LIKE THE COLD, THE BAYFRONT COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING A REGULAR MEETING, 20
[00:00:06]
21 DASH 07 TO ORDER.WE'LL START WITH THE PLEDGE AND COMMISSIONER FELIX WILL LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE.
THE. WE'RE ALL SO I'D LIKE TO GET A ROLL CALL GOING, CHAIRMAN MEDINA, PRESENT VICE CHAIRMAN JOHNSON HERE.
COMMISSIONER FELIX, COMMISSIONER BAILEY MR. FOSTER COMMISSIONER FILIBERTO AARON MR. PARR. YOU'RE A FROM KERRY ATTORNEY PATRICIA SMITH.
SO, GENTLEMEN, I JUST COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE WE WE RUN DOWN THE MINUTES AND SUCH, I WANTED JUST A BRIEF. EVERYONE, WE'RE ON A TIME CRUNCH.
IT IS ACTUALLY 18 OR THAT THAT CLOCK UP THERE IS TWO MINUTES SLOW.
SO WE'LL START WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES.
[ADOPTION OF MINUTES]
MOTION TO ADOPT SECOND.GOT A MOTION BY A COMMISSIONER PARR SECONDED BY VICE CHAIRMAN JOHNSON TO ADOPT THE MINUTES ALL IN FAVOR AND HE OPPOSE.
WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER BAILEY ON THE LINE.
SO LET'S GO STRAIGHT TO ITEM NUMBER ONE, BAYFRONT, SPECIAL MEETING, MADAM JONI.
[OLD BUSINESS]
GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.SO ITEM NUMBER ONE UNDER OLD BUSINESS IS THE CONSIDERATION OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH SHORE REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT, AS YOU HEARD ON MAY 11TH.
NORTH SHORE APPROACHED THE CITY TO AMEND THEIR REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT TO ALLOW FOR AN EXTENSION OF 18 MONTHS TO THE COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THE COMMERCIAL PHASE.
THEY HAVE ALSO INDICATED THEIR INTEREST TO BIFURCATE THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROJECTS AT PNC LAST NIGHT.
THE BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO ALLOW THAT SUBDIVISION, AND SO THAT'LL COME BEFORE CITY COUNCIL. BUT AT THIS TIME, WE ARE REVIEWING THE THE THE AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT, WHICH WAS NEGOTIATED IN COORDINATION WITH PATRICIA SMITH, OUR CITY ATTORNEY, NORTH SHORE REDEVELOPMENT AND MYSELF.
AND SO SOME OF THOSE CHANGES, AS REQUESTED BY THE BOARD, INCLUDE THE 18 MONTH EXTENSION FOLLOWING THE EXPIRATION OF THE BOND IN FAVOR OF THE CITY FOR 40000, A MINIMUM OF 40000 SQUARE FEET AS NEGOTIATED BY THE DEVELOPER.
AND THE ONE STICKING POINT I'LL JUST STATE FOR THE RECORD, IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, FOR MYSELF AND LOOKING AT THE AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT, PARAGRAPH FIVE OF THAT AMENDMENT DOES STILL ALLOW THE DEVELOPER TO BE ENTITLED TO THE ADVANCE TAX REBATE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION IF THEY DON'T PERFORM ON THE COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION.
SO WHILE WE DO HAVE A BOND IN OUR FAVOR, IF THIS IS APPROVED, THE PARAGRAPH FIVE STILL DOES ALLOW FOR THEIR ABATEMENT, THEIR REBATE FOR RESIDENTIAL.
SO WITH THAT, I'M REQUESTING A MOTION TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BAYFRONT CIERRA AND NORTH SHORE DEVELOPMENT LLC AND THE DEVELOPERS IN THE ROOM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
SO THAT WE CAN CLARIFY WE'RE GOOD WITH SEPARATING.
HOWEVER, THE BOND IS IS GOOD, RIGHT? THE BOND THERE IS GOOD.
SO IF WE'RE GOOD WITH SEPARATING THE TWO, WHAT IS THE ISSUE? ACTUALLY, WOULD WE HAVE A GUARANTEE WITH THE FUNDING? IS THAT CORRECT? SO I JUST WANTED TO GET THE RECORD, YOU KNOW, IN LAYMAN'S TERMS. SO WE DO HAVE THE VERIFICATION INDICATED IN THE AMENDMENT AND THAT WOULD SEPARATE THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PHASES OF THE PROJECT, THE THE BOND FOR THE COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION. THEY WOULD TAKE OUT A BOND IN FAVOR OF THE CITY.
SO IF THEY DIDN'T PERFORM ON THE COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION, THE CITY COULD PULL THAT BOND.
AND IT COULD YOU KNOW, WE COULD BUILD IT OURSELVES.
BUT MY MAIN CONCERN IS PARAGRAPH FIVE IN THE AMENDMENT, WHICH IS THE I'LL ACTUALLY READ IT OUT TO YOU. SEPARATION OF RIGHTS AND THE SEPARATION OF RIGHTS INCLUDE ALL RIGHTS, OBLIGATIONS AND LIABILITIES WITH RESPECT TO THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY ARE HEREBY SEVERED FROM THE RIGHTS, OBLIGATIONS AND LIABILITIES OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.
ANY SUCH LIABILITY OR DEFAULT UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WITH RESPECT TO COMMERCIAL PROPERTY SHALL NOT IMPACT THE RIGHTS, OBLIGATIONS, LIABILITIES OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND
[00:05:01]
VICE VERSA. AND SO THE ABATEMENT IS FOR THE COMMERCIAL.THE ABATEMENT FOR THROUGH THE REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT IS FOR THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE, WHICH INCLUDES THE FIFTY TWO POINT NINE DOLLARS MILLION WORTH OF INVESTMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL AND FOR COMMERCIAL.
SO WOULD YOU QUALIFY FOR THAT ABATEMENT SOLELY ON THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE.
OK, NOT TYPICALLY SO WHAT WHAT GIVES THE ABATEMENT IS THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT TO THAT.
AM I CORRECT? AND THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S THE SERIES WAS THE SERIES INTENT WHEN THIS WAS APPROVED? I'LL BE THAT COMMISSIONERS ANY ANY QUESTIONS? I'M USING A PARR.
I DON'T HAVE NECESSARILY QUESTIONS, BUT I DO WANT TO SHARE SOME THOUGHTS THAT I HAD IN THE TIME SINCE OUR LAST MEETING ABOUT THIS, AS I BELIEVE I WAS ONE OF THE FEW AND I WAS MR. BAILEY WAS HERE IS HE WAS THERE AS WELL.
PART OF THIS AGREEMENT WAS BOTH ASPECTS OF THE COMMERCIAL AND THE RESIDENTIAL AS A PACKAGE DEAL. LOOKING IN AND I WILL ALSO ADD THAT I HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH MR. STEELE AND.
I ASKED A VERY BLUNT QUESTION OF HIM, AND I'LL SHARE THAT QUESTION WITH YOU GUYS, AS I SAID, THAT WAS THE COMMENTS WERE MADE THAT COVID CAUSED THE LATE.
I SHARED WITH HIM THAT, YOU KNOW, I AM ALSO A LICENSED REAL ESTATE AGENT.
THIS IS BOOMING, THINGS ARE HAPPENING AND MORE OR LESS THROUGH THE CONVERSATION, IT CAME TO CONCLUSION. I ALMOST FEEL THERE IS IN THIS ASPECT A LITTLE BIT OF GRATITUDE THAT I KNOW I'VE I SHARED WITH HIM.
I WAS THANKFUL IS YES, THEY COULD HAVE POSSIBLY GONE HANDLED IT EVERYTHING TO TIME.
BUT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A SHELL, WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN TO SOMETHING OF OUR DESIRE AS FAR AS THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THAT WE ENVISIONED FOR THIS AREA.
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A BUILDING THAT IS JUST WAITING ON LEASES.
HE EXPRESSED TO ME THAT THOSE LEASES WERE ON THE VERGE OF BEING COMPLETED, READY TO GO.
AND THEN COVID HAPPENED AND THOSE LEASING PARTNERS WITHDREW.
THEY SAID IT WAS NOT TIME TO OPEN THE.
I ALMOST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR NOT RUSHING IT FOR THAT ASPECT OF IT, BECAUSE THAT COULD HAVE CAUSED US AN EMPTY BUILDING SITTING THERE.
NO OCCUPANT OF THAT COMMERCIAL.
SPACE AND JUST SITTING THERE BUILT OUT TO NOT THE DESIRE OF A COMPANY, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEIR. BUT INSTEAD, THEY MADE THAT DECISION TO WITHHOLD THAT AND HOLD BACK, SAYING, YES, COVID CAUSED US TO LOSE OUR BUSINESSES THAT WERE GOING TO BE COME IN THAT WERE SET UP. AND HE'S TOLD ME THEY'RE BACK COMING BACK TO HIM AND COMING TO HIM NOW TO GET THE SET UP. AND THAT'S WHY THIS EXTENSION IS IN PLACE IN.
I GO BACK TO WHERE I WAS WHEN THIS BEGAN BACK IN 2008, WHEN WE MADE THIS AGREEMENT, I REMEMBER IN THE MARINE BUILDING AT THAT VOTE, YOU KNOW, IT WAS A PACKAGE DEAL.
RIGHT NOW, I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD MOVE TO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, THAT DECISION THEY MADE. ACTUALLY WILL PROVE BENEFICIAL FOR US.
I'LL SHARE WITH YOU I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS EXTENSION SIMPLY BECAUSE IT WAS A PACKAGE DEAL THEN, AND I STAND BEHIND WHAT I VOTED FOR THEN.
I'D LIKE TO SEE IT COME TO FRUITION AS INTENDED AND NOT JUST BUILT OUT AS A SHELL FOR UNKNOWN COMMERCIAL BUSINESS, AND I APPRECIATE THAT, COMMISSIONER PARK.
COMMISSIONER BAILEY IS IN ATTENDANCE AT THIS TIME.
I WANTED TO TO JUST ASK YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO DENY AND YET I'M HEARING THAT THERE'S SEPARATION AND WE DO HAVE A GUARANTEE TO WHERE I'M GOING.
MADAM JONIE IS IF WHAT IS IT THAT WOULD HAVE YOU SUPPORT THAT SEPARATION? IT WOULD BE AN AMENDMENT TO PARAGRAPH FIVE THAT WOULD NOT ALLOW THE DEVELOPER TO BE ENTITLED TO THE REBATE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION IF THEY DIDN'T PERFORM ON THE COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION.
AND YET AT THE LAST MEETING, THEY SAID THEY WANT TO DEVELOP THAT COMMERCIAL PORTION.
THEY WERE PRETTY ADAMANT ABOUT DEVELOPING IN I RECOLLECTING CORRECTLY.
AND SO I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY THAT WAS AN AGREED UPON.
IT WAS REQUESTED BY ME TO THEIR ATTORNEY AND IT WAS DENIED THAT THE DEVELOPER HAD A BOND IN FAVOR OF THE CITY AS REFERENCED IN THE AMENDMENT, AND SO THAT THEY DIDN'T SEE A NEED FOR THE AMENDMENT TO PARAGRAPH FIVE.
THE COMMISSIONERS, ANY ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER FILIBERTO? IN A BAILEY, I KNOW YOU'RE JUST COMING IN.
[00:10:01]
THEN MY QUESTION WAS, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN ANSWER IT OR MAYBE GROWTH MANAGEMENT, THE 40000 ALMOST THAT AGREEABLE, AGREEABLE UPON STAFF OR.RIGHT. SO AND I'LL LET PATRICIA IN AND LARRY SPEAK TO THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT FROM AND THERE IS A CALCULATION IN YOUR PACKET.
IT IS CALCULATING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOT OF COMMERCIAL, DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF USE THAT THEY BRING IN AS A TENANT.
SO WHEN WE DISCUSSED IT AS A GROUP WITH THE DEVELOPER, WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT THE MAXIMUM WITH THE MINIMUM COULD BE BECAUSE WE CAN'T GUARANTEE A MAXIMUM.
IT ALL DEPENDS ON THE END OF USE.
SO THAT'S WHERE THE 40000 CAME CAME FROM.
THE MR. FOSTER. I JUST WANT TO SAY.
THE PURPOSE OF THE BOND IS TO BUILD THE COMMERCIAL, RIGHT? RIGHT, AND THEY AGREED TO THIS BOND, RIGHT, OK.
SO THE COMMERCIAL IS GOING TO BE BUILT, WE ASSUME.
I CORRECT TO ASSUME THAT IT IS ALMOST A.
WHAT'S THE GUARANTEE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE BUILT IF IT'S NOT IN THE BOMB BEFORE? RIGHT. WELL, IF THEY DO NOT COMPLETE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMMERCIAL BY AT THE TIMELINE SET, THE EXTENSION SET, THEN THE CITY COULD PULL THE BOND IN ORDER TO COMPLETE IT. BUT THAT'S STILL EVEN IF THEY YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY THEY DO HALF OF IT, LET'S SAY THEY DO NONE OF IT AND THEY WALK AWAY.
THEY ARE STILL ENTITLED TO THE REBATE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION, WHICH IS 85 TO 90 PERCENT OF THE ENTIRE REBATE.
RIGHT, BUT THAT REBATE SUNSET, WHEN SO THE REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT AND THE REBATE WILSON WILL EXPIRE BY 2024 WHEN THE SIERRA SUNSETS.
WE'RE LOOKING AT. YEARS, MAYBE BY THE TIME THEY COMPLETE AND GET THEIR CEO, WE'RE LOOKING AT MAYBE A YEAR OR TWO YEARS OF THE REBATE, THEY ARE ENTITLED TO THEIR REBATE STARTING IN FISCAL YEAR 2022.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT TWO YEARS.
IS THAT 800000 A REBATE? RIGHT, AND. THEY WALK AWAY.
THEY GET THAT THEY STILL GET THAT REBATE.
WHAT, A MILLION DOLLARS OR SOMETHING? THE BANAS WAS THE MODEL, WE CAN PULL THE BOND.
THERE IS NO BOND AMOUNT MENTIONED AND I'LL LET THE DEVELOPER SPEAK TO THAT, THE BOND AMOUNT. AND COMMISSIONER BAILEY HAD REQUESTED IT IN THE LAST MEETING THAT WE HAD A BOND AMOUNT OF, I THINK SEVEN POINT SEVEN MILLION, WHICH WAS, I THINK THE VALUE OF THE COMMERCIAL PORTION WHEN IT WAS PREPARED BY FISH KIND AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE ECONOMIC IMPACT. THE I THINK THE CONCERN OR QUESTION WAS THE VALUE OF OF MATERIALS AND THE BUILDOUT OF THE COMMERCIAL MIGHT VARY WITH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO THERE WAS NO AGREED UPON AMOUNT FOR THE BOND, SIMPLY A BOND IN FAVOR OF THE CITY TO CONSTRUCT THE 40000, A MINIMUM OF 40000 SQUARE FEET.
OK, BECAUSE WHEN WE BOUGHT OUR APARTMENT SEVERAL TIMES AND.
BEAUTIFUL PLACE. BUT THE PLACE WHERE THE COMMERCIAL SPOT TAKES AWAY THE BEAUTY, I WOULDN'T UNDERSTAND WHY WOULD THEY WOULD NOT BUILD SOMETHING THERE.
THEY CAN'T BUILD A PARKING LOT BECAUSE IT'S A GATED APARTMENT COMPLEX.
IT WOULDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE WHEN THEY COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF COMMERCIAL.
ORIGINALLY, WAS IT DONE WHEN YOU WAS IN? IT'S THE BOTTOM. NO, NO, I CAME IN IN TWENTY NINETEEN FEBRUARY, THIS STARTED DISCUSSIONS, I BELIEVE, IN TWENTY SEVENTEEN BUT REALLY WITH COUNSEL STARTING IN TWENTY EIGHTEEN.
IT SEEMED LIKE WE WERE DOING A WHOLE NEW DEAL.
ARE WE DOING A WHOLE NEW DEAL OR MODIFYING? YEAH, THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THEIR REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT AS IT RELATES TO THE REBATE, THE TIMELINE AND THE SUBDIVISION OF THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL BASIS OF THIS TAX ABATEMENT, WHICH WAS TIED TO THE APARTMENT, WAS IN THE ORIGINAL DEAL.
THE TAX REBATE, THE ADAM TAX REBATE IS TIED TO THE OVERALL PROJECT.
SO IT'S INCLUSIVE OF EVERYTHING AS PROPOSED AS PART OF THE PROJECT THAT CAME BEFORE THIS AREA. SO IT WOULD BE THREE HUNDRED AND TWENTY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, LUXURY UNITS, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS 54000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE.
I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY WOULD WE TAKE AWAY THAT TAX REBATE WHEN APARTMENTS ARE
[00:15:02]
BUILT? IT DEALT WITH COVID, I SPOKE TO MR. STILL HE HAD A DEATH IN HIS FAMILY FROM COVID, I MEAN, I COULDN'T OPERATE ON THE SAME CONDITIONS. MOST BUSINESS, YOU KNOW, SOME BUSINESS CLOSED BECAUSE OF CAUVERY STILL IN COVID. THEY'RE GOING TO BE TRYING TO BUILD A COMMERCIAL, I BELIEVE WILL BE AT THE BACK END OF COVER, BUT.ALL THIS ALL GOING TO PLAY OUT IN THE FUTURE? WELL, LET ME BE CLEAR, IT'S NOT ASKING TO TAKE AWAY THEIR RESIDENTIAL REBATE, NOR THEIR REBATE IN GENERAL. IT IS MEANT TO MY MY ISSUE WITH THE AMENDMENT AS IT IS, IS WITH PARAGRAPH FIVE, WHICH ALLOWS THEM TO BE ENTITLED TO THE REBATE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION, EVEN IF THEY DON'T PERFORM ON COMMERCIAL.
MR. BAILEY. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, I APOLOGIZE FOR MY TARDINESS.
I JUST WANT TO JUST CHECK AND SEE.
I KNOW STAFF HAD PROVIDED THE COUNCIL AN EMAIL WITH SOME HISTORY.
DID YOU GO OVER SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THE CITY HAS DONE TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE DEVELOPER? WE HAVE NOT TALKED ABOUT THAT NOW.
WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO HIGHLIGHT JUST SOME OF THE THINGS WHERE THE CITY HAS TRIED TO MAKE ACCOMMODATIONS TO TRY TO MAKE THINGS EASY AS POSSIBLE FOR DEVELOPERS ALONG THE WAY, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MAKE THAT CLEAR ON THE RECORD, THE WAY THAT WE ACTUALLY YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IT'S BEEN MISREPRESENTED PREVIOUSLY HOW THE CITY HAS ACTUALLY TREATED THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT AS WE MAKE SURE THAT THE RECORD SHOWS, ESPECIALLY FOR THE NEWER BOARD MEMBERS, WHAT THAT LOOK LIKE AND WHAT IT MEANT.
I'M GOING TO JUST STEP AWAY AND GRAB MY NOTES.
THERE WAS AN EMAIL EARLIER, MAYOR, I MEAN, CHAIRMAN.
OK, SO I SENT AN EMAIL EARLIER THIS AFTERNOON, AND IT WAS MEANT TO SUMMARIZE AND GIVE CONTEXT FOR THE HISTORY WITH NORTH SHORE AND THE CITY OR THE SIERRA.
SO THERE ARE A COUPLE OF ITEMS OF NOTE.
WE HAVE MADE SEVERAL ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPER.
WE HAVE ALLOWED REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS.
WE HAVE ACCEPTED IRREVOCABLE LETTERS OF CREDIT FOR SITE WORK.
WE HAVE MADE ACCOMMODATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION DELAYS BY ALLOWING CONDITIONAL CEO'S CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY FOR AN INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS RATHER THAN THE OVERALL PROJECT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PHASE.
WE HAVE ENTERED INTO JOINT PERMITS FOR THE FUNDING AND FOR THE I'M SORRY, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE DRAIN OFF SITE DRAINAGE DITCH, WHICH INCLUDED FUNDING SUPPORT FOR THE LAND ACQUISITION OF THE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND THE DESIGN AND ENGINEERING OF CONSTRUCTION, WHICH WAS DONE IN-HOUSE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION TO DITCH.
THE CITY REVIEWED NINE HOUR TAPS REVISIONS TO APPROVE PLANS BETWEEN JANUARY 20 18 AND JULY 20 20, WHICH WHICH IS QUITE A BIT.
AND THERE IS A TIMELINE AS WELL WHERE YOU CAN SEE HOW LONG WESTWIND STAFF RECEIVES THE REVISION, STAFF RECEIVES THE AACAP AND THE LENGTH OF TIME AND HOW MANY REVISIONS IT GOES BACK AND FORTH ON THAT ONE HOUR SO THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE TIMELINE, STAFF ISSUES, THEIR REVISIONS AND THEIR COMMENTS, THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT IT TAKES FOR THE DEVELOPER TO BRING THE COMMENTS IN, THE PLAN BACK TO THE CITY, AND THEN IT GOES BACK AND FORTH MULTIPLE TIMES. SO THAT'S JUST TO, I GUESS, CORRECT THE RECORD FROM THE MAY 11TH MEETING, WHICH IMPLIED THAT THE CITY AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT STAFF AND LAND DEVELOPMENT STAFF WERE NOT ACCOMMODATING. THE OTHER IS THAT THE OTHER TO NOTE IS THAT THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER DID ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AFTER CONSTRUCTION HAD STARTED.
SO TYPICALLY WHEN WE ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, IT IS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT AND IT OUTLINES WHAT THE CITY GETS AND WHAT THE DEVELOPER GETS AND THE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE BETWEEN THE TWO ENTITIES.
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS NOT DID NOT GET DRAFTED UNTIL AFTER THEY BROKE GROUND.
SO WE HAD TO DO A LOT OF BACK AND CLEANUP AND TRY AND CATCH UP.
SO THOSE ARE JUST THE KEY LEVEL, HIGH LEVEL GAMES.
IN YOUR OPINION, JOAN, I'M JUST CURIOUS, KNOW WHAT YOUR EXPERIENCE YOU DO YOU FIND THAT THE ORIGINAL WRITING OF THIS WAS REAL WELL WRITTEN ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND THE TAXPAYERS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT OR THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT? THE READ THE REBATE IS MY MAIN CONCERN, BUT BOTH.
OK, SO I WAS INVOLVED IN THE DAY, SO I CAN SAY THAT I DO FEEL CONFIDENT IT WAS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY, THE REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN.
[00:20:04]
AND IF IT WERE ME SITTING IN THAT SEAT, I WOULD NOT HAVE AGREED.I WOULDN'T WOULDN'T HAVE BROUGHT THAT FORTH TO THE SIERRA.
AND WE WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND BEYOND JUST HAVING A VERY FAVORABLE CONTRACT AT THE INITIAL.
WE WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND PAST THAT.
A COUPLE OF THINGS I'M NOT SURE IF YOU USE THEM OR NOT.
I WANTED TO NOTE BACK TO SOME OF MY OLD NOTES FROM BACK AT THAT TIME.
AND, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE OTHER THINGS I DON'T KNOW IF YOU MENTIONED WERE THE PERMITTING.
DON'T COMMITTEE, WHICH WE GAVE THEM SOME PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT ON REZONING, WHICH WE APPROVED FOR THEM. CONDITIONAL USE WE APPROVED FOR THEM, THERE WAS NO INTER LOCAL, I BELIEVE THAT OR ILFC THAT WE DID FOR THEM, AND THEN THERE WAS A.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE WERE NOT LEGALLY ABLE TO, BUT WE ATTEMPTED TO ALSO GIVE A ADDITIONAL. MONETARY INCENTIVE THROUGH THE UTILITIES AGREEMENT, SO ANYHOW, JUST TO MAKE SURE ALL THOSE ARE PART OF THE RECORD AND EVERYBODY IS CONCERNED THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
THANK YOU. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEFORE WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, MISS JOANNY. THANK YOU.
WE'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AT THIS POINT.
SO ANDREW STEELE, NORTH SHORE DEVELOPMENT, I HAD WRITTEN OUT WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY TONIGHT BEFORE BEFORE I CAME UP, AND MY FIRST STATEMENT ON HERE IS I WANTED TO THANK THE CITY PLANNING AND ENGINEERING STAFF FOR HELPING US QUICKLY GET THROUGH THE PLANNING AND ZONING PROCESS TO HAVE OUR PLAN APPROVED LAST NIGHT, WITHSTANDING A FEW COMMENTS THAT WE HAVE ON THE ON THOSE DOCUMENTS, WHICH WE HAVE REVISED FURTHER DIRECTION AND FINALIZED FOR THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL ON JULY 1ST.
ALSO WANT TO THANK MR. BROWN, MAYOR SMITH, MS. COCKCROFT, ALONG WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING GROWTH MANAGEMENT CITY STAFF, FOR ASSISTING US IN PROVIDING THE LANGUAGE THAT WE BELIEVE ADHERES TO SIERRA'S BOARD MOTION.
WE HAVE WORKED OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS WITH WITH THE STAFF TO.
TAKE THE LANGUAGE THAT THEY HAVE GIVEN TO US OR WE'VE WORKED ON TOGETHER, BUT WE HAVEN'T PUSHED BACK ON REALLY ANYTHING THAT THE CITY HAS HAS ASKED US TO DO EXCEPT FOR THE LIABILITY THAT CROSSES BETWEEN THE RETAIL AND THE APARTMENTS.
I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE. I CAN'T HAVE LIABILITY GO FROM THE APARTMENTS TO THE RETAIL BECAUSE I CAN'T GET FINANCING.
I IF AND I MADE THIS THIS ANALOGY IF IF KENNY AND I'M SORRY IF VICE CHAIRMAN AND CHAIRMAN WERE WORKING ON A PROJECT TOGETHER AND VICE CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONER FOSTER, WE'RE WORKING ON A PROJECT TOGETHER AND COMMISSIONER FOSTER'S PROJECT WENT SOUTH, WOULD IT BE FAIR TO HAVE THE MAYOR PAY FOR A MR. FOR CHAIRMAN FOSTER'S OR SORRY FOR COMMISSIONER FOSTER'S PROJECT? THAT'S THE WAY I CAN SIMPLIFY THIS DOWN.
I'M GOING TO HAVE TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF INVESTORS.
I HAVE ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIVE INVESTORS IN THE AQUA APARTMENTS PROJECT.
I'M PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE A DOZEN TO 20 INVESTORS IN THE RETAIL SIDE OF THE PROJECT.
THOSE INVESTORS AND THE LENDERS MORE SPECIFICALLY WILL NOT ALLOW ME TO START CONSTRUCTION ON THAT PROJECT WITHOUT HAVING NOTE, WITHOUT HAVING A SPLIT OF LIABILITY BETWEEN THE TWO SIDES. IT'S VERY SIMPLE.
I CAN'T START THE PROJECT WITHOUT THIS BEING DONE AND I CAN'T HAVE LIABILITY ON ONE TO THE OTHER. WE'RE OFFERING A BOND THAT GUARANTEES THAT THE PROJECT WILL BE COMPLETED.
WE HAVE A SET DATE. WE HAVE WE HAVE WE HAVE ADDITIONAL HURDLES.
WE'RE PUTTING A SITE PLAN TOGETHER.
AND WE HAVE A SITE PLAN DELIVERED TO THE CITY BY DECEMBER 1ST, 2021, WHICH IS THAT WHICH IS THE DATE THAT WAS SET OUT IN THE DOCUMENT FOR US TO BE DONE WITH CONSTRUCTION.
I REALLY WISH WE COULD BE DONE WITH CONSTRUCTION.
NOW, IF IT WAS IN MY POWER, I WOULD HAVE HAD IT DONE.
IT WAS NOT WE HAVE TO HAVE LEASES IN PLACE BEFORE WE CAN START CONSTRUCTION ON ON PARCELS. WE'RE TAKING THE RISK BY PUTTING THIS BOND INTO PLACE AND STATING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BUILD IT NO MATTER WHAT THAT MEANS.
THAT'S MORE MONEY OUT OF OUR POCKET TO BUILD IT.
THAT MEANS IF IT FAILS, THEN IT'S ON, THEN IT'S ON US AND WE LOSE MONEY.
THE CITY DOESN'T LOSE ANY MONEY HERE.
WE BUILD IT, WE PAY THE TAXES AND WE'RE GETTING A REBATE ON THE TAXES THAT WE PAY.
SAID HE DOESN'T LOSE ANYTHING HERE AND IT'S AN INCREMENTAL FINANCING, SO WHATEVER YOU'RE GETTING PAID IN TAXES RIGHT NOW, YOU'RE GOING TO GET NO MATTER WHAT.
WE BUILT NOTHING, THEN YOU'D STILL BE GETTING WHAT YOU WHAT YOU WOULD BE GETTING RIGHT NOW. IN THREE YEARS TIME, WHEN THE WHEN THE TIFF RUNS ITS COURSE AND THE CIA RUNS ITS COURSE, THEN YOU GET ALL THE TAXES.
IT'S GOING TO TAKE US THAT LONG TO DEVELOP IT ALL.
AND WE'RE GOING TO BE HERE FOR ANOTHER FIVE YEARS DEVELOPING THE THE WESTSHORE PROJECT
[00:25:01]
ESCHER PROJECT. AND MORE AND MORE AND MORE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE 200 MILLION DOLLARS OF INVESTMENT IN THE CITY AND.THIS IS A THIS IS A MILLION DOLLARS, NOT A BIG DEAL.
IT'S NOT. I CAN'T START THE PROJECT WITH THE LEGAL LIABILITY THAT I HAVE RIGHT NOW.
THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS, SIR? MR. STEELE, PLEASE STAND FAST.
YES, SIR. YES, CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, THEN COMMISSIONER FOSTER STRAIGHT AFTER.
SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND CLEARLY.
OR WITH, I GUESS, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS IN REGARDS TO SECTION FIVE, IN REGARDS TO LIABILITY, YES, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO GET THE ABATEMENT REGARDLESS.
NO, YOU WON'T EVEN GET THE ABATEMENT.
BUT NOT ONLY THAT, BUT YOU WON'T HAVE THE FINANCING TO EVEN BUILD ANYTHING OVER THERE.
RIGHT. RIGHT. IT'S A DOUBLE EDGED SWORD.
LOSE IT IN A CITY DOESN'T GET THEIR CONSTRUCTION AND WE DON'T GET OUR REBATE, SO WE CAN'T EVEN START. OK.
I'M GOOD FOR NOW. THANK YOU, MR. FOSTER. AT MR., YOU SAID A COUPLE OF THINGS AT.
OH, I DON'T WANT YOU TO REPEAT IT.
THAT'S HOW MUCH INVESTMENT YOU PUTTING IN THE CITY.
THE NEXT APARTMENT OR DEVELOPMENT AQUA IS APPROXIMATELY 54 MILLION DOLLARS OF INVESTMENT SO FAR. WESTSHORE IS APPROXIMATELY 46 MILLION DOLLARS OF INVESTMENT.
EACH PROJECT WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 65 MILLION DOLLARS OF INVESTMENT AND THE RETAIL PORTION WILL BE APPROXIMATELY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS IN INVESTMENT.
SEVEN POINT SEVEN DOLLARS MILLION IN VALUE IS NOT HOW MUCH IT COST ME TO CONSTRUCT IT.
THE EQUIPTMENT PROJECT IS WORTH ABOUT 70 MILLION DOLLARS.
THE WESTSHORE PROJECT WILL BE WORTH ABOUT 65 MILLION DOLLARS.
SO THERE'S THERE'S VALUE ON TOP OF THE CONSTRUCTION COST.
EXACTLY, AND. HYPOTHETICAL IF ALL THE DEVELOPMENT WAS DONE.
THAT COMMERCIAL PIECE WAS COMPLETED.
THE REST OF THAT DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT THAT MERCIAL PIECE.
CUSTOMERS, I THINK GOING OVER THERE, WE GET WE GET PUSHBACK ABOUT THERE NOT BEING ENOUGH DENSITY IN THE AREA. A LOT OF RETAILERS WANT THE YOU KNOW, WE CALL UP A RETAILER AND SAY WE HAVE A SITE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME SEE IT? AND WE'RE BUILDING 850 APARTMENT UNITS HERE AND THEY SAY, WELL, CALL US BACK WHEN YOU GET 850 APARTMENTS.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE ARE WE GET THAT PUSHBACK A LOT.
BUT WE ALSO GET PEOPLE WHO ARE WHO HAVE AND AND HOPEFULLY WILL CONTINUE TO COME TO US AND SAY WE'RE GOING YOU KNOW, WE'RE WE'RE MOVING ALONG WITH THIS, YOU KNOW, BEFORE YOU COMPLETE, YOU KNOW, ALL THE UNITS.
BUT WE ONLY WE ONLY NEED, YOU KNOW, A HALF A DOZEN TENANTS LIKE THAT TO COME WITH US BEFORE THE 800 UNITS ARE COMPLETE.
WHEN THE AARON NEWS ARE COMPLETE AND THE VALUE OF EVERYTHING KIND OF GOES UP.
IF I HAD IT, IF I HAD ALL THE APARTMENTS ALREADY DONE.
AND. YOU INVESTORS ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS COMMERCIAL PIECE, YOU'RE INVESTED FOR THE COMMERCIAL. YOU ALREADY HAVE THEM.
YES, SIR. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE THIS.
YES, ON YOUR BACKSIDE, AND THEY WOULD LIKE ME TO HAVE THIS STARTED AND COMPLETED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. HOW MUCH IS THAT? WE'VE BEEN WE'VE BEEN THEY'VE BEEN SITTING THERE FOR TWO YEARS NOW WITHOUT ANY RETURN ON THEIR INVESTMENT. YEARS WITHOUT A RETURN ON THEIR MONEY.
CORRECT. HOW MUCH IS THIS BOND COSTING YOU? I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY.
WE HAVE AN INSURANCE AGENT WHO GOES THROUGH A BOND COUNCIL AND AN.
THIS TAX ABATEMENT AND ALL THE DEVELOPMENT, IT STOP YOU FROM DOING THE DEVELOPMENT? THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. THAT TAX ABATEMENT ON APARTMENTS.
THE APARTMENTS AND THE COMMERCIAL PORTION OF THE PROJECT, DEPENDING ON WHICH AGREEMENT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, WHERE WE'RE DISCUSSED IS TWO PHASES.
AND SO THE PHASE ONE APARTMENTS WAS ALWAYS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL, APPROXIMATELY A YEAR BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL.
AND IF WE HAD TO IF WE HAD COMPLETED THE APARTMENTS IN 2019 INSTEAD OF 2020, WE WOULD HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED A TAX ABATEMENT FOR 2020, BUT WE DIDN'T FINISH THE APARTMENT PROJECT UNTIL 2020.
SO WE'RE WE'RE ALREADY BEHIND SCHEDULE ON THE 27TH PAYMENTS THAT WE WERE EXPECTING TO RECEIVE. SO YOU DON'T BUILD A COMMERCIAL.
YOU BUILD APARTMENTS BEFORE YOU BUILD A COMMERCIAL?
[00:30:02]
I DID. YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.SO IS YOUR INTENT IS TO GET THAT COMMERCIAL DONE? YES, SIR. IT IS MONEY SITTING THAT I'M PAYING FOR CURRENTLY AND NOT MAKING ANY INVESTMENT RETURN ON BAD INVESTMENT RIGHT NOW.
I JUST WANT US ALL TO BE MINDFUL WE'RE ON A TIME CRUNCH TODAY ON THIS.
COMMISSIONER BAILEY. I THINK THE CHAIR AND DID HAVE A QUESTION.
HAVE YOU BEEN TOLD BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THE MILLION DOLLARS IS NO BIG DEAL AND THERE'S ALL THIS MONEY FLOWING IN AND EVERYTHING'S FINE OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED TO SEPARATE THESE INTEREST.
ARE YOU BEING TOLD THAT THERE'S NO MEANS, NO PATHWAY WITHOUT OTHER THAN KNOW, WITHOUT AMENDING THIS OR GET THE REBATE AGREEMENT WAS AT THAT RIGHT THERE? THE MILLION DOLLARS DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING.
THROW THAT OUT AND YOU JUST NEED FINANCING FOR YOUR COMMERCIAL PIECE.
ALL YOU DO IS COME TO US IN THE SAME PROCESS AND ASKED TO I MEAN, WE'VE LAID OUT A PROCESS, CORRECT. STAFF IS LAID OUT PROCESS FOR YOU TO ESSENTIALLY DIVIDE THOSE PROPERTY SO YOU CAN GET FINANCING.
ALL RIGHT, I MEAN, THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE MORE COMMENTS, CHAIRMAN, BUT THAT'S THE MAIN POINT THAT I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT.
THANK YOU, MR. STEELE. THANK YOU.
SO BEFORE YOU STEP AWAY, ONE MORE, THAT BOND, AS COMMISSIONER BAILEY REQUESTED LAST MEETING TO BE SEVEN MILLION.
IS THAT WHAT THE BOND IS? TYPICALLY, A BOND IS LIKE LIKE AN INSURANCE POLICY.
ONCE, ONCE. SO WE HAVE TO HAVE THE SITE PLAN DONE.
WE HAVE TO HAVE THE BASICALLY A GC, GIVE US A CONSTRUCTION PRICING ON WHAT'S GOING TO COST TO CONSTRUCT A PROJECT, AND THEN THE BOND WILL BE SET TO THE CONSTRUCTION COST.
LUMBER PRICING ALONE HAS GONE UP 300 PERCENT IN THE LAST EIGHT MONTHS AND GONE DOWN, YOU KNOW. 25 PERCENT IN THE LAST IN THE LAST WEEK, SO IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SAY EXACTLY WHAT THAT NUMBER IS GOING TO BE, AN EVEN GUESSTIMATE, MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING I WOULD IMAGINE.
I WOULD IMAGINE OUR CONSTRUCTION COST IS GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE AROUND 115 TO 125 DOLLARS A SQUARE FOOT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THE ISSUE AS FAR AS THE VALUE OF THE BOND I SPOKE WITH ARE OUTSIDE CONSTRUCTION ATTORNEY AND I ALSO SPOKE WITH THEIR ATTORNEY.
ESSENTIALLY HOW THESE BONDS WORK IS THAT THE INSURER HAS TO KNOW WHAT THE VALUE IS.
ESSENTIALLY, THE INSURER IS PROMISING THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS WILL BE BUILT ACCORDING TO THE TERMS. IF IT IS NOT THE DEVELOPER, THEY WILL BUILD IT.
THEY WILL GIVE THE FUNDING TO US.
WELL, THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE OBLIGATED THEMSELVES TO UNTIL THEY KNOW WHAT EXACTLY IS BEING BUILT. THERE IS NO SITE PLAN HERE.
THAT'S WHY I PUT IN THE REQUIREMENT THAT THEY HAVE TO GIVE US THE THE SITE PLAN IS ESSENTIALLY LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT HAVE AN INSURANCE AGENT THAT YOU YOUR FAMILY HAS FOR A WHILE. SO YOU CALL UP YOU KNOW, I GOT THE 16 YEAR OLD YOUNG SON AND I GOING TO GET HIM A MUSTANG. WHAT DO YOU THINK MY INSURANCE VALUE IS GOING TO GO UP? HE CAN GIVE YOU A BALLPARK FIGURE, BUT HE'S NOT GOING TO LOCK HIMSELF IN UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY GIVE HIM THAT CAR, LET HIM SEE WHAT THE FEATURES ARE, WHATEVER.
THEN HE'LL TELL YOU, HEY, THIS IS HOW MUCH YOUR INSURANCE IS GOING TO BE ABOUT THE SAME WAY THEY GOT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE LIABLE TO BUILD BEFORE THEY TELL YOU WHAT THE VALUE IS. THEY WANT TO PROTECT THEMSELVES, TOO, BECAUSE IF THEY MAKE IT TOO LOW, IT DOESN'T BENEFIT THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT CHARGING APPROPRIATELY.
BUT RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A CONCEPT PLAN.
I DID HAVE THEM PROVIDE AN UPDATE, ITS CONCEPT PLAN, BUT IT'S STILL A CONCEPT PLAN.
THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD SET THEIR VALUE BASED UPON WHAT WE ALL AGREE, THAT THIS IS WHAT HAS TO BE BUILT. AND WE DON'T KNOW THAT YET.
IT WAS BASED ON 40000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL, YES, AND PLUMB LINE, THERE WERE FORTY THOUSAND. LIKE I SAID, WE DON'T HAVE THE EXACT SITE PLAN, BUT I DID TALK WITH MEMBERS OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT. THEY LOOKED AT THE WHAT THE DEVELOPER PROVIDED.
THEY LOOKED AT THE SITE AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, BASED UPON OUR KNOWLEDGE, THAT IS, IT SOUNDS REASONABLE. CAN THEY GUARANTEE THAT NUMBER IS THE MAX? WELL, YEAH, THEY COULD IF THEY HAD A SITE PLAN AND THEY KNEW EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING TO BE BUILT, THEN THEY CAN DO THEIR CALCULATIONS.
BUT WITHOUT HAVING THE SITE PLAN, THEY CAN.
THIS IS THE BEST THEY CAN SAY.
THIS NUMBER SOUNDS REASONABLE.
IT'S WITHIN REASON AS FAR AS WHAT OUR REGULATIONS ARE.
AND THAT'S THE BEST THAT ANYBODY CAN DO WITHOUT ACTUALLY HAVING A DEFINITIVE SITE PLAN.
THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM OUR COMMISSION, APART FROM MR. CHAIRMAN? YES, MR. STEEL. QUESTION. CECILE.
[00:35:03]
I'M GOING TO TRY AND KEEP IT WHENEVER WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, LET'S ALL JUST ASK AT THAT SAME TIME.AND JUST REAL QUICKLY, WITH YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE'VE DEMONSTRATED IS THE TYPES OF BUSINESSES, COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WE WANT IN THERE IS THE QUICKEST TIMELINE TO GET THERE.
WOULD THAT BE IN CORRELATION TO APPROVING THIS? YOU SAY THAT IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
I'M TRYING TO SAY, WHAT'S OUR QUICKEST WAY TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE HAVE THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES WE ARE DESIRING IN THAT AREA? SO IF WE WERE TO GO WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THIS, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS ALL GOING TO GET HELD UP WITH YOUR FINANCING SITUATION, GOING BACK TO YOUR INVESTORS.
WHEREAS IF WE WERE TO APPROVE IT, WOULD THAT BE THE QUICKEST TIMELINE TO GET US TO OUR DESTINATION OF DEVELOPMENT? YES, I HAVE AN APPROVAL NOW AND ALSO HELD TO HAVING A SITE PLAN DONE IN SIX MONTHS, IF THERE'S ANY CIVIL ENGINEERS HERE.
ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO WHO KNOW THAT BUSINESS SIX MONTHS TO GET FROM FROM A CONCEPT TO A, YOU KNOW, A SITE PLAN SUBMITTED WITH WITH THE CIVIL ENGINEERING THAT WE NEED AND THE AND THE SITE ENGINEERING THAT WE NEED WITH THE WITH A BUILDER SUIT USES, IT'S GOING TO TAKE EVERY DAY OF SIX MONTHS TO GET DONE SO THAT I'LL BE HONEST WITH THE TIME AS A CRUNCH, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR THE AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BAYFRONT.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
OK, OUR. AND YOU KNOW, THE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.
I SEE IT REAL QUICK, I'LL ASK YOU FIRST.
WHEN DID YOU FIRST WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT YOU OR ANYBODY WHO WAS WITH YOUR WITCH BOSS HAS REPRESENTED THE CITY THAT YOU GUYS WANTED TO DIVIDE UP THE PARCEL'S? TO DIVIDE, TO DIVIDE THE COMMERCIAL FROM RESIDENTIAL, WE SUBMITTED A PLOT PLAN BACK IN THE TWENTY EIGHTEEN. AND WAS THERE FURTHER CONVERSATIONS FROM TWENTY EIGHTEEN? YES. AND CHAIRMAN, IF I CAN, I JUST WANT TO ASK A QUESTION TO JOAN TO ALONG THAT SAY THANK YOU, MR. STEELE, EVERYONE.
THANK YOU, MR. STEELE. AND MS. AND JOE AT THE PRIORY KNOW WHERE I'M GOING WITH A LITTLE BIT, BUT AS A AS THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS AGREEMENT, THIS REPRESENTATIVE THEY MADE IS THEY TALKED ABOUT THIS IN 2018 AND THEREAFTER.
WAS IT TALKED ABOUT SINCE YOUR TENURE HERE? WAS IT WAS A CONTINUING DISCUSSION WHILE YOU WERE HERE AS WELL.
THEY MENTIONED AT ONE TIME ABOUT NEEDING TO DO THE SUBDIVISION.
IN FACT, ANDREW AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS, I THINK, ON THE PHONE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THIS CAME UP IN THE PAST. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE WAS EITHER TRANSITION WITH THEIR FORMER BEFORE MIGUEL CAME, IT WAS JIM TRANQUILA AND THEN JUST KIND OF DROPPED OFF.
I LOOKED AND, YOU KNOW, WE SAW IN THE MINUTES THAT IT WAS REFERENCED AND I THINK IN MINUTES AND FROM TWENTY EIGHTEEN OR TWENTY NINETEEN.
HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT FROM THE DEVELOPER.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY SUBMITTED THEIR SITE I'M SORRY, THEIR SUBDIVISION OFFICIALLY TO STAFF UNTIL APRIL.
IT ALL PREDATES COVID, CORRECT.
THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ASYLUM? PUTTING IT UP. OK.
NOW, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION CHAIRMAN LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO GO WITH STASS RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR THE AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH BAILEY BETWEEN THE BAYFRONT SCIARRA AND THE NORTH SHORE DEVELOPMENT.
THERE ARE SECOND OR DISCUSSION.
JERELL, SECOND FOR DISCUSSION, I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BAILEY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FILIBERTO, JUST MY THOUGHTS ON THE MATTER.
THE CITY WAS VERY ACCOMMODATING WITH NORTHSHORE DEVELOPMENT, WITH THE REZONING, WITH THE PERMITS, WITH THE ADDITIONAL USES, ET CETERA.
I DO HAVE SYMPATHIES FOR THE DEVELOPER CONCERNING COVID DID HIT.
I DO WANT TO SEE COMMERCIAL AND BAYFRONT COMMUNITY DISTRICT.
HOWEVER, I DO I AM CONCERNED ABOUT PARAGRAPH FIVE WITH SEPARATION OF RIGHTS.
SO I AM STUCK BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE HERE AND AS A REASON WHY I'M TAKING STASCH RECOMMENDATION. BAILEY, YOU MADE THE.
YEAH, IF I MAY, I WAS JUST MR. FILIBERTO WHEN IT'S BECAUSE I HAVE NO PROBLEM DEFERRING TO HIM REAL QUICK.
I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF THINGS YOU PROBABLY NOTICED ALONG THE WAY.
WELL, THE SEPARATION THIS IS PREDATES.
EVEN ACTUALLY, I THINK HAVING THE ACTUAL AGREEMENT TOGETHER AND IT PREDATES COVID AND IT WAS IT WAS NOT A NEW ISSUE.
[00:40:02]
THE SECOND THING IS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ACROSS THE WAY, IT HEADS TO BEDS, I UNDERSTAND THAT'S A CONCERN.OUR MR. FOSTER TALK ABOUT IT AND AT LEAST MAKE INQUIRIES IN THAT REGARD.
THOSE ARE COMING. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT COMMERCIAL IS TRULY RELIANT UPON THAT AND FOLLOWS THAT, WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT WE'RE GETTING COMMERCIAL, WHICH TIES BACK INTO WHAT THE VICE CHAIRMAN SAID. AND I BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE VICE CHAIRMAN, I THINK HE'S TRYING TO BE WISE AND SAYING, NO, I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING.
BUT I THINK THE ACTUAL LOSE LOSE SITUATION IN THIS SITUATION IS US GETTING OUT A BUNCH OF MONEY FOR A WEAK AGREEMENT WHERE WE'VE BENT OVER BACKWARDS OVER AND OVER AND OVER OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, OVER SEVERAL YEARS NOW AND THEN TO PAY FOR SOMETHING, TO CHANGE THE TERMS, TO PAY FOR SOMETHING THAT'S AT THIS POINT IS GOING TO BE COMING ANYWAYS AND IN THE FUTURE. WE DID NOT WHAT THE CITY DID NOTHING WRONG.
AND THE WAY WE DID IS WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING WE POSSIBLY COULD.
AND I THINK THE LOSERS WOULD BE US TAKING THIS STEP AND CREATING THIS SITUATION WHERE OUR TAXPAYERS HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT WHEN IT'S ALREADY COMING AT A NATURAL PACE, WHICH WHEN IT CAME, WOULD BEGIN WITH.
WHEN WE STARTED OUT THIS CONTRACT, IT WAS NOT COMMERCIAL AND AND RESIDENTIAL.
WHY WEREN'T THEY SEPARATED? WHY WAS THIS AN ALL OR NOTHING? BECAUSE WE DID NOT WANT RESIDENTIAL.
IT'S GREAT TO HAVE PEOPLE THERE, BUT WE WANTED THE PEOPLE THERE FOR THE COMMERCIAL.
IF IT DID NOT DRAW THE COMMERCIAL IN THE TIME LINE THAT WAS STATED IN THE AGREEMENT, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WERE ACCEPTING.
AND I THINK WOULD BE WRONG FOR US TO STEP BACK.
I THINK WE WOULD BE BAD REPRESENTATIVES.
REMEMBER, HE'S NO, WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE OTHER SIDE.
WE ARE THE REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE PEOPLE.
AND I DON'T THINK WE'D BE A GOOD REPRESENTATIVE FOR OUR BOSSES BY MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS IN THE WAY IT IS.
BUT THE IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER WHEN YOU LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS, LOOK AT THE NUMBERS FROM THE ORIGINAL ONE AS FAR AS COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL VALUE, VERY LOW IN LINE WITH WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE. THAT'S WHY I MEAN, THERE WAS I WANTED JOBS.
I MEAN, IF YOU GO BACK TO TO THE TO THAT MEAN I WENT TO JOBS, I WANTED A JOB REQUIREMENT.
I STILL THINK THAT ANY TYPE OF INCENTIVE WE GIVE SHOULD COME WITH SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. WHAT TYPE OF JOB, WHAT'S THE WAGES THEY BRING IN IN SOMETHING LIKE A CHECKER'S OR SOMETHING THAT'S NOT GOING TO HIT IT FOR ME.
I'M NOT SUBSIDIZING TRUCKERS AND APARTMENTS.
I CANNOT DO THAT IN GOOD FAITH.
AND I AND YOU GUYS HAVE HEARD ME WAX AND YOU KNOW, YOU'VE HEARD ME YOU'VE HEARD ME OVER MANY TIMES BECAUSE. NO, I KNOW MR. PARR HAS BEEN HERE MANY MR. FILIBERTO HAS BEEN IN VICE CHAIR HAS BEEN UP HERE WITH ME.
BUT THE REST OF YOU GUYS I KNOW YOU'VE PROBABLY HEARD IT FROM THE OUTSIDE.
AND IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE GOOD SENSE FOR FOR OUR SIDE TO DO THIS.
AND IF BOTH IF THEY CAN HANDLE THE FINANCING BY JUST SIMPLY SPLITTING IT, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I I'M WILLING TO ACCOMMODATE.
I'M NOT SAYING IT'S NOTHING AGAINST THE THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AGREEMENT.
IT'S NOTHING AGAINST TRYING TO STOP THEM FROM DOING ANYTHING.
BUT IF WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING, GO THROUGH THE PROCESSES, I WOULD BE VERY AMENABLE TO ALLOWING THIS SPLIT UP FOR THEIR FINANCING PURPOSES.
BUT THAT MEANS THAT THE REBATES OUT THE DOOR, BECAUSE IT WAS ALL OR NOTHING AND WE'VE ALREADY MOVED THE GOALPOST MANY TIMES.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER FELIX.
WHERE IS THAT LIVE US WOULD WE HONOR WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING TODAY? WELL, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE TO THE, YOU KNOW, FUTURE OF THIS PROJECT? SO THEY WOULD.
APPARENTLY, WHAT I'VE HEARD ALREADY FROM THE APPLICANT IS THAT HE HE HAS THAT LIABILITY AND HE'S NOT SURE HOW HE CAN MOVE FORWARD, CAN'T MOVE FORWARD.
THAT'S. AND I REALLY YOU KNOW, I GET MR. BAILEY IS COMING FROM COMMISSIONER BILL IS COMING FROM AND AND I GUESS IT'S NOT AN EASY DECISION, BUT IN GOOD FAITH, IN GOOD FAITH, I'M LOOKING AT THIS APPLICANT THAT POOR IN THEY LISTED.
ALL THE DIFFERENT PROJECTS, THEY PUT A SONG TO IT.
IN GOOD FAITH, MY OPINION, I'M WILLING TO TO HONOR.
WE REQUEST. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER PARR.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD, I MEAN, YOU BROUGHT UP MR. FELIX, YOU BROUGHT UP ALL THE PROJECTS.
IF ONE ASPECT OF ONE PROJECT IS NOT COMPLETED TO THE STANDARD THAT THEY'VE SET UP, THAT'S GOING TO COMPROMISE ALL OF THEIR PROJECTS.
I FEEL THAT WOULD BE A HINDRANCE IN THIS SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ALLOW IT TO GO AS IT'S INTENDED.
BE THE MAXIMUM POTENTIAL BY BY APPROVING.
I'LL JUST ADD THAT I APPRECIATE THAT I YOU KNOW, YOU GOT TO LOOK AT I'D LIKE TO WEIGH IN A LITTLE BIT, COMMISSION FOSTER AND I'LL GET BACK TO YOU.
[00:45:03]
BUT, YOU KNOW, IN THE SAKE OF TIME, YOU'VE GOT TO LOOK AT THERE ARE THREE MEMBERS ON THIS ON THIS BOARD. AND YOU'RE RIGHT, COMMISSIONER BAILEY, I WAS IN THE AUDIENCE WHEN THIS CAME UP SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE YEARS.WHETHER IT WAS WARRANTED OR NOT, THERE IS A FACTOR TO HEADS AND IN BED ROOFTOPS, SO TO SPEAK, FOR COMMERCIAL THAT THEY WEREN'T THAT FROM THE OFFSET.
PERHAPS NOT. BUT TO YOUR POINT, WE'RE THE STEWARDS.
OF THE TAXPAYER. WE'RE WE'RE THE ONES THAT HAVE TO LOOK OUT FOR THE TAXPAYER AND AND BEING A STEWARD AND UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WE ALWAYS HAVE TO PLACE THAT RESPONSIBILITY.
AND THE BURDEN OF THAT RESPONSIBILITY.
IT'S ON US AND THE PREPONDERANCE OF THAT EVIDENCE.
IT'S ON US FOR US TO MAKE A VISUAL AS IN AS SOMEONE IN THE AUDIENCE YEARS AGO AND NOW AS CHAIRMAN OF THIS BODY, I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER BAILEY SAID.
HOWEVER, I WAS LOOKING FROM THE OFFSET TO GET THEM TO A POINT WHERE THEY COULD EVEN WITH THAT PARAGRAPH FIVE, THEY DID GET THE BOMB.
SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THEY DID WERE ABLE TO GET THE BOMB.
BUT THERE'S BEEN SO MANY OTHER CONCESSIONS AS YOU LIST OVER THE YEARS THAT IS WELL, ABOVE ALL, WORKING HAND IN HAND WITH WITH THE APPLICANT.
COMMISSIONER FOSTER. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.
WE WANT COMMERCIAL GROWTH AND PALM BAY.
MR. STILL SAID HE HAS INVESTORS RIGHT NOW IS ON HIS BACKSIDE TO DEVELOP A PROPERTY WILLING TO PUT UP A BOND.
WHAT A SITE PLAN, I'M QUITE SURE THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU A SIDELINE.
WE HAVE A BOND. WILLING TO DO THAT, MOVE FORWARD.
THEY NEED THE REBATE, SEPARATE THE TWO IF YOU CAN'T SEPARATE THE TWO, THE LIABILITY INVOLVED AND YOU CAN'T MOVE FORWARD, THAT'S WHY I ASKED THEM QUESTION.
ROGER. SO FOR THE COMMERCIAL, IT'S GOING TO AND IT'S GOING TO HANDCUFF HIS ABILITY TO GET THE COMMERCIAL DONE, IT PUT IN SO MUCH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND PALM BAY IN THAT AREA IN A BLIGHTED AREA OF PALM BAY.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY IN THIS BOARD DROVE AROUND THAT AREA, I'M QUITE SURE ALL I DID AND I RECENTLY HAD.
YOU KNOW, MY OFFICE IS NOT TOO FAR FROM A BLIGHTED AREA.
THAT AREA IS GETTING DEVELOPED AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ARE GOING IN THAT GROUND.
AND THE ONE THING THAT EVERYONE IS MISSING IS COMMERCIAL BUSINESS.
AND. I DON'T ALWAYS DISAGREE WITH STAFF, BUT I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH THEM ON THIS ONE. RIGHT. THANK YOU.
AND WE HAVE A SECOND MAYOR CLOTHES COMMISSIONER.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.
IT'S REAL QUICK. I WANT TO CORRECT THIS PREMISE THAT THERE WILL BE NO COMMERCIAL WITHOUT THIS. IT'S NOT THAT THERE WILL BE NO COMMERCIAL WITHOUT THIS, THERE'S NO COMMERCIAL WITHOUT THE SEPARATION OF THE TWO, AND I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY FROM STAFF OR THIS BOARD OR COUNSEL SUGGEST THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE A ROADBLOCK IN THAT REGARD.
WHY WOULD THEY NOT BUILD IT ON THEIR OWN REGARDLESS? WHAT THIS HAS TO DO IS THE REBATE AND WHAT STAFF IS ASKED FOR IS ACCOUNTABILITY BECAUSE WE NEVER AGREED TO BUILD RESIDENTIAL AND SUBSIDIZE RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS.
OR A DEVELOPER, AND I THINK THAT ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC WHO HAS BEEN PAYING CLOSE ATTENTION TO THIS WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT'S NOT THE WAY WE NEED.
THIS IS NOT STOPPING THE COMMERCIAL AND THE OTHER THING THAT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT IS THAT ALL THE PROJECTS, IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE PROJECTS, EVEN ACROSS THE STREET, 65 MILLION DOLLARS OF RESIDENTIAL, I REALLY WANT THAT.
I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO STOP SOMEBODY FROM BUILDING THEIR PROPERTY RIGHTS.
IS THAT REALLY WHAT I WANT? IS A BUNCH OF PEOPLE THERE KNOW WHAT I WANT IS COMMERCIAL THERE. HOW MUCH COMMERCIALS THERE? FIVE MILLION DOLLARS.
ONE SEVENTH. WE'RE MAKING NO PROGRESS, WE'RE KEEPING THE CITY BUILT OUT IN THE SAME WAY THAT IT CURRENTLY IS, WHICH WE SAY IS A PROBLEM, AND WE'RE EXPANDING THE PROBLEM.
THANK YOU. I'VE GOT A MOTION AND I'VE GOT A SECOND ALL IN FAVOR I ALL OPPOSE.
[00:50:03]
OK, LET'S ROLL CALL CHAIRMAN MEDINA I VICE CHAIRMAN JOHNSON THE COMMISSIONER FELIX NAY.MR. BAILEY I MR. FOSTER. THE MISSIONER, FILIBERTO.
I MR. PARR A MOTION FAILS FOR THE THREE HOUR ENTERTAINING MOTION.
MUCH TO ACCEPT THE REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BAYFRONT SIARA AND NOSIER DEVELOPMENT LLC.
I'M A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER PARR SECOND, I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FOSTER.
ALL IN FAVOR ONCE DISCUSS OUR CHAIRMAN, WOULD THE BOARD CONSIDER WHAT STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED AND HAVING THE AMENDMENT IN SECTION FIVE, SUCH THAT WE WILL HOLD THAT RESIDENTIAL UNTIL THE TIME WHERE THE COMMERCIAL IS BUILT FOR TRYING TO SPEED UP THE PROCESS? AND WE WANT ACCOUNTABILITY, SOMETHING OF THAT REGARD.
AND I MIGHT NOT BE ARTICULATING PROPERLY EXACTLY HOW JOAN MIGHT HAVE PROPOSED.
OUR STAFF MIGHT PROPOSE IT, BUT SHOULD WE AT LEAST ENTERTAIN? THAT IS WHY I'M ASKING THIS BOARD.
SO I KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT SAID WHAT HE SAID EARLY EARLIER AND HE THAT WAS HANDCUFFING HIM. SO THAT WOULD BE A STICKLER POINT WITH THIS BOARD.
CONSIDER THAT. I THINK THAT THAT THAT'S THE THING THAT'S THAT'S THE WHOLE REASON WHY I'M SUPPORTING US RIGHT HERE, BECAUSE HE SAID IN ORDER TO GET THE COMMERCIAL, YOU NEED THE FINANCING. IF THE PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO FINANCE THE COMMERCIAL, THEN IT'S SITTING VACANT AGAIN OR ANOTHER.
WHO KNOWS HOW LONG. SO THAT'S WHY I WAS CONFLICTED ON THIS.
BUT LOOKING AT IT, WE WE NEED COMMERCIAL.
AND I'M WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER BAILEY.
WE ARE ADVOCATES FOR THE COMMUNITY.
BUT, YOU KNOW, SITTING I DON'T WANT TO SAY SITTING ON OUR HANDS, BUT HOLDING THIS UP, WHICH IS WHAT I SEE WE'RE HOLDING UP FROM THEM DEVELOPING SOMETHING.
AND IT'S NOT ABOUT ACCOMMODATING IS ABOUT GETTING THINGS DONE WITH THIS.
AND THAT'S THAT'S HOW I SEE IT.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET THINGS DONE.
AND YOU CAN'T GET NOTHING DONE WITH NO MONEY.
AND EVERYBODY KNOWS A LOT OF THESE DEVELOPERS, THESE THESE BIG BALLERS, THEY USE OTHER PEOPLE'S POCKETS, BUT THOSE PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO USE THEIR OWN MONEY IF ALL THESE LIABILITIES ARE HERE.
SO THAT'S I WAS CONFLICTED, BUT I'M SUPPORTED AS IS.
I SEE. WE GOT FIVE MINUTES LEFT.
OK, LISTEN, I'M CALLING THE QUESTION.
WE GOT A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR.
PASSES FOUR TO THREE, A ROLL CALL.
I REMEMBER THE NAME VICE CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, I MR. FELIX I MR. BAILEY MR. FOSTER I MISSIONER FILIBERTO MISSIONER PARR I THIS IS FOR THREE.
CONGRATULATIONS, COMMISSIONER REPORTS.
[COMMISSIONER REPORTS]
ARE THERE ANY ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS, ANY CARDS.WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER REPORTS.
I'D LIKE TO ADJOURN THIS MEETING SO THAT WE COULD GO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE BORKOWSKI FESTIVAL OUTSIDE.
I DO. I DO HOWEVER DO WANT TO QUICKLY REPORT ON WHAT JUST HAPPENED.
I THINK WE NEED TO GET BEFORE COUNCIL MEETING.
I'M GOING TO ASK ARE OUR CITY MANAGER, JOAN CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE WITH JOAN AND OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO COMMENT ON THAT.
WHAT WAS LAST SAID, WHICH IS, IS THIS THE FASTEST WAY TO GET IT DONE? WE WANT TO GET THINGS DONE. MY MY CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF AND THEY CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IS THAT GETTING THE SITE PLAN WOULD MAKE MUCH MORE SENSE.
SO I THINK WHEN THIS COMES TO COUNCIL, WE SHOULD SAY MAYBE WE NEED TO GET THE SITE PLAN FIRST. THAT'S THE THAT SHOULD BE A PRIORITY.
ANY OTHER REPORTS HEARING? NONE OF THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.