Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEOPW OMNI CRA 2001-09-24 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI Q-D �I1 0 16� CRA MEETING MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 24, 2001 PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Priscilla A. Thompson/City Clerk MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST AND OMNI DISTRICTS On the 24th day of September 2001, 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 Miami Arena VIP Room, Miami, Florida. The meeting was called to order at 5:08 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. ABSENT: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Joe Sanchez ALSO PRESENT: Carlos A. Gimenez, City Manager, City of Miami Frank Rollason, Assistant City Manager, City of Miami Dena Bianchino, Assistant City Manager, City of Miami Alex Villarelo, City Attorney, City of Miami Ilene Temchin, Assistant City Attorney, City of Miami Albert Ruder, Director, Parks & Recreation, City of Miami Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk, City of Miami 1 September 24, 2001 Sylvia Scheider, Assistant City Clerk, City of Miami Anna Rojas, Chief Deputy Clerk, City of Miami Annette Lewis, Acting Executive Director, CRA Nathalie Legagneur, Legal Counsel, CRA Hilda Tejera, Administrator, CRA Tina Frazier, Community Liaison, CRA Genaro Iglesias, Chief of Staff, City Manager's Office Hector Lima, Director, Building, City of Miami Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director, Planning and Zoning, City of Miami Gloria Chanel, Senior Administrative Coordinator/Projects, CRA Victor Igwe, Director, Internal Audits and Reviews Linda Haskins, Mayor's Office Laura Billberry, Director, Asset Management Richard Judy, Executive Director, Community Redevelopment Agency 2 September 24, 2001 An invocation was led by Chairman Teele, followed thereafter by a pledge of allegiance to the flag. Chairman Teele: Mr. Clerk, call the roll. Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call. Board Member Regalado. Board Member Regalado: Yes. Mr. Foeman: Board Member Winton. Board Member Winton: Yes. Mr. Foeman: Chairman Teele. Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. 1. STATUS REPORTS ON PROGRESS OF MAJOR PROJECTS. Chairman Teele: Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to, for the next month or so, have somewhat of truncated board meetings, and we're going to ask everyone to work with us in that regard. Please hold down the noise, if you would. There are refreshments. You're free to avail yourselves of this. But a number of the Board Members do have other activities that are sort of conflicting, and so we will go right into the Board agenda. We will not vote on any items for at least fifteen to twenty minutes, to preserve the right for any of our colleagues that may come late to have the right to vote. Madam Director, I'm deferring -- unless there is an important project that you'd like to discuss on Item Number 1, I am concerned about the status of the Margaret Pace Park. I've pretty much -- Mr. -- Commissioner Winton, Mr. Vice Chairman, I have, in the past, reclused myself, because I thought, with you providing leadership on that, it may be conflicting. But I am very, very concerned and I'd like to have a Sunshine Law meeting with you and the staff on the Margaret Pace Park, whenever it's convenient. Did you want to make any statement or directions to the staff? Vice Chairman Winton: No. I think your request is a good one, and maybe we could get it scheduled for some time next week. Chairman Teele: We'll work to schedule it some time next week, sir. And I'd like very much to make sure that the Parks Department is present, and we'd also like to see exactly what the Budget Office and the City is proposing relating to the request relating to Margaret Pace Park, please. All right. Board Member Regalado: So, what is the problem with it? Chairman Teele: It just doesn't seem to be moving fast enough for me, and that's what I'd like to know. But, Commissioner Winton, I'll yield to you. 3 September 24, 2001 Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I'm not completely up-to-date. I was just sitting here. I'm glad you brought it up, because the last meeting I had -- and usually, you know, there are so many things on our agenda that you manage a lot of these things by noise level. And by that I mean, when the noise level goes up at -- noise level is never generated when people are happy. Chairman Teele: That's the truth. Vice Chairman Winton: Noise levels are only generated when people are dissatisfied. And, so, the last meeting I had with the community, with staff from the CRA (Community Redevelopment Authority), staff from the City, we worked out a series of agreements to move the project forward, and my staff was in two subsequent meetings. Now, this has been probably a month ago and I haven't heard anything since then, so I just assumed, because there was no noise level, that things were moving forward. But it makes me real nervous that you raise this as a question, so that's why I was so eager to jump on the idea of you and I getting together and bringing staff forward so we hear the issues. Chairman Teele: I drive by -- and I'm just not pleased with the lack of work. I drive by -- make a point of driving the entire CRA area at least twice a week. I've not been in any meetings on it, but I would very much like to have a Sunshine Law meeting so that the Commissioner Winton and I, at least, are saying the same thing. All right. The Chair notes the presence of all of the board members and, as we've indicated, we wouldn't vote on anything until we had at least unanimous — thank you, Commissioner Gort. The Chair is so advised that there are a number of scheduling conflicts of board members. It's our desire to close the meeting by 6:45. These are the instructions that we received. Note for the Record. Board Members Gort and Sanchez entered the meeting at 5:12 p.m. 4 September 24, 2001 2. AUTHORIZE AMENDMENT TO CRA R-01-78 AUTHORIZING CONTRACT SCOPE OF SERVICES WITH H.J. ROSS, INC., ADDITIONAL AMOUNT $100,000.00, TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO PERFORM "OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE" AND "CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION" SERVICES IN ADDITION TO THE NW 3' ARENA SQUARE APARTMENTS PROJECT, THE MARGARET PACE PARK AND 91M STREET MALL PROJECTS AND FOR OTHER CRA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS INVOLVING CRA FINANCING THAT WILL BE ADDED TO THE SCOPE OF SERVICES BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. Chairman Teele: All right. The next item is a consent item. Would you explain? No, there's no need. Item B, which is Item 2, consent item, amending by expanding the scope of services for Ross. Is there a motion? Vice Chairnian Winton: So moved. Chairman Teele: Second? Board Member Regalado: Second. Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board Members (Collectively): "Aye." Chairman Teele: All opposed? September 24, 2001 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO. 01-117 OMNI/CRA 01-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CRA R-01-78 AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT SCOPE OF SERVICES WITH H.J. ROSS, INC., AN ENGINEERING FIRM ON THE CITY OF MIAMI APPROVED LIST OF PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS, IN AN AMENDMENT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $100,000.00, TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO PERFORM "OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE" AND "CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION" SERVICES (IN ADDITION TO THE NW 3' ARENA SQUARE APARTMENTS PROJECT OF RESOLUTION R-01-78), THE MARGARET PACE PARK AND 9TH STREET MALL PROJECTS AND, AS REQUIRED, FOR OTHER CRA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS INVOLVING CRA FINANCING THAT WILL BE ADDED TO THE SCOPE OF SERVICES IN EXHIBIT A BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT AND TO ISSUE WORK ORDERS REQUIRED IN THE CRA SCOPE OF SERVICES OF THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A", AS AMENDED (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 2 September 24, 2001 3. ACCEPT RECEIPT OF MONTHLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS PREPARED BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA). Chairman Teele: All right. And the resolution receiving the financial report. Motion to receive the financial report. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Board Member Sanchez: Second. Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board Members (Collectively): "Aye." The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 01-118 OMNFCRA 01-29 A MOTION ACCEPTING THE RECEIPT OF MONTHLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS PREPARED BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CPA). 1 September 24, 2001 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 Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 2 September 24, 2001 4. RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDED CAPITAL PROJECT AND PROGRAMS FOR THE OMNI & SEOPW CRAB. Commissioner Teele: Item number 4. Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, just — you took that as a resolution. That's simply a motion accepting the report. There's no legislation that's necessary. Commissioner Teele: Yes. Yes. I think — it says resolution. We ought to get it straight. But I think what we're dealing with here is a former finance director making sure that we acknowledge -can't say we didn't get it. All right. Next item is a resolution approving the amended capital... Commissioner Winton: And, you know, frankly, we ought to — I don't think it's — it's probably smart for us to have, whoever's responsible for finance every month, have that monthly financial report in here, and we acknowledge that we received it. Now, it doesn't mean we spent a lot of time on it or any time on it. Commissioner Teele: We just received it. Commissioner Winton: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: I agree with Commissioner Winton. I think the proper format should be a resolution receiving it or a motion receiving it, just so that it's there and we, and our staffs, are on notice. All right. Madam Director, the significant items on number 4, you want to just point them out, please? Ms. Annette Lewis (Acting Executive Director, CRA): On the previous listing... Commissioner Teele: Is your mike on? Ms. Lewis: Yes, it is, sir. On the previous capital improvement project items, there were... Commissioner Teele: Pull your mike a little closer to you, please. Ms. Lewis: There were a few items that weren't included in the last capital improvement projects and programs, totaling approximately ten million for the fiscal `02 allocation. So, this is an addition of those items. Commissioner Teele: What is the most important one that you'd like to call to our attention, if any? 1 September 24, 2001 Ms. Lewis: Namely, the lighting and security — lighting, security, and facilities upgrade; the joint Park West railroad project, and the Overtown Model Block. And we also increased the amount allocated for land acquisition. Commissioner Teele: A motion. Could you move it, please, Commissioner Regalado? Commissioner Winton: I'll move it. Commissioner Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. I'll second it. Commissioner Teele: Second. Is there objection? All those in favor say "aye." The Board Members (Collectively): "Aye." Commissioner Teele: All those opposed? The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Winton, who moved its adoption: SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO.01-119 OMNI/ CRA 01-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") APPROVING THE APPROPRIATIONS FOR SAID AGENCY AND TO AUTHORIZE ITS TRANSMISSION TO THE CITY OF MIAMI AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2002, ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED AS EXHIBIT "A". (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 2 September 24, 2001 Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None 3 September 24, 2001 5(A) APPROVE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND PROGRAM BUDGET FOR OMNI/CRA AND AUTHORIZE ITS TRANSMISSION TO CITY AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002. (B) APPROVE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND PROGRAM BUDGET FOR SEOPW/CRA AND AUTHORIZE ITS TRANSMISSION TO CITY AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002. Chairman Teele: Item 5A, a resolution on the budget for Omni. What's the most significant item in the Omni? Annette Lewis (Acting Executive Director, CRA:) The most significant item in the Omni is actually breaking out the cost for Margaret Pace Park, namely Phase 1 B, which is currently out to bid; showing a loan of four hundred and sixty-one thousand between the Omni CRA and the Southeast Overtown/Park West Redevelopment Agency. That actually covers 5A and B. Chairman Teele: Is the -- I don't understand one thing. Why is the bond figure one point one million dollars ($1,100,000)? I thought it was nine hundred thousand. Are we projecting next year? Ms. Lewis: Which? Chairman Teele: The bond for the Performing Arts Center. Board Member Sanchez: The one point three? Ms. Lewis: It's one point four three, based on the ordinance. That's a required contribution. Chairman Teele: No, it can't be an ordinance. It's an interlocal agreement. But are we going to collect one point four three this year? Ms Lewis: For the Omni CRA, we're going to collect one point six, based on the July assessments delivered. Chairman Teele: And so the two hundred thousand -- Ms. Lewis: Is there to fund Margaret Pace. Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Board Member Gort: I learned this from DDA (Downtown Development Authority): there is a difference between the projected income of the City and what you actually get. And what I would do goes by past performance and might help you a little better, because, usually, the City's projections are overstated a little bit. According to the assessed value you don't collect a hundred percent. Chairman Teele: Ninety. I September 24, 2001 Ms. Lewis: That is correct. And we do -- There is a calculation -- Board Member Gort: Oh, there is? Ms. Lewis: -- that's required by the State -- Chairman Teele: Is that 92 percent? Ms. Lewis: -- which is at 95 percent. Chairman Teele: Ninety-five percent. Ms. Lewis: And then we do have some allowances for the PAB, the Property Appraiser Board, which does -- so that's also included. Vice Chairman Winton: But the one point four three number -- one point four three million on the Performing Arts Center, that -- I'll have to admit, Commissioner Teele, that doesn't ring the right bell with me either. I mean, it could be right, but -- Ms. Lewis: I picked up that number from our agreement, and I don't have it on me. I didn't bring it here, but I will be happy to fax it. Vice Chairman Winton: Where's Phil Yaffe when you need him? Chairman Teele: Well, the agreement doesn't call for a number. The agreement calls for all of the money collected up to a certain number. Vice Chairman Winton: Up to. Right. Board Member Gort: There's a cap. Vice Chairman Winton: There's a cap. And I thought that number was like one -- Board Member Gort: And the cap was one point four. Chairman Teele: It was my understanding that the cap is one point four. Board Member Gort: Yes. I'm sure the cap is one point four. Ms. Lewis: I'll go ahead and research that. Board Member Gort: And anything above one point four goes to the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). 2 September 24, 2001 Chairman Teele: That was my concern. I apologize, I didn't have a chance to review that with you today, but I just would just like for us to make sure that we confirm that number and -- Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: -- amend it for the purpose of this one point four. And then, if you need the other thirty, come back. Ms. Lewis: Will do. Chairman Teele: Is that acceptable to you? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Board Member Gort: Yes. Richard Judy (Executive Director, CRA): I could assure you it's a million, four hundred and thirty thousand. Chairman Teele: Would you state your name for the record? Mr. Judy: Yes, sir. Dick Judy. Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Judy: In the interlocal agreement between the Omni and the County, the provision is a million, four hundred and thirty thousand dollars ($1,430,000). Board Member Regalado: For what? Mr. Judy: One million, four hundred and thirty thousand dollars ($1,430,000), up to that amount. That's the fixed amount. Chairman Teele: Well, I guess the reason that it's new is that we've never been at the limit, and we projected we wouldn't be at that limit for another two to three years. Board Member Regalado: But, Mr. Chairman, my -- Mr. Judy: However, a lot of the new properties, as you well know, have gone up. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, that could be. Board Member Regalado: My concern is different. There are definitely new projections on the bed tax dollars that the County could use for the Performing Arts. Do we have any commitment, other than what we have already committed? 3 September 24, 2001 Vice Chairman Winton: These aren't bed tax dollars. Chairman Teele: These are advalorem taxes. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. It's not bed tax. Mr. Judy: No. In fact, we're only allowed to give up to one million, four hundred and thirty thousand dollars ($1,430,000). Keep in mind, where Omni (inaudible). Vice Chairman Winton: And this is advalorem taxes, not bed taxes. Mr. Judy: That's increment revenue fund. And, consequently -- Vice Chairman Regalado: No. But what I'm saying is, the projections for the bed tax are down, so they're going to be short of money. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Board Member Regalado: And my question is, we don't need to -- we have not committed to any other -- I mean, there is not a fine print or anything that they can go after us if -- Mr. Judy: No. Chairman Teele: Well, they can always go after us, but it's going to be up to the City Commission, not the CRA. The CRA doesn't make the agreement. The Commission and the CRA. And if the Commission holds fast and doesn't amend the agreement, then the agreement will not be met. Mr. Judy: I must say that the CRA has that power, and the only person that has the power. The increment revenues belong to the Omni, and you people are the board. You make the decisions of whether you want to, in effect, enter into an agreement with this County to give them additional increment revenues over the million, four hundred and thirty thousand, if you decide that, but then you have to keep a look at the redevelopment plan. You have responsibilities in terms of using increment money for the other projects. This deal that was made was out of the redevelopment plan for the Omni. We agreed to give the County one of the projects of the redevelopment plan, believe it or not. The Performing Arts is a project of the redevelopment plan. It's this organization's right -- and what we did is, we made a deal with the County on the interlocal agreement saying, you will be responsible for all of the dealing with the Performing Arts, and you're responsible for the bonds and so forth, but that's it. Chairman Teele: All right. Well, the issue before us now is whether or not the budget calls for one point four or one point four three zero. You're saying -- Mr. Judy: One thousand, four hundred and thirty thousand dollars. Vice Chairman Winton: Is the number. Chairman Teele: And -- well, even though you don't have a briefcase, we'll accept -- 4 September 24, 2001 Mr. Judy: No. I know it positively. I can even tell you why -- Chairman Teele: Mr. Judy? Mr. Judy: Yes. Chairman Teele: Even though you don't have a briefcase with you, we'll accept you as an expert. Mr. Judy: I don't need a briefcase for anything you want. Chairman Teele: For that purpose. Mr. Judy: But let me explain where the four thirty comes -- the thirty thousand comes from -- Vice Chairman Winton: I don't think we -- Mr. Judy: -- a fixed amount of bond issues of eleven million something. What they did was, when they were creating the million, four hundred and thirty thousand dollars ($1,430,000), they used an interest rate and said that that would -- of eleven million something of bonds. So then they used that amount to cover the bonds at, let's say, seven percent. Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Judy: That's how it came about. Chairman Teele: We will leave the motion as it's presented by the Director and her experts. Is there further discussion, without amendments? We have a motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Winton. All those in favor, say "aye". The Board Members (Collectively): "Aye." Chairman Teele: All opposed? 5 September 24, 2001 The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved for its adoption: OMNI/CRA RESOLUTION NO. 01-31 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND PROGRAM BUDGET FOR SAID AGENCY AND TO AUTHORIZE ITS TRANSMISSION TO THE CITY OF MIAMI AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2002, ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED AS EXHIBIT «A„ Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: Item 5b. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Board Member Sanchez: Second. Chairman Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye". The Board Members (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right. 6 September 24, 2001 Board Member Sanchez: Second. Chairman Teele: And there is move by Commissioner Regalado and a second. Board Member Winton: Aye. Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, Mr. Bloom: Before you vote on that, you should be aware that the property is owned by the CRA, so the CRA can take the action that's required to clean up the property. It's your property. Board Member Winton: You're kidding. What's the hold up? Board Member Regalado: Then I'll move a resolution for the CRA to clean the debris in their property. Board Member Winton: Yeah. To meet with whom... Chairman Teele: Well, let's carry one motion at a time because I think we need to have -- I think we need to have a meeting of the minds. Board Member Winton: Yes, absolutely. Chairman Teele: I think we need to have meeting of the minds because ultimately, somebody's four hundred dollar ($400) tractor is going to wind up being a four hundred thousand dollar ($400,000) tractor when it gets towed. I can tell you that right now. So, we need to get a meeting of the minds with everybody on this. On that motion, do we have agreement? Do you all have an objection to meeting with the Manager and the CRA director, along with the NET Office and do a walk through and try to get a meeting of the minds? Board Member Winton: And there ought to be a City Attorney there also. Chairman Teele: And the City Attorney Board Member Winton: So we avoid the four hundred thousand dollar ($400,000) tractor. Mr. Bryan: Just name the time, sir. And if you have a trailer can pick up the... Chairman Teele: We'll do it when the Manager designates it. We'll all work through the Manager. On the motion, all those in favor say aye. 10 September 24, 2001 The Board Members: (Collectively): "Aye." The following motion was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved its adoption: SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 01-125 A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MEET WITH THE CITY MANAGER, THE APPROPRIATE NET OFFICE AND THE POINCIANA VILLAGE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION TO SCHEDULE A WALK-THROUGH WITH THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION AT A TIME CONVENIENT TO ALL PARTIES AND ATTEMPT A RESOLUTION OF PENDING CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES (I.E. PARKING PROBLEMS, CLEAN UP OF PROPERTY ISSUE, ETC.) 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 Board Member Joe Sanchez Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: Now, is there a motion instructing the executive director of the CRA to take whatever enforcement actions are necessary... Board Member Regalado: To remove the debris. Chairman Teele: After the walk-through and after a meeting of the minds has been held? Board Member Winton: Second. Board Member Regalado: Yes. Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Regalado. Seconded by Commissioner Gort. Is there objection? Is that all right with you all? Mr. Bryan: Yes, sir. The only thing the tractor and the trailer needs the transportation to 11 September 24, 2001 move it. Chairman Teele: Yeah, but you need a place to send it, too. Board Member Regalado: Is that yours? I mean... Mr. Bryan: The person who owns it has signed off. He doesn't want it. He says we can give it to... Chairman Teele: All right. We'll take the responsibility of paying the garbage costs and all of that. Board Member Winton: But we need a sign off. We need a sign off from the developer... Chairman Teele: And a release. Board Member Winton: Release. Board Member Regalado: I mean, the tractor is not yours, right? Chairman Teele: We'll get a release. Board Member Sanchez: Charge them storage fee. Mr. Ross: General contractor. Board Member Winton: So, moving on. Chairman Teele: On the motion, authorizing the executive director to remove the debris in conjunction with the City Attorney and the Homeowner's Association after the walk- through, and to incur costs and report back to the board the costs that are incurred. All those in favor say "aye." The Board Members (Collectively): "Aye." Chairman Teele: Those oppose have the same right. Unanimous. 12 September 24, 2001 The following motion was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved its adoption: SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 01-126 A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO TAKE ANY AND ALL ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS NECESSARY TO REMOVE DEBRIS AROUND THE POINCIANA VILLAGE PROPERTY AFTER WALK THROUGH HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND AN AGREEMENT HAS BEEN ATTEMPTED BETWEEN THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE CITY MANAGER, THE APPROPRIATE NET OFFICE AND THE POINCIANA VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO INCUR THE COSTS OF THE DEBRIS REMOVAL AND REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD REGARDING SAID COSTS. Upon being seconded by Board Member Gort, 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 Board Member Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton. Board Member Winton: Are we not in litigation with the developer? Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Mr. Bloom: No. On a different parcel. Basically, Ted Weitzel, who is the principal of Poinciana Village limited partnership, is also the principal in Sawyer's Walk limited. Different entities. Chairman Teele: But we're close to litigation on the -- based upon the letter that Dipak sent in February, March, instructing them to do certain things that you all threatening that you were going to do litigation if they didn't do it. 13 September 24, 2001 Mr. Bloom: Basically, the way the lease was structured, if certain events didn't occur, they didn't get the rights to phase II. They didn't occur, so Dipak sent the letter saying you have no further rights to phase II. Get off our land. Board Member Winton: OK. And that was when? In March. Mr. Bloom: In March. Board Member Winton: In March. Let's say, what is this month? Mr. Bloom: September. Board Member Winton: September. Let me see if I can -- October. So, let me see if I understand. So, we sent it in March; it's October. We told them they're in default in March. It's October. Chairman Teele: And to get off the land. Board Member Winton: Did we has anything happened since then? Chairman Teele: No. Board Member Regalado: May -- Johnny. Mail should be slow then, I guess. Unidentified Speaker: Mr. Chairman, I... Chairman Teele: I think dramatic. Unidentified Speaker: May I... Board Member Winton: Well, no. I want to finish where I am, please. Mr. Bloom: As the City Attorney, just mentioned, at this point we have told them they have no further rights to that land, get off that land. No action has been taken. I know at one point Dipak was supposed to have retained a company to fence in the property. Obviously, that has not happened. The construction debris, the trailer have not been removed. Board Member Winton: Well, here's my question. Because it seems to me that there ought to be some strategy associated with how we can take steps to move things forward quickly, if that's at all possible. As opposed to just simply litigation. And so, the question I have is whether or not we can hold that kind of discussion in executive session as opposed to in public. Because you can't talk about that kind of strategy in a public setting. Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): We can certainly -- with regard to Poinciana, the 91 units, we could have an executive session to discuss that. All I need to do is notice it and provide 14 September 24, 2001 a convenient time for the... Board Member Winton: Commissioner Teele, you opposed to that? Chairman Teele: I'm in very much in favor of that. And I will say this in fairness to the CRA staff, Dipak and others, we have not brought back to this board a resolution because the whole issue is, we really did want the developer to see that we were serious and to come in with a plan to finance it, an then, therefore, I just had open mouth astonishment when I met with Fannie Mae to find out that the partnership that we had put together that we were going to try to roll into this... Board Member Winton: Is faltering. Chairman Teele: -- is just not available. So, the developer really has no ability to go forward at this point, so there's no reason why we don't develop a strategy in an executive session. Board Member Winton: Great. Do we need a motion to do that? Mr. Vilarello: At my request, we can set up executive session. Board Member Winton: Great. Mr. Vilarello: Is there a particular time that's convenient for... Chairman Teele: Perfect. Before a regular Commission meeting. Board Member Winton: That's a good idea. Great idea. Mr. Vilarello: OK. Is that at 8:30 in the morning or... Chairman Teele: Well, not the next one. I mean, you know -- check with Commissioner Regalado and make sure he's available and we'll just set it up and call it for that time. Board Member Winton: Right. Thanks. Chairman Teele: We have to call a meeting, and then... Mr. Vilarello: It will be a meeting of the CRA... Chairman Teele: And then it will be a meeting called -- and he'll be there. Board Member Winton: At 8:30. Chairman Teele: Yeah. Board Member Winton: Fine. 15 September 24, 2001 Chairman Teele: Are you satisfied at this point? Mr. Bryan: Yes, sir. But I just like to make sure I do understand a couple of points. You said, number one, we have a completed community, one way or the other? Is that what you're saying here? Board Member Winton: Have a what? Chairman Teele: A what? Mr. Bryan: That we will have a completed development there? Chairman Teele: Well, what we're saying is that the CRA is totally committed to the 91 units. Just so that you're clear, if this developer doesn't develop it and it does not appear that he will be developing it, we've got to go out with a new competitive process and that process alone could take four to six months. Board Member Winton: And, and/or we may have to be in litigation with the developer. I don't want to mislead him here. You know, he -- the developer may litigate whether or not he has the rights to continue to stall this thing out further. So, I don't think y'all ought to be counting on seeing 91 units going up any time real soon, but I think you can count on the CRA board having a major commitment, which is reason why we are calling this executive session to talk about the strategy as it relates to how we move some of this stuff forward. Board Member Regalado: And you can just leave... Board Member Winton: I'm sorry, Commissioner Teele. Chairman Teele: You're right. Board Member Regalado: Sure that it is the will and the decision of this board to get you out of harm's way. You know, either on those leans and Code Enforcement and your other payment for the fees. That's what we can do now, and that's why we're doing. I mean, we are trying to just raise your quality of life by removing the debris and getting you out of a problem. Because once you get a lien of a Code Enforcement in your property, you're going to have to go to the board and clean the property and do something and take more time than you have and it shows that the board is committed to that project. Chairman Teele: I want to just clarify one thing. We're committed to absorbing the financial costs and getting it done. We cannot insert ourselves between you and the Code Enforcement Board or ourselves and the -- in other words, we're subject to them and we've got to go there and sort of cop a plea and ask them to wave the fees and say we're going to do it. We can be together, go down the aisle arm in arm on this issue. Board Member Regalado: No. But, Mr. Chairman, once we clean the place, there is no case at 16 September 24, 2001 all. And they go before the board... Chairman Teele: When are you all going before the board? th Mr. Bryan: It was deferred; I think, to October -- remember the date? October 10 Chairman Teele: All right. Well, we need to get this done before October loth, whatever we're going to do. Board Member Regalado: Well, we need to do is, we need to ask the Manager to ask for an extension and by the time that they go before the board, they have the place cleaned and that's it. Chairman Teele: You have a request from Commissioner Regalado, would you... Board Member Winton: And I would like to request that the CRA -- a CRA staff person go with the homeowners to the board jointly. Board Member Gort: My understanding is, gentlemen, as long as the board sees something is being done, they're willing to extend and give more time. They've done that in the past. All they want to make sure that people are in compliance. When they see the people are willing to comply, they'll give an extension. Chairman Teele: Madam Director, will you or will you designate a staff member at the appropriate time to go to the board to the Code Enforcement Board at the request of the Commissioner Winton and ourselves on this matter? Ms. Annette Lewis (Acting Executive Director, CRA): Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: OK. Thank you. Mr. Bryan: And, finally, Mr. Chairman, is there a particular individual we should be in contact with or are we going to be contacted by someone? Chairman Teele: Ms. Lewis, Annette Lewis is the person you should be in contact with. She will probably designate Ms. Frazier? Unidentified Speaker: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: Do you know Ms. Frazier, Tina Frazier? Mr. Bryan: Yes, I certainly do, sir. Chairman Teele: All right, Ms. Frazier, would you just stand up so everybody else knows who you are, and she'll probably be the person that Ms. Lewis will be designating. Ms. Lewis: And actually she has been working with them on this issue. 17 September 24, 2001 Ms. Mr. Bryan: We had a conversation late last Thursday. Chairman Teele: And if you would just let her know when your homeowners meeting are, et cetera, we can be a little bit more of a partner with you in this. Mr. Bryan: But with reference to the budget problem, who do we speak with? Chairman Teele: In Internal Auditor of the City will be in touch with you and that is how we're going to approach that for the time being. Board Member Winton: His name is Victor Igwe. Chairman Teele: Mr. Igwe. Mr. Bryan: Thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. We appreciate your time and we're happy to hear some of the things you said and look forward to working with you and having this community complete. Chairman Teele: Hope you'll come back and participate in our board matters on how we can better enhance the over all community as well. Mr. Bryan: I'll be happy to do that. Chairman Teele: We welcome your thoughtful input. Mr. Bryan: Thank you. 18 September 24, 2001 11. STATUS REPORTS ON SAWYER'S WALK AND LYRIC VILLAGE PENDING LITIGATIONS. Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, this is a good time to go through the litigations status of Sawyer's Walk and Lyric Village. Where is the attorney? Where did he go? Don't we have an item on the agenda tomorrow moving some of the funding back and forth? We've funded some of the funding over here. Mr. Attorney? Mr. Vilarello: Yes. Chairman Teele: Status of litigation in Lyric Village and Sawyer's Walk. Mr. Vilarello: I think Mr. Bloom could give you that. (Inaudible) discuss the financial issues that are on the agenda tomorrow. Chairman Teele: OK. Are those on consent agenda tomorrow? Mr. Vilarello: I believe so, yes. Chairman Teele: OK. Mr. Bloom, you're recognized for 30 seconds. Mr. William Bloom: OK. With respect to the... Chairman Teele: We're going to have an executive session on the other matter. Mr. Bloom: With respect to the Sawyer's Walk litigation, we're waiting -- I don't -- Board Member Winton: Excuse us in the back. Would y'all mind in the back? Eleanor gang back there, could y'all go outside and talk? Thank you. George. Chairman Teele: Go right ahead. We're going to lose some of the board members here because we have two members that have to leave right now. Board Member Winton: George Sanchez, please. Chairman Teele: Ms. Sawyer, it's good to see you here. I didn't see you back there. Mr. Bloom, go right ahead. Mr. Bill Bloom: OK. On the Sawyer's Walk litigation, we received late on Friday a settlement proposal from the developer. They submitted three separate leases, one for each of the three blocks. They were the subject of the RFP (Request for Proposal) and are requesting that we proceed with the finalization of those leases so they can get financing. As you may recall, the original resolution that the City Commission passed approving their selection as selected respondent was conditioned upon them providing -- obtaining financing prior to the City finalizing a lease with them. So, we'll analyze the settlement proposal so we can report back to the board and to the City Attorney but at this point we're proceeding with our motion for 1 September 24, 2001 summary judgment, which has been filed, and the hearing date, I believe, is in October. With respect to the St. John's... Board Member Winton: That's the three... Mr. Bloom: Three City blocks. That are adjacent to the Poinciana Village, Sawyer's Walk. With respect to the St. John's litigation, we took the deposition of the David Days, approximately two or three weeks ago, at the conclusion of that deposition, his -- the David Days is with the St. John's CDC (Community Development Corporation). Their former partner, Lyric Village Housing Inc. Was there represented and there were discussions about Lyric Village Housing and St. John's CDC making a settlement proposal to the CRA to go forward with the original proposal, with the two entities being partners as originally envisioned in the RFP (Request for Proposal) response. We have not yet received that proposal. So, we're hoping to get that shortly. Chairman Teele: Further discussion? Board Member Winton: Yes. Could we discuss these two issues in that executive session as well? Mr. Vilarello: We'll separately notice the executive session for each of those cases. The first one, Poinciana, 91 units, in anticipation litigation. Sawyer's Walk, which is already in litigation, and St. John's Lyric Theater. Board Member Winton: Great. OK. Chairman Teele: All right. Are there any other matters? Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Gort, I know that one of your colleagues is here. I just saw him kissing a lady. Ms. Gonzalez, are you here on any matter that is of interest directly to you or is there anything that you'd like to say to us? Angel Gonzalez: No, sir. I'm here just visiting. Chairman Teele: I see you kissing a lot of folks right now. Are there any other candidates for office that are here today? Board Member Winton: Yeah, aren't you? Chairman Teele: If not, the meeting -- the motion for the meeting to adjourn is in order. So moved. Meeting is adjourned. 2 September 24, 2001 There being no further business to come before the Community Redevelopment Agency for the Southeast Overtown/Park West and Omni District, the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR., Chairman ATTEST: WALTER J. FOEMAN, City Clerk SYLVIA SCHEIDER, Assistant City Clerk (SEAL) September 24, 2001 would have computation of gross income, rental income, and then you'd have deductions from that for vacancies. Vice Chairman Winton: How mysterious is that? I mean, that's how it works. You have gross potential income and you subtract vacancies, and you get effective gross income. I mean it's -- Mr. Echemendia: And we don't mind an audit, Commissioner. We're just saying, if you want one, get it done, please. Vice Chairman Winton: But it seems to me -- Commissioner Teele, if you don't mind. It seems to me that we're really trying potentially to make this more difficult than it should be. So... Mr. Bloom: Commissioner, there are also some large swings in some of the expenses that were charged. I mean, it may be something that the City's Internal Audit Department can audit. It shouldn't be a very complicated audit to do, and it should be something that can be brought to a head very quickly. It's really just a question of getting the ball rolling. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, since our Manager is here -- and I know that he is here as a courtesy to us -- but, Carlos, in your mind, the audit that someone wants to have done -- and what was the other task? Mr. Echemendia: All it is is an audit of our records. Once that audit is completed, then the appraisal -- Vice Chairman Winton: (inaudible) appraisal. Mr. Echemendia: It's suggested that the appraisal will be updated. You've done one in February, but you want to update it. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Mr. Echemendia: And then Bill wanted to review the (inaudible) documents, and I think, based on his review, he's implying that a refinancing has taken place, I believe is what he's saying. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think there's a real good opportunity here -- and we'd hate to miss it. Mr. Manager, in your view, do you think that those two functions are something the City ought to do or the CRA ought to be doing? Chairman Teele: Mr. Manager, before you answer that why don't you let Laura put on the record what it is she'd like, and then you can say. Because I know she's been in a lot of meetings and I really don't know where this is going. I don't really care, one way or the other. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, me neither. Just do it. Laura Billberry: Laura Billberry, Director of Asset Management. The last meeting we had was on August 24th with Mr. Bloom, Annette Lewis, the Manager, Dena, and Alex Vilarello. At that time, it was agreed that Annette would look into hiring Mr. Berkowitz, I believe is his name, to conduct the audits and, yes, we do have some financial audits, but there were questions, like Mr. Bloom indicated, of 7 September 24, 2001 some swings. It may be a matter of having someone review that and clarify it, and make sure they're all justifiable. It may not have to be a full-blown audit. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. I'm not sure you want to re -audit an audit. I think what you want to do is get an expert at the table who can interpret the audit. Ms. Billberry: And we need some of the background information, because what we have are summaries, which don't have any backup material. Vice Chairman Winton: But there's a big difference in starting from scratch and creating a new audit versus looking at the audit. If it's a certified audit, then what we really ought to be doing is hiring an expert that can help us interpret what the audit results are so we can make the appropriate decisions, not start over from scratch, unless you think that the auditor, who did the audit, is not reputable and nobody is going to stand by their numbers. Ms. Billberry: And, additionally, the audits that I have received copies of do not go back to day one of when they should have been submitted. So to calculate the true, real rent that may be due and owing may be subject to negotiation, because those numbers may not be available. Chairman Teele: All right. Well, why don't we hear from the Manager now that all the information is on the floor. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, just a question, before the Manager. You said that the last meeting was August the 24cn. Ms. Billberry: That was an in-house meeting. Correct. Board Member Regalado: I mean -- but that was -- is where you made the decision of hiring an auditor to audit the audit, right? Ms. Billberry: Well, prior to that, we had been discussing the actual amendment language and how we could work with them on doing an amendment, so they could continue with their financing while we worked on the fee issue. At that meeting was when Mr. Bloom indicated that they no longer wanted to proceed with the modifications, and wanted to go straight to purchasing the property. Board Member Regalado: No. I'm just asking, because I'm curious. You had that meeting on the 24tn, which is exactly 30 days. Ms. Billberry: Correct. Board Member Regalado: Anything happened in 30 days that we should know? Mr. Bloom: No. In the 30 days, the developer provided some information regarding the previous loan transaction, but I don't believe anything happened as far as hiring someone to review the books, at all. Ms. Lewis: No. That is correct. 8 September 24, 2001 Chairman Teele: Well, Ms. Lewis, I don't understand why you don't have a resolution, if you committed in a meeting to hire somebody. I don't see why you don't have a resolution before us authorizing you to hire the person. Board Member Regalado: That's what I'm saying. Chairman Teele: I mean, that's what the -- that's what Commissioner Regalado is saying. And this board is not going to sit by and let you all just drag this thing out. I mean, I have some concerns whether or not the company is coming here with clean hands. I mean I just have to remind this board that we were within a whisper of approving this thing under the statement that nothing was owed to us. So that does give me some concern for proceeding cautiously. But I'm with Commissioner Winton; there's no reason we should want to frustrate this thing. So, if there is a motion to authorize the Executive Director to engage, on an emergency basis, a consultant necessary to assist in the -- Vice Chairman Winton: Could we hear from the Manager or would you rather CRA do this? Chairman Teele: Well, I can tell you, the CRA probably is going to be able to move quicker on this matter. We can always go tomorrow. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Board Member Sanchez: Second. Discussion. The CRA is going to go ahead and hire a firm to do the audit? Vice Chairman Winton: And work in consultation with City staff. Board Member Sanchez: Exactly. Chairman Teele: And work in consultation with the City staff. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Board Member Sanchez: And bring it back at the next CRA meeting with a recommendation? Chairman Teele: And bring it back at the next CRA board meeting. Vice Chairman Winton: Bring what back? I'm sorry. Chairman Teele: The report. Board Member Sanchez: The report. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. The answer. 9 September 24, 2001 Board Member Sanchez: The answer, a final answer. Yea or nay. Because let me tell you what's happening here. Vice Chairman Winton: Not a hire, but to come back with the answer. Board Member Gort: Come back with the real numbers. Vice Chairman Winton: Consultant's been hired, consultant's engaged, consultant's done work, consultant brought results back 30 days from now. Chairman Teele: No. Consultant discussed it with the City and then they bring it back. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, I agree. Because they should be side by side. Chairman Teele: But we want to keep the City in the loop on this thing. Vice Chairman Winton: No. They should be side by side with the CRA and the consultant on this. Board Member Gort: OK. Chairman Teele: Board Member Sanchez has the floor. Board Member Sanchez: Yes, I do. One thing that we have to rely on is the advice of what I consider "the professionals" to make sure we do it right. We have an opportunity here of bringing in revenues to the CRA, and then we also have the possibility of bringing none, if it's not worked out, and then we end up in litigation again. So to be on the safe side, I think that we're taking the appropriate steps here to try to expedite it, to try to get a solution to come back at the next CRA meeting, with a recommendation to us. Mr. Echemendia: Mr. Teele, can I just add one thing? If Mr. Berkowitz does his work in time and if there's an opportunity to update the appraisal before the next meeting, is that something that could be done also? And then, lastly -- Vice Chairman Winton: That's a part of my motion. Mr. Echemendia: Thank you, Commissioner Winton. Lastly, Commissioner Teele, just to clarify. Bill's position has always been that the one million was owed. Our position has always been that one million is not owed, and that's always been very transparent. So it's always been clean hands. It's just been an agreement to disagree. Bill, please confirm that I'm correct. I mean, we've always had this debate. This wasn't kind of under the rug. Chairman Teele: Well, it wasn't a million, because before it was six hundred thousand. So we've never even agreed on the number until recently. Mr. Echemendia: But we've always had that -- 10 September 24, 2001 Vice Chairman Winton: They're not going to volunteer (inaudible). Mr. Echemendia: All right. Thank you. Chairman Teele: All right. We have a motion. Do we have a second? The motion includes -- Ms. Lewis, the motion includes the appraisal issues and, again, please be advised that we want to be -- take Commissioner Sanchez' sage advice to heart. We do want this to be transparent. There are a number of other properties that are in a similar situation, and whatever we do here is precedent setting. So we have the motion. We have the second. Do we have further need to clarify, Mr. Attorney? Board Member Sanchez: Call the question. Chairman Teele: All those in favor, say "aye". The Board Members (Collectively): "Aye." Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right. 11 September 24, 2001 The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 01-122 A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO ENGAGE, ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS, CONSULTANTS AS NECESSARY, TO ASSIST DESIGNATED CITY AND CRA STAFF IN EXPEDITING THE AUDITING AND APPRAISAL PROCESS, AS WELL AS THE OUTSTANDING RENTAL FEE ISSUE AS IT RELATES TO THE PARK PLACE BY THE BAY A.K.A. BISCAYNE VIEW APARTMENTS PROJECT; FURTHER INSTRUCTING THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO REPORT BACK TO SAID BOARD WITH AN ANSWER AT THE NEXT CRA BOARD MEETING AND TO ALSO REQUEST OF THE CONSULTANT TO BE IN ATTENDANCE WHEN SAID ISSUE COMES BACK; FURTHER DIRECTING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO RETAIN THE INDEPENDENT AUDITING FIRM OF RICHARD BERKOWITZ TO REVIEW THE BOOKS AND RECORDS OF PARK PLACE BY THE BAY A.K.A. BISCAYNE VIEW APARTMENTS AND UPDATE THE APPRAISAL BEFORE THE NEXT CRA BOARD MEETING. 12 September 24, 2001 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 Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 13 September 24, 2001 8. AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO ACCEPT 60-DAY EXTENSION FOR STEPHANA CLARK AND COMPANY AS RELATES TO NATIONAL FOOD FRANCHISE PROJECT. Chairman Teele: Is there a motion to extend on the franchise for 60 days to the Director -- authorizing the Director an additional 60 days? Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Board Member Sanchez: Second. Chairman Teele: Moved and seconded. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board Members (Collectively) "Aye." The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 01-123 A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO ACCEPT A 60-DAY EXTENSION FOR STEPHANA CLARK AND COMPANY AS IT RELATES TO THE NATIONAL FOOD FRANCHISE PROJECT. 1 September 24, 2001 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 Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 2 September 24, 2001 9. (A) AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND FUNDING, $15,000, TO GEORGE SANCHEZ FOR PROJECT "LA BENDICION/THE BLESSING" IN OMNI CRA AREA PENDING REQUIRED APPROVAL FROM FDOT. (B) REQUEST OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) TO ALLOW "THE BLESSING" ART EXHIBIT TO BE RELOCATED TO SEOPW/CRA DISTRICT UNTIL END OF JANUARY 2002. Chairman Teele: What is "The Blessing," Madam Director? Annette Lewis (Acting Director): "The Blessing" is a re-creation of the Villa Suave, if I've pronounced it correctly, and George Sanchez, who -- Chairman Teele: Mr. Sanchez, are you here? Would you give your name and address for the record, and give a 30-second overview for "The Blessing." We all need a blessing about now. George Sanchez: My name is George Sanchez. My address is 600 Northeast 36th Street, Unit 212, Miami, 33137. "The Blessing" is an art exhibit that will coincide with the Basel Art Fair, when it comes to Miami in December, underneath I-395. Board Member Regalado: To what fair? George Sanchez: The Basel Art Fair, the largest art fair in the world that's coming to Miami. As a property owner in Park West -- Chairman Teele: It's more than a huge thing. A Basel is more than a huge thing. It's the most important Mr. Sanchez: It's the most important catalyst for economic development for Park West -- that's probably ever happened for Park West, Omni, as well as the Overtown area. Because out of the twenty thousand people coming to the fair, I can guarantee over five thousand people will be coming through Overtown that have an average income of well over six figures. Chairman Teele: Just so that you know -- just so that it's on the record. The Basel Art Fair is the largest collection in the world of serious art collectors who buy art. Normally, it's held, I thought, in Switzerland or Geneva. Mr. Sanchez: It's been held in Switzerland for 37 years. Chairman Teele: And this will be the first time it'll be held on Miami Beach? Mr. Sanchez: It's the first time they've ever left Switzerland. It's, undoubtedly, the preeminent art fair of the world, and they're coming to Miami. Chairman Teele: And what you're proposing is, to do a signature event underneath -- in the Omni area, underneath 395? 1 September 24, 2001 Mr. Sanchez: Underneath 395. Chairman Teele: And you want the CRA's co-sponsorship and support? Mr. Sanchez: Please. Vice Chairman Winton: And the cost is what? Mr. Sanchez: Fifteen to twenty thousand dollars ($$20,000). The rewards for the community -- Chairman Teele: If it works, it's going to sort of be like draping the islands. It could have that impact. Mr. Sanchez: Yeah. The crystals project cost an estimated fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000). Vice Chairman Winton: George, I was flipping through here. What we're approving is fifteen thousand? Mr. Sanchez: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: That's what's before us. Board Member Sanchez: That's correct. Board Member Regalado: What's the dates? Mr. Sanchez: The dates are the 131h to the 171h of December. Board Member Regalado: Can you -- Vice Chairman Winton: Of this year? Mr. Sanchez: This year. Board Member Regalado: Can you -- Mr. Chairman, what would be --when the concept -- Chairman Teele: Go right ahead, Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado: The concept is -- well, the copies don't show very well. So, just for an idea that I have, could you tell me about the concept of the Villa? Mr. Sanchez: The concept is a reconstruction of a modern home built in 1927 in France. The architect and designer is one of the principal architects of the 201h Century, named (inaudible). He's one of the leading architects that also influenced city planning, design and expressways. And there's no coincidence as to why he placed it underneath I-395, with all the controversy being raised in the community. 2 September 24, 2001 Board Member Regalado: Is it going to function during the night, too? Mr. Sanchez: Absolutely not. It will be off limits, but it will be visible within hundreds of yards. And the DOT (Department of Transportation) has already offered its approval. Board Member Regalado: Well, because -- you know, I think that we lack here things about Christmas, and you're saying that it's until the 171h. So__ I mean, can we do something to sort of extend for three or four days, so the people can visit? Chairman Teele: The appropriate answer is yes. Mr. Sanchez: Yes. Board Member Regalado: OK. So the people can visit, you know. Because it may be a different crowd. Mr. Sanchez: Yeah. If it's possible and the DOT permits, I'm going to try to have it extended actually until Art Miami comes in January. In that way we would get an incredible amount of visibility and usage of one exhibit for two different art fairs. Vice Chairman Winton: Have we moved this yet? Chairman Teele: It's been moved by Commissioner Winton, and it was seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. I mean, Commissioner Regalado. Did you want to be heard on this, ma'am? (Comments off the record) Chairman Teele: Yes, ma'am. Eleanor Kluger: The Omni area is an art and entertainment area, and we're trying very hard to bring this out and show the community. The design district is also doing things for the Basel Arts. And we're very fortunate that Nancy Liebman, from the -- Commissioner Liebman, from the Beach, was able to get them to come to Miami Beach, and all over New York, and -- I mean, from all over people are going to come here. And if we can bring them to Park West and the Omni area for something exciting, they'll come to the design district on 36"' Street, where there's a lot of art people, and then they'll come on down Miami Avenue to this. And the Omni people are very much in favor of bringing attention. Vice Chairman Winton: And 2nd Avenue is quite a corridor, too. Ms. Kluger: And 2nd Avenue. And just getting people to come through our area and to see that this could really be something going on here, and letting them go past the Performing Arts Center that, hopefully, will be in construction by then, and just to bring the excitement here. And we need to advertise our areas more. So, we're in favor (inaudible). Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question. 3 September 24, 2001 Chairman Teele: It's been moved. The question has been called. Would you call the roll, please, Mr. Clerk? The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: OMNI/CRA RESOLUTION NO. 01-32 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OMNI DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND FUNDING NOT TO EXCEED $15,000 TO GEORGE SANCHEZ FOR THE PROJECT "LA BENDICION/THE BLESSING" IN THE OMNI CRA AREA PENDING THE REQUIRED APPROVAL FROM FDOT. Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: George, now, I'm voting yes because you promised that you would not only focus on the Omni and Park West, but you would be inclusive of Overtown and the literature, and that you're going to be helping us in the future with out art activities in Overtown. I know that you've been an art professor, and we're counting on you. So, I'm voting yes in hopes that we can work to bring the community more excitement. Mr. Sanchez: Thank you very much. Chairman Teele: And we will also ask Commissioner Winton to make a motion, asking that the DOT -- requesting that the DOT allow us to keep the exhibit up until the end of January. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Board Member Sanchez: Second Vice Chairman Winton: Right. 4 September 24, 2001 Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton. Seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye." The Board Members (Collectively): "Aye." The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO. 01-124 A RESOLUTION (subject matter: Requesting of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to allow "the Blessing" art exhibit to be relocated to the SEOPW/CRA district until the end of January 2002). 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 Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None Chairman Teele: Mr. Judy. Mr. Dick Judy. Would you make sure that Mr. Judy, Ms. Lewis, gets this and meets with the DOT right away? And let's try and work this agreement out. Ms. Lewis: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: Congratulations, George. Mr. Sanchez: Thank you very much. 5 September 24, 2001 10. INSTRUCT COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MEET WITH CITY MANAGER, APPROPRIATE STAFF FROM NET AFFECTED OFFICE AND POINCIANA VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION TO SCHEDULE WALK-THROUGH WITH HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION AND ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE PENDING CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES. INSTRUCT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO TAKE ALL ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS NECESSARY TO REMOVE DEBRIS AROUND POINCIANA VILLAGE PROPERTY; AUTHORIZE CRA TO INCUR COSTS OF DEBRIS REMOVAL AND REPORT BACK TO BOARD REGARDING SAID COSTS. Chairman Teele: Poinciana Village Homeowner's Association. Commissioner Gort, you, along with several others, have expressed some interest in this. I'm going to ask Hilda Tejeda -- Hilda, I'm going to ask you to please come forward on this and respond because this matter goes back to 1999, when you were the Acting Executive Director and the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) has made and is still waiting for the information from the Homeowner's Association based upon the offer that Ms. Tejeda made in'99. So, please, welcome, and we're delighted that you're finally here with us. Mr. Del Bryan: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, board members, Commissioners. My name is Del Bryan and with me is Randy Ross. We're both residents and homeowners at Poinciana Village and I'm not so sure I'm with the -- you know, the information you just mentioned about Ms. Tejeda and that offer. The developer is not here. We're here as homeowners who have a problem that we have asked to address this board on. With me this evening here, sir, are several members of the village. I'd like to ask them to stand just to say hello. Board Member Winton: Hello. Board Member Sanchez: Hello. Board Member Gort: Good afternoon. Mr. Bryan: Thank you. Thank you. Prior to this evening that you mentioned, we had the opportunity to visit with many of you in your capacity as Commissioners and we shared with you -- and since then, we have put together this package and that was delivered to your office last Thursday. I trust you found some useful information in here and that will allow us to be briefer really in our presentation. This evening we speak as one body. We're all promoters who have made a commitment the City of Miami. Many of us have been here five years or more and we made this decision to move here because it made sense to us at the time. We share common bond and we made this purchase because we believe at that time that all parties, the developer, everybody would stand by their commitments. Well, we did get started. The village was started in between 1999 and 2000; several units were completed and occupied. But, recently, this dream, this vision, has really become a nightmare for us. It's become a very burdensome situation and we have been forced to take very drastic measures, which has created a burden on many of 1 September 24, 2001 our homeowners. We're not able to meet all of our bills because the second phase or the final phase, which would have been the towers, should have started. And when that started, there was finances in there to cover portions of the monthly maintenance fees. Right there are 64 units occupied and paid for monthly fees. Of the 91, should have been started but during the construction process, there was financing arranged to pay that portion of the monthly fees. Because that has not started, there's been delays on that issue, the 64 homeowners must now pay the entire bill, which is (inaudible) increased fees by 112 percent. That has been very severe shock for a lot of homeowners, but we are still here hoping that this will resolve itself. The 91 units, when built, basically, will bring the village to a total of 155 tax paying residents of this great City of Miami. Again, we moved here. We came here because we bought the vision and we felt that this was really promoted by developer, the City, and its agencies, and we bought into it. We didn't know we would be faced with a nightmare at this point, and we really do need to ask your intervention. We're asking for your intervention in terms of a financial relief of some nature. We believe that there is room within all the factors that are there; that this could be worked out. We think there is a formula that could be found that we could live with and, hopefully, the developer could live with, and that would be reasonable to you as a body here. We've not left -- we're not abandoned the village. We're still here because we still believe that this is a great area. Overtown has for too long very neglected and we think -- we are here and we're a beacon for the area, and as the other 91 units are built, it's going to make the other developments far more saleable. It's going to make this an attractive place. If we have to abandon, then, you know, the reverse could very well possibly be not a very good picture. We want to stay here. We're committed. But we need your help. We could not do it without some relief and we do need this fairly immediately. We thank you for listening to us and just like to add that not only again is it just for us, but it makes good business sense. We would be 155 tax paying members in this community, plus the other persons that will come because we have the courage and foresight to have made a decision and to have stayed through all the difficulties that we've had to entail during the construction period. Thank you. Chairman Teele: Before you leave, let me just say three or four things because this is very simple and very easy. First, in 1999 the Executive Director, who was Hilda Tejeda, met with the Homeowners Association representative who, at that time, was the developer. There was a subsequent meeting with myself, Ms. Tejeda, and the developer at the site. We proffered to the developer at that time, which we would renew today, that the Homeowner's Association should be constituted outside of the developer, and that the CRA will be prepared to receive a package, specifically of financial assistance for the Homeowner's Association, provided we have a series of things, and I won't go into all of it -- but essentially, we need the financials, the same things we were just talking to the other lawyer about. We need the financial; we need a business plan, and we need to ensure that the Homeowner's Association is being managed by a professional entity that has an arm lengths relationship from the developer. In other words, 1, for one, am one punchers -- and I'm sure the majority of this board -- will support assistance to the Homeowner's Association based upon the fact that all of the costs were to be amortized over approximately 140, 150 units, whatever the number one. 2 September 24, 2001 Mr. Bryan: One fifty-five. Chairman Teele: One fifty-five. And, right now, we have probably about 60 or so units. Mr. Bryan: Sixty-four. Chairman Teele: Sixty-four units. This board, however, has not only expedited the funding by going out finding the partner, which was Fannie Mae, for the 20 units -- was it 20 or 40 units just completed, Hilda? Ms. Hilda Tejeda: Twenty-four. Chairman Teele: The 24 units. But not only did we go out and find the partner, but we also gave cash to the developer for the bridge financing and most of the landscaping, et cetera. The problem that we have is this: in a separate capacity, we're in litigation with the developer and, so, as long as we're dealing with the Homeowner's Association, less the developer, we have no problems in working through that, the City staff -- the City Attorney and Ms. Lewis. As late as two months ago, I passed a resolution instructing that the internal auditor would meet with the Homeowner's Association -- this was in July of - - two months ago -- and asked that the external auditor meet with the Homeowner's Association, with a view, again, toward reviewing the books, the historical books, of the Homeowner's Association. We were presented information in `99 that the Homeowner's Association had a debt of something like eight hundred and nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000) and those numbers were just beyond our comprehension. And, so, the internal auditor, if you would just come forward so that everyone knows who you are with the permission of the board, since the internal auditor is already looking into this pursuant to a City request, on tomorrow, I will by pocket item, extend the request that we already have with the internal auditor, which are what are the issues and what were where the comp commitments and promises made to a review of the financial records relating to the project? As well so that we can -- we don't have to go through the same discussions that we just had with the previous lawyer, but it's strictly a question that we're prepared to work with you, but we're not prepared to waste money. We're not prepared to funnel money back to the developer, who has presented us with bills that we just cannot reconcile. Just to be -- since he's not here, to be polite about it. Would you just put your name on the record, Mr. Internal Auditor? Mr. Victor Igwe: My name is Victor Igwe. I'm the Director of Internal Audit for the City of Miami. We're currently working on the Poinciana audit. One of the problems we're having is the problem of getting records. Because some of the transactions that we are looking into record as far back as 1988 so, I did send a memo to the Manager and copied all the City Commissioners, indicating that we may not be able to meet the 45 days deadline that was imposed on the audit because of the difficulties that we're having getting those records. And we will do the best we can to recreate some of the transactions and come up with a report as soon as possible. Board Member Winton: And how much time do you think that's going to take then, 3 September 24, 2001 Victor? Mr. Igwe: It will probably take -- depending on the -- how fast we can recreate and get feedback from the auditees, it probably will take anywhere from -- I would say, probably in —maybe in November, December. Chairman Teele: With the permission of the City Commission, tomorrow, I will extend that request to an additional 45 days, an include the request of the Homeowner's Association specifically as it relates to looking or reviewing the current financial records of the current Homeowner's Association, and making certain financial recommendations that you may deem appropriate to assist this board and the City in determining what type of financial relief package can be structured. Mr. Igwe: OK. Mr. Bryan: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. Mr. Randy Ross: Could I have a couple minutes, please? Mr. Bryan: Randy Ross is our treasurer and, you know, you've just really shared some new information for us, which is very helpful and... Chairman Teele: Could you -- before you do, could you give us the name of the management company that is managing the association. Can't afford one yet, sir. It's us. Board Member Winton: So, the homeowners are doing the management of the property themselves? Mr. Bryan: Yes. And when the security guard doesn't show up, we go out there... Board Member Winton: Wow. Chairman Teele: See, when we were dealing with -- when Hilda and I were dealing with this, the developer was still managing it and the developer presented us with a bill that literally was almost a million dollars ($1,000,000) and we said, look, we can't get a new Homeowner's Association, let's start fresh and we'll work with that Homeowner's Association. But we cannot provide an indirect subsidy to the developer. Board Member Winton: Well, now we've got the right kind. We've got to homeowners. Chairman Teele: The treasure wanted to be heard, I guess. Just give us your name and address just for our records. Mr. Randy Ross: Yes, sir. I'm Randy Ross. I'm at 201 Northwest 7th Street, unit number 4 September 24, 2001 301 in Poinciana Village. Just to clarify and to address your concerns, over the last year and a half or so we've been going through a transition where the developer has been getting out of the association. We've been taking it over. Before that period, the development company appointed all the officers to the association. They now do not have any officers. They're all elected amongst the other homeowners and as far as the finances we're able to appoint now -- where we're phasing out the old bank account that they had control of. We have a new bank account, which is strictly under our control. So, I think some of those issue that's you were concerned about were taken care of. Chairman Teele: And again, the only point that I want to be very clear with you on is that we have no litigation or no reason not to want to do work with the Homeowner's Association. Our concern was the representations of the developer and candidly, you know, we will -- if you have a lawyer, which we'll be more than happy to work with you all -- you can't afford one. But one of the things that... Board Member Winton: We would rather work with them. They don't have a lawyer that's all the better. Chairman Teele: That's even better. But one of the things we would like to do -- and in a very a -political way -- is maybe have our attorneys to come before your Homeowner's Association and bring you all up-to-date on what the issues are related to the construction that is missing. We very, very much, very, very much want to see the -- what is it 55 -- 95 units constructed and we want -- 91 units constructed there. We've told the developer notwithstanding the litigation, we're prepared to provide even additional bridge financing if that could be put together. And, so, we have absolutely no interest at all in that area going for all of the kind of crazy things. Candidly, I've told everybody that would listen to me, I'm against the Marlins stadium, so for somebody to say that I want to put the Marlins stadium there is not just misleading. It's ignorant. But the fact of the matter is, is that there's a lot of misinformation, which has been done and I would very much hope that our attorney could be invited just to give you a full flavor of the current issue that's we're dealing with, just so that you have an accurate and a non slanted. Just what -- the TV police used to say, just the facts, ma'am, on where we are on this because I think it would be very helpful. On the record, I would like for you to confirm that your homeowner fees have been increased by one hundred percent over the last year; is that correct? Mr. Ross: They were increased 112 percent in July and right now, you know, re- examining the budget, revising it, if we don't get any assistance, we're going to have to go up another ninety dollars ($90) or so. Chairman Teele: Yeah. And I think that would be most, most, most unfortunate. We want to work with you to head -- start that off -- stay that off. And I know Commissioner Gort has said several times, publicly, that he's very concerned about this. So, Commissioner, this may be a good time to register your ... Board Member Gort: Well, mainly in my conversations with them and some of the 5 September 24, 2001 condominium associations that take place, my understanding is, the developer is responsible for the maintenance fee of those units not sold because right now I'm working on a transaction with the certain people going to be paying, but the developer has to pay the rest of it. Now, what I was thinking of, whatever assistance, financial assistance we can give to the Homeowner's Association, it could be attached to the sale or whatever negotiations takes place with the developer, where we can get the money back. Chairman Teele: Well, at this point, I think -- I'm willing to listen and respect all of the board members. Getting the money back to me I think is really the secondary issue. What we've got to do is have stakeholders in our Overtown community and Poinciana Village to date represents one of our best hopes, and unless and until the 91 stories are built, it's just going to be a losing transaction. And I see no way -- I mean, I don't want to raise the bar that there is a potential of getting the money back at this point. The tax increment that is raised primarily from Park West but is a part of the Park West Overtown is here to stabilize properties, and I think this is an important stabilization. We don't want any of you fine people to move. Mr. Bill Bloom: Commissioner, to clarify the record with respect to the developer. Their lease required them to meet certain milestones as a condition for being able to proceed with the 91 units and have that land added to their lease. Those conditions including getting financing, obtaining a building permit, preparing plans and specifications by certain dates. Those dates were not complied with and in March of this year, the former executive director sent a letter to the developer confirming that their lease rights with respect to the 91 united had expired, that they have no rights in that property, that they're to remove their trailers, remove their construction materials, and that the CRA was going to fence in that property. So, that... Chairman Teele: But let's be clear about this. We want the 91 stories built -- we want the 91 units built. We are prepared to do -- to do whatever -- we're just not married to any... (Applause) Chairman Teele: We're not married to any particular developer for that. The thing that's very frustrating -- and I will say this because I go over to greater Bethel every now and then -- just like I go to St. Johns every now and then. I don't want to offend and I go to Bishop Cohen every now and then. Board Member Winton: You've now you've got to list them all. Chairman Teele: Now I've got to list them all. Board Member Gort: (Inaudible) you get in trouble. Chairman Teele: But the really depressing thing to me is to go up the steps of Greater Bethel and to look over there and to look at something that I've said a hundred times, 6 September 24, 2001 looks like Sanford and Son's junk yard. There is no way there's going to be any construction on that site for at least a year. They don't have plans permitted. OK. Even if there was quote financing, which is absolutely, absolutely, categorically not right -- the reason I know it's not right is that I met with the group, Fannie Mae, and they still haven't been able to resolved the financing of the 40 unit -- was it 40 units? Mr. Bloom: Twenty-four. Chairman Teele: The 24 units that were just completed. I mean, I'm trying to keep Fannie Mae out of a lawsuit with the developer because there -- that is turned into a sour situation. Board Member Winton: No. Chairman Teele: So, the idea was we were going to take -- we induced Fannie Mae to invest to provide the bridge financing three hundred and some thousand dollars. We were going to take that whole package and put it into the 91 stories. Well, there is something wrong with the three hundred and some thousand dollars that Fannie Mae put in. So, the point is this. Everybody can say they're ready to go, but unless they've got a permit pulled, they're not ready to go. They don't have a permit in. So, you can be about to start construction. The only thing that I've said repeatedly is as we rebuild Overtown and as we clean it up and we provide jobs and housing in Overtown, we have an obligation to keep it clean and what the developer has done to Poinciana Village is totally unfair to 81h Street, to Greater Bethel AME (African Methodist Episcopal) Church and all of the people -- and quite candidly, the people that live in the area. And, so, we're prepared to work -- to build the 91 units, but we don't want the developer to say I'm ready to start construction when in fact we know -- the Planning Department, the Building and Zoning Department will tell us whose ready to go with construction. If somebody's ready to go with construction, we'll be out there with police officers stopping traffic to help them build it. But if they're not ready to start construction, there's no reason to make the thing look like a garbage dump. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado: When I met with the residents, they were very gracious to come and give me a report and brief me on everything. I told them that I did not have any details about the problems with the developers, the construction, but I was going to support them because what is happening here is, they're are two issues, but we seem to keep putting both issues together. For me, one issue -- one immediate issue is the problem that they have paying in excess of (unintelligible) fees and even -- and I hope that we resolve that problem, even Code Enforcement cases because they have stuff on their lot or whatever. Everybody here wants that built, and you have heard the Chairman, and we will follow his leadership on this issue, but my issue -- my immediate issue, this is what we need to know and what we need to do -- I hope, is that we have to give some 7 September 24, 2001 kind of help to the residents. These are the victims of friendly fire. I mean, everybody -- they're stuck in the middle and the City and the developer are shooting at each other and - - and you know, everything that we do now, everything that we do now, we have to do thinking of the new reality of the country with what we have been going through and what can this impact the economy. And maybe, maybe one of the tenants is going through a process where his or her company is laying off people and if we come to this situation, then what we're going to have when we solve this problem, six months from now or nine months from now is that you're going to have 10 or 12 or 15 tenants that have foreclosure and they have left the building, and we've got to hurt for the people first, and, so, I would... Chairman Teele: Ms. Lewis, what Commissioner Regalado is clearly saying is, he wants this back on the agenda within the next 30 days for a provisional provision by which we can begin to develop a plan to provide financial relief to the Homeowner's Association; is that a fair statement? Board Member Regalado: It is. And... Chairman Teele: You don't want to roll this along in a... Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I am also concerned because I think that the residents have a Code Enforcement problem, which is not from the City. I mean, from the CRA, but from the City and we need to do something here in order to help them remove the debris, the Sanford and son situation that they are, because what they don't need is a lien on their property or a Code Enforcement ticket or go before the Code Enforcement because they have something that doesn't belong to them in their parking lot or if this City wants the parking lot fenced and they cannot park or they are parking in a lot that have not been paved. I mean, these are issues that are going to pile up on these people, and, you know, I just hope that we set up a work with them. Chairman Teele: Well, again, I think the Manager's here. I've never as a Commissioner or as a member of the board given instructions on Code Enforcement, even though I've asked for a lot of questions on this churches and -- I mean, I think they're -- there's no question in my mind that there are two systems of justice in the City of Miami, and as they say in NASCAR, you can't get no justice here. It's something wrong. Just so that the record is clear, the CRA also has the same code violations that you have because we're the property owner and so we've been sighted for not doing anything. I mean, we're all in this thing because at the end of the day, we own the property; we've got the citation, and I don't know how we're dealing with it. But the problem that I have is this: If you walk outside this building right now, there's cars parked all over the grass, right? Horrible. Debris all over the place. Water. This is City owned, MSEA (Miami Sports & Exhibition Authority) owned, no tickets. If you go down to the Women's Detention Center. There are cars parked all up and down illegally. They don't get any tickets, and that's what I say every meeting. I mean, I say this not just here for you, I say it in Commission meetings. There are two levels of justice in this town and it's one for people who -- who are not government and then there are one for people who are politically 8 September 24, 2001 connected with government an government itself, and I think if it's wrong for you all to be parked on the grass, which I think is wrong, I think it's just as wrong for the County, at the Women's Detention Center there on the corner of 7'h Avenue and 141h Street, I think it's just as wrong to have an illegal parking like we have here at MSEA, and see, that's the problem that I have with all of this. I don't think the answer is not having good Code Enforcement. But I do think the answer is having equal code enforcement. Which government has to adhere to the same rules and the political connected to people who have this illegal parking lot right across the street here that I find out now represent the people doing the parking studies for us. What is that thing called, the Parking Network? There are two systems of justice in this town. So, I'm totally against. I think, in this case of Poinciana, we need to -- I'll ask my staff to appear before the board with you and ask that we stay any actions to the extent that I can, but I think we, as legislative officers have to be very, very careful trying to give instructions on Code Enforcement or any form of enforcement, including telling police not to let people on dais and platforms and that kind of stuff, Mr. Manager. But... Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I didn't -- I didn't complain about the Code Enforcement action against the landlord. I am -- I was requesting... Chairman Teele: Well, I have a concern about it. Board Member Regalado: Against the landlord. I am... Chairman Teele: It's the homeowners. Board Member Regalado: I was questioning... Chairman Teele: They're in the middle. Board Member Regalado: Right. I was questioning because they have a problem. They have a problem because they -- some of the trailers are parked in their parking lot, in their back yard. If that property should be fenced in, they won't have then a place to park. They have a problem, and what I was... Chairman Teele: Well, then, why don't we pass -- why don't you all, for a resolution, asking that the CRA Executive Director, to meet with the Manager and the Homeowner's Association to schedule a walk through at a convenient time with the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Office, and to see if there can be some meeting of the minds. Board Member Sanchez: So moved. Chairman Teele: Would you move that, Commissioner Regalado? Board Member Regalado: Sure. 9 September 24, 2001 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO. 01-120 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND PROGRAM BUDGET FOR SAID AGENCY AND TO AUTHORIZE ITS TRANSMISSION TO THE CITY OF MIAMI AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2002, ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED AS EXHIBIT «A„ 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 Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 7 September 24, 2001 6. A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO ACCEPT NOTIFICATION FROM CIVIL CADD ENGINEERING, INC. OF A TWELVE MONTH TIME EXTENSION TO THE EXISTING CONTRACT WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DOLLAR EXTENSIONS FOR MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL ENGINEERING AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Chairman Teele: Madam Director, you are recognized. Item 6. You want to tell us what's going on? Annette Lewis (Acting Executive Director, CRA:) This has to do with the professional service agreements with Civil Cadd Engineering, where I've included in your package -- Board Member Regalado: You've got to speak into the mike. Board Member Sanchez: There's nothing in my package. Vice Chairman Winton: There's nothing in my package. Ms. Lewis: Oh, I'm sorry. Board Member Gort: We don't have anything. Ms. Lewis: Then it's a handout that's now before you, where I've given you supporting information, which outlines the ordinance, the resolutions -- Chairman Teele: All right, this is for a one-year extension? Ms. Lewis: Correct. Chairman Teele: And was the one-year extension contemplated in the original contract? Ms. Lewis: Correct. The first contract was one-year -- Chairman Teele: Is there a dollar increase added by this extension? Ms. Lewis: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: I beg to differ, Ma'am. We extended the full dollar amount in April or May. You may not have been here. Ms. Lewis: In February -- Chairperson Teele: In February. So, this is a zero -dollar extension Vice Chairman Winton: What is it? Chairperson Teele: It is a zero -dollar extension. It's a time extension only. 1 September 24, 2001 Vice Chairman Winton: Not more money? Chairman Teele: Not more money, unless you're proposing to provide more dollars. Then, if you are, I'm going to object. Ms. Lewis: No, sir, I'm not recommending a dollar extension. Chairman Teele: This is a time extension only. The original contract was a one- year contract, with three one-year options or two one-year options -- Ms. Lewis: Two one-year options. Chairman Teele: -- with a ceiling of nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000). And in May, we -- February or May timeframe, we amended the ceiling so that the ceiling could be up to nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000), as opposed to tying it per year. And the issue here is the additional time line, which is a no -dollar extension. Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Teele? Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: In this handout that's in front of us -- and I'm not sure I'm looking at the right section. Board Member Gort: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: But it says, if I'm -- resolution number 00-78, dated July 24, 2000. That's this one right here. This says that there's an extended term, two one- year terms, total compensation, which amount — for three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) -- shall be increased by three hundred thousand for each year of the agreement that the term is extended, to a maximum amount of nine hundred thousand. So... Chairman Teele: This handout is wrong. In March of this year -- and this is one of the things, Ms Lewis, that I discussed with you. Ms. Lewis: Sir, if you -- Chairman Teele: Amendment nine was never -- amendment nine, which changed the contract dollar amount from three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) a year for three years to a flat amount of nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000), was never executed. Ms. Lewis: That is correct. Chairman Teele: But that's not before this board. That's between you and the City Attorney to do. You and the Attorney to do. We approved everything we needed to approve -- 2 September 24, 2001 Ms. Lewis: That is correct. Chairman Teele: -- in February/March. So, we're not adding any more dollars to this contract today. Vice Chairman Winton: And, so, what is the contract amount now? Chairman Teele: The contract amount is the same amount as before. The problem is -- as I read the contract, the contract should have expired -- expires in August, unless it's extended for one year. And this is the notification of extension. Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman? Vice Chairman Winton: So, we need — I'm sorry. Chairman Teele: Go ahead, Commissioner Regalado. I mean, Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: So what we're -- our resolution is simply going to approve an extension for one 12-month period to this contract, the Civil Cadd Engineering -- is that Civil Cadd? Chairman Teele: Civil Cadd, with no dollar amendments. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, with no increase in the amount approved. Chairman Teele: In the amount approved. The amount previously approved, initially, was three hundred thousand and, then, because of the anti deficiency, it was changed up to the full amount back in -- was it May or June? Or February? Ms. Lewis: It was February 26t"'as you'll see in the next line. Chairman Teele: It's in February. OK? Ms. Lewis: That is correct. Chairman Teele: And so it went to nine hundred thousand. Ms. Lewis: That is correct. Chairman Teele: So we're not increasing the dollar amount beyond that amount. Ms. Lewis. No, sir. Chairman Teele: But this memo doesn't say that. Ms. Lewis: This memo is just giving you all the resolution history, in terms of the contract, sir. 3 September 24, 2001 Chairman Teele: The history. Board Member Gort: It's giving the history of all the different resolutions. Ms. Lewis: And it includes the one that the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) goes out for the services. The second one is where the services were awarded -- was awarded to Civil Cadd. The third one was the amendment that occurred on February 26th' increasing that -- Chairman Teele: What was the amendment? Ms. Lewis: -- to the maximum of nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000), the maximum compensation allowed in section nine of the previous resolution. And then the last caption is just to notify you that they're currently at nine hundred and sixty thousand dollars ($960,000), in terms of work orders issued, which is approximately six -- Vice Chairman Winton: Which is over the amount we're authorized to spend. So we've got work orders for sixty thousand more than we're authorized to spend in total. Ms. Lewis: That is correct. Board Member Regalado: So, who's going to pay -- Ms. Lewis: We're in the process of reconciling the outstanding work orders, because there are some of them that have been -- Chairman Teele: Well, what I'd rather do is approve it for nine hundred thousand, and then you all figure out how to either come back with a formal amendment, or conform it back to the nine hundred thousand. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman? Board Member Gort: (inaudible) for two years. Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, the board has approved a contract that may not exceed nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000). The fact that there are work orders in excess of that is an issue that Ms. Lewis and I need to address with the contractor, and then come back to it. But, otherwise, the direction from the board is clear to me. Chairman Teele: All right. That's exactly right. It is not uncommon for engineering contracts to have a ten percent clause in them, but this one doesn't have that. That is, the work can be up to ten percent over. That's the County's rule. But this doesn't have that. So they'll have to come back to us, if they go over -- one dollar ($1) over nine hundred thousand. Technically, Mr. Attorney, I don't know why the matter is before us, except for information, in that the Executive Director had that authority, in the way 4 September 24, 2001 the resolution was written, to extend the contract, but it's here. So, can we at least acknowledge it? Would you move it, Commissioner Winton, to accept the Director's notification of the extension of the contract for nine hundred thousand, without any further dollar extensions? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. I thought I'd moved this. I'm sorry. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton. Board Member Sanchez: Seconded, as amended. Chairman Teele: Seconded. Is there any objection? All those in favor, say "aye". The Board Members (Collectively): "Aye." Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right. The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption: SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 01-121 A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO ACCEPT NOTIFICATION FROM CIVIL-CADD ENGINEERING, INC. OF A TWELVE MONTH TIME EXTENSION TO THE EXISTING CONTRACT WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DOLLAR EXTENSIONS FOR MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL ENGINEERING AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. 5 September 24, 2001 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 Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 6 September 24, 2001 7. AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO ENGAGE ON EMERGENCY BASIS, CONSULTANTS TO ASSIST DESIGNATED CITY AND CRA STAFF IN EXPEDITING AUDITING AND APPRAISAL PROCESS, AS WELL AS OUTSTANDING RENTAL FEE ISSUE AS RELATED TO PARK PLACE BY BAY A.K.A. BISCAYNE VIEW APARTMENTS PROJECT; DIRECT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO RETAIN INDEPENDENT AUDITING FIRM OF RICHARD BER.KOWITZ TO REVIEW BOOKS AND RECORDS OF PARK PLACE BY BAY AND UPDATE APPRAISAL. Chairman Teele: All right. The place by the bay -- Poinciana is placed on the agenda solely at the request of the public mover. Just to refresh everyone's memory, this item is before the City Attorney and the City Manager for advice to the CRA. And, Mr. Counsel, if you would like to just put your name and address for the record. Santiago Echemendia: Santiago Echemendia, 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Winton, this is one of those items where I guess I'm here to make a little noise. We've been trying to get it off center for some time. We got a letter from Mr. Bloom September loth' saying that the City wanted to review our financial records. We've made those records available. The City wants to do an audit of those records. We would like for the City to move forward on doing the audit, update the appraisal, if you wish. We need to get before either the City Commission or the CRA -- Chairman Teele: It's not going to come before the CRA until the City does it. I keep telling you, I don't mind letting anybody come before the CRA, but the City has got to be responsible for at least advising us. This is a City agreement. All of these agreements are City agreements. We're acting as their -- Mr. Echemendia: Mr. Chairman, if it's before the Commission, that's fine, but we need some final determination, because our commitment with Lehman Brothers is going to expire. That gives the opportunity for the City to potentially make, in this deal, one point five/two million dollars ($2,000,000). Certainly, if we do -- Chairman Teele: Excuse me. Say that again. Mr. Echemendia: If we do the refinancing with Lehman Brothers, there's clearly a refinancing. In which case, the accrued rent would be due and owing to the City to the tune of, plus or minus, a million dollars ($1,000,000). If we don't move this forward and try to bring it to closure before the end of the calendar year, that Lehman commitment is going to expire, and that opportunity is going to be lost. Vice Chairman Winton: What is it that you're looking for from us or the City? Mr. Echemendia: The City basically needs to move this forward. The City wants to -- Vice Chairman Winton: What does "move forward" mean? I don't understand that, at all. Mr. Echemendia: The City wants to audit our financial records to determine if we've reported the correct rent. We're imploring you to do that as expeditiously as possible. We've submitted the records, they're certified, they're audited, but if the City wants to audit our records, so be it, audit our records. Do it expeditiously so that we can be before you in November. The City wants to update the appraisal 1 September 24, 2001 that you've already done. We can live by the appraisal, but if you want to update it, go ahead and update it. Thirdly, the City Manager was going to look at what funds were used, as part of the original deal, to determine whether any funds are still due and owing to HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) or any other agency that was involved. All I'm imploring this Commission to do is urge your staff to get that done as soon as possible, because if we're not before the Commission come November or December, our opportunity with Lehman, which is the refinancing that's going to give us money to buy the ground lease, is going to expire and that opportunity is going to be gone. So we're imploring you to urge your staff to get the ball rolling. Let's try to expedite this as much as possible. The Commission will ultimately decide what the purchase price is, but if we're not before you to make that determination before the end of the calendar year, that opportunity is not going to be available to yourselves or to ourselves. So we're urging you to just allow us to move this forward. William Bloom (Special Counsel, CRA): If I could clarify. There are two issues that they have asked for. One issue -- Chairman Teele: Before you clarify that, we are sitting here tonight as CRA board members. We cannot instruct the City Manager, who has the responsibility, on anything that you've asked. When you say "implore your staff," we can implore Ms. Lewis and the staff of the CRA. Of course, the Manager is a reasonable man and he's listening to everything that we're saying. Mr. Echemendia: Mr. Chairman -- and maybe we can clarify this as part of this discussion. As I understand it, of course, the ground lease has been assigned to the CRA, but this CRA has wanted to kick it back to the Commission, at least for some input. To the extent that Bill has suggested that the CRA or the City wants to do an audit, we would implore either the Commission or the CRA to urge the CRA or City staff to hire an accountant to do that audit. We submit that our financial records have been made available to you. They're audited. We have to submit them to agencies. You're not going to find anything that hasn't already been disclosed, but go ahead and do that. We just need to do it on a timely basis. Chairman Teele: Mr. Bloom, you were cut off. I apologize. Could you all hold the noise down, please, ladies and gentlemen? Mr. Bloom: The proponent has requested two things. One, they were going forward asking us to modify their existing lease to accommodate certain concerns that the lender had, and they also requested that the City or the CRA be willing to sell them the property, which is on the tax rolls for approximately two million, seven hundred thousand dollars ($2,700,000). We raised the issue with the developer that, to us, it appears that the property was refinanced approximately two years ago, and that there would be deferred rent, currently due and owing, of approximately one million dollars ($1,000,000). When we looked at the financial information that was submitted to the CRA and the City, we were not satisfied with the detail, and felt it was appropriate to have that information audited. Now there was discussion with the Executive Director about retaining an accounting firm to conduct that audit. We've also recommended -- I've recommended to Counsel for the developer that it may be prudent for them to bifurcate the issues in attempt to proceed with the modification of the lease, separately from their desire to acquire the property. And that's where we stand today. Chairman Teele: Well -- but let's put this in the right -- in the full context. 2 September 24, 2001 Mr. Echemendia: Can I just clarify, Mr. Chairman, before you do? Chairman Teele: No, not yet. No. Let's put this in the full context. This matter was presented to us about four months ago as a mere administrative matter, in which we were to provide consent for the refinancing. The question was raised "How much do we get?" Nothing. And this thing has sort of snowballed since then. So, I mean -- I'm certainly not saying you tried to slip one over on us, Counsel, but one was almost slipped over on us. There was an argument that we weren't owed anything. So, obviously, when we figure out we're owed a million dollars ($1,000,000), everybody's now got the caution lights on and the brakes on, and we're going through this step by step by step. You're right, this is a deal that is owned and controlled by the CRA to date. However, it was a deal structured like that of all of the land leases, Poinciana Village, and all of the others in which there's a land lease at the bottom of this, which the City devised, and -- the Attorney is correct. What this proponent or this lessee would like to do is convert their leasehold interest into a fee issue -- a fee interest. And I think Mr. Bloom is correct: these are two separate issues. And if the issue is to refinance, I think we can give you full comfort that we can come to a simple agreement on that. It is what it is, and whatever is owed is owed, and we'll provide all of the releases, et cetera, based upon the amount that is owed, which, initially -- you all were talking about three hundred and then six hundred thousand. Now we're talking about a million. But the fact of the matter is, whatever the number is, I could assure you, we can agree to that. The harder issue is going to be to agree upon what is the value of the fee, the underlying fee issue. And I would suggest that this is something we need to look at in all of our leaseholds, because I'm very, very concerned that these leasehold interests work against the CRA and the overall public interest of letting property be in the hands of the marketplace, as opposed to property being in the hands of government. So we're relying upon the City Manager and the City Attorney on that, and to the extent that I, as Chairman, could ask the Manager, respectfully, if he would look at it in an expeditious fashion with his staff, you have my request. We all know you want to do it by the end of the year. I would assume you would like to close it, which means it needs to be done in the next thirty days. Mr. Echemendia: Commissioner, one point of clarification is, Mr. Bloom implies that a refinancing took place two years ago. In fact, that was -- Chairman Teele: Whether that did or didn't, let's don't get -- the question -- there's only one issue: How much money do you owe us in rental payments? The same thing is true of all of the leasehold interests. We've not collected from any of the leasehold interests that we have, at all. We've not collected from Poinciana Village. We may as well get into it. We've not collected from Biscayne View. We haven't collected from anyone. We let everybody walk away, because it was in our interest to try to keep these properties operational. The point is coming now where everybody's going to have to pay their rental fees that are due and owed. Your rental fees, that are due and owed, are roughly one million dollars ($1,000,000), if Mr. Bloom is correct. Are you proffering a number to us? Mr. Echemendia: Yes. We believe it's one million dollars ($1,000,000). What I want to clarify, to make it very simple, Commissioner Teele. There is a dispute as to whether the one million is due or not. If we go to closing, there is clearly no dispute. There would be a refinancing. And, Bill, I think you would agree with me that, if we do the Lehman refinancing, clearly the one million is due. Otherwise, we would have to litigate the one million dollars ($1,000,000). The fact is, it's debatable. We have a 3 September 24, 2001 legal opinion that says the one million isn't due. Bill says one million is due. If we close and we agree on a number, we're going to pay the one million, because there's -- Chairman Teele: But we're not going to agree -- Mr. Echemendia: -- going to be refinancing. Chairman Teele: But, Counselor, we're not going to agree on a number. The number that is going to be paid is the number that is due. There's nothing -- Mr. Echemendia: Exactly. I agree. Chairman Teele: There's no need for reasonable people to negotiate. Let's just get two green-eyed shade accountants to come in and do it. You give us your number; we'll look at our number, and, then, if there's a difference in the numbers, we can talk about that. Mr. Echemendia: Mr. Chairman, we're willing to live with your number. We just want you all to give us a number. We're trying to get the ball rolling. Vice Chairman Winton: But the point he's making is that the number, in their mind, is zero -- Chairman Teele: No. Mr. Echemendia: Correct. Vice Chairman Winton: -- if they don't close -- Mr. Echemendia: That's correct. Vice Chairman Winton: -- on this refinancing. And that the number -- and our number is a million. Their number is going to be zero if we don't close, and that gap is going to be determined by a judge, because that's where it's going to get settled. That's the message we just got, and I think that's a fair message. I think what we really do want to do is, let's get to point "A" before anything else. There isn't any reason to talk about much else. Get the stuff done that we need to get done, so that we can move in a direction where, potentially, we don't have any litigation where we can get a million dollars ($1,000,000). If they close on their financing, they're saying, we're going to get that million dollars ($1,000,000). Mr. Echemendia: That's correct. Vice Chairman Winton: So let's get the pieces done that we need to get done. Chairman Teele: No. We're going to get that million dollars ($1,000,000), plus -- Mr. Echemendia: Plus the fair market value. 4 September 24, 2001 Chairman Teele: The real issue is, what is the fair market value of the underlying leasehold, which is somewhere between six hundred thousand and three million dollars ($3,000,000) is the right number, and we'll figure that out. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Mr. Echemendia: And we're willing to live with your appraisal. Just bring it to a head so that we can cut a deal before the end of the year. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Teele: Well, why don't we do this: why don't we ask our staff to present us a -- Ma'am, please, let me talk now. Let us have our staff to present to us next week — next month a range on the fee issue, and an estimated number on the outstanding rental fees, in conjunction with the City Attorney and Special Counsel. Mr. Bloom: Commissioner, based upon the discussions we previously had with the City Attorney and representatives of the City Manager, it was recommended that there be an independent auditing firm retained to review their books and records, so we'd know what their gross income was, and we could then use that -- Chairman Teele: Has that been done? Board Member Sanchez: Has that been done? Mr. Bloom: That has not been done. The discussion centered around hiring Dick Berkowitz's firm. And the Executive Director was going to speak to you about whether a resolution would be required, and I'm not sure where that stands at this point. Board Member Regalado: Well, how long is that? Chairman Teele: Well, why don't we ask Mr. Winton -- Commissioner -- Board Member Winton, if you would pass -- offer a resolution -- Board Member Regalado: Three days. Board Member Sanchez: Thirty. Board Member Regalado: Thirty days. Vice Chairman Winton: How long ago was that? Is that what you asked? Board Member Sanchez: Thirty days ago? Mr. Bloom: It's probably been between 30 and 45 days ago we met. 5 September 24, 2001 Vice Chairman Winton: Wow! Chairman Teele: But, see, this is what I'm a little bit confused on now. I thought our resolution was that we turned the matter and referred the matter over to the City to give us advise on this matter. Vice Chairman Winton: I don't remember. Chairman Teele: We formally voted on it, I thought. Mr. Bloom: No, I don't recall specifically, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: I don't remember either. Mr. Echemendia: Commissioner -- Mr. Bloom: I believe your recollection is correct. It's really a question of who is going to retain the accounting firm to come up with the audit. Chairman Teele: I mean -- well, why have I been meeting with Asset Management on this? I mean, I wouldn't just normally -- I mean, I've been meeting with Asset Management in the City Attorney's Office. Why don't we ask Asset -- Mr. Echemendia: Mr. Chairman, can I clarify, please? Chairman Teele: Please. Mr. Echemendia: When we went in front of the City Commission, the issue was posed to Dena Bianchino, as Assistant City Manager, regarding hiring an accountant with respect to looking at the modification and looking at the value. What has arisen recently, since we discarded the modification, was that Bill suggested, we're not quite comfortable with the financial statements that you've submitted; we'd like to audit your financial statements. We'd like to get the ball rolling on that. Our books are open. We've offered them. Let's get that done so we can move on to the next step of updating the appraisal, and then coming before the Commission and deciding what the value is. That's all we're asking. Chairman Teele: Madam -- Vice Chairman Winton: You have certified, audited, financial statements? Mr. Echemendia: Yes, sir. We've had to submit it to federal agencies. Vice Chairman Winton: And we're uncomfortable with audited financial statements. Why is that? Mr. Bloom: The statements that we saw -- and Lori Billberry, from the City Manager's Office, looked at them. Annette Lewis looked at them. There are issues that would have to be addressed. Such as, you 6 September 24, 2001