►
From YouTube: Community Redevelopment Agency 12122019 part 2
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
So
item
six,
your
call
came
up
in
the
workshop
in
October,
where
there
was
some
discussion
about
using
TIF
funds
for
things
like
workforce
training,
job
training
and
I
agreed
to
do
research
and
come
back
to
the
board
and,
as
you'll
recall,
I
ended
up
doing
it
early
at
your
November
meeting
and
I
discussed
this
with
the
maker
of
the
motion.
Mr.
Dean
Felder
yesterday,
and
we
agreed
that
I
don't
need
to
restate
the
results
of
my
research
again
unless
any
of
the
board
members
would
like
me
to
what
and.
C
So,
basically,
the
question
was
whether
you
could
use
TIF
funds
for
things
like
job
training,
workforce
training
and
what
I
told
you
is,
unfortunately,
the
way
in
which
the
legislature
tightened
up
the
statutory
language
last
year
and
in
my
research
and
my
discussion
with
the
general
counsel
for
the
Florida
Redevelopment
Association,
it's
very
clear
that
you
cannot
use
TIF
funds
for
that
type
of
project.
It
has
to
be
actual
redevelopment
now.
One
thing
I
would
point
out
because
it
came
up
I
believe
it
was
Commissioner
goods
that
ass
and
he's
not
here.
C
D
All
yeah
I
mean
the
thing
to
housing
is
with:
what's
the
the
enabling
act
for
CRA,
one
one,
forty
six
or
whatever
I
mean
it,
states
to
out
the
importance
of
affordable
housing
and-
and
so,
if
you
look
at
the
importance
that
the
law
sets
to
affordable
housing
versus
what
we
have
allocated
to
our
affordable
housing,
it's
it's
it's
minuscule,
and
so
hopefully
we
can
focus
on
that
going
forward.
I.
A
C
A
C
A
C
F
A
F
Afternoon,
border
Johnson,
East,
Tampa,
see
already
manager
I
bought
the
experts
to
talk
about
the
work
that
is
contemplated
in
the
history
of
what
Apple
Worth
Fair
Oaks.
So
director,
dial
and
manager,
Brad
Souter
are
gonna,
actually
do
the
presentation.
They
have
a
PowerPoint
presentation
that
they'd
like
to
make
at
this
time.
Okay,.
G
Good
afternoon,
Bret
Souter
is
our
planning
design
and
natural
resource
resources.
Superintendent
and
Brad
will
be
speaking.
The
part
of
this.
We
have
to
come
forward
to
look
at
the
needs
needs
regarding
the
renovations
at
Fair
Oaks
or
the
replacement
of
Fair
Oaks
to
look
at
the
facility
and
see
exactly
what
issues
we
had
with
that
and
the
state's
the
requests
to
come
before
the
council.
G
With
that,
just
a
couple
of
pictures
there
to
show
you
that's
the
layout
of
the
facility,
you
can
see
the
center
to
the
left,
lower,
left,
the
basketball
courts,
upper
left
and
athletic
fields
to
the
right
and
the
center
being
in
this.
In
the
center
of
that
picture,
we
do
have
the
the
caption
there
that's
blocking
some
of
through
our
audience
here,
but
providing
you
photo
that
of
the
facility.
G
What
I
wanted
to
do?
First,
though,
I
think
when
I'd
seen
this
on
video
before
there
was
some
conversation
related
to
dollars
real
for
the
facility
in
the
past
and
where
funding
was
and
was
there
funding
there
in
the
past
at
this
location,
and
we
want
to
give
you
a
bit
of
history
that
we
look
back
through
and
we
found
that
in
2008
project
description
was
created
by
Parks
and
Recreation,
where
the
potential
demolition
of
the
existing
structure
and
the
construction
of
a
10,000
square
foot
community
center
with
other
improvements
at
the
site.
G
The
plenary
cost
for
this
back
in
2008
was
three
point:
six
two
million
dollars
and
that
included
improvements
to
the
center
and
the
park
itself.
So
we're
looking
back
now,
11
years
from
now
just
to
provide
some
history
with
this
in
2009
with
land
I
should
state.
Most
importantly,
that
was
put
together
with
a
cost
estimate,
but
it
was
not
improved
in
any
capital
budget.
G
The
other
were
Park
improvements.
If
you
look
back
at
that
time,
Fair
Oaks
project
there
was
one
of
27
projects.
The
parks
and
recreation
is
submitted
for
consideration
for
the
FY
12
to
16
capital
improvement
program
through
the
CIT
tax,
and
the
project
was
not
at
that
time.
So
there
was
a
lot
of
public
involvement,
a
lot
of
people
talking
about
it,
but
the
project
was
not
funded
at
that
time,
but
it
was
considered
in
2013,
many
of
the
interior
and
exterior
improvements
were
completed.
G
Parks
and
recreation
did
about
33,000
dollars
worth
of
improvements,
a
playground,
new
fitness
equipment
and
its
new
flooring
in
the
fitness
room.
Logistics
and
asset
management
did
about
$300,000
in
improvements
so,
and
that
includes
some
major
things
like
removal
of
interior
drywall,
replace
some
of
that
framing
out
and
adding
some
additional
rooms.
G
But
to
verify
and
be
clear
here
that
we've
verified
that
endows
during
these
years
they
haven't
been
any
capital
projects,
so
there
weren't
dollars
that
were
approved
in
the
budget
and
move
to
another
location,
and
we
thought
that
that
might
be
helpful
to
you
as
we're.
Looking
at
the
issue,
we
didn't
ask
mr.
Suder
to
look
and
do
an
assessment.
The
facility
at
looking
at
the
location
looking
at
potential
needs
that
are
there
now
and
then
also
looking
as
it
was
directed
to
also
look
at
the
cost
if
something
were
to
be
replaced.
So
mr.
H
Parks
and
recreation
and
looking
at
the
center
and
speaking
with
the
staff
they're
essentially
overall,
the
building,
is
in
good
shape.
There
are
several
improvements
that
can
be
made,
which
will
go
a
long
way
for
one
showing
aside
a
little
bit
of
love
and
give
it
a
little
bit
more
of
a
refreshed.
Look,
you
know
just
go
down
a
quick
list
for
you
of
the
reception
desk
could
use
an
upgrade
right
now,
it's
kind
of
not
a
real
nice
entrance
experience
for
users
of
the
facility.
H
The
door
leading
outside
from
the
female
restroom
is
rusted
at
the
base
that
could
be
replaced
minor
wall
repair
in
the
game,
room
painting
needed
in
the
game
room
in
most
doorways
and
frames,
some
wall,
repair
and
paint
in
the
computer
lab
and
some
natural
light.
Its
control
is
needed
in
there
and
some
ceiling
tiles.
Could
you
be
replacing
there
as
well
on
the
exterior
they're
in
pretty
good
shape?
Overall
again,
some
improvements
could
be
used.
H
There's
a
lot
of
dirt
has
eroded
away
from
the
sidewalks
that
could
be
a
potential
tripping
hazard
there
bring
in
new
solid
as
well.
The
parking
lot
could
be
restriped
powerwash
the
center
and
all
the
walkways
repaint
the
four
square
and
resurface
the
basketball
court.
We
are
going
forward
right
now
investigating
the
possibility
of
a
grant
to
do
that
as
a
separate
project.
Right
now,
we
are
in
process
for
that.
H
The
estimate
for
improvements
on
this
is
about.
$150,000
could
be
up
to
200,
depending
on
the
windows
that
are
selected,
but
any
conceptual
plans
to
rebuild
or
remaster
plan
the
park.
I
would
just
recommend
that
we
would
go
back
to
the
public
and
hear
what
they
did
or
what
they
would
like,
similar
to
what
we
did
before.
There
were
some
requests
before
for
a
football
field
to
be
incorporated
into
what
is
now
like
the
softball
field,
and
that
would
be
fire
some
mitigation
of
some
oak
trees.
H
It
would
probably
make
sense
to
go
forward
with
vacating
east
caracas
street
so
that
Carrington
Pond
Park
parcel,
and
this
is
kind
of
connected,
so
it
makes
it
a
little
bit
bigger
Park
and
if
we
were
to
move
forward
to
you
replace
the
senator.
The
Senate
right
now
is
70
385
square
feet.
The
city's
cost
for
new
construction
is
about
$400,
a
square
foot
plus
consultant
fees
about
plus
or
minus
20%
would
make
it
three
point.
Five
little
bit
over
three
point:
five
million
dollars
for
a
new
center
of
equal
size.
H
If
we
expanded
the
current
facility
again
using
that
same
four
hundred
dollars
per
square
foot,
a
one
thousand
square
foot
expansion
would
be
four
hundred
thousand
a
two
thousand
square
foot.
Expansion
is
eight
hundred
thousand
and
I'm
breaking
this
out
because
it
really
depends
on
what
program
is
needed
there
or
desired.
H
H
Hundred
dollars
a
square
foot,
that's
what
contract
administration
is
advising
us
of
what
our
prices
are
coming
in
on
big
projects
right
now,
that
is,
that
is
their
average
of
and
it
it
goes
a
little
bit
lower.
If,
on
levels
of
magnitude,
you
get
a
little
bit
of
cost
savings
when
you
build
bigger,
but
they
say
right
now,
when
the
climate
that
we're
in
in
the
boom
that
we're
in
and
the
demand
that's
out
there,
city
workers
costing
$400
a
square
foot
city
work.
I
H
I
Just
looking
like
you
can
build
me,
yes,
sir,
to
me:
that's
a
lot
of
money,
and
you
know
I
talked
to
some
other
friends
of
college,
the
other
government
entities
in
and
they're
looking
at
doing
something
about
that.
You're
talking
about
four
dollars
a
square
foot.
I
My
family's
in
construction
me
and
I
see
that
number
I'm,
like
oh
boy,
someone's
getting
fat,
real,
quick,
real,
quick
and
I
just
think
you
e
we
may
need
to
reevaluate
someone
is.
This
is
I,
hear
you
what
we're
saying
it's
out
there,
but
you
know
I
always
used
to
turn
of
hunger
somebody's
hungry
and
you
got
to
keep
putting
it
out
for
bids.
You
got
to
keep
putting
it
out,
but
I'm
just
saying
that
price.
I
Therefore,
to
me
that
just
way
and
frame
it
and
I
just
think
somebody's
hung
is
somebody
quite
could
give
you
a
better
price,
but
those
prices
there
I
just
can't
I,
just
can't
see
that
it's
just
it
just
doesn't
make
any
sense
to
me
that
we
just
because
it's
gum
refill,
we
have
money
which
we
really
don't
and
you're
trying
to
work
for
the
public
and
get
the
folk
that
best
needs.
You
kid
for
communities
we're
getting
a
hammering
at
four
dollars
a
square
foot
on
projects.
I
What
I
would
like
to
say
as
far
as
it
relates
to
Fair
Oaks,
that
you
know
the
community
needs
to
be
aware
how
you
give
us
this
information
I
believe
mr.
Johnson
needs
to
have
a
community
meeting
regarding
Fair
Oaks
with
these
numbers,
as
it
relates
to
the
numbers
as
it
relates
to
what
happened.
So
people
assume
that
money
was
there
when
it
was
it.
People
need
to
know
the
facts
of
what
happened.
So
there's
no,
no
gray
area
of
what
didn't
happen.
I
So
I
think
you
know
I
mean
later
after
we
finished
in
reference
to
mr.
Johnson,
having
a
community
meeting
regarding
Fair
Oaks
in
the
Recreation
Department
going
out
in
explaining
the
cost
factor
versus
some
repairs,
just
proof
stuff
to
play.
Sometimes
you
do
a
lot
of
aesthetics
outside
to
make
the
place.
Look
like
it's
brand-new
and
that
may
need
happened
to
as
well
as
far
as
maybe
tear
to
adapt.
The
feeling
is
structurally
sound
and
we
make
sure
that
there's
no
pre-pre
critters
that
are
inside
the
drywall
and
so
forth.
I
Maybe
the
community
happy
I,
don't
know,
but
again
we
need
to
put
it
to
them,
and
that
way
we
come
back
and
we
can
mix
the
decisions
from
that
point.
But
I
can
say
if
any
parks
and
recreation
facilities
ability.
You
know
in
my
district
we're
gonna
be
asking
that
these
RFPs,
that
we
keep
putting
them
out
because
these
numbers
here
we
need
to
make
sure
we're
building
good
stuff
and
make
sure
you
get
in
a
good
dog
for
our
book
because
for
Roz
I'm.
Sorry
thank
you.
A
With
that
said,
I'm
excited
about
the
master
plan
process
and
I
wanted
to
know
Paul,
perhaps
or
either
one
of
you
where
we
are
in
terms
of
putting
out
we've
put
out
an
RFQ
or
an
RFP.
Looking
for
a
consultant.
Do
that?
What's
our
time
frame
on
that
and
and
and
what
is
the
timeline
on
that
whole
process?
When
can
we
see
the
the
end
result?
Well,.
G
We've
completed
eight
public
meetings
that
we're
done
internally
by
our
department
that
I
completed
about
a
week
ago.
We
are
in
the
midst
of
the
selection
process
for
the
consultant
and
we'll
be
meeting
with
all
of
those
firms
and
evaluating
the
product
that
they
provide
as
far
as
the
timeline
and
all
that
that
that's
part
of
this
process
when
we
meet
with
in,
we
will
speak
to
that.
G
A
H
We
expect
a
recommendation
to
the
mayor
in
late.
January
presentations
are
scheduled
for
mid-january
right
now
by
the
firm's,
so
we'll
do
that
evaluation.
After
that
they
make
a
recommendation
to
the
mayor.
It'll
have
to
be
approved
by
City
Council
and
then
we'll
get
right
to
work.
So
I
would
say
more
of
a
springtime
start.
H
Our
intent
is
to
have
the
master
plan
wrapped
up
in
a
little
a
little
less
than
a
year
or
about
a
year.
I
mean
that's
kind
of
a
timeframe.
We're
looking
what's
really
critically
important
is
that
we
have
this
in
place,
so
we
could
do
fiscal
planning
for
the
next
five-year
CIT
cycle,
which
starts
a
year
from
this
summer.
Thank
You,
Milly,
Frank.
E
D
That
one
more
yeah
that
one
okay
I
can
see
it
here,
but
we
have
it
up
now:
okay,
I,
based
on
the
feedback
I've
heard,
and
you
and
my
colleagues
may
have
heard
more,
but
there's
such
a
drumbeat
to
get
something
done
at
this
at
this
facility.
I
would
recommend
that
we
parallel
to
what
other
planning
process
and
potentially
building
something
new
I
recommend
that
we
allocate
150
or
200
thousand
dollars
to
do
these
basic
renovations.
D
You
know
the
Kate
Jackson
Park
in
my
district,
the
neighborhood
gets
upset
when
the
wrong
kind
of
window
is
put
in,
but
the
facility
is
beautiful
still
and
it's
again
it's
well-kept,
but
this
one
has
all
kinds
of
problems,
including
rats
in
and
until
month
or
so
ago,
when
we
passed
a
motion
to
get
rid
of
them,
do
we
have
a
150
or
200
thousand
and
that
CRA
did
mr.
Johnson.
Do
you
know
I
mean
can't
we.
F
F
D
Defer
to
my
my
colleague
mr.
goods,
but
if,
if
you
turn
that
in
what
you
said
into
ammo,
I
can
make
a
separate
motion.
But
if,
if
you
turn
what
you
said
in
a
motion,
I'd
love
the
second
and
have
a
friendly
amendment.
To
suggest
that
we
allocate
you
would
propose
having
a
public
meeting
to
talk
about
the
future
of
the
park.
D
D
D
If
you,
if
you
all
want,
we
could
I,
don't
know
if
you
want
me
to
add
to
your
motion
or
hat,
create
a
separate
one.
But
we
could
also
add
that
we
want
it
to
go
through
a
public
process,
but
a
public
meeting,
but
also
to
this
to
the
CAC
to
give
advice.
But
but
the
point
is
that
we
have
we
set
aside
a
budget
to
do
something
now
and
then
we
also
plan
for
the
future.
I
I
Not
saying
that,
but
again
you
know
you
doll
that
that's
a
down
the
road
issue,
but
at
least
we
let
the
people
know
there
are
some
options.
How
do
they
want
to
proceed
that
way
if
something
is
being
done
and
they're
not
saying
that
we're
not
doing
anything
and
since
they're
always
saying
that
we're
interfering
I
would
rather
than
have
a
meeting
a
general
meeting
of
that
public
that
community
over
there
and
let
them
let
the
do
the
whole
assessment
and
also
give
the
history
of
the
part
what
happened
so
they
won't
be
going
out.
I
Taking
our
false
narrative
out
of
this
words.
Money
went
over
here
today
was
out
because
we,
so
we
know
what
the
money
went.
Well
there
again,
it
was
no
money
that
was
allocated,
so
they
need
to
know
that
and
then
again,
I
have
no
issue
about
the
money
for
the
renovations,
but
I'd
rather
have
a
meeting
to
where
all
of
them
meet
and
Assisi
board.
Is
there
at
that
meeting
too?
I
D
Just
I
think
we're
almost
saying
the
same
thing
but
Mike
my
concerns
at
weeks
we
say
expressly
and
I'd
like
to
go
ahead
and
approve
the
budget
in
advance
to
say
that
we
can't
we
want
to
get
renovations
done
immediately.
We
know
that's,
not
the
long-term
solution.
We
want
your
input
on
the
long-term
solution.
We
want
your
input
on
the
short-term
solution,
but
we've
already
attic
allocated
150,000
or
whatever
to
get
something
done
right
away.
I
think
it
would
be
a
strong
signal
to
the
community,
but.
I
I
We
already
know
we're
gonna
allocate
something
to
the
park,
but
my
thing
is
our
relative
community's
say:
yes,
we
see
what
the
center
they
made,
but
you
didn't
add
this
on
the
that's
just
my
position
on
the
board:
can
voters
choose
the
projects,
think
we
need
to
let
it
go
back
to
the
community,
let
the
move
it.
We've
instructed
mr.
Johnson
to
have
a
community
meeting
now
rubbish
the
Fair
Oaks
and
have
the
parks
director
and
his
staff
there
to
talk
about
the
history
of
the
park.
I
J
E
You
mr.
chair,
a
couple
of
thoughts:
III
you
know
III
would
support
the
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars,
but
I
would
defer
to
councilman
boots
in
terms
of
the
method
by
which
he
wants
to
go
there.
A
couple
of
thoughts
on
that
in
in
dish
last
year's
budget
we
were
able
to
get
upgrades
for
as
Tampa
City
Council
for
in
my
district
I
solicited
the
mayor's
office
for
Takoma,
Park
and
Copeland
Park
and,
as
you
all
know,
we're
doing
those
as
days
of
service
where
we
promote
it
to
the
community.
E
We
go
we're
doing
these
improvements
here
to
beautify
the
park
and
we
make
it
into
a
community
date.
So
whenever
that
day
comes
I,
think
that
would
be
something
that's
great
to
do,
and
then
councilman
Koons
I
remember
on
the
first
day
of
City
Council
that
we
came
here,
you
also
talked
about
wanting
to
get
in
in
your
district,
including
in
East,
Tampa,
disability-friendly,
equipment
and
I.
E
Don't
know
if
that
was
mentioned
in
there,
but
maybe
that's
something
that
we
could
also
look
at
for
the
young
people
in
in
Fair
Oaks,
who
may
have
either
sensory
challenges
or
physical
challenges,
folks
that
are
just
in
wheelchairs.
Let
me
ask
you,
gentlemen,
if
I
may
mr.
chair
and
in
that
Park,
are
there
any
disability
friendly
off
the
top
of
your
head
playground
equipment?
If
you
don't,
if
you
guys
know
there.
H
E
I
think
that's
great,
because
there's
I'm
sure
and
again
I
defer
to
my
friend
and
colleague,
councilman
goos.
He
represents
that
area,
but
I
I
would
just
suggest
that
that's
certainly
something
that
be
part
of
the
community
narrative,
because
that
doesn't
cost
a
whole
heck
of
a
lot
of
money.
But
it
means
a
lot
to
somebody
raising
a
kid
with
cerebral
palsy
or
Down
syndrome,
or
what
have
you,
autism,
etc.
So,
just
I
guess
a
friendly
gesture
on
my
part.
Thank
you
and.
E
J
E
A
G
G
A
Yeah
you
see
that
no
matter
what
I
like
what
everybody's
been
saying,
I
think
that
the
community
has
come
down
here
and
spoken
very
loud
and
clear
about
the
needs
to
continue
to
either
upgrade
that
facility
and
or
knock
it
down
and
rebuild
it
one
or
the
other,
but
in
the
short
term,
I'd
be
totally
in
favor
of
funding.
You
know
funding
150,
even
200
thousand
dollars
of
improvements,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day,
when
you
say
it's
150,
inevitably
it's
gonna
be
200
or
more.
A
G
A
Well
before
we
before,
we
make
a
total
decision
that
it
should
all
should
be.
You
know
completely
CRA
I
hope
you
might
explore,
perhaps
sharing
it
between
the
city
budget
and
the
CRA.
We
have
gotten
complaints
specifically
from
East
Tampa.
You
know
saying,
don't
take
it
from
CRA
budget,
when
this
city
should
be
making
those
improvements.
So
anyway,
let's
let's,
let's
get
these
things
fixed,
but
perhaps
look
at
the
financial
aspect.
Maybe
this,
maybe
it's
a
50/50
split
between
the
two
budgets
or
something.
J
G
F
We
do
not
have
a
community
meeting
scheduled
until
February
because
we
postponed
our
December
and
January
meetings
because
of
the
holidays
and
the
Christmas
event
that
we're
having
tomorrow
night,
so
we're
not
having
a
meeting
in
December
in
January.
So
our
next
meeting
won't
happen
in
talador.
So
we
can't
have.
F
F
F
F
D
J
B
J
D
Think
we
need
to
move
urgently
because
we've
heard
so
much
from
the
community
and
I
think
what
councilman
Goods
proposes
exactly
what
we
need
to
do.
But,
in
addition,
I
think
we
ought
to
pre-approve.
Up
to
I
would
like
to
make
a
motion
to
pre-approve
up
to
$200,000
for
needed
renovations
subject
to
community
input
at
the
public
meeting.
That's
been
scheduled
and
subject
to
the
possibility
of
finding
matching
money
from
the
city
to
cover
some
of
the.
A
A
clarification
on
on
the
motion-
maybe
it's
just
semantics
when
we
say
pre-approve,
maybe
it's
a
signal
that
it
is
our
intent
to
to
ultimately
fund
this
up.
Shall
we
just
say
approve?
Is
that
I
mean
just
I'm?
Sorry,
should
we
just
say
approve:
okay,
no
I
think
approve
is
way
premature,
just
I'm
just
saying
maybe
it's
art,
it's
our
intent.
It's
our
intent
to
find
this
$200,000
for
the
community
through
the
CRA
and/or,
the
city.
It's
our
intent.
D
A
little
strong
know
what
I'm
the
point
I'm
trying
to
make
is
that
we
would
that
we
would
approve
a
budget
of
two
hundred
thousand
to
getting
feedback
from
the
community
as
to
how
the
two
hundred
thousand
should
be
spent
and
subject
to
the
possibility
that
the
city
would
subsidize
part
of
it.
The
different.
The
only
difference
is
that
we
have
to.
We
have
to
wait
till
out
to
this
meeting,
and
then
we
and
then
we
have
to
approve
it
again.
I
I
The
same
motion
you're
making
bill
I
already
said
that
we
would
do
that,
but
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
community,
if
there's
anything,
to
be
added
when
we
come
back
on
it
only
in
February,
but
we
need
to
up
that.
Then
we
can
up
that
and
make
the
approval.
So
we've
already
said
that
we've
already
worried
there.
We
just
want
to
make
sure
what
else
the
community
might
need
or
want
that
were
on
target.
I
mean
that
I
thought
that
was
the
motion.
I
was
mad.
B
B
B
J
D
That
is
okay,
a
rephrase
that
that
is
the
intent
of
council
to
allocate
it
sorry
is
the
intent
of
the
CRA
Board
to
allocate
up
to
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
for
renovations,
immediate
renovations
of
the
Fair
Oaks
Park
Community
Center,
subject
to
feedback
from
the
community
and
the
CAC
on
whatever
date.
That
was.
B
B
D
You
see
every
Thursday,
we
have
a
lineup
of
folks
and
they're,
not
completely
representing
the
entire
community,
but
you
all
get
calls
and
emails
too,
and
the
committee
wants
us
to
take
action
as
quickly
as
possible
and
my
concern,
especially
if
we
look
at
the
possible
complete
renovation
or
teardown
and
rebuilding
is
that
could
end
up
taking
a
long
time.
Look
at
the
trouble
you
went
through
to
get
the
two
or
three
million
dollars
for
the
other
part,
and
so
what
we?
D
J
Let's
move
forward.
Thank
you,
gentlemen.
Are
we
are
an
item?
Gender
number
sixth
legal
department
is
going
to
advise
us
on
services.
We
did
that.
Okay.
Thank
you
very
much.
We
now
on
seven
for
legal
staff
to
provide
reports
regarding
financial
grants
awarded
the
properties
owned
by
nonprofits
and
what
happens
those
grants
if
those
nonprofits
dissolved
correct.
C
Again,
I
just
wanted
to
quickly
remind
the
board
how
the
facade
grant
this
program
works.
I
know
you
deal
with
it
every
month,
but
also
for
those
listening.
This
board
approves
facade
grants
of
up
to
$50,000.
As
you
know,
you
don't
write
a
$50,000
check
upfront.
This
is
not
a
lump
sum
payment.
The
property
owner
is
reimbursed
as
the
work
is
done.
C
You
know
they
have
to
submit
receipts
and
other
items.
All
of
our
facade
grant
agreements
include
restrictive
covenants
and
those
require,
among
other
things,
the
property
can't
be
used
as
an
adult
use.
The
property
owner
has
to
pay
ad
valorem.
Taxes
have
a
valid
business
license
if
it's
required,
maintain
insurance
on
the
property
and
keep
the
property
in
good
repair.
C
The
grant
agreement
also
includes
a
restrictive
covenant
that,
in
the
first
five
years
after
issuance
of
the
grant,
the
property
owner
cannot
sell,
convey
or
otherwise
transfer
any
interest
in
the
property
without
the
C
aureus
consent.
And,
as
you
know,
you
also
record
a
notice
of
contractual
lien,
which
basically
is
intended
to
enforce,
is
another
method
of
enforcing
these
restrictive
covenants
and
again
that
lien
is
only
for
the
five-year
period.
C
After
that
we
release
it
and,
as
you
know,
the
CRA
is
often
asked
to
subordinate
the
lien
when
the
property
owner
has
to
obtain
financing
on
the
property.
Now,
with
regard
to
the
question
put
forth
in
the
motion
again,
the
grant
the
covenants
in
the
grant
agreement
specifically
state
that
they're
binding
on
transfers,
successors
and
a
sign.
So
in
other
words,
if
we
issued
a
facade
grant
to
a
nonprofit
and
then
not
that
nonprofit
cease
to
exist,
the
covenants
would
be
binding
on
whatever
entity
or
person.
C
Then
took
ownership
of
the
real
property
in
which
the
grant
was
provided.
By
the
same
token,
which
would
be
true
also
if
we
gave
it
the
Sai
grant
to
an
individual
and
that
person
died
and
their
family
inherited
that
the
house,
the
the
covenants
would
be
binding
on
them
as
well
for
that
five-year
period.
C
Now,
if
the
again,
if
the
property
owner
changes
ownership
without
the
permission
of
the
CRA,
you
have
the
option
of
finding
the
property
owner
in
default
under
the
terms
of
the
grant
agreements
restrictive
covenants,
and
we
can
attempt
to
recover
the
grant
funds,
but
again
only
within
that
first,
five
years
after
the
first
five
years
is,
is
over.
None
of
what
I
just
said
applies
so
I
hope
that
answers
your
question.
Thank
you.
Any.
J
This
type,
this
type
consuming
this
time
consuming
process
that
is
not
necessary
and
the
city's
interest
can
be
protected
in
the
same
way
through
a
covenant
that
runs
with
the
land
for
five
years.
My
motion,
gentlemen,
is
that
the
city
provides
its
current
policy
from
imposing
a
lien
for
facade
grants
to
impose
a
covenant
that
runs
with
the
land
for
five
for
a
five-year
period
as
a
opposed
to
the
lien
on
the
property.
B
C
This
is
an
issue
I
thought
you
might
bring
that
up
and
I
have
had
discussions
with
some
of
our
CRA
managers
about
this.
The
question
is:
is:
is:
is
it
better
for
the
city
to
have
a
lien
or
to
record
the
restrictive
covenants
which
really
you
end
up
in
the
same
place
with
either
one?
It's
really
a
policy
issue.
I
can
tell
you
that
the
staff,
the
the
seria
managers
like
the
like
the
lien,
because
they
feel
like
it,
the
optics,
are
better.
C
It
sends
a
signal,
it's
more
obvious
when
someone's
doing
the
title,
search
that
there's
that
lien
there
and
it's
in
effect
for
five
years.
By
the
same
token,
we
always
agree
to
subordinate
those
liens.
If
someone
gets
financing,
which
means
we,
we
lower
our
position
and
again
it's
only
for
a
five
year
period.
C
Anyhow,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
if,
if
we
recorded
the
restrictive
covenants
that
there
would
be
the
same
cloud
on
title,
that
there
is
with
that
five
year
lien
and
if
someone
and
to
go
back
this,
the
staff
prefers
the
lien
because
they
say
it
makes
it
easier
for
them
to
enforce.
If,
for
instance,
someone
gets
a
facade
grant
and
then
lets
the
property
fall
into
disrepair,
they
can
enforce
the
lien.
Well,
you
could
also
enforce
the
research
of
covenants.
C
In
both
cases,
you
still
have
to
go
to
court
and
show
that
the
property
owner
didn't
comply
with
the
conditions.
So
again,
it's
both
are
legally
valid
ways
of
ensuring
that
the
work
is
done
and
and
that
they
meet
the
conditions
of
the
grant
for
that
first
five-year
period.
So
it's
it's
in
the
decision
of
the
board
which
method
you
for.
J
What
remember
said
there?
There
are
people
that
need
to
go
out
and
get
some
type
of
financing
during
this
five
year
period
and
when
they
go
to
the
financial
institutions,
they
see
the
financial
institutions
of
itself
see
a
lien
against
a
property
and
they're
more
than
likely
they're.
Not
all
this
is
changing
is
from
a
lien
to
a
covenant
which
makes
it
easier
for
these
type
of
buildings
that
they
want
to
do
extra
work.
They
don't
have
to
jump
through
hoops
going
through
financing,
and
that
includes
nonprofits
I.
J
The
facade
grant,
if
I
remember
correctly
from
the
ycdt
the
sod
grant
is
not
thank
you
very
much.
Sod
grant
monies
are
not
given
until
the
project
is
completed
in
which
they
have
to
show
a
multitude
of
receipts
to
receive
the
monies
and
they're
paying
5050.
So
I
find
this
to
be
easier
for
the
for
the
for
the
people
that
are
trying.
A
F
F
However,
the
stronger
case
for
us,
as
managers
out
there
when
we're
talking
about
doubling
out
money,
is
the
lien.
The
lien
seems
to
carry
more
weight
with
people
and
usually
carried
through
with
what
they
say.
They're
gonna
carry
through
because
of
the
word
lean,
and
that's
the
one
of
the
main
reasons
why
we
put
that
language
in
there
when
we
first
initially
started
the
facade
program
by
the
way,
which
was
started
in
East
Tampa
and
everyone
else
copied
the
program
and
watered
it
down.
F
We
had
stronger
criteria
in
our
original
plan
to
be
able
to
make
sure
that
people
did
what
they
say.
We're
gonna
do
and
we
didn't
abuse
the
use
of
our
TIF
dollars
so
either
way
works.
You
know,
that's
strictly
gonna
restrict
your
call,
but
I
can
tell
you
as
a
lender
as
a
former
lender.
You
know
the
the
lenders
are
gonna.
Look
at
there,
they're
gonna
do
a
title
search,
they're
gonna
find
the
Covenant
or
the
lien,
whichever
is
out
there
anyway.
C
J
A
C
Only
reason
I'm
hesitating
is
I.
I
had
pushback
from
some
see
art
when
I
raised
this
issue.
I
personally
got
pushback
from
some
CRN
managers
that
aren't
here
today
that
I
care
now.
So,
if
you
wanted
to
give
them
the
opportunity
to
speak,
perhaps
the
chair
has
spoken
with
them.
It
really
is
kind
of
six
of
one
half
dozen
of
the
other,
and
it's
a
it's
a
policy
decision
for
the
for
the
board.
C
I
If
it's
both
ends
of
the
sword
with
the
age
is
no
difference,
they
don't
think
is
a
problem
Remy's,
but
you're
saying
it's
still
balanced
right
legally.
C
You're
in
the
same
spot,
I,
think
and
and
I
think
ed
was
alluding
to
this.
It's
sort
of
the
weight
of
the
word
lean
and
it
it
seems
to
carry
more
weight
with
the
property
owner.
They're
they're,
they're,
more
I
think
that
the
feeling
among
the
CRA
managers
is
if
the
people
are
more
inclined
to
comply
with
the
terms
if
they
know,
there's
a
lien
hanging
out
there.
Yes,
but
again,
legally
we're
in
the
same
position.
C
If
we
have
restrictive
covenants,
we
can
enforce
they,
but
we
could
still
go
back
and
recover
the
money
if
they
violate
the
restrictive
covenants.
We
can
still
create
that
cloud
on
title
by
recording.
We
don't
now
record
the
grant
agreement.
We
just
record
the
lien,
so
we
would
flip
it
and
record
the
restrictive
covenants.
C
So
in
both
cases
we
would
have
something
in
the
chain
of
title
saying.
If
you
didn't
comply
with
these
terms,
we
could
recover
the
grant
funds
and
again
remember.
This-
only
applies
in
the
whatever
percentage
of
situations
where
someone
doesn't
comply
with
the
terms
of
the
facade
grant
and
as
noted,
we
don't
give
them
the
money
until
they
do.
The
work,
so
this
really
goes
more
to
the
issue
of.
Do
they
sell
the
property
within
that
first,
five
years,
without
telling
us
do
they,
let
it
fall
into
disrepair.
C
C
A
J
A
Was
a
comment
on
the
motion
before
before
we
vote
Thank
You
mr.
chair,
so
we're
all
familiar
with
this
proposed
modification
to
the
century,
lower
project
being
proposed
by
the
the
now
owner
of
the
project
and
the
the
current
owners
doing
a
good
job
with
century
bore
they've
got
a
nice
mix
of
retail
non
retail
office
uses
and
there
and
and
they're
a
big
they're,
a
good
asset
to
e2e
more
City.
A
And
now
we're
going
down
to
20
well
normally
I
would
say:
that's
not
good.
However,
it's
been
pointed
out
to
me
that
that,
compared
to
the
current
agreement,
at
least
now
we're
guaranteed
a
little
more
retail
on
the
front
two
buildings.
So
again,
it's
a
compromise
I
believe
they
put
a
lot
of
good
work
into
it
as
compared
to
where
we
were
five
months
ago
and
I'll
support
the
resolution.
F
I
J
Made
by
councilman
gue
second
by
councillor
Miranda,
all
in
favor
any
opposed,
and
now
we're
on
item
number
12
entertain
a
motion
on
a
mod
number.
12
I've
got
a
motion
made
by
Councilman
good
second,
by
Councilman
dink
photo
all
in
favor,
say,
aye.
Well,
excellent.
All
right
information
reports
counts
of
a
decoder.
I
Mr.
chairman,
you
know,
we've
had
a
lot
of
discussion
today
about
we
have
that
sits
in
our
blighted
communities
and
dollars
that
are
being
allocated
with
our
housing
program,
our
city
housing
program,
to
help
with
rehab.
But
that's
there
earlier
we're,
there's
a
shortfall
owners,
a
gap
that
a
lot
of
folks
are
not
getting
the
help
that
they
need,
because
of
that
money
being
tired
to
federal
guidelines
or
we've
got
guidelines
that
we
I
see
already
giving
the
city
and
they're
using
those
particular
guidelines.
I
Today,
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
that
the
CRA
managers,
along
with
the
CC
Housing
boards
and
our
housing
department,
come
up
with
an
initiative
with
the
CRA
dollars
for
rehab
to
be
able
to
help
those
citizens
who
cannot
meet
the
criteria
of
the
current
rehab
policy
within
the
city
of
Tampa.
Within
that
motion
is
what
I'd
like
to
also
look
at
some
of
the
items
that
mr.
citizen,
mr.
Willie
Dixon
presented
to
Council
as
to
some
of
them
may
can
help
with
it,
with
the
new
initiative
and
I'll
submit
a
copy
of
mr.
B
B
I
B
B
B
D
Bring
out
one
thing
rule,
not
you
just
give
me
two
more
minutes,
please.
So
the
the
article
from
this
morning's
conversation
about
the
the
executive
director
is
out
and
I
the
headline
says:
mister
Berger.
What
the
story
the
headline
says,
mayor,
gen
caster,
will
pick
who
runs
the
city's
redevelopment
area.
J
D
And
then
on
the
inside
it
says:
Tampa
City
Council
members
unanimously
voted
Thursday
to
allow
her
to
hire
a
Community
Redevelopment
Director.
That
would
report
to
her
and
then
anyway,
well
I
called
John,
Bennett
and
I
said.
I
talked
to
mr.
Prager.
I
talked
to
John,
Bennett
I
said
this
is
not
what
I
understood?
Did
you
all
understand
that
that's.
D
D
I
was
willing
to
go
along
with
I,
said
I
would
rather
the
person
report
only
to
us,
but
that's
a
fine
compromise
and
and
then
he
presented
that
they're
gonna
hire
a
search
firm.
The
search
firms
gonna
find
the
people
I.
Remember
him
saying
that
they're
gonna,
shortlist
them
and
let
us
talk
to
them
and
then
we'll
choose
who
the
person
was
I
I
thought
we
were
choosing.
Is
that
how
you
all
understood
it.
I
D
Then
and
then-
and
then
also
we
said
in
you
know,
I
added
to
mr.
ding
fellers
motion
and
just
said
everything
he
said
about
about
proposing
what
the
the
reporting
structure
would
be
like
and
everything
we
would
put
that
in
as
a
as
two
or
three
paragraphs
inside
the
the
outsource
agreement,
and
so
some
of
it
is
yet
to
be
done.
But
the
conversation
we're
having
is
you
know,
is
it?
Is
it
significantly
different?
If,
if
the
former
person
would
come
to
us
every
month,
a
new
person
is
going
to
come
to
us
every
month?
D
Is
the
only
difference
that
we
have
this
five
to
two
vote
and
I
think
that
the
fundamental
difference
is
is
the
way
that
the
the
mayor's
office
presented
it,
which
is
that
it's
it's
joint
authority
over
them
and
and
so
the
reality
may
be
different
than
than
what
was
presented
but
but
coming
out
of
the
gate.
I
think
we
ought
to
make
sure
that
this
is
seen
as
a
as
joint
responsibility
and
cooperative
wet,
rather
than
one
side
versus
the
other.
B
C
D
You
know,
ultimately,
you
know
I'm
a
I'm,
a
PR
guy
and
I.
You
know,
I
know
that
sometimes
the
the
stories
reflect
exactly
what
happens.
Sometimes
they
reflect
part
of
what
happened,
but
but
in
this
case
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
from
you
all
that
that
you
all
understood
the
same
intent.
I
mean
you're.
You
with
you
all
understood
that
we're
going
to
be
interviewing
them
and
that
will
decide
correct.
J
A
Yeah
I
haven't
read
the
latest
article
and
and
frankly,
I
don't
care
the
the
bottom
line
is
I.
Think
we
had
good
motions
I
think
we
had
good
healthy
I
think
we
had
good
healthy
discussion.
I
think
we're
in
a
good
place.
We
are
going
to
be
participating
in
the
hiring
of
that
person
and
with
the
motion
that
carried
about
the
six
months
probation
period
and
the
five
to
two
votes,
we
will
be
participating
in
the
tenure
and
can
fire
them
if
we
want
to.
So
that's
all,
that's
enough
from
me
and.