman Teele: No-brainer. Mr. Bloom: This is a net gain to the CRA. But as the Commissioner said, it was intended to facilitate the (inaudible) NAP. Vice Chairman Winton: No, I understand exactly. So it does really two things. It really dramatically helps with the fast tracking of the NAP, and it generates revenue for the CRA. Mr. Bloom: And so it's a win/win thing. Chairman Teele: But it generates more money -- Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: -- on one tenth or one fifteenth of our parking than we're getting right now. And I mean Vice Chairman Winton: So we got some other work to do after that. Chairman Teele: We got a lot of work to do. That's the whole point. Board Member Regalado: And that is why, Mr. Chairman, that I, about two months, I think, two or three months ago, I requested that we do a study in terms of satellite parking in this area. Parking is like on -air time. If you don't sell it today, you will never get it back. And what I was trying to say is that we have the Heat season and it starts in late September, right? Mr. Tyler: That's right. Board Member Regalado: And there could be people who would rather park here for ten bucks than park there for twenty-five bucks and just take a shuttle. Vice Chairman Winton: Right, right. Board Member Regalado: Which will be, I'm sure -- I mean, we're not making any money at all here. So if we make three bucks per car, paying the shuttle and employees and all that, plus the surcharge, I mean. Mr. Bloom: Commissioner, you know, after the comments from the last meeting, I put Bob Tyler in touch with Thad Sheely (phonetic), who handles the parking situation for the Miami Heat. And based upon those discussions, Mr. Sheely indicated that because of the distance involved and the way the parking 52 CRA 7/24/00 patterns have evolved that they didn't feel it would be economical to run a shuttle service to the remote lots. Board Member Regalado: But what I'm saying is it's about the Heat. We don't care about the Heat. I mean, we care about, first of all, the people and revenue. Vice Chairman Winton: Making money. Board Member Regalado: I mean, I'm sure that there is a company somewhere that would do the shuttle, or even if the CRA contract, whatever, some people that would do the shuttle. Because I'm sure that if you advertise parking at half the cost or a third of the cost, people will park, because it's all about -- it's all about, you know, economics. And so I don't -- I'm sure that the Heat does not want any competition at all, nor do they want a hassle for their fans that, you know, maybe they have to take a shuttle or whatever. They would rather have them contained over there near the Arena. But this is their problem. And our problem is different. It's about revenue, and it's about service to the people, because, I mean, probably employees that will be working in the Arena would rather park here, bring their cars, instead of parking dozens of blocks away and walking to the Arena. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado, did we pass this item? Because I think what -- Board Member Regalado: No, we did not. Board Member Sanchez: No, we have not voted on it. Board Member Regalado: No, we have not voted. Board Member Sanchez: I just have a few questions for the Director, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Sanchez: Who's going to pay the maintenance of the parking lot? Cutting the grass, cleaning it up, who pays that? The lessee? Unidentified Speaker: Yes. Board Member Sanchez: Who's going to pay for it? They are? Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): (Inaudible, speaking off mike.) Board Member Sanchez: The utility, they'll pay for it, also? Mr. Judy: (Inaudible, speaking off mike.) Chairman Teele: You need to take the mike, Mr. Judy, if you're going to speak, so that the Clerk -- Mr. Judy: Well, if you're assigning the existing lease, they are responsible for maintaining it. 53 CRA 7/24/00 Board Member Sanchez: And they're also going to have liability? Mr. Judy: The same insurance that's in the lease. Board Member Sanchez: Is there any language in the lease that they can't do mechanics? Mr. Judy: It's a very good leasing for us. It's a very good leasing for us if it's one that's been assigned. I've gone through it in great detail from a commercial perspective. It is a very good lease. Board Member Sanchez: I understand. But is there any language in the lease that they can't do mechanics, because I've seen some yards outside of the City where they park buses. And, of course, you know, they do mechanics, also. Is there anything -- if not, I would move that there will be a law stated there where they can't do mechanics on the yard or the parking lot. Mr. Tyler: Section 5 in the lease agreement pertains to repairs and mechanics -- and maintenance, I'm sorry. Vice Chairman Winton: Of the lot, not of their buses. Mr. Tyler: Yeah, that's right. Chairman Teele: Are you talking about the lot or the buses? Mr. Tyler: That's the lot, itself. So, no, I don't think we have any language relating to them not being allowed to do maintenance or repairs to the vehicles on the property. Board Member Sanchez: Well, I would move that in this lease we put something that they can't perform mechanics in the parking lot. So move. Mr. Judy: Well, that's an issue. I think that we should, you know, try to make -- Board Member Sanchez: The premise should be free of mechanics. Mr. Judy: There should be no major -- Board Member Sanchez: It's a parking lot. It shouldn't be -- Mr. Judy: Yeah, but you have to careful. There may be some minor thing for moving the vehicle or something that has to be done. Board Member Sanchez: Dick, I understand that. But, I mean, you know, taking an engine apart from a bus, I mean. OK? Mr. Judy: No major maintenance. 54 CRA 7/24/00 Board Member Sanchez: Major mechanics. So there should be some language where no major mechanics is allowed on the premises. Mr. Tyler: Under use of premises here. Mr. Judy: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: That shouldn't be a problem with this, with the signing of this lease, should it? Board Member Regalado: It shouldn't be. I mean, major mechanics should not be done anyway. Mr. Judy: No. Vice Chairman Winton: You all have been negotiating it. Board Member Regalado: And major mechanics would include, you know, changing oil and all that. That is not supposed to be done in the parking lot. It becomes an -- Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Sanchez, Mr. Bloom is telling me that this lease has been in place for three or four years now. So at least in my experience, if -- Board Member Sanchez: Oh, here it is. I found it, number 8. Mechanic lease. There you go. It is in the agreement. Mechanics shall keep the premise free of clean mechanics and materials lien and other -- Chairman Teele: That's the mechanic's lien. Jesus Christ. Vice Chairman Winton: And the point I was going to make there is that there is simply no motivation on the part of the lessee to reopen the lease negotiations on a lease that they negotiated some time ago. So I can't imagine there aren't provisions in our Code that prohibit them from doing mechanics work in our parking lots. I'm sure we -- actually, I'm sure we have Code provisions which prevent that. (INAUDIBLE COMMENT NOT INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD) Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. So Commissioners, I really think we're pretty well covered there, period. Chairman Teele: On the question. Is there a second to the amendment? I think to the extent that Commissioner Sanchez is directing the attorneys and staff to insure that that provision is there, you know, I think that's helpful. But to the extent you're going to start amending a lease that's been done, you're going to reopen it and -- Mr. Judy: Can't do it. Chairman Teele: Say again, Mr. Judy. Mr. Judy: I don't think we can do that. We're at real risk. 55 CRA 7/24/00 Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. I think we're at real risk of blowing this thing up. I mean, my experience in negotiating all these kinds of things always has been you try to reopen the lease where there's no motivation -- Board Member Sanchez: Call the question. Let's vote on it. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Chairman Teele: All right. Board Member Regalado: You just get a commitment from them. Chairman Teele: Yeah, we get a commitment. That will be clarified, at least, certainly in transmittal letters or something, Mr. Tyler. Let's call the question. All those in favor of the item relating to Kelly, the assignment and assumption of the agreement between Kelly Charter Services, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same -- Walter Foeman (City Clerk): We need a movant and a seconder. Chairman Teele: Movant was Commissioner Winton. And seconder is myself. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-82 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") I) TO ENTER INTO AN ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN J.J. KELLY CHARTER BUS SERVICE CO. ("J.J. KELLY") IN THE FORM OF EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF (THE "ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION"), AND II) TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AMENDMENT WITH J.J. KELLY IN THE FORM OF EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF (THE "AMENDMENT"). (Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 56 CRA 7/24/00 Upon being seconded by Board Member Teele, the resolution 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. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: All right. As it relates to -- Mr. Bloom, before we move to that, Commissioner Regalado had a very, very important point that he was making. And I believe, just like we did at Bayfront Trust, we need to just go out with an expedited bid for parking with a minimum, with a minimum. And I mean, I don't see there's any -- you know, we've got enough bid forms out here that we don't need rewrite it. My personal view is simply this: Mr. Attorney does Off -Street Parking -- the CRA is not the City of Miami; is that correct? We're a separate legal entity. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): The Southeast Overtown/Park West and the Omni Community Redevelopment Agencies are both separate entities, independent of the City, notwithstanding the fact that you both serve as Board Members and City Commissioners. Chairman Teele: Do you have any legal objection to the Omni Redevelopment Authority and the Overtown/Park West Redevelopment Authority going out for bid for parking, management of properties owned by or controlled by the CRA? Mr. Vilarello: No, not at all. And in fact, there is no provision in the Charter that requires any independent agency of the City to go through the Department of Off -Street Parking. Chairman Teele: Then Commissioner Regalado, would you like to move that the bid be placed out? And one of the provisions of the bid also be that they show or respond with ways to provide the shuttle service that you talked about. (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD) Chairman Teele: Was it a management agreement before? Mr. Vilarello: (Inaudible, speaking off mike.) Chairman Teele: Wait a minute. Hold it. How many lawyers we got here? Four? Mr. Judy: That's not lawyering. That's just what the law is. 57 CRA 7/24/00 Vice Chairman Winton: Well, from a Board perspective, I don't think we care. I think that the message is clear here. Chairman Teele: Let's let the attorney -- let's let the attorney and the Director of Operations figure it out. The only thing that I would ask, that the minimum -- See, we know exactly from the budget now what Off -Street Parking is saying they're going to give us, and that's seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000). 1 would think that the minimum bid should be established at least something significantly higher than that. I'm not trying to hurt Off -Street Parking. I'm not trying to take any business from Off -Street Parking. And I think, Commissioner Gort, you know in bond deals, if you're not going to make a significant swing, then why do it? So the only thing that I would say is that at least be 150 percent or -- what's seventy-five and seventy-five? A hundred -- Mr. Tyler: A hundred and fifty. Chairman Teele: A hundred and fifth thousand dollars ($150,000), or some amount in excess of a hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000) as a minimum bid. I don't mind leaving Off -Street in there if there's nobody out there that's going to provide the service. But why should we leave money on the table if somebody is going to provide it? Vice Chairman Winton: Exactly. That's what I was -- if we only get seventy-five thousand from Off - Street Parking and somebody else bids eighty-five thousand or ninety-five thousand, I'm happy to -- Chairman Teele: Well, I wouldn't want to -- if they did, I wouldn't want to disturb the relationship with Off -Street Parking, per se. I mean, that's a fair commentary, and I think we can all have different opinions on that. I mean, Off -Street Parking, I don't want to appear that we're all beating up. I mean, there's a lot of other issues associated with Off -Street Parking. But what I'm saying, Commissioner is if we can get significantly more money -- and to me, 25, 30, 40, 50 percent more money is significant -- then we should really go with whoever does. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: But the motion would be to instruct the lawyers and the Director to competitively bid and to present recommendations to us in September, having bid this. Whether it be a bid or a management agreement, we'll leave that up to the attorneys and to the Director of Operations. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, it has to have a provision whereby whoever, whether it be Off - Street Parking or any other company, during the season will be responsible for operating a shuttle service. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Or it won't work. Chairman Teele: Sure. Board Member Regalado: Because that's -- Board Member Gort: That's an additional cost. 58 CRA 7/24/00 �x Vice Chairman Winton: That's exactly right. Board Member Regalado: And that is additional cost. And that would be additional cost for the operator. So I -- you know, I don't know if we should -- what we are trying to do here is making some money, having a service, an additional service, and -- and I think it's important to make the people understand that this area is alive. And the only thing to do that is to use some of the facilities here, have a nice shuttle, which is secure and people would start looking at this area. Chairman Teele: Just make the motion. Board Member Regalado: And the motion is very simple. I would request the administration to go out with a management agreement or whatever they decide -- Chairman Teele: Ora bid. Board Member Regalado: Or a bid in order to operate those parking lots during the season, the Heat season that is coming up, beginning in late September, with the condition that they will be responsible for operating a shuttle service from here to the new Miami Arena. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Mr. Bloom: To clarify that, though, when you're doing the RFP (Request for Proposals), do you want to require that all the respondents include in their proposal that they will provide the shuttle service? Board Member Regalado: Absolutely. Board Member Sanchez: Yes. Chairman Teele: No, no, no. Board Member Sanchez: That's what he said. Chairman Teele: What he said is that it's an element of a responsive bid. If they don't, if they don't include that, then they're non -responsive. Board Member Regalado: Right. And that is a must. That is a must. Chairman Teele: Further discussion? All right. And you all are authorized to work -- and I really think the City Attorney, Mr. Vilarello, you need to -- We've gone through this in three or four different versions now, so we've got a little bit of history. And we need to figure out what's the best thing to do, and I would hope that you'd work with the City staff, as well. Vice Chairman Winton: It seems to me that we're not just trying to limit this to the Heat games, but it would be any event that goes on at the American Airlines Arena. 59 CRA 7/24/00 M Chairman Teele: Right. But he was specifically requiring that there be a shuttle service during Heat games. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, but I would include the shuttle service during any American Airlines Arena event. Board Member Regalado: Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. But when you say -- Vice Chairman Winton: Because if they're sold out, they're sold out and they need -- Chairman Teele: But if the Heat is sold out, the Heat is sold out. See, that's the problem. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, yeah, that's -- oh, I see. OK. Chairman Teele: On the motion, all those in favor of the motion, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed? The following motion was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-83 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") AUTHORIZING THE CRA WORK IN CONNECTION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING ("DOSP") TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ("RFP") FOR A MANAGEMENT COMPANY ("MANAGER") I) TO OPERATE PARKING LOTS LOCATED IN THE VICINITY OF THE "OLD ARENA", II) AND TO OPERATE A SHUTTLE SERVICE BETWEEN THE OLD ARENA AND THE AMERICAN AIRLINES ARENA DURING THE COURSE OF THE MIAMI HEAT BASKETBALL SEASON COMMENCING AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER. 60 CRA 7/24/00 Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L.Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, I think this is very important that we move on this quickly and try to get this resolved. And I think you all need to work closely with Off -Street Parking. 61 CRA 7/24/00 13. AUTHORIZE CRA T ENTER INTO LEASE AGREEMENTS WITH LANDOWNERS OF PARCEL P-1 THROUGH P-6 AND M-2, PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL RENTS NOT TO EXCEED 10% OF APPRAISED VALUE OF SUCH PARCELS. Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, you have item number 16, which is relating to the parcels for ten percent of the appraised value. Apparently, one landowner has said they don't want that. They want to do the deal. I have no objections to this. Again, the problem becomes we have these things out here so long that people get frustrated. I think we ought to spend our energy in getting these eminent domain issues resolved. But is there a motion on item number 16? Several owners have indicated a willingness to do this. William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): There is a schedule attached identifying the owners. Vice Chairman Winton: I'll move it for discussion. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton. Seconded by the Chair. Unreadiness? Board Member Sanchez: Are the owners out-of-towners? Are they out of state or -- ? Chairman Teele: Many of them are. Board Member Sanchez: They are? Mr. Bloom: It's different situations. Some of them are title defects. There's one where they want more money than we're willing to pay or can pay because of the appraised values. So this would enable us to use it for parking, and pave and get it ready while we're going through the eminent domain process. Board Member Sanchez: Did they provide anything in writing that they're willing to sell? Mr. Bloom: Well, one said that they're willing to sell, but not for the price we're willing to offer. And Greater Miami Neighborhoods would be happy to, you know, give you -- you know, explain the discussion they have had. But on one particular property, the appraised value, I believe, is twenty-one thousand dollars ($21,000), and the property owner feels the property is worth far more than that, so they're not willing to sell at that price, while they're willing to lease the property at that price, and, you know, have at it in an eminent domain proceeding. Chairman Teele: All right. Further discussion? Each situation is going to be different. All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? All right. 62 CRA 7/24/00 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-84 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") I) TO ENTER INTO LEASE AGREEMENTS IN THE FORM OF EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF (THE "LEASE AGREEMENTS") WITH THE LANDOWNERS OF PARCEL P-1 THROUGH P-6 AND M-2, PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL RENTS NOT TO EXCEED 10% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE OF SUCH PARCELS. (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 Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: With regard to -- Board Member Gort: I'd like to give you a suggestion. Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Board Member Gort: There's a little house on the southeast corner behind the Omni. There's this little house in there that they held there for a while, thinking in the future they could make a fortune. It's sitting there by itself. Take some pictures of the house. Chairman Teele: Oh, yeah. Yeah. Right there on the corner. Vice Chairman Winton: And they still think it's worth a lot. Chairman Teele: OK. 63 CRA 7/24/00 14. AUTHORIZE CRA TO ISSUE RFQ FOR SALE OF PROPERTY [14TH ST. NEAR 395 EXPRESSWAY] TO DEVELOP ELDERLY HOUSING PROJECT ON PROPERTY. Board Member Gort: OK. Item number 17 is a very important issue. This is a resolution authorizing the RFP (Request for Proposals) for the sale of property owned by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) to developers of elderly housing project. And again, Mr. Attorney, Mr. City Attorney, I don't understand why it's necessary to do it this way, but consistent with what Commissioner Winton said, if this is the legal and the proper way to do it, then I'm willing to do it this way. This is elderly housing of about how many units? You had a discussion about the height of the building, et cetera. This is that Jubilee project again. It's 70 units, is it? Is that right, Doug? Unidentified Speaker: Yes. Seventy-one, actually. Chairman Teele: Seventy-one units. This would be primarily elderly housing. We've talked to at least five ministers. They're all very excited about the project. It will be one of the first significant elderly housing projects in Overtown, and there are some time constraints, I believe, Mr. Jubilee has in getting the site approved. This is sort of a rebound situation, as you were briefed before, where the previous site was -- the owners could not get control of the site. Vice Chairman Winton: Is this the one up against the expressway? Chairman Teele: This is near -- in the area near 14th Street, near the 395 Expressway. Vice Chairman Winton: Right up there, yeah, right. Chairman Teele: And it's surrounded by land either owned by St. John's Church, St. John's CDC (Community Development Corporation), and one or two persons that own land that is very, very difficult to understand why there was any commercial value in the ownership of the land. Robert Tyler (Director, Operations, Administration & Development, CRA): As well as CRA property. Chairman Teele: As well as, obviously, the CRA. Vice Chairman Winton: So, we need a motion, don't we? Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: So move. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton. Seconded by the Chair. Is there discussion? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All those opposed? All right. 64 CRA 7/24/00 M The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-85 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFP") FOR THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ON EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF (THE "PROPERTY") TO A DEVELOPER (THE "DEVELOPER") TO DEVELOP AN ELDERLY HOUSING PROJECT ON THE PROPERTY. (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 Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L.Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None 65 CRA 7/24/00 15. RECONSIDER AND RESCIND PRIOR MOTION (OMNI/CRA M-00-39 AND SEOPW/CRA M-00-72) PASSED ON JUKE 26, 2000 WHICH HAD INDEMNIFIED 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 (See Sections 3 & 17). Chairman Teele: Now, we go back to the matters related to the audit, et cetera and KPMG (Klynveld, Peat, Marwick, Goerdeler), and the matter related to a personnel matter. Mr. Attorney, you want to read into the record the resolution that you all have proffered? William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): With respect to? Chairman Teele: Ms. Thompkins. Mr. Bloom: Yes. Before I do this, Commissioner, there was some confusion on the record from the last meeting with respect to Ms. Thompkins and what was passed. It was my recollection from the last meeting that there was discussion, and no resolution was passed, while the Clerk's records indicated a resolution was passed. And what we request would be that you would rescind the previous resolution as reported -- Chairman Teele: There was no resolution passed. We asked that you all work it out. Mr. Bloom: Yeah, that was my recollection. Board Member Gort: Right. Mr. Bloom: However, that's not what was -- Chairman Teele: Motion to rescind by Commissioner Gort. Seconded by the Chair. Objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: All opposed? All right. 66 CRA 7/24/00 The following motion was introduced by Board Member Gort, who moved for its adoption: MOTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-86 OMNI/CRA 00-42 A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND RESCIND PRIOR MOTION (OMNI/CRA M-00-39 AND SEOPW/CRA M-00-72) WHICH HAD PASSED ON JUNE 26, 2000 AND WHICH HAD INDEMNIFIED ACTIONS OF THE DIRECTOR OF FISCAL OPERATIONS, NAMELY, MS. CHARLAYNE THOMPKINS, DURING HER TENURE AT THE CRA, RELATING TO THE USE OF HER SOCIAL SECURITY AND/OR FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER IN THE CAPACITY IN WHICH SHE SIGNED THE CRA'S APPLICATION TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER. 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 Board Member Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: So we're -- Right where we are now, let's try to clear this matter up, once and for all. Mr. Bloom: This is a resolution for the Community Redevelopment Agency to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Charlayne Thompkins for any tax liability, including interest and penalties as a result of Ms. Thompkins filing SS-4 tax forms on behalf of the CRA, on which tax forms, Ms. Thompkins was listed on line 7 as the responsible party and provided her own Social Security number. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Sanchez. Board Member Sanchez: No, no, no. Chairman Teele: All right. Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I don't even have that resolution. 67 CRA 7/24/00 M Chairman Teele: All right. Then let's temporarily pass it. Let's go on to the next item, then. Hold on, Ms. Thompkins. Board Member Sanchez: Who's got a copy of that resolution? It's not in the package. 68 CRA 7/24/00 16. DISCUSSION REGARDING UPDATE ON KPMG AUDIT. Chairman Teele: All right. Can you all proceed with the KPMG (Klynveld, Peat, Marwick, Goerdeler) thing while we move forward? Donnovan A. Maginley: Good afternoon. Donnovan Maginley with KPMG. I'm here with -- (Inaudible): With KPMG. Mr. Maginley: With respect to the audit, I guess the major issue that we were waiting for was the action by the Board today, which is item number 1. The financial statements, which I hope you got maybe a couple months ago, reflected the adoption of the passing of that resolution of the actions taken today. And I guess the only thing that we're now waiting for is we already had all the legal representations, and the only thing is a representation letter from management, and we will be ready to issue the statements. Chairman Teele: Are there any -- have you found any notable exceptions regarding the -- or any notable issues that you would like to bring to the Board's attention? Mr. Maginley: Procedurally, the next step is to discuss the management letter. We do have some comments that we noted during the audit, and we want to discuss that with management first, and make sure that we have proper clarification as to the items that we have observed. And then subsequent to that, what we'll do is issue a draft to the Board and to management for their response. Chairman Teele: All right. Have you had the opportunity to meet the new Assistant Manager for Finance? Mr. Maginley: Mr. Bob Nachlinger? Yes, I have. Chairman Teele: All right. Are there issues before the external auditors leave? Commissioner Gort. Board Member Gort: My question is, you're going to get the response back after -- you're going to give staff a chance t respond to your question, and then you're going to -- Mr. Maginley: Then we issue a draft, correct. Board Member Gort: OK, thank you. Mr. Maginley: Correct. Chairman Teele: I have a concern. The item that we passed, number 1, and Mr. -- let me apologize to the management, because I've not had the opportunity to discuss this with you. There is an issue of an eight hundred thousand dollar ($800,000) reserve, eight hundred and forty -some thousand -dollar reserve, based upon the bond. Not the 108, but the outstanding revenue bond. Mr. Maginley: 1990 bonds, right. 69 CRA 7/24/00 Chairman Teele: Yes. If you read the agreement between the City and the CRA, literally, with the first three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) being withheld or being paid by the City, then the last three years, which is what the bond indenture requires, which is estimated at eight hundred and forty thousand dollars ($840,000) translates out to less than three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) a year, which means that that should really be on the City side, say, for the purpose of facilitating, you know, movement, because really, it's an accounting issue. I would appreciate it if you would look at that issue with the Assistant Manager and see just how this can be approached. One of the things that I think-- to the management -- is that if you go back three years to your previous life as Assistant Manager for the City of Miami, of the City of Miami, your previous -- Bob Nachlinger (Assistant City Manager -Finance, City of Miami): Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: You will recall that one of the things in the five-year plan as an eligible use of the strategic reserves was the repayment of the six million dollars ($6,000,000) that had been transferred by the City for the CRA -- from the CRA regarding to the land on this building, which this seeks to settle. And that issue is settled. It would just seem to me that the language contained in that would authorize in the five-year plan, if it's still there, would authorize the use of our applying eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) of the strategic reserves in that manner. And therefore, it would be no expenditure on either side, per se. And I realize that the Oversight Board is closely scrutinizing the uses of the strategic reserve. But the original and adopted use of the strategic reserve was potentially to pay back the CRA six million dollars ($6,000,000) from the strategic reserve for the inappropriate transfer. So I only make two points. One, the eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) needs to be addressed as to whether or not it's on our books or their books. And secondly, if it's on their books, or either way, the utilization of the strategic reserves as a reserve for the eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000), which sort of -- since the reserves are there anyway, would basically, you know, free that up. Do you follow what I'm saying, Bob? Mr. Nachlinger: Yeah.. Chairman Teele: OK. But that's a big number. That's eight hundred and forty thousand dollars ($840,000) of funds that are now escrowed. OK? All right. Are there further questions of the external auditors? We really appreciate your time. Mr. Maginley: That's OK. (Inaudible). 70 CRA 7/24/00 on 17. CRA TO INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS CHARLAYNE THOMPKINS FROM ANY TAX LIABILITY AS RESULT OF MS. THOMPKINS FILING SS-4 TAX FORMS ON BEHALF OF CRA ON WHICH TAX FORMS MS. THOMPKINS WAS LISTED ON LINE 7 AS RESPONSIBLE PARTY AND PROVIDED HER OWN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER (See Sections 3 & 15). Chairman Teele: All right, Bill. William Bloom (Legal Counsel, CRA): Back to the Charlayne issue? Chairman Teele: Yes, back to the Thompkins matter. Mr. Bloom: At the last meeting, the Board directed staff to review the situation with Charlayne, and over the last several weeks, there were a number of meetings with Charlayne Thompkins. And at this point, we believe that with the passage by the Board of the resolution agreed to indemnify her with respect to any potential tax liability associated with the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) filing that all other issues between Ms. Thompkins and the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) have been amicably resolved. Board Member Sanchez: So move, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Second the motion. Is there objection? All in favor say "aye." All opposed, say "no." The Board (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: The item is adopted. 71 CRA 7/24/00 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-87 OMNFCRA 00-43 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS CHARLAYNE THOMPKINS FROM ANY TAX LIABILITY, INCLUDING INTEREST AND PENALTIES, AS A RESULT OF MS. THOMPKINS FILING SS-4 TAX FORMS ON BEHALF OF THE CRA ON WHICH TAX FORMS MS. THOMPKINS WAS LISTED ON LINE 7 AS THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY AND PROVIDED HER OWN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER. (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 Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L.Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None 72 CRA 7/24/00 18. CRA ADMINISTRATION TO WORK CLOSELY WITH CITY PARKS DEPARTMENT TO PURSUE PROGRAM TO INCLUDE COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY IN INNER CITY PARKS AND TO MEET WITH DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN CONNECTION WITH ANCILLARY SERVICES RELATED TO COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY TO BE PROVIDED IN CITY PARKS (DIGITAL DIVIDE). Chairman Teele: We have the last item, which, to me, is really one of the most exciting things. It's sort of like the NAP (Network Area Point). It's under Board discussion. As you recall, before the Board in September of last year, we began the process of talking about the NAP. In October of last year, we authorized Bermello, Ajamil to engage an economist to begin that process. And then in January, we came forward. One of the direct byproducts of the NAP is that there will be a tremendous surge of technology. And I know that Commissioner Gort and Commissioner Winton, you're following the fact that the opera is not over till the fat lady has sung, and she ain't sung yet on the NAP, and we don't want to count our chickens before they hatch, and that BellSouth is continuing their efforts to create a NAP in the western part of the County. But I think one of the things that we would be remiss if we did not acknowledge is that bringing together the concentration of technology and Internet companies so close to the inner City that we need to develop a strategy to provide for some spillover, if you will, into the community. I have begun a process of studying, and would hope that you will do the same, this whole issue that is being called the digital divide. And it's listed as a Board discussion item. Simply stated, it is very clear that as the technology is deployed, there will be a divide between those who have access to technology and those who don't. Unfortunately, that divide will largely follow the color lines, as well socio-economic lines. And simply stated, if your schoolteacher is giving homework on the Internet and you don't have a telephone at home, as many inner City families don't have for various reasons -- It's not even about having the computer. It's about not having the telephone and then not having the computer. So there are a series of issues. I think many people; people as far to the right as Newt Gingrich have said that the digital technology explosion represents a greater threat to the separation of races than anything since slavery. Having said that, I have asked a research scientist to come to Miami to the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), because I think the one thing that AT&T (American Telephone and Telegraph), the one thing that all of the people that are coming to the NAP have reached out and said is that we want to be a part of the community. We want to provide resources. Obviously, they're not interested in, you know, putting jerseys on basketball teams necessarily. They're really interested in sharing their technology and their technology application. Dr. Kimberly P. Williams, who is a research scientist at the Center for Learning Technologies in Urban Schools at the Northwestern University has a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, a Master's, of course from the University of Chicago and Florida State University, and a Bachelor's degree -- oh, my God -- from the University of Florida. Board Member Gort: We won't hold that against her. Chairman Teele: But Dr. Williams is no stranger to Florida. Dr. Williams, if you would make your way forward just -- because we're not going to hold people here that long. Dr. Williams is no stranger to Florida. Her father, of course, many of us will remember as the President of Florida A&M (Agricultural and Mechanical) University, the Dr. B.L. Perry, who is one of the distinguished Presidents. Dr. Kim Perry (sic) has agreed to provide expert consultant services to the CRA in helping us to learn the language and to interact with the technology companies that will be coming here. But more importantly, as we begin to focus on the details of the technology and cultural center, which has been a high component part of our 73 CRA 7/24/00 five-year plan, the plan to place a technology and cultural center right in the heart of Overtown, Dr. Williams is in a position to assist us in grant writing. And one of the things that she early indicated is that there are a number of foundations that are looking for projects, particularly in the right kind of geographic area. Dr. Kim arrived -- Dr. Williams arrived today. I want to welcome you to Miami, to the CRA meeting. And if you could just give us a brief overview of what you think some of the challenges are and perhaps opportunities. You don't have to dwell too much on the Gates Foundation Grant. I've already asked that you help us in writing the grant to the Gates Foundation. Board Member Sanchez: Let me see her resume. Dr. Kimberly Williams: OK. Good evening, "buenas noches." I am glad to be back in Miami, and thank you for having me. There are a couple of very critical issues with respect to the notion of the digital divide. It is a term that's thrown around a lot. It is the popular catch term now in the media. The important thing to keep in mind as we hear this term is that the digital divide refers not only to the problem of access to the hardware -- that is to say just having a computer or other kinds of technology in close proximity -- but it also refers to the skills necessary to both know how t navigate the technology, to use the technology properly, and also the skills related to knowing how to make use of the content once you actually get on it. And so with this in mind, what I'm hoping to do is to talk over the next few days with community people, government people, people related to community -based organizations to get a handle on what exactly the technology center, the arts and technology center will do with respect to really infiltrating technology for people in the community. So the goal, obviously, is to imbed technology and to leverage the resources you have in the Overtown area and in the entire Community Redevelopment Area. However, in order to be able to know how to leverage the technology and the resources that currently exist, we have to get a handle and kind of aggregate the data and figure out what is available for youths. What are the strengths that are already here, and where are the gaps? And then how do we go about trying to leverage what we have, and to fill in the gaps where we don't have the existing strength? Chairman Teele: Dr. Williams is scheduled to be meeting with a number of educators, including the superintendent and the principal at Booker T. Washington, as well as others. But one of the things that I think the Parks Director -- Mr. Director -- that is very; very important that I'm going to be pushing hard for throughout District 5 is that we redefine what Park facilities are in the inner City. I mean, you know, we always think about -- and I say this not because I'm not a good basketball player or football player -- but we're always thinking about basketball and football, particularly in the inner City. But I really do think that we've got to expand our definition of what kinds of opportunities we provide for children after school. And I really do think more and more, we need to look at technology as a component of our Parks activities after school. After all, if a family does not have the hardware, or for that matter, even the telephone connections in the home, where are they going to get it? And the only place, you know, other than the church or faith base is going to be in some our public facilities. So I'm a big proponent that we need to redefine what our Parks missions are, based upon this digital divide or this digital challenge, and that was one of the reasons why we have -- we said early on. The concept of the technology and culture center, we had a planning process over 18 months ago, and it was very clear that a lot of people wanted to do culture, like music, recording and that one of the things that I see on Saturday mornings are a lot of kids on the Internet. And you know what they're downloading? You know what they're downloading, Mr. Director? Primarily lyrics. A lot of it's lyrics to music and understanding really what's going on. So again, that just represents that there is a real opportunity to provide technology linkages for our children beyond the school system and beyond the library system. And one of the things that we're hoping is 74 CRA 7/24/00 coming out of this, working with the Law Enforcement Trust Fund dollars and working with foundation dollars, that we can build, primarily utilizing the proximity of the NAP with foundations like the AT&T Foundation or the BellSouth Foundation, opportunities to really create a state-of-the-art technology center, under your direct, Mr. Parks Director, in the Overtown area. And everyone is enthusiastic about it. The developers of the NAP are enthusiastic about it, and I think we have a real opportunity. Time is of the essence. Commissioner Gort, Commissioner Winton, I would yield to you. But I would specifically ask, Chelsea, that Dr. Williams be made available to each Commissioner, based upon their own schedule and convenience. Commissioners. Board Member Gort: One suggestion is I started with Al Ruder about five years ago with something very similar in the parks where we have -- we selected four parks, and we have the kids coming over and they're provided after -school activities. But before, they would have to comply with their homework, because they have people helping them with homework. So I'm a great believer in that. Number two is, my suggestion is that you, Chelsea, get together with the Downtown Development Authority, with the DDA. We've been working on this for quite a bit, too. We want to make sure the ancillary services will be provided, and we're doing the research on that. And they might be able to give you some of the people you can apply to for -- to donate services and computers and so on for the Parks Department. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Sanchez: I yield to you. Board Member Regalado: I guess that the Parks Department is one of the most looked at in every government. And yet, we always have the ability to not fund the Parks Department in order to make a reality the wishes that we all have. So I don't know what advice you can give us, but certainly, parks are very -- and programs within parks are very important issues for us, for the CRA, for the City of Miami. And I will tell you that I just hope that the City will be able to have a continuous program in all the City parks, not only during the summer, but also after -school activities, because the City of Miami has -- a beautiful thing is that every park is close to everywhere. And if we only would be able to do something with those parks, crime and problems will go away. So I guess with your input and ideas, we'll try to do more. Thank you. Dr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Regalado. I just want to comment that there are several models readily available, and it's simply a matter of making a decision as to what the Park District Building will be used for. That is to say whether you want students, young people, people in the community to get actual Internet technology training so that they can go out into the workforce. Another example would be that you utilize it as a center of community networking so that people in the community can get right on the Internet and find out about local community issues, community activities, government -related things, as well as looking up job information. That's another possibility. And then another one is simply to be used as a center for distance learning, linking up the local feeder schools to the park district, so that perhaps a class that might be offered in the parks district could be connected with something in the school. There are a variety of models. And frankly, this is the boom time for funding. Between Three.Com (phonetic) and the Gates Foundation, the AOL (America On Line) Foundation, (inaudible) Foundation there, they certainly are all there. And by and large, if the program is designed right from the beginning with a clear strategic plan linking every -- all of the different community stakeholders, it would not be difficult to 75 CRA 7/24/00 make a very good case for sustainability over the long term, which is what these foundations are interested in, in terms of funding. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: You know, I didn't agree with much that Newt Gingrich had to say back then, so I'm not going to -- I guess I'm struggling with him right now. I see, frankly, this -- you know, I understand the issue of digital divide. But I see this opportunity that we're staring at right in the face as the greatest opportunity for minority children to get them and their families out of poverty that we've ever, ever had in this country. And I have spent a lot of time talking to these technology companies, and technology is colorblind. And what most of these technology companies have told me is that they are hiring -- not college graduates -- high school diploma kids, on the basis of two things: Attitude and aptitude. And then they train them. If we -- I don't think there's anything more important the City of Miami can do, anything -- and we're doing a lot of things in the City -- I don't think there's anything more important that we can do in this City right now than to grab the moment here, seize the moment and take advantage of the dollars that may be out there, the support that could be out there, and get technology, make technology accessible to every single kid in junior high school, maybe even in grade school. Make technology accessible to every kid in the City of Miami. And we could wipe out poverty in this community in 10 years, because the salaries are huge, and they're great career paths. So anything I could do to help while you're here, I will do. This is a very, very exciting opportunity for us. Chairman Teele: I think the nexus or the rationale for the CRA is that we're in a unique position, having led the effort to bring the NAP here, to bring these resources here. That's going to happen, and we've got to really push now to make sure that those resources flow into the adjacent community of Overtown, if it's going to happen. I mean, one of the things when you go out, you talk to ministers, you talk to leaders. They say, "Well, what does the NAP really mean?" And it's kind of hard to explain -- Board Member Gort: How many jobs -- Chairman Teele: -- how many jobs. But the key is going to be what you said, and that is it's going to mean an infinite number of high paying jobs, if we can get the training and the technology to the youth at this point in time. And so we're really running to catch up, even though we're probably ahead of most other communities. I really appreciate, Dr. Williams, your coming and I hope that you will -- Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may. Ms. Williams, I'm very impressed and I'd just like to stipulate to the many good things that my colleagues have said. I would, at your convenience, would like to meet with you in my office so we could go over your resume, which I am very impressed with, and elaborate a little bit more on your services that you will provide to the CRA. Dr. Williams: I'd be glad to. Thank you. Board Member Sanchez: Thank you. Chairman Teele: Further discussion? Thank you very much, Dr. Williams, and we look forward to meeting with you. 76 CRA 7/24/00 Board Member Gort: Motion to adjourn. Chairman Teele: Are there any other matters that anyone would like to bring to the CRA? Board Member Gort: Move to adjourn. Chairman Teele: Motion by Commissioner Gort. Board Member Sanchez: Second. Chairman Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. Meeting stands adjourned. The following motion was introduced by Board Member Gort, who moved for its adoption: MOTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 00-88 OMNUCRA 00-44 A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, 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. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None 77 CRA 7/24/00 Fj 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 7:35 p.m. ATTEST: WALTER J. FOEMAN, City Clerk SYLVIA LOWMAN, Assistant City Clerk ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR., Chairman (SEAL) 78 CRA 7/24/00