Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:11]

>> I AM CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER. THIS IS THE FORT PIERCE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. IT IS NOVEMBER 12, 2019. PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

AND TO THE REPUBLC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

[4. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Any person who wishes to comment on any subject on this agenda may be heard at this time. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes or less, as directed by the Chairperson, as this section of the Agenda is limited to fifteen minutes. The FPRA Board will not be able to take any official actions under Comments from the Public. Speakers will address the Chairperson, Board Members, and the Public with respect. Inappropriate language will not be tolerated. Sign-up sheet is located in the lobby. ]

>> WE HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP. YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS ALSO, SIGN IN PIONEER THREE MINUTES WILL NOT START UNTIL SIGN AND PART AND THAT SHE CAN TALK AND SIGN IN AT THE SAME TIME.

YOU WILL GET A WARNING AT FIVE SECONDS. A PRETTY SIGN AND FOR US PLEASE.

>> MY NAME IS JEANNIE DARIUS. I LIVE AT 223 NORTH SECOND STREET.

I HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE HD PLANT CONTRACT THAT YOUR CONSULTANT HAD SOME CONCERNS WITH. IT WAS ATTACHED TO THE CONTRACT THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO SIGN.

I'M JUST WONDERING IF THESE CONCERNS THAT THEY ADDRESSED, IN AUGUST, HAD ACTUALLY BEEN CHANGED OR LOOKED AT. SOME OF THEM ARE KIND OF INSIGNIFICANT.

SOME OF THEM DO SHOW THAT THE VIABILITY MIGHT NOT BE AS ROSY AS THEY THINK IT IS.

THE FIRST ONE THEY SAID THEY DO NOT HAVE A CONTRACT, OR A LETTER OF INTENT WITH ANY HOTEL.

I AM JUST WONDERING HOW WE GOT THAT? HAS THE CITY GOTTEN SOMETHING FROM AUDUBON SAYING YES, MARRIOTT WILL BUY THE LAND AND THEY WILL BUILD A HOTEL.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIG THINGS THAT YOU GUYS HAD WANTED WAS A HOTEL.

THEY SAID THEY CAN PROVIDE MARRIOTT. I'M JUST WONDERING IF THEY HAVE ARE NOT? THE OTHER THING IS THEY MADE -- OR CONSULTANT IDENTIFIED SEVERAL CONTINGENCIES AND FINANCES THAT JUST DID NOT SEEM TO REFLECT WHAT YOUR CONSULTANT SAID IT SHOULD. THEY ASSUME THE SALES COST OF THE PROJECTIONS IS 4%.

THAT DOESN'T EVEN COVER HALF OF THE PEOPLE THAT WOULD BE REALTORS FEES, ET CETERA ET CETERA, THEY FEEL THAT THE SELLOUT FEES SHOULD BE CONSIDERABLY HIGHER.

IN ANOTHER SPACE THEY MENTIONED THAT THEIR VALUES THAT THEY WANTED TO SELL THE TOWNHOMES AND CONDOS WERE OUT OF LINE WITH WHAT THE CITY HAS. I HAVE NOT SEEN A REVISED PROPOSAL. THE ORIGINAL AND SAID THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD SELL THE TOWNHOMES FOR $650,000. YOU CAN GET A RIVERFRONT HOME FOR LESS THAN THAT.

MAYBE THEY KNOW SOMETHING I DON'T KNOW. I KNOW EDGAR FILLS PROPERTY VALUES HAVE SKYROCKETED. IN GENERAL, FORT PIERCE HAS GONE UP.

MY UNDERSTANDING OF READING THE CONTRACT IS AUTOBAHN IS NOT GOING TO BE THE DEVELOPER.

THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE THE ONE BUILDING THEM, THEY WILL BE SELLING THE LAND LIKE THEY DO WITH THE HOTEL TO ANOTHER CONTRACTOR WHO IS GOING TO COME IN AND BUILD THESE EXPENSIVE TOWNHOMES. DO THEY HAVE A CONTRACT? DO THEY HAVE SOMEBODY THAT IS GOING TO BUILD, YOU KNOW, $650,000 TOWNHOMES ON WHAT IS NOW A CANAL?

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THOSE CONCERNS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED?

>> CHARLIE FRANK MATTHEWS? >> CHARLES FRANK MATTHEWS FOR THE RECORD.

[00:05:04]

EVEN THOUGH I SERVE AS VICE CHAIR OF THE AUTHORITY, I THINK IN THIS CASE I WANT TO BE FAIR AND SAY THAT I AM A CITIZEN FOR THIS ISSUE. 5B.

I GRADUATED FROM HIGH SCHOOL, AND THAT YEAR, I WAS TOLD TO DO RIGHT, BECAUSE IT IS RIGHT TO DO RIGHT. MY GRANDPARENTS USED TO SAY YOUR WORRY WHAT IS BOND. WHEN IT COMES TO THE TAX CERTIFICATE THAT I AM READING AND DIGGING THROUGH HISTORY, IT WASN'T TOO LONG AGO I NEED TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY, I'M ASKING THE TAX CERTIFICATE WAS E101044. I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE RENEGOTIATED BY THE BOARD HERE.

I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE GIVEN A FAIR PLAY. YOU HAVE CHANGED.

IN JULY SEVEN, 2015, THERE WAS DISCUSSION ON THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION BY THE BOARD.

I WAS NOT A MEMBER OF THE BOARD AT THE TIME. DIGGING THROUGH WHAT I CAN FIND, BASICALLY ADVANCED SOME HELP WITH CLEANING UP THIS PROPERTY. A DISCUSSION WAS MADE, ON JULY 20, 2015. HOW WE FORGET? I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS ISSUE IS PURPOSELY DONE BY POLITICAL MEANS. IT IS REALLY, IN ALL PHASES, ANY REFUNDS OR ADVANCED MONIES, REIMBURSEMENTS, SHOULD GO BACK TO HELPED YOU.

YOUR WORD IS YOUR BOND. AS A YOUNG BOY, IF I BORROW $50 FROM A PARENT, I FOUND A WAY TO PAY IT BACK. I THINK WHEN YOU ALL DISCUSS THIS.

YOU CAN SEE IF YOU GO BACK TO READING, IN DIFFERENT SEGMENTS OF TIME, THIS MONEY WOULD BE NO QUESTION. THERE SHOULD BE GOING BACK TO YOU, THEY DECIDED THAT POINT THEY WANT TO ADVANCE IT AS A GIFT. THAT IS UP TO THEM.

I'M ASKING YOU TO RECONSIDER THIS AND THE MOVEMENTS ON 5B. THANK YOU.

>> MR. MATTHEWS? WOULD YOU STATE YOUR ADDRESS AND FOR ON THE RECORD, AND ALSO SIGN

IN FOR US, PLEASE? >> CHARLIE FRANK MATTHEWS, PO BOX 2593, FORT PIERCE.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. DORIS TILLMAN. YOU HAD TO BE HONEST, YOU ARE ON CAMERA.

STREET FORT PIERCE. I WANT TO TALK ON A GOOD NOTE. >> YOUR TIME WILL NOT START UNTIL YOU SIGN IN. UNLESS YOU CAN DO TWO THINGS AT ONCE.

>> TODAY, NO.

A MONUMENTAL MOMENT FOR THE CITY. I THINK WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THIS PROCESS SEVERAL TIMES. I THINK RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THE BEST PEOPLE WE WILL EVER HAVE.

I CAN SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE WITH THE CONTRACTOR, GREG LEWIS. HE DID THE SUNRISE THEATER FOR US HE DID OUR OFFICE FOR US. I SAW HIM GET RED-FACED ONCE, AND THOSE PROJECTS, THAT IS A MIRACLE. I WAS RED-FACED FOR SIX YEARS. WE'VE GOT A REALLY GOOD GROUP THAT WANTS TO DO THIS PROJECT. I'VE GOTTEN TO KNOW -- DALE.

>> GOOD OLD WHAT'S HIS NAME? MEET. HE HAS ALREADY JUMPED INTO THE SPIRIT OF FORT PIERCE.

I REALLY WANT TO SEE THIS COME IN. I THINK THEY HAVE GOOD PLANS, GOOD IDEAS. THEY REALLY WANT TO WORK WITH THE CITY AND BE PART OF IT.

I HOPE THAT Y'ALL WILL, YOU KNOW, LISTEN TO THEM TODAY GO FORWARD BEFORE WE HIT ANOTHER RECESSION. THANK YOU. 1020 THANK, MA'AM.

DID YOU SIGN AND, DORIS? THANK YOU. MARCIA BAKER.

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, I AM MARCIA

[00:10:01]

BAKER. WHEN THE POWER PLANT WAS RAISED IN 2008, THE CONTRACTORS READ PCB CONTAMINATED SOIL OVER LARGE AREA. INSTEAD OF CONTAINING IT TO THE SMALL SECTION OF THE PROPERTY WHERE WAS LOCATED, WHICH IS SMALLER THAN THE PROPOSED HOTEL PARCEL. IN NOVEMBER 2012 I WAS A MEMBER ALONG WITH SEVEN OTHERS OF THE FPR A ADVISORY COMMITTEE OVERSEEING THE CLEANUP. WE MET REGULARLY EXAMINE TEST BORINGS, VOTED TO ADVISE TO CLEAN THE PROPERTY TO THE HIGHER RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS.

IT TOOK THREE YEARS TO CLEAN UP THE PROBLEMS CAUSED BY CONTRACTING FOR THE INITIAL DEMOLITION BASED ON THE PROMISE TO DO IT QUICKLY. NOW WE HAVE A PROPOSAL FROM A DEVELOPER THAT WAS APPROVED TO DEVELOP THE SITE BECAUSE THEY CLAIM TO BE ABLE TO DO IT IMMEDIATELY AND BECAUSE OF GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS AND A VERY ATTRACTIVE MEDIA PACKAGE THEY WON THE BID. THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT LACKS ANY SAFEGUARDS FOR THE CITY TO PREVENT THE HOTEL PROPERTY FROM BEING SOLD WITH NO WAY OF RETAINING CONTROL OVER ITS DEVELOPMENT. THE NEW OWNER CAN RESELL OR DECIDE TO JUST HOLD ONTO THE PROPERTY WITHOUT DEVELOPING IT AT ALL AS THEY WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE REVERSION CLAUSE OR THE PERFORMANCE BOND. CLOSE THE TAX INCREMENT BENEFIT TRANSFER TO THE NEW OWNER HAS NO TIME LIMIT. THE NEW OWNERS WILL HAVE REQUIRED -- ACQUIRED A KEY PROPERTY FOR SMALL INVESTMENT, $1 MILLION WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN EXPENDED IN PROVIDING INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE HOTEL SITE THIS WILL HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS THE RUSH TO HIRE A CONTRACTOR TO DEMOLISH THE PLAN DID IN 2008 WHICH CREATED CONTAMINATION OF THE ENTIRE SITE.

IF THERE IS NO WAY TO RECOVER THE CITY'S INVESTMENT, IF AUDUBON FAILS TO DO ANY FURTHER DEVELOPMENT AS ANY ENFORCEMENT OF THIS AGREEMENT WOULD TAKE YEARS AND SINCE AUDUBON HAS NO SKIN IN THE GAME, THEY HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE. WE WILL HAVE LOST A KEY PIECE OF THE PROPERTY. HOPEFULLY, ANY NEW RFQ WILL INCLUDE A MARKETING ANALYSIS TO EVALUATE THE ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF ANY PLAN. HASTE MAKES WASTE.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, PETE, FOR PAYING ATTENTION AND FOLLOWING THE RULES.

GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR, I AM PETE TESCH, PRESIDENT OF THE ECONOMIC RELEVANT COUNSEL WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY. I AM HERE TO SUPPORT THE AUDUBON MANAGEMENT PROJECT.

THIS IS A HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT DAY FOR FORT PIERCE. AS A RESIDENT OF FORT PIERCE, I AM SO EXCITED THAT THIS PROJECT IS COMING TO FRUITION. I WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND MY APPRECIATION TO YOU AS A GOVERNING BOARD IN MAKING THIS DECISION.

IT DOES REQUIRE A LITTLE BIT OF RISK, BUT THE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS THAT WILL ACCRUE BECAUSE OF THIS DECISION WILL BE FAR-REACHING INTO THE FUTURE. AS WE ALL KNOW FROM AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE, FORT PIERCE IS ALWAYS IN NEED OF CAPITAL INVESTMENT AND INFUSION OF MONEY TO CREATE WEALTH. THIS WILL HELP DO THAT. WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS HELP INCREASE THE AVERAGE EARNINGS PER WORKER AND HOUSEHOLD INCOMES BECAUSE WE REALLY NEED IT.

I CANNOT THINK OF A BETTER PROJECT TO DO THIS FOR DOWNTOWN. IN TERMS OF JOB CREATION, CAPITAL INVESTMENT, THE DECISION YOU MAKE TODAY IS SO IMPORTANT AND GETTING TO KNOW DALE MATTISON AND HIS TEAM, I THINK WE HAVE A FIRST-RATE DEVELOPER THAT WILL CREATE, YOU KNOW, THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT IS SO DESPERATELY NEEDED FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

I AM SO EXCITED TODAY. I HOPE THE DECISION WILL BE MADE TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS.

WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU, AND DALE, AND ALSO THE EDC TO MAKE THIS AN EVEN MORE

VIBRANT COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THAT IS ALL OF THE PEOPLE WHO SIGNED UP. >> THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA

[5. NEW BUSINESS]

IS, FPRA RESOLUTION 19-04 DECLARING THE FOLLOWING REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY THE FORT PIERCE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO BE SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO DISPOSE OF SAID PROPERTY: 1134 AVENUE D, PARCEL ID 2409-501-0305-000-7 AND 1138

[00:15:14]

AVENUE D, PARCEL ID 2409-501-0306-000-4. FPRA RESOLUTION 19-03 AUTHORIZING PROCEEDING WITH THE SALE OF VOLUNTARY CLEANUP TAX CREDIT CERTIFICATE NUMBER 1005 UTILIZING FALLBROOK CREDIT FINANCE AS THE PLACEMENT AGENT. APPROVAL OF THE AGREEMENT FOR

DEVELOPMENT OF KING'S LANDING WITH AUDUBON DEVELOPMENT, INC. >> AT THIS TIME, WE ARE REFLECTING BACK ON WHAT OCCURRED OCTOBER 201ST AT OUR MEETING. WE RECEIVE DIRECTIVE TO MOVE FORWARD FOR SOLICITATION WITH BIDS FOLLOWING PRESENTATION FROM A SPONSORED BY ALLEGHENY FRANCISCAN MINISTRIES TO BRING A VIBRANT ECONOMIC EXCITING DEVELOPMENT IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE LINCOLN THEATER. UPON RESEARCH, IN MOVING FORWARD WITH THE SOLICITATION AND RFP, OR THE BID COME OR WHATEVER WE CHOOSE TO DO, WE DETERMINED THAT THIS PARTICULAR LAND WAS PREVIOUSLY RETAINED FOR THE HOPE AND DESIRE THAT THIS WOULD FACILITATE THE PARKING NEEDS FOR THE LINCOLN THEATER. SO, WE HAVE NEVER DECLARED THIS LAND A SURPLUS.

BASED UPON THE WANTS AND DESIRES OF THE GROUP THAT CAME AND THE OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES.

I BELIEVE WE CAN UTILIZE THE LAND WITHOUT COMPROMISING OUR FUTURE LAND USE OBJECTIVES.

I BELIEVE IF WE ARE TO RETAIN THE LAND AND HAVE A LONG-TERM LEASE WITH THIS GROUP, OR ANY OTHER GROUP THAT SO DESIRES TO BRING A DEVELOPMENT SUCH AS THIS WE CAN HAVE SOME SORT OF LANGUAGE WITHIN THE RFP THAT WE ARE TO KEEP THE LAND IN OUR OWNERSHIP AND WE WOULD HAVE SOME SORT OF PROVISION THAT ALLOWS US TO TAKE BACK THE LAND IF NEEDED TO PROMOTE ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR THE LINCOLN THEATER. AT THIS TIME WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS CERTAIN PROCESS AS REQUIRED BY THE FLORIDA STATE STATUTES TO DECLARE IT -- REQUIRE THIS LAND SURPLUS AND

THIS IS >> WE ARE DECLARING IT SURPLUS BUT WE ARE NOT SELLING IT

WITHOUT A CAUSE, IN AWAY? >> OR IF WE KEEP IT AS A LONG-TERM LEASE WE CAN JUST

RETAIN THE OWNERSHIP. YES MA'AM. >> I REMEMBERED THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD PRIOR TO THIS. ABOUT THE EFFECTS IT WOULD HAVE WITH THE LINCOLN THEATER INITIATIVE AND HAS ANYBODY REACHED OUT FROM THAT MEMBERSHIP TO SAY THAT HEY, WE ARE MOVING

FORWARD AND WE ARE REALLY COUNTING ON THIS POPERTY? >> I HAVE NOT SPECIFICALLY HAD A MEETING WITH OUR COMMITTEE. WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO MEET WITH THEM TO TALK ABOUT THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE LINCOLN THEATER. WE HAVE NOT -- WE REACHED OUT TO LINCOLN PARK MAIN OF MOVING FORWARD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF RFP.

AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH A DEVELOPMENT WE CAN GET THE INPUT FROM THE THAT WAY WE ARE

PARTNERS IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. >> IN FOLLOW-UP, SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WELL, WE CAN HAVE OUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO, WE JUST DON'T HAVE TO SELL IT TO THEM AND WE CAN RETAIN THE CONTROL TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT IN THE FUTURE, BUT, I MEAN,, MY THOUGHT IS, WHAT IF THE RFP RESPONSE IS IMPROVE THE PROPERTY , PUT A BUILDING ON IT, DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

I MEAN, THAT KIND OF COMPLICATES THE MATTER LITTLE BIT. I GUESS WE CAN DEAL WITH THAT

WHEN WE GET THERE. >> IT WOULD BE NICE IF WE HAD A LOT OF INTEREST.

>> THEY WANT TO USE IT, THEY HAVE A PURPOSE THAT THEY BROUGHT IT TO US.

THE PEOPLE THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THAT ARE ALSO KNOW THE PEOPLE THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THE LINCOLN

THEATER. >> YES MA'AM. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> RIGHT NOW IT IS JUST SITTING THERE, AND IT'S VACANT. WHOEVER STEPS TO THE PLATE FIRST TO MAKE IT AS VIBRANT AS POSSIBLE, IN LIGHT OF WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO I WOULD THINK WOULD SERVE THE SAME OBJECTIVE IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO AND THAT IS TO MAKE THE BEST USE OF THE PROPERTY BEING IT IS OWNED BY THE TAXPAYERS. RIGHT NOW IT IS JUST SITTING THERE. PUTTING IT UP FOR RFP. ALL THAT DOES IS DRAW PEOPLE TO THE STARTING BLOCKS OF SOMEONE CAN COME OUT RUNNING. IT HAS BEEN SITTING THERE VACANT FOR THE LONGEST. I THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE INTERESTED. WHO KNOWS SOMEBODY MAY COME FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE WITH A BETTER IDEA. AT ANY RATE, SOMETHING IS FINALLY GOING TO BE DONE WITH THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. IT IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

>> I AGREE, COMMISSIONER. IN ALLEGHENY THEY CAME IN WITH SOME IDEAS, THIRD-RATE PARTNER.

[00:20:01]

THERE IS NO DOUBT, IF PART OF THAT PROPOSAL, AND THE WINNING PROPOSER IN THE CASE, OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, IT WAS A PARTNERSHIP THAT IS ALREADY ESTABLISHED.

THEY ARE THE ONES WITH SOME IDEAS AND THEY ARE COMING OUTSIDE THE BOX A LITTLE BIT WITH SOME IDEAS. I AM IN SUPPORT OF THE RESOLUTION.

>> I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION IF SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE? >> I AM FOR THE APPROVAL.

AUTHORIZING PROCEEDING WITH THE SALE OF VOLUNTARY CLEANUP TAX CREDIT CERTIFICATE NUMBER 1005 UTILIZING FALLBROOK CREDIT FINANCE AS THE PLACEMENT AGENT. APPROVAL OF THE AGREEMENT FOR

DEVELOPMENT OF KING'S LANDING WITH AUDUBON DEVELOPMENT, INC. >> MADAM CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE FPRA BOARD. AS WE DISCUSSED, OCTOBER 21 AT OUR FPRA BOARD MEETING.

THIS WAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO SELL OUR RECENTLY RECEIVED BONUS TAX CERTIFICATE FOR THE VOLUNTARY CLEANUP TAX PROGRAM ON THE OPEN MARKET. WE HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING ANYWHERE FROM 85-90% RETURN ON SALE. WITH THAT BEING THE CASE, HOPEFULLY WE CAN ANTICIPATE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 400-FOR THE $50,000 CONSERVATIVELY, MAYBE $425,000 THAT CAN BE RETURNED TO THE FPRA UNUSED AT YOUR DISCRETION.

NOW, AT THAT OCTOBER 21 MEETING, THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT THE UTILIZATION OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE SALE. BASED UPON RESEARCH DONE BY STAFF, THERE IS NO AGREEMENT THAT PROHIBITS OR RESTRICTS THE UTILIZATION OR THE DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS BY THE FPRA AND THE FPRA BOARD CAN UTILIZE THOSE FUNDS AND TAX PROCEEDS, TAX SALE PROCEEDS, AT YOUR DISCRETION.

STAFF ALSO FOUND THAT FPRA HAS NO FINANCIAL OBLIGATION FOR THE REHABILITATION COST.

THE FPRA IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP COSTS.

I WANTED YOU ALL TO KNOW THAT, BUT AT THIS TIME, THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO FULFILL OUR SALE AS PARTICIPANTS OF THE PROGRAM. AND ALSO ONE OF OUR PARTNERS WAS RIGHT THERE, KIM DELANEY.

SHE WAS WITH US THROUGH THE TREASURE COAST PLANNING COUNCIL. WE BORROWED A BUNCH OF MONEY FROM THEM. WE HAVE SUBSEQUENTLY PAID BACK ALL OF OUR LOANS, NOW WE ARE EVEN, WE ARE READY FOR DEVELOPMENT WE ARE READY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE PROCEEDS OF THIS SALE ARE NOW AT YOUR DISCRETION. WE ARE ASKING NOW IS FOR A RESOLUTION TO BE EXECUTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SALE OF THIS TAX CERTIFICATE.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION. THE QUESTION I HAVE A NEW JUST ANSWERED, I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT EACH TIME WE DID THIS WAS AN INDIVIDUAL

RESOLUTION WAS IT NOT? >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> THAT IS CORRECT.

I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE MEETING WHERE WE DIRECTED STAFF TO COME UP WITH A RESOLUTION THAT SAID ANY MONIES OVER AND ABOVE THE LOAN PROCEEDS WOULD GO BACK TO THE F PUA.

THAT RESOLUTION WAS NEVER CREATED, AND WHAT WAS DONE, EACH TIME WE HAD TAX CERTIFICATES WE INCLUDED THE PARAGRAPH IN THEIR THAT SAID ALL MONIES OVER AND ABOVE THE LOAN WOULD BE RETURNED TO THE FPUA. I BELIEVE IT WAS $3.3 MILLION PAID OUT BEFORE WE TOOK THE LOAN I THINK IT BELONGS TO THE RIGHT PAYER. I UNDERSTAND THAT I AM TORN, BECAUSE THE REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM HAS SOME REALLY GOOD THINGS IN IT THAT I WOULD LOVE FOR THE CITY TO HAVE THE MONEY, AND BE ABLE TO DO WHAT WAS IN THE PROGRAM.

I DO BELIEVE THAT THE PROCEEDS FROM THIS VOLUNTARY TAX CLEANUP SHOULD GO BACK TO THE RATEPAYER.

>> MADAM MAYOR? >> YES, SIR. >> I HAVE WRESTLED WITH THIS MYSELF. I WAS ON THE UTILITY AUTHORITY WHEN WE DECOMMISSION THE PLANT.

I JOINED YOU FOLKS, I GOT TO SIT ON THE OTHER SIDE AND FOUND OUT THAT BOTH THE UTILITY AUTHORITY

[00:25:03]

IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE ARE THE POLLUTERS IN THIS MATTER. WHAT DID WE DO, WE GIVE THE PROPERTY TO THE FPRA. IT IS WHAT ANY GOOD DEVELOPMENT -- I AM LOOKING DOWN AND I'M SEEING ALL OF THESE HATS EVERYBODY HAS GOT TO WHERE.

I KEPT GOING BACK AND FORTH, I TALKED TO MR. TOM PECK, AND HE HAS TALKED TO ME SEVERAL TIMES, I'VE TALKED TO STAFF. EVERYBODY HAS A VALID POINT. MS. BAKER GOT UP AND SPOKE ABOUT WHAT WE DID AFTER WE DECOMMISSION THE PLANT. THAT WAS MY MEMORY ALSO AND I HELD ONTO THAT. AT THE END OF THE DAY, I DID WHAT ANY GOOD PERSON WOULD DO, AND I JUST SPLIT IT DOWN THE MIDDLE AND I SAID YOU KEEP HALF AN YOU KEEP HALF.

RATEPAYERS ARE HAPPY, THE CITIZENS OF FORT PIERCE ARE HAPPY, THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT HAPPEN THERE. I DON'T KNOW FOR CERTAIN, IF THE $3.3 MILLION IN CLEANUP WAS EXACTLY THE BEST USE OF THE MONEY AT THAT TIME THAT WE REDUCE THE CONTAMINATION TO THE PROPERTY. I DON'T KNOW THAT. IF IT DIDN'T THEN IT CREATED THIS HUMONGOUS MONSTER THAT WE HAD TO GO TO THE TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING AND APPLY FOR THE REVOLVING LOAN AND BE ABLE TO GET THAT. AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'VE GOT THIS MOST BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN CLEANED UP TO RESIDENTIAL STANDARD.

WE'VE ALL GOT MONEY IN THIS THING. I AM A RATEPAYER AND A TAXPAYER.

IT'S COMING OUT OF ONE POCKET OR IT DOESN'T MATTER AT THE END OF THE DAY, I FEEL FPRA HAS A RESPONSIBILITY GOING FORWARD FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE EXPENSES THAT ARE GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THIS PROPERTY DOWN THE WAY THAT MAY COME BACK TO US. I JUST GOT TO THE END OF IT AND I SAID, YOU KNOW, THE BEST THING

TO DO IS TO SPLIT IT ON THE MIDDLE, THAT IS WHERE I AM AT. >> RECALL A STORY ABOUT A BABY.

>> RIGHT. 1134 AVENUE D A COUPLE OF COMMENTS, I HAVE WRESTLED WITH IT, TOO. GONE BACK AND FORTH WITH THE WHOLE THING.

I GO BACK TO THE HISTORY, TALKED ABOUT IT LAST TIME, YOU KNOW, THE KING POWER PLANT WAS FIRED UP ON THANKSGIVING DAY IN 1912, FOR 60 YEARS BEFORE THE RATEPAYERS, I'M SORRY, BEFORE THE CITIZENS OF FORT PIERCE WENT TO THE BALLOT BOX AND VOTED FOR FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY, RIGHT? YOU KNOW, HE OWNED AND OPERATED THE POWER PLANT ON THE PROPERTY.

I CAN ONLY IMAGINE WHAT HAPPENED IN THOSE 60 YEARS, RIGHT. I THINK WE ARE BUYING TANKERS OF OIL AT THE TIME TO POWER THE POWER PLANT. I AM TORN ALSO.

YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THAT HISTORY THERE. WHAT OBLIGATION DO WE HAVE AS A CITY. ALL THE SUDDEN NO ONE HAD A CRYSTAL BALL WE DID NOT KNOW THERE WAS GOING TO BE AN TWO FPRA. WE HAVE AN FPUA.

I'M STILL STICKING WITH THAT OPINION THAT, YOU KNOW, WE SHARED IN THE BURDEN WE SHARED IN THE CLEANUP WE SHARED IN THE DUE DILIGENCE. I WAS IN ON ANY ONE OF THOSE BOARDS AT THE TIME. READING THE HISTORY AND LOOKING AT WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE.

AND WHAT WE PROPOSED TO DO WITH IT AS AN FPRA BOARD. IT IS A GOOD STEP FORWARD.

>> I BELIEVE WHAT STAFF HAS PRESENTED ALREADY IS A GOOD PLAN IT IS REDEVELOPING AND REINVESTING IN OUR COMMUNITY AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. I GOT THE MEMOS.

I DID NOT TALK TO MR. TOM PECK SPECIFICALLY. I DID GET SOME INFORMATION THAT HELPED ME MAKE THESE COMMENTS ON THIS DECISION. THAT IS KIND OF WHERE I SIT.

I'M NOT FULLY SAYING THAT IS WHERE I STUCK IN THE SAND ARE STUCK IN THE MUD RIGHT THERE.

>> STAFF RECOMMENDATION? >> I AM WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

>> MR. SESSIONS? >> I TELL YOU, WHEN WE LOOKED AT WHAT STAFF HAD PROPOSED LAST TIME IN TERMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ECONOMICALLY DEPRESSED, BLIGHTED, NEIGHBORHOOD, I CANNOT TAKE A CHANCE AND SIT HERE, AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AND INVOLVE A THIRD-PARTY WITH JUST

[00:30:07]

A UA. I AM AT A POINT HERE WHEN I'M IN A POSITION TO BE ABLE TO CLEAN UP SOME OF THE ISSUES, ESPECIALLY IN MY DISTRICT THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.

WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED BY STAFF WILL IN FACT DO SO. EVEN IF ALL OF THE MONEY WERE TO GO TO THE UA, I WOULD BE THERE LOBBING THEM TO TRY TO GET THE MONEY TO SPEND IT FROM WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED BY STAFF BECAUSE IT ADDRESSES WHAT THIS ORGANIZATION IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT. THAT IS CLEANING UP BLIGHTED, DILAPIDATED AREAS.

I STILL TAKE THE SAME POSITION TODAY THAT I TOOK THEN, THE ONLY CAVEAT FOR ME WAS THAT IF THERE WAS SOMETHING IN WRITING THAT PREVENTED THAT FROM HAPPENING THEN LEGALLY WE WOULD BE OBLIGATED TO DO SO. I'M NOT GOING TO WAVE, AND I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IN TERMS OF HALF-AND-HALF THAT WAS SOMEWHAT REASONABLE. I'M DEFINITELY NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND WAVE AN OPPRTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IN TERMS OF CLEANING UP SOME OF THE MOST BLIGHTED AREAS IN OUR CITY. FOR ONCE, WE FINALLY HAVE SOME MONEY AVAILABLE AND THAT MONEY HAPPENED AS A RESULT OF THE OWNERS OF THE UTILITIES AUTHORITY WHICH HAPPENS TO BE THE TAXPAYERS AND TRUE ENOUGH WE HAVE CUSTOMERS.

BUT, AS FAR AS THE OWNER IS CONCERNED, IT IS TIME TO COLLECT ON YOUR HARD WORK.

THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE SOME MONEY IS AVAILABLE THAT WE CAN FINALLY DO SOMETHING TANGIBLE AND FROM WHAT STAFF ISSUE TO US, LAST MEETING, IT WILL BE MONEY WELL SPENT.

AGAIN, I THINK IT IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY. WE CAN PASS IT BY, AND PASS THE BUCK I GIVE IT TO SOMEONE ELSE, OR WE CAN STEP IN AND DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO AS CITY COMMISSION

AND ADDRESS SOME OF THIS BLIGHT IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. >> WANT TO RUN REMIND THIS COMMISSION OF A COUPLE OF THINGS. THE UA, HAS ON ITS OWN, CREATED TWO PROGRAMS THAT ARE GOING TO HELP THE CITY THAT ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND HAVING TO DO WITH A STRAIGHT PROVISION OF UTILITIES. ONE IS WORKING WITH ALLEGHENY FRANCISCAN MENTOR -- MINISTRIES AND PUTTING THE FIBER-OPTIC TERRITORY IN THE LINCOLN PARK NEIGHBORHOOD.

THEY DID THAT. THEY OFFER THAT UP. THEY DID IT FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY AND ADDRESSING THE SAME THING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, COMMISSIONER SESSIONS, IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD. I ALSO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE AND ARE NOW WORKING ON A TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM WITH OUR FORT PIERCE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT WILL HELP IN OVERALL CRIME REDUCTION.

THAT WAS ALSO SOMETHING THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE TO DO. I AM VERY INTERESTED IN HAVING A GOOD RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FPUA AND THE CITY OF FT. PIERCE. WE ALL HAVE THE SAME GOAL.

WE ALL WANT THE SAME THING. IN THE PAST, PERHAPS THERE HAVE BEEN DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ON HOW EACH HAS SPENT THEIR MONEY. I HAVE TRUST IN MR. MIMS AND THE CITY OF FT. PIERCE TO SPEND THE MONEY WISELY. AND I HAVE TRUST IN MR. TOM PECK AND THE FPUA TO SPEND THE MONEY WISELY. I'M NOT SURE THAT I COULD HAVE ALWAYS SAID THAT I BELIEVE IT IS REALLY IN THE INTEREST OF GOOD RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE FPUA WHEREAS, MY HEART IS IN THE PROJECTS THAT MR. MIMS ON HIS STAFF HAS PROPOSED TO US. I BELIEVE THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS TO RETURN IT TO THE RATEPAYER. I WILL ALSO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I FEEL LIKE I'M JUST ABOUT TO BE OUTNUMBERED. I AM STILL SAYING THAT I WANT THESE TWO ORGANIZATIONS TO GET ALONG IF FOR NO OTHER REASON THAT I SERVE ON BOTH AND I HAVE TRUST AND FAITH AND BOTH ORGANIZATIONS. AS MUCH AS -- I WILL SAY THIS, OVER THE YEARS THERE HAS BEEN A PERCEPTION THAT FPUA HAS A LOT OF MONEY AND THE CITY DOESN'T

[00:35:04]

HAVE VERY MUCH MONEY. THERE IS ALWAYS A TUG-OF-WAR. I HAD HOPED THAT WE WOULD BE IN A SITUATION NOW WHERE THERE WAS MUTUAL TRUST BETWEEN THE TWO ORGANIZATIONS.

I DON'T WANT TO RUIN THAT TRUST. I JUST BELIEVE WHAT IS RIGHT IS RIGHT.

>> I HAVE RESPECT FOR WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IN TERMS OF WORKING WITH ONE OF OUR AGENCIES.

WE HAVE SO MANY DIFFERENT NAMES FOR THE UA NOW. WHAT IS EVEN MORE IMPORTANT TO ME THAN HAVING AN AMICABLE RELATIONSHIP, EVEN IF IT BECOMES ADVERSARY IS TO DO THE BEST THAT I POSSIBLY CAN FOR THE CITIZENS. SOMETIMES IT MEANS SOME CONFLICT , AND IF IN FACT IT MEANS THAT, AND IF WE CAN ACCOMPLISH AND GET THE BEST BANG FOR THE DOLLAR, WHICH IS AN OPPORTUNITY THAT WE HAVE HERE TODAY, I FEEL WITH HIS HALF A MILLION DOLLARS TO ADDRESS SOME OF THIS BLIGHT. I WILL TAKE THE HEAT FOR THAT. AT THE END OF THE DAY IT IS ABOUT DOING ALL THAT WE CAN POSSIBLY DO FOR THE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE ELECTED US, AND THAT IS TO MAKE THIS THE SAFEST AND THE BEST POSSIBLE MUNICIPALITY THAT WE POSSIBLY CAN.

ONE OF THE LIMITING, AND MOST INSTANCES SINCE I HAVE BEEN UP HERE, HAS BEEN RESOURCES.

IF I AM GIVING THE ABILITY TO HAVE SOME RESOURCES TO DO ALL I POSSIBLY CAN, THEN I AM GOING TO MAKE SURE I UTILIZE THAT. THIS OPPORTUNITY FOR HALF A MILLION DOLLARS TO MAY NOT COME AGAIN. IF IT MEANS BECOMING AN ADVERSARY FOR THE UA.

IT WOULD BE ONE THING IF OUR GOALS WERE DIFFERENT. BUT, I HAVE SEEN WHAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED BY STAFF. IT ADDRESSES A LOT OF THIS BLIGHT, AND A LOT OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN NEGLECTED AN END AREA THAT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR.

AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PASS UP AN OPPORTUNITY TO FINALLY TAKE SOME RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE BEEN FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO OBTAIN TO ADDRESS AND CLEAN UP SOME OF THAT.

THAT IS MY POSITION. >> WHEN THIS THING FIRST STARTED , THERE WAS NO WAY IN THE WORLD WE WOULD ENVISION HAVING MORE MONEY THAN WE NEEDED TO PAYOFF THE THE LOAN.

I'VE GOT TO TELL YOU THAT. >> PIPE DREAM. >> I SAID DEAR GOD GET US CLOSE TO WHAT WE OWE SO THAT WE ARE NOT DIPPING INTO, THE GENERAL FUND OR IN THE UTILITIES OF CAPITAL FUND. THAT PRAYER GOT ANSWERED. ALL OF A SUDDEN THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF SHOCK AND AWE WHEN WE FOUND OUT THAT WE HAVE A WINDFALL THAT COULD BE $450,000.

HERE WE ARE TODAY. THIS IS NOTHING THAT WE COUNTED ON.

THIS IS BASICALLY EFFORT FROM THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND THE F.B.I. TO GET HERE.

A WINDFALL LIKE THIS, TO ME, I GUESS BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE FOUR KIDS, YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO FIGURE IT OUT. SOMETIMES YOU ARE SPLITTING THE BABY ON A LOT OF STUFF.

I SEE A REASON FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE AGENCIES TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE MONEY.

AT THE END OF THE DAY WE ARE SITTING HERE WITH A WINDFALL AND I THINK THE BEST WAY TO DO IT IS I AM SURE, IT'S NOT SPENDING THE MONEY WITH THE UA. THEY ARE GOING TO SPEND $250,000 AND TURN IT INTO GREAT BENEFITS. I AM SURE, I AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT.

I THINK THE MONEY WILL BE WELL SPENT. THE SAME THING WITH THE FPR A.

WE ARE ALL WORKING IN THE SAME MOTION. WITH THAT.

THE LONE WOLF HERE, I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SPLIT THE MONEY FROM THE PROCEEDS, 5050 BETWEEN

THE FORT PIERCE UTILITY AUTHORITY AND THE RFP. >> IS THERE A SECOND?

SALES BY A LACK OF SECOND-PERIOD IS THERE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION? >> MAKE A MOTION FOR THE PASSAGE

OF RESOLUTION 19 -- ZERO THREE -- -- 19-03. >> IS OUR SECOND?

>> SECOND-PERIOD >> CALLED THE ROLL PLEASE.

[00:40:13]

>> COMMISSION SALES. -- FAILS. >> I HAVE A SUGGESTION.

I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT A PRESENTATION BE MADE TO THE FPUA BOARD ON THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE'S PLAN FOR THIS REDEVELOPMENT, AND THAT WE POSTPONE THIS UNTIL A FUTURE

DATE. >> WE HAVE ALREADY HEARD A PROPOSAL.

>> FPUA HAS NOT. >> OKAY. I KEEP FORGETTING WHO WE ARE.

I AM SORRY. >> THE CITY IS READY TO GO. >> I MEAN, 30,000-FOOT VIEW, REDEVELOPMENT DOLLARS INTO THE COMMUNITY MAKING A AN IMMEDIATE IMPACT REVENUE TO THE FPUA.

>> AGREE. >> REMEMBER WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE PORT, IT HAS BEEN TWO YEARS AGO BEFORE THE COUNTY GOT INTO THE SITUATION WHERE THEY ARE TODAY.

WE TALKED ABOUT BEING A PARTNER, TRYING TO BE A PARTNER AS A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. THAT IS WHEN SOME OF THE FUNDING DISCUSSIONS CAME UP ABOUT THE UA AND WHAT WAS UNRESTRICTED RESERVES, AND ALL OF THAT STUFF. WHEN IT GETS OVER THERE, IT IS DIFFERENT. WE CANNOT TAKE THE MONEY OUT OF THE UA TO PUT IT INTO THE FPR A OR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. IT IS AN ENTERPRISE FUND IN THE SENSE OF TALKING GOVERNMENT SPEAK. WHEN THE MONEY GOES OVER THERE, IT IS RESTRICTED IN ITS OWN

SENSE. >> IT IS ALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

>> I AGREE WITH YOU. WE DON'T NEED ANY ADVERSARIES. WE ARE ALL PARTNERS.

>> THE HEAD OF THEIR LOGO IS COMMUNITY PROUD. THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

YOU KNOW, BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE ARE INVESTING IN AN INFRASTRUCTURE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES AND ALL OF THAT GOES HAND-IN-HAND FOR THE 30,000-FOOT VIEW AND WHAT IS HAPPENING IN OUR CITY. I THINK, IF ANYTHING, MAYBE WE HAVE MORE LATITUDE IN THE FPRA TO SPEND THOSE MONIES. OTHER THAN IT BEING RESTRICTED OR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE BEING RESTRICTED. WHEN THE LAND WAS THERE AND WE WERE TRYING TO CLEAN IT UP AND GIVE IT TO THE FPRA BECAUSE THERE IS OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE FPRA. WHEN I TAKE ALL OF THOSE PARTS AND PIECES INTO THE BIG EQUATION AND I SAY WELL, IT'S IN A GOOD SPOT RIGHT THIS SECOND. WE ARE ABLE TO REINVEST IN THIS COMMUNITY AND WE WILL MAKE MORE MONEY, THIS FPUA WILL MAKE MORE MONEY THEY WILL HAVE MORE CUSTOMERS AND MORE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WHICH MEANS MORE WATER AND SEWER CUSTOMERS.

THAT IS WHERE I SIT. ANYWAY. >> WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE TRACK RECORD OF THE UTILITIES AUTHORITY. WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SIT DOWN AND HAVE A COUPLE OF WORKSHOPS FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS. WE'VE EVEN BEEN ABLE TO OBTAIN DISCUSSION OF THEM ON PARTNERING WITH US IN TERMS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT PRIOR TO THAT, THE FPUA HAS BEEN, YOU LEAVE US ALONE AND LET US RUN.

YOU DEVELOP YOUR CITY. YOU GET YOUR REVENUE. BUT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE TRACK RECORD IN TERMS OF WHAT THE FPUA HAS DONE IN TERMS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THERE IS NOT ONE.

THAT IS THE ONE I'M NOT WILLING TO RISK AT THIS POINT. ONCE THAT MONEY GOES OVER THERE, IT IS OUT OF OUR CONTROL. IT IS LIKE YOU SAID AN ENTERPRISE ZONE.

I DO HAVE CONTROL OVER IT OVER HERE TO TRY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THIS BLIGHT AND CLEAN THE CITY UP. I JUST DON'T FEEL IT IS NECESSARY TO TURN OVER THE FUNDS TO THE UTILITIES AUTHORITY, TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM THAT ALL OF US FULLY CAPABLE OF DIRECTING STAFF IN IMPLEMENTING POLICY TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF THE CITIZENS OF FORT PIERCE.

LEAVE THE POLITICS TO THESE INDIVIDUALS. YOU CONTINUE TO RUN, THE UTILITIES AUTHORITY HELP US OUT WITH SOME OF THE STREETS THAT YOU ARE TEARING UP IN TERMS OF

[00:45:01]

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THAT IS ALL I NEED YOU TO DO. IF YOU WOULD JUST DO THAT IT WOULD MAKE THINGS A LOT EASIER FOR US UP HERE WHEN IT COMES TO SPENDING MONEY.

LET US TAKE THIS MONEY AND PUT IT TO GOOD USE. AND IF YOUR OBJECTIVE IS THE SAME OF AS OURS IN TERMS OF MAKING THIS THE BEST THAT TO LIVE IN THAT I CANNOT SEE THE UTILITIES AUTHORITY'S BOARD. WE HAVEN'T SAID WERE GOING TO TAKE THIS MONEY AND SPEND IT ON THE HOTEL OR GO OUT AND TAKE THIS MONEY AND SPEND IT ON SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T NEED.

THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE NEED. AND WE DESPERATELY NEED THESE THINGS.

ALLOW US TO DO SO. THANK YOU. >> I WANT TO COMMENT ON ONE THING YOU SAID THAT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASPECT IS THERE ALL THE TIME, AND THEY SIT ON THE BOARD, THEY CONTRIBUTE TO THE EDC, THEY ARE VERY MUCH A PART OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BECAUSE A LOT OF THE MONEY THAT THE RFP SPENDS -- FPUA SPENDS IT IS HEAVILY CAPITAL INVESTMENT. IT IS A TRANSFORMER THAT COST $2 MILLION. I MEAN, SO, THERE IS A LOT OF HEAVY AMOUNT OF MONEY SPENT ON THINGS THAT DO NOT APPEAR TO BE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THE WHOLE OPERATION IS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. IT PROVIDES THE ELECTRICITY, THE WATER, THE WASTEWATER, THE GAS, AND THE FIBEROPTICS FOR THIS TOWN AND FOR OUR CITIZENS AND FOR OUR RATEPAYERS.

THE WHOLE OPERATION IS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPERATION. >> IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO PRESENT THIS TO THE FPUA BOARD. I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP. I'M NOT SURE WHAT IS GOING TO

COME OUT OF THAT. >> I AM NOT EITHER. I MEAN, WITH FOUR OF US HERE WE

ARE STALEMATED. >> LET ME ASK YOU THIS. YOU ARE SUGGESTING 50/50?

>> YES. I WOULD BE AMENABLE 1-FOR VERSUS 3-4.

>> STARTING TO SOUND LIKE MONTY HALL. >> TRYING TO GET SOME MONEY SPENT SO WE CAN SEE SOME THINGS DONE AROUND HERE AND GET SOME OF THIS POLITICS OUT OF IT.

AND SEE SOME THINGS BUILT AND CONSTRUCTED AROUND HERE. ACCOMPLISHMENTS, DOING SOME THINGS. THAT IS WHY I AM TRYING TO PLACE MYSELF IN A POSITION TO BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING. HALF I CANNOT SEE. I TEND TO BELIEVE IF WE HAD A FULL COMMISSION HERE THIS EVENING WE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE.

AS UNFORTUNATE AS IT IS WE CAN'T. WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION TODAY. TO MOVE THINGS FORWARD I WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT.

>> WILLING TO DO WHAT? >> MAKE A MOTION TO THAT. >> I WILL WAIT, IF THERE IS A

MOTION ON THE FLOOR. >> I HAVEN'T MADE A MOTION YET. THAT IS WHY I LIKE THESE KIND OF MEETINGS TO SEE WHAT MY COLLEAGUE THINKS ABOUT IT. WHAT IS YOUR POSITION IN THAT

REGARD? >> -- MY EFFORTS ARE NOT TO CHANGE, BUT TO MOVE FORWARD AND IF YOU TAKE THE SAME POSITION, I AM WITH YOU. I BELIEVE IN THAT AS WELL AS YOU. I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE CAN GET SOMETHING DONE AT THIS STALEMATE

POINT THAT WE ARE IN? WHAT DO YOU THINK? >> I AM STUCK AS PRESENTED.

I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE FPUA BOARD IF WERE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT, IF WERE GOING TO CHANGE AROUND A LITTLE BIT. I DIDN'T GET TO VOTE -- YES, I DID.

I TAKE THAT BACK. A COUPLE OF THE RESOLUTIONS. IT IS JUST A DIFFERENT OUTLOOK AT THIS.ON WHERE WE ARE DRIVING REDEVELOPMENT MONIES AND HOW WE ARE TRYING TO CHANGE AROUND A

[00:50:08]

LITTLE BIT. I GUESS IF I WERE TO HEAR FROM THE UA BOARD I CAN DO THAT.

THEY ARE RESIDENTS ALSO. IF FEW OF THEM MAY OR MAY NOT LIVE IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA.

YOU KNOW, LOOKING THROUGH A DIFFERENT LENS IS ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT IF SCENARIOS. I AM KIND OF STUCK HERE. MAYBE I'M JUST, I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T WANT TO BE BULLHEADED. >> I APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I AM WITH YOU 100%. YOU'RE RIGHT. LOOKING AT IT FROM DIFFERENT LENSES, HAS AN IMPACT. STILL I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE SAME THING ACCOMPLISHED ON THE ROAD EVEN THOUGH WE MAY BE LOOKING AT IT FROM DIFFERENT LENSES AND I'M JUST NOT CERTAIN

ABOUT THAT. IN LIGHT OF THE HISTORY. >> WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS HAMSTRING THE UA BOARD. WE WILL GIVE IT TO YOU BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NO FUN.

ACCEPTING DIRECTION LIKE THAT. >> MADAM CHAIR, THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE STAFF IS TO -- I'M SORRY, WRONG RECOMMENDATION. HERE WE GO.

THE APPROVAL OF THE SALE OF THE VOLUNTARY CLEANUP TAX CREDIT CERTIFICATE WITH THE HELP OF OUR CONSULTANT. THERE IS NO DEFINITIVE UTILIZATION OF THE PROCEEDS.

WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ACTUAL RECOMMENDATION, AND THE ACTUAL DETERMINATION BY YOU ALL TO HAVE STAFF PROCEED WITH THE SALE OF THE TAX CERTIFICATE AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE CITY STAFF WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO MEET WITH THE FPUA BOARD, GET THEIR INPUT AND REPORT BACK TO YOU AT

THE NEXT BOARD MEETING WHICH I BELIEVE WILL BE IN JANUARY. >> YOU ARE SAYING THAT THIS JUST GIVES YOU THE AUTHORITY TO DO THE SALE, AND WE WILL NOT SET THE DIRECTION AS TO WHAT AGENCY?

>> WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY IN OUR HANDS YET. IF I REMEMBER YOU DON'T HAVE THE

MONEY YET, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DIRECT IT AT THE MEETING. >> THAT IS WHY I MADE THE MOTION

KNEW WE WEREN'T GOING TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. >> ALL RIGHT.

I DON'T HAVE THE PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS IN FRONT OF ME TO COMPARE SIDE-BY-SIDE.

THE LANGUAGE, BASICALLY THERE WAS ONE PARAGRAPH THERE THAT STATED, ANY ADDITIONAL PROCEEDS OF THE TAX SALE WOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE FPUA FOR THEIR COST AND PERFORMING THE CLEANUP.

THAT PARAGRAPH HAS BEEN REMOVED. THIS IS JUST SAYING, HEY, WE ARE GOING TO SELL THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE ACHIEVED OUR SITE REHABILITATION CLEANUP ORDER AND ALSO THIS IS A BONUS TAX CERTIFICATE. THIS WILL BE OUR LAST TAX CERTIFICATE.

WE WANT TO SELL IT, RECEIVE THE PROCEEDS AND THEN YOU ALL AS THE FPUA BOARD TO DETERMINE HOW

YOU'RE GOING TO DISTRIBUTE ALL OF THOSE FUNDS. >> OKAY.

>> GLAD YOU DIDN'T REMAKE THE MOTION OVER HERE. RESOLUTION NUMBER 19-03.

>> CALLED THE ROLL PLEASE. >> CLARIFICATION? THE DIRECTION IS NOT PART OF

THAT RESOLUTION. >> HOW IT IS GOING TO BE SPENT IS NOT PART OF THAT RESOLUTION.

>> I KNOW, I HAVE READ THE RESOLUTION.

>> OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM IS APPROVAL OF THE AGREEMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF

THE KING'S LANDING WITH AUDUBON DEVELOPMENT, INC. >> NOW IT IS TIME FOR THE FUN STUFF. SINCE, I DON'T KNOW, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME. I'VE BEEN TALKING TO THOSE GUYS BACK THERE, LEE, DALE HAVING SATURDAY AND SUNDAY CONVERSATIONS. YOU KNOW, I'M A LITTLE TIRED OF IT. SO NOW -- WE HAVE REACHED A POINT WHERE I BELIEVE WE ARE VERY EXCITED TO HAVE DOCTOR DELANEY DO A PRESENTATION, SHE IS GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE AGREEMENT AS A PRESENTED TODAY, AND WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE INTRICACIES OF THIS DEVELOPING AGREEMENT, AND WE ALSO HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM AUDUBON DEVELOPMENT HERE. HOPEFULLY WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE KING'S LANDING DEVELOPMENT. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO KIM AT

THIS >> THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION. KIM DELANEY FOR THE RECORD.

[00:55:04]

AND ALSO TOM LENIHAN THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS HERE TODAY AS WELL.

WE ARE SO FORTUNATE TO HAVE HAD THE HONOR AND THE PRIVILEGE OF WORKING WITH THE FPRA IN HELPING WORK THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT YOU HAVE FOR CONSIDERATION TODAY.

WE HAVE A FAIRLY HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY PRESENTATION THAT WILL TOUCH ON ALL OF THE HIGH POINTS ON THE KEY POINTS THAT ARE IN THE AGREEMENT. AMONG THE TEAM THAT YOU HAVE HERE TODAY, ANY QUESTIONS AS WE GO THROUGH, OR AT THE TAIL END OF THE PRESENTATION WE ARE ALL HAPPY TO WALK THROUGH THOSE. ONE THING TO MENTION, AS WE GET INTO THE DISCUSSION OF THE AGREEMENT. EVERY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FROM A PRIVATE ENTITY, ESPECIALLY IN A PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ARRANGEMENT HAS SOME DEGREE OF RISK FOR BOTH PARTIES.

THE FPRA IN THE CITY COME INTO THIS PROJECT WITH A PIECE OF LAND THAT SITS ON THE PRIVATE -- PUBLIC SECTOR SIDE SO IT DOESN'T YIELD ANY TAX REVENUES IT DOES CARRY SOME COST TO THE CITY AND THE FPR A AND MAINTAINING IT AND CARRYING IT FORWARD. THIS AGREEMENT LOOKS TO MINIMIZE THE RISK TO THE FPR AND THE CITY. TO GET THAT LAND OUT OF THE PUBLIC SECTOR SIDE AND INTO THE PRIVATE SECTOR SO WE CAN START PAYING SOME TAXES TO THE CITY, IT START TO GENERATE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE CITY, JOBS, HOUSING AND OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES THAT WE WANT THAT LAND TO PRODUCE. I DON'T WANT TO SUGGEST THAT THERE IS ANY RELATIONSHIP LIKE THIS THAT WOULD NEVER HAVE RISK FOR EITHER PARTY.

THIS ONE YOU HAVE AN AGREEMENT TO CONSIDER TODAY THAT HAS NO CASH OUT OF POCKET FOR THE CITY.

THAT IS VERY HARD TO ESTABLISH IN A PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AGREEMENT.

AGAIN THERE ARE STEPS IN THE AGREEMENT, MEASURES AND THE AGREEMENT THAT ARE DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE YOUR RISK TO WHAT WE WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU AS YOUR CONSULTING AGENCY.

AS A TEAM, WE WOULD MINIMIZE THE RISK TO THE EXTENT THAT IS REASONABLE AND MAINTAINING AN AGREEMENT THAT HAS NO OUT-OF-POCKET FOR THE CITY OR THE AGENCY.

I WANTED TO OFFER THAT PERSPECTIVE TO YOU AS WE WALK THROUGH THE PIECES.

WE HAVE HAD A FAIRLY QUICK MOVING NEGOTIATION PROCESS. AS THE BOARD WILL RECALL BACK IN JUNE. YOU MADE YOUR SELECTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT ENTITY OF AUDUBON DEVELOPMENT TO CARRY FORWARD WITH AN AGREEMENT. WE BEGAN NEGOTIATION MEETINGS WITH THE DEVELOPER IN JULY. IT'S YOUR STAFF CAME BACK IN SEPTEMBER TO ASK FOR A LITTLE MORE TIME BECAUSE IT WAS A DIFFICULT AGREEMENT TO ESTABLISH.

FAIRLY QUICKLY WITHIN ABOUT FIVE MONTHS WE ARE BACK HERE AS CHARGED BY THE BOARD WITH AN AGREEMENT THAT WE THINK, AGAIN,, ADDRESSES ALL OF THE PIECES THE BOARD WAS LOOKING TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE RFQ THAT WAS SET FORWARD THAT CARRIES OUT COMPLIANCE WITH YOUR REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, WITH YOUR COMP PLAN AND YOUR EXPECTATIONS. WHAT YOU WILL NOTE IN THE AGREEMENT, THERE IS A FAIRLY SUBSTANTIAL ATTACHMENT. THERE IS A 61 PAGE DOCUMENT.

FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, THERE ARE A SERIES OF ATTACHMENTS, EXHIBITS A THROUGH G THAT ARE INCLUDED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. I WILL JUST TOUCH ON THOSE.

IF YOU WANT TO FOLLOW ALONE -- ALONG IF YOU HAVE THE DOCUMENT AT HAND.

I WILL TOUCH ON THOSE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THESE HIGH POINTS AND WHERE THEY ARE IN THE AGREEMENT. THE FIRST THING TO POINT OUT, AGAIN, IT IS IN A PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AGREEMENT LIKE THIS ONE. EVERY PARTY COMES TO THE TABLE WITH RESPONSIBILITIES AND EXPECTATIONS. THIS SLIDE ILLUSTRATES WHAT HAPPENS FROM THIS.GOING FORWARD.

THERE IS A DUE DILIGENCE PERIOD, AND A SET BY BOTH PARTIES TO MAKE SURE, AS YOU ARE COMING TO THE ALTAR TO GET MARRIED THAT EVERYONE IS THERE IN THE FORM THAT HAS BEEN EXPECTED.

THERE IS THAT DUE DILIGENCE TIME PERIOD IF THAT WILL LAST FOR ABOUT 120 DAYS.

THE RESPONSIBILITIES CARRY FORWARD FOR ABOUT A YEAR BOTH ON THE CITY SIDE AND THE DEVELOPER SIDE. THE CITY SIDE OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES HAPPENED TO BE ALONG THE BOTTOM IN THE YELLOW COLOR. THE CITY WOULD BE TAKING OF THE LEAD IN THE BANDING AND OF AVENUE B WHICH HELPS CONSOLIDATE THE SITE.

THE CITY WOULD TAKE ON THE ROLE OF CHANGING THE LAND USE AND THE ZONING.

THAT WAS A POINT OF AGREEMENT AS WE DEVELOPED THE AGREEMENT YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER TODAY.

THOSE ARE THINGS THE CITY CAN DO, IT IS A SWEAT EQUITY EXERCISE TO CHANGE HER OWN ZONING AND LAND-USE USE BY CARRYING OUT THOSE ACTIONS YOU RAISE THE VALUE OF YOUR OWN LAND AND YOU MAKE YOUR OWN LAND MORE MARKETABLE. WE JUST MOVE THE BALL AHEAD TO THAT. OF TIME TO MAKE THE PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT WE CONTROL AS THE PUBLIC MORE VALUABLE AND MORE MARKETABLE. ON THE DEVELOPER SIDE AND THOSE ARE IN THE BLUE CIRCLES AT THE TOP. THE DEVELOPER HAS A SERIES OF

[01:00:01]

RESPONSIBILITIES THAT HIS TEAM HAS TO CARRY OUT. ONE OF THOSE THINGS, IT HAS BEEN TOUCHED ON IN THE COMMENTS EARLIER TODAY. THERE IS MORE DETAILED MARKETS AND FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS THAT IS DUE THE CITY IN THAT TIMEFRAME WHILE THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE CARRYING OUT THAT FIRST SET OF TASKS HEARD THE DEVELOPER IS ALSO GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN. THE CONCEPTUAL PHASING PLAN IS IN THE AGREEMENT. IT IS EXHIBIT F. THERE IS A SLIDE THAT WILL ILLUSTRATE THAT. THE DEVELOPER WILL TAKE THAT DIAGRAM AND DEVELOP A SET OF DETAILED PLANS AND DRAWINGS COME AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE, OF COURSE.

SO SPECIFICITY OF THEM ISSUING PERMITS WHEN YOU ARE READY. THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO BE WORKING ON A SUBDIVISION PLAN. THE SITE WILL BE BROKEN DOWN FROM 17-ACRE PARCEL TO EIGHT INDIVIDUAL PIECES. THAT MAKES IT MUCH EASIER IT MAKES IT EASIER FOR YOU TO ADMINISTER PERMITS. IT ALSO TIES THE DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITIES TO EACH OF THOSE INDIVIDUAL PARCELS IN A MANNER THAT IS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE RISK TO CITY MINIMIZE RISK TO THE PUBLIC. AT THE END OF THAT TIMEFRAME, IT WOULD BE CONVEYED TO AUDUBON AND THE GOOD NEWS ABOUT THAT IS ONCE THE LAND IS OFF YOUR SIDE OF THE LEDGER AND IT IS ON THE PRIVATE SIDE OF THE LEDGER THEN SOMEONE IS RESPONSIBLE TO START PAYING YOUR TAXES.

IN THAT TIME. WHICH IS ABOUT A YEAR HE WOULD PUT IN SWEAT EQUITY, CHANGE THE ZONING AND THE LAND USE. GET A PORTION OF THE ABANDONS SAY HAVE A NICE CONSOLIDATED SITE THAT IS MORE MARKETABLE AND MORE VALUABLE. THEN YOU WILL GIVE IT TO SOMEBODY TO START PAYING YOUR TAXES ON IT. THAT IS WHAT THAT PROCESS REFLECTS. I AM HAPPY TO STOP AS WE GO THROUGH OR IF IT'S EASIER I WILL

CARRY THROUGH THE PIECES AND THEN WE CAN GO BACK AFTERWARDS. >> GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS

SLIDE. >> ALL OF THOSE COLORS THERE, THE ONE THAT LIGHTS UP THE MOST TO ME THAT REALLY DESERVE SOME ATTENTION IS CONVENIENCE OF THE LAND.

FROM SITTING UP HERE -- ULTIMATELY THAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN.

I AM HOPING THROUGHOUT OUR DISCUSSIONS, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE ABILITY FROM A STANDPOINT, I JUST GOT THIS FEELING THAT ONCE THE CONVENIENCE TAKES PLACE FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT MY ABILITY TO DO SO IS SOMEWHAT VERY LIMITED. WHILE OF COURSE, TRUE ENOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY ON THE TAX ROLL, SOME MONEY IS BETTER THAN NO MONEY.

HOWEVER THAT IS NOT WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR IT IN INSTANCE. THEY WANT THAT PROPERTY FULLY DEVELOPED SO WE CAN GET TOP DOLLAR WE DON'T HAVE TO IF YOU'D BACK AND FORTH WITH THE UTILITY'S AUTHORITY THEY CAN COLLECT OUR OWN TAXES. THAT IS MY MAIN CONCERN, THE CONVENIENCE. AND THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME CONTROL, HAVE I LOST ALL OF THEIR CONTROL, FROM A REVERTER STANDPOINT. I JUST WANT TO BRING THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION, AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE FROM ALL OF THIS. I LIKE WHAT I HAVE HEARD.

I VOTED FOR AUDUBON, AND I LOVE WHAT THEY HAVE PRESENTED TO US. I LOVE THE IDEA THAT WE HAVE LOCAL CONTRACTORS, IT IS LOCAL IT IS A WIN-WIN FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED.

I JUST DON'T WANT FLASHBACKS LIKE WE HAD WITH MR. BELL'S PROPERTY.

ONCE THE CITY SOLD THAT, WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING DEVELOPED ON THE PROPERTY.

IT IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE. I JUST DON'T WANT TO HAVE THAT AGAIN. THAT IS NOT GOING TO BENEFIT THE TAXPAYERS AND IT'S GOING TO BE A STALEMATE. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO RIDE BY FORT PIERCE AND SAY WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BUT WAS NEVER DONE BECAUSE OF THE POLITICS OF THINGS.

I WANT US TO MOVE FORWARD AND GET SOMETHING DONE AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE.

BY THE SAME TOKEN DON'T LOSE OUR ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO CONTROL GETTING TOP-NOTCH PROPERTY BUILT ON THAT PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY SO WE CAN COLLECT TAXES AS YOU INDICATED AS SOON AS

POSSIBLE. >> THANK YOU FOR RAISING THOSE POINTS.

WE WILL TOUCH ON THOSE IN A MOMENT. I WILL TRY TO ADDRESS ALL OF THOSE QUESTIONS AS WE GO FORWARD IF THAT IS OKAY, COMMISSIONER. AND THEN BE HAPPY TO GET INTO

[01:05:03]

GREATER LEVEL OF DETAIL AS WE DO THAT. AS YOU POINTED OUT, THE MOST IMPORTANT BUBBLE ON THAT SERIES OF CIRCLES AS THE ONE THAT SAYS CONVEYANCE.

THAT IS THE BIGGEST STEP THE CITY AND THE AGENCY WOULD TAKE. WHEN THAT CONVEYANCE WOULD OCCUR , AGAIN, A COUPLE OF POINTS JUST TO NOTE. THE LAND BECOMES TAXABLE, SO THAT IS AN ADVANTAGE TO THE CITY. THE DEVELOPER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING A WHOLE SERIES OF INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, ROADWAY, WATER SEWER AND STORM WATER. AND ALL OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS INCREASE THE VALUE AND THE MARKETABILITY OF YOUR ASSET, RIGHT? WHICH HE WOULD NOT HAVE CONTROL OVER THAT POINT IN TIME ONCE THE LAND IS CONVEYED. HE WOULD THEN BE CONTROLLING WHAT IS HAPPENING AROUND THAT PARCEL TO POTENTIALLY DRIVE UP THE VALUE TO MAKE IT MORE DESIRABLE FOR SOMEONE TO DEVELOP REALLY PUTTING MORE PRESSURE ON THE DEVELOPER BECAUSE THE VALUE IS GOING TO GO UP SO THE TAXES ARE GOING TO GO UP. THE OTHER THING TO NOTE OF COURSE IS THAT, AS THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS ARE MADE AND AS MORE COSTS ARE INVESTED IN AND AROUND THE SITE, THAT INCREASES THE PRESSURE AND LIKELIHOOD FOR DEVELOPER TO TAKE PLACE. THOSE ARE THINGS WE WOULD SAY ARE ADVANTAGEOUS TO THEIR FPRA.

THE AGREEMENT IS DESIGNED TO DO THAT. THE LANGUAGE REFERRING TO CONVEYANCE FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO REFERENCE THAT IN THE DOCUMENTS, THE CONVEYANCE LANGUAGE BEGINS ON, I APOLOGIZE, I LOST IT FOR JUST A MOMENT, PAGE FIVE. THOSE ACTIONS ARE DETAILED.WHER- COMMISSIONER SESSIONS TO YOUR POINT IN PARTICULAR, WE WANT TO PRESENT AT A HIGH LEVEL AND THEN DIVE DOWN AS DESIRED. WHAT THOSE OPPORTUNITIES ARE WITH RESPECT TO REVERTER'S, AND CONTROLLING THE LAND. SOMETHING TO POINT OUT, IF WE STEP AWAY FROM THE PROJECT FOR JUST A MOMENT, IN A TRADITIONAL LAND DEVELOPMENT ARRANGEMENT, IF THE CITY PUT A SIGN OUT THERE THAT SAID FOR SALE TO HIGHEST BIDDER. THE CITY WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO SELL THE LAND TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER, BUT THEN REALLY RELINQUISH A LOT OF CONTROL OVER THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE. HOW THE SITE IS DEVELOPED, WHAT THE EXPECTATIONS ARE WITH RESPECT TO ARCHITECTURE WITH PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT.

THOSE TYPES OF THINGS BECOME LESS CONTROLLABLE AS THE TRANSACTION IS SIMPLER QUITE FRANKLY. THE BEST WAY FOR THE CITY TO GET TOP DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS WHAT I THINK THE CITY'S EXPECTATION HAS ALWAYS BEEN AND WHAT THE DEVELOPER BELIEVES HAS BEEN PROVIDED IN THE PROPOSAL THUS FAR IS A TOP-QUALITY DEVELOPMENT.

A MIX OF LAND USES AS THE CITY HAS DESIRED. BY HAVING A PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AGREEMENT WHICH IS THE ONE YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY, THERE IS A BALANCE OF CONTROLS THAT ARE VARIED AND EVERY AGREEMENT. ONE OF THOSE CONTROLS IS CAN YOU GET THE LAND BACK IN CONTROL IN PERPETUITY. IT IS NOT EASY TO DO THAT IF ON THE OTHER SIDE YOU WANT TO HAVE CONTROL OVER THINGS LIKE PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENTS. VERY SPECIFIC DENSITIES, INTENSITIES, TIME FRAMES AND BONDS TO PROTECT YOUR INTERESTS AND TO PUT PRESSURE ON THE DEVELOPER TO DELIVER THOSE THINGS IN A CERTAIN. OF TIME.

THOSE THINGS EXIST AND BALANCE IN ANY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BE AT ONE LIKE THIS WHICH IS A PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AGREEMENT WHERE IT IS VERY DETAILED OR JUST A SIMPLE ISSUANCE OF LAND DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL THROUGH YOUR REGULAR PROCESS. THROUGH YOUR REGULAR PROCESS IT IS VERY CLEAN, YOU TAKE MONEY, YOU SAY HERE ARE THE KEYS WE ARE GOING TO CHECK TO MAKE SURE YOU DEVELOP BASED ON THE PLANS WE HAVE APPROVED. THIS SET OF PLANS IS GOING TO BE MUCH MORE DETAIL THAN THAT BECAUSE YOU ARE INFLUENCING AND CREATING EXPECTATIONS THAT ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT TRADITIONAL SYMBOL LAND USE WILL PROVIDE.

THOSE TWO THINGS EXIST IN BALANCE. AS I TALK ABOUT THE DEFAULT PROVISIONS, WANT TO KEEP THAT POINT THERE IS A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THOSE TWO THINGS.

WHAT THE AGREEMENT HAS IN IT WITH RESPECT TO DEFAULT IS BROKEN DOWN INTO TWO COMPONENTS.

ONE COMPONENT IS THE FIRST PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. THAT IS THE HOTEL PARCEL AND ALL OF THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE ON THE SITE.

WHAT THIS SLIDE ILLUSTRATES IN RED, ARE THE AREAS OF THE SITE THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED IN THAT FIRST PHASE. WE REFER TO A GENERALLY AS THE HOTEL PARCEL.

IT IS DELINEATED IN THE DASHED LINES LIKE AN L SHAPED PIECE PROCESS HOTEL PARCEL.

THAT IS THE FOOTPRINT OF WHERE THE HOTEL IS EXPECTED TO BE. THAT PHASE ALSO INCLUDES

[01:10:01]

ADDIESIDENTIAL WORKPLACE AND REL USES WHICH CONTINUE TO THE EAST IF YOU WILL ON THE SLIDE. AND THEN ALL OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS ARE IN THE RED. ALL OF THAT LAND AREA THAT IS NOT BUILDING, RIGHT, SO THE STREETS ON INFRASTRUCTURE BUT ULTIMATELY COME BACK TO THE CITY OR THE FPR A RATHER.

THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE PAYING FOR THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. HE WOULD BE MONITORING THOSE IMPROVEMENTS AND THEN HE WOULD RECEIVE THOSE THINGS AND HAVE THOSE AS ASSETS IF YOU WILL.

IF THE PLANETS DO NOT REMAIN ALIGNED AND THE PROPERTY IS NOT DEVELOPED BY THIS DEVELOPER, YOU HAVE A SITE THAT HAS PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE THAT YOU CONTROL ALL AROUND IT, ALREADY CONSTRUCTED AND HIGHER VALUE LAND THAT WOULD BE IN SOMEBODY'S ROSTER.

THE HOTEL PARCEL, EVERYTHING IN RED, THE LAND THAT CONTINUES ALL THE WAY TO INDIAN RIVER DRIVE AND THE BALANCE OF WHAT IS YOUR PUBLIC STRUCTURE ON THE SITE. ONCE THE LAND IS CONVEYED TO AUDUBON, WHAT WE BECAME AWARE OF AS WE WENT THROUGH THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS IS THAT CONTINUING ON THE LAND PREVENTS THE ABILITY TO GET A CONSTRUCTION LOAN FOR THAT PARCEL. THAT PUTS US IN A STALEMATE POSITION.

THE WAY THIS AGREEMENT IS ARRANGED WITH NO CASH OUT OF POCKET FOR THE CITY OR THE AGENCY. WE FOUND A WAY TO WORK AROUND THAT AND THAT IS WHAT IS PRESENTED TO YOU TODAY. WHAT THE AGREEMENT SUGGESTS, WHAT HE PROPOSES IS A LAND WOULD BE CONVEYED TO AUDUBON, YOU WOULD RELEASE THE REVERTER WHICH ENABLES AUDUBON TO GET A CONSTRUCTION LOAN ON THE SITE. THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE PUTTING A MILLION DOLLARS IN ESCROW AND CASH AND IN THE ACCOUNT CONTROLLED BY THE CITY. THE DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO BUILD THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS IDENTIFIED IN THAT RED AREA. THAT IS THE FIRST PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT, WATER, SEWER, STORM WATER, STREETS, LIGHTING, AND LANDSCAPING.

IT IS ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT $2.5 MILLION. 1 MILLION IS NOT EXPECTED TO COVER THE WHOLE 2.5 MILLION BUT THAT WAS A POINT OF NEGOTIATION. THOSE FUNDS WOULD BE IN AN ACCOUNT CONTROLLED BY THE CITY. THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS AND COME BACK TO YOU IN A HEARING TO HAVE THAT APPROVAL GRANTED. AS THE DEVELOPER CONSTRUCTS THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE TURNING INVOICES INTO THE CITY.

THE CITY WOULD CONFIRM THE CONSTRUCTION HAS TAKEN PLACE AND FOR PLANS.

REBATING THE DEVELOPER AS THE DEVELOPER'S BUILDING FROM THAT YOU ARE HOLDING THAT BACK, IF YOU WILL. AGAIN, WITH ANY AGREEMENT LIKE THIS, IF EVERYTHING FALLS APART WE HAVE A IN AN ACCOUNT, OR YOU HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE BUILT AROUND THE PROPERTY AND THE BALANCE OF WHAT IS LEFT OF THE MILLION DOLLARS SITTING IN THE ACCOUNT. OR YOU HAVE AT LEAST A MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS CONSTRUCTED WITH MOTIVATION FOR SOMEONE THAT HAS GOTTEN A CONSTRUCTION LOAN THAT YOU HAVE APPROVED TO CARRY WITHOUT IS NECESSARY TO SATISFY THAT LOAN. THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT WE WOULD SUGGEST, THINGS THAT PUT OUR DESIGN IN A MANNER TO BE TO THE ADVANTAGE OF THE FPRA AND THE CITY.

IN ADDITION, WANT TO TOUCH ON THE CONSTRUCTION LOAN. AND THIS PHASE ON AS THE DEVELOPER CAN'S -- SECURES CONSTRUCTION LOANS, THEY CAN ONLY BE COMPLETED AFTER THE CITY HAS REVIEWED AND CONFIRMED THEY CARRY OUT THE ACTIONS AND THE PERFORMANCE THAT YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED IN THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS AND IN YOUR AGREEMENT.

YOU ARE GOING TO BE SITTING AS A PARTNER WITH THE DEVELOPER, THIS IS A PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP REVIEWING CONSTRUCTION LOANS, CONFIRMING THE ACCURATELY REFLECT WHAT YOUR EXPECTATIONS ARE, AND APPROVING THEM BEFORE THE DEVELOPER CAN GO GET THAT LOAN, YOU RELEASE THE REVERTER AND THEN THE PROJECT GOES UNDER CONSTRUCTION. THOSE ARE THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE IN THE AGREEMENT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY. WE WOULD SUGGEST THESE ARE MEASURES THAT ARE DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE THE RISK TO THE EXTENT TO THE FPRA AND THE CITY WERE IN AGREEMENT WE HAVE NO CASH OUT OF POCKET. I WILL PAUSE FOR A MOMENT.

IF IT IS OKAY, I WILL DESCRIBE THOSE PROVISIONS AND THEN WE CAN PAUSE THEN AGAIN.

CHEYENNE WANTS TO GET TO THAT NEXT SLIDE. SHE ALREADY PUSHED ME FORWARD EXHIBIT F IN THE AGREEMENT. IT IS FIVE PAGES FROM THE END, IT'S ABOUT A 61 PAGE AGENDA ITEM

[01:15:05]

THAT YOU HAVE. THE PHASING PLAN, FOR THE BOARD'S KNOWLEDGE LOOKS LIKE THIS. THIS ONE IS, FOR THE PUBLIC THIS IS EXHIBIT F WHICH IS IN THE AGREEMENT. THIS IS BEEN PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER AND THIS AS WE SAT WITH THE DEVELOPER TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE EXPECTATIONS WERE. WHAT YOU SEE ON THIS PHASING PLAN IS HOW THE SITE WOULD BE BROKEN DOWN. AGAIN THAT PHASE ONE PIECE THAT HAS A MILLION DOLLARS IN ESCROW, THEY APPROVAL OF A CONSTRUCTION LOAN AND THEN A REVERTER BEING RELEASED FOR THE DEVELOPER TO BEGIN THAT ACTIVITY. THAT IS ALL THE STUFF THAT IS IDENTIFIED IN RED. AND THEN THE BALANCE OF THE SITE IS BROKEN DOWN WITH SEVEN OTHER PHASES IF YOU WILL. THEY ARE COLOR-CODED ON THE SLIDE.

IN THE AGREEMENT, THERE IS A LEGEND AND IT IS COLOR-CODED AS WELL.

ON EXHIBIT F. THAT DELINEATES THE OTHER PHASES OF THE SITE.

THEY HAVE ALREADY BEEN WORKED THROUGH. YOU CAN SEE THERE IS PHASES 1-8 THAT TAKE US ALL THE WAY OVER TO THE WESTERN SIDE WHERE WE BEGAN TO -- THE ENTIRE SITE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEVELOPMENT BASED ON WHAT YOU APPROVE IN THE SITE PLAN THAT IS SUBMITTED TO YOU FROM THE DEVELOPER. SO, UM, AS EACH PARCEL IS TRANSFERRED OR CONVEYED TO THE DEVELOPER, THE CITY WOULD BE RELEASING THE REVERTER ON THAT LAND AFTER YOU APPROVE THE CONSTRUCTION LOAN, THE DEVELOPER PROVIDES TO YOU FOR YOUR REVIEW TO CONFIRM THE DEVELOPERS TAKING OUT A LOAN TO BUILD EXACTLY WHAT IS DETAILED IN YOUR SITE PLAN AND IN YOUR DEVELOPER AGREEMENT.

IN ADDITION THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO BE PUTTING FORWARD PERFORMANCE BONDS FOR EACH PHASE OF IMPROVEMENT. THE CITY IS NAMED AS ADDITIONAL OBLIGEE.

YOU HAVE UM CONTROL AT THE TIMING WHEN THE CONSTRUCTION LOAN IS APPROVED AND THERE IS A BOND IN PLACE THAT GUARANTEES THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO BUILD EXACTLY WHAT IS DETAILED IN THE AGREEMENT AND IN THE SITE PLAN. AGAIN, THESE ARE MEASURES THAT ARE TO MINIMIZE THE RISK TO THE EXTENT PRACTICAL TO THE CITY. PUTTING CASH INTO THE PROJECT. WE AS A TEAM BELIEVE THIS IS THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CITY AND AGENCIES RISK CAN BE MINIMIZED. THAT INCLUDES, BY THE WAY, REVIEW BY THE MEMORANDA IN THE AGREEMENT. WITH THEIR PARTICIPATION AS WELL, THAT ARRANGEMENT IS AGAIN MINIMIZING THE CITIES RISK TO THE EXTENT PRACTICAL.

THE NEXT BIG PIECE OF THE EQUATION. AS UM BEGINS, THE LAND IS GOING TO MOVE ON THE CITY'S TAX ROLL INTO THE PRIVATE SECTOR. THE REBATE, YOU MAY RECALL IN THE THE DEVELOPER'S PRESENTATION, WAS FOR THE LAND TO BE TRANSFERRED AND A REBATE OF UP TO $1 MILLION, OVER TIME, AS THE PROJECT IS DEVELOPED. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE PAID BACK BY THE TAXES THE DEVELOPER PAYS. AGAIN THERE IS NO CASH OUT OF POCKET TO THE AGENCY, OR THE CITY. IN THE AGREEMENT, BEGINNING WITH THE COMPLETION OF PHASE ONE CONSTRUCTION AND THAT INCLUDES THE HOTEL, THE MIXED USE, THE RESIDENTIAL, THE OFFICE AND ALL NOT UNTIL AFTER ALL OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IS COMPLETED THERE WOULD BEGIN A SERIES OF TIF REBATES TO THE DEVELOPER, THEY WOULD BE A MAXIMUM OF $200,000, OR UP TO HALF OF THE TOTAL TIF GENERATED IN A GIVEN YEAR.

LET'S SAY IT'S ONLY 100,000 IN YEAR ONE. THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE PAYING THOSE TAXES IN AND AFTER THEY ARE PAID END, HE WOULD THEN REBATE HALF OF WHAT THE DEVELOPER PAID IN. IF IT WAS ONLY 100,000 IN THE FIRST YEAR, HE WOULD BE REBATING $50,000. UP TO A MAXIMUM OF A MILLION DOLLARS IN FIVE YEARS.

YEAR SIX THERE IS NO REBATE. IT'S ONLY FOR THE FIRST FIVE YEARS.

THAT IS A MEASURE THAT IS DESIGNED TO PUT PRESSURE ON THE DEVELOPER TO BUILD QUICKLY AND GENERATE REVENUE SO YOU PAY TAXES SO YOU WILL GET PAID BACK. YOU DON'T GET PAID BACK AND YOU PAY TAXES. AND YOU DON'T PAY TAXES UNLESS THERE IS VALUE ON YOUR ASSET TO GET THAT MONEY BACK. THAT IS A MEASURE THAT IS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE RISK TO THE CITY AND THE AGENCY. THE DEVELOPER IS BEING PAID BACK WITH FUNDS THE DEVELOPER IS CONTRIBUTING AS A TAXPAYER. AGAIN, THERE IS NO CASH OUT FOR THE CITY OR THE AGENCY.

EXCELLENT. >> ANOTHER IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THE PROJECT, ARE THE PUBLIC

[01:20:08]

REALM IMPROVEMENTS ON THE AMENITIES. WHAT I MENTIONED WAS WITH A TRADITIONAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL, YOU PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE GETTING IMPROVEMENTS ANYWHERE IN THE REALM OF THE SCALE OF IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE DETAILED WITH THIS PROJECT.

THOSE WOULD LIKELY BE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD TEND TO TAKE PLACE ON THE CITY SIDE OR THE AGENCY SIDE OF THE LEDGER. INSTEAD WITH THIS AGREEMENT THERE ARE SEVERAL CATEGORIES OF IMPROVEMENTS THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE PROVIDING AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE.

THE PUBLIC STREET NETWORK WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED BY THE DEVELOPER. BOTH DRINAGE ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE WILL BE CONSTRUCTED BY THE DEVELOPER. MORRIS CREEK WOULD RECEIVE A PROMENADE AND A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE. AGAIN FUNDED BY THE DEVELOPER.

A SERIES OF. IT WOULD ALL BE PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER.

THOSE ARE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE THAT WOULD BECOME THE OWNERSHIP OF THE CITY, ONCE THEY ARE APPROVED BY THE CITY. THAT GIVES THE CITY CONTROL OVER HOW THOSE AMENITIES CARRY FORWARD TIME. THE CONNECIONS THAT TAKE PLACE WHICH ARE VERY IMPORTANT. ONE OF THE THINGS WE HEARD IN THE DISCUSSIONS WAS TO MAKE SURE THIS SITE IS CONNECTED TO THE REST OF THE DOWNTOWN. THIS IS ONE OF THE WAYS YOU CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT. YOU CAN MAINTAIN THAT CONNECTION.

IT IS NOT WALLED OFF IN ANY WAY, IT IS INTERCONNECTED WITH REST OF DOWNTOWN TO CARRY THAT REVENUE BENEFIT, IF YOU WILL AND CAPITAL BENEFIT INTO OTHER PORTIONS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. THIS IS THE PUBLIC REALM PORTION.

WITH THAT YOUR STAFF ACCOMMODATION, AND YOUR REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL IS TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT AS PRESENTED BY THE FPRA BOARD. IT STARTS THE CLOCK TICKING AND MOTION TO HOPEFULLY WHAT WE ALL DESIRE WHICH IS A REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT PROJECT THAT IS NOT JUST FOR THE LONG-TERM BENEFIT OF THE CITY BEFORE THE BENEFIT OF THE ENTIRE REGION.

HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM. OF COURSE YOUR STAFF AND US AS A

TEAM HAS SPENT MANY HOURS. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> WHO WANTS TO GO FIRST?

COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? >> SURE. A COUPLE OF COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, TOO. GO BACK TO THE ESCROW. YOU SAID A MILLION DOLLARS AND THEN YOU ESTIMATED INFRASTRUCTURE VALUE OF WHAT WAS A NUMBER AGAIN.

THOSE PLANS HAVEN'T BEEN DRAWN YET. THE CALCULATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED YET. THAT WAS A NUMBER WE ARRIVED UPON AND NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE

DEVELOPER. >> THE REASON I BRING THAT UP COMMISSIONERS IS THE INDUSTRY& THAT I GET TO WORK IN, WHEN YOU HAVE A EVALUATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND IMPROVEMENTS LIKE THAT. THE CONSULTANTS ARE THE DESIGNERS THERE IS A RANGE OF 5%, 6% UP TO 10% OF THE VALUE WHAT THE DESIGN FEES ARE. WHEN YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT AND YOU TAKE $2.5 MILLION, EVEN ON THE HIGH SIDE AT 8%, THAT IS $200,000.

WE ARE COVERED WITH THE ESCROW ACCOUNT. THE LEAVES ANOTHER 800,000 TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE DON'T HAVE TODAY. THOSE ARE SOME OF MY QUESTIONS I

HAD TODAY. >> IF I CAN CLARIFY THAT POINT, THAT MONEY IS JUST TO BE REBATE OF CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION, AND OFFER DESIGN. THE DEVELOPER IS PAYING FOR DESIGN, THAT MILLION DOLLARS DOES NOT BECOME AVAILABLE UNTIL DIRT GETS MOVED.

PAYING FOR THOSE DESIGN FEES, THEY ARE BEING ABSORBED BY THE DEVELOPER.

PRIOR TO THE AVAILABILITY OF THAT MILLION DOLLARS TO BE REBATED.

THAT IS A PARTICULAR POINT OF NEGOTIATION. >> THANK YOU.

>> CLARIFY, FOR ME, I THINK THIS IS A BASIC EYE, TIF IS THE MONEY OVER AND ABOVE WHAT THE REGULAR TAXES ARE, IS THAT CORRECT? TAX INCREASE FINANCING, IS NOT THE MONEY YOU GET FOR THE

IMPROVEMENT OF THE LAND LAND? >> YES, MA'AM. WITH THEIR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY YOU ESTABLISH A BASELINE AND THOSE FUNDS SHALL ALWAYS BE RECEIVED BY THE PRIMARY AGENCY WHICH WOULD BE THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. FROM THAT BASE MOVING FORWARD, THE DIFFERENTIAL IN THAT TAXABLE VALUE, OR THE AMOUNT OF TAX REVENUE WOULD THEN GO TO THE REDEVELOPING AGENCY. THE FUNDING WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BASELINE,

[01:25:06]

AND THE PROPERTY EVALUATION AS A RELATES TO THE TAX REVENUE. >> 50% WOULD BE JUST THE

INCREASE, NOT THE BASE TAXES? >> 50% OF THE -- >> THE REBATE?

>> IN A SENSE, THE REBATE WOULD BE 50% UP TO A MAXIMUM OF $200,000 OF THE AMOUNT PAID BY THE ACTUAL OWNERS OF THE PARCELS. ONCE WE DETERMINE --

>> THAT IS ALL OF THE TAXES. THE BASE TAXES PLUS THE TIF. >> THAT WOULD JUST BE THE TIF

REVENUE. >> WE WILL STILL GET TAX REVENUE WE GET TO KEEP?

>> YES. AS A MATTER FACT, SINCE BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON BROUGHT THIS UP, 1912-1904, WHATEVER HE SAID, 1912, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY TYPE OF TAXABLE REVENUES FROM

THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL SINCE 1912. >> EVERYTHING WILL BE TIF.

>> THE CITY INCORPORATED IN 200. >> EVER. GOT IT.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS HAPPENS TO BE ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT DECISIONS I THINK WE ARE ALL GOING TO MAKE. FORTUNATELY, I DON'T THINK SOME OF US WILL SEE THE FULL BENEFIT 30-40 YEARS FROM NOW, YOU WILL, CHEYENNE, I DON'T THINK I WILL BE THERE.

KEY. FORT PIERCE, WE HAVE BEEN PATIENT FOR YEARS WAITING FOR THE TIME, NOT ONLY WAITING, WE HAVE BEEN SHORING UP A DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON OUR DOWNTOWN, OUR COMMUNITIES, OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, TRYING TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING, WE ARE TAKING STEPS IN LEAPS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

I AM NOT EXPERIENCED AT ALL IN NEGOTIATING SOMETHING THIS BIG. I HAVE BOUGHT PROPERTY BEFORE ONCE, BUT NOTHING LIKE THIS. I DEPEND ON YOU AND SERVICES OF STAFF TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

I JUST HAVE TO HEAR FROM YOU TO SAY, IF THIS REALLY DIDN'T WORK, IF THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG

WITH IT, HE WOULD TELL US THAT, RIGHT? >> I WOULDN'T BE AT THE PODIUM.

WE GIVE YOU A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. >> KIM, I KNOW WHO YOU ARE.

YOU CARRY A LOT OF WEIGHT WITH THAT. BUT I HAVE TO HEAR THAT, BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE LEAPED INTO THINGS WHERE THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE DOING THE PERFECT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GET INTO THE WORLD OF BIOTECH IF YOU WANTED TO.

I CAN GO NOT THAT THERE IS ANY GUARANTEE TO WHAT GOES ON. SOMETIMES THE PLAN, THEIR EXCITEMENT AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU HAVE ELECTED OFFICIALS APPEAR THAT ARE NOT INTIMATE WITH ALL OF THE DETAILS. THERE IS A DETACHMENT. WE RELY ON AUTHORITIES AND STAFF TO BE ABLE TO GET US THERE. IT IS NOT UNREASONABLE FOR ME TO REACH OUT AND SAY, OKAY, IF THIS REALLY WASN'T GOOD, WOULD YOU TELL US SO? IF YOU SAY "YES", THAT GIVES ME A WARM FEELING. I LIKE PIZZA, AND I KNOW PETE WILL PUSH US IN THE I JUST HAVE TO HAVE THAT REAL COMFORT FEELING. THIS IS PART OF OUR LEGACY.

AS WE GO FORWARD, I MEAN,, I AM SURE AUDUBON, I MEAN, I HAVE BEEN EXCITED ABOUT THEM SINCE THE DAY THEY WALKED INTO THE ROOM. WE JUST HAVE TO BE REAL SURE WHAT WE ARE HEARING AND WHAT WE ARE DOING, BECAUSE WE GET TO MAKE A BIG DECISION THAT IS GOING TO AFFECT EVERYBODY IN THIS COMMUNITY FOR SO LONG. THANK YOU FOR ENTERTAINING THAT UNUSUAL QUESTION. THIS HAS BEEN AN UNUSUAL EXPERIENCE FOR ALL OF US.

IT REALLY HAS. WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT DOWNTOWN AREA, WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT KING PLANT SITE IS GOING TO BE KEY TO HOW WE GO FORWARD. I MEAN, I KNOW RISK IS THERE, AND I HAVE DEALT WITH RISK BEFORE. WE HAVE YOU TO GIVE US SOME GUARANTEE THAT REASONABLE RISK IS OKAY. IF WE ARE LOOKING AT REASONABLE RISK GOING FORWARD, I AM OKAY WITH THAT. IF THERE ARE SOME BIG GAPS, YOU KNOW, UNUSUAL THINGS THAT WE ARE HOPING TO LEAP OVER THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW ABOUT THAT.

IF IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS IF WE ARE DOING EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO AND FEEL THE WAY THAT WE DO, THAT THIS IS EVT THAT SCHEDULES ARE GOING TO BE KEPT, BUILDINGS ARE GOING TO BE

[01:30:09]

BUILT, THIS IS GOING TO BE A REALITY AND A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, I AM GOOD WITH IT.

IF THAT ISN'T SO, I NEED TO KNOW NOW. I CAN TELL YOU, EVERYONE HAS ENTHUSIASM AND HOPE, RIGHT? THAT IS PART OF WHAT COMES INTO HAVING A CRA.

YOU DO NOT CREATE A CRA IF YOU ARE A PESSIMIST. ONLY IF YOU'RE AN OPTIMIST THAT YOUR FUTURE IS GOING TO GET BETTER. YOU TAKE THOSE MEASURES TO HELP MAKE YOU DON'T PUT A PIECE OF LAND OUT IN RFP PROCESS IF YOU ARE A PESSIMIST IT.

YOU ONLY DO THAT IF YOU HOPEFUL AND OPTIMISTIC. THAT IS PART OF THIS PROCESS.

WE CAN'T PRETEND THAT ISN'T THE OF AGREEMENT.ASPECT OF THIS TYP- TO YOUR POINT, THERE ARE OTHER PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ARRANGEMENTS AND OTHER LOCATIONS WHERE THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF HOPE AND OPTIMISM AND THEY HAVE NOT WORKED OUT THE WAY PEOPLE WISH THEY DID.

THIS AGREEMENT IS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE THE RISK TO THE FURTHEST EXTENT THAT WE THINK IS PRACTICAL, REASONABLE, GIVEN THE TERMS AND THAT YOU HAVE ASKED TO BE NEGOTIATED.

WE DON'T WANT TO PUT CASH IN, YOU DON'T WANT TO CARRY ANY OBLIGATIONS OR BONDS.

YOU DON'T WANT TO CARRY ANY FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT. YOU HAVE AN ASSET THAT HAS BEEN SITTING WITHOUT GENERATING ANY REVENUES FOR YOU FOR A LONG TIME AND YOU ARE PUTTING IT INTO THE MIX, RIGHT? WITH OPTIMISM AND HOPE THAT IT IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT HAS BEEN PRESCRIBED IN THE AGREEMENT. WE ARE BROUGHT TO YOU IN AGREEMENT THAT MINIMIZES YOUR RISK AND HAS A DEVELOPER PUTTING $1 MILLION IN CASH IN ESCROW.

A SERIES OF PERFORMANCE BONDS SO EVERY SINGLE PHASE OF THE PROJECT IS BONDED WITH THE CITY BEING NAMED IN THAT BOND DOCUMENT. YOU ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY, YOU ACTUALLY HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO REVIEW EVERY CONSTRUCTION LOAN BEFORE IT IS ISSUED.

YOU AS PARTNERED WITH A DEVELOPER AS WE BELIEVE YOU CAN BE PARTNERED AGAIN WITHOUT PUTTING CASH OR FINANCING, OR OTHER RESOURCES OR ASSETS AT RISK.

YOU ARE NOT DOING YOU'RE HOLDING HANDS TO GET MARRIED, I HAVE USED A FEW TIMES WITH YOU, YOU'RE GETTING MARRIED OR YOU'RE LOOKING AT EVERY LEVEL OF DETAIL THAT YOU CAN COME AND YOU ARE APPROVING IT BEFORE THOSE NEXT STEPS GET TAKEN. WE DON'T HAVE GUARANTEES IN ANYTHING THAT WE DO. GOSH, IT WOULD BE A LOT EASIER IF WE DID.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT LUXURY. WHAT WE HAVE IS AN OPPORTUNITY WITH AN ASSET THAT YOU HAD SITTING ON YOUR BOOKS, AND YOU HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT MINIMIZES RISK AND AS THAT AGREEMENT CARRIES FORWARD, IT PUTS MORE AND MORE PRESSURE ON YOUR NOW PARTNER TO MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN AND GET A RETURN ON THAT PARTNER'S CAPITAL THAT THE, YOU'RE NOT PUTTING MONEY AT RISK. YOUR PARTNERS PUTTING MONEY AT RISK YOUR PARTNER'S LENDERS ARE GOING TO EXPECT TO GET PAID BACK SO AGAIN, WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT IS DESIGNED TO PUSH THAT PROPERTY FORWARD IN A MANNER THAT WE THINK IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE MANNER RAISED ON

THOSE TERMS. >> COMMISSIONER SESSIONS? >> I COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS HERE IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU HAVE COME UP WITH IN TERMS OF PROPOSED AGREEMENT, AND I AM REALLY IMPRESSED WITH THE FACT THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOME INPUT AS TO EACH PHASE OF THE CONSTRUCTION LOAN, I TAKE IT BEFORE IT DRIES TAKEN. IN I UNDERSTANDING?

>> BEFORE THE LOAN IS FINALIZED YOU WOULD BE REVIEWING THE LOAN DOCUMENTS AND CONFIRMING THOSE LOAN DOCUMENTS ARE GOING TO BUILD EXACTLY WHAT YOU HAVE AGREED IS GOING TO BE BUILT.

IF THOSE LOANS ARE PRODUCING WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO THEN YOU HOLD THE PROPERTY.

>> WILL THE MONEY BE DISBURSED IN PHASES? >> YES, THERE WOULD BE A

PHASING. >> WILL WE HAVE ANY INPUT AND THAT ASPECT OF IT?

>> YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT THOSE PHASES 1-8. BEFORE THAT NEXT PHASE STARTED, CAN YOU PULL OF THAT MAP? THERE'S EIGHT PHASES OF THE PROJECT.

THE PARCEL IS BROKEN DOWN INTO EIGHT PHASES, RIGHT? PHASE ONE IS EVERYTHING IN RED.

YOU WOULD BE REVIEWING THE LOAN TO MAKE SURE THE DEVELOPERS GOING TO BUILD EXACTLY WHAT YOU APPROVED IN YOUR SITE PLAN THAT YOU HAVEN'T SEEN YOU BUT YOU HAVE SEEN THE IMAGERY THAT HAS BEEN CREATED, RIGHT? AND ALL OF THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS DETAILED

[01:35:02]

IN THAT. YOU WOULD BE APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION LOAN THAT THE DEVELOPER CANNOT TAKE OUT THAT LOAN AND GET THE LAND UNTIL YOU APPROVE THE CONSTRUCTION LOAN.

THAT SAME PROCESS WOULD TAKE PLACE FOR EACH OF THE NEXT SEVEN PHASES.

YOU WOULD APPROVE THE LOAN, DOCUMENTS MAKE SURE THE DEVELOPERS TAKING OUT MONEY TO BUILD EXACTLY WHAT YOU EXPECT. THE DEVELOPER IS PUTTING A BOND UP TO SAY, CITY, I GUARANTEE THROUGH THIS PERFORMANCE BOND I'M GOING TO DO EXACTLY THAT IS WHAT THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED.

THE PRESSURE THEN GOES ON THE DEVELOPER, BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER HAS THOSE OBLIGATIONS.

THAT IS HOW THIS HAS BEEN DESIGNED. AS WE GO FORWARD, THE PRESSURE CONTINUED -- CONTINUES TO GO ON TO THE DEVELOPER SIDE OF THE TABLE TO PERFORM.

YOU HAVE A BOND IN PLACE OF THAT PERFORMANCE DOES NOT TAKE PLACE THE WAY YOU HAVE AGREED TO.

>> I KEEP HEARING YOU REFERRING TO THE RISK INVOLVED, RISK ON THE PART OF BOTH PARTIES, SOMEWHAT OF A MARRIAGE AGREEMENT AS YOU SAY. BY THE SAME TOKEN, THE INDIVIDUAL THAT HAS THE MOST AT STAKE AND HAS PUT THE MOST UPFRONT SHOULD TAKE THE LEAST AMOUNT OF RISK, AT LEAST FROM OWNERSHIP STANDPOINT. ESPECIALLY FROM SITTING UP HERE AND REALIZING THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS OWNED BY THE TAXPAYERS.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU HAVE DONE. I HAVE TO ALSO LOOK TO MY LEFT, BECAUSE JUST LIKE THAT HUMANE SOCIETY, LEE SAID THAT WE ARE TUSSLING BACK AND FORTH WITH, THE LANE THAT WAS PUT IN THERE, THE DEVAULT LANE, WHICH WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME, THE DEFAULT LANGUAGE THAT TRIGGERS SOMETHING FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE CITY BEING ABLE TO GET BACK AND TAKE CONTROL. I LOOK TO MY CITY ATTORNEY, WHICH I HOLD HIM TO AN EVEN HIGHER STANDARD THAN I DO YOU AS A CONSULTANT, BECAUSE HE IS THE CITY ATTORNEY.

I ASK HIM THE QUESTION, ARE IN TERMS IN THE AMOUNT OF RISK THAT THE CITY IS TAKING AT THIS., ESPECIALLY CONCENTRATING ON THE DEFAULT LANGUAGE WHICH TRIGGERS A REFERRAL IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN. DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH IT. DO WE NEED TO HIRE AN OUTSIDE ATTORNEY, AS THE COMMISSIONER POINTED OUT HERE, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO US. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ALL OF OUR TEES CROSSED AND ALL OF OUR EYES DARTED AS WE ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT TO PROTECT THE CITY'S INTEREST AND AGAIN, JUST LOOKING BACK ON THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN THE PAST.

THINGS LIKE THAT, IF THEY ARE NOT PUT IN PLACE THEY WILL COME BACK TO HAUNT US.

THAT IS WHY IT IS NECESSARY THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT LANGUAGE IN THERE, TO PROTECT US AND ARE YOU

COMFORTABLE WITH THIS AT THIS POINT? >> MADAM CHAIR, THANK YOU.

I WANT TO ECHO FIRST OF ALL EVERYTHING THAT DOCTOR DELANEY HAS SAID.

SHE IS NOT A LAWYER. THAT IS A GOOD THING. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, BECAUSE SHE SEES IT THROUGH A DIFFERENT LENS. TO YOUR QUESTION COMMISSIONER.

THIS IS THE BEST NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT OVER THE LAST FIVE MONTHS WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO REACH. LET ME BE CLEAR, NEGOTIATION IS TO PARTIES, AND THERE WERE CERTAIN THINGS THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD NOT AGREE TO, THIS IS NOT THE FIRST ITERATION OF THIS AGREEMENT IT IS NOT EVEN THE FIFTH ITERATION, IT IS PROBABLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF CLOSER TO THE SEVENTH OR EIGHTH. WE DID HAVE THE BENEFIT OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL ASSISTING MYSELF , SO ALONG WITH DOCTOR DELANEY ASSISTING HOMES AND MEMS, I ALSO HAD THE BENEFIT OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL, BOARD-CERTIFIED SPECIALIST IN REAL THE DEVELOPER IS REPRESENTED BY VERY COMPETENT COUNSEL AS WELL. VERY PROFESSIONAL AT ALL TIMES TO WORK WITH.

IN ANY AGREEMENT, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO REALLY GIVE A FIXED NUMBER OF THE RISK.

I CAN TELL YOU ZERO RISK WOULD BE IF WE'VE JUST DONE IT OURSELVES.

WE DON'T HAVE THE FINANCIAL WHEREWITHAL TO DO THAT. THE OTHER END WOULD BE AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER IN A TYPICAL SITUATION YOU PUT A FOR SALE SIGN OUT FRONT SOMEBODY BUYS IT AND YOU WOULD ZERO CONTROL. WE WOULD HAVE NO RISK IN ANOTHER WAY, BUT WE WOULD HAVE ZERO CONTROL. ANY NUMBER OF PERMITTED USES COULD GO THERE IMMEDIATELY OR MAYBE NEVER. HE MADE THE ILLUSION EARLIER TO SOME PROPERTY THE CITY SOLD MANY YEARS AGO. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS 50-50, 60-40, 70-30?

[01:40:04]

I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WILL KNOW UNTIL IT'S COMPLETELY BUILT OUT AND WE CAN SAY IT WAS 50-50 AND IT WAS PERFECT, OR HE GOES WRONG AND THEN WE WILL FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHO IS DEFENDING IT.

I CAN TELL YOU WITH ALL CERTAINTY, THIS IS THE BEST NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT WITH THE PROTECTIONS OF REVERSIONARY LANGUAGE THAT IS IN THERE UNTIL CERTAIN THRESHOLDS ARE MET.

CONSTRUCTION LOAN FINANCING. THESE ARE INSTITUTIONAL LENDERS. CONSTRUCTIONAL FINANCING IS NOT GOOD TO BE FOR A $5 MILLION, THIS IS 20-$30 MILLION BASED ON LENDERS DON'T GIVE THAT KIND OF MONEY WITHOUT AN EVEN MORE SPECIFIC PLAN THAT WE ARE ASKING FOR.

THEY WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT KIND OF FIXTURES ARE GOING IN. AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT YOU HAVE BONDING, SEVERAL LEVELS OF BONDING. YOU HAVE ESCROW FINANCING, WHICH WE ARE GOING TO HOLD. YOU HAVE BONDING AT EACH PHASE. THAT WILL BE TIED DIRECTLY TO THE BUILDING PERMITS THAT THEY PULL TO SAY THE LIGHT BLUE IN THE BOTTOM LEFT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS GOING TO BE $4 MILLION STRUCTURE. WE WILL KNOW THAT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO SAY WHAT IT IS GOING TO BE WHEN THEY PULLED THE BUILDING PERMITS.

IT WILL HAVE A PERFORMANCE BOND PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION, I APOLOGIZE 10 DEFAULT, AS WILL

ALL OF THE PHASES. >> PAGE 9. >> I KNOW THAT IS A TYPICAL ATTORNEY ANSWER.

THAT THIS IS THE BEST NEGOTIATED DEAL THAT WE COULD GET. THE DEVELOPER, AS I SAID WAS WILLING TO GIVE ON CERTAIN THINGS AND NOT ON OTHER THINGS AND THIS IS THE AGREEMENT WE ARE PRESENTING TO YOU. ULTIMATELY IT IS UP TO YOU, BASED ON MY ADVICE AND OUR WORK TOGETHER, ALL OF US TO DECIDE WHETHER IT IS THE RISK THAT THE CRA WANTS TO TAKE.

I CANNOT TELL YOU BECAUSE I DO NOT HAVE A CRYSTAL BALL. THAT IS MY BEST ADVICE.

>> .OUT TO ME SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THE DEVELOPER WAS NOT WILLING TO BEND ON, BECAUSE THAT IS AN INDICATION TO ME THAT SOMEONE FROM STAFF, ARE YOU YOURSELF RAISED SOMETHING OF INTEREST THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN OUR BEST INTEREST. I'M JUST CURIOUS TO KNOW IF YOU

DON'T MIND DIVULGING NOT TO ME. WHAT WAS IT EXACTLY? >> I CAN GIVE YOU A VERY CLEAR EXAMPLE. THE INITIAL REQUEST WAS TO PROTECT US TO THE FULLEST EXTENT. TO PROTECT US FROM THE FULLEST EXTENT WOULD HAVE A REVERTER IN THE ENTIRE TIME. AS YOU ARE DOCTOR DELANEY SAY DURING THE PRESENTATION SIMPLY CANNOT DO THAT BECAUSE IT'S CONTINGENT ON CONSTRUCTION FINANCING.

JUST NOBODY IS GOING TO LEND THAT TYPE OF MONEY WITH A REVERTER IN THEM.

IT WAS NEGOTIATED OVER A SEVERAL WEEK TIME FRAME THE VERY BEGINNING.

THAT IS WHAT YOU SAW IN THE EARLY PART, JUNE TO JULY TIME. THOSE DISCUSSIONS WERE REALISTIC AS TO WHAT THEY WERE. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CHANGED AND EVOLVED.

THERE WERE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES DISCUSSED. AS WE SIT HERE NOW, THAT IS THE COMPILATION OF THE DIFFERENT PROTECTIONS. I WILL SAY THE PERFORMANCE BOND WAS NOT AN INITIAL DISCUSSION AND THAT DEVELOPED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS.

THAT IS A CLEAR EXAMPLE OF THE VERY BEGINNING I CAME OUT ALWAYS BE ABLE TO TAKE IT BACK.

I WAS FUNDAMENTALLY OF A NONSTARTER BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE DEVELOPMENT IS STRUCTURED

WITH CONSTRUCTION FINANCING. >> THAT PERFORMANCE BOND CAME AS A?

>> ABSOLUTELY. THAT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS THE FIRST OUT OF THE GATE.

AGAIN I DO WANT TO GIVE CREDIT TO THE DEVELOPER AND ITS COUNSEL COMING UP WITH CREATIVE IDEAS.

AS MR. MAM SAID THERE WERE SATURDAYS, SUNDAYS, LATE NIGHTS, EARLY MORNINGS, E-MAILS AND TIMES NOBODY SHOULD BE GETTING E-MAILS. THAT IS PART OF IT, YES, SIR.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT AVENUE B. WINDOW DOES SOMETHING HAPPEN?

DO WE GIVE IT UP, TELL ME WHAT HAPPENS TO AVENUE B? >> AVENUE B, WE DON'T HAVE, I'M GOING TO POINT YOU TO AN EXHIBIT IN THE AGREEMENT JUST TO MAKE THAT MORE CLEAR.

AVENUE B AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A, OKAY? EXHIBIT A LOOKS LIKE THIS, IT IS

[01:45:06]

TO PAGES, BLUE ON ONE SIDE FOR THE PUBLIC AS WELL, AND ON THE BACK THERE'S A LOCATION MAP THAT

ILLUSTRATES THAT PORTION -- >> I REMEMBER SEEING THAT ONE. >> AS YOU BEGIN YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL ACTIVITIES, THERE ARE THREE BIG THINGS, WE NEGOTIATED WITH THE DEVELOPER, WE ARE NOT BRINGING CASH INTO THE DEAL, BUT WE, AS THE CITY CAN DO A LOT OF THINGS MUCH MORE NIMBLY THAN THE PRIVATE SECTOR CAN. THERE ARE THREE ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN, TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY THE CITY. ONE OF THOSE IS TO ABANDON THAT PORTION OF AVENUE B THAT LIES TO THE WEST OF SECOND STREET. THAT WILL ALLOW THAT PARCEL TO BE CONSOLIDATED. THE OTHER ACTIONS AS I MENTIONED YOU WILL BE CHANGING FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND CHANGING THE ZONING. THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT I WOULD DESCRIBE AS PUTTING IN SWEAT EQUITY. AVENUE B IS ANOTHER PARCEL, PIECE OF LAND NOT PAYING ANY TAXES OR PRODUCING REVENUE FOR FRANKLY IT REPRESENTS COST AS DOES EVERY ASSET.

THE ABANDONMENT OF THAT PARCEL IS TAKING A BURDEN OFF THE CITY RIGHT IT CREATES A LARGER MORE DEVELOPED PIECE TO THE WEST OF SECOND. THE ZONE USE AND LAND ACTIVITIES DRIVE OF THE VALUE AND MAKE THAT SITE MORE MARKETABLE. THAT IS EXHIBIT A WHICH IS TWO PAGES. I'M SORRY, IT IS THE BALANCE OF EXHIBIT A.

>> CAN I BUILD ON THAT? >> GO AHEAD. >> WE KNOW AVENUE B AS PART OF THE PARCEL ALSO BECAUSE IT IS LABELED AVENUE. THERE IS A RIGHT WAY WE ARE SAYING IN THE LANGUAGE IS BEING ABANDONED. WHAT ABOUT THE UTILITY EASEMENT.

IT'S IN THE SAME EXHIBIT THAT WE CALL AVENUE B WITH A GREEN SIGN ON SECOND STREET, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT AVENUE B. WHAT ARE WE DOING WITH THE EASEMENT.

WE HAVE ALREADY TALKED AS A COMMISSION ON FPRA, ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DOING SOMETHING WITH THAT.

I SEE IN THE PLAN, AND IT IS CONCEPTUAL THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE CROSS CONDUCTIVITY BETWEEN SECOND STREET AND INDIAN RIVER DRIVE POTENTIALLY. THAT IS AN EASMENT --

>> IT'S ADJUSTING IT OVER, PETE, YOU NEED TO JUMP IN HERE WITH ME HERE.

>> YES, MA'AM. SO, IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT EXHIBIT A, THE TITLE SECTION PORTION OF AVENUE B TO BE ABOUNDED ON THE WEST SIDE OF SECOND STREET, THAT IS EASY.

RIGHT NOW YOU WOULD RECOGNIZE IT IF YOU DROVE BY IT AS WHAT LOOKS LIKE A PARKING LOT.

THERE IS NO INFRASTRUCTURE THERE AS FAR AS A DEDICATED RIGHT-OF-WAY.

AND HAS BEEN A A RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN AS AVENUE B FOR A LONG TIME.

THE AREA THAT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON IS REFERENCING WAS WITHIN THE LAST 9-10 MONTHS, ACTUALLY DEDICATED AS A CITY ROADWAY HEARD THAT WAS ONE OF THE VERY FIRST THINGS IN MY TENURE HERE THAT HAPPEN. FOR MANY YEARS AS YOU ALLUDED TO, IT WAS NOT ACTUALLY A DEDICATED ROADWAY. OUR CITY ENGINEER, ONE OF OUR FIRST LEGAL SERVICES THAT I LOOKED AT. IT IS NOW DEDICATED, I THINK IT IS 50 FEET.

IT IS INTENDED TO CONTINUE TO BE MAINTAINED AS A PUBLIC RIGHT. IS THAT ACCURATE?

>> YES. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE LANGUAGE IS OKAY IN THE DOCUMENT. THAT WAS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS I HAD WRITTEN DOWN.

JUST TO BE CLEAR. >> WHEN YOU SAY AVENUE B, WE GO TO THE EAST SIDE OF SECOND

STREET, NOT WEST. THANK YOU. >> I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION.

WE REFER TO A HOTEL, BUT WE DON'T REFER TO A SPECIFIC HOTEL. IS THERE A REASON FOR?

>> THE DEVELOPER HAS NOT PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION YET. RESPONSIBLE FOR DOING THAT IN

THE DUE DILIGENCE PHASE. >> ALL RIGHT. OTHER QUESTIONS, OR OTHER

DISCUSSION? >> YOU MADE AN INTERESTING POINT.

I WAS HAVING SOME INSIGHT, AS A MATTER FACT, WE HAD A COMMISSIONER ACTUALLY WANT TO RENEGE AND WE FOLLOWED FOR THE MOST PART HIS DIRECTION WE DID NOT AGREE ON A FLAG, AND I

[01:50:03]

THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY, THAT WAS NOT PART OF OUR INITIAL DISCUSSION. I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING INTO THIS KNOWING WHAT FLAG --

>> I THOUGHT WE WERE, TOO. >> AS OF OUR LAST DISCUSSIONS WITH THE DEVELOPER, THERE IS NOT YET A COMPLETED AGREEMENT IN PLACE. THAT MIGHT BE A QUESTION YOU CAN POST TO THE DEVELOPER WHO IS HERE TO HIS -- WITH HIS TEAM. WE DO NOT HAVE THAT AS A

CONDITION IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. >> TO AT LEAST MAKE THAT

DETERMINATION THAT WAS A REAL IMPORTANT POINT. >> I RECALL IT COMPLETELY.

AS OF OUR LAST NEGOTIATION WITH THE DEVELOPER, THAT INFORMATION WAS NOT YET AVAILABLE IN A FORM THAT COULD BE INSERTED INTO AGREEMENT WITH THAT LEVEL OF SPECIFICITY.

DO WE HAVE IN THE AGREEMENT THAT WE GET THAT SPECIFIC NAME BEFORE WE GET TO GREEN HERE?

>> THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO BE NEGOTIATING A SALE OF THE SITE TO THE HOTEL.

I WOULD IMAGINE THE HOTEL WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE CONSTRUTION LOAN, NAMED IN THE CONSTRUCTION LOAN. I THINK THAT IS YOUR POINT OF APPROVAL.

YOU WILL BE APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION FOR WHAT IS TO BE BUILT THERE.

AS THE ATTORNEY MENTION, THE LEVEL OF SPECIFICITY IN THE CONSTRUCTION LOAN INCLUDES THE TYPE OF FIXTURE, WHAT THE OPERATORS GOING TO BE, WHAT THE CONDITIONS OF OPERATIONS WILL ULTIMATELY BE. THAT IS THE POINT AT WHICH I THINK APPROVAL WILL BE UPON THE

CITY. >> ARE YOU SAYING WE CAN RENEGE IF WE ARE AT THE POINT AND WE DO NOT AGREE WITH THE ACTUAL PROPOSED FLAG, IF ANY AT ALL? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?

>> PETE, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DEFER TO YOU ON THAT. >> THAT WAS A VERY IMPORTANT

ISSUE FOR US IN THE BEGINNING. >> YES. MY RECOLLECTION FROM BEING INVOLVED IN THE LAST FIVE MONTHS IS THAT THERE WAS INITIALLY A DISCUSSION OF A PARTICULAR BRAND AT THE TIME AND HAD NOT BEEN REDUCED TO BETWEEN AUDUBON AND THE BRAND, THE FLAG COME AS YOU WILL. HOWEVER, SUBSEQUENT TO THAT WE HAVE BEEN MADE TO KNOW, BECAUSE WE ASK AT SAME QUESTION DURING OUR NEGOTIATIONS, SEVERAL TIMES. INTEREST WAS GENERATING AMONG SEVERAL FLAG BRANDS, THE MAJOR HOTEL CORPORATIONS. THAT IS NOT A BAD THING FROM THE DEVELOPERS PERSPECTIVE. THE MORE INTEREST YOU CAN GENERATE, OF COURSE, THE BETTER RETURN HE CAN GET WHICH HOPEFULLY IS BETTER PRODUCT FOR THE CITY, THE DEVELOPER, AND THE COMMUNITY. AS A RESULT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STATUS OF THAT IS NOW.

I DON'T KNOW IF HE STILL HAS MULTIPLE INTERESTS AND HE'S HOPING TODAY TO SAY HEY, LOOK, I'VE GOT THE AGREEMENT, WHICH ONE OF YOU IS GOING TO GIVE ME THE ABSOLUTE BEST DEAL.

SO IN THE NEXT 120 DAYS WE CAN BREAK GROUND. HOWEVER, UNDERSTANDING THE CONCERN OF THE CRA, THAT IS A VALID QUESTION. THE GENTLEMAN GENTLEMAN APPROACHING THE PODIUM'S COUNSEL HE WILL INTRODUCE HIMSELF ON PERHAPS HE HAS SOME INSIGHT INTO

THAT. >> GIVE YOUR NAME AND AFFILIATION FOR THE RECORD.

>> HERE REPRESENTING AUDUBON. YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT QUESTION.

JUST A BIGGER PICTURE ISSUE, COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE WITH THE CIRCLES ON IT.

IN THIS STAGE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, WE HAVE NINE MONTHS TO COMPLETE THIS.

YOU CAN KIND OF THINK OF THIS AS, YOU KNOW, STAGE ONE AND WALKING DOWN THE AISLE TOGETHER.

BOTH PARTIES HAVE CERTAIN OBLIGATIONS. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT MR. MADISON IS GOING TO HAVE TO DO IN THAT TIMEFRAME. HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND A LOT OF MONEY AND GET A LOT OF THINGS DONE. ONE OF THE THINGS HE IS GOING TO HAVE TO GET DONE IS GETTING THE SITE PLAN, THE PD PLAN BECAUSE IT WILL BE CHANGED TO A PD ZONING. IT IS A ZONING CATEGORY THAT GIVES A LOT OF SPECIFICITY IN TERMS OF WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE, WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE, STANDARDS IN TERMS OF ARCHITECTURE, SETBACK STANDARDS IN TERMS OF LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN LAYS OUT A LOT OF SPECIFICITY. ONE OF THE REASONS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT LIVES THAT IS BECAUSE IT DOES HAVE THAT LEVEL OF SPECIFICITY AND HATS THE ABILITY TO CONDITION THINGS.

[01:55:02]

YOU GET TO LOOK AT THE DEVELOPMENT AND SATISFY YOURSELF THAT WHAT IS BEING PROMISED TO YOU IS WHAT IS BEING DELIVERED. ALSO DURING THAT TIMEFRAME, HE WOULD NEED TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE TAIL YEAR. HE'S BEEN HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM, AND I'M SURE MR. MADISON CAN TELL YOU MORE ABOUT THE SPECIFICS FOR THAT. WE COULDN'T REALLY ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE HOTEL YEAR TO DO HOTEL UNTIL WE HAD THIS AGREEMENT IN PLACE.

AS MR. SWEENEY WAS INDICATING, WE WERE NEGOTIATING BACK AND FORTH QUITE A BIT ON THE PARAMETERS OF THIS AND WHAT THIS WOULD LOOK LIKE. OF COURSE, THE HOTEL YEAR, ALTHOUGH THEY ARE BUYING A SITE AND THEY ARE GOING TO GO IN THERE AND DEVELOP THIS HOTEL.

THEY ARE VERY MUCH A PARTNER IN THIS PROCESS. WHAT EVER THAT APPROVAL LOOKS LIKE, AND THE CONDITIONS IT HAS, WHATEVER THAT CYCLONE LOOKS LIKE, THEY ARE BUYING THEY ARE GOING TO BE AN INTERVAL PART OF THIS. THEY ARE VERY INTERESTED IN WHAT IT IS. THEY ARE VERY INTERESTED IN WHAT THIS AGREEMENT SAYS.

THEY ARE ALSO BUYING INTO THAT. ONE OF THE THINGS IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE, IS THIS AGREEMENT GETS RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD AND IT RUNS WITH THE LAND. WHEN THE HOTEL YEAR BUYS UP THE PROPERTY, THEY ARE BUYING A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS SUBJECT TO THIS AGREEMENT AND ITS REQUIREMENTS. ALSO BUYING A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS SUBJECT TO THAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ITS REQUIREMENTS. WE WOULD NOT ASKED HIM TO.

>> I DON'T MEAN TO OBJECT, BUT DO YOU RECALL WHEN WE SAT AT THE TABLE AT MARRIOTT, AND WAS PART OF THE TEAM, AND IT CAME ACROSS AS IF THEY WERE GOING TO BE A PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM.

I MEAN,, YOU REMEMBER? >> I WASN'T THERE SO I DON'T REMEMBER.

I UNDERSTAND. >> THAT IS WHAT REALLY STOOD OUT IN MY MIND, BECAUSE I KNEW WHAT CLASSIFICATION, OR WHAT STANDARD WE WERE LOOKING FOR FOR THE AREA, THE SUN TO SET IN THERE.

>> I WAS AT THE MEETING, MARRIOTT WAS THE NAME OF THE FLAG WE TALKED ABOUT.

PRODUCED FROM THE FRANCHISEE FROM MARRIOTT, GREEN PARK MANAGEMENT.

THAT LETTER OF INTENT, OR THAT AGREEMENT HAS GONE AS VERY FAR AS WE CAN TAKE IT, BECAUSE I CANNOT SELL THEM ANYTHING WITHOUT AN AGREEMENT TO GO SELL THEM SOMETHING.

SO, I AM AS MUCH CONCERNED ABOUT IS YOU ARE IS WHAT FLAG IS THERE, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT A MOTEL SIX SITTING IN THERE AND TRY TO SELL HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLAR CONDOS.

IT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT SITTING ON THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY WHAT FLAG YOU'RE FLYING.

BUT WHEN YOU'RE SITTING NEXT T& THE MARINA, NEXT TO HOMES I WANT TO SELL, I WANT THE VERY BEST WE CAN GET. THE MARRIOTT FLAG HAS GOT A PRETTY BIG BAND WITH.

THEY GO FROM RITZ-CARLTON ALL THE WAY DOWN YOU ALSO HAVE TO BE REALISTIC.

A RITZ-CARLTON IS NOT GOING TO WORK THERE. I CAN ASSURE YOU I SHARE YOUR CONCERN, THAT I WANT THE VERY BEST TO FLAG I CAN GET FOR THAT SITE, SO THAT I CAN GET THE MAXIMUM DOLLAR FOR OUR DEVELOPMENT, AND CREATES A MARRIOTT IS THE ONE WE HAVE NAMED, IT IS FROM GREEN PARK MANAGEMENT. WE HAVE A LETTER OF INTENT FROM THEM DATED AUGUST 16. WE HAVE GONE AS FAR AS WE CAN GO.

I HOPE I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. >> MORE IMPORTANT THAN THAT, IT IS GOING AS FAR AS IT GOES, WHAT IF IT GOES AS FAR AS I CAN GO AND WE ARE NOT ABLE TO REACH AN AGREEMENT IN TERMS OF WHO THE

FLAG OR HOTEL IS? WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE THE CITY? >> IN RESPECT TO WHAT? WHAT HOTEL GOES THERE? IF I AM NOT YOUR DEVELOPER, THEN WE DON'T HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH

THE HOTEL. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THAT WAS REAL IMPORTANT FOR US, YOU KNOW? >> IT IS VERY COMPELLING WHAT YOU SAID, WHICH IS, YOU WANT THE VERY BEST THERE, TOO. YOU WANTED TO BE -- THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE OF A CALIBER, THAT A VERY GOOD HOTEL WOULD BRING TO THAT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT. >> CAN WE GO TO THE SLIDE WITH THE HOTEL PARCEL? MR. DOBBINS BROUGHT UP A GOOD. PART OF OUR PROCESS IS GETTING THIS TO A PD.

[02:00:04]

THAT PARCEL, NOTHING CAN GO THERE WITHOUT THE PD, I'M SORRY WITHOUT HOTEL BEING SURROUNDED BY THE PD, BECAUSE THERE'S NO PARKING. THERE IS NO PARKING WITHIN THAT PARCEL RIGHT THERE. THIS IS THE PARCEL YOU ARE DESIGNATING?

>> CORRECT. >> HOW BIG IS IT? >> 1.3 ACRES, SOMETHING LIKE

THAT. >> AS IT SITS, THE PD CAN CHANGE A LITTLE BIT, BUT MY QUESTION IS

, DO YOU PROPOSE THAT THAT FOOTPRINT IS THE HOTEL FOOTPRINT >> IN THE SPIRIT OF THE RENDERING, YES. MARRIOTT REQUIRES ONE PARKING SPACE PER HOTEL ROOM, IF I HAVE 100 GRAMS I NEED 100 PARKING SPACES. MUCH LIKE THIS, THIS PROCESS WITH NEGOTIATION WITH THE CITY IT IS I NEED TO MOVE SOME PARKING SPACES OUT OF THIS AREA MOVE THEM OVER THERE. THE PARKING AREA TO THE WEST OF THE HOTEL HAS EXPANDED A DEGREE, AND IT WAS MORE LANDSCAPING, LESS PARKING, BECAUSE MARRIOTT CAME BACK AND SAID DALE, WE NEED A 141, I HAD TO EXPAND OF THE PARKING TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE HOTEL.

IT IS A GIVE-AND-TAKE. UNTIL WE GET THE MASTER FOOTPRINT DONE, IT IS GOING TO MOVE A LITTLE BIT. I CANNOT MAKE A MOVE WITHOUT YOU BLESSING WHAT WE ARE DOING.

YOU'RE GOING TO GET TO KNOW ME REAL WELL IF YOU CHOOSE ME AS YOUR DEVELOPER.

>> BRING UP POINT UP, BECAUSE PART OF THE OVERALL PLAN IN PHASE ONE, IF YOU GO TO THAT SLIDE, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A LOT OF PARKING AROUND HERE. HE JUST SAID TO US IT IS ONE PARKING SPACE -- WE ARE IN IT. WE ARE IN IT WITH THEM. THE PD HAS TO BE APPROVED AND REVIEWED BY US. THE PD INCLUDES PARKING. I DON'T BELIEVE, IT CAN BE DONE, BUT WITH VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION THAT IS VERY EXPENSIVE. YOU CAN DO PARKING ON THAT 1.3 ACRES, BUT, YOU KNOW, NOW THEY ARE JUST GOING VERTICAL AT THAT.WHICH IS VERY EXPENSIVE.

WE ARE A PART OF THAT EQUATION IS WHERE I'M GOING WITH THAT. >> YEAH, THIS COMMISSION TURNED DOWN A DEVELOPER BECAUSE WE DID NOT LIKE THE HOTEL. THAT IS HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO US. I WAS VERY PIGHEADED THAT TIME, WHICH HAPPENS FROM TIME TO TIME.

I CAN SEE THE FACT THAT THIS HOTEL REALLY SETS THE BAR, AS FAR AS YOUR WHOLE DEVELOPMENT.

IF I WAS THE DEVELOPER I WOULD WANT THAT BAR AS HIGH AS I POSSIBLY COULD.

IT IS GOING TO AFFECT YOUR RETAIL. IT WILL AFFECT YOUR RESTAURANTS.

IT WILL AFFECT YOUR RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT. IT ACTUALLY AFFECTS EVERYTHING.

I BELIEVE, AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME, THAT ISSUE, YOU AND I HAVE THE SAME INTEREST AT HEART.

>> THE BEAUTY AS WE HAVE PARALLEL INTERESTS. I'M GOING TO PULL AS HARD AS YOU WANT ME TO PULL TO GET THE VERY BEST FLAG IN THERE. ONE THAT MAKES SENSE.

THE RITZ-CARLTON WOULD NOT MAKE SENSE. SO MUCH BANDWIDTH FROM THE MARRIOTT FLAGS THAT WE WILL FIND THE SWEET SPOT. THEN IT GETS DOWN TO NUANCES, THE DIRECTOR SHIPYARD GUYS SAY WE WANT EXTENDED STAY, BECAUSE IT IS NOT JUST THE YACHTS THAT, IT IS THE 30-40 TRADESMEN THAT WORK ON THE YACHTS, THEY WANT TO COME IN ON A MONDAY AND STAY MONDAY, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY, CHECK OUT FRIDAY MORNING.

WHAT KIND OF CAPACITY TO HAVE HER EXTENDED-STAY? IT IS GETTING TO -- NOT TOO GRANULAR, BUT STARTING TO GET TO THE POINT YOU THINK OF THAT SORT OF STRUCTURE.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING WHERE WE STUCK MARRIOTT AND THE PROPOSAL AND SAID THAT'S A GOOD WE HAVE A LETTER OF INTENT, WE ARE READY TO GO FORWARD. WE'VE JUST GOT IT AS FAR AS WE

CAN TAKE IT. >> THANK YOU. >> ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD DALE, ORLY LEE, THAT WE HAVE NOT COVERED OR THAT NEEDS TO BE SAID?

>> I WOULD LIKE TO THANK STAFF ARE ALL OF THEIR HARD WORK. WE DID SPEND A LOT OF IN TERMS OF TRYING TO MAKE IT WORK FOR BOTH SIDES. SOMETHING THAT COULD BE PALATABLE FOR THE CITY AND PROTECT THE CITIES TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT THAT WE CAN WHILE BEING SOMETHING THAT WORKS COMMERCIALLY THAT WOULD WORK FOR THE HOTEL YEAR, THE LENDERS.

I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF THE HARD WORK, MR. MIMS, WE TALKED FREQUENTLY.

[02:05:07]

ALWAYS WARM, NEVER I SEE.

HELPING US WITH SOME OUT-OF-THE-BOX THINKING AND TRYING TO FIND SOLUTIONS TO MAKE IT WORK FOR ALL PARTIES. I REALLY WANT TO THANK THE ENTIRE TEAM FOR THEIR WORK.

>> THANK YOU. >> FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, PEOPLE QUESTION THIS ALL THE TIME, IT'S VERY SIMPLE AND I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER, IT ALWAYS SAYS "DAYS" IN THIS AGREEMENT THAT IS CALENDAR DAYS, I JUST WANT TO MAKE. IF IT SAYS 15 DAYS, IS THAT WORKDAYS, OR GOVERNMENT DAYS WITHOUT HOLIDAYS AND ALL OF THAT STUFF?

FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE? >> THOSE ARE CALENDAR DAYS. >> MR. DOBSON AND I ARE 100% IN AGREEMENT. SUBSEQUENT TO THAT IT WOULD BE TO MINIMIZE IF WE NEEDED TO ADD

DEFINITION OF DAYS. >> THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE FOR THAT, BECAUSE NOTIFICATION TO THE CITY SAID SOMETHING ABOUT 15 DAYS. I CAN SEND AN E-MAIL AND SAY I NOTIFIED YOU, YOU HAVE 15 DAYS TO RESPOND. WHAT IS THE LEGAL PARAMETER OF A

NOTIFICATION? >> WE HAVE A NOTIFICATION PARAGRAPH WHICH IT DEFINES HOW NOTIFICATIONS HAVE TO BE DONE. IT'S ON PAGE 12 OF THE BOTTOM, SECTION 20.

IT HAS TO BE SENT IN WRITING. HAND DELIVERY, CERTIFIED MAIL, POSTAGE PREPAID, OR BY OVERNIGHT

COURIER. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

THAT IS WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR. >> GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MR. MADISON, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SAY? >> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT WE ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT. I HAVE HEARD IT MENTIONED HOW MUCH SKIN DOES AUDUBON HAVE IN THE GAME? WE HAVE A LOT OF SKIN IN THE GAME. DEPENDING ON HOW YOU ROUND THE NUMBERS, WE WILL HAVE OVER $15 MILLION IN SKIN IN THE GAME. BEFORE WE GO VERTICAL. PLENTY OF IT SKIN IN THE GAME.

AND THEN I THINK IN TERMS OF THE PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY, THE WAY THAT YOU ARE NEGOTIATING TEAM NEGOTIATED, VERY RIGOROUS AND VERY FAIR. WE HAVE THE RUNNING JOKE THAT WE ARE GETTING MARRIED, BUT WE HAVE THE RUNNING JOKE I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MORE BUBBLEWRAP WE CAN WRAP THE CITY AND HERE, BECAUSE WE ARE ON OUR THIRD OR FOURTH LAP TRYING TO MAKE THIS THING AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE. THE PERFORMANCE BONDS HATCHED OUT OF THAT.

A LOT OF INNOVATIVE THINGS, BUT A TREMENDOUS OF RESOURCES. THERE ARE SOME REALLY HIGH-POWERED GUYS ON THIS TEAM. I SAY GUYS FIGURATIVELY, MEN AND WOMEN, THAT ARE DRIVING THE BUS.

THEN WHEN YOU GET DONE, AND WE TURN ALL OF THIS INFRASTRUCTURE BACK OVER TO THE CITY, I THINK ONE OF THE MOST EXCITING THINGS FOR ME IS PHASE ONE. I MEAN, WE WANT TO GET THIS THING GOING, WE WANT GENERATING TAXES AND EVERYTHING. PHASE ONE HAS TO BE DONE IN 420 DAYS. 420 DAYS I HAVE TO HAVE ALL OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE BUILT, ALL OF THE STREETS NAMED NAME, SIDEWALK STREETS, HOTEL BUILT, RETAIL, RESIDENTIAL, IN TERMS OF RENTAL, AND OFFICE SPACE ALL FOZ WILL THAT PHASE ONE, AT THE SAME TIME I WOULD CAUTION ANYBODY THAT IS WATCHING ON A VIDEO, BECAUSE I HEAR FROM TIME TO TIME IS WHEN IS THE TRUCK GOING TO SHOW UP? WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO START DIGGING? IT TAKES A LITTLE BIT TO GET TO PHASE ONE. WE WILL NOT BE DIGGING NEXT WEEK.

WE WILL DO IT AS QUICK AS WE POSSIBLY CAN. THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE THIS. I HOPE TO BE YOUR PARTNER. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> DISCUSSION? PROPOSAL? MOTION?

EVERYBODY HAVE THEIR QUESTIONS ANSWERED? >> MOVE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT OF KING'S LANDING WITH AUDUBON DEVELOPMENT AS

PROPOSED BY STAFF. >> IS THERE A SECOND? >> I WILL SECOND THAT.

>> I WANT TO SAY BEFORE WE VOTE, I FEEL REALLY GOOD ABOUT THIS AND HOPEFUL, AND MORE THAN HOPEFUL, BECAUSE OF THE CALIBER OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE WORKED ON THIS IN TERMS OF THE PROPOSAL , FROM THE DEVELOPER SIDE, MANY OF THEM ARE KNOWN TO ME.

[02:10:05]

I FEEL THEY HAVE CREDIBILITY AND MANY OF THEM HAVE A STAKE IN FORT PIERCE AND I DON'T BELIEVE THEY WOULD RISK THEIR REPUTATION OR THEIR CREDIBILITY TO BE A PART OF SOMETHING THAT ISN'T GOING TO SUCCEED. I ALSO FEEL VERY GRATEFUL TO STAFF FOR YOUR EXCELLENT LEADERSHIP MR. MIMS, AND FOR ALL OF YOU, BECAUSE EVERYBODY BROUGHT SOMETHING TO THE TABLE.

I GUESS I DIDN'T REALLY KNOW HOW HARD YOU HAD WORKED ON THIS, SO I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.

I APPRECIATE THE CALIBER OF THE DECISIONS OF THE RESEARCH, AND THE HONESTY AND FORTHRIGHTNESS YOU DEALT WITH THIS, AND ESTABLISHING THE RISKS AND THE REWARD, AND I THINK IT HAS BEEN VERY REALISTIC. I AM WILLING TO TAKE THAT PLUNGE INTO A MATRIMONY.

THAT I WAS PREPARED TO SAY, GO EITHER WAY. I DIDN'T COME IN HERE PRESET, THAT IS MAYBE SOME OF THAT, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTIONS I ASK AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, WE REALLY HAVE TO HAVE SOME COMFORT LEVEL.

I WOULDN'T MIND AT ALL GOING BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD. WE HAVE DONE THIS THREE TIMES NOW. WE WANT TO GET THIS RIGHT. WE ABSOLUTELY WANT TO GET IT RIGHT. GOING TO TELL YOU, WE WERE NOT PRIVY TO SOME OF THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS THAT YOU HAVE GONE INTO. EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE I PEEKED THROUGH THE WINDOW, AND I WOULD SIT THERE AND SAY, OH, MY GOSH, THIS THING IS NOT GOING THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

I AM AMAZED THAT WE GOT TO THIS POINT IN TIME WHERE THIS FINALITY, AND A GIVE-AND-TAKE BETWEEN THE BRIDE AND THE GROOM, BUT THAT IS WHAT IT TAKES TO GET THERE.

>> AND THE IN-LAWS. >> RIGHT. ALL THE ONLOOKERS THAT HAVE THE RIGHT ANSWERS, BUT, THIS IS A REASONABLE AND, YOU KNOW, TO PROPEL THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IN THE WAY THAT I ENVISION IN THE WAY THIS COMMISSION HAS TALKED ABOUT AND ENVISION.

YOU HAVE TO TAKE ON SOME REASONABLE RISK, YOU REALLY DO. YOU HAVE TO PUT IT OUT THERE.

YOU HAVE TO NOT SIT BACK AFTER THAT. YOU HAVE TO GO AHEAD AND, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO SUPPORT IT IN ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN. THIS IS A LONG-TERM RELATIONSHIP. WHATEVER THIS VOTE HAPPENS RIGHT NOW, IT IS GOING TO BE AN ONGOING COMMITMENT AS WE I JUST WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT I WAS PREPARED EITHER WAY.

SOME OF YOU THAT SPOKE TO ME BEFORE I GOT INTO THIS MEETING, YOU KNOW, GAVE ME DIRTY LOOKS WHEN I SAID I DON'T KNOW. I COULD SAY NO AS EASY AS I CAN SAY YES.

I HAD CERTAIN QUESTIONS THAT WERE ANSWERED HERE TO AT LEAST A REASONABLE SENSE.

>> I AGREE. I WAS OPEN WHEN I WALKED IN HERE, TOO.

>> WE HAVE TO BE. WE ARE, WE HAVE BEEN, WE HAVE DONE OUR DUE DILIGENCE HOW WE HAVE WORKED HARD. IT IS THE, IT IS VERY IMPORTANT.

YOU KNOW, THE COMMITMENT BY BOTH SIDES. THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED ABOUT PERFORMANCE BONDS AND CONSTRUCTION FINANCING PART, WHAT IS THE INTEREST IN THE STATE. I'M GOING BACK TO WHAT I WAS SAYING IN THE PREVIOUS TWO ITEMS. WE INCORPORATED 1901, AND WE HAVEN'T RAISED A DOLLAR ON THIS PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF UTILITY REVENUE. THAT IS OKAY.

THAT IS STILL PART OF IT. THIS IS JUST A DIFFERENT TIME, A DIFFERENT ERA.

IT IS EXCITING. WHAT WE SAID BEFORE, WHEN WE WERE MAKING THIS DECISION, YOU KNOW, 100 PLUS YEAR OLD CITY AND WE ARE MAKING A DECISION THAT WILL LIVE FOR ANOTHER HUNDRED PLUS YEARS. WE ARE EXCITED. I AM EXCITED.

WE HAVE HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND. I AM SUPPORTING THAT.

>> SHALL WE VOTE?

[6. STAFF COMMENTS]

[02:15:01]

HE THOUGHT, AND ASKED HER WHAT SHE THOUGHT AND NOBODY ASKED ME WHAT I THOUGHT, IT'S OVER NOW, BUT, I MEAN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU UNDERSTAND, PETE. NO COMMENT.

>> MR. SWEENEY? >> I ALREADY KNEW WHAT NICK THOUGHT.

EXPRESS.

VERY EXCITED TO MOVE FORWARD IN THE NEXT AGE. I'M SURE I'LL BE TALKING WITH MR. DOBBINS AND WE WILL PROVIDE REPORTS IS THAT PROGRESS CONTINUES ON.

>> THANK YOU BOTH. THANK YOU ALL. >> BOARD COMMENTS.

[7. BOARD COMMENTS]

>> ANY BOARD COMMENTS? >> NOW, MA'AM. 1020 ARE WE DONE TALKING TODAY

-- >> ARE WE DONE TALKING TODAY? WE ARE GOING TO BE ADJOURNING.

WE WOULD LIKE EVERYONE TO LEAVE THE CHAMBER, WE WILL TURN OUT THE LIGHTS.

IF YOU WANT

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.