Loading...
Minutes 10-30-03 MINUTES OF THE CONTINUED REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 30, 2003 AT 6:30 P.M. Present Larry Finkelstein, Chairman Douglas Hutchinson, CRA Director Jeanne Heavilin, Vice Chair Lindsey Payne, Board Attorney Alexander DeMarco Susan Vielhauer, Controller Don Fenton Annette Gray, Administrative Assistant Charlie Fisher Absent Michelle Hoyland Henderson Tillman Call to Order Chairman Finkelstein called the continued Community Redevelopment Agency meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. The Recording Secretary called the roll and a quorum was present. Chairman Finkelstein requested that City staff present the first item. VI. Public Hearing E. Code Review 1. Project: Sign Code Amendments - Sign Heights Owner: City Initiated Description: Request for Amendments to the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 21, Signs, to provide definitions for monument and pole signs and establish maximum sign heights that correspond with road type Ed Breese, Principal Planner, stated that the item is staff generated. Since staff has been reviewing many new site plans they have had to deal with signage issues. The City Code currently allows 20' pylon and pole signs. Developers are more interested in getting visibility and marketability on their signs, especially smaller sites, and are requesting larger type signs. Currently, staff is reviewing the Sign Code and should have the results to present to this Board, the Planning and Development Board and the Commission within the next six months. Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Staff would like to have this one item of the Sign Code approved for adoption and is requesting the following amendments to the sign code as follows: · Pylon signs would be eliminated from the code entirely if they could be freestanding or on freestanding poles, or other freestanding supports, so that the bottom edge of the sign is at least 6' or more above grade. · A definition of a monument sign would be added to freestanding signs. Currently it talks about ground-type signs, but staff is getting very specific with the monument type sign and that definition would read: "^ freestanding sign situated directly on the ground or mounted completely along the bottom of the sign cabinet to a Iow-profile base or pedestal." · Amend the definition of freestanding signs for monument signs. Ground signs can be supported by poles but cannot have more than two feet of area beneath the sign face. With the landscaping requirements, this two- foot space would be hidden. · Freestanding signs must have a numerical address prominently located on the sign for ease of finding a location. · There will be different requirements for signs along different types of right- of-ways. For a shopping center or mall, at least four acres in size, a monument sign cannot exceed 15' in height and must include the project name and be used for a directory of the businesses located within that shopping center. If the property is on the corner, it would be allowed a 10' second monument sign as a directory for the businesses located within that center. · For all single tenants and all multiple tenant sites under four acres in size, staff tried to downsize the size of the monument sign by the number of drivable lanes in front of it. For roadways with six travel lanes or greater, there is a 12 foot height limitation; travel lanes of four would have a maximum of 8 foot high monument signs; and staff is also recommending other criteria that may limit or go below the 8 foot requirement, such as the type of surrounding properties, the speed limit and the scale of the project in which it is located in front of. For travel lanes of two, monument signs would be no greater than 6' in height and the four-lane highway regulations would also apply here. · In the Central Business District there would be a 5' height limitation on monument signs. This could be superseded by any planning documents for certain planning areas within the CRA and any future plans for which there is specific design criteria. These changes also would not supersede any planned industrial or commercial district sign programs that have been in place or are being proposed to be in place for any new projects. Pending redevelopment for Heart of Boynton, MLK and the surrounding 2 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 areas, those specific plans would take place over the general sign code and the amendments. Lastly, staff is not trying to make a lot of signs non-conforming and start fining people and creating problems. Their goal is to look at new development with a new set of regulations. Mr. Breese concluded his presentation. Mr. Fisher inquired how the Planning and Development Board voted on the item and Mr. Breese stated they voted 6-0 in favor of the changes. Mr. Fisher asked if existing businesses would be grandfathered in and Mr. Breese said that they would. The only time this would not apply is if a sign were damaged more than 50%. Vice Chair Heavilin asked if an existing business wished to change their sign, would they have to comply with the new regulations. Mr. Breese said that each case would have to be looked at individually. Vice Chair Heavilin felt it was a great code change and would like to have it apply to everyone eventually. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that the CRA Fa(~ade Grant Program does provide matching funds for signage. Mr. Fisher asked if there has been community input on these changes. Mr. Breese responded that these new amendments would only apply to new development and would not require current signs to conform. Therefore, the business community has not been consulted. Mr. Fenton asked about the cost of a monument sign versus pylon. Mr. Breese stated that they have not looked at the costs and it would depend upon the grade of the monument sign. Mr. Fenton asked why this change came about, and Mr. Breese said that staff is beginning to see smaller lot owners trying to get more visibility by having a higher sign that could add to visual blight along the right-of-way. Mr. DeMarco inquired if City staff contacted the County's Planning and Zoning Department to see what they are doing regarding signs. Mr. Breese said that they have not, but it is something they could look into. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that this City has been working on this for many years and thinks this is a step in the right direction. Chairman Finkelstein opened the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Fisher raised concems that the business community and the County were not included in the plan. He would like to see them included in the plan for their input. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the public had been included in all previous workshops and businesses were not opposed to the new code. They just did not feel that existing signage should have to come up to the new code. This was due mostly 3 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular CommunitY Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 because of the costs associated with complying with the code. Mr. Fisher did not want to see new businesses coming in and be limited in their signage that would make it difficult for them to be seen. Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, stated that typically when Land Development Regulations are amended, they try to get public input. What is before the Board tonight is an interim fix and staff is reviewing the entire sign chapter in a comprehensive manner. When this is completed, it will be presented to the public to provide ample opportunity for them to provide input. Staff considers this to be merely some of the basics that they would like to get in place with regard to height only. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to recommend approval of the Request for Amendments to the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 21, Signs, to provide definitions for monument and pole signs and establish maximum sign heights that correspond with read type. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. Motion carried 3-2 (Messrs Fenton and Fisher dissenting). IX. New Business (Heard out of Order) Commissioner Fisher requested that Item F. be moved up to be heard first. F. Consideration of waiving the title work for Boynton Seafood, Inc. Development Regions Core Grant Contract (addressed out of order) Mr. Hutchinson reported that the CRA took over the Core Grant Program from the County, and Ms. Vielhauer is administering the Program. In this particular instance, a question has come up about placing a lien on the property to protect the CRA's position on the grant. There is an issue on whether the Board wants to do the title work to determine where that lien would fall. Mr. Hutchinson reported that staff called the members and everyone was comfortable moving forward with the project and the grant. The item is on the agenda tonight for formal approval. Chairman Finkelstein disagreed with the memo. He recalled saying that he was in favor of the lien, which would cost around $500, in order to protect the CRA and its position in the project. When Ms. Vielhauer informed him that the applicant did not want to assume the cost for a title search, he did not think that he would have told her to go ahead with the grant without doing the necessary title work. He is not in favor of moving forward unless the title work was done in order to protect the CRA's lien. Mr. Hutchinson informed Chairman Finkelstein that the CRA would have a second lien on the property, but this could not be ascertained without a title search. Vice Chair Heavilin also disputed that she would have ever agreed to move forward without a title search on any property that would put the CRA at risk. Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Mr. Fisher inquired who would pay for the title search and was informed it would be the applicant. Mr. Fisher asked what a title search would provide, and Chairman Finkelstein stated it would show what liens there are on the property. He recalls that the applicant stated that they have no liens, but a title search would confirm this. When the CRA records its lien, it would go by the date where it would fall. Mr. Fisher inquired if this would affect awarding the grant. Chairman Finkelstein stated if a search revealed that the CRA might be a fifth or sixth position lien holder, the CRA might never recover its money. Attorney Payne pointed out that there is also an issue of ownership and they are not sure who owns it, since it is not the applicant. Vice Chair Heavilin pointed out that there could be liens on the property that the applicant is not aware of and without doing a title search, this could not be determined. Mr. Fisher said that this is a small business that has been in Boynton Beach for some time and has received other grants. He did not think it was fair to impose this cost on small businesses while they are trying to encourage them to do business in the City. Chairman Finkelstein stated that Mr. Fisher could make a motion that the CRA absorb the cost of the title search. Mr. Fenton disagreed with this and noted that anyone who wants to get any kind of a loan has to pay for the title search; the bank does not pay for it. This is common business practice. He would like to move forward with the grant, but felt that this should be the applicant's responsibility. Chairman Finkelstein inquired if the application stated who would pay for a title search. Mr. Hutchinson was not certain and would check on this. Mr. Fenton felt that this would set a bad precedent and applicants would want the CRA to absorb all the costs. Chairman Finkelstein asked what the total amount of the grant was and was informed that the CRA would contribute $10,000 and the County would contribute $15,000. Vice Chair Heavilin asked if the County required a title search. Mr. Hutchinson responded that it was up to this Board solely. Mr. Fisher inquired that if he made a motion for the CRA to pay for the title work up to $500, would this set a precedent for the next entity applying for a grant. Attorney Payne suggested that the Board establish a policy whether to pay for title searches or not pay for them. Mr. Fisher noted that this particular applicant has received previous grants from the City and it has always benefited the City. Vice Chair Heavilin stated that a title search is part of doing business. By the CRA not paying for this, does not mean that the CRA is trying to penalize small businesses. 5 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Motion Mr. Fisher moved to approve obtaining a title search on the property and that the CRA pay for up to half the costs of that title search. Motion died for lack of a second. Chairman Finkelstein asked if the CRA was requesting that it have a second position on the property. Mr. Hutchinson said that the Board needs to determine what it wants. Mr. Fenton pointed out that it can only be determined what the CRA's position would be if a title search were done and then the Board can decide whether to proceed at that point. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to amend the Development Regions Core Grant Program to require the applicant to secure a title search and title insurance and that the CRA be placed in either first or second mortgage lien position. Mr. Hutchinson noted that the County has already approved the grant and that the CRA inherited two of these grants that had been approved. As a result, the CRA's position may have to be overlooked. The CRA could then come up with a policy to research this for future applicants. Mr. Fisher seconded the motion to allow discussion. Chairman Finkelstein noted that if a future applicant already had a first and second mortgage on the property, the Board could amend the rules at that time. Right now, the CRA has no rules. Therefore, the Board is requiring that a title search be done so that the CRA would have a first or second position. Mr. Fisher felt it would be more realistic to require a third, fourth or fifth position, since many businesses already have first and second mortgages. He noted that the purpose of these grants was to attract small businesses and this requirement would deter many businesses by putting these types of restrictions on them. Mr. Hutchinson noted that to receive a grant, you must create jobs, and the lien would remain on the property as long as the job criteria is met, which is 20 months. Mr. Fisher inquired if the grants were for improving businesses. Chairman Finkelstein explained that the grants are not for construction improvements; the grant could be used for equipment and job creation. If the recipient of the grant receives the money and added four new employees and two month's later said business is slow and was getting rid of those four employees, they would still have the money if it was handled as suggested by Mr. Fisher. With the CRA lien on the property, the CRA would have the right to take back the $30,000 if they do not keep the jobs in place. That is the whole intent of the grant. This grant is not a CRA Program; it was inherited from the County. 6 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Mr. Fisher asked if the operator of the business could speak. Members did not think that this was relevant at this time. Mr. Fenton asked Vice Chair Heavilin if she would amend her motion to make the Board's position a third position and she said that she was not willing to do this. Vote Motion carried 4-1 (Mr. Fisher dissenting). Chairman Finkelstein asked the Board if they wanted the new regulations to apply to the application before the Board. Motion Mr. Fenton moved that the applicant, Boynton Seafood, Inc., Development Regions Core Grant contract adhere to the previously adopted motion of the Boynton Beach CRA. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin. Motion carded 4-1 (Mr. Fisher dissenting). B. Consideration of the Arches Contract (Heard out of Order) Mr. Hutchinson reported that they went over the contract and there is a marked-up copy that they are going to read into the record. Chairman Finkelstein noted that they met with the applicant and many changes were made that will be read into the record. Mr. Hutchinson distributed the documents to the Board. Nancy Graham of Boynton Ventures I, LLC (The Arches) appreciated the time taken by the staff and the Chairperson to work with them and go through the documents. The changes that have resulted will clarify certain questions. Ms. Graham reported that they have no objections to the changes that will be read into the record. The changes were also reviewed by Attorney Payne, who agreed with all of them: Attorney Patrick Brown read the changes into the record as follows: Direct Incentive Funding Agreement · Page 2, the definition of "commencement" has been changed by stdking the words "of demolition and/or site work" that appears in two places. The words "vertical construction" would be substituted in place thereof. · Page 2, "Project Increment Revenue," the base year is 2003 and the base year number would be "$31,129." · Page 2, in the definition of "Public Improvements" the words "utilities to be dedicated to the public" have been stricken and the word "parking" has been added between the words "public" and "spaces" and a new exhibit has been added entitled "Delineation of Public Areas attached as Exhibit C." ^ new exhibit will be prepared that will show the walkways and the public plaza. 7 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 · Page 2, the definition for "Public Utilities" has been deleted. · Page 3, Section 4, the paragraph has been cleared up by changing the word "materially" to "substantially" and adding after the words "Public Improvements" - "or the number of commercial or public parking spaces." · Page 3, Section 4, the word "substantially" has been defined to mean "any change that would trigger a major site plan modification." · Page 3, Section 5, an outside limit on the time for construction has been set to two (2) years from the effective date of the agreement. · Page 4, Section 9, a sentence has been added at the end that reads "Provided, however, that if the CRA decides to borrow the money to fund the $2 million for the Advance Funding Agreement, the project increment revenues may be pledged for such debt." · Page 4, Section 10, "Advance Funding," after the words "advance fund" the words "a portion of" the Project "Increment Revenues" have been added. · Page 5, In Section 13.2, wherever it states "Other Public Areas," these words will be deleted and the words "Public Plaza and Walkways' will be substituted. This will make it consistent with the exhibit. · Page 5, Section 13.2.1, "Exhibit C" has been added. Wherever the words "Other Public Areas" appear have been deleted and the words "Public Plaza and Walkways" have been substituted therefore. · Page 7, Section 16, the word "Site" has been deleted. · Page 8, Section 18, "Assignment," a new sentence has been added to read, "Provided, however, that any assignee hereunder shall assume all of the obligations of the developer under this agreement." · In Exhibit D, "Declaration of Restrictive Covenants for Public Plaza and Walkways" all the language in the Exhibit relating to useful life that was tied to an IRS Code provision has been deleted and in its place the words "thirty (30) years" from the opening of the project, will be added. · Exhibit D, the words "site plan" have been deleted and the words "delineation of public spaces" will be substituted therefore. · Exhibit C, the words "useful life" have been deleted and the words "thirty (30) years" have been substituted on page 1 and 2 of the Exhibit. ADVANCE FUNDING AGREEMENT (UNDER DIRECT INCENTIVE PROGRAM) · Page 2, the same definitional changes were made to "Commence" or "Commencement" to "Project Increment Revenue" and setting the base at $31,129. · Page 2, the definition of "Public Improvements" was changed in accordance with the eadier agreement. · Page 3, the definition for "Public Utilities" has been deleted. · Page 3, "Schedule of Values" the words "and then multiply that factor by the total costs for the parking garage to arrive at the allocation of the cost of public spaces to all spaces." 8 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 · Page 3, "Soft Costs," the word "general" has been stricken and the words "and general conditions" have been added after the word "overhead." In the next line after the words "incurred during" the words "the construction of" have been added, as well as the words "development of the" before the words "Public Improvements." · Page 4, the word "materially, has been changed to "substantially" wherever it appears. · Page 4, first paragraph, the words "the number of commercial or public parking spaces has been added after the words "Public Improvements." · Page 4, the definition of "substantially" has been changed to "major site plan modifications." · Page 4, Section 5, "Commencement of Construction" has the same change. There is an outside date for commencement of two (2) years from the effective date. · Page 4, Section 6, the word "Project" has been added before the words "Completion Guarantee," wherever it appears. At the end of the first sentence the period has been changed to a comma and the following words have been added, "and the CRA shall be named as co-beneficiary of such guarantee." · Page 4, Section 9, thirty days has been changed to ninety (90) days. In the same Section, fifth line, the following sentences have been added: "The CRA shall have the right to have a third party, consultant review the Schedule of Values and determine that the improvements referred to therein are as described in this Agreement and are reasonable. The CRA shall also have the right for a third party consultant to approve the quarterly application for disbursement." · Page 5, Section 13, the CRA Counsel will confirm that the $3 million loan does not pledge the $2 million cash that would be segregated. If it does pledge it, then Counsel will add language that will provide an exception for that amount. · Page 7, Section 18, the word "Site" in the f'~h line has been deleted. · Page 8, Section 20, the same language under assignment that was added in the previous agreement has been added to read, "Provided, however, that any assignee hereunder shall assume all of the obligations of the Developer under this Agreement." Vice Chair Heavilin inquired if public parking was the first 167 parking spaces and Mr. Brown stated that this was correct. With regard to the $2 million set aside, Mr. Fenton asked if there was a ratio between soft and hard costs. Mr. Brown responded that there is a 25% add for all soft costs, including overhead, general conditions, architect fees, etc. This is stated on Page 4, Section 9 of the Advance Funding Agreement under "Method of Disbursement." Vice Chair Heavilin inquired how the 167 public parking spaces would be restricted. Mr. Brown stated that it would be cited in the restrictive covenant that it be open to the public on a first-come, first,serve basis and that it is exclusive to the public. Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Kevin Lawler of N-K Ventures responded that these would be the first spaces in the garage and the residential spaces will be above the public spaces and gated off. Vice Chair Heavilin noted that in the Direct Incentive Funding Agreement it provides in Section 13.1.3 on page 5 that public parking would be free to the public during a 10- year period. She was under the impression that this would always be public parking, and she was not comfortable with a ten-year limit. Mr. Lawler responded that when they made their application and presented it to the Board in May, they never committed that the parking would be free to the public in perpetuity. The funding that they asked for covers a portion of the parking and they are prepared to pay all the operating and maintenance costs for a 10-year period. However, after 10 years, they are asking for the right to charge, if the market permits it, in order to recover their costs of maintaining the parking. Mr. Fisher asked what the yearly costs would be to maintain the parking garage. Mr. Lawler stated that including all the costs, it would cost between $800 to $1,000 per space per year, which would be around $150,000 a year that they would be paying for during the first 10 years. He pointed out that it was important that the first floor of the garage be maintained to the highest standards since they have residents parking above it. He noted that the incentive funding does not cover all the costs of the public area improvements. Chairman Finkelstein requested that Attorney Payne be allowed time to review the corrected documents and exhibits when they come back. Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve the Direct Incentive Funding and the Advance Funding Agreement, as amended today, with approval of the amendments and the addition of the required exhibits by Attorney Payne. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco and unanimously carried. VIII. Old Business A. Consideration of Approval of the Contract with the Owner's Representative (CRA) Firm Jonathan Ricketts, Inc. for the Boynton Beach Boulevard Extension, Promenade and RiverWalk Design/Build Project Mr. Hutchinson stated that staff has been working with Legal Counsel on Mr. Ricketts' contract, which was distributed prior to the meeting. The contract contains "not to exceed provisions" and allows the CRA to pick and chose services as needed. This would prevent as little oversight as possible. The contract is based on an AIA Contract 10 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 and provides for broader definitions than the original contract. The insurance and indemnification issues have been worked out with legal staff. Mr. Fisher stated that if the three contracts were added together it would come to under $300,000 and asked if this in the budget. Mr. Hutchinson responded that the phasing has provisions and they are waiting for the costs analysis. He felt that by the next meeting they would have exact costs. Also, Mr. Hutchinson was not certain if they were going to need all the services contained in the contract. Chairman Finkelstein discussed the costs of the contract and the houdy rates. Mr. Hutchinson said that he spoke with Dale Sugerman, who thought the fees were very reasonable. Chairman Finkelstein asked where the 78 weeks came from in the contract. Mr. Ricketts responded that all the timeframes listed in the outline are based upon their review of the CPA's contract with Burkhart Construction. Mr. Ricketts noted that the contract has a seven-day termination clause so that any time during the contract if the Board was not happy with services or the term of the project, they could terminate it. Chairman Finkelstein asked if the houdy rates were fixed and Mr. Ricketts responded that they were for the duration of the contract. Motion Mr. Fenton moved to accept the contract with Jonathan Ricketts, Inc. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried. IX. New Business A. Selection of Feasibility Study Team for Savage Creatures of Ancient Seas Attraction (previously heard) B. Consideration of the Arches Contract (previously heard) C. Consideration of the Business Genesis Program Chairman Finkelstein distributed a memo dated October 30, 2003 and he would like the Board to table this, as well as the launch program. Legal Counsel has recommended this. Mr. Fisher requested that Chairman Finkelstein elaborate briefly on this. Attomey Payne asked Chairman Finkelstein to report on the facts and she would report on the legal aspects. Chairman Finkelstein said that a call and complaint were received, as well as legal accusations, that the CRA does not own the project and that somebody was hired to create the project. He further stated that a contract was signed and payment was 11 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 refused. They are now seeking payment based on the contract and an acknowledgement that it signed. He felt that if the Board moved forward with utilizing this project there could be some additional liabilities to the CRA and the fact that we are using a project that we do not own and have refused to pay for. Chairman Finkelstein said that he could not furnish all the details because he just received this information today. He felt it was a significant amount of money. Commissioner Fisher asked for legal's input. Attorney Payne said that Chairman Finkelstein's statement was correct since they have been furnished with limited information. To be cautious, since it is unknown where the claims will come from, she felt that if they moved forward with the event this weekend, they would be increasing their liability. If the CRA does not own the program, which is the claim at this time, as she understands it. It may not be true, but they have not had an opportunity to speak with Mr. Hutchinson about this. Mr. Fenton asked for clarification on "own the program." Chairman Finkelstein explained that there is a claim that this program was created by someone else under contract. Mr. Fenton said that the Business Genesis Program had been discussed at their meetings several times and he had not been aware that this was an "owned" program. Mr. Hutchinson responded that this is just a claim and staff can respond to all this since there are extensive meeting notices and minutes; staff has done a great deal of work on this; and there are other witnesses. This is one of things where anybody can say anything and put a claim in. We will have to respond to it, which they are prepared to do. Mr. Fisher inquired if this was the consultant that the CRA was considering to hire for this program and Mr. Hutchinson responded affirmatively. He stated that they did not provide the required information, consulting or documents, and a contract to the CRA office. At a certain point, staff let them go because they were unable to perform. Mr. Hutchinson thinks that this person already had a factoring company forward her money and she wants them to force our issue. By doing so, this would put pressure on the Executive Director to say okay, let's do it. He said that this is not the case and he stands firm and has documents and other parties that will support his position. Mr. Fenton felt that the first paragraph of Chairman Finkelstein's memo contained serious allegations. Mr. Fenton asked what those were and by whom. Chairman Finkelstein said that the details Mr. Fenton was asking for were included in the memo. Attorney Payne noted that Chairman Finkelstein provided a brief explanation of the facts because he was the one who received the phone calls and the faxes today. Mr. Hutchinson responded that when the CRA let her go, which was done officially by email, because their own consultants were fighting among themselves. There was no 12 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 problem until she had borrowed money against this and that company is now going after her to collect. Mr. Hutchinson said that he asked to see what signatures that they have of his. Attorney Payne pointed out that one document did contain Mr. Hutchinson's signature. He said that they are prepared to produce the exact dates and what happened and when these things were created. Mr. Fisher referred to the Saturday event and inquired how much of the Genesis Program was going to be rolled out at that event. Mr. Hutchinson stated that they were going to be doing a business survey of the businesses in the area. He further stated that the survey was developed in-house between Annette Gray and himself. They did not use any forms that were given to them. After that, they would evaluate the businesses interested in coming in over the next two months. A consulting will be selected once staff determines what their needs are, which cannot be done until the results of the survey are known. Mr. Fisher inquired if the Saturday night community event at which a needs assessment was discussed and a questionnaire was completed, would that make the CRA liable. Attorney Payne noted that if the CRA "used her material," which she is alleging, and if the CRA did take, there could be liability, but if the CRA did not use her material, then there is none. Attorney Payne stated that if the CRA did take her material, the CRA has no dght to use them at this time, assuming the allegations are true. Mr. Fisher would like to cancel the event, without looking foolish, but also to prevent any possible liabilities on the CRA. If the event moved forward, he would recommend that the questionnaire be removed from the event and that the Saturday event would become a social event between the CRA and the business community. Is this possible without increasing the CRA's liability? Attorney Payne stated that she did not know the details of the claim, but if the CRA did not use any of her materials, this would lessen the claim. She did not think that holding a social event would encroach on anything she would have done. Mr. Fenton said that he distinctly remembers being at the CRA office and he distinctly remembers the first order of business for Annette is that I am going to give her the Business Genesis Program and she would be putting it together. Mr. Fenton thought that this was a good management decision when Ms. Gray became Administrative Assistant. He had no idea until tonight that there was a third party involved. Chairman Finkelstein stated that no one on the Board knew this. However, in the claimant's documentation she claims that she hired September 2002 by Mr. Hutchinson. Mr. DeMarco inquired if there was anything in writing and Mr. Hutchinson stated that there was no contract. Mr. Fenton noted that over 100 people have been invited to Saturday's event and he would like to go ahead without exposing the CRA to any legal implications. Mr. Fisher asked if the CRA's legal exposure is $9,000. Attorney Payne said it would not only be 13 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 the $9,000, but whatever her work was worth on top of that. It would come down to what the questionnaire is worth and Attomey Payne did not think that a questionnaire could be worth that much money. Mr. Fisher recommended not handing out the questionnaire on Saturday. Mr. Fenton asked Ms. Gray to take the podium to present her point of view. Annette Gray, CRA Administrative Assistant, stated that they never got any survey from Lori's company. Chairman Finkelstein acknowledged this and noted that she refused to give Ms. Gray the questionnaire because staff refused to pay the invoice. Ms. Gray affirmed that she did not give them a survey and she did not give them an invoice. Mr. Hutchinson stated that she does not have a contract. Ms. Gray stated that it was she who designed the goals and program description with assistance from Mr. Hutchinson. What Lod did was spend time in trying to get the contract. Consultants have to put in legwork in order to be considered for a contract. She did that, and we had several meetings and what she tumed into staff was a proposed contract, which' was redlined, edited and returned to her for corrections. Mr. Hutchinson said that the contract was unacceptable and in one and one-half hours after that, she was terminated. The material you see in front of you was done after all this happened. Ms. Gray said that she and Doug wrote the program and she was the one who got the sponsorship money for the program and she wrote the survey with Mr. Hutchinson. Ms. Gray stated that the only thing the claimant wrote was a proposed contract, which was not accepted and could not be accepted before it was brought to the Board. Mr. Fisher questioned the use of the word "terminated" and if this person did not have a contract, how could she be "terminated." Ms. Gray said that "terminated" is probably an incorrect term. Mr. Finkelstein asked why staff signed an invoice agreeing to pay $9,000. Mr. Hutchinson said he did not think he signed the invoice with all the information on the page. Mr. DeMarco asked if there was anything else in writing furnished to the claimant and Chairman Finkelstein stated that there is an agreement signed by the Director to pay $9,000 to a funding company where the claimant factored her invoice. Mr. Fenton asked Mr. Hutchinson if that was his signature and he said it was, but he is not sure that this was the document that he signed. Chairman Finkelstein noted that the fax cover sheet was the CRA cover sheet and stated "Acknowledgement and Invoice attached." Vice Chair Heavilin recommended not going any further with this until legal counsel has had an opportunity to check into everything. She has concerns about Saturday night and Mr. Fisher was not comfortable Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 with canceling Saturday night. He felt that this would still provide the CRA an opportunity to build relationships with the community. Mr. DeMarco noted that City Manager Bressner was present tonight and asked if he had anything he would like to add. Mr. Bressner stated that this the first time he heard about this as well and he felt that the CRA could be facing a claim for "intellectual property dghts" and is a separate issue. From the CRA's prospective, he felt that they should move forward with a generalized program and still hold the function on Saturday night, but felt that they should hold back on the questionnaire until the claims can be looked into. He suggested doing a type of meet and greet function and inform people that the CRA is working on a survey that will be distributed at a later date. Mr. Bressner also suggested that the CRA consider trademark or register the "Business Genesis Program" to protect the program, if the CRA decides to move forward with it. Vice Chair Heavilin asked if Genesis was the CRA's name. Mr. Hutchinson said that they came up with this name, but they have not copyrighted it. Mr. Hutchinson stated that this entire program was developed and written by internal with the assistance of business leaders in BODA and others over many months. He pointed out that this was discussed at several budget workshops. Chairman Finkelstein if this was included in the budget workshops and money was set aside, but the program was not approved and that is why he requested it be on the agenda tonight because the CRA was having a launch program for a program that was not approved. He felt this was another reason they were in the hot seat, because they planned a program, a launch party and invitations for a project and program that was never approved by the Board. He pointed out that just because something was in the budget, did not necessarily mean that the money had to be spent for a particular project or program. Chairman Finkelstein did not have a problem with moving forward with event, since the event is being paid for by another entity, which Mr. Hutchinson confirmed. Chairman Finkelstein stressed caution on what they would do at that event, since it is not just a claim for intellectual property, it is a claim for work performed, which the CRA agreed to pay for and did not pay. Mr. Hutchinson said that they could move forward with the Saturday event and have it sort of a "readiness event," and people could be asked for their input. Mr. Fisher asked if staff would be showing approved projects at the event. Mr. Hutchinson stated that they would be showing their development information book. Mr. Fisher also was not comfortable moving forward with the Business Genesis Program at this time. Vice Chair Heavilin noted that the invitation does not mention a survey or questionnaire. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the invitation does state "to the launch the Business Genesis Program." 15 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Mr. DeMarco stated that he had concerns that there are communication in writing between the claimant and the CRA and did not want to become involved in any type of legal situation at a future date. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that Attorney Payne would be looking into all of this. Mr. DeMarco felt that the affair should move fonvard. Mr. Fenton pointed out that the Board is not terminating the Business Genesis Program, but is merely delaying it. Motion Mr. Fisher moved to table the Business Genesis Program until the first available CRA meeting where legal has had an opportunity to confer about this particular issue. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin. Mr. Fenton requested that Mr. Fisher amend his motion to a time certain. Mr. Fisher did not wish to amend his motion since the Board cannot determine when legal will be ready. Vote Motion carried 5-0. Motion Mr. Fisher moved to direct staff to continue with the event scheduled for Saturday with the thorough understanding that the Business Genesis Program is not part of the event. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin. Motion carried 4-1 (Mr. Fenton dissenting). Motion Mr. Fisher moved to reconsider his motion to allow discussion. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin. Mr. Fenton asked what the invitation stated and was informed it read "to the launch of the Business Genesis Program," yet we cannot talk about the Business Genesis Program. Mr. DeMarco did not want to have this motion on record. Mr. Fisher said that the reason his motion was that specific was that it was on the record that the CRA is not doing a Business Genesis Launch Saturday night. Mr. Bressner recommending referring to it as an emerging business development program for Boynton Beach and the CRA and talk around the issue, but not use the wording. There should be someone to speak about the business development opportunities and that a program such as this could develop, without giving it a name. He felt it was important that the program have some content. 16 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Mr. Fisher requested that Chairman Finkelstein review the agenda for the Saturday event. Ms. Gray said that she would edit the program and have it approved by Chairman Finkelstein. Mr. Fisher amended his motion to direct staff to ensure that the Chairman has an opportunity to see the updated program. Vice Chair Heavilin agreed to the amended motion. Vote The motion unanimously carded. The meeting recessed at 8:25 p.m. and reconvened at 8:35 p.m. D. Consideration of Acquisition Underwriting for Heart of Boynton Properties Mr. Hutchinson reported that the CRA has been working with the Development Department and neighborhood associations and is now ready to move forward with some options. Referring to the map in the agenda packet on page 3862, Mr. Hutchinson pointed out the properties in "green" as properties being considered for acquisition. Chairman Finkelstein had a list of five properties in the area for acquisition, but since there were other properties as well, it made sense to purchase those properties also. Staff is asking the Board to utilize the City services through their procurement and appraisal services and, if necessary, the City's power of condemnation to acquire the "green" properties and the CRA would reimburse the City for all costs incurred. Secondly, there is a series of properties that staff would like to have appraised in order to determine what the market rate of assembling properties would be in the area. They are not prepared to do anything further with these properties, other than ascertaining their property values. Vice Chair Heavilin inquired if the Urban Group would handle this. Mr. Hutchinson said that Mr. Greene's office would utilize the process they have in place. Mr. Fisher recommended letting people in the audience speak first. David Zimet, Boynton Beach Faith Based Community Development Corporation, 2191 North Seacrest Boulevard, understood that there would not be an RFP to do an accumulation process, which is commonly done by CRAs. Mr. Zimet appreciates it being done in this manner. He is present to speak on behalf of his Board and R.M. Lee CDC as well. He was excited about seeing development come to the Heart of Boynton and is interested in seeing that things proceed as smoothly as possible. He would like the CRA to do the best job possible for his community. He had concerns about how the development process would proceed and how the CRA would be able to select the best 17 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 developer. He also questioned whether it was too late for developers to approach the CRA with proposals. He would like to have some guidance and clarification. Reverend Clarence Ellington, Executive Director of the R.M. Lee CDC, had the same concems as Mr. Zimet. He would like assurances that the people are taken care of and to insure that the residents have an ownership in their community. He pointed out that a lot of studies and meetings have taken place over the past two years seeking community input. He would like to see the input used in the development of the plans for the Heart of Boynton. Mr. Fisher inquired if the Board was being asked to purchase properties that were available at this time. Chairman Finkelstein said that this has been approved previously; there is money in the budget to buy these particular properties; and to date nothing has been bought. He thinks this is a CRA project and the City has been coming to the CRA on how this would be done. The CRA would do the MLK commercial area and the City would do the residential portion, along with the Section 108 loan from the Federal Government. He pointed out that usually other CRAs purchase the property, accumulate it, .and then go out for an RFQ or RFP to put together projects, referring to Delray Beach's award winning Atlantic Grove project. Chairman Finkelstein asked why the CRA would consider purchasing the two pieces of properties that are part of the "buy/condemn now" category since it is not near the core area. Mr. Hutchinson responded that these two properties are for sale. Chairman Finkelstein questioned the wisdom of appraising the entire neighborhood. He is unaware of the costs associated with doing this and if they have money budgeted. There is $500,000 available to purchase specific properties, but it appears that they are not coming up with a concerted plan to get this going. Chairman Finkelstein brought this up to Mr. Greene and Mr. Hawkins sometime ago, and he was not certain if this project should be given to the City staff. He felt that there are certain planning steps that need to be done to make it come to fruition. Chairman Finkelstein noted that there is the Heart of Boynton Plan and this Board needs to decide if the properties are going to be acquired one way or another; put the plan together; and move forward. He felt that nothing was being accomplished, and he would like to move forward with the purchase of the properties. He was uncertain why the properties on the map in "blue" were to be "appraised only" and why would so much property be needed. In summary, Chairman Finkelstein felt it was a CRA project, they should start working with the people to purchase the property, but there needs to be a plan to show people why the CRA is buying the property and what the CRA intends to do with it after it is purchased. 18 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Mr. Hutchinson responded that some of the "green" properties might be unwilling sellers, which means that titles would have to be split between the City and the CRA because the CRA does not have the power of condemnation. Attorney Payne stated that the City would deed the property over to the CRA since the CRA is paying for them. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that many of these parcels would become City property. Mr. Fenton pointed out that a City park was not part of the original plans and was never discussed. Now the CRA is being asked to pay for condemnation of properties that the CRA did not want in the first place. Mr. Fenton was not in favor of using CRA money for condemnation of private residences. Mr. Hutchinson stated that they should have these properties appraised for the next stage of assembly, Even though the area is big, it would still be less than 10 acres that would trigger a major comprehensive plan. Also the CDCs may be included in the entire project, and they are looking at multiple projects in that area. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that there are many property owners in that area that do not wish to sell and want to be part of the new development. He would like to see a program that would allow these people to be part of the new development. This cannot be done until the appraisals have been done. Staff had a problem understanding how title could be transferred if some properties were City owned and others were not. Legal was consulted on this, which took six weeks, and staff is now comfortable with moving forward using either option. Mr. Fenton asked what the City has done over the past two years regarding this project and questioned if anything has been accomplished. Kurt Bressner, City Manager, said that the City has been waiting for a decision from the CRA regarding the "green" parcels and pointed out that was before the CRA Board previously and there has been no action taken with regard to moving forward. Chairman Finkelstein responded that the Board did take action, and Mr. Bressner inquired what that was. Chairman Finkelstein stated the consultants were informed to buy the property and that funds were put aside to purchase the property. Mr. Fisher asked why the properties were not purchased. Mr. Hutchinson stated that there is a logistics problem, depending upon the type of projects and how they are assembled. Mr. Bressner requested to address this. He noted that there has to be a systematic approach to purchasing the property.. Regardless of the colors on the map, he felt that appraised values for these properties needed to be established. The original approach to acquiring the commercial properties east of Seacrest was okay and will probably develop as a mixed-use combination of commercial, residential, institutional, and 19 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 religious. In conversations with the CRA staff, the City is trying to come to terms with trying to get an assemblage of property or an area of interest. By approaching it this way, it would give the CRA and the City an opportunity to move forward in a more systematic way to acquire land. With this approach, the CRA and the City could then move forward with more in-depth conversations with the stakeholders and determine the level of involvement they want to have in a project, if one develops. Mr. Bressner said that the City was willing to take the entire project on and would ask the CRA to support the concept of turning it back over to the City. Chairman Finkelstein inquired who would be in charge of the project. Mr. Bressner responded that it would probably be Dale Sugerman, who has established an effective relationship with the Urban Group in terms of getting things done. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that everything the City was asking the CRA to do was started and has been in progress for over a year or two. They had conversations with the Urban Group; staff was meeting with all the property owners in the area; and the property owners were hooked up with the developers; and the City should have all this information. Mr. Bressner was not certain whether appraisals were authorized by the CRA. Chairman Finkelstein responded that appraisals were approved for these specific properties and funds have been earmarked for them. Mr. Hutchinson responded that they asked the Urban Group to make sure that all sellers were willing and some people indicated that they had not been contacted by them. Chairman Finkelstein noted that there was confusion with the Urban Group that stated they did everything they were supposed to do, but the chart they fumished the CRA indicated that they could not contact many of the people. Mr. Bressner said that he initiated this because he was waiting to see the appraisals and they never came. He did not remember the Urban Group getting appraisals for the properties. Chairman Finkelstein acknowledged that they did not get appraisals for all these properties. Mr. Bressner pointed out that under the City's rules and regulations, as City Manager, he has the ability to authorize the appraisals. He also does not recall specific authorization coming back to the CRA for specific appraisals for specific properties that are marked in green. Chairman Finkelstein inquired, since the property owners in "blue" were contacted, what was their response. Mr. Hutchinson said that they have talked to many of the people in phase 1, "blue," and many are ready to remain and some wish to be bought out. Mr. Hutchinson said that he is not ready to offer to purchase any properties until he knows what the appraised value is of those properties. Chairman Finkelstein inquired why the CRA could not go out now and purchase the properties of the people who indicated they wanted to sell. Mr. Hutchinson said again that appraisals must first be done. Chairman 2O Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Finkelstein recommended putting these properties under contract, subject to the appraised value and Mr. Hutchinson said if he was directed to do so by the Board, he would. Mr. Hutchinson inquired how you can determine which properties would be taken by condemnation and which ones would not. Attomey Payne said that the title issues could be worked out between the City and the CRA. Further, Attorney Payne stated that the City and the CRA can transfer title to each other at any time, and for any reason. Mr. Hutchinson felt that if the CRA wanted to do this it would probably result in hit and miss properties. He pointed out that there are Board members that have strong opinions on this and he works for the Board. Chairman Finkelstein said that they would give Mr. Hutchinson that direction once the Board understands what he is trying to accomplish. Chairman Finkelstein still felt that this was a CRA project, but if the Board wanted the City to do it, he would go along with that. Mr. Hutchinson said that he has received all the direction he needs, except for the condemnation. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the Board could not do condemnation. Mr. Bressner noted that the Board is not in a position to make a recommendation for eminent domain until it is known that the property is not for sale. At that point, the Board would have to make a decision on a case-by-case basis to recommend eminent domain to the Commission. Mr. DeMarco recalled that several months ago, the Board was having problems with getting appraisals and the associated costs. What this Board did was to tighten up the ship and not go all over town to get appraisals because of the costs. Mr. DeMarco said that it was up to this Board to give some direction to staff on getting these appraisals done. Mr. DeMarco felt that they should proceed in purchasing some of the properties that are willing sellers. Mr. Bressner said that he would lend the City staff to the CRA to work with the consultant to pursue the acquisition of the parcels of property the CRA would like to purchase. Mr. Bressner pointed out that the CRA is swamped with work, and he felt that by allocating City staff, this would expedite things. When the appraisals are done, they can be brought to the Board for a decision. Mr. Hutchinson stated that staff also needs direction on which side of Seacrest to proceed. Chairman Finkelstein said if there was not enough CRA staff, it might be best to consider hiring additional staff. Mr. Fisher inquired if the "green" properties were for sale. Mr. Hutchinson responded that some are for sale or they have been identified as high priority for acquisition. Chairman Finkelstein explained that money has been set aside to purchase property at the intersection of MLK and Seacrest and now the Board has to make a decision as to whether it wants to reverse its decision not to land bank. 21 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Mr. Fenton is not in favor of condemning property and forcing people to move out of their homes. He felt that people should be allowed to live in their homes, and he was against allocating any money for eminent domain and/or condemnation. Mr. Fenton felt that when Mr. Greene and Mr. Hawkins were at a previous meeting, that this was moving forward. Mr. Hutchinson stated that a Section 108 loan had been applied for to cover relocation costs. Mr. Bressner pointed out that this was for the residential properties on the west side of Seacrest Avenue and is a separate project that the City is working on. The HUD loan only applies to acquisition of those properties. Chairman Finkelstein stated that they were informed that the HUD loan was being used for relocation of residential properties in the Heart of Boynton. Mr. Hutchinson said they cannot assemble a project by picking up these properties piecemeal. Also, there is a park area that might need to have some help, and they have to make a commitment to that as well. Mr. Hutchinson stated that he has not been given absolute direction on how to proceed on which properties the Board wants to have appraisals for. Chairman Finkelstein recommended moving forward with a section that has a proposed development. Mr. Fisher pointed out that neither this Board nor the City Commission favors condemnation. It has to be looked at on a case-by-case basis and the overall focus must be what is best for the entire area, not just one block. Chairman Finkelstein noted that the Board was going to take the MLK area and the Board needs to live up to this promise. Chairman Finkelstein agreed with Mr. Bressner that the properties that are available should be purchased. This is a project for the people who live in the Heart of Boynton. Chairman Finkelstein noted that the Board earmarked an area from the railroad to Seacrest and then from 9th through 11~ as the area they would concentrate on. They should go into this area and purchase what they can and move forward. If there were a few holdouts, then those properties would probably have to be taken. Mr. Fisher said that this dialogue could continue all night, but it is October 30th and the Board needs to decide on how they want to move forward. Does the Board want to focus on the "green" properties and direct staff to go out and obtain a contract for each of the 17 "green" properties for November 30th? Chairman Finkelstein would like staff or whoever to go out and speak with the property owners who have already indicated that they want to sell, regardless if the properties were "green" or "blue." Mr. Fisher was agreeable with this and recommended that they should go out and get contracts and appraisals for property that has been identified as being for sale within the targeted area. Mr. Hutchinson said that he is going to have to be authorized to try to negotiate prices and then bring them back to the Board. He would like to know how the Board wants to handle this. Does this Board want him to get a contract and then obtain appraisals? 22 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 The City does it the other way around; they get the appraisals and then write the contracts. Chairman Finkelstein noted that Mr. Hutchinson informed the Board that he had people who were willing to sell based on appraisals. Chairman Finkelstein said that these people should be wrapped up immediately with a contract, subject to the appraised value. The Board would approve the contracts; staff will obtain the appraisals, and then close on the property. Mr. Hutchinson said he could do this. Mr. Hutchinson did not want to purchase these properties on a hit and miss basis. He asked the Board how they wanted him to move forward with the acquisition. Mr. Bressner suggested that the area from NE 1st Street extending north, and behind St. John, everything west of that in the "blue" area, plus the "green" should be the first area of concern. This is the first area in the Heart of Boynton Plan that was identified as a potential development area. Mr. Bressner suggested expanding upon Mr. Fisher's comment about juSt doing the "green" and suggested that they move in on the area generally west of NE 1st Street, as extended, to NE 9th Avenue. Chairman Finkelstein informed Mr. Bressner that the Board has already approved this. Vice Chair Heavilin felt that the Board needs to decide that it is going to take on this project and to land bank properties. Mr. Fisher inquired if a motion would be necessary, and Chairman Finkelstein said that a motion was needed. Mr. Hutchinson requested that the phase 1 area be defined. Mr. Hutchinson inquired whether the Board wished to address the property acquisitions on the west side of Seacrest and that he needed clear direction in this area. Chairman Finkelstein said that this would be included in the motion. Motion Mr. Fisher moved to direct the CRA to land bank within the Heart of Boynton. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. Vice Chair Heavilin felt that the motion should be more specific and Mr. Fisher pointed out that the motion is only to land bank in the Heart of Boynton. Chairman Finkelstein stated that the next motion would be more specific. This vote will give the CRA an opportunity to purchase certain substandard lots. Mr. Bressner suggested that the subsequent motion should reference the October 7, 2003 memorandum and to focus in on that as a priority within the areas depicted in "green" on the exhibit, plus the area that is generally located west of NE 1st Street along the MLK Boulevard. This could also include the "blue" parcels on the west side of Seacrest. 23 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Mr. Hutchinson further requested that the motion include that he have the authorization to bring a contract with a price to the Board, pending the Board's approval for pumhase. Vote The vote on the motion was unanimous. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved that phase 1 acquisition by the CRA in the Heart of Boynton would include the properties immediately west of Seacrest, previously identified; properties along Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard, west of NE lS' Street; running from NE 9th Avenue to NE 11th Avenue. Mr. Fenton pointed out that NE 1st Street does not go through and Mr. Finkelstein 'recommended adding "contiguous properties south that front on Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard." Mr. Fenton stated that if you go up using a straight line it would give the CRA more properties, and Mr. Bressner stated that was his intent. Mr. Bressner suggested changing the motion to include "beginning at a point at the northwest corner of NE 1st Street and NE 9~h Avenue, thence north a certain distance. Chairman Finkelstein said that this was not necessary and could merely state "continuing directly north to NE 11th Vice Chair Heavilin restated her motion as follows: Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved that the CRA start acquiring properties in the Heart of Boynton, Phase 1, being commercial properties on the west side of Seacrest as previously identified; properties along the Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard extending from a corner of NE 9th Avenue and NE 1st Street, due north to NE 11th Avenue with the initial properties to be those identified as available for purchase. Motion seconded by Mr. Fenton and unanimously carried. Vice Chair Heavilin stated that the Board still has to give staff direction with regard to the appraisals. Chairman Finkelstein stated that the Board must also give direction as to who is spearheading and funding the project. Vice Chair Heavilin recommended that the Board accept the City Manager's offer of a volunteer. Mr. Fisher would like the CRA to maintain control, but will utilize City staff. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved that the CRA request that City staff provide the necessary assistance in the acquisition process as outlined by the CRA. Motion seconded by Mr. Fisher and unanimously carried. 24 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Mr. Bressner referred to the "green" parcels east of the designated area and Chairman Finkelstein thought the land bank motion covered this. Mr. Fisher said that they should be specifically addressed. Mr. Hutchinson said that some of these properties are not for sale. Vice Chair Heavilin inquired if these properties are not for sale and not immediately adjacent to phase 1, why should the Board be concerned with acquiring these properties now. Vice Chair Heavilin suggested making a motion that in addition to phase 1 that the CRA acquire the properties identified as "green" on the map. Mr. Hutchinson stated that the four properties on the right would be used for right-of-ways and this should be done now so that they can start planning for the streets and utilities. Mr. Fenton felt that the Board should concentrate on phase 1 for now. Mr. Bressner said that he would look into the four parcels on 9th Avenue. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved that in addition to the Phase 1 that has been previously identified that the CRA purchase any other available parcels along the MLK Boulevard. Chairman Finkelstein requested that Vice Chair Heavilin amend her motion to include "should other parcels come available, north of NE 9th, west of the Florida East Coast Railway and south of NE 11th that the CRA would entertain the purchase of those parcels." Vice Chair Heavilin amended her motion to include Chairman Finkelstein's recommendation. Mr. Fisher seconded the motion and carried 4-1 (Mr. Fenton dissenting). Mr. Bressner inquired if the Board was going to authorize the Director to get appraisals as necessary. Mr. Fisher stated appraisals would be obtained for properties that are for sale and willing sellers, which was included in Vice Chair Heavilin's motion. Vice Chair Heavilin stated that her motion did not include appraisals. She felt that they should go to contract, subject to appraisals, rather than do appraisals first. Mr. Hutchinson inquired how he was to handle property owners that wanted to stay and the CRA wanted to purchase their properties. Mr. Bressner said that this was a separate issue. Mr. Hutchinson said that he would bring back an inventory of the status of each of the properties and pointed out that there are different appraisals for different kinds of properties. Vice Chair Heavilin inquired if the CRA could use the 108 funds for purchasing properties. Mr. Bressner stated that a policy decision needs to be made as to whether the CRA, in dealing with residential property, wants to adopt the Federal Uniform Relocation Act requirements and whether federal funds would be used. Once the Board 25 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 determines this, regardless of where the funds come from, the Board could deal with this issue. Mr. Bressner said that the money from the 108 program would not be available until at least March of 2004. He did point out that many CRA agencies have some kind of uniform relocation policy and he thinks this is something the Board should have. Chairman Finkelstein recommended that they follow those guidelines. Vice Chair Heavilin inquired if the CRA would have to do this separate from the City. Mr. Bressner said that in order for the CRA to use those funds, the CRA would have to work with the City. He stated that the City is pledging a portion of their future Community Block Grant funds as a surety for the bond issue that will be funded to get the lump sum cash for the 108 program. Mr. Bressner thought, however, that if the CRA pledged increments, they might be able to participate in the City's 108 program, and they would work with the CRA on this. He would be agreeable to talking to HUD about this. Chairman Finkelstein said that he looked into this and it is available. Chairman Finkelstein noted that the CRA took out a $3 million loan for land acquisition that is available. Mr. Hutchinson reported that the CRA has an additional $453,000 that could also be used for other projects. Vice Chair Heavilin asked Mr. Hutchinson if he needed any further direction tonight and he stated that the motions are clear, and he was pleased to receive backing from the Board in order to move forward. Vice Chair Heavilin asked if an update would be available at the next Board meeting. Mr. Hutchinson felt that he could have the tax values for the next meeting. Chairman Finkelstein said that he has this information available. Mr. Fisher requested that beginning the first of the New Year that the Heart of Boynton become a bigger focus of the CRA. He would like the Board to get together with the two groups and do another tour of the Heart of Boynton area. Chairman Finkelstein also recommended that a workshop could be held as well. E. Consideration of Request for Appraisal on Phase 1 Redevelopment Properties in the Heart of Boynton Area (previously discussed) F. Consideration of waiving the title work for Boynton Seafood, Inc. Development Regions Core Grant Contract (previously discussed) G. Consideration of a proposed amendment to the existing contract with Kimley-Horne Mr. Hutchinson requested that Item G be removed from the agenda. Staff will bring this item back to the Board in November. 26 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 Motion Commissioner Fisher moved to remove Item G (Consideration of a proposed amendment to the existing contract with Kimley-Horne). Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco and unanimously carded. H. Recommendation of members to be selected for the CSC Committee to review the Financial Advisory Services RFQ Mr. Hutchinson said that staff is recommending several people for the selection committee to review the RFQ for a financial advisor. With bigger projects coming in, these services will be important and will have an effect upon the TIF. Chairman Finkelstein noted that only two responses were received. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to approve the staff recommended CSC Committee. Motion seconded by Mr. Fisher and unanimously carried. I. Consideration of Rescheduling the CRA November Board Meeting due to the Holiday Mr. Hutchinson announced that the next Regular Meeting would be held on Thursday, November 20th in the Library at 6:00 p.m. Mr. Hutchinson said that he would be speaking with the Clerk's Office to discuss reserving the Chambers on the third Thursday of each month in the event a second meeting is necessary. Xl. Board Member Comments None Xll. Legal None Xlll. Other Items None XlV. Future Agenda Items A. Consideration of special pilot program for Police Patrol in Heart of Boynton and the CBD B. Consideration of pilot program for trolley service in the CBD 27 Meeting Minutes Continued Regular Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 30, 2003 C. Madna Parking Garage Expansion D. Consideration of Secudng Surface Parking Rights XV. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting propedy adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (November 3, 2003) 28