Loading...
Minutes 07-11-17MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD HELD ON TUESDAY, JULY 11, 2017, AT 6:30 P.M., IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS CITY HALL, 100 E. BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PRESENT: Steven B. Grant, Chair Justin Katz, Vice Chair Joe Casello Mack McCray Christina Romelus I. Call to Order Mike Simon, Interim Executive Director Tara Duhy Board Counsel Chair Grant called the meeting to order at 6:29 p.m. II. Invocation The members recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. III. Roll Call Roll call revealed a quorum was present. IV. Agenda Approval A. Additions, Deletions, Corrections to the Agenda B. Adoption of Agenda Motion Vice Chair Katz moved to approve the agenda. Mr. McCray seconded the motion that unanimously passed. V. Legal None. VI. Informational Items and Disclosures by Board Members and CRA Staff: A. Disclosure of Conflicts, Contacts, and Relationships for Items Presented to the CRA Board on Agenda Items Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 Messrs. McCray, Casello, Vice Chair Katz and Ms. Romelus had no disclosures or announcements. Chair Grant announced he saw the last Music on the Rocks concert and the completion of construction for Hurricane Alley. He commented the new construction was nice. B, Informational Announcements VII. Announcements & Awards A. Music on the Rocks Mercedes Coppins, Special Event Coordinator, announced the last concert was held on June 16th, featuring School of Rock. Despite the rain, about 150 people attended. The new season will begin October 2018 followed by the Haunted Pirates Fest. VIII. Consent Agenda A. Approval of Period Ended June 30, 2017 Financiai Report B. Monthly Purchase Orders C. Approval of CRA Board Meeting Minutes — June 13, 2017 D. Approval of FICE Design, Inc. for Commercial Interior Build -Out Grant Program E. Approval of Silver Bullet, LLC for Commercial Rent Reimbursement Grant Program IX. Pulled Consent Agenda Items None, Motion Mr. Casello moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. McCray seconded the motion that unanimously passed. X. Information Only A. Public Comment Log B. Marketing and Business Development Campaign 2 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 C. Social Media Outreach Program Mathew Mienzer and Jamil Donith, Social Outreach Coordinators, gave an update as follows: • They are working with 10 plus businesses; • They have concluded a needs assessment and reached what they needed; • They are working with businesses to further their social media platforms; • For those without any social media platform, they are receiving training to use social media properly; • They are pushing their business events on the CRA's own social media platforms and showing them how to do so; • Some businesses that are receiving the training on a weekly basis are Yoga Fit, Jamerican, Boardwalk, and Bark Avenue; and • The CRA developed a drop box to keep in contact with businesses and upload visual assets that can be exchanged. Examples of how they worked with the businesses and graphic posts were viewed. Mr. Meinzer explained they are entering the information onto a spreadsheet, creating custom graphics and sharing events. Some of the analytics were viewed. He and Ms. Donith were working on compiling the actual numbers how the training correlates to the business. Currently they only have word of mouth. It appears the social media outreach program is working and has provided a slight benefit so far. Other examples, such as updating websites, inserting social media buttons, creating custom graphics, sharing events were reviewed. Facebook is popular with the program. Twitter and Instagram were off in the distance for most business owners so they were concentrating on Facebook. Since the program started, likes, attention, impressions have all been increasing and they hope it continues into the future. Mr. Meinzer was also teaching local businesses about email programs such as constant contact and search optimization. Mr. Casello asked how many businesses were in the CRA district. Mr. Simon responded they initially targeted an existing pool of 65 plus businesses that took advantage of CRA grants as they are part of their information group. The CRA had their first impression meeting with 15 businesses interested in the program, but there are hundreds of businesses in the CRA. Their capacity is about 20 businesses each for one-on-one mentoring. When they establish the varying degrees of assistance each needs, as some may need more assistance than others, they can add additional businesses to the list for assistance. He anticipated there should be between 40 and 50 businesses that were touched on some level within a year or six months. The Board will receive updated reports. There has been 30 plus days of meeting with businesses, conducting the needs assessment and once some of the social media components are set, a baseline for that business is established. Mr. Meinzer commented they should have their first baseline established and more analytics available by August. 3 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 D. Boynton Beach Boulevard Project Update Mr. Simon explained the project is underway with design and meetings with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and CRA staff. They are in the process of assembling a list of light fixtures and surface elements, such as pavers or painted concrete, the style of which the Board can prioritize. They are conducting value engineering for the cost of each element of the project. The CRA Board is the entity that implemented the design and is working with the design engineers. Input from City staff will be sought prior to bringing the list of options to the Board and the CRA will provide direction how to obtain public input on the type of materiais, colors or styies of light through community input meetings. The information will be forwarded to the City Commission for their approval regarding the style, types of materials as well as for final design. The project is on schedule. XI. Public Comments: (Note: Comments are limited to 3 minutes in duration) None. XII. Public Hearing 1► .[7m XIII. Old Business A. Consideration of Amendment to the Purchase and Development Agreement for the Property Located at 480 E. Ocean Avenue Mr. Simon commented the amendment was requested from the owner of the Little House. The property was sold to Ocean Avenue Pride, LLC, and they have been working on the renovations for a new restaurant. The request was received because under the prior addendum, the contract provided 240 days for project completion, but due to delays regarding the windows and other materials to seal the outside portion of the porch before breaking into the exterior wall, they asked for an additional time to get the Certificate of Occupancy. The request was an extension of 35 to 40 days to September 30th. The original contract specified completion by August 2nd. Mr. Simon saw no reason to deny the request and the delays have been documented. Mr. McCray asked if the Board granted the extension, if they would open October 1St Mr. Simon explained they would be out of contract if they could not obtain the CO by September 30th. If the Board desired, the Board could pursue a legal avenue at that point. Il Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 Motion Vice Chair Katz moved to approve. Mr. McCray seconded the motion to extend to September 30th. The motion unanimously passed. B. Discussion and Consideration of the Budget for FY2017-2018 Mr. Simon explained at the June meeting, the Board reviewed the project fund. A spread sheet, already reviewed by the CRA Advisory Board was provided and Mr. Simon explained staff added rollover funds to the accounts the Board could be considered. There was $500K released for completed projects and set aside contingencies from various contracts or work orders to add to this year's project fund. There is about $5.9 million and those funds were added to allocated projects for this year or a future year. Mr. McCray inquired who tracks what people are doing and the organizational chart. Mr. Simon replied the Economic Development and Strategy Director and Community Standards Outreach Coordinator are part of the City Organizational chart so staff did not add them to the CRA chart although the CRA funds them. Mr. Simon explained if no changes were made to the Board recommendations made in June, there is now an additional $522 thousand dollars to attach to a project this fiscal year or in a future fiscal year. There was $2,082,000 in identified roll overs that can be left in their current line items, or the Board could reassign them to a project. Neither the CRA Board, at its June meeting, nor the CRA Advisory Board, at its July meeting set aside funding for the Ocean Breeze East project. The Board may want to address it now or see what occurs in August with respect to the RFP and then decide. The CRA Advisory Board recommended, and staff reviewed how to reach lower funding levels such as for special events, business incubator programs and other recommendations made in June and make those adjustments and pointed out neither Board supported funding for the CRA special event grant to fund an event to benefit business entities and both Boards supported its removal. In total, there is $2.6 million to allocate which was the $2.082 million rollover and the $522,000. Mr. McCray wanted to ensure there are funds set aside for Ocean Breeze East. Vice Chair Katz offered a motion to amend the agenda to move up the Ocean Breeze East item. He wanted to see what the potential RFP would be before allocating the funds and the Board has not defined the parameters. Mr. McCray reiterated he wanted to ensure funds will be available. Mr. Simon explained there is money available in the $2.6 million to allocate or re-evaluate other project funds. Chair Grant suggested moving this item to the end of the list and addressing it at the end of Old Business and New Business. 5 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 Motion Ms. Romelus moved to amend the agenda. Vice Chair Katz seconded the motion that unanimously passed. C. Consideration and Execution of Purchase and Development Agreement for the CRA owned Property Located at 222 N. Federal Highway, a/k/a the Ocean One Project Motion Mr. McCray moved to remove item D, the next item, from the table. Ms. Romelus seconded the motion that unanimously passed. Attorney Duhy addressed Item C. The Purchase and Development agreement was approved at the last meeting, but some caveats were included in the meeting materials as a draft. The Board did not want to execute the document until the Tax Increment Revenue Agreement was agreed on and executed. Reference had been made that document as a baseline for the time period the developer will have to begin construction, before the deed restriction requiring plaza construction would commence. The additions were highlighted and included as an update. When Item D is heard, Item C will be ready to approve with exhibits and will apply to Phase I only. Chair Grant commented on sections 19.8 and 19.12, which are specific and asked why there were two different clauses. Attorney Duhy explained section 19.2 pertained to a transactional fee for Attorney Duhy regarding preparation of the agreement. She was comfortable with not charging attorney fees. Chair Grant commented he did not want language, if the CRA had to sue for default, that the CRA will have to represent themselves unless the CRA is the prevailing party. There was discussion the language will remain and there is also a right of first refusal included. The TIRFA is contingent on the Development agreement. Attorney Duhy confirmed the CRA document will be not be executed until the Tax Increment Revenue Agreement for Phase I or contingent on what the Board decides for Agenda Item D, is executed. D. Consideration of Tax Increment Revenue Funding Agreement for the Ocean One Project (Tabled 6/13/17) Attorney Duhy outlined the terms based on the last meeting and items all parties agreed to were incorporated. Items in blue and red are up for discussion with CRA staff and the developer. Ms. Romelus inquired what the developer proposed about the requirements for the occupied commercial/retail space. Attorney Duhy explained the prior language from the last Board meeting said the developer would construct the building and obtain their 9 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 certificate of completion for the gray shell. It will be ready for a tenant, but they are not required to have the last step of having a tenant occupy the space. Attorney Bonnie Miskel, on behalf of the petitioner, explained the original negotiation was the entire building will be constructed. Retail space will be on the first floor and the only thing that will remain is the build -out of the tenant bays. Until they have a tenant, the developer will not know what their needs are. She noted retail space is about 3.4% of the building's total square footage. When the residential units are on the tax roll, the CRA will receive the tax benefit of the units and the cost of construction of the commercial space. The new language indicates if the developer does not meet the timeline and the market does not support the developer meeting the timeline, the CRA will withhold the incentives that 97% of the building will provide. Attorney Miskel commented it was unfair. Additionally, the developer drafted a pro -forma which indicated an amount of incentive that was requested, that assumed the developer will receive the incentive, which is what they use to recruit investors and lenders. The new language jeopardized the incentive. If the developer does not meet the two-year requirement, the developer will not receive the incentive and they will be unable to find a lender. The developer designed receiving the funds based on when it will hit the tax rolls. Chair Grant commented the Board has used this provision with other developers who have leased some commercial spaces. Attorney Miskel explained there is 8,500 square feet and a big user may use the entire space and they could be fine in the first two years. If there are multiple users and they only lease one or two units, they could be in jeopardy. The language uses the 3% to determine what will happen on the rest of the site. The reason they used a percentage and not a number of users is because the developer will not know what the demand will be. Chair Grant wanted the developer to help tenants and they have economic development grants. Attorney Miskel reiterated the retail is 3% of the overall square footage, and if the developer does not meet the trigger dates, the CRA will withhold 100% of the incentives. She thought an alternative may be to withhold 5% or 10% of the incentive. She emphasized withholding 100% is not acceptable to lenders or investors. The developer wants to build the project and fill it as it is revenue they will lose. They are motivated to fill the space in the second year, but they have no control over the market. The developer does not have extra tools, whereas the CRA has economic incentives they can offer. The project is reliant on what the market will bear and no lender will take the risk. Attorney Miskel thought it would be more equitable to have a holdback. The agreement reads 25% of the space has to be occupied during the first and second year to receive 75% of the taxes. The next trigger is 50% of the space must be occupied between the third and fourth, fifth and sixth years. If they do not reach the 50%, they do not receive the 75% of the funds during that time, and the last portion deals with a lesser rate. The CRA is receiving almost 100% of the building's taxable value and withholding it because there are triggers the developer has no control over is punitive. If there is no tenant, they have to pay taxes on the total cost of construction of the building including the 7 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 commercial space. The tenants that move in will want services. Attorney Miskel emphasized they are very motivated, but have no control over the commercial market. Mr. Casello thought Attorney Miskel had a valid point. He inquired if the developer would be comfortable with withholding 5% and learned they would. He requested the Board agree to the 5%. Chair Grant would consider 10% as would Vice Chair Katz and Ms. Romelus. Ms. Romelus pointed out the incentive was an exchange, and did not think the provisions of the incentives were fair, noting the funds are taxpayers. Mr. Casello inquired what 10% of incentives would be in terms of dollars. Attorney Miskel agreed to provide them to him. Attorney Duhy commented the document indicates 25% will be filled by year one and two. There was agreement to use language indicating the 25% occupancy requirement must be filled by the end of the second year. Attorney Miskel also clarified the holdback on the 10% does not necessarily equate to receiving 65% of the funds. The Certificate of Occupancy (COU) for the retail must be obtained by the end of the second year the building receives its COU. Chair Grant suggested including the provision to the second and third year of occupancy and move the 50% requirement for the fourth, fifth and sixth years. Ms. Romelus liked the existing timeline. Attorney Miskel asked, noting with any commercial property, there are tenants that come in and vacate while a building is being retrofitted for new tenant and presumed this percentage is intended for the first level of occupancy. Once the developer reaches the 50%, if one of the tenants vacate and the developer is refitting for a second tenant, they are going for first occupancy. Ms. Romelus agreed. Motion Mr. Casello motioned to move the timeline from 25% to the end of the second year and third year and 50% would apply to the fourth, fifth and sixth year. There were no changes to years seven and eight. Mr. McCray seconded the motion that unanimously passed. Attorney Miskel was unclear what "all reasonable efforts" meant and advised they were comfortable with "reasonable efforts" as it is a defined term with case law. Chair Grant pointed out "coordinate job placement and training with Boynton Beach Community High School and South Tech Academy" and commented he really wanted to see the public private partnership work. Attorney Miskel responded they were excited about the partnership as well. There were no objections to removing the word "a-4 reasonable efforts." Attorney Duhy spoke about the assignment provision. Currently the assignment provision to a related entity requires prior written consent of the CRA. She clarified this is a notification issue. The developer wants to eliminate the requirement. Attorney Miskel was unclear about the notification provision. Chair Grant explained they were Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 working with one entity for a TIF agreement. If the CRA has to give the TIF to someone else, the Board would want to approve who would be receiving the funds. The Board wants the same assurance, similar to a sublease, and have them come to the Board and present what they would do to the property due to the conditions of the 50% and 70%. Attorney Duhy recommended adding "which would not be unreasonably withheld" to the agreement. Consent would be required, but not unreasonably withheld. Attorney Miskel agreed. Chair Grant spoke about the green designation and noted the TIF lists six different green designations. He asked if it could be narrowed down to two or three. Attorney Miskel explained the Board may not want to as it was contingent on the system used and some were better than others. The Building Department may like one over the other and that is why the language was inserted. Chair Grant commented LEED has Gold, Silver, and Bronze certifications, and asked if they could reach an agreement on the level. After brief discussion, there was consensus to limiting it to the Florida Green Building Standards, which does not have levels. Attorney Duhy explained the developer does not want the annual performance report, which is the report the developer provides to the Board how it complied with the terms of the agreement. The developer proposed to just submit it as long as it is consistent with the attached exhibit. As a rule, they always bring it to the Board's attention to review and approve as compliant with the agreement. Attorney Duhy commented language could be added to approve it meeting the terms of the agreement. Attorney Miskel suggested adding language as it shall not be unreasonably withheld as the Board likes to see it on an annual basis. Attorney Duhy emphasized this agreement is only for Phase I and not tied to Phase II which is a separate parcel. The Phase II agreement draft was prepared and given to the developer to review, which will come back to the Board. Mr. Casello liked the way Attorney Duhy presented the issues. Attorney Miskel complimented Attorney Duhy and Mr. Simon. Attorney Duhy requested a motion to approve the changes as discussed. Chair Grant noted the CRA Advisory Board did an approximation of $4,087,476 and asked if there should be a top end limit for TIF or if it just the percentage and whatever that amount would be. There was agreement to use percentages. Motion Ms. Romelus moved to approve the agreement as amended. Mr. Casello seconded the motion that unanimously passed. Motion Ms. Romelus moved to approve the Purchase and Development Agreement. Mr.. Casello seconded the motion that unanimously passed. 9 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 E. Discussion and Recap of Sara Sims Park Master Plan Design and Conceptual Housing Component Mr. Simon explained staff attended the Recreation and Parks Board meeting held on Monday, June 26th. He presented information similar to the information presented at the May 31St meeting at the Carolyn Sims Center, at the June 1St, CRA Advisory Board meeting and the June 13th CRA Board meeting. Recreation and Parks Board supported the community's position regarding removing or adding housing to a small portion of the park and supported improvements recommended for this fiscal year for the park including landscaping, lighting, fencing, irrigation, a pavilion, and restrooms. Staff has also added a questionnaire about the park to the CRA website and to the August water bill to get input for elements of the park and the design and master plan for the park that is contained in the CRA Redevelopment and HOB plans. If the CRA approved the budget and the amount to match City dollars, staff would continue to explore design options and further improvements after these are made that the Board or community would like to have done. Chair Grant asked about the cost for public Wi-Fi, similar to the Library. Mr. Simon replied that could be added to the cost pro -forma. Once the budget is approved, they will start to set aside design improvements and other items they would like to add. They want to add a solar tree to charge phones and other electronics as well as the Wi-Fi and the procurement and community wealth building aspects of the contracts, trying to incorporate the philosophy the City and CRA is adopting with regard to using a bidding process for contractors that local vendors and subcontractors can bid on. Mr. McCray stated for the record from the Recreation and Parks Board and charrettes held in the community, there was consensus there will be no housing at the park. Vice Chair Katz noted there are residential properties adjacent to the park that could be later acquired and incorporated. Mr. Simon explained the full master plan was reviewed with additional properties incorporated in the design the CRA does not currently own. Vice Chair Katz noted there are property acquisition funds rolling over, and the CRA must set some aside to purchase land to incorporate into the property. Chair Grant wanted an estimate and asked if land could be acquired through eminent domain. Mr. Simon thought it was preliminary. Mr. McCray asked about community input. Mr. Simon explained the park improvements already approved would move forward, but staff would seek community input regarding other elements to be added. XIV. New Business A. Discussion and Consideration of the Ocean Breeze East Request for Proposal Criteria Mr. Simon explained at the last meeting, staff and legal were directed to develop the above and announced this is the draft document. Legal approved its form, but there were some items to give the development community as a specific outcome. He would 10 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 like some items discussed and approved. Mr. Casello asked about the deadline. Mr. Simon responded staff already issued a 30 -day Notice of Intent to Dispose (NOI) was designed to meet two goals. Although staff issued the 30 -day notice, it would provide the Board with a 30 -day window of opportunity to go through a tax credit application which would be submitted by the end of October. If there was enough of a response, the Board would then select a developer and negotiate a Purchase and Development Agreement in time to submit an application for funding. The Board could discuss it at a special meeting at the end of August to discuss the RFP. Mr. Simon thought a lot of the information the Board would be looking for would be something readily available and he felt comfortable it was something that could be turned around quickly. The responses have to be hand delivered by 3 p.m. on August 15t". Staff would issue the RFP on July 14 and have a submission date of August 15t". If the Board did not want to hold a special meeting, they could discuss it at the regular Board meeting in September. If a meeting was wanted, the Board could discuss it on August 29tH Mr. McCray asked if the Board would let the developers tell the Board what they could do or with the property or if the Board would indicate what it wanted in the development. Mr. Simon wanted input from the Board. There were bullet points of the RFP under Commitment to the Project identifying financial incentives or conditions the Board may or may not want to offer to the development, one of which is if the development would be a senior affordable complex or a multi -family complex. Vice Chair Katz explained the Board had discussed this in the past and he opposed age restrictions. Mr. McCray favored a mixed-use, all -age affordable housing complex. Chair Grant spoke with neighbors who want senior housing and announced he wanted senior as well as 20% of the units would not have to be senior housing. Ms. Romelus and Mr. Casello wanted all ages. Mr. Simon asked if the Board should offer the land for zero or $10 rather than a fixed purchase price. Mr. Casello did not mind giving the property, but opposed providing cash up -front and holding the note for 10 years. Ms. Romelus favored giving the land as an incentive. Chair Grant and Mr. McCray agreed. Vice Chair Katz was not opposed to giving the property away contingent on other issues and assuming total expenditures by the CRA was limited to a certain level. Mr. Simon explained these will be advertised in the RFP as potential incentives that will later be approved by the Board contingent on meeting the conditions of the RFP. Mr. Simon asked if the Board wanted to offer cash or an additional funding incentive outside of the land or discussion of long-term financing for the project. Vice Chair Katz noted this was a combination of incentives and thought the land and the TIF generated by the property for a total of $2.5 to $3 million was sufficient. He did not favor other financial incentives, impact fee credits, or utility fee waivers: only the TIF.. Mr. McCray favored the opposite. 11 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 Chair Grant favored the $1.1 million for the MILK Corridor Redevelopment should be used for the project. He noted the letters of intent that were received wanted $450,000 a year for 20 years. Chair Grant proposed $350,000 over 20 years or $7 million. He noted the land was vacant for 20 years and the project was ancillary to the Town Square: If there is a good development, it will further the Town Square. Vice Chair Katz agreed, but thought it was an exorbitant amount over the actual cost of the development. Ms. Romelus understood in order to apply for tax credit funding, applicants had to show community support and $551,000 had been listed in the fetters of interest with a maximum of $1 million. She wanted the developer to go out a year or more to obtain tax credits to lessen the cost of the project and lower the amount the CRA had to pay She favored putting aside $551,000, but not $1 million to assist with obtaining the credits or the SAIL funds, contingent only if applying for the tax credits. If they apply for tax funding and are unsuccessful, there would be no cash incentive in addition to the land. Mr. Casello agreed with Ms. Romelus with a minimum of $551,000 without the receive tax credits. Vice Chair Katz supported that position. Chair Grant polled the members if they wanted to give the developer 12 or 24 months to have two options to apply for tax credits and favored 24 months to give the minimum. If the developer is not funded with the credit, it falls to the CRA to help fund them. Vice Chair Katz explained the concern is the land has not been developed. If the time allotment is 24 months, it will be 24 months before something would be developed unless the tax credits are achieved. The tax credit is a parallel route. He thought after 12 months, whoever is awarded the RFP should be obligated to build. Mr. McCray favored 18 months, but it was noted the tax credit cycle did not conform to a second application cycle. Mr. Simon asked how the Board wanted to proceed and outlined the options: • Support a one or two cycle application process, and if not achieved, the CRA would accept a portion of the funding; • Self -fund the project to $6 or $7 million, depending on the project; or • The CRA would fund the project up front and not apply for the credits. Chair Grant polled the members. The consensus was tax credit only and not the dual funding regarding the $551,000 minimum. Vice Chair Katz understood with the CRA's incentive package, the Board is issuing an RFP saying this is enough of an incentive. The applicant will apply for the credits and if unsuccessful with the credits, they were still comfortable with the land and the TiF. Discussion followed about the amount of TIF to provide which could range between $185,000 and $200,000, or as was requested by one entity in its letter of intent, more than $200,000 a year.. 12 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 Vice Chair Katz was opposed to paying more than $200,000 a year. He was not prepared to go above 100% of the throw -off regarding the TIF. Mr. McCray wanted to fund the project along with the TIF. Chair Grant inquired if the Board wanted the project to be market rate, workforce or affordable. The different rental amount makes a difference to developers and there was a correlation with the tax credits with the different type of homes. Chair Grant wanted up to $350,000 a year in TIF. Ms. Romelus noted the various T iF totals over 20 years. If the CRA gave the land away and the developer was not funded with tax credits; she favored starting at 100% of the TIF to help the numbers match up and have the project be affordable based on Board consensus. This would be paid over 20 years. Ms. Romelus understood the land would be free at $1.4. If the developer applied for the tax credits they would receive $551,000 to get the local government support preference. If the developer was not awarded the tax credits, the CRA will help fund on the back end by funding the TIF at 100% or more based on what could be done financially. Mr. Casello favored the land and 100% of the TIF for 20 years. All the members favored a 12 -'month application cycle except Chair Grant, who favored two years to permit two application cycles. Mr. Casello also thought after the 12 -month tax credit cycle, the Board should negotiate. Mr. Simon asked the Board what elements they want in the proposed project, such as leasable space or certain elements to be placed within a retail space or if it would be up to the developer. Mr. Casello asked if having a commercial space in the project would help the developer and learned Mr. Simon did not believe it helped, but commented the Board could incentivize some type of a project. He asked if the Board wanted to include, in addition to some type of a market space, or the neighborhood policing space and if the CRA would wanted to provide $500,000 to incorporate those amenities. There are funds that could be used as an incentive or request it be done as part of the project. Mr. Simon did not think a 5,000 square -foot grocery store was feasible. It is a large space. The Board could include a 2,000 square -foot component, incubator or some type of community space or nonprofit, that had elements such as fresh vegetables or ready-made foods or to share in a kitchen type scenario. He did not think 5,000 square feet is a requirement unless it is very manageable on behalf of an entity like that. There could be parking or flex space be added to the RFP. Mr. McCray preferred to leave it open and see what a developer brings to the table with the incentives already named. Mr. Casello agreed with Mr. McCray. The Board would incentivize commercial space in the retail project. Ms. Romelus asked about the footprint and understood retail would not be appropriate there; however, it was noted retail was across the street from the project site. Vice Chair Katz opposed requiring some retail as it is an affordable housing 13 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 project. Chair Grant wanted to keep the project open and incentivize and noted if an incentive is on the table, it should be defined. Ms. Romelus commented most projects the Board has seen proposed 100 senior or 118 multi-family units. If adding a grocery store to the project, she asked if the footprint could accommodate the use. The density is there for more units and the project can be multi-storied, but the cost to build versus the income gained in rents is the same thing as Ocean One was looking at in a market-rate project except this is affordable housing. There is a break point for construction and operating costs and more units does not always mean better. Ms. Romelus favored letting the deveiopment community determine what would be successful. Mr. McCray commented over 20 years ago, the HOB had a plan and the community wanted a grocery store on MILK Boulevard. He wanted the developer to be able to decide. Community Partners were already included in the RFP, Motion Mr. McCra� moved to approve staff releasing the RFP with the presentation date being August 29t .The motion was duly seconded and unanimously passed. The meeting will take place in City Commission Chambers. The Board resumed its discussion of the 2017/2018 Fiscal Year Budget The members discussed allocating the $551,000 for the RFP. Chair Grant preferred to allocate more. Chair Grant noted there was $1.1 million allocated last year for the HOB. Vice Chair Katz wanted to keep the $1.1 million for the MLK Corridor. Chair Grant wanted to have Ocean Breeze East contracted and next year work on the MILK Jr. Boulevard Corridor. Vice Chair Katz wanted to see other items discussed first and expressed the CRA purchases property nearly every month. He found it hard to believe the CRA would not purchase any property in the coming year. There is property adjacent to Sara Sims that may become available for purchase. (Ms. Romelus left dais at 8:27 p.m.) Mr. Casello wanted to keep the $550,000 for Ocean Breeze East. Chair Grant and Mr. McCray wanted to increase it. Mr. Simon explained the Board can reallocate funds as projects arise or not completed during the fiscal year within the project fund without a budget amendment. (Ms. Romelus returned to the dais at 8:31 p.m.) Ms. Romelus favored using a place -maker and allocating a minimum of $551,000, `E! Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 There was consensus to keep the Town Square project funding at $2.5 million. There was consensus to fund Sara Sims at $600,000. There was consensus to leave the MLK Corridor Redevelopment allocation as is. The Model Block line item had no change. The Boynton Beach Design Construction line item remained the status quo. The E. Boynton Beach Boulevard Extension improvements funds of $125,000 to match the City's funds of $75,000 remained the status quo. Property acquisition rollover funds of $585,000 could be reallocated. Mr. Simon thought having acquisition funds available was prudent. Mr. McCray wanted to discuss the flow chart and noted City staff was working for the CRA with no accountability. He noted the CRA would be spending $50,000 for the Director of Economic Development. He had asked `nim for a monthly report and received one page in May, nothing in June and it is already mid-July. An assistant director will be hired for the CRA and the $50,000 should be redirected from the Director of Economic Development, who does not follow instructions, to the new CRA Assistant Director. Mr. McCray advised if funding the Economic Development Director provision was in the budget, he would oppose the budget. Mr. Simon recommended rolling forward the remaining $70,000 in the Cottage District Capital Improvement. He has not received calls from developers interested in the property. Chair Grant asked if the funding would help to relocate the Community Caring Center and learned it would. Special events increased from last year. The change the Board voted on at the June meeting was monies changed from the marketing line item into the special events to market special events. Staff felt it was appropriate for the $78,000 to be added to the project fund and not the general fund. The Board had also discussed the increase in crowd size means more police, lighting towers and generators were needed thereby increasing the cost of the event. The $578,000 would fully fund the special events budget without eliminating movies or concerts, but it would eliminate the special event grant funding. Mr. Simon explained adjustments could be made to the event budget. Staff could reduce it by eliminating a concert or movie, or eliminate funds for the City and CRA parade or holiday event. Currently the $578,000 funds all the events. Mr. McCray and Vice Chair Katz favored keeping the $578,000. Vice Chair Katz noted it was actually a shift and not really an increase. Chair Grant suggested using different types of sponsorships and inquired if more was being done to obtain sponsors. Mr. McCray 15 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 favored keeping the Haunted Pirate Fest as a signature event, but noted there were other events such as the Blarney Bash. Vice Chair Katz favored entertaining sponsors and any leftover funds could be reallocated. Chair Grant agreed. Mr. Casello queried if the events were at a level where corporate sponsors could be used. Mr. Simon explained sponsors would want verification of attendance and how to document the exposure. Mr. Simon pointed out the events are free so there are no ticket sales to measure attendance. Staff was conducting touch polls and developing ways how to better identify attendance levels. Staff has been slowly growing sponsorship dollars and last year received about $20,000 in sponsorship funds. He noted this is the sixth year the CRA holds the Haunted Pirate Fest. Ms. Romelus suggested using check points and turn -styles. Special events/community grants would be discontinued. Women's Club building renovations was budgeted for $100,000. Chair Grant favored the status quo as did Mr. McCray. Mr. Casello inquired if the amount included the purchase price and learned it did not. The $100,000 for Economic Development Grants was the amount the Board set aside at the June meeting. These grants were very successful over the last 10 years. Mr. Casello inquired about the average amount used over the last three years and learned it was $300,000 to $350,000 each year. The Board had previously increased the allocation. Mr. Casello asked if a book store would receive the same funding as a restaurant and learned they would not. Currently, there are four grants that could be used. Mr. Simon commented one could be eliminated, leaving three grants remaining depending on the amount of funding. Linda Cross, 65 Casa Loma Boulevard, Unit 601, Chair CRA Advisory Board, mentioned the grant program was successful having awarded about 79 grants with 71 of them being businesses that are doing well. The Advisory Board wanted even more money allocated, but it was subject to what funds were available and they were unaware of the roll-over funds. She praised the economic development grant program noting they assist start-up businesses and more commercial space was becoming available. Chair Grant favored remaining the status quo and then revisiting. Staff and the CRA Advisory Board found some reductions in the Professional Services, line item and determined $516,000 was enough with one item carrying forward. Mr. McCray favored $564,000. Mr. Simon explained these are fees for architectural work, site work, demo, contingency and legal fees. Vice Chair Katz supported the $564,000 as did Ms. Romelus. The Neighborhood Police line item was reviewed by the CRA Advisory Board. They recommended adding another officer and funding it. Mr. Simon explained due to scheduling, there are three out of four days when two officers are together. With a third 16 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 officer, there would be no days where a single officer operates the unit and it will result in more of a street presence. Mr. McCray explained they said they needed another officer and at one point, the Board agreed to give them another officer and be present more often outside. He favored adding an extra officer as did Chair Grant. Vice Chair Katz supported the addition, but wanted to evaluate the program in a year to see if adding a third officer made the program more successful. He thought the Board may be spending $400,000 to obtain a marginal gain. It was noted the Police submitted a report for August. The Community Standards Outreach Coordinator and the Economic Development Director positions were taken out of the CRA Budget and put into the City budget. Chair Grant asked if the CRA would share a portion of the salary for the outreach coordinator. The coordinators are assigned to zones and some are within the CRA. Mr. McCray explained he is upset about holding people accountable. He agreed with Mr. Casello, they police the police. He did not want to pay the $134,000 and thought the City should since the CRA hired other officers. He wanted the City to hold them accountable. Lori LaVerriere, City Manager, agreed with Mr. McCray. She explained there is no difference in coverage or responsibilities. When discussing reorganizing Code Compliance to Community Standards they talked to the CRA about financial support. In light of the contributions the CRA made to the Town Square, the City pulled back the funds for the Director of Economic Development and the Outreach Coordinator that is currently within the CRA's budget. Those funds ($184,000) would be available to help the CRA with other projects. This was acceptable to the Board. Mr. Simon commented $97,000 was added to the Neighborhood Police line item for a new total of $372,000 Mr. McCray did not want the Economic Development Director position kept on Board. Mr. Casello asked if the CRA pays for walkie-talkies and other equipment when the new officers are hired for the CRA District. Mr. Simon responded the officers are assigned, in addition to, an existing force. Another officer for the CRA District would open up a position in the Police Department including funding for pensions and benefits. The total estimate for the position was about $110,000. Mr. McCray also questioned police equipment for officers not on duty in the CRA. The site work and demolition line item has rollover funds. Mr. Simon recommended funding the community workshops and meetings as this line item takes care of meetings at the Carolyn Sims Center and other locations. Mr. Simon explained staff will put together a funding availability program for the Business Incubator Program. He advised the Board will need to determine the allocation, per award, and whether it is open to the Board's discretion to set amounts that can be applied for in different categories. There is $125,000 in the line item which Mr. Casello favored keeping. There were no objections. 17 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 The Community Clean Program was reviewed and it was noted staff attempted to develop a program this year for the HOB and/or CRA District when Mr. Scott became the Economic Development Director. Staff would try to undertake the program again which involved management of a cleaning crew and the needed licensing and insurance. The CRA may not be best suited to manage the program. He noted there would be a new Economic Development Director and there will be opportunities to develop other type of programs. Using the Boy Scouts or the Wild Cats was challenging. Smaller maintenance vendors taking on single streets through contracts throughout the year to clean three -days a week may be better. (Mr. Casello left dais at 9:13 p.m.) Ms. Romelus commented instead of hiring a commercial vendor to operate under Public Works, she favored using community wealth building. Mr. McCray preferred to keep the $50,000 as did Chair Grant. Vice Chair Katz was opposed to the program as people should pick up their trash on their yard and there was no way to measure the program's effectiveness. People should be responsible for their streets and neighborhood. Chair Grant commented the trash could be weighed and he wanted to see how it would move forward. (Mr. Casello returned to the dais at 9:15 p.m.) Mr. Casello asked if there were measurements in place and learned there were none. Staff had also sought to come up with a program building wealth in the community and it did not work. Mr. Casello did not see an overwhelming difference the program made and he opposed the $50,000 as he felt the program failed. Mr. McCray favored the program on the vacant lands and properties and thought it was measurable. Vice Chair Katz explained if approved, this program extends to the entire CRA. Mr. Simon provided the history of the program. Staff used one vendor to service three different corridors three times a week that was overseen by Public Works. At the end of that time period, the Board thought there was no difference. (Chair Grant left dais at 9:22 p.m.) Vice Chair Katz thought a program could be created using volunteers and the funds be used to inform volunteers of the schedule to clean up streets. It could build community as the program hires people to pick up after other people. He offered residents would learn by picking up the trash. Hiring someone to pick up trash is only as effective as a coordinated effort that involves community groups and organizations. Mr. McCray countered the community does get involved and it does make a difference. He commented the individuals who throw the trash do not live in the HOB. Mr. Simon commented staff has a good idea of suggested ways to use the funds and could bring back a hybrid program. in Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 (Chair Grant returned to the dais at 9:24 p.m.) Ms. Romelus explained the CRA has the funds and agreed with Mr. Casello the results left something to be desired. This year, the CRA earmarked the funds, but did not spend them. She proposed a grant program that allows the community to help clean after itself and thought it would bring a more tangible result. Ms. LaVerriere explained when the CRA budgeted for the program, the City contracted with a vendor for the work. The CRA defunded it and the City absorbed the $50,000 and has continued the program. She has also received complaints and just spoke with Dr. Martha Meeks Light about the condition of the area. Every time Ms. LaVerriere drives by, the intersection at MLK Jr. and Seacrest Boulevard and vacant land is filled with litter. The litter is mostly produced from the Z -Mart area. She authorized Mr. Livergood to add two more days for five days a week cleanup in that quadrant. Ms. Romelus suggested letting the contractor finish and create something to entice the community to clean up after themselves. She thought David Scott could develop something with the various community coalitions. Ms. LaVerriere explained he had already submitted a draft program to Mr. Simon. Mr. McCray explained the person that owns the Z -Mart hires someone to clean up his parking lot. He keeps the place clean and it is still occurring. Chair Grant asked if they could obtain more trashcans. Ms. Romelus favored anything to help fix the issue. Mr. Casello agreed with Ms. Romelus and Vice Chair Katz's comments. There was agreement to allocate $50,000. The marketing/business assistance line item was for programs the CRA has for local businesses within the CRA District, i.e. Father's or Mother's Day promotions. They are advertised in the Boynton Forum and through flyers, billboards, websites ad banners. Tracy Smith -Coffey, Marketing and Business Development, explained the actual amount for the budget only covers marketing for the Marina, the CRA annual reports and other required items. She provides a marketing and business development recap for small businesses and the Marina each month. One suggestion made at the June meeting was to reduce the amount of print ads. The amount was reduced and would be provided at the August meeting. Ms. Romelus favored marketing businesses more effectively. She learned the CRA features five businesses at the Movies at the Park and the attendees like the drawings for gift certificates. Ms. Romelus favored outside the box thinking. The business is also on the YouTube page and the owner is given a disk they can post on social media. Ms. Romelus asked if handouts and flyers were printed locally and learned they were. Mr. Simon explained the Board could remove any item they wish if they desired to reduce the budget. The Housing Rehab Program assists with home rehabilitation and what it encompassed is up to the Board. It is a grant program. Mr. Simon thought $20,000 to $25,000 could be allocated per house or it could be a match program. Funds could also supplement 19 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 the City's rehabilitation programs. Chair Grant explained it would be need -based and income eligible. Mr. McCray noted SHIP is for the entire City, but this program would be just for the CRA District. The program would only address exterior work. Staff would revise the prior program guidelines from 2012, but there is no current ongoing program. Mr. Simon agreed to provide a copy of the guidelines to Mr. McCray. Ms. Cross noted the CRA Advisory Board felt a serious issue with storms is roof damage and homes are typically uninsured or underinsured which was why the CRA Advisory Board wanted to increase the amount to $100,000. If restricting the grant to just the roof, each home could receive on average, $10,000 in assistance. Mr. McCray commented the Board could always adjust the amount. Chair Grant favored rounding the amount up to $50,000. The Board agreed. It was noted there was $799,049 left to allocate. Vice Chair Katz commented he wanted to return the allocation for MILK Jr. Boulevard for $1.2 million to pursue the development aggressively with incentives and felt $600,000 would not suffice. Chair Grant agreed. Vice Chair Katz commented the Board could complete the Ocean Breeze East, MLK Jr. Boulevard and Sara Sims projects. He did not want the funds to be used for anything else. Mr. Simon advised staff will come back with identified ways to use the funding. Ms. Romelus thought the Board could use the same parameters as with NuRock to expedite development projects. It was also agreed to roll the remaining funds into the economic development grant categories bringing the total to $310,049. Staff will send the updated budget to the members. Ms. Romelus asked about filling the vacant position on the CRA Advisory Board. Mr. Simon explained it will go before the City Commission on July 18th. One assignment the CRA Advisory Board had was to review the special event grants and make recommendations. Ms. Romelus hoped it would be on file. The Vendor policy was also under review. XV. CRA Advisory Board A. CRA Advisory Board Agenda — July 6, 2017 B. Minutes from CRAAB Meeting — June 1, 2017 C. Pending Assignments from CRA Board Meeting April 11, 2017 1. Review and Revise Current CRA Special Event Grants 2. Review and Revise Vendor Policy for other CRA's/Non- Profits D. Reports on Pending Assignments 1. None E. New Assignments from CRA Board Meeting June 13, 2017: 20 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Board Boynton Beach, Florida July 11, 2017 1. one XVI. Future Agenda Items A. CareerSource March Career Expo Recap B. Consideration of Purchase and Sale Agreement with the Boynton Woman's Club located at 1010 S. Federal Highway C. Consideration of Purchase and Development Agreement with Heartfelt Florida Housing of South Palm Beach County Community Land Trust Inc. (Habitat for Humanity) D. Consideration of Purchase and Development Agreement for the CRA Owned Property located at 711 N. Federal Highway to South Florida Marine E. Discussion and Consideration of Rehab or Demolition of CRA Owned Property Located at 1110 N. Federal Highway XVII. Adjournment Motion Ms. Romelus moved to adjourn. Mr. McCray seconded the motion that unanimously passed. The meeting was adjourned at 9:57p.m. Catherine Cherry Minutes Specialist 21