We can we'll uh we'll wait we get down past presentation but um for just the sake of time as we got 7 o'clock commission meeting. So um looking for a motion to approve the CRA minutes of 12126. So moved. Got a motion by member
Drago. Second by member Anderson. All those in favor? I. All oppose. Motion carries unanimously. All right. Presentation. Who's internet? Where is internet? Oh, there she is. Okay,
>> I'm here. >> Good evening. Antranet Forbes, economic development director. I wanted to take this opportunity to introduce you to one of our newest business owners within the CRA, Mr. Indigget Singh. And I'm going to hope I say that correctly. He's here
to uh just um introduce himself as a new business not only to Apka but also to um our CRA. And so I wanted to afford him the opportunity to just say a few words and let's welcome him. >> Yeah, you got Yes. and name and address
for the record, please sir. >> Well, first and foremost, um, good evening everyone, mayor, commissioners, and members of the community. I would like to appreciate all of you guys for having me here today. And so, my name is Inderjet and I'm proud to be a part of
and the owner of Indian Beastro. We're just opening up right up um, across 60 East Main Street where the old Hicks Seafood used to be. Back in the days used to be a chuck wagon. So, we choose a Popka because we see a a strength and
a growth and the city is expanding and finally I've been residents, me and my brother, we have been living here in Orange County for the past 19 years and we finally lived in South Orlando. We finally moved up to
PSR and uh love to have be here in Apopka now. you know, we have two houses, two brothers right next to each other, and we wanted to invest in our city now. Tired of South Orlando, the traffic and all that. So, here we have a lot of peace of mind. But, um, we're
going to be having a a lunch buffet there. So, for all of you guys, you know, go on lunch break. We'll definitely have for the the members, whoever shows their ID, we'll give them 10% off on the buffet as well. And as well as for ding in or to go's order. So
we, you know, we all have to help each other out. So that's the only way we can survive to stay in the community and we want to provide jobs. That's the number one focus you know providing jobs. Obviously job market has been fluctuating. So we want to provide the
citizens a job. So that's our main focus uh as well. And I would like to extend my heartfelt congratulations to Nick Nesa, our new mayor. So looking forward to work with him. And thank you Mr. Brian Nelson for the past amazing years as well and thank you for your time and
your support. Thank you. >> And when will you open up? >> So we're targeting miday to to end of May. We just have to apply for the uh DBPR license and then get the fire and the uh building permitting. So we're
just working on some of the remodeling. Um as of this moment, I mean that place was pretty bad. So, we're just putting up new floor, you know, uh put the pest control out and and you know, that takes it it's a month of a treatment for the
pest control cuz it was like bad, you know, it got flooded in there. So, we had to replace all the floor. We had to replace all the walls of the bottom of it. So, that took a little time. So, we're still in process of remodeling. Once that done, we'll go ahead and
forward apply for the licensing. So, we just need your support. So, we you'll see me here coming in the office pretty soon. >> All right. Thank Thanks for having us tonight. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> All right. Next up, new business item number one, the property. Duke property
internet. Oh, there we are. So give me one minute. So this particular property is a vacant property owned by Duke Energy. It is currently uh zoned for multi-use. The
future land use is for industrial. Here he is a picture of it. Um so the property currently appraised at 156,000. That appraisal is appraisal is from September of last year. Uh we do have this budgeted in our um our current year
for 150,000. Um so at this point we have not um had any discussions um with Duke Energy. We would just seek guidance from the board if this is a a property that you would like us to pursue. So, um, if you would
like us to pursue it, we do need a a motion or some sort of direction to tell us how you'd like us to move forward. >> Oh, and I'm sorry, one one other thing I just want to mention. So, it's my understanding, and I say my understanding because this predates me, that I believe the intended use of this
property was supposed to be a um a resource uh facility um for um because it's across from Lowe's and Fishes, so to serve the community. if that is still the the will of the board. >> Any questions for Antonet?
>> Mr. Chair, >> um I read the appraisal uh report and what I don't see in it is the net square footage relative to the use.
Uh the appraiser talked about constraints on the property. Um he said because the rear north of the site is lined with a drainage ditch and the west side is bounded by West Orange
Trail as well as the fact that the subject I assuming that subject property is bounded by industrial warehouse properties and church building property and a con conservation site that is bounded by a single family home. So
given those constraints on a property, not not knowing the net square footage that's buildable or usable, I think uh I think for us to make a more intelligent decision, I I
think I would like to see those uh facts and also if there's going to be a structure, what's the setback requirements? I believe there's a question or a comment. So I yeah I similar comment overall and and I don't know what the goal is whether it is to do a resource
center if we're just land banking to keep it preserve it in some capacity to maybe use it down the road but if we are going to use it as a resource center something in that capacity I would also like to see uh what again what we could actually do there uh long term and then put a place a plan in place for that
moving forward versus just buying it and hoping that we get to it down the road. >> Correct. So, I can tell you that your master plan does talk about purchasing property. It also mentions about um having a a real estate strategic plan.
So, to identify properties that meet certain criteria and then to be able to use that for future use. Uh our current master plan does not speak to um a a community resource center or that type of specific use, but that is something that could be included when we do our
master plan update should the board choose to do so. In reference to the existing constraints on the property, I think it was also noted that it was um evaluated based on oh here it is um of uh vacant land, sorry, vacant
residential land. although like I said the future land use um currently is for um industrial. So just just things to consider. Uh you may the CRA board may decide that it
wants to to use your term land banket for a a future use of some sort. >> Any other questions for internet? No, I mean, we've kind of had a discussion, a long discussion, probably an hour discussion about some of my
concerns. It's just a planned, a more detailed plan on what it looks like. So, um, I I I guess the question is, and something else we talked about was the use. Is it permitted for us to purchase it with CRA dollars?
That was something we talked about as well. Did you do more research on that? I know that. >> So, okay. >> Yes. Yes, you can purchase it with CRA dollars. Your three things that you look at is is it allowed by Florida statutes 163? Is it um in your master plan and is
it in your budget? So to purchase property, yes, it checks all those boxes. We are allowed CRA is allowed to purchase property. The purchase of the property is back a line item in the budget and purchasing property is part
of our master plan. Now, as we talk about future use of how you would like to use it, we have not specified that um how or what projects we intend to do in our master plan that would have to be incorporated in the update,
>> right? And we had talked about um you know yeah once we purchased the property um and and you know we discussed what would it cost to put you know a a structure on it >> and um and that will absolutely cost a a
lot more than just purchasing the property and having it just sit there until we can figure out you know how are we going to uh fund a structure for that area and then of course we talked about the square
footage and you know what would be the maximum the minimum so you were talking about almost a little bit over a million dollars in today's market so um >> correct and if I can kind of >> so the the only thing is like you said
it's not in our master plan for the CRA um and when we do update that we can include that but the the only setback I have with that is, you know, yeah, we can purchase it, but we don't have the funds to put a
structure on it. >> Correct. At this time, no. So if the CRA board wanted to purchase it for that specific use, you could do make the direction for staff to do the purchase and then as part of our master plan
update, we would include that project as part of it and then we would budget accordingly for for future um construction. But first things first, the question is whether or not we'd want to by we, I mean with the board direct staff that we
want to make this purchase. And then the other thing I wanted to um reiterate that we spoke about in our respective um agenda reviews was that the CRA um would not and cannot be responsible for its ongoing maintenance and operations. So
even once it's built, we could not use CRA funds to do that. Uh so so we've talked about this uh several times and and that was our intent uh to build a resource center something that's much needed in our
community. And I would think that if we didn't purchase it now uh at this price uh in the future it could cost more. Uh and so since it is within our legal bounds to to
purchase a property. I would think that would be a good idea to purchase it and then once the rewrite is done and then incorporate the resource center into that master plan and then seek funding to to do that and does it have to be a
brick and mortar or could it be one of those prefab buildings? I think they're a little bit cheaper. So that is something we'd have to coordinate to make sure that it meets our current code. However, uh materials and design
that we decide we decided to use. Um but obviously we want to build the the best structure at the most affordable price. >> Okay. >> All right. Well, I'm just looking for direction. I mean, if if you know, if we want to purchase it, that's great. If we
don't, I just need to let Duke's kind of been holding holding back, you know, putting it on the market to see what what the city wanted to do. So, I'm just looking for direction and we can, you know, we can approve it or or
move on and that's either either way is fine. So, I'm just looking looking for some direction. >> Well, I think it's an ideal location being directly across the street from boats and fishes along the bike trail >> um >> bus access there. So I think it's actually I probably think we probably definitely move forward with purchasing
it because where else would we put our resource center? >> They've been asking about it for years. So >> to give up this opportunity. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Ideal location for it. >> Okay. Um anybody anybody from the public >> before we start? >> Yeah. >> I know the board item said to buy it not
to exceed $156,000. The budget only has 150,000. So, I'd be a little concerned about negotiating a contract for 156 without $156,000 being in the budget.
>> Did they that just that was that was the just the appraisal, correct? >> That was the appraisal. >> That was the appraisal. I don't think Are we at Are we offering 150? Is that what we're offering is 150? >> So, we would have to have discussions with Duke. Okay. >> Based on the appraisal that was provided and based on what our budget is. Offer
150. >> Okay. That's what we got the budget. >> Yeah. We just offer 150. >> They they they've been good good partners. >> I think I think for the purpose that we talking about trying to help >> I think they would
I'm sorry. I was just making clarification. So we would have to bring the contract back um before the board for approval. So we would get seek direction at least to negotiate with Duke um on the price but then the contract itself would have to come back for approval. >> So if you bring the contract back and if
it exceeds 150,000 there has to be a budget amendment attached. >> No. Why? >> But this still has to be transferred. >> I'm sorry. So that we >> Okay. >> A reallocation but not a budget amendment. So, there's $600,000 in the
contingency fund. >> Yes. And we've already taken 10,000 out already for the rewrap. >> 10,000 for what? >> Rewrap program. >> What? >> I'm sorry. >> For the rewrap program to Yes, that was
at the previous meeting. But you have the contingency funds and you can transfer >> from there to there. But we don't do it without, >> you know, prior to the approved. So there's $150,000
whatever the account >> I'll deal with. I'll deal with >> the transfer has to be made before we pay for it. Okay. All right.
>> Yeah. Come on up. >> No, you got to come up. Gota get you on the Matthew Hutcherson 1262 Lake Francis Drive and 72 East Main Street. I think it's a perfect property that you could purchase for a resource center. In fact,
I think a couple years ago there was some momentum moving in that direction to put a resource center. My my business partner and myself offered to I don't know whether it would comply or not. and we're I'd have to go back to him, but we did offer to buy the one of the portable
uh school units that Orange County sells. They sell them for about $5,000. We would donate that. And then there's other resources, too. I have to go see if that offer still stands, but it is the perfect location. And then, um I think you got a lot of momentum going
there. If you put a resource center, we'll we'll try to help as well with the building side of it. to to your point. I mean, with the schools like shutting down seven schools, I got to believe some additional >> Correct, Mr. Mayor. They sell those portables for between $2,500 and $5,000.
We we offered to transport it, but we just didn't have property at the time. So, if I were you and there's property available, like I'm not thrilled about $150,000 just being spent when my taxes keep going up. But this is CRA money and it's already budgeted. You got $150,000.
It's going to cost you more down the road. and our offer is not going to stand at some point. You know, I got to go back to him and see if it's still available or, you know, but we're willing to put a a portable there. That may not be enough, but it's a start. Yeah. >> Good. Anybody else?
>> Okay. If not, we'll close the public hearing. Look for a motion. >> So, move. >> Got a motion to purchase make an offer to Duke Energy for the purchase of the property on 8th Street. >> Second. >> Second by member Anderson. All those in favor? I. All opposed. Motion carries
unanimously. >> All right. The next item is the update to our existing assistance program. So at the last Siri board meeting, we had discussed how uh staff had been receiving some applications that uh we had to bring
back before the board because the existing policy needed a little bit more clarity um in terms of uh vetting and underwriting to make sure that they were in compliance. Not to mention that there was missing criteria that staff felt was pertinent in order to underwrite such
applications. So, uh, as promised, we have now brought back, um, the existing incentive programs with certain updates in order to, um, make sure that they met the goals of what I think the intended program should be. So, I think I
provided all this background now, but just to reiterate for the record, the CRA currently administers three incentive programs designed to encourage redevelopment, reinvestment, and economic activity within the CRA districts. The existing programs support targeted improvements and have contribute to visible progress in
private investment. As redevelopment needs to evolve and market conditions change, staff has identified opportunities to expand the CRA's incentive toolkit. And as I mentioned at the January 21st CRA board meeting, the board directed staff to review the
existing programs to promote more participation and refine the program language for clarity and consistency. So, our existing programs are the facade renovation assistance program and the building code assistance program. We I of course did not include rewrap because
that was already very recently revised. Um many of the changes here reflect um or mirror the rewrap program so that again we are consistent across the board. So the highlights are we have increased the maximum award amount from up to 5,000 to up to 10,000 per
application. We also suggested the removal of nonprofits from the eligibility criteria for the reason that generally speaking nonprofits do not pay real estate taxes. And so because CRAAS or TIF tax
increment funding is sole sourced from real estate taxes in order to provide funding or from our only source of revenue does not equate. However, that is a recommendation. Um, we also put in language that allows for a re-review or
a an appeal um by the applicant um if it met certain consideration or certain criteria. We added requirements that any business seeking um grant funding must have an active BTR and must be non-
delinquent on their property taxes. Uh we've also changed it so that the payments will be made directly to the contractor which mirrors the rewrap and we are recommending to increase the deadline for completion of the project from 6 months to one year. We are also
we've also added dispute resolution language in there which mirrors the reap and that grantees should not be eligible for any other city or CRA grants within a five-year period to prevent duplicity. So, those are the recommendations um
that staff is um suggesting for both programs. Um I've included the the policy of both respective programs in your packet. I will note that there was Oh, no. Yeah. So, I included it in your packet and I'm available for questions.
>> All right. Any questions for internet? Is this are we talking about the facade renovation assistance program and the building code assistance program? >> Yes. >> Yes. Okay. All right. So, when I looked at the budget, the code amount is
$45,000 and the commercial is $100,000. So, if you raise the amount from five to 10, that means under commercial you can only do 10 projects and code you could do four. So the first question is, can somebody
get $20,000? 10 from commercial and 10 for the code. >> So no, they could not. And I'm going to start with your last question and back up. So no, they couldn't because under the suggested language, they can only
receive one grant from either a city or CRA program within the 5-year period. So they could not get one for building code and then one for the facade. And then you also made reference to the budget. So the budget currently, yes, I'm not
recommending any changes to those respective line items for this fiscal year because we've had not had a very high participation in it, which is also one of the reasons that I'm recommending some of these changes. Now, as we go into budget prep for next fiscal year,
we can increase the amount um based on participation levels. But at this point, we at least would like and by we I mean staff would like the opportunity to um market the program with the recommended changes to see if there's enough appetite and then I can recommend for
next budget year to increase the amount. >> Okay. Uh when I read over the commercial facade renovation assistant program guidelines, policy, and some procedures, >> uh all the funding is paid directly to the
contractor, whether it's the contractor chosen by the applicant or a contractor from our approved list. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> All right. And uh the next one is uh you the city's
requiring a 25% project Matt. So is it 25% of $10,000 $2,500 the applicant has to put up. >> Correct. So if the project was 125 then they would put in their 25% their 2500 and they can get the full 10,000.
>> Okay. Um, also it also says a business must hold an active business tax receipt. >> Correct? >> All right. So, here's a scenario. If if a tenant is leasing a structure,
commercial structure, and the tenants responsible for paying the business tax, fails to pay the business tax, and the owner of the property advertises the property for lease, is the owner entitled to apply for the
grant even though the business tax receipt wasn't paid? So the applicant needs to have an active business tax receipt whether that is the owner or that is the tenant. The applicant of who is the recipient of the
funds need to have an active BTR. >> Okay. Um goes on to say that um property must be compliant with all city codes or agree to become compliant as part of the project. So the question is I don't know what agree means relative
to a time frame. So what that means is um they should be compliant. However, some of the improvements that they're requesting may put them in compliance. So therefore, they are agreeing to become the scope of work that they're suggesting will now
place them in compliance. >> And then it goes on to say that the applicant was demonstrated financial capacity. So what does that mean? >> Correct. They must be available to do the match.
Also the ineligible expenses you included plumbing, mechanical >> and also include security system. >> Correct. Um, on page
32, >> member DGO, your mic is not on. >> Chairman, uh, on page 32, uh, there's a paragraph in there that says, "No extension shall exceed an
additional six months without CRA board of prior approval. Any and all extension requests must be made a minimum of five business days before the expiration of the completion date. >> Correct. >> All right.
As I go further on to your applicant acknowledgement form on the uh one, two, three, four, five, six, seventh paragraph. It says one extension of 180 calendar days may be granted by the CA CRA board
of directors on request of the applicant if the request is made at least 30 days prior to the expiration of where conditions or codes have not changed. So tell us chronologically how the 30 days works relative to the five days. Second
question is we meet every three months. So if the expiration date was two months before our meeting. How does the applicant get an extension in order to continue the project?
So to answer your first question, that is an error on page 37, paragraph 7 where it references 30 days, it should be five. And then in reference to the request for the extension on page 32 where it makes reference it says however no extension
shall exceed six months without C board approval. So they can have an additional six months approval. Anything that is over that amount would require the board. So they can still get the six months and within that time period the board will meet and then if they have need something longer than that the
request can be made at that time. So you're going to >> So the city is going to allow them to proceed with the project even though the board has not approved the extension. >> So my recommendation is that staff has the ability to allow them for an
additional six months without board approval but with notification and then the board can excuse me the applicant if they needs more than the six months then the board can make that determination. But again this is a recommendation. So
what I found with some of our applicants under our existing program, it allows for four months to complete the project. Supply chain issues, things are happening and so they are not able to make the fourmonth period. And so at
least since my time here, each one of the applications I've had has requested an extension. And uh the last paragraph on 37 when I read it, it seemed to say that
in the original policy. >> Thank you. I'm not used to this. So uh it stated in the initial policy the city makes payments directly to the con to the contractor. In the last paragraph on 37, it seems to say differently.
>> Last paragraph 37. >> I can change that wording so it's provides more clarity that it should be paid directly to the contractor. So that'll be removed where it says the applicant will be required to pray uh to provide proof of course of payment and
then it goes on to say the applicant must be prepared to pay all contractors and vendors. >> Yes, I can >> be removed. >> I can modify that language because remember they still have to pay the 25%. But I can uh make that language a little bit more clear so that it reads as such
that we will be paying we being the CRA will pay directly to the contractor and then the applicant will be responsible for paying the contractor directly and they'll have to provide written confirmation as part of their um agreement. >> Okay.
>> Anything else? Good. >> Yes. >> Okay. Anybody else from the board? >> Uh, yes. >> Um, I had concern in reference to removing nonprofits from being eligible and I understood the rationale that she
gave in reference to some nonprofits do not pay property taxes. Therefore, they're not contributing uh to the uh CRA fund. But there are instances where nonprofits are paying property taxes and so to remove them means that they
wouldn't be eligible. And then also she said it wasn't getting a lot of traffic. And so then if you remove nonprofits then you're creating even less traffic. And so I just like to see an exception if nonprofits are paying property taxes
that they be allowed and be eligible but without having to go through the appeal process. Everybody, >> that is the direction. >> Everybody okay with that? Um well that we did discuss that because they she um I don't want to say she u
Miss Antonet Forbes had said that yes there are some nonprofits that have properties that they pay property tax on that separate property but not the nonprofit itself but that
they have the ability to appeal But why go through the appeal process if they're paying property taxes? >> There's not that many nonprofits that own separate properties where they pay >> Yeah.
>> property tax. So, I did I did recommend that the nonprofit would have to fill the application and prove that they have a property that they pay property tax. >> Yeah, that's right. >> Yeah, makes sense.
to add that as >> instead of removing it all together >> would be to include it but that they must uh provide the property that they do pay property taxes on. >> The property has to be located in CRA
area or just any property. >> No, they all CRA. >> I just want to clarify. Yeah, clarify that in the CRA area. >> So, I just want to be clear. I have direction or consensus rather from the entire board that we would like to
update the policy to include nonprofits if they pay property taxes. >> Right. If they have a property that they pay property taxes. >> Okay. I'm going to acknowledge there are all head shaking agreement. Okay.
>> Anything else, commissioner? Anything else? >> No. >> Okay. Anybody from the public wish to speak on this one? If not, we'll close the public hearing. And we got So, we got three different that got three changes there. And would you mind going back through the three changes that
we've agreed to before we Oh, anybody? Nobody from the public. Okay. Um, if not, the the three things that we are three adjustments we've made. If you would just state that for the record. >> I will do my best to see if I got that
one. So, it is to update to include nonprofits that contribute to the tax base. It's also to offer a correction. Bear with me one second here. On page 30, >> page 37 where it makes reference to 30
days where it should be 5 days prior to the expiration. And then also on page 37 where it makes reference to um the applicant paying the contractor directly to clarifying that language that the applicant while they will pay the contractor directly it will be
specifically for their um 25% contribution and that the CRA will be paying the contractor directly for its >> okay everybody good with that? >> Yes. >> And when is this effective? I like it effective immediately, which
is why we included the policy as well as the application. >> All right. Okay. Look for a motion. So move. >> Got a motion by member Anderson. >> Second by member Smith. All those in favor? I. >> All oppose? Motion carries unanimously.
>> Okay. Blanch. >> Mr. Chair, are we going to go over the building code assistance program? >> Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. >> Yeah. The the incentive program. >> Yes. I'm sorry. >> That's okay. Well, >> huh. >> I know we have consultants here. They
charge. So, do we want them? Do you want to keep the order the way it is or >> which? >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. Are you referring to the the FRAP and the BCAP programs?
>> All it says is the building code assistance program >> guidelines, policies, and procedures. >> BAP, >> that was the second part of the >> Then my apologies. I assume we were talking about both programs collectively. So, are there other suggestions you'd like to make in
reference to BCAP? Well, the first one is um the All right. So, the eligible upgrades to the building code is
electrical upgrades and HVAC systems. All right. You said on page 30 under eligible >> 40 on page 40 >> excuse me >> the eligible >> okay >> the eligible reimbursements is electrical upgrades and HVAC systems.
>> Yes. >> Okay. And um now so the HVAC system required for occupancy. Does that mean that you can give an
applicant money if it if the air conditioning is for the occupancy of the structure? >> Correct. So, in order for them for the structure to be habitable and it's
already uh met some sort of whether there's a code violation or there's some sort of um notation that's already been identified that they need to meet this requirement, then they can apply for this funding. So, it's not simply an an
upgrade to the existing uh HVAC. >> Okay. Okay. So on page 41 where it lists the ineligible expenses, >> it goes on to say interior renovations including but not limited to plumbing, mechanical, HVAC, electric.
>> So air conditioning is normally in in normally the interior of the structure. So if I read this one, that expense for HVAC is not eligible for for reimbursement compared to page 40 which
says it is. >> So I can add clarifying language that specifies unless otherwise stated um under eligible improvements >> and security system also is not included as an eligible expense. Right?
>> Correct. correct >> and I think the same thing occurs uh on the uh 30-day >> bike again remember member your mic >> we can make I can make that update
>> right so the five days and 30 days. Okay. >> So should be five. >> The last part also you're going to correct about the applicants only acquired for 25% and the city pays the rest. >> Correct. >> Okay.
Is that that it member? >> Okay, good. Any anybody else in the board? If not, anybody from the public wish to speak to this one? If not, look for motion. We've got a those couple changes. If you would uh go over those again for me, please ma'am.
>> Um on page Sorry, page 41 where it lists ineligible expenses that there will be a notation made under interior improvements uh specifically as it relates to plumbing, mechanical, and HVAC that unless it's otherwise stated under the eligible improvements. Also
updating to the um from 30 days, it should reflect 5 days prior to the expiration date. >> And I believe that was it. >> All right. Oh, and of course the 25% um contribution by the applicant. Okay,
>> with those changes, look for a motion to approve. So move. Got a motion by member Drago. >> Second. >> Uh second by member Anderson. All those in favor? I. All oppose. Motion carries unanimously. Okay. Blanch. Good evening, chair, members of the
committee. Um, tonight we have Mr. Daniel Anderson, a partner with Malden and Jenkins. He wants to present to you the FY25 audit report. Well, the CRA. >> Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the
board. As Blanch mentioned, my name is Daniel Anderson. I'm an audit partner with Molden and Jenkins uh with ultimate responsibility for the CRA's 2025 fiscal year and audit. I've got a full presentation regarding the the overall city audit that I'll give at the the commission meeting at 7:00. But I did just want to make a few specific
comments about the CRA audit that we performed about five years ago. Florida statutes require CRAAS that have more than $100,000 of revenues or expenditures to have a separately issued financial statement audit just on the CRA. We conducted that audit and have
issued an unmodified opinion which is the highest form of assurance that we can render. We did perform that audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards as well as government audit standards to support that opinion. Additionally, um like the city's overall financial statement audit, we do have to
issue a report on our tests of controls and compliance with respect to significant laws, rules, and regulations. This is a negative assurance report. However, this is where we would identify findings of significant deficiencies or material weaknesses if we noted any. happy to report that we did not note any in
performance of the CRA's 2025 fiscal year in audit. Um so we performed the standalone audit. You should have a copy of the financial statements in front of you. Uh we issued an unmodified opinion and we had no findings or recommendations uh with respect to the performance of that audit. Uh those are the comments that I have for for right
now. Uh if you guys have any questions, I'm happy to answer those at this time. >> Any questions for Daniel on this? I know this was put on last minute. We they just completed it I guess Thursday or Friday last week or may maybe no this week I guess maybe it was Monday and so we just wanted to add it to the agenda
and have while we had you here it would be >> so if they had a question about that for sure the audit that's that was that was our reasoning putting it on tonight. So any questions for Daniel? Anybody from the public wish to speak on this one? I think it's really not a it's not an
action item though is it? >> Okay. I'm going to do it to 7 o'clock. Okay. >> Acceptance of the audit report. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, look for a motion for acceptance. >> Okay. Motion to accept the fiscal um year end September 30th from Molden and
Jenkins for the CR. >> So, well, do we we don't do we have to accept it? >> I mean, you do you have the acceptance on the next agenda meeting? Yeah. It's as a business item, >> but because we just we just received it, so I don't want to I haven't had time to truly go through it. >> It wouldn't change. You don't have to.
>> Okay. Yeah. I mean, >> you'll feel comfortable though. I know I just received I don't know about everyone else but I just want to make sure if we haven't had time to review it. I don't want to >> I just received it. So we just No, just making sure. Yeah. >> So we'll just we'll just >> we'll just punt it. >> Okay, that's fine. But I don't have to bring it back because we normally don't
even come here. Okay. >> Is that good? >> Okay. Got it. All right. >> Her next item. I want to share this information. transfers. >> Oh my god, I can't even see this. these glasses that we see. >> All right,
internet. >> Yes, I was trying to read this small fine print we just got. >> Yeah, it is small >> even with my glasses. Okay. So, the next item um are newly proposed incentives. Again, at the last January 21st area
board meeting, I talked about um offering new incentives and or rather assistance programs in replacement of some of our um uh programs that were um no longer available due to changes in
the statute. So, these are replacements. And so once again, they're looking to support targeting improvement in order to increase the visibility and also hopefully promote private investment, which is what CRAAS are all about. And so there are three programs. And if you
remember, there we go. If you remember at the last meeting, um I brought these forward at least in concept, which was the demolition grant, the design, engineering, architectural services grant, and the special project grant. So under the demolition grant um which
provides um uh grant funding for structures that are incompatible with the existing or anticipated redevelopment projects and structures. We actually the CRA had a demolition grant some years ago. Um I found out and through my research apparently there was
only one project that's ever been awarded under that that program. So, I would hope that as we uh you look at some of these updates, it'll hopefully um encourage some additional um improvements.
And so, bear with me one second. So, one thing that I wanted to correct because it was after my conversations with the city attorney um timing wise in reference to the PowerPoint is that it would not be reimbursement that demolition grant that would be paid directly to the contractor that we are allowed to to do that. in reference to
the design. Well, I can go one by one if you like. So, under the demolition grant, that is a a excuse me, a max award amount of $20,000 that replaces the building permit refund assistance program. Um, so
that $20,000 is a total amount that I am suggesting. So, that could be one project, could be multiple projects. The um reasoning behind that is because again this is a pilot project in order to see if we garner more interest and if
we in fact did then the next uh CRA budget year we can put more funding towards it. Um so that is why it is intentionally a small amount. >> Any questions? >> On page 55 you have it at $15,000.
You are correct because originally we thought it'd be 15. I was able to get up to 20. So that is an error and it should be 20,000. >> Okay. Yeah. And the other thing I noted from the last time you brought this before us and I made this comment so I'll make it again.
Uh, I have an issue with giving any money to an historic structure to de to demolish it. >> Uhhuh. >> The city doesn't have any because I looked through all the codes, they don't
have any standards to protect historic structures from demolition. And uh several meetings ago, I read some emails from one of the department heads in charge of building basically said if he got an application uh by email and uh
and everything was in order, he would issue the demolition permit. Well, that's not what the federal government expects out of historic properties. So I understand the demolition relative to other structures, vacant properties, slabs that are bad,
etc. But I think until the city develops a comprehensive set of standards to protect historical structures, then the demolition grant should not apply to those structures. I believe we did give uh our attorney
Cliff that uh uh direction for him to create a policy because I have the packet at home but we never had a followup from it. >> I've never seen it. So we haven't gotten it but So what I'm saying is >> but I do remember because I have a
>> I think we gave them direction if you council. Yes. Yes we did. Well, we can we can just we can put that in policy that you can't use it for a historic building. That's that's fine. >> Yeah. >> And how would you define a historic building?
>> It's already in >> Yeah. Yeah. >> All right. Any other any other questions for internet? All right. So, we can add that. Uh, anybody from the public wish to speak on this one?
If not, look for a motion to approve. >> Got a motion by member Draco. Second. >> Second by member Smith. All those in favor? I. >> All oppose. Motion carries unanimously. >> The next one is the design engineering architectural uh services assistance
grant. Now, this one is a reimbursement grant. And so after several conver it it is excuse me uh designed to help with the to help with um the soft cost or the predevelopment costes associated with
doing new construction or redevelopment of an existing structure. It is um like I said a reimbursement because after conversations with the city attorney it was important to note that it needs to result in a finished product. It needs to be a brick and mortar. So, you don't
want to reimburse just to get a set of plans. And so, this um program specifically is designed to provide that reimbursement um after the project has been completed. >> Uh make sure I have everything I want. >> So, when you say that, sorry to
interrupt. Like after it's coed, >> correct? >> That's when we'll reimburse. >> Okay, understood. So, it's up to $50,000 per project. Keeping in mind that the total amount I'm requesting is 50,000 for this with
20,000 coming from the building impact assistance program which is um no longer in place as well as 10,000 from the residential fee assistance program and then 20 from contingency. Again, this is a occurrence where we may have one project or multiple projects,
but we are starting at a very small amount to make sure that we garnish garner interest. Good. Um, when I read over this, um, entitlement program And I think I've I think I've stated
this in the past. I will restate it again. Without a comprehensive set of development standards, including a color pallet adopted by the board,
this grant can provide an architect to design any building he or she wants, color it any color they want. uh and it kind of defeats the purpose of having harmony within the
district. So I can give you some examples. Of course, one example I noted was the was the real estate firm um behind the CVS and all the architectural structures around there is
Victorian and you have some some some building that looks industrial colored any way they want to. Uh if you get into the historic structures on the residential, there's a house at the corner of uh Second and Central
that's painted orange red. Uh there's a metal two-story garage behind a structure on South Island which I know is prohibited in the code. So the question is how did that get
permitted? and this this design program would allow somebody to come in and design that structure as I read it. So I think until the city comes up with a set of comprehensive design standards where
this where this assistance program applies directly I think you're putting the cart before the horse. >> So if you like I can I can respond to some of that. So in reference to the design standards which was referenced by
this board at the last meeting uh one of the things I think is important about this particular program is that it helps the the CRA guide some of the designs as that we will be intricatally involved in the process of creating those site plans
because now it'll be not just at a staff level we will be working in coordination with the proposed developer to help guide some of those decisions. as far as color palettes and and that sort of thing. Number two, I thought was important to mention is that um part of
our master plan update, we can include some of those specivities as far as color palettes and things are concerned um when we perform the the the plan update. Well, the attorney will tell you absent
of design standards adopted by ordinance, you could try to negotiate all day with a developer, but according to this program, the developer has the leverage and government does a poor job in negotiating outcomes. I can speak from
experience. So in order to protect the residents and the investments of the residents and the businesses, the design standard should be adopted first. Then this assistance program comes after the fact.
And there's the attorney there. You're welcome to ask him. >> So So the kind of, you know, that was one of the things, one of my concerns is that the harmony within the, you know, that downtown area. So, I kind of actually agree with member Draco on that that there should be a standardized um harmony uh design standard. So, I
actually agree with that and if it's not written, we can guide all we want, but they don't really don't have to follow it. >> That that is correct. So, that is I'm going to try to speak louder because I'm getting more people. Um so, that is if that is the direction the board, we can absolutely include that that language. I
will tell you that it may um slow down the um of starting this particular program because now we have to put we have to codify those those standards first before we can offer it. So again, this is a pilot program. There's only 50,000 attached to it to see if there's even
interest um available. Um and and if there's not, we can always staff bring it back and say that you know there was not and perhaps we should make other modifications. And I know Mount Dora because my brother participated he purchased a building in in Mount Dora a few years ago. He participated in that in their program. They had a design
standard. It was you you receive this money but you have to follow and it was very strict. So I think when you look at kind of Mount Dora and I think he did a great job because you look at how they kind of renovated that downtown area and revitalized that. So I think whatever standard they have it looks really good. So I definitely agree with that.
>> Not a problem. So I was >> to maybe table this one for now until we get a little more detail on the back end. >> Good. >> Sure. So just for point of clarification, would you like to table it until staff can bring back some form of design standards to include? >> I think that'd be appropriate.
>> Yeah. >> All right. So we got a motion to table the design engineering and architectural services assistance program. >> So moved. Got a motion by member Drago. >> Second. >> Second by member Anderson. All those in favor. >> All opposed. Motion carries now.
>> Okay. >> Okay. >> So the last one is the special project grant. Now this one again is on a reimbursement reimbursement basis. It is designed to incentivize um commercial projects that hopefully create employment opportunities, increase the tax base and attract significant private
investment into the CRA. This one there is a proposed budget of 203,000 which is a reallocation of 103,000 from the proposed parket park on 8th and Highland and 100,000 from contingency. One thing to note about this one is because it is
quote unquote special, any applications will come directly to the Siri board for review. If you look at page 58 under program eligibility, it talks about what the expectations are for a proposed project. besides the fact it
needs to be within the CRA, but more importantly under um number seven, it talks about projects needing to have uh job creation, a minimum of 10 jobs. Um it needs to have a 3 to one um private
to public investment. It needs to substantially increase the tax base. It needs to have a certain level of project readiness and feasibility. That there needs to be design quality and placemaking standards. that it needs to have a community and public in excuse me benefit. So we're looking for a project
that uh meets at least one or more of those criteria and then when such project comes about not only do they need to include an application but it also needs to include additional language so that the board can have a comprehensive overview of proposed
project. So it needs to include for example any proposed site plans or conceptual drawings. There needs to be financial feasibility um documentation such as proformers or a budget. There needs to be evidence of financial commitments that there is the private investment. It'll be have it'll have a
preliminary review on a staff level both from the CRA as well as from our finance department before it comes before the CRA board. But again, because of the amount um this is something that will go directly to to the board for review.
I also wanted to make note let's see in here one second I also wanted to make note u once again or ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra ra rather re reemphasize the importance of the job creation component um in here which is the only other grant
that we have that talks about that. >> Any questions for internet on the special project grant program? >> Yes, Mr. Chair. Uh the projects include repair or rehabilitation of buildings.
So we just had a discussion about the design services not having um comprehensive design standards. So this one somebody could come in and rehab a building without the design
standards to any design they want to. All right. Well, >> so you're asking the same thing. >> Same thing table should we get >> the design standard? >> The design standard. >> Okay. And since we're going to table, uh, I also would like for there to be
some clause that should this special project grant is used for business and then they leave that they reimburse >> fall back, >> right? They reimburse those funds. >> Okay. Yeah. I think which one has that in there? This one didn't because we talked about that, remember?
>> Right. There is a call back provision in the FRAP and the BCAP, but yes, we can include that as well in this one. Okay. >> All right. So, look for a motion to table the special project grant program. Member >> second.
>> Motion by membero, second by member Smith. All those in favor? All oppose? Motion carries unanimously. >> Okay. That I think that's it, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yeah. >> Uh before we leave,
>> uh there's a just a couple items I need to >> Okay. >> do a status report on. Uh, I looked at the amended budget that the trustee gave me. Now, you don't have to get up. You don't have to get up. Uh, so I noticed that in
the facade program there was $60,000 added to cover the two applications that are outstanding. Is that right? >> That's correct. >> And there's only two applications outstanding. >> They are in process now. They have been approved. They've been awarded. And now they are waiting to um have the work
done. >> But you have no more in the queue. >> If there's more funding, I'm sure I can get more in the queue. But no, there are no more weight listed. Uh anyone that is called, we have informed them that the funding has been completely awarded and
we refer them to other local resources. >> Okay. Good. Uh the second thing is uh your predecessor started a program called economic gardening. She gave it a different name and I think it was a couple of meetings ago I inquired as to the update of that
program. Is it still being used not used? >> I am unfamiliar with >> economic gardening is a program that helps identify u resources in a community for small businesses to hire
employees. So, I'm unfamiliar with that program, but I can do some research, including calling my predecessor and find out and I can give you a report back. >> And the last thing is, um, it was several meetings ago, uh, a
realtor came up here and wanted to sell land next to the museum and the charge was for you to analyze the feasibility of purchasing that property. Was that done? Um, no I have not worked on that yet, but I will put that as a priority.
>> Thank you. >> Anybody else? >> Okay. All right. With that, we'll close the CR meeting. We'll be back in five minutes. Start the trigger.