So, good evening everybody. I'd like to call the meeting to order. Uh, welcome to the August 19th meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency for the City of Temple Terrace. Uh, first order of business, council members or board members, is the consideration of minutes from our previous meeting on May 20th.
Uh, has everybody had an opportunity to review the minutes? And if so, is there a motion? Move >> to approve. >> Second. >> Any corrections or additions to the minutes? If not, all those in favor say I. >> I. I. Opposed. No nays. The minutes are adopted. Next is a consideration of
proposed final site plan for SPR25-01 for Berea Pediatrics at 234 Bullard Parkway and our senior planner Alyssa Livingstone is here to present. >> Good evening. >> Good evening. >> One second, Mayor. Just before we start, I think we have an exparte disclosure on
this one. >> Yes. >> Okay. Well then, um >> if I if I if I may, um I just want to disclose an expert in communication with I believe was Julia Grande um last this last week regarding this item. It was
simply a hi, we're we're coming before council and the CRA next week. If you have any questions, please let me know. But that's all that was discussed. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Um well, we might as well do a poll with the council then. I've had none. >> I've had none. I mean the only thing on this item would be the ribbon cutting
that's scheduled for me but otherwise no conversation. >> Very well. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mueller. So, all right, Miss Livingston. Back to you. This is a brief presentation to request the CRA board's approval to advance this
site plan application for consideration at city council. Staff is requesting CRA board approval to advance this site plan for a onestory pediatric facility to the city council
for consideration. The subject property is within the redevelopment area and is currently zoned as commercial office. The surrounding area contains developed commercial and residential properties.
The proposed project will be preserving an existing historic building. There will be an expansion to the rear of it. The planning commission has reviewed the site plan and has found it to be consistent with the city's comprehensive
plan. The white unshaded area to the center bottom of the image near the pond represents the historic portion of the structure that will be preserved.
>> Yeah. The gray shaded area represents a non-historic addition to the rear of it that will be removed to make way for the pediatric expansion. If approved by this board, more details
will be expounded on at the city council meeting. If found to be acceptable, I'd like to request that the board approves by a motion to advance a site plan to the city council for
consideration. >> Thank you, Miss Livingstone. Are there members of the public who wish to comment on this item? Seeing none, council members, are there questions? Board members, sorry. Are there questions? >> Okay. If there are no questions, is
there a motion? Yes. Move to approve u to the city council uh move to the city council meeting the consideration of site plan SPR25-04 for the pediatrics building at 234 Bullard Parkway.
>> Second >> motion and a second. Is there discussion? If not, all those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Okay. The site plan is adopted and we'll go to city council for our next meeting. Thank you. >> Thank you.
Next up, consideration for proposals to purchase and develop properties located at on Terrace redevelopment area. Community development director Greg Polly will introduce the presenters. And I do have a question before you start. In the past, we have done the and I don't recall because it's been a little
while now. We've done the the the full presentation at one meeting or the other, but not at both. >> That's correct. >> How are we going to do this tonight? >> Well, um part of my introduction will kind of explain that a little bit. Okay. >> Um, and if you still have uh questions pending, I'll be happy to come back and
drill down a little more on those. >> Great. Thank you, Mr. Paul. >> Um, once again, this is um an item that involves proposal summaries. Um, our brokers uh from Florida ROI are here tonight to present uh a summary of three proposals to purchase and develop
properties in the redevelopment area. We've received two proposals for the property located at 8901 North 56th Street and one proposal for the property located at 8447 North 56th Street. The summary presentation that you will see tonight
in this meeting will be led by our brokerage team from Florida ROI um and will not include individual project presentations. However, the developers for both projects are in the audience tonight and are available to
respond to specific questions regarding their projects. Projects found to be suitable for further consideration may be referred to the city council and presented in greater detail at tonight's city council meeting immediately following this meeting. At that time, sir, you all will
be able to see the entire uh developer presentation for any project that is referred beyond this meeting. Um, in order for the project to be referred, I'd like to recommend that the board approved by motion to refer such project or projects to the city council
for further consideration. Any project referred to council will be presented in detail by the individual developers at tonight's city council meeting. If the board does not find any of the proposals suitable for further consideration, the board is under no obligation to refer
any of the projects viewed tonight. In this case, I'd like to recommend that no referrals be made. And now, I'd like to pause for just a moment and entertain questions on the review process. >> Board members, questions on the process for this meeting?
>> Council member Kravitz. >> So, just to clarify, we're not under any obligation to put any of these proposals into the city council agenda. We can always say no or refer back to the people who have submitted proposals requesting to make improvements in this committee before it proceeds further.
The action that we're requesting of this board in this meeting is to um if if this board finds any of the proposals acceptable for further consideration to refer them to the council for full
presentations. Bo uh projects that are not referred will not be presented in their entirety. So if we find a project to be interesting but not ready to proceed to city council,
we can instruct the developer in this meeting to make improvements to their proposal. >> That's not the general protocol for this meeting. This meeting is is either a thumbs up or thumbs down type uh decision. Those discussions are very common at the city council meeting. So
if we don't like the proposal here, it's simply no thank you. And then this is essentially a closed bid procedure where they are giving their best possible offer, putting their best foot forward here in this committee in an effort to proceed. And if we don't like what they've done, it dies.
>> If it doesn't pass this board, it doesn't go it doesn't go further. >> And they can always come back again later. >> They can always come back again later. >> Thanks. That's all I have. Thank you. >> Okay, Mr. Polly. >> Okay. Very well. Um, at this time I would like to uh turn the podium over to
our brokerage team uh Mr. Eric Odum and Mr. John Lochner uh from Florida ROI. >> Good evening. >> Evening. Appreciate the time again to make a presentation to you guys. Um uh
John, do we have um the presentation? Okay, there we go. Just want to talk a little bit in terms of what John and I are going to discuss. We're going to go through each one of the part uh proposals because there's actually three proposals from two different development groups. One um of
the groups um is going to make a proposal on both 8901 and the south parcel at 8447. We're going to go through each one of them one at a time uh by each one of the proposals and each one of the the two groups. And then first I'm going to talk
about 30,000 foot level terms of concept and then John my my partner Lner will go over the specific on each one of the deals and the deal structure. Um the the groups are here. So Greg I believe that they'll be able to ask questions
directly to Right. Correct. So, so if there's operationally related issues or about anything beyond just 30,000 foot conceptual, I would ask that you make those questions towards the the the groups because again from John's perspective and I we're looking at it
really from a 30,000 foot level of what is a real estate deal, how is it going to work, and then how is it structured. So, um John, is there anything you want to add about that? Okay. So, let's go ahead and start with um 8901. 8901 is Smith and Henzy. Smith and
Henzy was founded in 2014. Uh they've created and preserved over 8,000 affordable housing units nationwide, representing about $2.5 billion in development. They're known for partnering successfully with municipalities around the country, mostly in New York and in Florida. They
are Florida based. And they've they've done, I believe, also in in Connecticut as well. Most of what they're working on is workforce housing and and senior housing. >> So we're looking at 8901 now and this is a multif family retail parcel with ground floor. On the ground floor would
be retail on the upper floor would be upper floors would be housing. Um they've demonstrated a track record of doing this type of development in the past. And what they're looking for in terms of components is the 3080 um AMI on this. for you guys who know from HUD,
it's essentially it's a an affordable housing project. Is there anything else you wanted to highlight on that? Okay. Um John, you want to talk a little bit about specs? >> Sure. So, I'll just go into some of the
specifics of each of the proposals. Um this of course is the 8901 Smith and Henzy affordable groups offer. purchase price is $22,500 per unit for approximately 80 units or $1.8 million.
The initial deposit of $5,000, feasibility deposit $20,000 and the final deposit of $25,000. Uh the inspection or feasibility period on this is 180 calendar days from contract execution.
uh approval period is until December 35th 1st, 2027 and the closing will be the earlier of 365 calendar days following approval period or December 31st, 2028. Uh as
Eric mentioned, this is senior affordable housing with retail on the ground floor. So, moving on to 8447. Again, this is uh Smith and Henzy, and this is affordable housing. The proposals for affordable housing, no retail on the ground floor.
Um, continues their their mission of addressing local housing needs through Melissa Municipal Collaboration. It's also on the 3080 AMI proposal. And John, you want to talk a little bit about specs? >> Sure. Very similar offer. Uh, this is
$10,000 per unit for 80 units, $5,000 initial deposit, $20,000 feasibility deposit, $25,000 final deposit, 180 calendar days from contract execution is the feasibility period. Um, the approval
period is until December 31st, 2027. And the closing will be the earlier of 365 calendar days following approval period or December 31st, 2028. And as Eric mentioned, this is senior
affordable housing with no retail. >> So I don't know from the board's perspective if you would like at this point if you have questions for us about Smith and Hz or you think John is better we just roll through the >> Keep roll. Keep roll. Okay. Fair enough. >> Circle back. >> Fair enough. Okay. So the uh the other
proposal is from Blazing Paddles. It's on the 8901, the northern parcel. And the concept is a pickle ball facility with restaurant and bar. It's not a housing project. It's purely commercial recreational use, entertainment use, and it's very distinct from Smith and
Hanzies on their affordable housing proposal. Obviously, completely different type of a concept. This is not a chain. This would be their first location. And the group has assembled a a team of experts that would help them not only in the development side but also on the restaurant and bar
operational side. Okay. Um the specifics of this offer are a purchase price of $1.4 million with an initial deposit of $100,000. The inspection examination period is 45
calendar days from contract execution. There is a financing period of 60 calendar days from contract execution and obviously those are concurrent. Um and the closing would be 15 calendar days after approved financing and
removal of all contingencies and it looks like there's something misspelled there. Um this is as Eric mentioned um a pickle ball restaurant bars. And then for comparison here uh are all three proposals.
>> Any questions? >> Are there members of the public who wish to comment on this at this point? Not council members questions. Council member Kravitz. >> As experienced commercial realtors, do
you have any thoughts about adding additional commercial uh excuse me, retail space in an area where there are already considerable retail vacancies, for example, at fountain shops. the the what we had originally talked
about in terms of of our agenda moving forward was to to include retail in everything that we're doing. So this was not we knew that 8901 was not the intent of the board the council to have um a
housing only facility. So we making this proposal with the idea of having retail on the ground floor. >> Uh okay. So, it's it's not your understanding that at the last meeting we wanted to go in a direction of a community amenity or a a
more multi-use space that could attract people to downtown with, for example, a small public use component combined with whatever enterprise might be entertained by the investor um with a preference. This is my recollection. And I'm just seeing if you understood it that way as
well for um actually I can quote here from your big proposal. It was uh by enhancing recreational opportunities, drawing new visitors and stimulating local economic activity. So um is is there a recreational component or like new visitor draw component to this that
Temple Terrace downtown already does not have in the form of for example retail space? Well, that certainly could be something in the retail aspect that you could that we could make specifications on a retail consumer that might fit that bill. Yeah. >> I'm just trying to understand whether this brings anything new to the table
that we don't already have because my understanding is we already have retail units available. >> Mhm. >> Is that also your understanding that this is essentially providing additional retail? Is there something special about these retail units that I'm missing? Well, the retail is spec retail, so
we're able to it's somewhat malleable in terms of what we want to do and what the public might want. So, it's leaving that component open for trying to fit, you know, backfill essentially what you're trying to accomplish. >> Okay. Um, with affordable housing of this nature, I'm not asking you to advise on this, but you might have
experience from it uh in it with other projects. Is there a tax impact to the city that might engender from having so many affordable housing units? to the best of your knowledge. >> I'm I'm I'm sorry I can't answer that question. >> Okay, I yield the floor. Thank you.
>> Other questions? Council member Chambers. >> And I apologize if this is a very uh simple answer that I don't get. Um between projects one and two, uh one is purchase price of 22,000 per unit and the other one 8,000 per or excuse me
10,000 per unit. Other than size of the units, what's the difference? And that may be for the developers. That's probably more for the developer, but I imagine it has something to do with the retail. >> Can someone just answer real quick on that? >> Okay.
>> Just hiding in the back, you know, see what comes out. >> We just need your name on the record, please. >> No problem. Uh Jake Zunan with Smith and NZ affordable Group. Uh the Delta and the prices are really just location. One is on the main street. The other is a little bit more complex in terms of the layout and functionality. Um and also a
little bit of what I've understood recommendations from the board and assessed value. Um really we are mainly affordable workforce housing developers. And so um either one can work but that's that's the delta in terms of uh the price points and we're just
acknowledging the value of the more uh main street location along with the extra retail as John uh John mentioned. So >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I have a question. Um, on both proposals
concerning housing, you mentioned 30 to 80% AMI, but you said senior affordable living, but in the backup material, it doesn't restrict this strictly to seniors. Is this senior affordable living or is this affordable living that includes seniors but also includes other
people? >> I'll stay up here. Um, no. So, um, without delving too far into the LITC realm and how it all works, uh, effectively, you know, 30% AMI up to 80% are all considered affordable. Um, I think you hit the nail on the head.
Initially, we kind of proposed a more senior, but when we revisited and presented the more backup information, specifically the main street, the 8901, that's more open to probably a workforce community. So, just 30 to 80% AMI would
be the flexibility there. Um the smaller lot, the 88 8447 lot would be more for uh senior housing, but I think the main one we're thinking that's more of a workforce uh 30 to 80%. And as it pertains to the retail, which I know was mentioned, um really that's just a
little bit what we understood potential direction of the board. For us, that space is extremely malleable as Eric mentioned. So, um, we'd love to give back in any way we can and that's not really part of our underwriting as it has to be some use. We'd be more looking
to the board, uh, for things that could, um, you know, bring more visitors and be of more public service. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Other questions? >> Okay. >> Have these directed questions to the developer right now or to the realtor?
>> Sure, you can. Sure. >> Then I'd like to ask the developer a couple questions. Hi. So, first of all, thanks very much for considering investment in Temple Terrace. This is an incredibly important space for the city. Uh, and it's really important that we nail it and really get it right. So, but I appreciate you putting the proposal together and for
taking an interest in the city. So, thank you very much for coming by and also for answering questions, which is not always easy. So, um, my question to you is um, similar to the one I just asked of our realtor. Do you plan on obtaining a t a property tax exemption by the construction of this or do you
plan to um pay property taxes on it as if it were a commercial property as a typical multif family? >> Right now with the live local act and some of the other laws in place uh we do have the ability to go for a property tax exemption. So we likely would um and
yeah I mean that's the current laws in place. So we probably would would look for that. You know, I you have to understand it's quite difficult for the city to absorb a hit because we have calculated TIFF funds based on certain property tax revenues from the downtown area and if we don't obtain those, then
those revenues are going to be in jeopardy. So, that would become a long-term fiscal problem for the city. >> Yeah. So, splitting the two properties um in tandem, the one that probably would be exclusive for seniors, a smaller lot, we definitely look for it there on the larger lot um or the more
main street one, let's call it. Um, I don't think there'd be a way for us to seek that on, you know, the bottom portion. So, we could I mean, there's a million different legal ways that we could do it and have done it and in many different developments and communities we built. So, probably condo that out in some way and that would have some uh
form of of tiff revenue like you're talking about. >> Um, but ultimately we probably would seek that. >> Yeah. Uh, is there a reason why you didn't include a community amenity? Uh, was that not communicated to you by the by the broker when you went to them or >> did you not have see did you see no
opportunity to fit it into your plan? >> No. Well, are we talking about each one or just we're specific on the 809 89? >> Right now I'm only talking about 8901. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, I think honestly we we received a lot of different feedback that we were trying to nail and figure out and we are housing developers so I
don't want to go around that. That's our main proposal. But in terms of the base, we felt like there were lots of different ways um that something could be fit. Wanted to come have the chance to meet with the board uh discuss it. So right now uh we have community amenities baked in there kind of back of house,
all things we do in our typical uh communities, you know, gyms, media centers, movie rooms, etc. And then the quote unquote retail space, as I said, um I'm I'm with you. I mean, I've driven the area many times, familiar with it. Uh we're building development over in Riverview. I don't know necessarily that
there needs to be more retail, but I understood maybe a goal of of destination retail. And so those areas um we'd more than be happy to look to the CRA and say, "Hey, what are the existing local businesses that need support and how can we work in tandem with them? How can we make these in more
communal spaces?" So that's we're very uh open to all of that. I want to be clear about our housing intent, but in terms of those spaces, uh we're open to your suggestion and um who wasn't able to be here with me tonight is uh one of our local partners uh pastor church and
we've spoke a lot about many of the different elements that exist here, but I' I'd hate to just put something without uh hearing your feedback. So, those areas are are totally open and um we we could fit them in the needs of uh of this community. So, >> thanks for answering my questions. You
have the floor. >> All right. Thank you. >> Questions? >> I do have one more. >> Okay. Different group. >> Council member Dwell. I have some questions for the other group also. So, Council Member Chambers, >> thank you. Um, for the uh Blazing Paddles group, are y'all here? Hey. Hi.
Okay. Uh, in the presentation it was mentioned that this is the first project this group is doing. Is there any any any links to the projects that Tampa just did? Some of the warehouse conversions downtown or some of the uh uh area different projects like this
that are you know taken off. >> So Jed Werek Steve Danalook thanks for taking >> and before you answer good name too blazing >> thank you also known as courtside group. >> So there's no direct connection with the
competitors in the space. viously have Tampa pickle ball crew and eore. There's the St. P athletic club, but there are specific uh vendors for those places that we are partnering with from like a a court building standpoint and uh different amenities that we're going to offer, but no direct connection.
>> Okay, that answered it. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> I wouldn't go anywhere. Other questions, council members? I have I have a few. Mr. Paulie, can you put the slide back up that shows the side byside potential site plans for the pickle ball facility?
Yes, that one. So, gentlemen, I have a couple questions about this one. I I was looking at this on our in our software on my small computer screen. It's really hard to see some of this. I believe what we're looking at is the left the diagram on the left is your
preferred arrangement and the diagram on your right is your possible but not preferred arrangement. So can you tell us on the the image on the left where is the restaurant and bar
and where is the outdoor um concert music space that that is alluded to in the backup materials. >> Yeah. So, the image on the left is our preferred uh design. The image on the right actually isn't a preference at all. It was just to kind of show what
the building would look like if the parking was in the back. But on the left, the restaurant and the bar. I wish I could come up there. >> We have a pointer up there. If you can you show them >> Oh, it won't work on the >> It doesn't work well. >> So, you see the middle of the parking lot and then the the the white area that
juts out to the left. That is your kind of central hub to the entire experience. So you have uh your restaurant and bar and seating areas there. At the very bottom of the image to the left, that is open yard area where we would have live music. We'd have social games like
cornhole, shuffle board, uh and just like seating areas, but that's kind of like the the open space where we would have that. And then you have kind of surrounding that outdoor courts. And then inside the building in the white space, you have six indoor courts as well >> as well as a mezzanine at the top for
gamification bays. So, the restaurant and bar is kind of like the rectangular in the very center like right off the parking lot. That's what you walk into. >> Exactly. You're walking directly into that. >> Okay. The outdoor area looks like you would walk out there and then there's three pickle ball courts and then you'd
walk beyond that and that's where the seating area, the concert area, outdoor area would be. >> Correct. >> Correct. So in that space, if you had an event out there, it's hard to tell how big it is, but I mean, if you had event out there, would there be food and drink
service available out there during these events? >> Absolutely. So, we would have satellite bars uh and like food um kind of vendor, not vendors, but o places to buy food directly outside. Uh, for sure. >> One of the key parts of our design when
we were actually building this is trying to create a seamless experience that flowed completely together. And so when you walk in sort of that central hub that Jed was talking about, there's a little area when you come out as well that would be um like a like a outdoor
entertainment space that leads out into the courts and into that entire area. So the restaurant bar area would be accessible from every aspect of this design. It was really important for us that the amenities were all uh really accessible for the player, not only to
drive revenue, but to have a frictionless experience for the players and the customers that come. The image on the right kind of shows what it would look like to have to access from one court all the way to the the bar. The foot traffic and the, you know, distance you'd have to walk might minimize the
amount of time that someone's spending at the venue. >> Okay. I I have some further questions, but I'm hoping that we'll get to talk in the city council meeting and I don't want to drag you through detailed questions twice. So, >> that's what
>> Okay, thank you very much. Other other questions? Oh, council member Kravitz >> do have a few questions. Thank you. >> Same same as I said before. Thank you very much for considering Temple Terrace. Um I I wanted to ask uh one of the criteria that were in the bid
uh list was um evidence of previous successful projects. I was just curious, you list four of them here. What work did you do at Florida College? >> So our team here is actually actively involved and they're they're here to today. So our architects are the sole design studio um and our general
contractor would be the Franklin Development Group and they are actively involved in the Florida College space. So, as we walked in and saw the picture over here on the wall, we were just talking about how it was just torn down and being rebuilt. So, when uh we kind of set out on this process, it was critical for us to find the best of the
best uh in their fields of design and general contracting, but it was also critical to find people that had experience working in this community that knew Temple Terrace so that we can have a successful project here. >> Oh, so you acquired your own architectural and general contracting firms? We do not acquire but we are
partnering with them and have worked with them for many months at this point to bring this vision to life. >> So then if I'm not mistaken you haven't worked at Florida College the people you hired have. Correct. >> Okay. And is that true for these other three projects too? >> Correct. >> Okay. So you have not completed any project successfully.
>> Okay. >> So this is your first project which is why it was so important to get a strong team behind us. >> Yeah. Absolutely. So if this is your first project, how do you have $8 million? Because I didn't start out with an $8 million project when I got into real estate. very fair. Uh, a lot of this might get covered in the
presentation as well, so happy to answer now. But Steve and I have worked together for almost a decade now uh in edtech and uh help scale a business from 0 to $750 million within four years. Um, and so we would be selfunding this with our own capital. We'd have a mix of an
SBA loan to maintain a strong ownership, but we also have a team of investors that's currently on the sidelines that are committed, but we haven't made anything official yet because we want to know that this project is going to move forward. I might have skipped over a few things there, but it sounded to me like you just said that you sold a company for
$750 million. Is that how you have the money scaling the company? >> Okay. Then if you have $750 million, why did you arrive at a price that's $600,000 under the one that we listed for? >> We scale we helped scale the business to 750. We did not sell it. So, we were not like the direct owners of that.
>> We were part of We were part of the executive team that took a company from startup to being acquired for $750 million. Jed and I both had equity in those companies. >> So, one of the things we asked for in the proposal requirements was um a
summary of the applicant's most recent personal and or corporate financial statement to show sufficient liquidity for a project of this kind. How much money do you have for this in total? Like how much is on how much liquid money do you have in a bank account to execute this project? >> We are uh personally putting in over
300,000 a piece. So, that's $600,000. We have an investment on the side for 1.2 million for a small equity stake in the business and then we're pursuing the SBA loan. If for some reason uh the SBA loan is slowed down, which we have,
we've been working with the bank since early on in this project when considering where to bring it, we have uh the opportunity, it's not the preference, to raise full capital for the full project. >> So you have $600,000 on a project that's going to be 8 million. So, you're
bringing in 7.5% equity, which is less than I've used to purchase any property that I've ever owned, >> which is why we mentioned the 1.2 million in equity stake that would be part of the project. >> Okay? If you obtain that, you don't have that secured yet. >> We I would say we have verbal commitments. We we have it secured, but
again, we're not going to make it official with those investors until we have a project here. Um, in your proposal here, you say that you plan to be the Top Golf of Pickle Ball. And I just got curious and looked around a little bit about Top Top Golf, and I found out that they lost $1.5 billion in
the last quarter of last year. So, is that really going to be your model? >> I mean, they're also $5 billion uh organization. So, it is a concept of Top Golf, but it is not exactly Top Golf. >> And pickle ball is one of the fastest growing sports in the country right now.
So what we're doing is bring bringing a unique vision and concept to pickleball so that it's not just the pickleball game. There are game bays and opportunities to engage in a social setting. So you could go with a group of friends, have food, have drinks, but play pickle ball. That is kind of the
concept and what we mean by top golf pickle ball. >> Okay, I'm glad to hear that. It's not the part where they lose money. That's all my questions. Maybe we get into this. >> Can I yield the floor? >> Thank you so much for your time. >> Sure. Other questions? >> Well, questions for us. Okay. Well, discussion. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Are there questions for the brokers or applicants? >> Okay. Uh, seeing none, council members discussion. >> Council member Fernandez. >> The what I'd like to just clarify is the
process. How do we recommend what projects we would like to see in more detail at the city council meeting? >> So, that's a a very good question. Thank you. So what happens at this meeting is this board takes a vote to either
advance one or all three of the uh projects for consideration to the city council at our meeting later. Um we are not voting at this body to accept the proposal. We're just voting to hear it
at the as the city council, which is why we aren't asking a lot of detailed questions here because if we're going to talk to them later, we don't want to have two separate presentations. even at the city council meeting later if we vote to move one forward. All the
details that you saw on there about the selling, the buying offer, the terms, the days, the contract days, all that stuff, we we would not be approving that tonight. Even as city council, we would be at that point if the council desires
to make an a motion to approve our staff to enter into discussions with the broker and the developer and all those terms that we see here are subject to legal review and subject to staff's
right getting with them to talk. So, um a motion later would not be to yeah, we're going to sell it for that price under these terms. we wouldn't be getting at that that that contract would come back to us at a later date for approval. >> So we would be agreeing if we do to
enter into further negotiation. >> Correct. >> In order to come back to council later with an actual agreement to be accepted or >> That's correct. >> That's correct. So at the stage of this meeting right now, the vote, if there is
one, the motion would simply be to move one or all three at the council's pleasure to our next meeting for further discussion. If we do that, if we moved one or all three to that, then we would have a much more indepth presentation
on on each one of these. If at this point we vote not to move a particular project forward, then that's that's it. We won't hear from them again unless they come back with a future proposal. So, >> okay, that makes sense. Okay.
>> So, other discussion >> discussion or just commented? >> Well, discussion or a motion um whichever is preferred. I would like to prop make a motion that we bring proposal number three uh for
the the the was it blazing paddles op uh uh project forward to the uh the corsite project to the full council for discussion. >> Second that. >> Any discussion? >> Seeing none, >> I've got one. Excuse me. >> Oh, I'm sorry, Council Member KV. I I
just I don't feel it's a good idea because they've they've missed the mark on several of the important criteria that we gave our realtors previously, namely to have some previous experience to have secured financing because we don't want to run into a situation where the developer walks off the job and it isn't finished or it's delivered in a different form than we want because they
run into financing and we have a situation here where they don't even have their equity together, let alone financing for the other $8 million that they're planning to spend for a business model that seems to be in dire straits right now. Callaway is spinning off Topgolf. This is obviously reminiscent of Topgolf. And also, we're competing
with our own recreational facilities that we just built in Temple Terrace, which is pickle ball courts. So, several pickle ball courts were just built at rec center to replace um uh other forms of recreation that we previously had there. So, I think we're not gaining anything from this really, and it
doesn't meet the standard of the bid that we outlined. So, I would I don't know why we'd let it through. That's kind of where I'm at with that one. But I think it's cool that we're getting interest and I think it's also cool that we've got at least something that might potentially be a draw, right? Like this
is at least something that like draws people to downtown in theory. And it also doesn't have the community space though, unfortunately, which I think is really important to that area that we give pedestrians a reason to walk around where there could be music, where there could be food trucks, events, something like that. So, um, this doesn't really
conflict with that, but it does eat up that space that could be used for that. that doesn't really leave us any options there. So, >> I I'm in favor of the motion just because there's questions we didn't get into. I don't know ultimately whether I'd be in favor of it or not, but that's the purpose of discussing it in depth at
the council meeting. So, I I would vote with you to move that forward, but um so I I do understand what you're you're talking about. I would like to hear more about the proposal. Just from my own experience with the 30-ish age group and
and younger, I know that they love to go to places and play games and do activities. And I know that even though we have recently added pickle ball as our recreation that
the level of growth in the pickle ball area is extreme and so I would like to hear more about the presentation. Not saying that I I will agree to it or not, but just hear more about the project
just because viability I know that it's as something that's very attractive to people who would activate the space. >> But again, I I totally agree. It's not necessarily what I would hope for in the
public space activation and recreation, but I would like to hear about the project. So that's why I would agree to move it forward. >> Council member Chambers, anything? >> No. Motion second. Any
>> quick comment on that? I totally totally get it and you know, a lot of sympathy for that. My only concern is once it gets to city council, it's on the agenda. It's going to come back again and again. It sort of develops a dynamism that it doesn't really have right now. And if I'm honest, my
preference would be to just say, "No thanks. Go and submit another bid because they can do that and then they can submit a bid that meets our criteria." So like they can figure out what their financing is going to be. They can get that equity investor that they're talking to to sign on. Maybe then that equity investor even comes here and introduces himself because he's
going to be the majority partner. That's the other thing. Like if they're getting one point one one point what was it? Uh they're getting 600,000 together with two people then the other person's bringing the other I guess 800,000 I think. So that makes
yeah 1.4. So the other person would have actually majority share in that from the get-go. So we're not even talking to the person who's going to be the owner of the project. So that's also kind of an issue for me and I just feel like come on back next time, you know, bring your better proposal and then we'll go from there before we let them through the
gates. So that's my personal preference, but you know, they can still improve it later. I'm just kind of skeptical that they will once they've already gotten into the process. >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I opposed. >> Uh nay.
>> Okay. Motion carries. We'll see you at the council meeting. Mr. Paulie, anything other business to come before the CRA? >> Uh, first of all, I'd like to thank you all for your time and attention to what uh staff considers a very uh significant
and serious uh matter and that is um continued development within our CI. I would like to thank all of the um representatives that have come tonight to um present before you or at least to uh field your questions. um coming up at
the six o'clock meeting um the project that you have uh referred will be uh queued up uh when that time is right and um they will be at the podium presenting their presentation to you at that time. >> Good. Thank you, Mr. Paulie.
>> Thank you. >> Yes, Vice Mayor Schisler. >> Yes. Thank you. Um I didn't think it was appropriate for the discussion at the time of the motion because it really wasn't with related to the motion. But uh my problem with the other the other
uh projects was the uh uh going forward of uh tax exemption that creates a significant issue for for the city going forward. Um and uh uh the affordable housing
moniker that would be attached to it at least you know in in in the general public in my mind would not would not really fly. It would be a difficult decision. I know you guys put a lot of work into it. I appreciate that. I appreciate the fact that you brought it back and and and our brokers, you know,
G gives us a flavor. we told you to go out and get some people and you come back and now we're this is our back and forth where we're uh fine-tuning what we're looking for. Um because it's, you know, it's it's it's an iterative process. So uh nothing
against the projects, just don't really fit what where our vision is for that area. But uh I'm looking forward to hearing more about the Blazing Paddles. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Polly. Our meeting will be adjourned and we will reconvene at 6:00.