[Music] 2025 uh we're at the U the commun community redevelopment agency meeting uh Mary is there corn and proper notice been given yes sir yes sir uh
Commissioners I'd like the approval of minutes for January 16th 2025 CRA meeting move second okay thank you Mary roll call Mr ASB body I Mr Holland hi Vice chair
Ashcraft hi chairman Hawkins I okay Tom now over to C items uh yes uh we have a brief presentation from Al ladimer on item 2.1 Al ladimer economic development director uh Commissioners tonight we're
bringing to you a vote on the um bringing for your consideration a vote on the uh final draft of downtown master plan uh the plan was produced by Mig uh Mig was the lead consultant on the three consultant team Mig provided expertise
in planning design and Engineering uh um W architecture provided expertise in landscape architecture and design and Johnson economic Consulting provided expertise in market and financial
analysis the plan was created based upon the city's uniqueness and developed from ele uh and developed from the uh the plan was created based on the city's uniqueness uh and developed from elements including public input find um
analysis of existing plans and the city's physical infrastructure or physical characteristics I'm sorry the original time estimated to complete the uh project was uh nine months it doesn't sound like it's it
doesn't sound like it's work okay that's better I guess let me just jam it up here no yeah jam it up there okay so originally it was going to take 9 months to finish the project or complete the project it actually took 18 months uh
that was due to scheduling conflicts uh illnesses and weather related events um if approved the master plan will guide the future development uh and Redevelopment of the downtown area there are two special notes for
your consideration number one throughout the implementation phase throughout the implementation phase uh Community input will continue to help align projects with the goals and values of the citizens of
usess also the master plan will be amended into the CRA Redevelopment plan because otherwise CRA funds cannot be spent on its development and Redevelopment activities staff recommends approval
uh and I'm I'm available for questions now Al to reiterate it nine months it took uh 18 months 18 months it was supposed to take N9 months that's correct okay I thought it was a lot more than
that I'm showing aot more than that yeah if I'm not mistaken it was supposed to be completed by April of 2023 was that right uh it's the uh it officially got
underway um July 88th 2022 right yeah and it was at least with my brain the calculation was probably around April of 2023 it was supposed to but it took longer than that that's correct
okay and I believe we pushed it we moved it forward the first meeting um of the year and they estimated 300 days being Ultra conservative and it took us almost three
years if I remember correctly I I pulled the watched the video that they made the presentation uh the final presentation to the community uh roughly November 14th I
think in 2024 that was the final that was Final presentation okay yes okay any questions any comments um I have a quite a few
concerns um that I wanted to share I I look back just so you know where I'm when I'm where I'm drawing from look back at the minutes from our um workshop and I feel
like I feel like there that the process isn't following the will and the consensus of the commission um which was to uh and I could go through them all but to to hire
a consultant on the uh master plan who would help us with experience on Land Development economic development master planning uh there was a real estate uh
factor to there as as well land use local government U familiarity with the area the surrounding the county and I think somewhere we lost we lost that and
uh ended up with a uh ended up with a commercial real estate broker instead of a consultant uh for what we want
so that's my first concern my other concern is the process and I can't emphasize enough that the process um this process we can do better as a community
or as a city with this process to be more transparent um to put forth um transparency um I uh we were not I was not allowed to be part of the review process or to be
present um which I would have liked to be I know somebody else also wanted to be there and uh was not allowed to be there and I I I feel like the our constituents in the city votes for us to
watch out for them we're their elected officials us five um and we needed to be involved in that process we needed to have the ability to question the people who responded to the RFQ to look at them all to see the
rating system to see where everybody rated um to question them uh to things that we might want or feel that are important and we didn't get any of that and I think the process failed us um
and I think I don't think any of us want to be excluded from that so that's a big part of that first um we gave direction to get a
consultant for a master plan and specific bulletproof bullet points that I conveyed and uh we were in consensus on um and and really at this point we don't need a realtor it's too soon to have a
real estate guy um we need to figure out what we want and the the one biggest thing in the minutes that really I kind of Trumps everything for me is that we agreed that we would have a another workshop and then we would review everything together and we would all have an opportunity to ask the questions
I remember Emily and and I don't know why she's not here but she should be a part of even this decision today in my opinion but um we need to be responsible for this we have four goals I Googled before I came in here to what I was really getting into and one of them
dealt with infrastructure budgeting Public Safety um and everything and and we're not part of that we need to be part of that we we're putting our names to something this year we hit 150 years since usus um
was founded I guess it was a little later when when it became a city so I would like to see us have stick to what we said in our in our minutes have our Workshop um have an opportunity to
interview and look at the five uh respondents to see the rating system uh to see how they rank and to question them and make sure that we're happy with that that that falls on us so I would like to uh I I would like to
see that happen um I'd like to hear some feedback from you guys and then I might want to add to that but yeah I'll I'll I'll start off you know I um I sat down and and I met with
the the uh the firm uh yesterday that that the city has uh agreed to uh you know consider for this um and I
asked him the tough questions um I didn't get to ask him as many as I wanted to um but but I asked him the tough questions about projects he's done uh before U the scope the death
uh and he the one chosen he presented to us uh what a month ago month and a half ago um jary 13th yeah yeah and I think that that when he left you know I I thought
that we were comfortable with what we were getting um now I will say that that I don't think we as as as a commission uh uh we we have the time to
interview five different firms I think that we uh that we hire people to do that and you know and I'd be comfortable with you know us interviewing the top two uh but I don't
think that we have the time to to to interview five people and I think we're taking away from the responsibility of of the people that we hire to do it and I will say they they know more
about a lot of the process than than we do so at some point you know we have to allow them to do their job but I do agree and I think that it would have been good to to talk to the top
two they talk to they did the master plan or the top two that that were hiring as the new consultant the new Consultants okay yeah well I tend to agree with you I think that's a staff's job um and you know in the for we're
considering you know adopting this master plan it's a guide it's uh it's not anything set in stone it it it's um I believe it's uh regulatory because you know we're spending money CRA money and we have to have something in uh in the plan to do
that um just lock but you know we've uh good back but you know we have we have uh we have uh we have spent considerable amount of time you know getting this master plan
done and we were all we were all involved um the commission the residents stakeholders we were all invol involved that whole process and this is what they finished after talking to us the
public and everything that we thought we wanted um in the downtown but it's once again it's an opinion it's a guide it's uh it can be a living document it can change so I mean I think I think we should move
for least move for approval to get it adopted and then we can change it anywhere anywhere down the road I think there's two separate things here the consultant is one the plan is the other in my opinion I feel pretty much the same way
we we pay a professional staff and I think we probably got one of the best staffs in the county um yeah I would have liked to maybe interview the the top two um at this point we cannot delay we need to move
forward um and we can make adjustments as we go everything we do is almost a living document and we we can make changes on the Fly I think most of us that have been here a little bit have said we drag our feet and government is too slow and
that's one of the things we've got to change um it's okay to be cautious but we have been waited in irely too long on a lot of this stuff so that's just my stand at this point so you're
saying let let me go back to we we had a master plan presented we agreed in the previous meeting that we would have a workshop review the plan I know
commissioner Lee who's not here and I think we should be including her in this important discussion uh wanted to have a workshop as well and we didn't do what we said we were going to do and what we agreed to in our minutes and then we have the second
issue about the the uh U the process and this is nothing against Mr Gan at all this is all about process just so that it's clear and the process was not transparent and the process in my opinion was
clearly not a good process we selected and I think we have a fantastic staff but they have only certain amount of knowledge especially in specific areas take take so you're saying that we have more knowledge than they do no what I'm
saying is that we're responsible to report to our people to the people who have voted for us and to vet this stuff and when you have a process or in this case I guess I'll call it a board um I think it's
unfair to staff to put them in that predicament to do that I think uh we've got a great staff I think it's unfair the process is the problem I would have liked to have seen us bring in experts
to help us select from these people we don't even know these people we didn't even seen their their their proposals we don't even know what's going on apparently there's a contract I found signed already with with uh with uh the
U with the realtor that we hired we didn't see that we need to see that this is the biggest decision that will ever be made in the history of the city and it's our responsibility the five Commissioners to
know it to put our opinion to it and if we don't know it to get at the top people who help us do it and yeah I think it's above uh our head and it's above the staff's head certainly so um I
mean how are they going to look at five different proposals vet them question them and know what they're doing when they're sitting in a room with their boss that's another concern how do you
get a fair and equitable that's like taking a whole family and putting them on a jury for somebody we want independent thinking we want experience people thinking we're doing good we're farther than I ever thought any other commission has gotten on
this we need to have our Workshop like we said we would in the January 13th we need to go over that master plan and I agree with you we should uh maybe each of us pick take a look at them we need to get these proposals that were sent in
or responses to the RF you and if you for example want to see somebody else on there be it first second third I don't have the faith in the process uh so we need to look at them all and each commissioner can pick who they want to hear from if we all pick
the same person it'll make it easy if we end up with five so be it it's worth it the next hundred years relies on these decisions you know there's a saying I I I I love which is in the haste of moving quickly we begin to pain paint during
the rain and uh we're doing good I think we got a lot to be proud of what we've accomplished so far but we need to look at these uh question them like who who are them who are them the five
applicants the five who responded to the RFQ we have a financial obligation to the community as well to understand that part because we're going to be the one to approve it so we're approving money we don't know why what what the contract anything we can't have our name on that and we're not asking for any a long it
can be done as quickly as we can do it it's smart government it's transparency these people out here want transparency and they want us to do the best job we can do and I know we could do better and we're doing good we just
need to keep that going okay well let's um let's go uh let's go right into it and what hold on go ahead go ahead I can say Tom what what kind of criteria did we use to I to select so
um I don't know how much commission wants me to talk about process so this is a process laid out uh in our Charter and in our code of ordinances it's a process that we use regularly um for all kinds of purchasing and
procurement um so what we did was uh based on the commission's uh recommendation we issued a request for qualifications um that was issued uh to the world uh anyone who was interested
could respond um it was advertised online um we did get uh five respondents uh we then formed a staff
committee again consistent with um other uh purchases other uh contracts other uh continuing um contracts and the staff committee reviewed the five responses
um at a public meeting uh the staff reviewed uh their comments um the committee was uh myself uh Miranda burrow Rick Eric Mike Lane Al
laimer and the process was facilitated by Tracy jeans um and again we um we all uh sat down in a public meeting discussed our comments uh and arrived at a unanimous
number one uh which was Gan in York uh I can uh the our notes are all publicly available our scoring is all publicly available it's a very transparent process um but in the end we had a
unanimous number one and there are uh various procedures if we had had uh very close scoring we could have had another round we could have had a round of presentations um however uh when the five staff members arrived at a
unanimous number one it was clear uh we have a number one let's move forward um and so uh that was uh the process um I can get into the details of the various proposals again we all took
notes but I'm sorry Tom but there's a rating system based on categories I'm assuming yeah we had we had five categories I don't have it here in front of me but we had five categories for a total of 100 points now where it gets
tricky is each of the five U kind of assigned points based on their own criteria but then so we ranked uh who is your one who is your new two who's your three four five and then compared on that basis um and again we arrived at a
unanimous number one um and was it close uh the it was it was close between two and three but no one was close to number one uh so one was unanimous but it was a clear and distant unanimous um and then number two and
three were very close to each other um who was number two and who was number three the uh so uh Ley G and Community solutions group were number two uh and I do want to point out that that the levy proposal was a partnership with uh G and
Community solutions group and again if we want to get into details um part of I think part of the group scoring was affected by the fact that it was a partnership between Levy G and Community solutions group uh and then I think uh
RMA was uh number three why was it a conflict can you explain that to us you said it would be a what did you use the word it would be a concern or conflict why would it be a conflict no I don't think I use the word conflict I'm sorry I I didn't what did you say say it again
uh I said we had to take into account that it was a partnership between Levy G and Community solutions group so we weren't just evaluating Richard Levy we were evaluating G and Community solutions group as well is that a positive to have two people two
companies helping us it it can yeah I thought it I thought I thought it was were you concerned as to whether one or another was actually involved I think I think you mentioned to me that now that you mentioned that you had said
that um Dr Levy was not really going to be involved but named on there and in the background what does that mean I I'm sorry repeat that you had mentioned to me that that Levy was really really not looked at as part of
this because he was kind of in the background and you didn't feel like he was going to be involved something along that way are are we concerned about the two of them or the the input that we might get from say Dr Levy versus
GI no I think the um you see that that's why I would love for us to really let him let him finish please around that let him finish it in reviewing the LG Community
solutions group proposal it was unclear who would be assigned what responsibilities and so um again I think um
this if if I can speak frankly I think because of these Partnerships because of the very very um complicated and detailed and Technical information in these proposals I think that's why in
other areas whether it's um picking a an engineering firm to design and engineer a 12 to13 million Wastewater Plant this is the process we use we you know we have a
certain level of expertise at the staff level to review the these very complicated uh technical documents and that's what we've done in this case was um five
staff members reviewed these proposals and we we we again unanimously came to our number one you did George you uh Tom you said uh it was
unclear Levy's role in that so if I or if any of us were to look at we picking on that proposal look at that proposal which was number two we would be unclear as to Levy's role is what you're saying is that
right that what you said what I was saying was because it was a joint proposal between Dr Levy GI and Community solutions group it was difficult for us to determine what
which of those groups would be performing what te so for example um they were required to submit um uh resumés and experience and clearly uh Richard Levy was included so were
people at gii and Community solutions group we asked them to submit examples of previous work there was some work for for Richard Levy there was some work for G there was some work work for Community
solutions group and so it was um there was a lot of information to go through and try to determine what who has worked on projects most similar uh to the to
usus and I do want to point out that I had several conversations uh with Richard Levy uh both before the process and after the process and he is a former uh chief administrative officer um
former planning professional uh with the city of Orlando and so he's very knowledgeable of these procurement processes and uh understood or when I spoke to him prior to the process and after the process um he understood uh
the process and understood where we were I to say we can I finish come back on that can I address what he spoke Okay so if we would have looked at the proposal and the pro and the proposal said in the
response from Mr Levy that he would be the Project Director in charge with an Army staff of Gia you didn't see that in that in his
proposal that he would be the Project Director which is completely in contrast to what you just said that's why I think we need to sit down and kind of look look it over I know but we we sorry we we direct when and when he
said um hey it would be unclear to uh his exper unclear whether he would be a good mix for this I I I have I mean I could read you what public information has gotten in his
qualifications uh and if you don't mind I'd like I'd like to uh touch on that for the S commissioner do you have an affiliation with these firms do I absolutely not absolutely not do you no
I know but it seems like you're you're fighting for I mean we directed Tom fighting for transparency and and and Tom just said it was it completely transparent we D we directed Tom to find a consultant he found a consultant based on the same criteria that we use for
every other project we do Tom you had five people in the room with you right uh well five others five six people in the room right did uh did you at all tell them who you thought would
be number one we we all ranked no I mean prior to no okay um and I'll say this in the last couple of months uh I have set on sever several U several boards uh
committees with the school board and we've gone through the exact same process uh at the school board uh and we had to rank uh and we did not share who
we ranked with so we did not have the expertise that some people may think that that we needed uh but the school board took our recommendation and they made the decision so at some point we have to
move on with our project and I understand uh you know I I understand we may not have have uh done it the way that everyone wanted it to be done but we have a process that we've been doing
for years um and it has never been called into question is there a relationship between ji and either one of developers uh there is a relationship between G3 and
gii um that's a concern of mine uh and they're going to be overseeing what G does correct I think relationship means that they've worked together does not mean they have a financial I think they've
been actually on quite opposite uh conflicting uh sides of of relationships so which is not AB normal G is a huge company let me ask you this
and was there a relationship between G and the principal Dr Levy and an organization that moved to and D3 I'm
sorry and organization that moved from Eustace to mount door um it if you're if you're asking if if Dr Levy and G3 were involved in a business relocation previously from
Eustace to M Dora the answer is yes I have a concern man is doing his job and you have a concern he's he is the top consultant in the na in the nation and he gets hired he has a fiduciary to who he gets hired the same
way he would work just as hard for us or any of those five would have he's been in the industry 40 years if we're kind of picking on him of course he's worked with just about everybody everybody but I mean but we're but we're back to two issues the master plan and
consultant are completely different yes I I don't the master us adopting the master plan is one item and then the consultant that we toon to hire can be
another and I don't remember telling him to hire him but if you say so my my concern is the process my concern is getting the master plan right my concern is our involvement in this process and it isn't going to take much
we plann to have a workshop anyway let's have a workshop any one of us Commissioners can ask the will ask to have somebody come forward there's it's we haven't done anything that we can't reaffirm is is good um and and and
continue to move forward we're going to have a a workshop anyway and there's concern with with for me with the process um and uh and that's that's what we said we would do in the minutes should we do
what we said you're the one I you're the one that actually asked us to hire the so okay but our minutes say that it was a consensus of the entire commission to have a workshop review and then move forward so
that's got we got to discuss it we can't do that in 15 20 minutes that's going to reflect for the next 100 years I mean if we do another Workshop we're just going back to the same process that they used already no we never asked to hire a real estate or a realtor or a broker we asked for a consultant with with deep
experience we didn't ask ask for for for a broker not at all and at that point we can review people's qualifications and make sure that we have the right person and we can ask Dr Levy if he comes if he decides to be part of the process to further Define and we can
look at his proposal we haven't seen it uh we haven't seen if he's the director okay we we're and and I'm glad that we're having this debate but uh Tom could you please tell us why you chose why he was number one so
the why uh Gan and York was uh number one yes they um have a lot of extensive experience in uh similar projects uh they bring um a lot of expertise in a lot of different fields
uh to bear um not just uh in uh real estate but in uh Redevelopment in finance in um review of of financials and pro foras um uh some level of um uh
planning uh data analysis um and um experience or at least familiarity with the local community um that was why I ranked Gan
in York number one okay I I I would say that all of the public information shows complete contradiction to what he just said I would say that if you pulled and I have it here if you want to look at it
you pull their resumés their online their websites their LinkedIn they are completely opposite of what he said and I might be wrong but I think we should find out I think we should have a process this is a decision for 150 year
100 years at least these buildings should last and we should make sure that we dotted every I and crossed every T I mean I could give you some of it now I don't think it's the time or the place if you ask me but I would suggest that
we table this we do a workshop we select who we want to view discuss it come back and run mik I called the question I I'm the same way I make a mo
I make a motion for a vote we're not I do have a card for public input Mr chair Mr chairman we're not I'm I'm not done in the okay you don't mind it's not yet for for that um I you asked Tom some questions can I
ask him a question no okay can I ask why uh yes because I I would like for you to tell us you state the reason why we should move forward I don't want this to be an adversarial issue between you and the city
manager I don't I don't think it's adate Serio I don't I I'm I'm trying to clear I want to be transparent I want to be transparent the public needs to be transparent everything needs to be discussed and out right right we want that I know we all want
that that's that's why we're here otherwise we wouldn't be public Serv to do this put in this time so that's that's I'd like to ask Tom some questions um am I allowed to or would
you please allow me Mr uh I guess your chairman on this or mayor or whatever um and they're difficult questions yes but they're with good spirit we're going to do good in this I want us to do good this community is going to be proud of what we do going forward we need to do
it together they voted us all in and we got to work for them well I think that we all understand that but I don't want one I don't want to make it adversarial uh I just want to make it
factual how's that no adversarial just factual I'll give you a couple minutes I I I I don't know that time restriction well then then we need to just have a conversation you need to have a conversation with the uh the city
manager on your own well it's on this issue we can't move forward without discussing everything that's relative to it and I need to I need to discuss Tom help me understand the
Dynamics of your relationship with Mr gemman from when it started to where we are help me understand that I think he asked me if I had a what did you ask me if I had a financial interest no I did not ask financial George I asked you had a
relationship a relationship okay yeah so C can you explain to me Tom the Dynamics of your relationship um I I've known Mr Gan for a few years um when he uh purchased a
home in Eustace he introduced himself as uh and economic development real estate consultant um and uh the extent of our relationship is um we have met for lunch periodically over the last several years
uh but there's been no uh Financial or business relationship with Mr Gan until uh just uh recently do you advocate for him to get business do you um help him pick up
business in the community or anywhere no do you know how long how long is this going to take however long it takes the years now you're now your question The credibility of the city manager I'm asking him questions just
like you asked me a very direct two minutes let's move it on let's move it I'm I'm in agreement I'm in understanding from you guys that you don't want to table this go to what our plan was for a uh uh Workshop discuss it
and interview maybe the one and two if if we're in agreement with that then I I I'm fine let's let's go to that if not then will you can we have a pre consensus as to whether that's where we're headed because if we are I need to
just saved us for that now the you'll know when we vote so that's no Yes actually Mr chairman remember we have a straw poll situation today because um commissioner Lee's out
okay uh Tom audience to be heard uh yes I'm not going to be able to continue I was going to trying to find out I I still have some questions sir they're not redundant
questions this is important you know that this is the most important thing in 10 years of me being watching commission meetings that ever had to be done the process is the problem let us make it right there's nothing wrong with that
transparency is never wrong just remember that word transparency I can say everything is trans transparent everything everything that we do is transparent anything anyone can find out anything that they want it's all public record including as Tom
stated the scoring the scoring for the con for the consultants and why weren't we furnish that I don't think there was that's not our job our job is to direct Tom to do his job and I I would add that we just
went through continuing Services agreements for engineers for surveyors for uh environmental consultants and that we went through the same process for that um so this is a process we use to secure consultants for Professional
Services Tom can I ask you a question sure have you had a relationship with Dr Levy uh I interned for Dr Levy a long time ago with the city of Orlando um and um I've worked with him
uh periodically over the years years um so I would say I don't have a close relationship but yes I have a relationship with him may I continue so uh
Tom in the spirit of being transparent uh did you introduce me to Mr gemman about two or three years ago uh yeah I did yep and you asked me if he could help me with any business
that he is an experienced realtor broker retired from Connecticut move down here and asked me to meet with him to see if he could help me in my business no that's not my recollection we key and I were having lunch and you were having
lunch in the same restaurant and he came over to introduce himself as my recollection and I didn't meet with him and then are you are you aware that the city then emailed me on two separate occasions after that asking me I'm sorry
are you aware that Mr Gman emailed me on multiple occasions after that asking to meet with me and copying the city I don't have any recollection of that okay do you want a copy of that I conf share for you Mary if I could put into a copies of
two emails going back to uh 2003 uh both came and copy to the city no no no we can't we can't have the talko okay has to be on the microphone you have to be on the microphone please I don't like the I don't like the
way this is going um yeah it's transparent yeah it's transparent but it's also I think becoming a little disruptive then let's have a workshop and let's discuss it um I think that we're going to do our straw poll right now okay well uh audience to be heard
please uh Pam Ras Mr I had one more issue to address no good evening Madam attorney the chairman is in charge of of the board um he's already you've already
asked and he's given you the time M Reas please my not locked up sorry good evening mayor in commission good evening um I would like to see a transparent process not just for you guys because this is a big decision for you but for the public
as well so that we can be aware fully aware um when um commission I mean mayor Hawkins mentioned that with the you made selections and gave it to the school board for them to make the decision that's the same process I would have
loved to seen here is that the selection committee made recommendations and brought it here because I was at the workshop meeting and it was a very clear direction that was given to get a master somebody to help with the master plan and consultant to help the
commission and so to take the commission out of that selection process I think is a a fault that's I I believe it's putting you guys in a position to make to take what is given to you instead of taking control of this huge
project it all lands on your plate at the end of the day it's your signatures are on there and I want to see you guys have the best that you feel comfortable working with staff has valuable input they have very valuable input but it's
your decisions so just like that example you gave with the school board it went back to the school board and the school board made the decision and we're missing that part of the process and that is so important and it's not delaying anything it's a part
of the process it's a part of the steps and I think in order to do this correctly we can't skip steps so every time a step is exposed or brought up or Workshops the reaction I see on the commission of Dramatics that is slowing
down the process it's not slowing down the part of the process it is the process process it is exactly what you should be doing you were given a master plan that cost $250,000 for the city from the city to
not get in there and deep dive in there and digest it I think it's foolishly spending our money and I disagree with that you the commission asked for Workshop prior to the exact words in the minutes prior to
approving the master plan skipping that is not delaying it's a part of the process selecting the best candidate to consult and manage this Pro help with the management of this Pro U project is a part of the process it's
not delaying things I think the mentality out there has to shift it just has to change every time something's added in the reaction is that we're delaying things how long is this going to take that mentality is going to cause mistakes and I'm seeing it happen and
unfold right before my eyes and it's alarming you are not delaying things by sticking to the process and doing things in the right order it's steps we're doing the baby steps we're creating a strong Foundation you guys are doing a good job continue doing a good job don't
deviate from things don't take shortcuts that's not delaying things it's making a mistake thank you thank you Mr chairman Mr chairman if I may I I I just need to clarify something um so everyone is clear the uh the meeting for
the school board was it a closed meeting okay no so it was also public yes okay our public our procurement process which is outlined in the charter as well as Florida statute because we're required to uh follow Florida statute is this all
laid out there this was a public hearing um it was noticed as such and the procurement process has a way to contest bids and and all all the information that that needs to be given because this has to be posted and Tom notified the candidates now we've used this process
which is a selection of Staff committee to make those choices and then bring it to commission if applicable not all contracts come before commission depending on the amount and if they're continuing services but I reviewed the RFQ for this particular um contract
because of the nuances with G3 C2 and there is a provision in there that the city can terminate at will um for convenience essentially any um engagement for continuing Services because it's exactly that just for continuing services so were there to be any kind of disappointment in
performance we just have to provide notice of 15 days um it's far more lenient than the one we had entered into previously and it's again it's consistent with the Florida statute so it was open it was an open meeting um there's nothing was being conducted
privately so I'm not sure I for this turn into a trial so just so if I can just be clear you're saying that we hire this any consulted we can dismiss them after two weeks if we wanted to the terms of the RFQ state that they just require 15 days notice
for convenience thank you me so we're not bound too too much thank you thank you thank but when we ratify the master plan we can't undo that the the master plan can be changed if it needs to it can come back
and and be uh remodified the intent from what has been expressed um here is it's already gone through uh quite some time it's been through the community meeting and the the funds that are necessary for any movement to take place on that can't be transferred until the master plan is
adopted so that's that's a concern but the workshop is a separate matter I just wanted to address a public availability of of anybody to be a part of that process because it is consistent with Florida statute and and Tom actually said that earlier but it kind of got missed so I
wanted to make sure that well I to attend that and I was told I couldn't so I are you sure we're talking about the same thing I asked to be there during their process and I was not allowed to so was it a public or was it not it was a public hearing no I think the the ask
was could you be on the Review Committee and the response was no this is a staff level abely not it would be a complete Conflict for me to be on there that is completely untrue I asked to be there Pam asked if the chamber could have a presence or somebody else I never asked
that that is not true not true I believe I believe Pam's ask was to be on review that is not true what you said okay you have a relationship with him and it's a conflict it's a conflict and it's a
crime by stat it is a crime and these people have to understand that I can I cannot believe what I'm hearing Tom you have any other calls um I have a card from Daniel D venanzo but it's unclear if you want to
speak on this item I I just hey Daniel D venanzo um a business owner in eess uh I just want to share a couple of items the clock's not running if you want to hit that buzzer real quick that timer thank you thanks Daniel um so the a couple things first
of all this is not a service contract negotiating service contracts with waste management or engineering firms this is potentially a $70 million deal um okay correct um it's a $70 million deal so
it's a little bit different criteria and a couple things I wanted to relate to you um so I negotiated four Parcels that were uh that we purchased from the foundation I also negotiated the road to get McDonald through through the property because the city at that time
under Paul Berg there was a conflict also uh just just to be clear it's um I went online today to try to find the agreement that you're going to enter into with the with the uh consultant per se and I could not find it I could not
read the agreement or find it I'm just curious about that but a couple of things that I think are important for you guys to know that is I think important first of all $65,000 which I understand and it's non-binding for me what's 65,000 bucks I mean I think there
will probably be some information you can glean but here's the part that I just have a problem with I have been here all these years and you know that I first of all I tried to buy the property from the hospital I tried to buy the property found Foundation I actually
negotiated for the two blocks $850,000 and then surprisingly a number of the foundation members left the foundation and purchased it for 900,000 the city ends up you know where we're at 3 million the thing is I have been shut out of doing anything on this property
for seven years seven years closed doors don't want to talk about it we're working on it before it was the your property it was the uh the uh Partnerships before it was the partnership it was the foundation and I want to tell you I know
you're looking at a big deal and we want to have something big happen big happen I mean and I and I've Done big jobs but the thing is is uh when we're hiring a consultant I just want to make sure the end is that he's not being hired to negotiate the purchase agreement before
we've seen anything because and I want to tell you what the benefit is when you're looking at vacant land and you want to make a purchase and you don't know how many residential units are going to be out there or how many storefronts do you understand what the base price of the
land for residential unit is today 30,000 bucks in an apartment setting if they're going to put 80 Apartments out there that's 2.4 million built right in but if you don't see anything if you don't know it's there how do you value the property is it is it you know what's
possible or what we're going to what we're going to look in because I don't want the negotiation to work in AAR for the city and I'm going to agree with George on one thing guys and Mike Mike I got to appreciate you've been here for all
these years this is the biggest deal that usus is probably GNA face for our downtown for decades for decades and I know and I know we all want to get something going I'm gonna I just want to remind you PRN Patricia had a deal here
with Atrium Adam we were here they had a bond in place they had a three-year process and do you know we walked away from that because we had a commissioner that was insistent on seeing Patricia's personal fin financials I called people up and said they've got a bond why do
you need somebody's are we asking for personal financials this time we asked for them last time so the the thing is I think and I'm not I'm not faulting you guys because I know everybody here is personally vested in usess including Tom
I mean that Tom I and I have no question with regard to Tom's Integrity personally so I'm just saying that I don't want us to pull a trigger and all of a sudden well hey we paid $65,000 for consultant the colon tells us we need to sell this is the agreement these are all
the variables we don't even have a plan in front of us I I just I I think and and nothing and by the way I understand the man comes with Incredible credentials it's just it's a big deal it's not about
procurement for Waste Management or for police cars or for civil engineers it's about a $70 million deal that's what it's going to be 70 million and the local boys all locked out sorry about that I
apologize okay is that it Tom uh that's it as far as cards yes Sasha audience okay audience be heard anyone that hasn't put a card in on on this matter did you want to
speak on this George or did you want to speak at the commission meeting yeah yeah we haven't got not commission yet and we can close it on this item on this item Kevin but the U
hello Kevin janess Peddler's wagon downtown Eustace um 25 pdor I will acknowledge U it's been oh time um 37 years that's how long I've been in business in this community that
I've had my shop um 12 15 years now that I've owned the building downtown five or six years since I bought the other small building downtown that I have I am vested I was born here in eustus grew up in the area not in eustus but tar basal Park and lived in the area for years I have learned over all these years almost
four decades now that nothing nothing in this community happens fast and nor would I expect expected to and I I don't think that's a bad thing necessarily and I will acknowledge tremendously this is a single chance object to get it right you do not have the capacity of
backpedaling if this goes wrong it's a disaster I will say and I'll point it out there I have never been a fan of an all and nothing approach to this project I don't understand why all three blocks are tied together as a single unit and has be done completely or nothing it has never made sense to me ever I don't
understand why the city hasn't carved the space out that it wants and sold off the other spaces allow the development to acrew naturally and if mistakes are made adjusted corrected for the next project go along I don't understand why it has to be is a single unit um I would
state that anything that's recommended for this project be done in tight and phases that if something doesn't Cur to the satisfaction that then the rest of it then is procured back again becomes so I said any property then becomes the management this is millions invested in community funds being in Grants and and
to other to develop in concept and I'm not anti-development by any means but it has to be done wisely and intelligently and I think with caution and with time I said and the certainly capacity to be done um I would like to see the the commission really forth put I'm looking
casually at the plans I'm I'm designing looking s and listening to the to the last things that were stated um I've heard anywhere from 40 to 80 units on a block I've heard all sort of discussions I've heard very little aspect um I've heard aspects of parking but I've heard nothing ever stated a public parking
that public that parking being built would be accessible to the public and every public and not privatized I've heard no issues of parking deliveries garbage pickup things that come into every play and I've heard no one mention the fact that three current blocks right now that have being used by the community for both parking and usage
will now be gone what happens to all that residency all the apartments that are currently existing all the businesses that are currently here what happens to their spaces their uses that are currently being used when they're gone there's very little concept of all of that the concept is singularly focused on the development of these
three blocks and their usage exclusively it does not seem to include the outside surrounding areas of how it's affected that's why I'd like the commission to take its time to Workshop as long as it needs to do I don't care just get it done right when it's done and that's why I'd like to this commission take further
time involved in and do not do not by any means Rush a decision thank you okay right we can uh close with the public um since we only have four of you tonight uh to vote and we are missing um
commissioner Lee or board me from remly we would have to do a straw poll process which our U code provides for now before I do that I wanted to first ask is there a motion or an interest in a motion to table this item for another meeting and I'm speaking specifically about 2.1 the
recommendation of the adoption you know I and I think it's something we need to think about uh because is so important and because commissioner Lee uh she was concerned about it I think that we'd be taken away from her voice if we did it
tonight okay I agree so was it and the remaining would you like to I just think it's important to she you got be until until the next meeting okay so that's to I would like to see popon yes
and to have a workshop discuss it be transparent and move forward okay well I'm just right now I'm dealing with the postponement so to hear what I was thinking sure and that's a yes to postpone I mean and I can do the consensus
okay what's forward want to move forward move forward okay so we're at 22 still at 22 yes so um that doesn't get us anywhere so we would have to move forward um then with a straw poll process and essentially what we're looking for is um to determine since
this is a curable absence uh for board member Lee then we want to achieve if possible at least three votes uh so that we can take action on the item and um avoid the tutu and I'm going to ask first uh before we do that what your position is
to determine whether we can actually vote on the item formally or if we're then going to discuss postponement again okay uh so as far as item 2.1 the recommendation to the city Commission to adopt the master
plan that has been developed by Mig think is there a motion on I would motion that we table that until we have a workshop that review the uh the respondents uh at that point and then
move forward all right well um so we don't I'm asking for a motion on the recommendation that will be a separate issue because we there's no postponement from what I heard from the straw pole so if we want to go ahead and vote on that motion then we can Sasha
this recommendation is just to move this to the commission for adoption correct at another meeting correct so this is just Emily would be here when it comes back in front of the city commission correct that's true so if we approve this tonight it's going to go within the
next meeting or two back to the commission for approval would have a full commission set yes is that correct Y and the same process would well later this evening for City commission it's just because we're missing we don't have a full board we have to go through the stable process I
move for approval of the recommendation to move this to the city commission for consideration second okay I had a motion up first he had a motion but there was no second so it died for lack of a motion um we have a motion in a second was that confirmed it died from lack I I
jump in there to clarify no one second it was it the intent of anyone to Second it no okay so we do have a motion to adopt um well to recommend that the city commission adopt the downtown master plan and a second now we have to do roll
call Mr as body I I would my vote is not uh is no and the reason for my vote is so that we can be transparent review and have a master
plan that we can live with and run with Mr holl I Vice chair Ashcraft I chairman Hawkins I so this will be back before City commission at which time you will vote again whether you actually want to incorporate
this this plan formally into the city okay can you say anything else well we have the other one more I know you're try yeah thank you Al you're
welcome ready for the second item yes okay thank you um as we embark on the journey to build the city's future and take on development I can't hear I can't hear him can you move to this one Al is there any interest in tabling this where we can continue this discussion
through number two and everything and uh and go uh not feel rushed because we're going to have discussion we're going to go through all that can we even consider having a workshop fing we just voted we just
voted on it we just voted to move it to to the city commission City commiss we haven't even started a city commission meeting yet this is important important I know it's important and and I know you want it to be transparent I know you want it to be done right I'm with you on that
a meeting is not going to change our lives it's only going to help make it better great so I guess that motion dies well well you were asking them if they would be interested in it what is is this for item 2.2 because we've already
well we are already I already the I already didn't get that for one so I'm asking that that we post budgeting is going to come as part of whatever we end up doing so when we end up doing it at the commission meeting or whatever then we could do the budgeting then it doesn't matter right um so I would table
that until we till we get to the commission the the cra's uh decision tonight is just the recommendation so you're going to look at it again as a commission at a future date um I read the resolution and it said that it allows it trans talking about
2.1 just to clarify yeah with 2.1 is dead right it's over it's not dead it's coming it's you're going to see it again it's done discussion yes you're going to see it again a city commission where you could vote no and then nothing happens but and then we can address the money then depending on where we're going and what we do if that's the intention um
tonight so do do you want to proceed with presentation before discussion proed okay go ahead Al thank you uh board members as we embark on the journey to of building the city's future and taking on development and Redevelopment projects with more
complexity than previous ones uh Commission authorized the city manager to hire a development and Redevelopment real estate consultant to provide expert advice insightful analysis assistance in implementing the downtown master plan
and supporting other real estate related interest of the city uh Goldman in York was selected from a list of five companies that responded to the solicitation staff estimates that the amount needed to engage Goldman and York
Services through the remainder of of the year is $80,000 15,000 of which we have on hand in Professional Services the remaining balance of 65,000 staff recommends be transferred from CRA
Reserve funds for future projects um staff further recommends that the board authorize the finance director to amend the fiscal year 2425 budget to make this transfer and just just to clarify one more
time if we're not happy with Gman we can terminate them at any time that those are the terms of the RFQ yeah can we see that can we see the agreement can we see that ran I don't have the agreement that was signed but the RFQ that was posted which is
standard for All City contracts really it states that we can the city can terminate the contract at will at convenience um with with 15 days notice I would like to see us in the F provide a copy I would like to see those
contracts for something as big as this and those review process be willingly given by by you to us to review and the public sure it's that important yeah I mean we weo said he he he could not get
it so he was the public was deprived of the right to see that on our transparency sure we have a process in place consistent with our Charter and our city code but if you ask for something we're happy to provide it I I think it's important that I say this and
uh you know as the chairman of this board I don't like the the inference that the city is doing anything underhanded and uh not in the best interest of the community this is a process that we've used for years uh and
there has never been an issue so I would like for you to please make sure that when you make comments they're not to the detriment of the city of
Eustace I think you're directing that to me yes I am I I mean it's not like I'm hiding right I don't I I pledge that my comments are transparent true and accurate and need to be said difficult
decis decisions leaders are required to make even if they're not popular and I apologize if they're not popular but they need to be transparent I want us all to get into a uh do what we said do what we said in our minutes have a
workshop discuss review these and and and move forward together I'm sorry that it was a little heated whatever the word is but it's in the spirit of the best interest
of the city in transparency and allowing people like Daniel who is a huge stakeholder in this community the jesses who are huge stakeholders in this community to be heard and right now we're not allowing that so uh I have some difficult things I said and I
apolog just heard from both of them and and we're not following what they recommend or what their thoughts are we didn't validate we dismissed them that's what I heard you know we heard them of heard them and acted on it though sir is different one of the things that I think
that you you need to understand is that uh we listen to 25,000 people in the city of Eustace and we appreciate the input of everyone but we have to make a decision for 25,000
people exactly very much and I think that this committee is trying to do that I believe that I I believe that so to say that we're not listening to anyone and because we don't vote the way that
they want us to that we negate sorry careful yeah careful we can't have any sorry I knew that was going no talking if it's not on the record sorry he was making fun of my code what happened okay I don't know now just want to avoid any no talking into each other's ears while
we're on it has to be on the record so it could be misinterpreted we've already had enough drama tonight okay I understand all right so are we in agreement that we would should have a workshop and for to discuss this like we started in our first one that we'll continue to have a workshop every month
until we get this thing nailed down is that fair if we said we'd have a workshop every month I think we need to move on to 2.2 and let's get on with the city commission yeah we're going to be we need to work on this budget that we've got right before us is what's in
front of us right now this isn't George I know it's important George we've had Community meetings we've had Community meetings for over a year 18 months we need to move we just got the master plan done okay so no that's not we
didn't have on that we just got the master plan Al if I me ask a question about uh or Tom um have these funds are just being transferred to the account is any of that being remitted to uh Gan and York uh no not until Services have been rendered so as of now we have nothing
due to them well I I would say that meetings have started they have met with uh a couple of Commissioners uh there's a meeting schedule tomorrow with G3 C2 so Services have started but nothing's been paid yet okay so that would be yes
then right yes okay so it's but it's essentially a transfer from one account to the other yes the and it could be so so we have Professional Services money budgeted in the CRA we have we have gotten started knowing that we have some
money budgeted already what we are doing tonight is we know the money we have budgeted which is 15,000 will not be enough for the entire fiscal year based on the scope of work that we're anticipating so we're asking for an
additional 65 for a total of 80 so the the services have started nothing's been paid 15,000 is already budgeted we are asking to transfer another 65 from the fund balance reserve for future projects in the CRA to
Professional Services within the CRA okay will that 15 be eaten up how long do you expect it to take uh it I don't know okay less than or more than the next commission meeting
uh I would expect we would not go through $155,000 so we have enough to operate uh let's move forward please 2.2 yep he already presented so any questions for Al any other questions any cards Tom uh no cards for
this item okay okay we should allow public input briefly okay is there anyone out there like to give public input okay saying none okay we will close public inut Mr chair I move for approval of resolution 2
2.01 second roll call Mary Mr adth body at this point I would say no until we know what we're spending the money for and who we have so no Mr Holland
hi Vice chair Ashcraft hi chairman Hawkins hi Mr Mayor before you GA us out I I want everybody to pay attention to the state legislature at this time um there are some bills that are coming up uh
that deal with cra um and how it's going to um state legislators is going to try to Sunset C in the State of Florida and it is going to drastically limit what we're going to be able to use our funds for within the
next year year and a half so we need to be mindful as that as a city commission from what my understanding is there is great Traction in Tallahassee to limit the cras and to cut them off so we need to really keep our eye on that bill as
it goes through I know that um we've got folks in Tallahassee working on our behalf the farida leag of cities is working on our half but I did want this Committee just to to have that in front of them and make calls if you can okay thank you thank
you okay meetings adjourn it is 6:55