Jun 30, 2022 Special City Commission Meeting

[1. Call to Order ]

[00:00:06]

>> OKAY, GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING FOR THE CITY OF PARKLAND THURSDAY, JUNE 20, 2022 TO ORDER, PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

ROLL CALL?

[4.A. Discussion to provide Staff with the potential action to submit an offer for the purchase of a portion of the Heron Bay golf course. ]

>> SO, THE SPECIAL AGENDA ITEM A DISCUSSION TO PROVIDE STAFF POTENTIAL OPTION TO SUBMIT AN OFFER TO PURCHASE A PORTION OF THE HERON BAY GOLF COURSE. I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.

BEFORE WE START. WITH SUNSHINE, WE CANNOT DISCUSS THESE TYPES OF TOPICS.

OBVIOUSLY, WITH PLANNING AND MEETING SOME OF THE ADS MAY COME UP.

BUT WE'VE NEVER TRULY HAD A DISCUSSION AMONGST US ALL. SO, THAT IS WHAT WE ARE HERE TO DO TONIGHT. AND OBVIOUSLY, WHERE IT GOES FROM THERE WE WILL SEE.

I'LL JUST MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS BEFORE WE START. BEFORE WE DO THAT, I DO WANT TO CONGRATULATE COMMISSIONER BRIER AND COMMISSIONER -- ON THEIR OWN OPPOSE ELECTIONS.

I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO -- [APPLAUSE] >> AND THANK YOU TO THE

RESIDENCE FOR ENTRUSTING US. >> I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR BEING HERE AND BEING ACTIVE IN THE DISCUSSIONS OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS. YEARS FOR SOME.

IT IS IMPERATIVE TO STAY POSITIVE AND CONSTRUCTIVE THROUGHOUT.HE GIRLS OF WHAT HAPPENS HERE TONIGHT, THERE IS A LONG ROAD TO GO. AND WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THIS DECISION DOES AFFECT ALL OF PARKLAND. I CANNOT STRESS ENOUGH, POSITIVE AND CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS IS WHAT WE NEED. I WANT TO START BY THANKING NSID, ROD COLC3N, NEIL -- AND OTHERS. WITHOUT THEIR EFFORTS, WE COULD BE DISCUSSING DEVELOPING OF 220 ACRES, AND NOW WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PURCHASING AND DEVELOPING 65 ACRES. WE WILL HAVE WHAT WILL BE AN AMAZING 150 ACRE NATURAL PRESERVE PARK. WITH FIVE MILES OF WALKING PATHS, WATERING AND STOPPING STATIONS. A MEMORIAL TO REMEMBER THOSE LOST IN THE MSD TRAGEDY.

-- THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO SERVE OUR RESIDENTS AND PROTECT OUR WAY OF LIFE.

THIS PIECE OF LAND IS FAR TOO IMPORTANT, AND TOO IMPACTFUL TO OUR CITY, TO SIT ON THE SIDELINES.UR RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN VERY VOCAL, I FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT PARKLAND HAS SPOKEN LOUD AND CLEAR. THE DIRECTION IN WHICH THIS PROCESS WAS HEADED, LEFT PARKLAND AS AN OBSERVER, NOT AN ACTIVE PARTICIPANT. WE ARE NOW HERE TONIGHT, TO DISCUSS IF TAKING ADDITIONAL STEPS, BY PURCHASING THE LAND IN HERON BAY IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR CITY. AS THE CITY AND LANDOWNER, THIS WILL GIVE US ADDITIONAL BENEFITS AND PROTECTIONS. THIS IS BY NO MEANS AN EASY DECISION.

AND I KNOW ALL OF US UP HERE, I SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO GET TO THIS POINT. AND I APPRECIATE EVERYONE OF MY COLLEAGUES.

THIS IS A BIG REASON WHY I FEEL COMFORTABLE CONSIDERING THIS PURCHASE.

I CANNOT IMAGINE GOING TO THIS DIRECTION WITHOUT THESE GENTLEMEN APPEAR.

THERE IS NO QUESTION, THEY ALWAYS HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF THE RESIDENCE FRONT AND CENTER. I LOOK FORWARD TO OUR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.

TONIGHT, OUR DISCUSSION AND ULTIMATE DECISION IS STRICTLY TO GIVE THE CITY MANAGER THE ABILITY TO COMPLETE NEGOTIATIONS, AND CONTRACT AS REQUIRED, TO PURCHASE THE LAND IN HERON BAY. THE FINAL CONTRACT DOES HAVE TO COME BEFORE US.

AND ANOTHER MEETING BEFORE ANYTHING IS FINALIZED. I DO WANT TO TOUCH ON THE

[00:05:02]

AS IT IS A RECOMMENDED DEVELOPER BY NSID RFP COMMITTEE.

AND WE ARE LOOKING TO HAVE THE RIGHT AS THE CITY OF PARKLAND, AND CORAL SPRINGS, TO HAVE LAST LOOK SO TO SPEAK, AND MATCH THEIR OFFER. OF COURSE, WE MAY AND I'M SURE WE WILL DISCUSS SOME ADDITIONAL ASPECTS, AS FAR AS LAND USE, ETC. BUT NO FINAL DECISIONS ASK WHAT TO ULTIMATELY WILL BE DONE WITH THE LAND, WILL BE MADE TONIGHT.

THOSE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE WILL HAVE, ARE FOR FUTURE MEETINGS. THIS PROCESS IS IMPORTANT TO CLARIFY. TONIGHT VOTE AGAIN, IS ONLY GIVING YOUR CITY MANAGER THE ABILITY TO FINALIZE NEGOTIATION WITH THE CONTRACT. THERE ARE STILL ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE WORKED OUT WITH NSID, THE HOA AND CORAL SPRINGS.

CORAL SPRINGS IS AN IMPORTANT PIECE IN THE PROCESS. PARKLAND TO BE ACTING AS THE AGENT OF THIS PURCHASE. IF THE PURCHASE MOVES FORWARD, FOR THE OVERALL LAND, PER THE REQUEST OF CORAL SPRINGS, PARKLAND WOULD FOLLOW OUR PURCHASE, WITH THE SALE OF ALL LAND AND CORAL SPRINGS BACK TO THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS. DISCUSSIONS OF THE PROJECT TOGETHER AS A TEAM, WILL TAKE PLACE SO THAT THE ENTIRE AVAILABLE LAND WOULD BE USED IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR CITY. ONCE AGAIN, TONIGHT VOTE WILL REQUIRE THREE VOTES IN FAVOR TO TAKE THIS DIRECTION. THAT IS OUR DECISION TONIGHT, THE CITY MANAGER WILL COMPLETE THE FINAL DETAILS AND FINALIZE AND CONTRACT WITH NSID. THEN WE WILL NEED TWO READINGS.

BOTH READINGS WILL REQUIRE A SUPERMAJORITY OR FOUR VOTES. MY GOAL IN THIS PROCESS, WOULD BE FOR US TO TRY AND COMPLETE THIS WITHIN 30 DAYS. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN UP TO OUR COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER BRIER, THIS IS YOUR DISTRICT -- ACTUALLY, WE DON'T HAVE COMMENTS SO IF YOU GUYS WANT TO TALK FIRST, WE CAN HAVE SOME DISCUSSION. OR IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE IF THERE IS ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK. DOES ANYONE HAVE A PREFERENCE? [INAUDIBLE] OKAY. ALLISON, I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE AN EMAIL TO READ INTO THE

RECORD.> YES. >> MOTION TO AMEND THE AGENDA TO INCLUDE A PORTION OF TIME AT

THIS TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. >> SECOND. >> OKAY, THIS IS FROM NEIL --

>> ALL IN FAVOR? OKAY, PLEASE SHOW THIS PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

>> THIS LETTER IS BY NEIL -- 1164 NW. 69TH PLACE. PARKLAND, FLORIDA.

PARKLAND CITY COMMISSION THE FOLLOWING IS A PUBLIC COMMENT THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO READ THE MEETING. I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT PARKLAND IS CONSIDERING THE PURCHASE OF THE 69 ACRE PARCEL OF THE HERON BAY GOLF COURSE. I BELIEVE DOING SO GIVE PARKLAND RESIDENTS A GREATER VOICE. WITH RESPECT TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT TO DO WITH THE GOLF COURSE. THE CURRENT STATUS OF NSID AND EAST COAST BUILDERS WORKING TOGETHER TO BUILD A MONSTROUS COMMERCIAL PROJECT IN A QUIET RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY OF HERON BAY IS AN APPROPRIATE AND HIGHLY INSULTING TO RESIDENTS WHO LIVE IN OR ANYWHERE NEAR HERON BAY. I WANT TO THANK THE PARKLAND COMMISSION FOR TAKING A BOLD STEP OF ATTEMPTING TO RECLAIM THE PROPERTY.

THAT IT CAN BE USED IN A MORE APPROPRIATE AND LESS INTRUSIVE MANNER.

THEN I HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO SIGNED UP. >> OKAY.

BEAR IN MIND WITH PUBLIC COMMENTS, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO MAKE THOSE COMMENTS.

>>.

>> GENTLEMEN, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST THANK YOU FOR PULLING THIS TOGETHER.

RICH, I KNOW THAT YOU WERE ON THIS AND -- AS WELL FROM THE HERON BAY, MY PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE OF THE BOARD, I THINK YOU'RE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

I THINK WE TRUST THAT THIS COMMISSION IS GOING TO HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL OF PARKLAND AND HERON BAY RESIDENTS. TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION AND

[00:10:01]

I JUST WANT TO GIVE THEM A VOTE OF CONFIDENCE ON THIS AND I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT ALL OF YOU

WILL GIVE THIS CONSIDERATION. >> THANK YOU. >> MARK --

>> GOOD EVENING GENTLEMEN. I AM THE PRESIDENT OF HERON BAY.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY, YOU MENTIONED NEIL. I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD FIVE YEARS. SO I WAS INVOLVED WITH THE VICE PRESIDENT WHEN NEIL WENT THROUGH ALL OF THIS. YOU KNOW, NEIL AND I SAT ON THE FIRST NSID RFP COMMITTEE GOING TO THIS. AT THE TIME WE HAD TWO REPRESENTATIVES I THINK FROM PARKLAND AND THE OTHER LOCATION. WE WENT TO THAT.

IT WAS ALL KIND OF MESSED UP WITH NEGOTIATIONS THAT WE GOT TO THE NEXT PHASE.

AND WE REALLY TRIED TO MAKE YOU KNOW RICH AND I TALKED AND WE TRIED TO MAKE ALL OF THIS WORK WITH NSID WITH THE ISSUE THAT KEPT COMING UP WAS THE DEVELOPMENT.

YOU KNOW, I CONTINUE AS PRESIDENT OF HERON BAY, IT WILL BE VERY DIFFICULT, ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE. THE ONLY WAY I SEE THIS GOING FORWARD NOW, IS, AND I FULLY SUPPORT THIS, BECAUSE I THINK IN SOME WAY, THEY HAVE THE SAME FEELING THAT WE DO THAT WHOEVER THIS IS, THIS COULD BE ANYBODY. BUT WILL WANT TO WORK WITH SOMEONE THAT IS VERY PROFESSIONAL, AND WE WANT TO PROJECT THAT IS GOOD FOR PARKLAND AND AT THE LAST BOARD MEETING WE EVEN SPOKE, WE DON'T WANT THIS TO BE A DESTINATION FOR BROWARD COUNTY WANT THIS TO BE A REALLY NICE PLACE FOR THE PEOPLE OF PARKLAND WHERE WE CAN TAKE KIDS AND FAMILY.

WHATEVER WE ARE GOING TO DO. AND I HAVE GOT A MINUTE HERE. WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, THERE ARE EASEMENT ISSUES. I DO NOT SEE THE GOVERNANCE ISSUE BEING A PROBLEM.

AND YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS EASEMENTS GO, WE'RE GOING TO WORK SOMETHING OUT ON THE EASEMENTS. SO I DON'T SEE HERON BAY STANDING IN FRONT OF THIS.

WE MADE AN OFFER ON THIS AND WE WERE WORRIED ABOUT GETTING STUCK WITH $21 MILLION.

SO I FEEL FOR WHAT YOU GUYS ARE READY TO TAKE A RISK ON HERE. AND I CAN TELL YOU, I AND THE MOTHERBOARD NUMBERS IN MOST OF THE COMMUNITY, 80 PERCENT OF THE COMMUNITY WILL WORK WITH YOU GUYS. WE ARE HERE TO WORK WITH YOU AND I THINK THAT WE CAN GET

THROUGH THIS TOGETHER. >> THANK YOU GUYS. >> THANK YOU, MARK.

>> MARTY -- >> MARTY -- FIVE LIVING IN PARKLAND OVER 20 YEARS.

I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD OF HERON BAY SINCE INCEPTION AND TONE OF HER.

I AM ONE OF THE ORIGINAL BOARD MEMBERS, JUST MYSELF AND JIM WEISS.

WE ARE SO HAPPY THAT THE CITY HAS STEPPED UP TO TRY AND HELP US BECAUSE WE FEEL IT IS THE RIGHT MODEL AND WE HAVE A LOT OF SUPPORT FOR THE PARTNERSHIP FOR MANY OF THE RESIDENTS.

AND I JUST WANT TO ECHO WHAT MARK SAID, THAT WE ARE REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO CREATING SOMETHING THAT THE COMMUNITY WILL REALLY ENJOY AND FOR YEARS TO COME.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. THAT'S IT? OKAY. THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC -- ROBERT?

NO PROBLEM. >> CITY OF PARKLAND. I KNOW THAT I'VE TALKED TO SOME PEOPLE ON THE BOARD HERE, AND IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO YOU TO BE HERE FOR THE RESIDENCE.

I KNOW THAT I'M ON THE BOARD FOR SUBDIVISION OF HERON BAY. NOT ON THE MASTER.

>> WERE STILL IMPORTANT. [LAUGHTER] >> EXACTLY, THAT'S WHAT I KEEP

[00:15:02]

WHETHER IT IS SPOKEN, TEXT MESSAGE OR SOCIAL MEDIA. YOU HAVE A LOT OF SUPPORT FROM

THE COMMUNITY. >> GREAT, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE?

BOB, AND THEN JIM. >> BOB, NOT ON THE BOARD OF ANYTHING.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I THINK IT'S GREAT. I THINK WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING STEPPING UP TAKING CHARGE AND TRYING TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT MEETS WITH THE RESIDENTS IN THE COMMUNITY IS FANTASTIC. IT IS VERY CLEAR TO ME AFTER SEEING THE TWO ARTICLES IN THE FLORIDA CENTER FOR GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY THAT THE INTEREST OF NSID ARE NOT NECESSARILY ALIGNED WITH PARKLAND, CORAL SPRINGS OR HERON BAY. AND I TRULY BELIEVE THAT YOU FOLKS TO HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE AND AS LONG AS WE CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS, I THINK THAT THIS CAN BE A GREAT OUTCOME THANK YOU.> GREAT,

THANK YOU. >> JIM WEISS. 7523 NORTHWEST 124TH AVENUE IN BROOKLYN. I HAVE BEEN ON THE BOARD OF HERON BASES TURNOVER.

AS PRESIDENT FOR ALMOST 5 YEARS. BUT TODAY, I AM ALSO, I HAVE BEEN ON THE AFFILIATE WITH THE PARKLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY. FOR ABOUT THE LAST 10 YEARS, AND I'VE BEEN VICE PRESIDENT OF THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS.

I WANT TO SPEAK TONIGHT REALLY FROM A HISTORICAL STANDPOINT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THIS IS A HISTORICAL EVENT THAT YOU ARE EMBARKING UPON. PARKLAND STARTED, WE HAD 60 OR 59TH BIRTHDAY IN 11 DAYS. IN THE NEXT YEAR WE HAVE THERE WERE 60TH ANNIVERSARY, ALONG WITH CORAL SPRINGS. IN THE 1990S, AND KEN, I THINK REPLACES.

IN THE 90S, COURT RIDGE PROPERTIES WANTED TO REMOVE THE ANNEX.

I THINK 1900 ACRES, WHICH WAS WEST PARKLAND. HERON BAY AND THE OTHER NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES.AND THEY DE-ANNEXED THE LAND AND DUE TO MAYOR SALE HE STEPPED UP AND GOT THEM TO PUT IT BACK IN. I KNOW THAT YOU ARE RELUCTANT ABOUT BUILDING HERON BAY BUT AS YOU LOOK AT THE PAST WHATEVER, 30 YEARS, HAVING PARKLAND, HERON BAY, THE WEDGE, THESE ARE ALL POSITIVE IMPACTS ON WHAT PARKLAND IS. AND THIS AGAIN, IS A HISTORICAL EVENT BECAUSE YOU CAN DETERMINE BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE, WHAT THAT LAND IS GOING TO BE AND HOW IT SHOULD RELATE TO PARKLAND. HOW IT WILL LOOK TO PARKLAND AND THAT AFFECTS EVERYONE ON THE WEST SIDE THE ENTIRE WEDGE THAT WE BROUGHT INTO PARKLAND.

PARKLAND IDOLS, -- PARKLAND ISLES AND HERON BAY. I TRUST YOU TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION. I PUT MY TRUST IN YOU AND I ASK YOU PLEASE, MOVE ITH PURCHASING THE D JUST A FEW MORE SECONDS. FOR THE HOMEOWNERS, I THINK THEY NEED TO REALIZE THAT IS GOING TO RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, THAT THE ONLY WAY IT'S GOING TO WORK.

WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A LEAP OF FAITH IN THE COMMISSION.

BUT YOU'RE GOING TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND DO RIGHT BY PARKLAND AND THE HOMEOWNERS ON

[00:20:05]

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]

>> MY NAME IS RICHARD DEUTSCH, LONG-TERM RESIDENT OF BOTH HERON BAY AND FLORIDA SINCE 1947. ANDREW SPOKEN ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PARKLAND TO CONTROL THE OUTCOME OF THIS IMPORTANT PARCEL. WE HAVE NOT SPOKEN ABOUT THE OTHER SIDE. WHICH IS LEAVING A MAYBE, SKETCHY FOR PROFIT ORGANIZATION, THAT DOESN'T HAVE OUR INTEREST AT HEART. SO, IT IS NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT RISK OF WHAT COULD HAPPEN IF YOU TAKE IT OVER. THE GREATER RISK IS IF YOU DON'T TAKE IT OVER. AND LOOK AT THE ORGANIZATION THAT HAS NO INTEREST OTHER THAN A PROFIT MOTIVE AND IN HISTORY LIVE IN THE FUTURE THERE. I WANT TO LOOK AT THE RISK OF NOT TAKING THE FUTURE IN YOUR OWN HANDS AND YOU HAVE THE FULL SUPPORT OF VIRTUALLY EVERYBODY AND I APPLAUD THE ORGANIZATION FOR STEPPING FORWARD AND SEIZING THE OPPORTUNITY.

IT'S A VERY POSITIVE ENDORSEMENT OF THE SCOPE OF WHAT THE COMMISSION IS PICKING UP OPPORTUNITIES TO DO. THAT NORMALLY WOULD BE OUTSIDE THEIR PURVIEW.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> HELLO.

I AM A HERON BAY RESIDENT. >> NAME PLEASE? >> -- SHELDON.

HERON BAY RESIDENT SINCE 2000. I JUST WANT TO SAY, HATS OFF. YOU GUYS STEPPED UP AND SAVED OUR COMMUNITY. WHEN I ATTENDED THE HERON BAY MEETING LAST NIGHT WAS PLEASANT SURPRISE, YOU'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING AND I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL.

>> THANK YOU. COME ON, KEN. THEN THE GUY IN THE BACK.

>> HELLO KEN -- I WHAT YOU KNOW WE ARE ALL FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

ON THE PRESIDENTS COUNCIL BASICALLY REPRESENTS PROBABLY 95 PERCENT OF PARKLAND, COMMUNITIES AND SO, WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSON AS WELL. IT IS NOT JUST HERON BAY YOU KNOW THINKING THIS IS A HERON BAY ONLY PROBLEM. THIS IS A PARKLAND ISSUE.

AND SO, YOU HAVE FULL SUPPORT OF AT LEAST 95 PERCENT OF ALL OF PARKLAND.

THAT I AM AWARE OF THROUGH THESE COMMITTEES. SO THANKS FOR WHAT YOU ARE

DOING. >> THANK YOU, KEN. >> HELLO, MY NAME IS.

SINCE 2017. I'M A SOFT FLORIDA RESIDENT, BORN HERE AND GROW HERE.

HIALEAH, FLORIDA. I SEE THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY.

SEVERAL FOLKS IN SPOKANE MENTIONED THE WORD OPPORTUNITY. AND THE FACT THAT THE CITY IS NOW INVOLVED, OPENS UP THAT WINDOW TO SO MUCH MORE. I AM AN ARCHITECT.

I TRAINED AS AN ARCHITECT, I AM AN EDUCATOR. I HAVE WORKED WITH YOUTH.

WE SHOULDN'T UNDERESTIMATE THE IDEAS THAT CREATIVE POWER OF OUR COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE WITHIN SOUTH FLORIDA, THREE ARCHITECTURE SCHOOLS. AND THEN ALL THE ARTICLES I READ, I HAVEN'T SEEN AN ENGAGEMENT WITH THE CREATIVE FORCES THAT EXIST.

WITH THE YOUNG VOICES THAT EXIST WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY. AND OFTEN TIMES WHEN THINGS ARE HAPPENING WITHIN YOU KNOW PRIVATE CORPORATIONS, ON PRIVATE LAND, THERE IS NO NEED FOR THAT. BUT THE FACT THAT THE CITY IS INVOLVED, IT OPENS UP SO MUCH MORE. TO ENGAGE WITH ADVANCED DESIGN CENTERS.

I REMEMBER WHEN I WAS IN FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY IN THE ARCHITECTURE SCHOOL.

DITTO PROFESSOR TAKE US TO WEST PALM BEACH, AND A PORTION OF THE CITY OF DOWNTOWN THEY WERE TRYING TO DEVELOP, PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS AND THEY SAID HEY, URBAN DESIGN

[00:25:04]

MAYBE INCORPORATE SOME OF THAT. I THINK IT IS NOTHING BUT OPPORTUNITIES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]

>> ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WISH TO SPEAK? ALL RIGHT.

WE ARE GOING TO GO BACK TO US. WOULD YOU LIKE TO START? >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAYOR.

AS A REPRESENTATIVE FOR DISTRICT 1, IT'S BEEN MY MISSION EVEN BEFORE RUNNING AND CERTAINLY AS A CANDIDATE AND NOW, AS A COMMISSIONER, TO PROTECT AND CONTROL TO THE BEST WE CAN, WITH THOSE ON THE HERON BAY GOLF COURSE. WE'VE SEEN THIS PROJECT OR POTENTIAL ISSUE COMING DOWN THE PIPE FOR MANY YEARS. AND IT HAS BEEN IMPERATIVE TO ME AND FOLKS I'VE HEARD FROM AND SPOKE WITH, THAT WE GET THE RIGHT ULTIMATE RESULT.

A LOT OF WHAT GOES ON THE GOLF COURSE. I, LIKE MANY OF THE RESIDENTS, WISH THAT THE GOLF COURSE REMAINED A GOLF COURSE. I WAS A PARTICIPANT THERE AS OFTEN AS I COULD. I HAD MY LAW SCHOOL GRADUATION THERE AND SOME EVENTS FOR CHARITIES AND MY KIDS AT THE CLUBHOUSE. THE NOTION THAT IT IS NO LONGER GOING TO BE A GOLF COURSE, IN ITS ENTIRETY, BOTHERS ME. BUT AS THE MAYOR SAID, PART OF THE SILVER LINING IS THAT A LARGE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO REMAIN GREEN SPACE.

II THINK NSID AND HERON BAY BOARD MEMBERS APPEARED AND CONCERNED ABOUT PROPOSALS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED FOR THE PROJECT. AND I'M SURE THAT WITH RESIDENTS BOTH AS A HOMEOWNER, HERON BAY AND NOW AS A COMMISSIONER.

I'M NOT HAPPY WITH ANY PROPOSALS IN ENTIRETY. THERE ARE SOME THAT I THINK ARE VALID AND COMMENSURATE WITH OUR CULTURE. BUT MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS PRESERVING A SMALL TOWN FIELD. WHEN I CAME TO PARKLAND IN 1984 WITH MY FAMILY AND MY PARENTS, THERE WAS NO COMMERCIAL WHATSOEVER IN PARKLAND. I REMEMBER THE FIRST COMMERCIAL PROJECT THAT THEY WERE PUTTING UP ON THE FRINGES ON PARKSIDE DRIVE ACTUALLY THAT WAS WITHIN, WITHOUT BEING ON THE EXTERIOR OF 441, A NUMBER OF CHALLENGES WERE FACED.

I'VE SINCE SEEN SOME OF THE COMMERCIAL PROJECT IN PARKLAND NOT BE FULLY SUPPORTED BY THE RESIDENTS. VACANCIES. AND SO THAT IS A CONCERN.

THE NOTION OF PUTTING SOME MONSTROSITY THAT IS GOING TO ATTRACT PEOPLE FROM AROUND SOUTH FLORIDA AND THE TRI-COUNTY AREA, ESPECIALLY, IS OF CONCERN.

WE'VE ALWAYS HAD A BEDROOM COMMUNITY. THE PHILOSOPHY HAS BEEN TO KEEP THIS A COUNTRY ELEGANT COMMUNITY AND TO PRESERVE, NOT ONLY THE QUALITY OF LIFE THAT WE HAVE IN PARKLAND, BUT THE CHARACTER AND CHARM OF PARKLAND.

IT'S A GREEN SPACE, IT IS PASTORS, HORSES, WHICH UNFORTUNATELY, THAT HAS DIMINISHED A LITTLE BIT AS WE'VE GROWN. IT IS ALSO THAT THIS IS, THIS IS WHERE YOU COME HOME TO. THIS IS NOT A DESTINATION CITY. THIS IS NOT A TOURIST HEAVY CITY. PEOPLE THAT ARE IN PARKLAND EITHER LIVE IN PARKLAND OR VISITING PEOPLE IN PARKLAND WERE ATTENDING BALLGAMES FOR THEIR CHILDREN OR THEIR RELATIVES IN PARKLAND. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO PRESERVE.

I HAVE GREAT CONCERNS WITH CERTAIN OF THE PROPOSALS FROM CERTAIN DEVELOPERS AND TO

[00:30:05]

I ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ON THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS AND THE ROLE OF THE CITY AND STEPPING OUTSIDE OF ITS BOUNDARIES. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE MINDFUL OF THAT.

I THINK IT IS INCUMBENT UPON US TO APPRECIATE THE IDEAS THE CURRENT OWNER OF THIS LAND.

THEY CAN CHOOSE TO CONTRACT AND SELL ITTO WHOMEVER THEY CHOOSE TO SELL.

WE HOWEVER AS A CITY, HAVE AND WILL CONTINUE TO CONTROL THAT PROCESS ON WHAT GOES ON THAT LAND. AND I UNDERSTAND AND WE WILL HEAR FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY LATER THIS EVENING I'M SURE, AS TO WHAT THE LEGAL CONTROLS ARE IN THE PROCESS.

BUT MAKE NO MISTAKE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN NO COMMITMENTS FROM MYSELF OR ANYONE ELSE AS TO APPROVING ANYTHING IN ITS ENTIRETY OR ANY SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT.

WHAT I AM COMMITTED TO IS PROVING ONLY FOR MY CONSTITUENTS, THOSE THAT RESIDE IN HERON BAY BUT ALSO ALL OF PARKLAND RESIDENTS IN PRESERVING OUR CULTURE, OUR CHARACTER AND CHARM. AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT IN ANY WAY INFRINGED BY WHAT ULTIMATELY, GOES ON THE HERON BAY GOLF COURSE OR ANY OTHER PROJECT IN PARKLAND FOR THAT MATTER. I'M HAPPY THAT WE ARE HAVING THIS DIALOGUE AND DISCUSSION.

VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT THE MAYOR AND OTHER COMMISSIONERS AND THE VICE MAYOR HAVING THIS DISCUSSION. AND I'M EVEN MORE HAPPY THAT OUR CITIZENS HAVE COME OUT.

NOT ONLY TONIGHT BUT OTHER NIGHTS AND THE NSID BEATINGS, HERON BAY BOARD MEETINGS AND HAVE VOICED THEIR POSITIONS. I'VE HEARD VERY CLEARLY FROM THEM THAT THEY FAVOR ONE DEVELOPER OVER THE OTHERS. THAT THEY FAVOR THE PROPOSAL CONCEPTUALLY.

NOT IN THE CENTAURI OVER SOME OF THE OTHER PROPOSALS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE.

AND I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT. WITH THAT IS GOING TO COME COMPROMISE ON ALL PARTS.ON ALL PARTIES WITH REGARDS TO WHAT ULTIMATELY GETS PUT ON THE PROJECT. WILL HAVE TO WORK WITH THE HERON BAY HOA, WE WILL HAVE TO WORK WITH THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS IN THIS PROCESS. AND HERE, CONTINUE TO HEAR DIALOGUE FROM RESIDENCE. NOT ONLY OF HERON BAY BUT ALL OF PARKLAND.

WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY WE HAVING THIS DIALOGUE TONIGHT. I WANT TO CERTAINLY HEAR FROM THE CITY MANAGER ON THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS. THE APPLICATIONS ON THIS I WANT TO HEAR FROM THE CITY PLANNER ON SOME OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE ABOUT ANALYSIS, TRAFFIC STUDIES, IMPACT ANALYSIS ON THIS POTENTIAL TRANSACTION WANT TO HEAR FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THE POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS THAT THIS WOULD HAVE. BECAUSE WE WANT TO GET TO THE RIGHT RESULT, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE DONE ALL WE NEED TO DO AS BEING ENTRUSTED AS A CITY REPRESENTATIVES. I APPRECIATE THE DIALOGUE AND VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF US MOVING THIS FORWARD. AND WE WILL GO FROM THERE.

I ALSO WANT TO ADD ONE THING, IF I MAY. ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, IS THE CITY, THE GOAL IS NOT TO BE AS THE MAYOR SAID, IN THE REAL ESTATE, RETENTION OR FLIPPING BUSINESS OR ANYTHING ELSE. BUT WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP.

THE STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED IN THE ULTIMATE DEVELOPER SOMETHING I LIKE TO SEE THE CITY WORK TOWARDS BECAUSE I THINK WITH THAT, WE CAN CURATE WHAT GOES ON THE PROPERTY AND WILL BE THE BEST RESULTS FOR THE RESIDENCE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. KEN IS STILL TAKING. ANYBODY?

>> I THINK SIMEON SAID IT BEST. THE REASON WE HERE TONIGHT IS BECAUSE EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM CARES ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE CITY AND THIS IS OBVIOUSLY GOING TO PLAY A ROLE IN THE LONG-TERM FOOTPRINT, THE LONG-TERM FEEL, LOOK, WHAT HAVE YOU.

BUT IT'S ALWAYS BECAUSE THE DECISION HAS TO BE DONE PROPERLY.

HAS TO BE MAJOR THAT WE DO ALL OF OUR DUE DILIGENCE, ANALYSIS AND I GET IT TONIGHT WE ARE NOT HERE TO SAY YES WE DOING THIS WE ARE TO SAY YES LET'S MOVE THE BALL TO THE NEXT GOAL LINE.

SO FOR ME, THINK WE CANNOT GO BACKWARDS IS HELPFUL TO KIND OF LOOK AT WHERE WE STARTED HERE.

WHICH IS, WERE A LOT OF GREAT CONCERNS ON THIS CONVERSATION FIRST STARTED ABOUT NSID, AND RIGHTFULLY SO. I THINK WE PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING HERE AND EXPRESSING THEIR DISDAIN FOR THE IDEA THAT SOMEONE ELSE WOULD CONTROL THE DESTINY OF THE PROPERTY OTHER THAN THE RESIDENCE OF HERON BAY OR RESIDENCE OF PARKLAND OR THE CITY ITSELF.

AND THE REASON THAT PARKLAND HAS SOMEWHAT TAKEN THE APPROACH IT HAS, IS BECAUSE DESPITE THE FACT IT WASN'T AN RFP PROCESS IT WAS NOT OUR OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY.

FROM WATCHING THE SILENCE WE'VE SEEN THAT THE GAME IS NOT NECESSARY PLAYED ON THE WAY WE

[00:35:01]

THAT'S NOT THE IDEA. THE IDEA IS TO SAY THAT 50 YEARS FROM NOW WHEN PEOPLE LOOK BACK ON THIS THE SAME WAY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HERON BAY, WE HOPE THAT PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM SAY THAT YOU KNOW WHAT YOU GOT RIGHT IS A TOUGH DECISION, THERE WAS A LOT OF RISK, WHATEVER PATH WE GO NOT TO SAY WHATEVER IT WILL BE THE POINT IS THAT HIS COMMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET IT RIGHT. RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T, I WILL SPEAK MYSELF.

I'LL HAVE THE CONFIDENCE IS MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION. THAT SAID, THE MONEY, TIME, RISK, NOT ONLY POTENTIAL OF HAVING TO RECOUP THE COST, EVEN IN THE EVENT THAT THERE IS SOME AMOUNTS ARE NOT RECOUPED TO THE EXTENT THAT WE HAVE A FINANCIAL FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY, NOT JUST TO DO IS BEST FROM AN OPERATIONAL AND DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT BUT ALSO FINANCIALLY. THIS IS A BIG FINANCIAL INVESTMENT. THERE IS NO GUARANTEE RECOUPING THE FULL AMOUNT.

WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE THERE IS AND WOULD LIKE TO THINK MAYBE THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF MAKING MONEY ON TOP OF THAT. YOU NEVER KNOW. BUT THE MARKET IS CHANGING, FLUCTUATING EVERY DAY. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT TOMORROW BRINGS.

FOR ME I THINK TONIGHT NEEDS TO BE JUST AS MUCH ABOUT QUESTIONS AS IT IS ABOUT ANSWERS.

AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE DIALOGUE.HANK YOU. >> BOB? OR KEN? I CAN SPEAK AGAIN IF YOU GUYS WANT.

GO AHEAD. >> I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM STAFF.

>> OKAY. >> IF YOU'LL INDULGE ME, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO HEAR FROM

STAFF. HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. >> THERE WE GO. >> FIRST, ONE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY HAS NOT DECIDED TO BUY THIS PROPERTY.

THAT IS NOT WHAT TODAY IS ABOUT.WE'RE DISCUSSING THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME ON THIS DAIS. I'VE NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM ON THIS ISSUE. AND IT MAY BE THE BEST THING IN THE WORLD FOR OUR COMMUNITY, AND FOR US TO DO THAT BUT IT HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED TONIGHT.

I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO MISUNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING TONIGHT.

WE ARE TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT. WHETHER WE REALLY WANT TO DO THAT OR NOT. THUS THE FIRST PART OF IT. THE SECOND PART IS, YOU KNOW, I'M GLAD THAT JIM BROUGHT UP THE HISTORICAL ASPECTS OF THIS. I ALSO WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN HERON BAY WAS PURCHASED, IT CAME AT A TIME WHEN ACTUALLY, THE LINE -- THE LAND HAD BEEN DE-ANNEXED. PEOPLE DECIDE BECAUSE THEY WERE GIVEN THE WAY THEY WOULD GO OVER OUR HEADS GO TO THE LEGISLATURE, GO THROUGH THE CHANNELS AND ACTUALLY TOOK THE LAND OUT OF OUR CITY. AND THEN, THERE WAS A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE WE CONTINUE WITH SOME OF THE THOUGHTS OF BUILDING AND EVERYTHING AND WHILE THAT WAS GOING ON, CYPRESS HEAD AND SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENTS WERE DEMONSTRATING THAT THE LAND VALUES AND PARKLAND WERE MUCH HIGHER THAN WHAT WAS IN CORAL SPRINGS. AND SO, CORAL RIDGE DECIDED, MAYBE WE DO WANT TO BE IN PARKLAND AFTER ALL. AND SO THEY CAME BACK TO THIS COMMISSION. AT THE SAME TIME -- WAS MAYOR. BOB MARKS WAS THE VICE MAYOR.

THERE WERE OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT WERE ON THE PANEL. -- FOR EXAMPLE IS ONE OF THEM.

AND, THEY WERE VERY VERY FOCUSED ON THE DEA THAT IN ORDER FOR US TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN THAT SMALL SMALL TOWN FEEL, THEY WERE GOING TO CONCENTRATE VERY SPECIFICALLY ON DENSITY. NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENED, THEY DID NOT WANT TO HAVE MORE THAN THREE UNITS PER ACRE ON ANYTHING THAT WAS GOING TO BE BUILT IN THAT AREA.

AND THERE WAS VERY SPECIFIC REASONS FOR THAT, AND THOSE REASONS ARE WHY PARKLAND IS WHAT IT IS TODAY. WE'VE MAINTAINED LOW DENSITY. THE WAY THAT THEY WENT INTO THE CALCULATION OF FIGURING OUT THE DENSITY WAS TO INCLUDE IN THE ENTIRE PROCESS, ALL OF THE LAND, INCLUDING THE LAND THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE GOLF COURSE.

AND THEN, WHAT THEY DID WAS, THEY ALLOWED FOR THERE TO BE SOME SORT OF FLEXIBLE ZONING DONE, SO THAT COULD BE MORE UNITS ON A PARTICULAR ACRE THEN WHAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE THREE UNITS PER ACRE, BUT IT ALLOWED FOR US TO HAVE A GOLF COURSE. AND AT THE TIME THAT THIS COMMISSION BACK IN 1994 AND 1985, WERE MAKING THOSE DECISIONS, IT WAS THEIR BELIEF THAT THIS GOLF COURSE WAS GOING TO BE HERE FOREVER. THEY HAD NO INTENTION OF DOING

[00:40:01]

AND IT WAS FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME AS JIM POINTED OUT. AND RIGHTLY SO.

I HAD A LOT OF MISGIVINGS ABOUT HERON BAY COMING IN. JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE, YOU MOVE IN HERE AND YOU WANT TO SHUT THE DOOR BEHIND YOU. BUT HERE'S THE THING.

AS A COMMISSION RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE CERTAIN POWERS AND ABILITIES OVER THAT PROPERTY BECAUSE OF WHAT WAS DONE BACK IN 1994 AND 1995. WITH THE LAND USE AND WITH THE ZONING AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS EXPLORE A LITTLE BIT WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY, THOSE CONCEPTS. IN TERMS OF WHAT OUR ABILITIES ARE RIGHT NOW AS A COMMISSION, TO DO WITH ANYTHING THAT IS GOING TO COME INTO THE AREA. SO FOR EXAMPLE, ON THE PROPERTY THAT WE ARE CONTEMPLATING THAT MIGHT BE PURCHASED, WHAT ARE OUR OBLIGATIONS, DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES? WHAT POWERS DO WE HAVE THE COMMISSION RIGHT NOW, IF THEY

WERE TO COME BEFORE US? >> ANTHONY -- CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE RECORD.

VICE MAYOR, THE GOLF COURSE CURRENTLY HAS A LAND USE DESIGNATION OF SIDENTIAL THREE, THREE UNITS PER ACRE. IT IS IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED A-1 AGRICULTURAL.

A1 AGRICULTURAL ZONING DOES NOT ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

ANYONE WHO WANTS TO PUT IN A SIGNIFICANT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OR COMMERCIAL VELTMAN ON THE PROPERTY, WE NEED TO SEND AN APPLICATION TO THE CITY FOR REZONING WITH PLOTTING AND SITE PLAN WHICH WOULD ALL COME BEFORE YOU. IF SOMEONE WERE TO PROPOSE COMMERCIAL BUILDING, BECAUSE OF PROPERTY HAS A LAND USE OF R-3 RESIDENTIAL THEY WILL LIKELY NEED LAND USE A MINUTE. THAT WOULD ALSO BE BROUGHT TO THE CITY AND BY THE WAY WOULD ALSO GET PROCESSED THROUGH THE COUNTY AS WELL. AND IN TERMS OF WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH LAND USE, I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT YOUR CREDIT BEFORE THE TRIANGLE OF LEVELS OF DISCRETION AND AT THE TOP IS LAND-USE. BECAUSE IT IS PURELY A LEGISLATIVE DECISION. MEANING SOMEBODY PROPOSES A LAND-USE AMENDMENT AND IS UP TO THE COMMISSION TO DETERMINE WHAT YOU BELIEVE IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY.

AS OPPOSED TO A QUASIJUDICIAL PROCEDURE OR ZONING OR PROCESSING A SITE PLAN, AND ESSENTIALLY, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO LOOK, WERE THE CONDITIONS OF THE CODE, HAVE THEM AT THE

CONDITIONS? >> LET ME STOP YOU THERE. JUST SO I CAN CLARIFY THIS.

IF RIGHT NOW, WE WERE TO LET NSID CONTINUE WITH WHATEVER THEY'RE DOING FOR DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES, THEY CHOOSE EAST COAST JUSTIN IS AN EXAMPLE. YOU CAN'T JUST LAND-USE AND WANTED TO BUILD SOMETHING COMMERCIAL THERE. PWE HAVE THE AUTHORITY AS A

LEGISLATIVE BODY, ON THAT LAND-USE ISSUE, TO SAY NO. >> THAT IS CORRECT.

THEY HAVE THE MMA BEFORE YOU TO SWITCH TO COMMERCIAL YOU CAN SAY NO.

>> ARE THE HIGHEST AMOUNT OF POWER RIGHT NOW AS WE ARE SITTING HERE, TO MAKE A

DETERMINATION WITH THE LAND USAGE WILL BE. >> OF THE HIGHEST AMOUNT OF DISCRETION AT THE LAND-USE LEVEL SOMEONE DOES NOT HAVE THE LAND-USE CURRENTLY THAT THEY

NEED TO DEVELOP. >> SO, ON THE LAND-USE, HAS TO GO BEFORE THE COUNTY, CORRECT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> THE COUNTY CANDY NIGHT AS WELL.

SO AGAIN, IF WE WERE TO PURCHASE IT, THE COUNTY COULD DENY A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND

WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE LAND-USE, CORRECT? >> IT WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE COUNTY AND BECAUSE IN BROWARD COUNTY, ARE LAND USE PLAN HAS TO MATCH THE COUNTY PLAN.

THE DIRECT ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS YES. >> ALRIGHT SO, LET'S GO BACK TO WHAT WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO. NOW, IF THEY WERE TO PROPOSE TO US, IT COMPLETELY RESIDENTIAL KIND OF A PROJECT, BECAUSE WE CAN SAY NO TO ANYTHING THAT THEY WANT TO BUILD FROM A COMMERCIAL PERSPECTIVE. WHAT CAN THEY DO FROM

RESIDENTIAL STANDPOINT TO THAT PROPERTY? >> OKAY.

SO, IT ALREADY HAS A RESIDENTIAL LAND USE. THEY WOULD LIKELY NOT NEED A LAND-USE AMENDMENT BUT THEY WOULD NEED REZONING. BECAUSE OF PROPERTY IS ZONED A-1 AGRICULTURAL. YOU MAY BE ABLE TO GET AN OUTBUILDING OR SOMETHING TO SERVICE THE AG LAND. NOTHING SIGNIFICANT. THEY WOULD NEED TO COME BEFORE YOU FOR REZONING AND ALL THE CONSIDERATIONS FOR REZONING. IS IT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA, IS THERE PROPER ACCESS, LOOK AT TRAFFIC IMPACTS, THE SURROUNDING VALUES OF PROPERTIES. NOT QUITE AS MUCH DISCRETION AS THE LAND-USE AMENDMENT BUT YOU

[00:45:01]

CONDITIONS. >> IN TERMS OF LIMITATIONS OF THEIR ABILITY TO BUILD RESIDENTIAL, WHAT WOULD THEY BE CAPPED AT IN TERMS OF UNITS PER ACRE?

>> RIGHT SO, IT IS CAPPED AT THREE UNITS PER ACRE AS YOU MENTIONED, VICE MAYOR.

WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED AND, THERE IS ANNEXATION AGREEMENT RECORDED AGAINST THE LAND. IT CAPS THE PROPERTY AT THREE UNITS PER ACRE.

THERE WAS JOINING THE ORGANIST AND THAT WAS MAKING CLEAR IS CAPPED AT THREE UNITS PER ACRE.

LAND USES THREE UNITS PER ACRE. WHEN IT WAS DONE, THERE WAS SOME FLEXIBILITY AS YOU MENTIONED BEFORE, THAT THE THREE UNITS PER ACRE IS LOOKED AT ON A GLOBAL BASIS.

BASED ON WHAT WAS CALLED ANNEXATION PARCEL NUMBER TWO AND ORIGINAL ANNEXATION AGREEMENT THAT PROVIDED THAT. THE OVERALL PORTION OF THE ACREAGE NEEDS TO BE THREE UNITS PER ACRE. AS YOU ALLUDED TO BEFORE, YOU COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE A PORTION WITHIN HERON BID HAS FOUR UNITS PER ACRE.VERY PERSON THAT HAS ONE UNIT PER ACRE. SONG IS OVERALL THE PARCEL, THERE ARE THREE UNITS.

>> ALL RIGHT. IN THAT REGARD THEN, WE ARE ASKED IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE, TO POTENTIALLY PURCHASE A PROPERTY FOR 25 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS AS I'M UNDERSTANDING IT BECAUSE THAT IS A MATCHING BID OF WHAT EAST COAST HAD UP THERE. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> I HAVEN'T BEEN INVOLVED DIRECTLY IN THOSE CONVERSATIONS BUT I WAS PROVIDED WITH A CONTRACT THAT HAD THAT NUMBER IN IT. 25.410.

>> AND IN REGARDS THE CONTRACT, WHEN YOU REVIEWED IT WHEN YOU FIRST GOT IT, WAS THE LAND

SPECIFICALLY DESIGNATED IN A CERTAIN WAY? >> THE FIRST, I FIRST GOT A CONTRACT THAT HAD A MAP IN THE BACK WITH CERTAIN PARCELS THAT LOOKED SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS IN THE RFP. I GOT AN UPDATED VERSION OF THAT.NE WEEK LATER.

>> A WEEK LATER MEANING LIKE FRIDAY? >> FRIDAY BEFORE THIS MEETING.

>> THE LAND THAT WAS SUPPOSEDLY FOR SALE THEN, WAS CHANGED, MODIFIED OR DIFFERENT SIZE THAN

WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED? >> THAT'S CORRECT. IT WAS CHANGE, ONE OF THE PARCELS ON THE CORAL SPRINGS SIDE, I GUESS WHERE THE COUNTRY CLUB IS NOW.

THERE WAS LESS OF THAT ACREAGE, FIVE ACRES WAS NO LONGER THERE THE DOG -- WAS EXTENDED.

THERE WAS ALSO A PROPOSED 15 FEET WIDE STRIP ALONG THE PROPERTY THAT WAS EXCLUDED.

>> IN TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ON THIS PROPERTY, HAS ANYONE IN THE CITY DONE ANY

KIND OF AN ANALYSIS ON THIS PROPERTY? >> I MEAN, I DON'T THINK A DETAILED ANALYSIS IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT STAFF, WHAT I JUST SHARED WITH YOU FROM THE ZONING PERSPECTIVE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE BUT YOUR CITY MANAGER MAY BE MORE

APPROPRIATE. >> NANCY? >> NO, WE HAVE NOT.

>> OKAY. AND HAS ANYONE DONE ANY KIND OF TITLE SEARCH ON THIS PROPERTY, TO MAKE SURE WHAT IS AS PROPOSED IN THE LATEST ITERATION OF THIS CONTRACT, IS

ACCURATE AND FULLY OWNED OR CAPABLE OF BEING DEVELOPED? >> WE'VE NOT DONE A TITLE SEARCH SINCE FRIDAY. FRANKLY, IF WE DO THE TITLE SEARCH TWO WEEKS AGO PROBABLY BEEN WASTING SOME TIME AND RESEARCH BUT RESOURCES, EXCUSE ME.

BUT CERTAINLY SOMETHING I WOULD RECOMMEND. IF THE COMMISSION DECIDES TO GO IN THIS DIRECTION. THAT WE DO, FOR THESE PARCELS, WE ARE SURE IS PROBABLY

DEVELOPED. >> UNDERSTAND THIS TOPIC. SOME OF THAT LAND IS IN CORAL SPRINGS. SO THOSE NUMBERS, THAT YOU ARE USING WITH THAT, WOULD BE

INCLUSIVE OF CORAL SPRINGS? >> RIGHT. EVERYTHING YOU SPOKE OF ON THE THREE UNITS PER ACRE, THE ZONING, LAND USE, THAT IS A GOOD POINT, MAYOR.

THAT SPEAKS THE CITY PARK AND IS IN PROPERTY IN PARKLAND THE PROPERTY THAT WAS ANNEXED AS I MENTIONED. IN TERMS OF THE PROPERTY IN CORAL SPRINGS, THAT WILL BE

SUBJECT TO CORAL SPRINGS ZONING REGULATION. >> RIGHT SO CORAL SPRINGS HAS ROUGHLY, EIGHT ACRES ADJACENT TO, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ADJACENT TO OUR INCLUSIVE OF THE 40 ACRES ON -- HILL AND THEN ANOTHER ROUGHLY, NINE OR 10 ACRES, JUST BEYOND THE MARRIOTT. SO THERE IS YOU KNOW, WHILE A MAJORITY OF THE LAND IS IN

PARKLAND, IT IS NOT ALL IN PARKLAND. >> ON THE MAP THAT IS PROVIDED,

YES, THAT IS CORRECT. >> MARK AND SOME OF THE HERON BAY MEMBER SPOKE EARLIER TONIGHT AND INDICATED A WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THE CITY RELATIVE TO THE COVENANTS

[00:50:02]

>> RIGHT SO, WHEN THE GOLF COURSE PROPERTY WAS TRANSFERRED FROM LIKE I SAID, -- AT THE TIME, THE DEED CONTAINED A DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT RESTRICTED THE USE OF THE GOLF COURSE PROPERTIES TO CERTAIN USES AND THOSE USES WERE NOT RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL. IN THE COVENANTS WAS SUPPOSED TO APPLY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME AND THE HOA FOR 30 YEAR PERIOD FROM THE TIME THAT THE AGREEMENT WAS RECORDED, WHICH DON'T QUOTE ME ON THIS SPECIFICALLY, PRONE TO SAY EITHER DECEMBER 19 OR DECEMBER 21 OF 2027. THAT WOULD BE THE EXPIRATION OF THAT.

THE 30 YEAR PERIOD. >> AND IT MEANS THAT NOBODY CAN DEVELOP ON THAT PROPERTY UNTIL

THE EXPIRATION OF THAT COVENANT? >> NOBODY CAN DEVELOP

RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL, THAT IS CORRECT. >> WITHOUT THE APPROVAL.>> NANCY, FOR ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OR HERON BAY AND THEIR WILLINGNESS TO WAIVE SAID COVENANTS OF THE CITY WERE TO MAKE THE PURCHASE THAT THEY WOULD BE FREE AND

CLEAR TO GO AHEAD AND DEVELOP IT? >> WE HAVE BEGUN DISCUSSIONS ON

IT BUT NOTHING HAS BEEN FORMALIZED. >> AND HAVE THEY MADE ANY INTIMATIONS IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS THAT THEY MIGHT WANT SOME SORT OF COMPENSATION OR SOME SORT OF PAYMENT FROM THE CITY, RELATIVE TO THE WAIVER OR THE REMOVAL OF THAT

COVENANT? >> YES BUT NO SPECIFIC DOLLAR AMOUNT WAS COMMITTED OR

MENTIONED. >> SO IN ADDITION TO THE POTENTIAL $25 MILLION PLUS THAT WOULD BE NEEDED TO GO AHEAD AND PURCHASE THE PROPERTY FROM NSID, THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL MONETARY CONSIDERATIONS THAT THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY PPARKLAND MAY HAVE TO CONSIDER

IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT. >> THAT'S A GOOD ASSUMPTION AT

THIS POINT, YES. >> SO, IN REGARDS TO OUR CITY BUDGET, MY UNDERSTANDING IS OUR

CITY BUDGET IS $57 MILLION? >> CLOSE TO 60. >> OKAY AND WE TALK ABOUT MAKING A PURCHASE THAT COULD BE ALMOST, I MEAN, VERY CLOSE TO HALF OF WHAT THE ACTUAL BUDGET

IS RIGHT NOW. OKAY. >> WHILE THAT IS CORRECT, KEEP IN MIND THERE IS A PORTION THAT IS CORAL SPRINGS LAND THAT CORAL SPRINGS HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO PURCHASE. IMMEDIATELY BACK FROM US.

YOU ARE ACCURATE. >> AND ISLAM CLEAR THEN, WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING HERE, IS TO MOVE FORWARD POTENTIALLY, WITH THE PURCHASE FOR $25 MILLION PLUS WHATEVER IT MIGHT COST US TO DO THE COVENANT THING. AND THEN, TURN AROUND AND HAVE ANOTHER CITY PURCHASE A PORTION OF THAT. IN A MARKET AS JORDAN POINTED OUT, WHERE INTEREST RATES AT THE TIME THAT NSID WENT AHEAD AND MADE THIS PURCHASE FROM -- FOR $32 MILLION, THE INTEREST RATES WERE ABOUT TWO PERCENT OF THE TIME, BUT NOW THE INTEREST RATES ARE AROUND EIGHT AND RISING. AND I'VE GOT ECONOMISTS EVERY DAY ON THE RADIO AS I'M DRIVING TO WORK AND COMING HOME SAYING, THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT POTENTIAL RECESSION AND SLOW DOWN IN THE BUILDING MARKET AND WE'VE GOT PROBLEMS WITH SUPPLY CHAIN AND ALL HIS OTHER THINGS.

>> I'M NOT SURE INTEREST RATES ARE EIGHT PERCENT AND I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO GET INTO IT NECESSARILY DISCUSSION ON ECONOMICS AND POTENTIAL RECESSION.

WHEN ECONOMISTS WILL SAY THERE IS RECESSION AND THE OTHER WILL SAY THERE'S NOT.

SO YES, THE ECONOMY IS CERTAINLY NOT BOOMING LIKE IT WAS.

A YEAR AND 1/2 OR TWO YEARS AGO. SO THAT IS CERTAINLY A CONSIDERATION, BUT YOU KNOW, WOULD WE CALL IT -- I DON'T KNOW.GAIN, I'M NOT IMPLYING THAT IS HOW YOUR YOU KNOW, PUT IN THE ECONOMY BUT THERE IS STILL CONSTRUCTION GONE THERE STILL HOMES BEING BUILT. YOU KNOW, THERE IS OPPORTUNITY FOR GROWTH.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE DONE A FINANCIAL MODELING REPORT ON THE IMPACTS OF WHAT THIS POTENTIAL OUTLAY OF CITY FUNDS WOULD HAVE ON OUR OTHER STRATEGIC PLANNING PROJECTS THAT, THAT WE SPENT TWO FULL DAYS GOING THROUGH. AVE WE DONE THAT?

>> ABSOLUTELY. AS I HAD MENTIONED, VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE 25 MILLION

[00:55:02]

WE HAVE THE FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR 15 YEARS? NO WE DON'T.

TIME IS OF IMPORTANCE TO US. AT THIS TIME, WE DO HAVE THE $25 MILLION THAT COULD BE USED TO PURCHASE THIS LAND. WHAT IS THE FINANCIAL IMPACT? THERE COULD BE FUTURE FINANCIAL IMPACT. ONE OF THE THINGS. WHEN YOU DO NOT NEED THIS MORNING TO BALANCE A BUDGET. THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT KEY. THEN WE HAVE OUR MILLAGE RATE AND IT WILL STAY THE SAME. THERE IS NO INTENTION TO INCREASE ANYONE'S BUDGET TO MAKE THIS TRANSACTION HAPPEN. OWEVER, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS THE CAPITAL.

WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS WHOLE NEW NAMING IDENTITY THING AND LOOKING AT DOING NEW ENTRY SIGNS INTO THE CITY. SO, A TWO YEARS WE HAVE $5 MILLION SET ASIDE TO DO ENTRY SIGNS.WOULD THAT PROJECT BE PUT ON HOLD? YES.

THAT IS A TYPE OF IMPACT, WILL BE A FUTURE PROJECT POTENTIAL. ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS WE HAVE $20 MILLION EARMARKED FOR THE 36 ACRE PARK. WHAT IF THE DESIGN COMES IN HIGHER? WHAT IF PICKLE BALL COURTS ARE DESIRED FOR THAT PARK AND IS NOT IN THE BUDGET? WE WOULDN'T HAVE THOSE AVAILABLE RESERVES TO DO ANYTHING ABOVE THE $20 MILLION THAT'S BEEN EARMARKED, SO IT'S REALLY LIMITING EXTRA TEPID

PLANS IN THE FUTURE. >> JUST ON THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE, IS THAT THE PARK YOUR TALK ABOUT WE LIVE IN A MILLION 1/2 DOLLAR GRANT THAT HAS A TIME CONSTRAINT ON IT? AND WE HAVE TO COMPLETE THE BUILDING OF THAT PARK ON A TIMELY BASIS, --

>> NO, NOT SNEER, AS LONG AS THAT 1.5 MILLION IS UTILIZED FOR ANY TYPE OF PARK SERVICES OR PARK DEVELOPMENT, WHICH EQUATES TO ANY OF OUR TURF FIELD, NEAR THE PARKING LOT REDO, AND OF THE ARTIFICIAL TURF, SO WE ARE CURRENTLY PULLING DOWN ON THAT GRANT AMOUNT. SO IT IS TIED TO PARKS IN GENERAL.

>> BUT I THINK TO KEN'S POINT, THE 20 MILLION TO BUILD A PARK WOULD STILL BE THERE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS IF WE HAD TO DO EXTRA THINGS, THAT'S WHAT IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO DO UPGRADES. ON THE 20 MILLION.

>> OF 20 MILLION. >> AND THAT'S TO SAY, WE DON'T GET ANY OF OUR MONIES BACK THAT WE OUTLAY FOR THIS PURCHASE. SO YOU KNOW, WE CAN BUILD A PARK FOR 20 MILLION HAVING SPENT 25 MILLION, THAT IS MY QUESTION. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. 20 MILLION SEPARATE AND SOMETHING THAT HAS ALREADY RECEIVED THE FUNDS ON ALONE AND THAT MONEY HAS IN EARMARKED. BUT THE QUESTION WAS ON THE

$1.5 MILLION FOR THE GRANT. >> BUT NO, THAT GRANT IS TIED TO US FINISHING THE 36 ACRE PARK IN THREE YEARS. THAT CAN STILL HAPPEN. WE'D ONLY BE ABLE TO SPEND $20 MILLION ON THAT PART. TO YOUR POINT, KEN, WE CAN BUILD THE PARK.

WE CAN MEET THAT TIMELINE. THE PROBLEMS THAT WE WOULD POTENTIALLY RUN INTO, IF WE RECEIVED ZERO OF OUR FUNDS BACK, WE WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO SPEND $20 MILLION ON THAT PARK.

WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO POTENTIAL UPGRADES IF THAT IS SOMETHING WE WANT TO DO.O NANCY'S POINT, IF WE WANTED TO ADD PICKLBALL COURTS AND IT WASN'T IN THE $20 MILLION BUDGET, WOULD HAVE TO GO -- FOR GO THOSE. IF YOU COULD DO FINANCIAL MANEUVERING, ONE WOULD BE SELLING THE LAND BACK TO CORAL SPRINGS.

YOU KNOW SELLING CORAL SPRINGS ELLEN VECTOR THAT WOULD HAVE AN INJECTION OF FUNDS.

DEPENDING ON HOW FAST WE TAKE IN OUR PROCESS, WHETHER IT IS RFP OR HOWEVER WE HANDLE THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IF THAT IS THE WAY WE GO. WE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECEIVE MORE OF THOSE FUNDS YOU KNOW BEFORE FIVE YEARS. I THINK, WHICH WE HAVE TO DO IS IF WE CAN'T COME TO AGREEMENT WITH HARAMBE, WHAT WILL HAPPEN, IF WE HAVE TO MEET THE FIVE YEARS. THAT'S YOUR CONCERN AND THAT IS MY CONCERN AS WELL.

WE CAN DO THAT. WE WOULD STRUGGLE. WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO UPGRADES BUT WE COULD KEEP ON THE BUDGET. I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE

SAYING NANCY, IS THAT CORRECT STATEMENT? >> I'M COMFORTABLE SAYING THREE YEARS. I'M NOT AS COUNTABLE SAYING A FULL FIVE YEARS.

>> AND WHAT IS THE DEBT SERVICE THAT WE WILL HAVE IN THAT THREE YEAR PERIOD? MEANING -- NO, ON THE $25 MILLION. WHAT IS THE CITY LOSING?

>> RIGHT, IF THERE IS NO DEBT SERVICE, BUT WHAT ARE THE OPPORTUNITY COSTS LOSS WOULD

[01:00:04]

THAT COULD RUN ABOUT ANOTHER 100,000. WE LOOKING AT PROBABLY --

>> 100,000 PER YEAR? >> YES. LOOKING AT 250 Ã300 PER YEAR

TO HOLD THE PROPERTY. >> SO, BASED ON THAT, IT COULD BE ONE HALF MILLION DOLLARS OF

COST TO PARKLAND, SHOULD WE HAVE TO HOLD IT FOR FIVE YEARS. >> YES AND THEN THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE TWO APPRAISALS THAT WE HAVE TO CONDUCT ON THE PROPERTY.

IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE LEGAL FEES FOR DOING TITLE SEARCHES AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF THAT

NEEDS TO BE DONE. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE COSTS.

>> OR OTHER EXPENSES AND THEN, OF COURSE, WE HAVE NO IDEA ON WHAT A COVENANT ASPECT OF IT WILL COST. THEY'RE GOING TO WAIVE THE COVENANT AND THEY WANT TO CHARGE US AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT OF MONEY OVER IN HERON BAY, TO ALLOW FOR EVEN BUILDING OUT THERE, THEN THERE IS ANOTHER FACTOR THAT WE DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO YET.

>> 100 PERCENT AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT. >> I WAS GOING TO JUMP IN AND THE EXACT SAME PLACE YOU LEFT OFF.S IT POSSIBLE WE CAN ASK MARK, I'M CURIOUS BECAUSE THIS THE FIRST AND REALLY KIND OF HEARING ABOUT THIS PAYMENT FOR I GUESS THE RELEASE OF THE COVENANT AND KIND OF A LITTLE BIT I GUESS IT DOESN'T JIVE WITH ONE OF HER IN THE PAST WHICH IS, RESIDENTS OF THE HARAMBE COMMUNITY ARE ACTUALLY VOICING POTENTIAL OF BUYING

PROPERTY THEMSELVES, -- >> I'M JUST TALKING OUT LOUD SO THAT WE CAN ALL HAVE THIS

DISCUSSION. >> SURE. >> I'M HESITANT TO HAVE THIS.

I KNOW WE CAN ONLY DO THIS TOGETHER AND WE CAN ONLY DO THIS IN PUBLIC.

BUT I'M HESITANT TO ASK MARK TOO MANY QUESTIONS TO PUT HIM ON THE SPOT.

>> HE HAS A BOARD HE HAS TO GO BACK TO. >> OF COURSE.

I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT OBVIOUSLY, YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE THE CONVERSATION IS GOING.

AND WE ARE OBVIOUSLY LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. WE NECESSARILY CAN PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION, BUT IF WE CAN GET A LITTLE BIT, I JUST, I DON'T WANT TO GO TOO MUCH INTO --

>> HERE. I'M NOT LOOKING FOR DEFINITIVE DOLLAR AMOUNT.

I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE OVERALL CENSUS OF THE BOARD. >> THERE ARE TWO ASPECTS HERE.

A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WHICH WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR THAT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

THE WAY THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, I DON'T WANT TO BE ON THE SPOT HERE SO I AM --

>> IF YOU WANT ME TO EXPLAIN IT? OR DO YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN IT?

>> I LOVE TO HEAR HIM. >> OKAY. >> I CAN GIVE YOU WHAT -- WHAT WE ARE GETTING FROM OUR LAWYER RIGHT NOW. WITHIN OUR INCORPORATION, DECLARATION OF INCORPORATION, THE BOARD HAS THE POWER TO WAIVE THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

BUT WE DID MAKE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE HOMEOWNERS BACKBONE WERE DOING THESE RFPS, EVERYBODY WAS CONCERNED THAT THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW IS THAT SO THE BOARD, LET'S SAY THAT THE BOARD WAIVES THIS. THE BOARD WAIVES THIS. WE DO HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE HOMEOWNERS. OKAY? AND THE HOMEOWNERS CAN OVERRIDE THE BOARDS RECOMMENDATION. IN ORDER TO DO THAT, 50 PERCENT OF THE HOMEOWNERS HAVE TO VOTE.

AND IF YOU KNOW A MAJORITY WITHIN THE 50 PERCENT SAY WE DON'T AGREE WITH THE BOARD, --

>> THEN THE COVENANT STAYS IN PLACE. >> IT WOULD STAND.

>> I JUST WANT TO INTERJECT BECAUSE I THINK IT ALSO BEARS MENTIONING, MARKET, AND IT WANT TO SPEAK FOR YOU BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS, WHO IS ASKING THE COVENANT TO BE WAIVED? THAT'S A BIG FACTOR. IN TERMS OF WHETHER IT IS THE CITY OF PARKLAND, OR A CHOSEN DEVELOPER THAT THE HOA HAS APPROVED VERSUS A LESS THAN DESIRABLE DEVELOPER.

>> THIS THING WILL HIT -- >> AGAIN, THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE HERE IS THAT WE ARE CONTEMPLATING PURCHASING SOMETHING FOR $25 MILLION. WE ARE USING THIS CITY, THE RESIDENCE, TAXPAYER MONIES TO PURCHASE SOMETHING FOR $25 MILLION, AND IS SUBJECT TO OUR ABILITY TO TURN IT OVER FOR DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES WHICH IS SUBJECT TO A VOTE BY PEOPLE

[01:05:01]

THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER. >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MAY BE EXPLORED IN A MENTION OPENING COMMENTS, SOME SORT OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WHERE MY UNDERSTANDING AND ANTHONY CAN ADDRESS IT. MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CITY DOES NOT NEED TO GO THROUGH AN RFP PROCESS TO SELECT THE DEVELOPER, TO WORK ON THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THIS LAND. AND I ALSO UNDERSTAND THERE ARE SOME RECENT DEVELOPMENT THAT OCCURRED WITHIN THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS AS TO I HEARD THAT EAST COAST PROPOSED A DOLLAR FIGURE TO BUY THE LAND WITHOUT ANY CONTINGENCIES.

IT ALSO HARD THE TOLL BROTHERS EQUALLY MATCH THAT WITHOUT ANY CONTINGENCIES.

AND THAT'S A RELATIVELY NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT A LITTLE MORE.

ONE OF THE CONCEPTS I DON'T THINK SHOULD BE OVERLOOKED, IS THE CITY NOT BEARING ANY FINANCIAL? THE CITY WORKING WITH WHETHER HIS PUBLC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPER, TO ACQUIRE THE LAND, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY AND GETTING THE BLESSING AND WAIVER FROM THE HOA, TO FACILITATE THAT.

AND ANTHONY, YOU CAN SPEAK AS TO WHAT OTHER REQUIREMENTS OR WHETHER WE NEED TO DO RFP OR WE CAN, IN SOME SORT OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP MAY BE AMUSING THE WRONG

TERMINOLOGY. >> THE WAY UNDERSTAND IN A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WE WOULD RETAIN THE LAND. THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER DISCUSSION ALTOGETHER.

BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE LEASES AND YOU KNOW -- YOU BECOME THE LANDOWNER IN THAT INSTANCE. WE ARE STILL ABLE TO SELL THE LAND TO A DEVELOPER, HAVING TAKING CARE OF THE COVENANT, HAVING TAKING CARE OF THE EASEMENTS, WHICH WOULD IN ESSENCE, POTENTIALLY MAKE THE LAND EVEN MORE VALUABLE BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY SETTLED A LOT

OF THE OUTSTANDING ISSUES. >> I WOULD HOPE WE HAVE THE VOTE TO WAIVE THE COVENANT.

WITHIN THE NEXT 30 DAYS OR 90 DAYS OR WHATEVER WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'VE ALL TALKED ABOUT. YOU KNOW, TONIGHT IS THE THREE VOTES TO GO AHEAD WITH THIS AND THEN WITH NSID, WE HAVE TWO WAIVE THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, WHICH WE HAD TO GO TO THE BOAT AND THE OTHER ISSUE WE HAVE TO WORK AT THE EASEMENT ISSUE AND THAT CAN EITHER BE MONEY OR LAND SWAP IF WE TALK ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE.

>> THAT BRINGS ANOTHER QUESTION TO MIND. >> WE AGREE WITH THAT WILL BE AND I CAN'T DO THAT TONIGHT BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY AGREE IN THE NEXT --

>> AND THAT WILL BE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THIS PROCESS WOULD ALLOW NANCY TO DO, WHICH WOULD BE MORE FIRMLY, YOU KNOW, WORK OUT THE SPECIFIC BECAUSE WE CAN'T WORK OUT THOSE SPECIFICS UNTIL WE TAKE THAT NEXT STEP, WHICH IS ALLOWING NANCY THE ABILITY, TO KIND OF NEGOTIATE AND FINALIZE THOSE TYPES OF DEALS. SO THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT WE ARE LOOKING TO DO TONIGHT. WE ARE LOOKING TO DO TONIGHT, IS TO BE ABLE TO REALLY HAVE ANTHONY AND NANCY YOU KNOW, DROP LEGAL DOCUMENTS, COME UP WITH LEGAL SOLUTIONS, COME UP WITH YOU KNOW, DOLLAR VALUES. UT AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, WE ARE JUST HAVING A DISCUSSION. WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THAT IS

SOMETHING WE WANT TO ENTERTAIN. >>! ASKING QUESTIONS.

I'M TRYING TO FIGURE STUFF OUT AND IN THAT REGARD, AS I UNDERSTAND THE COVENANTS OR DECLARATIONS RESTRICTIONS THAT RUN WITH THE LAND PART OF THE COVENANT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FOR THE 30 YEARS, THERE'S ALSO SOME SORT OF MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT THAT GOES TO THE OWNER AS WELL. WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THERE?

>> THERE IS MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT THAT THE MARRIOTT PAYS.

AND NSID IS PARTLY PAIN THAT IS 15 -- >> IS NO MORE THAN $50,000.

>> WHAT THE ASSESSMENT IS FOR, IS, WE MAINTAIN ALL THE LAND ALONG NOB HILL.

AND WE MAINTAIN THE MEDIAN. AND THAT IS WHAT THE MONEY IS TO COVER AND THE MARRIOTT PAYS ASSESSMENTS FOR THE LAND ALONG NOB HILL. WE OWN THE PERIMETER, WE MAINTAIN. THAT IS ANOTHER ITEM OPEN FOR DISCUSSION HERE.

I DON'T HAVE ANY USE FOR THAT LAND. SO MAYBE WE CAN --

>> THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE AS COMMISSIONERS, WE ARE FIDUCIARIES OF THE TAX DOLLARS THAT ARE RESIDENTS ARE ENTRUSTING US TO USE IN THE

[01:10:01]

THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL $50,000 -- >> 60.

>> $60,000. [INAUDIBLE] >> ANYONE THE PLAZA PROPERTY

WILL BUY THAT PRICE TAG. >> I APPRECIATE THE FINANCIAL CONCERNS.

ONE OF THE THINGS OF GOD I COULD HAVE ANTHONY ADDRESS AND WE CAN GET BACK TO IT BECAUSE I WORK FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CITIES REQUIREMENTS WOULD BE FOR WHETHER THE CITY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH RFP PROCESS OR WHETHER THE CITY COULD PARTNER WITH A DEVELOPER TO BEAR THE FINANCIAL BURDEN MOVING FORWARD.

AND THAT SOMETHING HOPEFULLY ANTHONY CAN EXPLAIN. >> SURE.

UNDER THE CITY CHARTER AND THE CITY CODE, -- >> THANK YOU.

>> THANKS MARK. >> THE PROPERTY, IF YOU WANT TO SELL THE PROPERTY AND IS VALUED AT MORE THAN $50,000, REQUIRES AN ORDINANCE PASSED BY AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF FOUR COMMISSIONERS AND REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING. YOU'VE CODE PROVISION THAT COMPETITIVE BIDS ARE NOT REQUIRED. THAT WOULD BE A DECISION AT

THAT POINT THAT YOU WOULD MAKE BUT YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED. >> WE COULD YOU KNOW, IF WE PASS IT, SO COULD COME AND SAY, I GOT A PLAN LOOK AT THIS PLANET OFFER YOU X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS AND WE CAN COME BACK UP HERE AS A BODY, AND APPROVE THAT SALE.

>> THE SAME NUMBER. FOR THE SALE OF PROPERTY UNDER 8.01.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T GET TO FINISH MY QUESTION AND HE DIDN'T WANT TO INTERRUPT. WHEN I STARTED WITH THE QUESTION, IT WASN'T CLEAR IF THERE WAS AN AMOUNT OF MONEY TO WAIVE THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

HE SAID IS NOT THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AND USE OF THEIR TWO THINGS AT ISSUE.

RESTRICTIVE COVENANT EASEMENTS AND REMOVED WAY UP TO THE CONVERSATION.

I'M CURIOUS YOU SAID IS EITHER OR -- MONEY OR LAND SWAP. -- BUT WHAT IS IT?

>> WE OWN ALL THE LAND ALONG -- BOULEVARD AND NOB HILL, WE OWN THE LAND.

SO, IF SOMEONE WANTS ACCESS WITH THE PROPERTY INSIDE, I THINK WE'VE GOT A RIGHT TO BE

COMPENSATED FOR EASEMENT. >> ALSO TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. WHEN YOU SAY LAND SWAP YOU'RE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING OUTSIDE THE CITY THAT HAS -- QUICKLY -- ORIGINALLY WE WERE LOOKING TO BE COMPENSATED. RIGHT NOW, THEY HAVE TWO EASEMENTS AND WE ARE NOT TALKING LAYOUT. TO BE COMPENSATED FOR THE TWO. > AND THAT'S VERY THINK WHERE

I COME FROM.>> I'LL BE HONEST. I REALIZE RECENTLY THE CITY IS LOOKING TO BUY THE EASEMENTS. WE WERE ALWAYS GOING TO SELL IT TO THE DEVELOPER.

AND WE LOOK AT APPRAISING EASEMENTS, IT'S REALLY BASED ON WHAT THEY ARE FOR.

YOU CAN GO TO A COW PASTURE YOU KNOW THAT'S A LOT DIFFERENT THAN THE IMPORTANCE OF AN

EASEMENT TO GO TO 150,000 SQUARE-FOOT. >> I GET THAT.

WHAT I'M HEARING, I WILL THINK OUT LOUD HERE. THE RESIDENCE HERE FROM HERON BAY ARE ALL HERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE INVESTED INTEREST IN WHERE THE DECISION GOES, RIGHT? BUT I ALSO THINK THAT AS WITH ALL THE RESIDENTS PAYING TAX MONEY, THOUGH BE CONTRIBUTING TO THE OVERALL THING, WONDERING, IS HERON BAY, AND I GUESS YOU HAVE TO GIVE ME AN ANSWER SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. IS HERON BAY NOT AGREEABLE OR AMENABLE TO CONTRIBUTE SOMETHING WITHOUT ASKING FOR -- IN THE SENSE OF ACTUALLY GIVING THE ADDED INVESTMENT BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE TALK ABOUT THE DOLLAR FIGURES ADDING UP.

I WANTED TO BE SOMETHING FOR THE RESIDENCE TO THINK ABOUT OF HERON BAY.

THAT WE ARE ALL TRYING TO GIVE SOMETHING HERE AND TO SOME EXTENT IS THAT THE MORE ALL OF US CAN GIVE, THE BETTER CHANCES ARE OF ACTUALLY CREATING SUCCESSFUL PROJECTS.

AGAIN, OBVIOUSLY OVER 30 TO DISCUSS IT BUT I THINK IT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.

>> ONE MORE. >> YOU MENTIONED REGARDING THE EASEMENT.

THAT THE BOARD CAN WAIVE THE EASEMENT BUT THEN YOU HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE RESIDENCE.

>> RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. >> RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.HOW DOES THE EASEMENT WORK?

DOES THE BOARD OF THE DECISION? >> THE BOARD HAS THAT. >> THE BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY.

> THE BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DISPOSE OF LAND OR ACQUIRE LAND.

>> OKAY. >> I WASN'T DONE. >> YOU BEEN GOING FOR A LONG TIME. SIMEON OR BOB, OR WOULD YOU LIKE KEN TO KEEP GOING?

[01:15:02]

HE'S DOING A GREAT JOB. >> I AM IN TROUBLE. >> ABSOLUTELY IT'S A PLEASURE

TO WATCH. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANTHONY, YOU KNOW, IN TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE IMPACT IS GOING TO BE ON THE CITY, ONE OF THE OTHER ELEMENTS TO THIS THAT I HAVE GREAT CONCERN ABOUT, IS THIS IDEA THAT AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS CURRENTLY PENDING A LAWSUIT THAT WAS FILED BY SEVERAL HOMEOWNERS AGAINST NSID, MY UNDERSTANDING THAT SOME PART OF THAT HAD TO DO WITH THE COVENANT AND THEIR ABILITY TO ENFORCE IT OR NOT.

IS THAT ACCURATE? >> YES. >> OKAY.

AND SO, HAVE ANY DISCUSSIONS BEEN HAD WITH THE PLAINTIFFS, THE PLAINTIFFS ATTORNEY OR ANYTHING IN THAT REGARD THAT IF A SUBSEQUENT OWNER SUCH AS THE CITY, WERE TO COME IN AND PURCHASE THE PROPERTY, WE WOULD NOT BE BUYING INTO THE LAWSUIT OURSELVES.

>> I'VE NOT HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS. >> THAT IS ANOTHER CONSIDERATION. WE MAY VERY WELL BE BUYING OURSELVES INTO A LAWSUIT.

>> IT IS POSSIBLE THAT IF THAT CASE IS NOT RESOLVED THAT THEY COULD AMEND THEIR COMPLAINT AT THE SUBSEQUENT PURCHASER OF THE PROPERTY, WHOEVER THAT MIGHT BE.

>> NOW, I KNOW THAT COVENANT IS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RELATIVE TO THE FIVE YEARS ARE LEFT, OR COVENANTS THAT RAN WITH THE GOLF COURSE. ARE THOSE COVENANTS, OR IS THERE ANY LANGUAGE THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF, I MEAN, I SAW SOME LANGUAGE IN ACTUALLY, I PULLED IN INDIVIDUALS -- IT WAS INCORPORATED ALL THE VARIOUS EASEMENTS, COVENANTS, ETC. FOR THE REST OF THE PROPERTIES. DO WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ANY INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNERS BEING ABLE TO ENFORCE THESE COVENANTS OVER AND ABOVE WHATEVER IS DONE EITHER BY THE HOMEOWNERS

ASSOCIATION, OR BY A VOTE. >> SO, THE GOLF COURSE COVENANT THAT I REVIEWED IS LIKE SECTION 18, BUT IT SPEAKS ABOUT, SPEAKS THE BENEFIT OF THE COVENANTS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TIME DEVELOPER, AND THE HOA. DOES NOT SAY SPECIFIC. DIDN'T GENERALLY WHEN YOU BUY A HOUSE, GET A DEED FOR THE HOUSE. YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE A ONE PAGE OR TWO PAGE DOCUMENT. THERE IS A LEGAL DESCRIPTION USUALLY SAYS SUBJECT TO KIND OF STANDARD LANGUAGE SAYS SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS COVENANTS OF RECORD.

RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD SO, THAT MAY BE THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU SAW.

AND I THINK WHAT IT SPEAKS TO IS TALKING ABOUT ON YOUR PARTICULAR PROPERTY OR PARTIAL.

YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU LIVE IN HOA TYPICALLY THIS DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPERTY. THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE TO PAY MAINTENANCE FEES AND FINES. AND SO, HAVE NOT SEEN IT RECORDED YET.

NOT TO SAY SOMEBODY CAN'T -- [INAUDIBLE] I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY.

>> OKAY. >> AS PART OF THE PROCESS I'LL JUST MENTION THAT ONE OF THE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, ONE OF THE PRINCIPLES OF THE PLAINTIFF IN THE ACTION, PROVIDED AN EMAIL THAT WAS READ AT THE OUTSET OF THE MEETING IN SUPPORT OF THE CITY INTERVENTIONIST PROCESS.

MY HOPE WOULD BE THAT IF WE ARE TO PURSUE A FURTHER DIALOGUE, OF EITHER THE CITY WORKING IN TANDEM WITH A DEVELOPER ON A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP AND THE HOA A WAIVER OF COVENANTS, PART OF THE DIALER CAN ALSO INCLUDE SITTING WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS AND PLAINTIFF IN THAT LAWSUIT. AND ADDRESSING THE RESOLUTION OF THAT LAWSUIT AS PART AND

PARCEL OF THIS. >> MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IN SPEAKING WITH THE PLAINTIFFS AS RESIDENCE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS, INTENT OF THAT LAWSUIT WAS TO PREVENT THE NIGHTMARE SCENARIO THEY SAW COMING DOWN THE PIPE OR WHAT WOULD BE DEVELOPED ON THE GOLF COURSE AND CERTAINLY, THEY HAVE IN SUPPORT OF WORKING WITH THE HOA, THE CITY AND CORAL SPRINGS ON AVOIDING THAT NIGHTMARE SCENARIO. AND HOPEFULLY, OF HOPE THAT DISCUSSION WOULD BE TO

RESOLUTION OF THE LAWSUIT. >> BOB? >> GO AHEAD.

>> HE NEEDS TO REGROUP. [LAUGHTER] >> NANCY, I HAVE A QUESTION.

ABBY SAID, HERON BAY HAS EXPRESSED THEIR VIEWPOINT THAT THEIR BOARD IS ABLE TO WAIVE

[01:20:07]

>> AS PART OF THE AGREEMENT THAT WAS FORWARDED TO OUR ATTORNEY, WE ARE ASKING FOR EASEMENTS ON ALL PARCELS THAT TOUCH PARCELS THAT WE WOULD BE PURCHASING.

>> AND CURRENTLY, THEY HAVE NOT GIVEN APPROVAL.> NO BECAUSE WERE NOT REALLY INTO CONTRACT

NEGOTIATION AT THIS POINT. >> NOT WRITING BUT THERE IS NO VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS THAT WHATEVER EASEMENTS THE CITIES LOOKING FOR, WE WOULD HAVE. BUT AGAIN, IN ANTHONY'S YOU KNOW, BRIEF LOOK AT THE CONTRACT, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO THE NEXT STEP.

>> WHEN THIS FURTHER I WILL SAY NORTH, WHERE TRAILS AND THAT WAS INITIALLY PART OF THE

PURCHASE. >> ARE STILL IN EASEMENT THERE. >> THE EASEMENT IS HERON BAY.

>> AT TRAILS END. >> AT TRAILS AND WITH THE INITIAL FOUR ACRES OR FIVE ACRE

PARCEL WAS PART OF THE SALE. >> ACTUALLY ORIGINALLY IN THE RFP, IT WAS, IF ANYONE WANTED IT. SO IN THE ORIGINAL RFP, ONLY TO MY KNOWLEDGE, ONLY EAST COAST INCLUDED THAT IN THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE THOSE, THAT ACREAGE. PULL BROTHERS MY UNDERSTANDING, DID NOT INCLUDE THAT. THE PORTION OF TRAILS END AS A PART THAT THEY WERE GOING TO PURCHASE. THERE WAS A SEPARATE ALTOGETHER.

>> WHAT WAS SENT TO NANCY OFFICIALLY IN THE OUTLINE OF THE PARCEL PURCHASE, THAT WAS

INCLUDED, CORRECT? >> THAT IS CORRECT. INITIALLY, AS WERE HER LEFT FRONT OF THE PROPERTY CHANGED AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE CHANGES.

THAT WAS -- >> OKAY WANT TO BRING IT UP IT WAS INCLUDED.

>> THE END OF -- >> YES. >> OKAY.

>> A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANTED, KEN ADDRESS SOME OF THEM THE INGRESS, EGRESS AND THE EASEMENT. OBVIOUSLY, WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE APPRAISAL FOR THE PROPERTY. THE QUESTION IS, IN THE APPRAISAL PROCESS, WHAT POTENTIALLY COULD BE THERE OR WHAT IT CURRENTLY IS. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, HOW DO

WE, HOW WOULD THE APPRAISAL WORK? >> INITIALLY PRICE WAS $150,000 AN ACRE. WE LOOK AT 285. WHAT'S WHAT?

>> THE APPRAISAL WOULD BE ON THE LAND ITSELF. >> ALSO NOTED FUTURE POTENTIAL.

>> NO. >> JUST IN CURRENT LAND. >> IS MY CURRENT UNDERSTANDING.

YOU MAY HAVE MORE KNOWLEDGE BUT TO MY UNDERSTANDING, IT WILL BILL THE ACTUAL LAND BECAUSE

THAT'S WHAT THE ASSET IS. >> JUST TO THROW THIS OUT THERE, WE ARE DEALING WITH THIS, I'M DEALING WITH A PRIVATE MATTER, YOU CAN GET BOTH DOES NOTHING STOPPING US FROM GETTING BOTH APPRAISALS. THAT WAY WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DISCUSS THE LAND IF WE ARE NOT ABLE TO MAKE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER AND WANT TO SELL THE LAND AND RECOUP IT, VERSUS WHAT THE POTENTIAL UPSIDE IS IF WE ARE ABLE TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER THING IS WORTH HAVING

BOTH. >> IS GOING TO POINT OUT YOUR ACTUALLY REQUIRED OF TWO APPRAISALS BEFORE YOU EFFECTUATE THE SALE BASED ON PURCHASE PRICE.> THEY GO WE CAN DO ONE OF EACH RIGHT? DO THEY HAVE TO BE THE SAME TYPE OF APPRAISAL?

>> IT DOES NOT SPECIFY THE HAVE TO HAVE THE SAME EXACT APPRAISAL CONSIDERATIONS.

>> GO AHEAD. >> GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. I GET TO SPEAK TONIGHT.

SPRINGS FOR 11 YEARS WE WENT THROUGH THE -- DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS THE COUNTRY CLUB.

SO I'M SORRY, I NEED TO SPEAK LOUDER. JUST THE BACKGROUND.

AND ERIC IS HERE, WITH LAMBERT ADVISORY AS WELL AS DIANA WHITE IS HERE FOR TRAFFIC SO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. YOU CAN DO BOTH. THE LAND IS REALLY WORTH WHAT THE LAND IS WORTH NOW BASED ON LAND USE AND ZONING IN PLACE. BUT HE COULD ALSO DO AN APPRAISAL BASED ON WHAT YOU MAY WANT TO SEE THERE, THE BEST USE BUT THAT WILL REQUIRE THE CAVEATS AND APPRAISAL LOSSES YOU CAN'T BOOK COMMERCIAL ON IT TODAY SO THEREFORE, THIS WILL

REQUIRE LAND USE ZONING. >> QUICK QUESTION ANTHONY REGARDS TO THAT.

[01:25:06]

CONSIDERATION, DO YOU KNOW? >> I DON'T RECALL AT THE TOP OF MY HEAD, VICE MAYOR.

>> WERE THEY LOOKING AT THIS WITH COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN MIND? AND WITH THE YOU KNOW, ALL THE BELLS AND WHISTLES WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT CAN BE PLACED ON THERE FROM THE PROSPECTS THAT CAME FROM EAST COAST OR TOLL OR DO THEY SAY IT'S JUST A VACANT

YOU KNOW, GOLF COURSE AND NOBODY IS USING ANYMORE.>> SURE.

I WANT TO SPEAK TO BECAUSE ANOTHER REVIEWED THE APPRAISAL. I AM NOT SURE.

DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION? >> ANOTHER GOT TWO APPRAISALS.

>> ARE WE RESTRICTED IN ANY MEANS, BECAUSE AGAIN, WE ARE BASICALLY LOOKING AT WHAT THE MARKET CONDITIONS ARE. ARE WE RESTRICTED? LET'S SAY FOR EXAMPLE, THE APPRAISAL CAME IN AT 10 MILLION. AND WE LOOKING TO BUY IT FOR

25, DO WE HAVE RESTRICTION IN OUR CODE ANYWHERE? >> EFFICACY THE QUESTION YOU'RE GOING TO. WE ARE REQUIRED TO GET APPRAISALS BUT NO RESTRICTIONS

THAT SAY, YOU CAN'T PAY MORE OR LESS. >> AND WE ARE NOT GETTING A MORTGAGE ON IT. SO INTERESTED WERE NOT VARY BASED, NOT THAT THE APPRAISALS

NOT IMPORTANT BUT YOU KNOW. >> THE APPRAISALS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT.

IF AN APPRAISAL] $10 MILLION AND WANT TO SPEND $25 MILLION OF OUR RESIDENTS TAX MONIES,

THAT IS A PROBLEM! >> AND I HEAR THAT. BUT BASED ON THE TWO RFPS THAT WERE PERFORMED BY NSID, THEY HAVE GOTTEN FOUR OFFERS OVER $30 MILLION AND TWO YOU KNOW

ONE WELL UNDER 30 MILLION, AND ONE JUST UNDER 30. >> THOSE WERE ALL IN PRESUMPTION THAT THE COULD COME BEFORE THIS COMMISSION AND GET WHAT THEY WANTED AND WHAT THEY PROPOSE. AND THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE NECESSARILY HAVE TO LET THEM

DO. >> NO, 100 PERCENT. AS A LANDOWNER WE ACTUALLY HAVE EVEN MORE RIGHTS. THAT IS CORRECT. OBVIOUSLY, ONCE, IF WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, WE DO PURCHASE IT. AT THAT POINT, WE HAVE DISCUSSIONS AS TO WHAT WE ARE GOING TO WANT TO SEE THERE. AND THUS WE HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS AS TO WHAT WE ARE GOING TO WANT TO SEE, THAT WILL BE THE TIME FOR US TO ENTERTAIN MOTHERS PARTNERING WITH A DEVELOPER, WHETHER IT'S GOING THROUGH THE RFP PROCESS.

WHATEVER THE PROCESS IS, THAT'S WHEN WE START TO ENTERTAIN WHAT IS GOING TO BE THERE.

>> LET ME JUST SAY SOMETHING. MY UNDERSTANDING. THE RESIDENCE AND I SPOKE, THOSE I SPOKE WITH ABOUT THE CITY, TO STEP UP AND INTERCEDE IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE THEY SAW THAT THE PROCESS THAT WAS GOING ALONG WAS NUMBER ONE, GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION COMPLETELY, NUMBER TWO, WAS GOING TO BE ADVERSE. NOT ONLY TO THE RESIDENCE OF HERON BAY BUT THE ENTIRE CITY, COMMUNITY AND SMALL TOWN FEEL. IF THERE'S A WAY TO SKIN THE CAT WITHOUT THAT BEING A FINANCIAL BURDEN, OF THE RISK, AND I DON'T WANT, I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR -- MY INTENTION HAVING THE CITY INTERCEDE IN THE PROCESS, IS NOT FOR THE CITY TO MAKE A PENNY. IF NOT FOR THE CITY TO LOSE A PENNY! BUT FOR US TO MORE CONTROL THE PROCESS. AND MORE CONTROL WOULD ULTIMATELY GETS PUT ON THE LAND FOR R THE BENEFIT OF THE RESIDENTS OF PARKLAND IN TOTAL AND THE RESIDENCE OF HERON BAY. IF THERE IS A WAY, AND I MENTIONED THE WORD PRIVATE, PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP. BUT PERHAPS IT'S THE WRONG TERMINOLOGY.

>> THERE IS A WAY TO SKIN A CAT. >> LAND USE CONTROL WE HAVE ON

THAT PROPERTY IS EXACTLY THE WAY TO SKIN THE CAT. >> THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF SCARE TACTICS THAT HAVE BEEN USED BY A VARIETY OF SOURCES, THAT HAVE CONCERNED THE RESIDENCE TO A GREAT DEAL, ABOUT WHAT IMPLICATIONS THERE ARE INPUTTING THIS LAND IN THE WRONG HANDS.BECAUSE IN THE SAME WAY THAT THE LAND USE CONTROLS THAT, THE RESIDENTS OF ALSO BEEN HEARING THAT THIS BODY HAS ONLY CERTAIN LIMITATIONS ON WHAT IT CAN TELL A LANDOWNER TO DO AND NOT DO THAT A LANDOWNER HAS RIGHTS. NO -- WE GOT TO BALANCE THOSE TWO THINGS. AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH ALL OF YOUR CONCERNS BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL VALID AND COMPLETE LEGITIMATE. ONE OF THE THINGS I HAD WHEN WE HEARD WE WERE HAVING THE MEETING I WANTED TO TALK BECAUSE WITH THE CENTRAL WE CAN'T TALK OUTSIDE OF YOU. WE WANT TO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT AVOIDING THE PROBLEM THAT

[01:30:01]

THEY'VE ASKED THE CITY TO STEP UP AND DETER THAT TRAIN FROM COMING AT THEM.

IT AFFECTS THEIR BACKYARDS, EFFECTS OF TRAFFIC, IN FACT THE SCHOOLS, IT AFFECTS THEIR PROPERTY VALUES. AND SO -- [APPLAUSE] I'VE NO CONCERN ABOUT FIGURING OUT A CREATIVE SOLUTION BECAUSE I HAVE ALL OF THE SAME FINANCIAL CONCERNS YOU HAVE.

MARKET COULD CHANGE TOMORROW. GOODBYE LYNN FOR 25 MILLION, IT'S WORTH 20.

JUST BE SPENDING TAX PAYERS MONEY CAN BE HAVING ADDITIONAL COST ASSOCIATED WITH ALL OF THOSE. I SHARE ALL OF THOSE CONCERNS. ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I WANTED TO HAVE THIS DIALOGUE AND WANT TO HEAR THE COMMENTS FIRST BEFORE SPEAK OPENLY, WE HAVE A WAY, I BELIEVE, BASED ON MY DISCUSSIONS AND THE CITY ATTORNEY CAN CHIME IN.

WE HAVE A WAY WHERE WE CAN SOLVE THE NIGHTMARE SCENARIO THEIR RESIDENCE INVESTIGATORS TO STEP UP AND SOLVE WITHOUT BEARING THE FINANCIAL BURDEN. I HEARD FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY, THAT TOLL BROTHERS FROM NOT THEM, BUT FROM SOMEONE ELSE THAT TOLL BROTHERS HAS MANAGED EAST COAST -- WITH NO CONTINGENCIES AND WITH QUICK CLOSING.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS ACCURATE OR NOT. LET ME SAY IT, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS ACCURATE OR NOT BUT THAT IS ONE POTENTIAL RESOLUTION.

THE OTHER IS THIS PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP RESOLUTION.

AND I HAVE ALSO HEARD FOR THE FIRST TIME A FEW DAYS AGO, THAT THE PROPERTY THAT WE ARE CONTEMPLATING PURCHASING FROM NSID HAS NOW CHANGED ONCE AGAIN.

I'VE CONCERNS OF WHAT WE ARE ACTUALLY BUYING IF WE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIALLY BUYING ANYTHING. WE ARE DEALING WITH A NUMBER OF FACTORS HERE.

BUT AS LONG AS WE GET TO THE ULTIMATE GOAL, WHICH IS WAITING FOR ALL THE RESIDENTS OF HERON BAY, AND OTHER RESIDENTS OF PARKLAND, THE NIGHTMARE SCENARIO, THEN I THINK WE'VE

ACHIEVED OUR MISSION. >> BUT YOU ARE SUGGESTING, YOU ARE SUGGESTING WE NOT BUY IT,

YET, WE MAKE SURE NOTHING BAD HAPPENS. >> IF OUR ONLY WAY TO ULTIMATELY CONTROL WHO WINDS UP BEING THE DEVELOPER OF THE PROJECT TO BUY THE MUST HAVE THE DISCUSSION LIKE WE ARE HAVING AN LEFTIST WORD UNDERSTAND ALL THE RISKS ASSOCIATED. THE ANSWER IS THAT WE CAN FIGURE A WAY TO PUT THAT IN SOMEONE ELSE'S HANDS, OTHER THAN WHAT LOOK LIKE IT WILL BE ULTIMATE OUTCOME OF THE PROCESS THAT WE FEEL AS A BODY INTO THE CITY MORE COMFORTABLE IN DEALING WITH AND WE ARE SOLVE

THE PROBLEM. >> DO YOU HAVE THAT SOLUTION? >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROPOSERS ARE WITH PHYLLIS REVELATION. BOTH RFP RESPONDENTS HAVE NOW -- THAT MATCHED EACH OTHER'S OFF WITH A QUICK CLOSING WITH NO CONDITION.

>> THAT IS EXACTLY WHY WE HEAR. >> ABSOLUTELY!> BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH HEARSAY AND THIS AND THAT. THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WE'RE HERE. WE ARE HERE TO TAKE CONTROL THE PROCESS. AND THAT IS WHY, I'M PROPOSING WE PURCHASE IT.

BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY SOLUTION THAT I PERSONALLY, CAN THINK ABOUT THIS MOMENT, WHERE WE CAN GUARANTEE THE OUTCOME AND TO ME, YES, THERE'S REST. THERE IS ALWAYS RISK AND UNDERSTAND EVERYONE'S CONCERNS AND WE NEED TO ADDRESS THOSE AND WE HAVE TIME TO ADJUST THOSE. IF WE TAKE THE NEXT STEPS FORWARD.

BUT TO TALK ABOUT OTHER SOLUTIONS AND I HEARD THAT THIS PERSON MATCHED THAT PERSON I HEARD THIS PERSON -- I HEAR SOMETHING DIFFERENT EVERY SINGLE DAY.

>> MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY. >> AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WENT TO THIS MEETING.

AND EXACTLY WHY I WANTED TO TAKE CONTROL OF THIS PROCESS AND EXACTLY WHY I FEEL MORE STRONGLY TODAY THAN I DID YESTERDAY, THAT US PURCHASING THE PROPERTY IS THE PROPER COURSE TO TAKE. WHAT WE DO WITH THE PROPERTY, LOOK, EVERYBODY KEEPS TALKING.

JUST WANT TO 5:00 AND IS ALL HAPPY, I GET EVERYBODY KEEPS TALKING ABOUT SMALL TOWN FEEL AND PRESERVING PARKLAND.WE, YOU CAN HAVE SOME COMMERCIAL AND HAVE A SMALL TOWN FEEL.

SMALL TOWNS ARE NOT ABSENT OF ANY COMMERCIAL OR ANY RESTAURANT OR ANY PLACE FOR COMMUNITIES TO GO. SO SMALL TOWNS DO NOT JUST HAVE HOMES THAT PEOPLE DRIVE HOME FROM WORK AND GO TO BED. SMALL TOWNS HAVE CENTER WHERE DRAMAS CAN COME TOGETHER IN FAMILIES CAN GO HAS SOMETHING TO EAT AND THEY CAN GET ICE CREAM AND THEY CAN DO DIFFERENT THINGS AS FAMILY. WE CAN KEEP A SMALL TOWN FEEL AND WE CAN HAVE THE PARKLAND AMBIENCE AND ALL OF THAT AND HAVE SOME SORT OF COMMERCIAL, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M HONEST WITH THE COMMUNITY AND I'M NOT SAYING, BUT I HEAR TIME AND TIME AGAIN, EVEN HERON BAY'S OWN SELF POLE. THE RESIDENTS WANT COMMERCIAL. THE RESIDENTS WANT MIXED-USE.

[01:35:03]

RESIDENTS WANT SOMETHING ELSE TO DO. DOES THAT MEAN WE NEED A MALL? OF COURSE NOT! BUT HAVE A SMALL PLACE WHERE FAMILIES CAN COME TOGETHER AND GET TOGETHER AND DO THINGS. IT'S WHAT THE RESIDENTS ARE ASKING.

>> HERE'S MY PROBLEM WITH THAT. HERE IS OUR PROBLEM WITH THAT RIGHT NOW.

YOU'RE ASKING A DEVELOPER TO COME IN AND DO WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING A SMALL TOWN STUFF FOR PRICE TAG OF 25 OR $32 MILLION. THERE ISN'T A DEVELOPER ON THE PLANET ISN'T GOING TO LOOK AT A PROJECT AND GO, IF I CAN GET MY MONEY BACK OUT OF IT AND GET BACK OUT IN THE TIME PERIOD I NEEDED TO GET IT DONE, I'M NOT BUYING THAT.

>> BUT AGAIN, WHAT IS SMALL TOWN? TO ME, SMALL TOWN IS SOMETHING FOR EVERYONE. AND SOMETHING THAT IS SUCCESSFUL.

SOMETHING THAT ISN'T EMPTY. THAT DOESN'T LOSE THOSE. DOESN'T MEAN THAT SMALL TOWN DOES NOT MEAN IT IS TWO RESTAURANTS -- QUICKLY RUNS INTO PROBLEMS WITH TRAFFIC AND

RUNS INTO ISSUES WITH OVERCROWDING. >> AND THOSE ARE THINGS WE NEED TO WORK OUT AND THAT IS WHY WE HAVE A DUE DILIGENCE PERIOD. THAT'S WHY, IF WE GO THROUGH WITH THIS, THEY WILL GO THROUGH THE CONTRACT AND WE ACTUALLY BUY IT, WE STILL HAVE 100 DAYS TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE. WE HAVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR APPRAISALS AND TRAFFIC STUDIES,

-- >> I STILL THINK IF YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF US BUYING THE PROPERTY AND TRYING TO FLIP IT OVER TO A DEVELOPER. WE LOSE THE ABILITY TO CONTROL OUR DESTINY ON THAT. WHAT WE ARE ESSENTIALLY DOING, WE'RE TAKING, HERE'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. DEVELOPER COMES IN AND SAYS, I'VE GOT TO DO THIS.

AND WE SAY OKAY WE CAN DO THAT BUT WE HAVE TO DO IT AND YOU HAVE TO FIGHT OVER DOING THAT.

AND IF WE DIDN'T BUY THE PROPERTY AND IT DIDN'T SELL IT TO SOMEBODY OR GIVE IT TO A DEVELOPER, WOULD BE IN A POSITION TO BE ABLE TO SAY, LAND-USE SAYS NO COMMERCIAL.

YOU'RE LIMITED TO THREE UNITS PER ACRE FOR RESIDENTIAL. IN REAL AT THAT.

HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTROL WHETHER OR NOT ANYONE CAN GET AN EASEMENT TO THE PROPERTY.

AND THE DEVELOPER WANT TO BUILD A PROJECT. SO, WE ARE RIGHT NOW IN A

POSITION OF THE MOST CONTROL. >> CAN I INTERJECT? >> I DON'T DISAGREE NECESSARILY WITH ANYTHING YOU SAID. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THERE IS A HYBRID SOLUTION.

THE NOTION OF US SITTING BACK, AND THUS MAY CONCERN BECAUSE THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT WE ARE GOING TO GET THIS IN THE HANDS THAT THE RESIDENTS WILL COME TO WITHIN THE NOTION OF A SITTING BACK AND DOING NOTHING I THINK IS, I'M SO HAPPY WE'RE HAVING THIS MEETING TONIGHT TO AVOID THAT BUT MAYBE THERE'S A HYBRID. AND I'VE DONE OUT THERE.

>> YOUR SAYING PRIVATE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP. >> REALITY IS THIS.

>> TELL ME WHAT IT MEANS. >> IF NSID HAD APPROVED THE SALE THE PROPERTY, TO TOLL BROTHERS OR ANOTHER DEVELOPER THAT ON THE PLAN THEY COULD GET BEHIND, WE WOULD HAVE HEARD THE SAME COMPLAINTS WE BEEN HEARING. WE WOULD HAVE THE PEOPLE HERE TONIGHT COMPLAINING ABOUT IT. SO I'VE HEARD FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY, THAT THE PROPOSAL WAS MADE TO MATCH THE OTHER OFFER. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ACCURATE OR NOT. AND SO, MENTION THE WORD PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP BECAUSE IF THERE'S DEVELOPER THAT WILL UNDERTAKE THE FINANCIALLY ABILITY THE FINANCIAL RISK, BUT THE REWARD AS WELL. FOR THE PROPERTY THAT AVOIDS OTHER VERY LEGITIMATE CONCERNS ABOUT THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS THAT THE CITY HAS.

>> I THINK THE BEST PLACE IS TO START OFF, WHAT IF WE DID NOTHING, RIGHT? THE ANSWER IS, IS ALREADY ZONE NORMS ARE LAND-USE FOR RESIDENTIAL.

IF WE DID NOTHING, EVEN IF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS ARE NOT LIFTED IN FIVE YEARS, SOMEONE CAN BUILD UPWARDS OF ABOUT PROBABLY 300 SOMETHING HOMES IN THAT SPOT.

THAT IS TO ME, STARTING POINT OF THE ANALYSIS BECAUSE THE QUESTION OF, ARE WE AS A COMMUNITY AND CITY SATISFIED WITH THAT OPTION? I PERSONALLY AM NOT FOR THE ISSUES WE HAVE WITH SCHOOLS ALREADY STARTING TO REACH THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY.

THE PARKS, DESPITE THAT WE ARE BUILDING ANOTHER 36 ACRE PARK. WE ALREADY HEARING THAT IS TOUGHER KISS AGAIN THE SPORTS TEAMS ARE ON THE FIELDS. TO ME, AGREE NO ONE WANTS A BIG MALL BUT I THINK THERE HAS TO BE SOME ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO THE FACT THAT WE CANNOT USE THIS TOTALLY FOR RESIDENTIAL. I JUST THINK IT HAS TO BE A TRUE STATEMENT THAT WE CAN ALL ACCEPT BECAUSE CAN IT BE RESIDENTIAL, SURE. PARKLAND IS A FINITE AMOUNT OF SPACE WE ARE NOT IN FORT LAUDERDALE WE ARE NOT A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF LAND STILL AVAILABLE FOR USE. THERE'S ONLY SO MANY MORE PARKS AND SCHOOLS WE CAN PUT IN THIS

[01:40:01]

THE ULTIMATE THING IS WHO WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT? WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT TOLL VERSUS EAST COAST. THAT IS NOT THE END-ALL BE-ALL. OTHER THE ONES IN CONSIDERATION RIGHT NOW? YES. BUT OUT THE GIFTED LIMIT OURSELVES TO JUST DEVELOPERS ALIKE THE GENTLEMAN SAID IN THE BACK ABOUT HAVING MORE PRIVATE INVOLVEMENT IN A CREATIVE SOLUTION HERE BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS SO MANY MORE POSSIBILITIES THAN WHAT WE RESTRICT OUR CONVERSATION TO SO FAR.

BUT THE TRUTH IS THAT, IF WE WERE TO NOT TAKE ANY ACTION AND EVEN IF THE DEVELOPER SELECTED AND THEY WANT TO DO PEER RESIDENTIAL, ULTIMATELY FIVE YEARS THERE BUILDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND TO ME, I THINK BY US TAKING SOME ACTION, WHETHER IT IS TO PURCHASE THE LAND OURSELVES OR TO AT LEAST HAVE A PLAN THAT IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO PURCHASE OURSELVES, HOW WE WILL INTERPLAY AND MONITOR AND CONTROL.

I THINK THE POWER THE KNOW IF WE VOTE TODAY MOVE FORWARD, TO ME, I DON'T SEE ANY HARM IN THAT. THIS CONVERSATION IS VERY HEALTHY, IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THIS. BUT TO ME, TO SAY YES, LET'S MOVE FORWARD.

WE HAVEN'T SIGNED THE CONTRACT AND EVEN IF WE GET TO THE POINT TO SIGN THE CONTRACT GIVES US A 108 INVESTIGATION PERIOD THAT WE CAN BACK OUT FOR ANY AND ALL REASONS AND STILL GET A DEPOSIT OF $250,000 BACK. TO ME, I THINK THIS IS A CONVERSATION EVERYONE HAS BEEN HEARING AND SAYING LOOK, WE ARE ALL MOVING THE RIGHT DIRECTION. PBUT FOR PURPOSES OF TONIGHT, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO SHORTCUT ANYTHING. I THINK IT WOULD BE MISTAKEN TO NOT VOTE IN FAVOR OF AT LEAST GOING TO THE NEXT STEP. BECAUSE ALL IS DOING IS STILL

KEEPING US IN THE GAME. [APPLAUSE] >> BOB?

>> A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. JUST AGAIN, THE ENVIRONMENT OF STUDY.

[INAUDIBLE] NANCY, AN ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY WE STILL HAVE NOT DONE.

>> WE HAVE NOT. >> WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN A COPY OF THE NSID ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY.

>> WE HAVE NOT. >> OBVIOUSLY IN THE CONTRACT OR WHATEVER SO, THE ONE THING THAT I HAVE NOT HEARD IS, AT LEAST DOING SOME SORT OF MARKET ANALYSIS.

WE TALKING ABOUT BUYING 65 ACRES. WE ARE READY HAVE IT IN LINE WITH THOSE BEEN PRESENTED BUT WE HAVEN'T REALLY DONE A MARKET ANALYSIS TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX. MAYBE THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE HAVEN'T EVEN DISCUSSED AND MAY NOT GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE.

WHETHER OR NOT IT IS WORKING OUT A DEAL WITH YOU KNOW JUST NOVA SOUTHEASTERN TO DO SOME SORT OF SATELLITE PROGRAM AND TO BUILD THE FACILITY. I DON'T KNOW IF THE RESIDENTS WANT THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE BUT INSTEAD OF MAYBE COMMERCIAL, MAYBE THAT'S AN OPTION. WE HAVEN'T SPOKEN ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP THAT WE HAVE WITH CORAL SPRINGS.E ARE SELLING IT TO THEM.

WHY AREN'T THEY PART OF THIS? IF WE ARE TOGETHER WITH THEM, >> NSID IS PREFERRED TO WORK WITH ONE ENTITY. THAT'S WHY. WE'VE SPOKEN WITH CORAL SPRINGS, NANCY, AND I JUST TODAY SPOKE TO FRANK. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON.

THAT'S IT. >> THAT IS NSID. THE POINT THAT KEN WAS MAKING WAS THE RESIDENCE HERE, AND ACCORDING TO WHAT I HEARD, THEY DON'T HAVE TO PROVIDE AN EASEMENT. FOR THAT PROPERTY, THEY CAN SIT THERE AND SAY, WE DON'T WANT TO GIVE TO ANYBODY. AND STILL MAINTAIN WHETHER THEY WOULD BE ONLY ONE ACCESS POINT.

WHICH IS THE AREA THROUGH CORAL SPRINGS. >> HERON BAY BOULEVARD.

>> CURRENTLY BOULEVARD. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE RESTRICTIONS TARA BAY BOULEVARD. ANYTHING FROM CORAL SPRINGS WITH THE DEAL FROM THE MARRIOTT OR ANYWHERE TOGETHER BECAUSE IS THE ONLY ACCESS WAY TO THE MARRIOTT.

>> I BELIEVE WE ASKED FOR EASEMENTS OVER THERE AS WELL. >> YES WE DID.

>> NOT US ASKING FOR EASEMENTS. DO THEY PROVIDE EASEMENTS NUMERICALLY BECAUSE THAT IS NSID PROPERTY BASED ON THE PROPERTY APPRAISER PETER FROM DRIVING TO GET THE MARRIOTT I'M GOING ON NSID PROPERTY. IF I'M GOING TO THE OFFICE BUILDINGS, I'M GOING EITHER

[01:45:05]

THROUGH THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS -- >> OF CITY ANSWERS THE QUESTION

IS YES, THEY DO. >> WHO DOES? >> NSID MUST GIVE EASEMENTS TO

THE MARRIOTT. >> BUT WE DON'T KNOW. >> BUT TO ACCESS IT THAT WAY.

>> I'M JUST SAYING, THE INFORMATION IS NOT BEEN PROVIDED.

>> AGAIN, THAT IS WHY WE ARE HAVING -- WE'VE HAD SOME DISCUSSION.

WE HAVE NOT GONE YOU KNOW, FULL OUT AND NANCY HASN'T YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T DONE ALL THAT BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE ARE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION. BECAUSE UNLESS WE AGREE ON AS A BODY, THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH TIME WE SHOULD BE SPENDING ON TRYING TO NEGOTIATE SOMETHING.

>> BUT IS THE SAME WAY AS FRANK HAS HAD CONVERSATIONS, THE CITY MANAGER HAS HAD CONVERSATIONS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE GOVERNING BODY OF CORAL SPRINGS MIGHT DECIDE TO DO.

THEY MAY SAY WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN PURCHASING IT. >> I'VE SPOKEN TO --

>> UNTIL IT COMES DOWN TO A VOTE, WE DO NOT HAVE THAT CONTROL.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> WE CAN SIT HERE ALL DAY WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD AND SAY WE WILL DO BOUNDARY PROCESSES. WE'LL HAVE THE VOTE, SCHOOL BOARD US.

THERE ARE THINGS THAT CONCERN ME ABOUT THIS. THE OTHER PART IS, AND I BRING ABOUT, KEN BRINGS ABOUT WHAT THE ECONOMY IS. CENTERLINE WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE RESERVE PROMISED THEY WOULD DO A MINI PARK WHERE THE TOWNHOMES ARE.

THAT WAS ALL THERE, READY TO GO. IT DID NOT MATERIALIZE, THE ECONOMY WAS GOOD. WHOEVER HAD THE PROPERTY FILED FOR BANKRUPTCY.

NEXT YOU KNOW IT WAS BROUGHT BACK AND -- >> AS THE OWNER WE HAVE THE OPTION. AS THE OWNER, IF COMMERCIAL DIDN'T WORK OUT, AND WE ENDED UP HAVING TO DO RESIDENTIAL JUST FOR ECONOMICS, WE WOULD HAVE THAT OPTION.

WE WOULD AT THAT POINT, BE OWNING THE PROPERTY. >> THE OTHER PART IS GOING BACK TO THE PLANNING COUNCIL.AVE WE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM ABOUT WHERE THEY WOULD STAND ON

COMMERCIAL, NANCY? >> NO WE HAVE NOT. >> WE NOT SPOKEN TO BARBARA OR -- CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? WE HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO THEM ABOUT ANYTHING?

>> NO. >> THAT I BELIEVE SOMETIMES IT IS A TEDIOUS PROCESS.

BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WHEN WE HAD THE -- SITUATION THEY WANTED TO LOOK FOR FORMAL HOUSING AND SWAP. THEY MIGHT WANT TO SWAP AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CORAL SPRINGS SECTION. BECAUSE WE OWN IT PIERCING IF YOU WANT COMMERCIAL HERE, YOU GOT TO HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING HERE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW CORAL SPRINGS FEELS ABOUT IT. SO THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT ARE KIND OF OUT OF OUR CONTROL. I AGREE WITH SIMEON AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT IS CALLED IF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP OR PARTNERSHIP OR AGREEMENT BUT IF WE CAN GET SOMEBODY LIKE YOU KNOW SOME DEVELOPER WHO WHATEVER IT MAY BE TO FINANCE IT, AND WE CAN WORK WITH THEM IN HERON BAY THEY CAN WORK WITH THEM AND CORAL SPRINGS CAN WORK WITH THEM, WE CAN ALTOGETHER --

>> I WILL BE GETTING NSID TO SELL IT TO SOMEBODY WE WANT. >> OR SELLING IT OR PUTTING IT UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE CITY AND MAKING IT FREELY ASSIGNABLE OR SOME OTHER MECHANISM.

>> NSID IS LOOKING FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THOSE FUNDS. BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT SIGNING IT OVER TO PARKLAND WITHOUT GETTING PAID BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO PAY DOWN A BOND TO THE CUSTOMERS DO NOT GET AN ASSESSMENT. OUR OPTIONS AT THIS JUNCTURE ARE THIS. EITHER WE VOTE SAY TO APPROVE MOVING FORWARD, CONTINUING TO DO SOME DUE DILIGENCE. THAT WOULD TAKE THREE YES VOTES.

OR WE VOTE TO DENY IT, AND GO BACK TO SQUARE ONE AND TALK TO NSID AND CROSS OUR FINGERS AND

HOPE IT ALL WORKS OUT. THAT IS OUR DECISION TONIGHT. >> KEN? I LOVE YOU, YOU'RE MY HOA PRESIDENT. BUT AS FAR AS COMMENTS FROM THE

-- >> WELL -- >> I MEAN, THAT'S --

>> JUST SO I'M UNDERSTANDING. WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING IS NOT NECESSARILY THAT PARKLAND IS GOING TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING IS THAT PARKLAND IS WILLING TO DO SOME ADDITIONAL DUE DILIGENCE TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY.

THERE IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING. >> THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN.

I SAID THAT FROM THE OUTSET. THIS MEETING WAS FOR US TO DISCUSS, TO PURCHASE IT.F THERE IS ADDITIONAL DUE DILIGENCE THAT YOU WANT, I WANT YOUR ANSWERS --

>> NO, NO. YOU ARE CHANGING WHAT YOU SAID. WE ARE NOT TODAY, MOVING

[01:50:07]

>> I GUESS TO THE POINT, SORRY FOR INTERJECTING. WE HAVE A CONTRACT FROM NSID.

I WILL MAKE THE ASSUMPTION THAT NSID IS LOOKING FOR US TO SIGN THIS OR MOVE FORWARD BY SIGNING

THIS AGREEMENT TONIGHT. >> NO. THEY HAVE NOT.

>> BECAUSE WE HAD CONVERSATION WITH ROD, HE SAID 100 DAYS AND YOU KNOW --

>> THAT AFTER THE SIGNATURE. >> SO, IF WE WERE TO, AS KEN POINTS OUT, VOTE TODAY TO DO

SOME DUE DILIGENCE, AND COME BACK -- >> IT IS MORE THAN DUE DILIGENCE. TONIGHT, WE ARE VOTING ON TRYING TO GET THE ANSWERS WE NEED, TO SIGN A CONTRACT. IF THERE ARE ISSUES WE HAVE, WE HAVE TO FIGURE THOSE OUT.

WE NEED, WHAT MORE DUE DILIGENCE DO YOU NEED? THOSE QUESTIONS, WE NEED TO ASK, AND WE NEED TO EITHER PUT THOSE IN THE CONTRACT, OR WE NEED TO WALK.

>> SO, I MEAN I THINK ALL OF US ARE KIND OF GETTING INTO THE SAME PLACE.

THE PROBLEM I SEE IS THAT WE ARE TALKING IN THE ABSTRACT. ECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE A DEFINED PLAN, RIGHT? THEY'RE ALL THESE DIFFERENT PLANS.

THE EAST COAST, THE TOLL, SOME PEOPLE WANT TO ENVISION SOMETHING.

MY SUGGESTION IS THIS. THERE IS NO SHOT CLOCK RIGHT NOW HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR US TO SIGN THIS CONTRACT. I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE VOTE IN FAVOR OF MOVING TO THE NEXT STEP WHICH NOW GIVES US A CHANCE TO NEGOTIATE THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT.

HOWEVER LONG IT'S GOING TO TAKE, YOU THEN HAVE 100 DAYS AFTER EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT FOR DUE DILIGENCE. THE INVESTIGATION PERIOD. 100 DAYS AGAIN, WE CAN DECIDE FOR ANY REASON BEFORE THOSE 100 DAYS TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT ANY PENALTY WHATSOEVER.

I WOULD PROPOSE THIS. I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO START THINKING ABOUT IS THE SCENARIOS. OUR OPTIONS.YOU HAVE 100 PERCENT RESIDENTIAL.

OR YOU CAN DO 75 PERCENT RESIDENTIAL 25 PERCENT COMMERCIAL.

YOU CAN DO 50 PERCENT RESIDENTIAL AND 50 PERCENT COMMERCIAL.

SOMETHING WE HAVEN'T EXPORTED YET, WE COULD HAVE A PERCENTAGE OF RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL IS TO LEAVE A PERCENTAGE OF IT AS A PARK. THAT PARKLAND ACTUALLY NOW PAYS AN AMOUNT TO MAINTAIN AND RETAIN, IF WE ARE REALLY LOOKING TO INVEST, I'M NOT SAYING WE HAVE TO SPEND THE FULL 25 MILLION AND EAT IT. BUT REALITY IS IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ALL OR ONE OR THE OTHER. IF WE CAN KIND OF DO A WARGAME SCENARIO AND HAVE THE SCENARIOS BUILT OUT OF WHAT THE POSSIBILITIES ARE, THEN THE STAFF CAN DO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY OF EACH OF THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. CAN LOOK AT WHAT THE FINANCIAL RISKS AND BENEFITS ARE. AND LOOK AT ALSO ACTUALLY, MAYBE EVEN THE CREATIVE SOLUTIONS WE HAVE FOR DEVELOPING SOMETHING COMMERCIAL THAT IS BEYOND WHAT THE TWO PROPOSALS ARE CURRENTLY. BUT WITHIN THIS TIME PERIOD WHILE THE STAFF IS WORKING ON THAT, WE HAVE NOT LOST ANYTHING RIGHT? NO WE ACTUALLY HAVE SOMETHING MEANINGFUL, SOMETHING SUBSTANTIVE TO LOOK AT AND SAY IN THE HUNDRED DAYS YOU KNOW WHAT? THIS MAKES SENSE. OR MAYBE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

BUT EITHER WAY WE AT LEAST PUT SOMETHING OUT THERE THAT NOW WE ARE ALL BEING ABLE TO DISCUSS IN CONCRETE TERMS INSTEAD OF THEORETICAL AND TALKING ABOUT THE WHAT IF.

AND I DON'T SEE ANY HARM IN THAT. >> IF I MAY.

MY CONCERN IS ULTIMATELY FOR GOING TO EXECUTE ANY CONTRACT, WE NEED A FOUR ÃONE VOTE AS WE UNDERSTAND IT. ONE THIRD PARTY PURCHASES THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE.

I KNOW THAT HERON BAY DID THEIR SURVEY. AND YOU, RICH, LIKE I, WE DIDN'T SPEAK AT THE SAME MEDIA BECAUSE OF SUNSHINE LAWS WE ATTENDED SOME MEETINGS BY THE HERON BAY RESIDENTS. I THINK IS FAIR TO SAY THAT THEY ARE VERY MUCH APPRECIATIVE OF THE FACT THAT THERE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE SOME COMPROMISE. ON WHAT GOES ON THAT LAND.

THE COMBINATION OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, IF THAT'S ULTIMATELY WHAT GOES THERE.

IT'S FINE AS LONG AS THE SCALE IS THE CRITICAL ISSUE. THE SCALE OF WHAT THE PERCENTAGE, WHAT THE SIZE OF THE COMMERCIAL PROJECT, JUST BECAUSE OF A SMALL TOWN FEEL.

WE ALSO COMMERCIAL READY. I GIVE THE ANALOGY OF THE PARKLAND COMMENTS NEXT TO THE GOLF. HER VARIOUS HOMES THAT CAN LITERALLY WALK THROUGH THE BUSHES, TO GET TIM PARLIN COMMENTS. I DON'T THINK THAT THEY SEE THAT AS A FACTOR THAT DETRACTS FROM THEIR PROPERTY VALUES OR ANYTHING ELSE.

MANY HAVE EMBRACED THAT SHOPPING CENTER IS BEING A GOOD MEETING SPOT.

RESTAURANTS, COFFEE SHOPS, SUPERMARKETS, ETC. THEIR CONCERN IS ALWAYS BEEN THE SCALE AND QUALITY OF THE PROPERTY. AND THAT LEADS TO THE QUALITY

[01:55:05]

WHETHER IT IS ANALYSIS ON THE RIGHT MENTAL ISSUES OR ON WHAT THE COUNTY WOULD ALLOW ETC. AND ALSO WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWED ON THAT PROPERTY. BECAUSE EVERYTHING RIGHT NOW HAS BEEN HYPOTHETICAL. PERHAPS THERE IS A WAY WHERE WE CAN MOVE THAT BALL FORWARD, GIVE STAFF THE ABILITY TO START TO GET TOGETHER THAT DUE DILIGENCE, HAVE THE MEETING IN ANOTHER 30 DAYS, AND REDO THE ISSUE. BECAUSE WHAT I DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN, AS LONG AS WE GET TO THE GOAL I STATED I BELIEVE THE RESIDENTS WANT, I DON'T CARE HOW WE GET THERE. IF WE CAN AVOID THE FINANCIAL, IF WE CAN AVOID THE FINANCIAL IMPACT, THE NEGATIVE FINANCIAL IMPACT FROM THE CITY, WE HAVE SOLVED BOTH PROBLEMS. PERHAPS WE NEED TO GIVE STAFF AND THE CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTION TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSIONS WITH NSID. THE HOPE IS THAT THERE'D BE A GOOD CORPORATE NEIGHBOR AND GOOD GOVERNMENTAL NEIGHBOR. AND WORK WITH US ON THAT DUE DILIGENCE OVER THE NEXT 30 DAYS. AND THEN COME BACK AND HAVE SOME OF THE ANSWERS TO THE VERY VALID QUESTIONS THAT WE PROPOSED TONIGHT. AND MAYBE AN INTERN THERE IS A SOLUTION THAT COMES ABOUT THAT SOLVES THIS. THE BALL MOVES AGAIN TODAY.

AND FRIDAY AS TO WHAT THE PROPERTY WAS OR WHO'S GOING TO POTENTIALLY BUY THE PROPERTY.

MAYBE THERE IS A SOLUTION INTERIM BUT I DON'T WANT TO STOP THE MOMENTUM OF MOVING THIS FORWARD BECAUSE I THINK THE RESIDENTS HAVE ASKED US TO STEP UP AND START TO MOVE THE BALL FORWARD IN TRYING TO INTERCEDE HERE TO AVOID WHAT THEY SEE AS POTENTIAL

NIGHTMARE. >> DOES ANYBODY -- >> I MAKE A MOTION TO VOTE.

>> THERE YOU GO. >> I WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF GIVING STAFF DIRECTION TO CONTINUE WITH NEGOTIATION, GET MORE INFORMATION ABOUT OBVIOUSLY, GOVERNMENTAL, TITLE, MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE OUR EXPERTS READY AND CONSULTANTS TO DO THAT NECESSARY IMPACT STUDIES BASED ON DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THAT LIKE I SAID, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO GET TOO GRANULAR. BUT LEAST UNDERSTOOD HAD THE OPTION OF 100 PERCENT RESIDENTIAL AND KIND OF PERCENTAGES IN BETWEEN WE WANT TO PLAY WITH.

I WOULD ASK THAT WE CONSIDER EVEN THE POSSIBILITY OF RESERVING SOME OF THE LAND FOR ANOTHER PARK. WE ARE PARKLAND, I THINK EVERYONE'S HAVING A HARD TIME BECAUSE WE'VE COME WITH THIS ALL OR NOTHNG AND IT MUST BE SOME RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY, THIS WILL BE ANOTHER PART OF THE CIT THAT SHOULD HAVE ITS OWN FEEL. AND I THINK A PARK GOES A LONG

WAY AND THAT. THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. >> I WOULD ONLY ASK THAT WE GIVE THE STAFF CLEAR DIRECTION. MAYBE IT IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION.

AS TO WHAT THE DUE DILIGENCE AND ADDITIONAL NEXT STEPS CLIFF.

EXPERTS YOU CAN TALK ABOUT COST AND TIMING OF TRAFFIC STUDY. I WANT TO GIVE THE STAFF VERY CLEAR DIRECTION. WE HAVE OUR PLANNER HERE WHO CAN TALK ABOUT THIS AND THE CITY ATTORNEY. WANT TO GIVE STAFF VERY CLEAR DIRECTION SO THAT WE ARE MAKING GAINS IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS, THAT ARE BETTER, THAT ARE QUANTIFIABLE.

AND WE ARE REALLY MOVING THE BALL FORWARD. >> THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

IF I COULD ADD, BECAUSE OF HER MAKING A LIST. MY TO DO LIST IS TO MEET WITH -- DISCUSSED THE PENDING LAWSUIT REMOVAL. TO GET TWO APPRAISALS ON THE LAND AND BASED ON THE CURRENT ZONING. THEN TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY. THEN TO DO A MARKET ANALYSIS. TO GET WITH THE COUNTY -- TO SEE IF COMMERCIAL BE ACCEPTABLE AND TO DO A TITLE SEARCH AND SURVEY.

THAT'S A LOT TO DO IN 30 DAYS. ON A MARKET ANALYSIS OF ONE OF YOU COULD PLEASE COME UP AND TALK A LITTLE ABOUT WHAT'S NEEDED TO DO ON A MARKET ANALYSIS, I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT.> I WANT TO THROW IN ONE THING WHILE HE'S COMING UP.

WE COULD ALSO REQUEST SORRY I'M NOT TRYING TO STOP YOU. WE CAN ALSO REQUEST THE COPY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY AND OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN DONE LONG AGO.

>> YOU ARE RIGHT BUT I HIGHLY RECOMMEND WE DO OUR OWN. >> I'M JUST SAYING IT'S A GOOD STARTING POINT FOR VISIBILITY INTO WHERE WE ARE GOING. IT MAY NOT ALL HAVE TO BE

DEFLATED IN THE 30 DAYS. >>! EAGER FOR YOU ALL TO TELL ME

WHAT YOU LIKE ME TO DO. >> CAN I POSE A QUESTION? I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE HAS AN ANSWER.SID WITH YOUR RFP AND HAVE TWO POTENTIAL BIDDERS. WE ARE SORT OF INTERLOPERS INTO THE PROCESS. TALK WITH THE RFP WE DIDN'T MAKE PRESENTATIONS, WE DID NOT APPROACH THEM UNTIL AFTER THEY HAD DONE THAT. ARE WE SUBJECT OURSELVES IN ANY

[02:00:03]

DOING THIS? >> AS YOU KNOW THE VICE MAYOR CAN FILE A LAWSUIT.

IT IS NSID PROPERTY RIGHT NOW. ULTIMATELY, THEY WILL BE THE ONES I HAD TO MAKE THE FINAL DETERMINATION. YOU KNOW, COUPLE OF POINTS I THINK THAT THEY REQUESTED DEVELOPERS. IT WASN'T JUST YOU KNOW, THE SELLER PROPERTY, WHO WANTS TO

BUY IT. >> AND THEY ALSO, AND BOTH RFP PROCESSES, WERE VERY ADAMANT ABOUT WANTING THE CITIES AND PUT SO, YOU KNOW THE CITY INPUT WAS, WE WEREN'T HAPPY WITH THE PROCESS SO WE WOULD LIKE TO PURCHASE. BUT AS FAR AS A LAWSUIT GOES --

>> WE HAVE CONTROL OF LAND USE AND THAT'S WHY THEY WANT OUR INPUT.

THEY WANT US, TO BE PART OF THAT -- >> TO ME THAT WAS NOT ENOUGH.

THAT WASN'T ENOUGH CONTROL. I GET IT. WE HAVE THE ZONING AND LAND

USE. THAT WASN'T ENOUGH CONTROL. >> WHEN YOU SAY ENOUGH CONTROL.

THE QUESTION I GUESS IS -- >> I WANT TO WORK WITH WHO I WANT TO WORK WITH.

>> I'M SAYING IN A STRATEGY. ARE WE BUYING AND SELLING, ARE WE BUYING AND HOLDING? OR ARE WE BUYING DEVELOPING AND HOLDING, OR ARE WE BUYING, ZONING AND PLANNING AND THEN SELLING? ARE WE BUYING DEVELOPING AND SELLING?

>> IF IT WAS MY STRATEGY, IF IT WERE UP TO ME, I WOULD LIKE TO BUY IT, AND THEN SELL IT TO A DEVELOPER, WORK WITH THEM, I WOULD LIKE TO GET A PROPOSAL, BACK FROM A DEVELOPER, THAT SHOWS ME WHAT THEY BELIEVE THE SITE PLAN WOULD WORK AND I WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH THEM AND EITHER AMEND THE CODES, MAKE A DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT, AND THAT IS A PROCESS I WOULD

LIKE TO TAKE. >> I GUESS I'D BE CURIOUS TO FIND OUT FOR MARKETING, I GUESS MARKET ANALYSIS, WHERE WE STAND IN THE BETTER POSITION IF WE, THE MAYOR'S TALK ABOUT JUST BUYING AND SELLING. WHETHER WE BUY, PLAT END ZONE, OUT OF THE SCENARIOS, WHAT IS THE BEST OPTION FOR US TO SIT THERE, IF WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT. AND FOR MY POSITION, I DON'T WHAT THE CITY, THE CITY DOES IT MAKE A PENNY. BUT I DON'T WANT THE CITY TO LOSE A PENNY AS PART OF THE PROCESS. IF WE CAN CONTROL THE OUTCOME, THE PROCESS WITHOUT RISKING THE TAXPAYER DOLLARS, AND IF THAT MEANS SOMEONE ELSE IS GOING TO PROFIT OFF OF THE PROCESS, THAT'S FINE. BUT WE HAVEN'T PUT THE TAXPAYER DOLLARS AT RISK.

AND THAT'S WHY I MENTIONED, AND AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO USE THE TERMINOLOGY BECAUSE I DUNNO IF IT'S RIGHT. -- THAT TO ME AVOIDS A SCENARIO WHERE THE CITY TO TRY TO INTERCEDE, TO NAVIGATE THIS IN A GOOD CONCLUSION ONCE OF LOSING MONEY.

THAT SOMETHING I DON'T WANT. >> RIGHT. >> MY POINT WITH THAT, THE STRATEGY WILL DEPEND UPON THE MARKETABILITY. FOR EXAMPLE, NSID BOUGHT THE LAND UNDEVELOPED FOR $150,000 PER ACRE NOW THEY ARE LOOKING TO SELL IT FOR $285,000 AN ACRE. I DON'T KNOW, BUT IF THEY WERE TO PLAT AND DESIGN AND DO WHATEVER IT WAS THEY COULD POSSIBLY SELL FOR $700,000 PER ACRE.

I MEAN -- >> ARE LOOKING TO FELT THAT MY BECAUSE TWO DEVELOPERS HAVE

APPROACHED THEM WILLING TO PAY THE AMOUNT. >> ACTUALLY, ONE OFFER $38

MILLION. >> THAT'S RIGHT. BASED ON AN EVEN BIGGER

PROJECT. >> AND THE LAST TWO RFP'S BOTH WERE OVER 30 MILLION.

>> MY POINT IS THIS. FOR ME, FROM MY POSITION, I DON'T CARE WHAT THE BEST, HIGHEST VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS. AS LONG AS THE CITY IS COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT GOES ON THE PROPERTY IN SUPPORT OF THE RESIDENCE AND PRESERVING PARKLAND. IN THE CITY DOESN'T LOSE ANY MONEY OR PUT ANY AT RISK.

THUS WHY MENTION THE WHOLE IDEA OF PARTNERING WITH A DEVELOPER TO TRY TO --

>> THAT'S WHAT ULTIMATELY, MY VISION IS WHAT, WE WOULD PARTNER WITH THE DEVELOPER.

[02:05:03]

WE JUST LOOK FOR THEM TO PASS BACK. >> BUT THAT'S WHAT I SAID.

WE LOOKING AT I THINK BACKWARDS RATHER THAN THE OTHER WAY. IF WE ARE GOING TO SAY TO A DEVELOPER, YOU WILL BE LIMITED TO 150 HOMES AND THIS AMOUNT OF SQUARE FEET.

>> I WOULD NOT WANT TO DO THAT. >> BUT AGAIN, WHAT WE ARE HEARING IS THAT WE ARE BUYING IT FOR A PRICE. THE VALUE OF IT. RIGHT NOW, YOU GOT TWO PERSPECTIVES OR NSID HAS TWO PROSPECTIVE AGENCIES OR ORGANIZATIONS THAT WANT TO BUY

IT BASED UPON WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH IT. >> MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY HAVE BASED ON THE INFORMATION THEY GOT TODAY, WE CAN CORROBORATE THIS IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS WERE BASED ON THE INFORMATION I GOT TODAY, FROM NSID, AND ANTHONY SAID IT WITH THE EAST COAST. YOUR TWO DEVELOPERS WILLING TO BUY THE LAND FOR A SET PRICE.

WITHOUT ANY CONDITIONS OR CONTINGENCIES FOR THE CITY OR OTHERWISE ON A SHORT CLOSING.

AND IF THAT IS THE CASE, THEN IT IS A QUESTION OF FIGURING OUT IF ONE OF THOSE DEVELOPERS

IS INTERESTED IN PARTNERING WITH THE CITY. >> RIGHT, AND THAT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING TO LOOK AT AS WE ARE DOING THE DUE DILIGENCE IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS.

BUT NSID RIGHT NOW, HAS THE ABILITY TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS.

>> THE CITY CAN FACILITATE THE REMAINING PIECES THAT THOSE TWO PROPOSALS DON'T CONTEMPLATE, WHICH IS WORKING WITH THE HOA AND RESOLUTION OF THE EASEMENTS AND THE COVENANT AND WORKING WITH THE LAWSUIT PLAINTIFFS AND RESOLUTION OF THAT. IF THE CITY CAN BE FACILITATED TO THAT THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, THAT PROPOSAL GETS MORE ATTRACTIVE.

>> THAT -- > TWO IMPORTANT POINTS CAME UP THAT I WANT TO HIT HIM THEN I THINK WE CAN CLOSE THIS OFF. THE FACT THAT THERE ARE TWO ORGANIZATIONS OR REPLACE COMPETITIVE BIDS ON IT, SAYS THAT WE NEED TO BE SOMEWHAT TIMELY.

THERE IS NOT TO SAY THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE A RASH DECISION BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT NSID WILL NOT ALSO SIT AROUND FOREVER. THAT'S WHY THINK IT'S IMPORTANT

-- >> THEY HAVE TO PAY OFF THEIR BOND.

>> CORRECT. THAT'S WHY THINK THE DECISION TONIGHT --

>> THEY COULD VERY WELL SAY LOOK, PROMISED ONLY 30 DAYS NOW YOU'RE ASKING ME TO WAIT 60 OR 90 DAYS. I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT I'M SELLING IT.

>> IS WHY THINK TODAY'S VOTE IS IMPORTANT. WE'RE NOT LOCK OURSELVES INTO ANYTHING BUT IT'S GIVING US A GOODWILL OR GOOD FAITH REPRESENTATION TO NSID THAT WE ARE TAKING IT SERIOUSLY. I WORRIED IF WE VOTE IT DOWN TONIGHT --

>> IF WE VOTE IT DOWN TONIGHT IT IS A DONE DEAL. >> NOT NECESSARILY.

WE VOTED ON SITE SAY MAYBE WE WANT TO COME BACK. THE POINT IS, I THINK THE DECISION HAS TO BE MADE TONIGHT IF WE ARE INTERESTED IN MOVING FORWARD.

BUT I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE POINT I AGREE WITH YOU SIMEON, I DON'T WANT TO LOSE MONEY EITHER BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT NOT NECESSARILY CAN BE THE BAROMETER BY WHICH WE MAKE A DECISION BECAUSE ULTIMATELY IF WE PAY PURCHASE PRICE, AND RELEASE SOME DEGREE OF MONEY AND EXCHANGE FOR CONTROL, I DO CONSIDER THAT A LOSS I CONSIDER INVESTMENT.

THAT HAS TO BE ANALYZED IN THAT WAY BECAUSE THE MONEY WE'RE SPENDING IS FROM THE GENERAL RESERVES. THAT MONEY WILL BE USED LIKE WE SAID, FOR SIGNAGE, CITY BRANDING, IF THERE'S A HURRICANE OR CLEANUP, THE POINT IS THAT IF WE ARE GOING TO COME UP WITH A DECISION THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY FOR THE FUTURE OF THE CITY, WE HAVE TO BE WILLING TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE MAY NOT GET BACK EVERY PENNY.

>> SO, JUST SO I'M CLEAR IN REGARDS TO THAT POINT. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE THAT ARE PREDOMINANTLY HERON BAY PEOPLE. BUT WE HAVE NOT PUT IT OUT FOR REFERENDUM TO HERE WITH THE REST OF OUR COMMUNITY WANTS. AND WE DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, WE ARE CONTEMPLATING A PURCHASE OF $25 MILLION.N EXTRA MONEY THAT COULD POTENTIALLY GO ALONG WITH THAT FOR INVESTIGATIVE PURPOSES AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF.

AND YOU KNOW, THAT IS THE KIND OF LARGE PERCENTAGE OF OUR TOTAL BUDGET THAT REALLY, WE

SHOULD HAVE OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY INVOLVED IN. >> UNDERSTAND WHERE INVESTING $25 MILLION. BUT WE ARE GOING TO GET SOME OF THAT MONEY BACK.

WE ARE NOT INVESTING $25 MILLION. WILL NOT BE A ZERO-SUM GAME.

IF NOTHING ELSE WERE GETTING PROPORTIONAL SHARE FROM CORAL SPRINGS.

SO, THERE IS ZERO CHANCE THAT WE WILL NOT RECUPERATE SOME FUNDS.

TO JORDAN'S POINT, IF WE LOOK AT ALL OF OUR FUNDS BACK, AND IT'S A GREAT PROJECT, THAT THE CITY LOVES FOR YEARS TO COME, THAT IT WAS WORTH THE INVESTMENT.

IF WE END UP MAKING MONEY, SO BE IT! IF WE END UP BREAKING EVEN, SO BE IT!WHATEVER HAPPENS, THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS HAVING A PROJECT THAT LAST FOREVER, AND THE RESIDENCE OF PARKLAND AND JOY IT FOREVER. THAT IS THE ULTIMATE GOAL.

AND WE WILL NOT -- >> IT WOULD BE GREAT IF THAT WOULD HAPPEN.

>> THAT'S WHAT OUR JOB IS. >> WHAT YOU ARE RISKING BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW, IF

[02:10:13]

THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. >> EVERYTHING WE DO, WE RISK. >> $25 MILLION.

>> WE ARE NOT RISKING $25 MILLION. >> 18 MILLION.

WHATEVER. GOING TO KICK IN $7 MILLION RIGHT?

THEY HAVEN'T VOTED ON THAT. >> KEN, YES, WE ARE RISKING MONEY.

BUT THERE IS ZERO CHANCE THAT WE CANNOT RECOUP SOME OF THE FUNDS.

>> 30 DAYS ALLOW THEM TO MAKE THAT DECISION? WILL 30 DAYS ALLOW CORAL

SPRINGS TO MAKE A DECISION? >> MAKE WHAT DECISION? >> THAT IF WE WERE TO ACQUIRE

THE LAND THAT THEY WOULD -- >> TODAY -- CONFIRMATION FROM FRANK --

>> I UNDERSTAND BUT KEN'S POINT IS THAT THE GOVERNING BODY HAS NOT MADE A DECISION.

THE CITY MANAGER HAS INTEREST BUT THE GOVERNING BODY. CAN WE PUT STAFF, RIGHT NOW, GIVE THEM CLEAR DIRECTION TO COME UP WITH A PLAN, THAT WE ARE GOING TO COME BACK IN 30 DAYS. BUT IN THE INTERIM WE WILL MOVE THE BALL FORWARD.

WE'LL GET ALL THESE ISSUES MOVED FORWARD. >> I THINK WE ARE REALLY MUDDY

AND THE WATERS WERE OBVIOUSLY, IT GOES TO WHAT -- >> IT WAS A WASTE OF TIME WITH GET TO A FOUR ÃONE VOTE IF WERE GOING TO PULL PURCHASE TRIGGER ON PURCHASE AND WE HAVE TO DO THAT. MY POINT IS, IF THE PROBLEM CAN GET RESOLVED, AND WE CAN GET STAFF TO ASSIST IN THE PROCESS IN CORAL SPRINGS, HAND IN GLOVE TO WORK WITH US IN THE PROCESS

THAT MAYBE WE GET THERE. >> CORAL SPRINGS IS ALREADY COMMITTED.

I GUESS, YOU WANT US TO ASK CORAL SPRINGS TO HAVE A MEETING, TO HAVE A MEETING ON THE BOOKS, TO SEE THAT THEY WILL BUY THEIR LAND BACK FROM US.

>> YEAH. >> OKAY. >> IS ON MY LIST OF THINGS TO

DO. >> OKAY. I MEAN --

>> I'M JUST GOING TO PUT IT OUT THERE -- >> TO ME, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY. AS JIM SAID, TO DO SOMETHING HISTORICAL.

AND WHILE I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S CONCERNS, TO ME, THIS IS, THIS IS A DECISION WE NEED TO MAKE FOR RESIDENTS. I'VE NOT SPOKEN TO ANY RESIDENT WHO IS NOT IN FAVOR OF US MAKING THIS DECISION. THE HERON BAY INTERNAL SURVEY ARE BRANDON STOVER THAT WE'VE GONE OUT, TIME AND TIME AGAIN, RESIDENTS ARE ASKING FOR SOMETHING.

IT HAS TO BE NICE, IT HAS TO HAVE A SMALL TOWN FEEL. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY WHAT THEY WANT. WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT.

AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST HOLDING BACK.HICH IS FINE! I JUST HOPE THAT NSID IS GOING TO GIVE US THE TIME, TO WORK THROUGH WHAT WE HAVE. BUT TO ME, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I HAVE ABSOLUTE TOTAL NO-BRAINER, OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WITH THE WORKOUT. TO ME, THE ONLY STICKING POINT IS WORKING OUT WITH HERON BAY.

THAT WE GET THE EASEMENTS AND THE COVENANT. AS FAR AS RECOUPING OUR FEES, THAT TO ME IS, EVEN IF WE DIDN'T DO COMMERCIAL WE DID 600 HOMES, IT'S PROBABLY $45 MILLION. WE JUST MADE $20 MILLION. AND DID 400 HOMES AND WE DID

NOT EVEN DO COMMERCIAL. >> BUT YOU'RE PRESUMING THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THE SAME GROUP OF PEOPLE IN HERON BAY, YELLING AT YOU THAT YOU'RE PUTTING THAT MANY MORE HOMES AND PUTTING

MORE IMPACT ON SCHOOLS. >> WE ARE NOT MAKING EVERYBODY HAPPY.

>> RIGHT. >> NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS, WE ARE GOING TO LOSE BY SOME PERCENTAGE OF THE PEOPLE. IF WE SIT BACK HERE AND DO NOTHING, WE WILL GET TOLD WE DID NOTHING. IF WE DO SOMETHING, WILL BE TOLD WE DIDN'T DO THE RIGHT SOMETHING. SO NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS, WE WILL BE TOLD WE DID SOMETHING WRONG BY SOMEBODY. AND THAT'S WHY WE DECIDED TO COME AND BE IN THIS POSITION.

AND I WOULD LOVE TO MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY BUT THERE'S NO WAY THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AND DEFINITELY NO WAY WILL HAPPEN IN THE SITUATION. SO IT IS UP TO US TO DO OUR ELECTED DUTIES, AND UNDERSTAND WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING WE COULD TO TALK TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS WE CAN. WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT, WE KNOW WHAT THEY WANT, WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REACT, AND IT'S OUR TIME RIGHT NOW TO SHOW THE RESIDENCE, WE ACTUALLY HAVE YOUR BEST INTEREST AT HEART. WE HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND

WE'RE GOING TO DO IT NOW. SO -- [APPLAUSE] >> I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, MAYOR, AND I APPRECIATE IT BUT I ALSO GO BACK AND LOOK AT, KEN AND ARE

[02:15:01]

WHAT GOES ON IN HERON BAY, ON THE GOLF COURSE, WE HAD BJ'S COMING TO TOWN THE RESIDENT SAYING, WHY ARE YOU LETTING THIS, WHATEVER THERE CAN HAPPEN PEOPLE WANT TO GET FILLED UP WITH GAS, GASES ALL THE WAY DOWN HILLSBOROUGH BLOCKING TRAFFIC.

I WANT TO SAY NIGHTMARE. WE'VE GOT THE EVERGLADES WE HAVE PARKSIDE DRIVE AND IT'S CRAZY. AND I'M JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE, -- HAS A 25 ACRE PROPERTY WHERE THE ELECTRICAL LINES. $4 MILLION, WHATEVER THE PRICE IS. I'LL GO BACK AND SANK A 25 MILLION RESIDENTS ARE ASKING FOR US TO BUY IT AS OPPOSED TO WORKING WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD TO USE IT AS A THOROUGHFARE.

TO OFFSET THE TRAFFIC ON PARKSIDE. ARE WE GOING TO SAY YEAH, THAT'S A GREAT IDEA, LET'S GO FOR IT? IT IS A RHETORICAL QUESTION.

I'M JUST SAYING -- >> THIS IS NOT AN EAST-WEST, NEW OLD PARKLAND.

THERE'S BEEN ISSUES, WHEN I FIRST GOT ELECTED, ALL YOU ARE TRYING TO DO IS MAKE PARK TRAILS NICE OR PINE TRAILS, THAT'S ALL YOU'RE GOING TO DO. PARAMORE IS BRAND-NEW.

WHAT WE DO, EVERYTHING WE DO IS FOR THE ENTIRE CITY OF PARKLAND.

NOT FOR ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER SIDE. IS THE WHOLE REASON I WANT TO THIS BRANDING PROJECT. SO WE CAN STOP WITH THE EAST-WEST, THE OLD AND NEW.

WE ARE ONE PARKLAND. EVERYTHING WE DO AFFECTS ONE ANOTHER WILL IS ON THE MILLAGE RATE, AMENITIES, WHATEVER IT IS. CAN WE SOLVE ALL THE PROBLEMS? NO. BUT WE ARE DOING A REALLY DAMN GOOD JOB OF DOING THAT BECAUSE WE ARE DEALING WITH THE RANCH AS NO ONE ELSE DID, TO WITH PINE TREE ROADS NOBODY ELSE DID, WE ARE TAKING ON THE BIG ISSUES AND WE ARE NOT BACKING DOWN FROM THAT.

AND HERE'S ANOTHER ONE. THE BIGGEST ONE WE HAVE YET TO COME.

AND WE JUST NEED -- MY OPINION, WE NEED TO STEP UP AND TAKE ACTION BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S

BEST FOR PARKLAND. >> LET ME SAY THIS BECAUSE TO DISPEL THIS NOTION A GROUP ON THE EAST SIDE OF PARKLAND. IN FACT IT WAS THE ONLY SIDE OF PARKLAND.

BECAUSE IT WAS ONE ENTRANCE OFF OF 441 AND NOTHING WEST OF THE UNIVERSITY NOR LIVE ON THE WEST SIDE. I DO NOT VIEW THIS AS AN EASTSIDE VERSE WEST SIDE ISSUE ON A VIEW THIS IS A HERON BAY ISSUE. I VIEW THIS AS A CITY PARKING ISSUE.EVERYONE HAS COME TO ME, WHETHER IT'S EAST OR WEST SIDE WITH SOME PROPOSALS OR BEEN LAID OUT, WOULD IMPACT ALL OF PARKLAND. YOU HAVE MORE TRAFFIC COMING DOWN FOR 441 TO GET TO THE WEST SIDE AND FOR THIS MASSIVE MONSTROSITY, WHATEVER IT IS.

IT IS GOING TO AFFECT ALL OF PARKLAND. THE RECIPROCAL IS TRUE.

IF WE'RE GOING TO GET THIS RIGHT, IT WILL BENEFIT ALL OF PARKLAND.OT JUST HERON BAY.

IT WILL BENEFIT THE TAXPAYERS, IT WILL BENEFIT THE RESIDENTS IN TERMS OF PROPERTY VALUES, IT WILL BENEFIT OUR WAY OF LIFE. IF WILL BE SOME SORT OF GATHERING SPOTS FOR THE RESIDENCE BECAUSE OLIVIA WAS PARKLAND BUT I MET PLENTY OF EAST PARKING SPOTS ON A WEEKLY BASIS.LMOST DAILY BASIS. AND VICE VERSA. I WANT TO DISPEL THE NOTION WHATSOEVER. I AGREE WITH THE MAYOR THAT WE GOT TO TAKE ACTION.

IT IS BOLD AND AGGRESSIVE BUT AS I SAID, AS LONG AS WE GET TO THE SAME RESOLUTION, IF WE CAN AVOID SOME OF THE PITFALLS THAT YOU ALL HAVE SHARED THAT THE VICE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONER AND MAYOR HAVE SHARED, I AM OKAY WITH IT. BUT I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE THE BALL FORWARD AND I AM TRYING TO BE A PROPONENT OF THAT, BUT STILL ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT. I THINK WE NEED TO GET A PLAN PUT IN PLACE.

I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A DEFINITIVE PLAN AND I DON'T WANT TO LET THIS LINGER.

I WANT TO MOVE THIS OVER. I WANT TO GIVE STAFF TONIGHT, THE AUTHORITY TO GO FORWARD AND GET THE ANALYSIS. AND EXPEND THE FUNDS BECAUSE I VIEW THAT AS A VALUE TO ALL OF PARKLAND. NOT JUST THROUGH HERON BAY. I VIEW THAT AS A VALUE TO ALL

OF US. >> WE CANNOT HAVE A PLAN BEFORE WE DECIDE TO SIGN THE CONTRACT.

BECAUSE WE HAVE TO CHANGE OUR CODE AND ALL THAT STUFF.T IS NOT SOMETHING THAT --

>> I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT. >> YOU ARE MISTAKING THE WORD PLAN.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT A PLAN FOR THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT DEFINITIVE AGENDA OR ITEMIZED PLAN FOR TONIGHT ON THE NEXT STEPS. THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

NOT A PLAN FOR THE PROJECT. >> AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE COST WILL BE AND HOW WE WILL GO ABOUT DOING ALL OF THOSE THINGS. ALL THE STUFF WE TALKED ABOUT.

I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TRAFFIC STUDIES ARE.

YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ON THAT. >> THAT'S WHAT THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO HAVE TO DO WHEN THEY COME TO US AND THEY PUT THEIR PROPOSAL.

THEY WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE US WITH THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND SHOW THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE

IT WORK. >> AND THE SAME THING WOULD HAPPEN WITH ANY DEVELOPER THAT

[02:20:01]

PURCHASES THE PROPERTY FROM NSID. >> UNDERSTOOD 100 PERCENT.

>> AND I WOULD BE SPENDING $25 MILLION OF TAXPAYER MONEY. >> WERE NOT SPENDING 25 MILLION OF TAXPAYER MONEY. BECAUSE WERE NOT GIVING AWAY THE PROJECT FOR FREE! WE ARE NOT SPENDING THE MONEY. YES, WE OUTLINE THE MONEY. IT IS AN INVESTMENT, WE OUTLINE THE MONEY WE ARE NOT GIVING IT TO WHOEVER THE DEVELOPER IS FOR FREE.

WE'RE GOING TO ASK FOR IT BACK AND WILL PROBABLY ASK MORE BACK BUT I AM NOT IN THIS, THIS IS A BUSINESS TRANSACTION TO MAKE MONEY. THIS IS A BUSINESS TRANSACTION TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTS TO ENSURE THAT THE SMALL TOWN FEEL THE PARKLAND FEEL AND ALL THAT STUFF STAYS AND US OWNING IT GIVES US A THOUSAND TIMES MORE OPPORTUNITY AND CHANCES TO HAVE

THAT OUTCOME. >> WHEN THE WEDGE CAME INTO PLAY, DID WE BUY ANY OF THAT

PROPERTY? >> MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE. >> WE DIDN'T BUY ANY OF THAT PROPERTY? AGAIN, IF AND WHEN HENDRIX FARMS COMES INTO PLAY, DO WE

PLAN TO BUY ANOTHER PROPERTY? >> WITH A $500 BUT MAYBE. >> AGAIN, MY STATEMENT WAS VERY CLEAR. I DO NOT BELIEVE PHILOSOPHICALLY, THEY SHOULD BE IN THE REAL STATE FOR DEVELOPMENT OR LAND BANKING BUSINESS.

HOWEVER, THE DIRECTION THAT THIS WAS GOING, WAS NOT WHAT THE RESIDENTS WANTED.

THE RESIDENTS SPOKE UP AND SAID, THIS IS NOT THE DIRECTION WE WANT.

SO THAT GIVES US TWO OPTIONS. WE THEN TAKE THE BULL BY THE HORNS AND REPURCHASE IT, OR WE JUST LET IT GO THE WAY IT WAS GOING TO GO AND HOPE THE ZONING CODES AND EVERYTHING ELSE HOLDS

UP. >> I CAN TELL YOU EVERY ONE OF MY COMMUNICATIONS, WITH RESIDENTS LEADING UP TO THE NIGHT, I MADE IT VERY CLEAR, AND WE WILL REITERATE IT AGAIN.

IT IS NOT MY INTENTION TO BE A PROPONENT OF MOVING FORWARD WITH THE CITY INTERCEDING THIS FOR PURPOSE OF THE CITY HOLDING THE LAND. IT IS MY INTENTION FOR THE CITY TO INTERCEDE IN THE PROCESS FOR THE CITY TO CURATE AND GOVERN WHAT GOES ON THAT PROPERTY.

BECAUSE OF RESIDENTS HAVE VOICED A DEMAND FOR US TO DO THAT.

>> THEN YOU ARE AGREEING WITH WHAT WE ARE SAYING. >> THAT IS NOT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT. THAT IS NOT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT.

WE'VE NOT DONE A REFERENDUM IN PTHE CITY WHERE THE RESIDENTS HAVE SPOKEN.

YOU HAVE PEOPLE HERE THAT HAVE SPOKEN. AND YOUR PEOPLE IN THE HERON BAY AREA THAT ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY A BUILDING THAT MIKE ON THE PROPERTY BUT YOU HAVE NOT DONE A REFERENDUM WHERE YOU HAVE THE ACTUAL PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY VOTE

ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT IT. >> I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT THE VOCAL RESIDENTS HAVE SPOKEN OUT ABOUT THIS ISSUE HAD DEMANDED OUR INVOLVEMENT. JUST LIKE THE VOCAL RESIDENTS TO SPOKE ON THE FIRST CAMPAIGN DEMAND TO BE JUST A PINE TREE ROAD ISSUE AND OPTIMALLY BROUGHT A LAWSUIT. WE TRY TO ADJUST THE MAYOR!E ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS ALL THE ISSUES AND FIX AND ADDRESS ISSUES THAT COME BEFORE US. SOME ARE VERY TOUGH TASKS.

I ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE WITH YOU THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET 100 PERCENT OF THE RESIDENCE TO AGREE. WHETHER REFERENDUM IS NEEDED OR NOT.

BUT I WILL TELL YOU I DON'T THINK PEOPLE IN PARKLAND WANT A 900,000 SQUARE-FOOT MALL IN THE

BACKYARD. >> NORWOOD WE LET THAT HAPPEN. >> NO IS PROPOSING IN 100,000 SQUARE-FOOT MALL. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE CONTINUE. THERE WILL BE NO MONSTROSITY NO

MATTER WHAT HAPPENS. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. >> WITH THE RESIDENTS HAVE

REACTED TO THAT PR CAMPAIGN. >> ONLY THAT IT WILL BE A MONSTROSITY.

EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT THERE WILL BE SOME MIXED LEVEL OF MIXED-USE.

EVERYONE. AND AGAIN, GO BACK. I'LL BRANDON, WE DID A SURVEY.

IT CLEARLY SAID, PEOPLE WERE MISSING SOMETHING. NOT ENOUGH RESTAURANT, NOT THIS, NOT THAT. WE WERE ELECTED TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS.

AND IT IS OUR JOB TO MAKE SURE WE ARE AFTER COMMUNICATING WITH THE RESIDENTS, LISTEN TO WHAT THEY'RE SAYING, UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON. I'VE BEEN TO SEVERAL MEETINGS IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES, FOUR SEASONS, HERON BAY, CYPRESS HEAD, I HAVE BEEN TO DOZENS OF MEETINGS WITH RESIDENTS.I HAVE NOT HAD ONE THAT DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THERE'S GOING TO BE MIXED-USE THERE. WHAT THEY DON'T WANT, IS WHAT THEY WON'T GET, IS A MONSTROSITY. BUT WE CAN DO THIS AND HAVE A SMALL TOWN FEEL, WE CAN ENCOMPASS ALL OF THAT! THERE IS SIX PROPOSALS TO NSID.

EXCUSE ME, FIVE PROPOSALS TO NSID. FOUR OF THEM OVER $30 MILLION.

WE ARE NOT SPENDING TAXPAYER MONEY. WE ARE INVESTING TAXPAYER MONEY, AND WILL UNDOUBTEDLY BE REIMBURSED. TO WHAT EXTENT, 90 PERCENT, 90

[02:25:06]

THAT I CAN SAY WITH 100 PERCENT CERTAINTY. I UNDERSTAND IT'S A BIG NUMBER.

BUT AGAIN, TO JORDAN'S POINT, IT IS AN INVESTMENT THAT WE ARE MAKING FOR OUR COMMUNITY, TO GROW. PARKLAND IS AMAZING. IT IS MISSING A LITTLE BIT OF SOMETHING. AND WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTROL IT 100,000 PERCENT.

AND THIS IS THE OPTION THAT WE HAVE. THIS IS THE BEST OPTION, ON THE TABLE NOW. MAYBE YOU KNOW, A PRIVATE PARTNER, PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP BUT LOOK, IT'S THE SAME THING. YOU MAKE PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN RETAINING THE LAND. IF YOU WANT TO BE A LANDOWNER AND LEASE IT. WE ARE NOT HOLDING ONTO THE LAND, MY OPINION, WE ARE NOT HOLDING ONTO THE LAND. IT IS MERELY FRONTING THE MONEY SO THAT WE HAVE TOTAL CONTROL.

AND THAT'S IT! THAT'S ALL WE ARE DOING. AND I UNDERSTAND THEIR CONCERNS. I'M NOT 100 PERCENT BUT THIS IS THE BEST, THIS IS THE BEST THING FOR PARKLAND. THERE ARE NO IF AND OR BUTTS ABOUT IT.

THAT IS 100 PERCENT HOW I FEEL AND I'M WILLING TO DO WHATEVER IS THE WILL OF THE COMMISSION.

BUT I DON'T WANT TO LOSE THIS OPPORTUNITY. I DON'T WANT TO LOOK BACK FOUR YEARS, TWO YEARS, 10 YEARS, 20 YEARS FROM NOW AND SAY, WE MISSED A BIG OPPORTUNITY.

LOOK AT THIS THING. IT'S TERRIBLE OR WHATEVER. WE COULD HAVE MADE IT WHAT WE WANT IT TO BE EXACTLY. AND UNDERSTAND WHERE ZONING AND LAND AND ALL THAT STUFF.

BUT OWNING IT, WE TONGUE THE RESIDENCE, WE ARE HERE! WE ARE HERE FOR YOU AND WE WILL

ACT. >> ULTIMATELY LOVE TO COME BACK TO THE BODY FOR A VOTE BEFORE WE CAN EXECUTE IT. WHAT IS A DOWNSIDE ON US DOING THIS DUE DILIGENCE AND

AUTHORIZING STAFF TO CONTINUE THOSE DISCUSSIONS? >> THERE IS NO BECAUSE THAT --

>> THIS MEETING TONIGHT, WAS TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT. I PERSONALLY, THIS IS BASED ON CONVERSATIONS WITH NSID, THIS PROCESS IN MY OPINION, MAYBE WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS CAN TAKE 90 DAYS.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT CAN TAKE 60 DAYS. BECAUSE FOR ME, THE DUE DILIGENCE, I HAVE DONE MY DUE DILIGENCE. I UNDERSTAND, TO ME IT'S PRETTY SIMPLE. WE SPENT 25 MILLION, WE KNOW THAT WE ARE GETTING, IS AN OFFER FROM TOLL BROTHERS FOR 32 MILLION. AN OFFER FROM EAST COAST FOR 25 MILLION. AN OFFER FROM FALCON GROUP FOR 39 MILLION.

I KNOW FOR SURE. AND THERE IS A REIMBURSEMENT FROM CORAL SPRINGS IMMEDIATELY.

WE PUT OUT 25 MILLION, I GET 30 PERCENT BACK. THEN WE GO, IF WE GO TO TOLL BROTHERS, THERE ARE 32 MILLION. WE'VE ALREADY WORKED OUT THE EMINENT DOMAIN, THE EASEMENT, THE COVENANTS, WORK ALL THAT STUFF OUT WITH HERON BAY. THEY NOW HAVE A FREE AND CLEAR

PIECE OF PROPERTY.MAY WE CAN SAY LOOK, WE WANT 30. >> RICH, ALL OF THOSE OFFERS WERE MADE ON THE CONDITION THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD WHAT THEY PROPOSED.

THAT IS THE POINT -- LISTEN, I'M NOT ADVERSE TO THIS IDEA OF DUE DILIGENCE.

>> NEITHER MY. >> WE WANT TO KNOW THE ANSWER TO ALL THE QUESTIONS.

>> AND WHY YOU HAVE THE ANSWERS BECAUSE I WANT YOU TO FEEL COMFORTABLE.

I WANT TO PUSH AND SHOVE ANYTHING DOWN ANYONE'S THROAT. THAT IS NOT MY INTENTIONS.

BUT THEY PUT UP PLANS, THAT THEY WANT TO DO SOMETHING LIKE WHAT THEY PROPOSED.

NOT EXACTLY BECAUSE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, THE FIRST PLAN EAST COAST PORT WAS, A MONSTROSITY OF 700 OR WHATEVER THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS AND THEY OFFER 20 MILLION.

THEN THEY CUT IT BACK TO 200,000 SQUARE FEET AND MADE IT 25 MILLION.

TOLL BROTHERS HAS 150,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL AND PUT 32 MILLION.

OR 25 MILLION, THE SAME NUMBER. THEN THERE WERE 200,000 SQUARE FEET WITH A DIFFERENT PROPOSAL THAT WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT WITH THE SAME NUMBER. WE STILL NOT GOING TO HAVE AN EXACT NUMBER ANYWAY. THEY LOOKING TO DO SOMETHING MORE OR LESS WHAT THEY'RE

PROPOSING. >> CAN I SUGGEST THAT THE FIRST THING WE PUT ON OUR DUE DILIGENCE LIST IS TO FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT NSID IS WILLING TO ALLOW US THE TIME TO DO

[02:30:03]

TO ALLOW US -- >> I TIMETABLE THAT WE CAN STICK WITH, THAT I CAN GO BACK TO NSID AND SAY, THIS IS THE COMMISSIONS WILL. THERE THIS IS THAT WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD. WE NEED SOME ADDITIONAL DUE DILIGENCE.

I NEED 30 DAYS FOR NANCY TO GET US TO A COMFORT LEVEL. AFTER THE 30 DAYS, AND I'M JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE. BECAUSE I WANT TO BE ABLE TO DISTINCTLY TELL NSID THIS IS OUR TIMELINE AND WE WILL STICK TO IT. AND IF WE DON'T, YOU DO WHATEVER YOU HAVE TO DO. AFTER THOSE 30 DAYS, WILL WE BE ABLE TO COME TO A MEETING, AND BE ABLE TO VOTE ON A FIRST READING, OR WOULD WE BE LOOKING TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION?

SO, WITHIN 30 DAYS, ANTHONY? >> THE CODE REQUIRES, IN ORDER TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT, THE CODE REQUIRES AN ORDINANCE WITH TWO READINGS. TWO SEPARATE MEETINGS.

AND A AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, THE PURCHASE CONTRACT IS TO BE IN THE BACK UP TO THE ORDER.

THAT NEEDS TO BE THE PURCHASE CONTRACT WE NEED TO BE FULLY NEGOTIATED.

WE NEED TO COME BEFORE YOU FOR ORDINANCE ON THE FIRST READING. YOU WOULD HAVE TWO READINGS ON THAT. YOU'RE PROBABLY TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER MONTH TO GET TO THE APPROVAL PROCESS ASSUMING YOU'RE TOTALLY NEGOTIATED CONTRACT.

>> BASED ON WHAT ANTHONY SAID, WOULD WE ALL BE ABLE TO HAVE ENOUGH TIME, 30, GIVE OR TAKE -- NANCY, I WILL NEED YOUR INPUT HERE AS FAR AS HOW MUCH TIME YOU HAVE.

TO GET US THE INFORMATION WE NEED, BUT ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO AT THE NEXT MEETING, APPROVE OR DENY SOME SORT OF CONTRACT? OR WILL WE NEED ANOTHER MEETING, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST TRYING, I WANT TO KNOW, CAN I GO BACK TO NSID TOMORROW AND SAY, IN 30 DAYS, WE WILL DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE. BUT WE WILL HAVE A CONTRACT AND A PRESENTATION FROM WHOMEVER WITH TRAFFIC AND MARKET ANALYSIS.

WE CAN HAVE STAFF AND CALVIN DO SOME SORT OF PRESENTATION FOR US.

AND HAVE A FULLY DIALOGUE BUT WOULD WE BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THE APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT THAT NIGHT? OR DO YOU WANT TO HAVE ANOTHER DISCUSSION AND THEN HAVE

ANOTHER MEETING WHERE WE ACTUALLY -- >> I'M GOING TO HAVE CALVIN COME UP. BECAUSE AGAIN, MORE CONCERNED PROBABLY ON THE MARKET ANALYSIS THAN ANYTHING. IN ORDER FOR THEM TO DO THE MARKET ANALYSIS, THEY'LL HAVE TO MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS ON WHAT WILL BE THERE. CAN YOU GUIDE US ON THAT,

PLEASE? >> RIGHT.HE MARKET STUDY NORMALLY TAKES 45 DAYS, IF NOT 60. IF WE HAVE SOME IDEAS I THINK OF THE DISCUSSIONS WE HAVE A SCENARIO WHERE IT'S ALL RESIDENTIAL, A MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL AND MAYBE SOUND LIKE A MIX OF PARKS AS WELL. IF WE HAVE THOSE STEREOS, WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE KIND OF FIGURE OUT WHAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS WILL BE.

AND AGAIN, IT'S A ROUGH ESTIMATE. WE WON'T KNOW WE WILL JUST DO THE BIG PICTURE THING. IN ADDITION, WITH TRAFFIC, WE CAN DO THE SAME THING.

TRAFFIC WILL BE AT A HIGHER LEVEL AT LIKE LAND USE OR REZONING WHERE WE WILL SAY X AMOUNT OF CARS, THEREFORE, THESE MIGHT BE THE IMPACT. YOU WILL NOT GET THE EXACT COME WITH EXACT PROJECT IS BECAUSE WE WON'T KNOW THAT UNTIL YOU ALL GET TO THE POINT WHERE IT'S GOING DOWN THE PROCESS, WHETHER ITS OWN THAT COMES IN FOR DEVELOPMENT OR SOMETHING THAT

IS GUIDED BY THE PROCESS. >> CAN I MAKE ONE COMMENT? I REALLY DON'T KNOW ABOUT EAST COAST VINYL TOLL BROTHERS. THEY WOULD NOT HAVE PUT TOGETHER AN OFFER THEY DID AFTER SOME STUDY. AND I'M NOT SAYING WE OBVIOUSLY BIKERS STOP TO DO THE STUDY BUT I THINK YOU FOR FOR PURPOSES OF TRAFFIC STUDIES, THAT WILL TAKE TIME AND AS YOU SAID, DETAILED AND SPECIFIC PROJECTS AND DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES. TO ME, WE HAVE TO DO THE VALUE OF THE APPRAISAL BUT THE TRAFFIC STUDIES ULTIMATELY GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE DONE BY THE DEVELOPERS WHO COME TO PROPOSE THEIR PROJECTS.

I DON'T WANT TO GET BOGGED DOWN IN THINGS THAT MAIL TO REALLY BE ABLE TO BE DONE AT A LATER TIME AT SOMEONE ELSE'S EXPENSE. I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE I THINK WE DO NOW THE BARE MINIMUM OF WHAT'S REQUIRED IN ORDER TO GET TO THE NEXT STEP.

>> WHAT OUR NEXT STEP IN MY OPINION NEEDS TO BE, WE NEED TO BE TO A PLACE WHERE WE CAN EITHER APPROVE OR DENY THE USE OF THE TEMPORARY USE OF $25 MILLION.

>> BUT NOT EVEN ACTUALLY. I DON'T EVEN THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY ACCURATE AND I'LL TELL

[02:35:08]

THAT CONTRACT STILL HAS PROVISION FOR AN INVESTIGATIVE PERIOD.

WE HAVE AN AGREED UPON THE AMOUNT OF DAYS BUT LET'S ASSUME THEY GIVE US 90 DAYS.

WE SOLVE THE 90 DAY PERIOD BEFORE 25 MILLION, BEFORE CHARGE OF $50,000 EVEN IS REMOVED FROM OUR POCKET. WE KEEP THINKING 30 DAY INCREMENTS BUT I'M READY TO VOTE ON IT TONIGHT. I'M READY TO VOTE ON THE CONTRACT TONIGHT.

I'M NOT SAYING, WHATEVER BUT HE ALSO FELT COMFORTABLE. I JUST WANT YOU KNOW, I WANT

EVERYBODY ELSE TO FEEL YOU KNOW BECAUSE AGAIN, WE NEED FOUR. >> THAT'S MYPOINT.

INFORMATION IS POWER. >> YEAH I FEEL I HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION I NEED.

YOU GUYS NEED TO TELL ME OR HOWEVER, I NEED TO GO BACK WITH A REAL TIMELINE.

I NEED TO HEAR FROM YOU GUYS WANT MORE INFORMATION YOU NEED, AND WHEN WOULD YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE APPROVING A CONTRACT? THAT'S THE INFORMATION I NEED.

THAT IS INFORMATION I NEED TO TAKE BACK TO NSID AND SAY, IS THIS TIME ON SOMETHING YOU CAN DEAL WITH? AND THAT IS WHERE WERE AT. AND I NEED TO SAY, WE ARE STICKING TO THAT. AND IF IT VOTES DOWN, IT VOTES DOWN.

>> FOR ME YOU HAVE THE HERON BAY COMPONENT. THEIR BOARD CAN OBVIOUSLY PROVIDE AN EASEMENT WITHOUT GOING TO GUESS, THEY CAN PROVIDE EASEMENT THEN HAD TO GO BACK AND GET A VOTE. HOWEVER LONG THAT TAKES, I WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHETHER THAT IS APPROVED OR NOT. AS FAR AS IF THEY DON'T WANT TO DO EASEMENT, THEY JUST WANT TO SELL THE LAND OR WHATEVER IT IS, YOU DON'T NEED BOARD APPROVAL.

YOU DON'T NEED THAT IN OTHER WORDS, I WANT TO KNOW THAT BEFORE --

>> WHAT ELSE DO YOU WANT -- >> I'M JUST GIVING YOU -- THAT IS SOMETHING YOU WANT TO KNOW.

I WANT TO KNOW THAT NSID IS GOING TO PROVIDE ANY EASEMENTS THAT WE NEED AS WELL.

BECAUSE CURRENTLY, THEY DON'T HAVE THAT IN WHETHER OR NOT IT IS WITH THE CANALS OR ANY OF

THE LAND THEY OWN, -- >> I BELIEVE WE HAVE THAT. BUT WE CAN APSLEY GET THAT.

>> WE TALKED ABOUT CORAL SPRINGS. THE OTHER ISSUE IS THAT AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW, BUT AT LEAST SOME SORT OF IDEA OR AT LEAST, SOME THOUGHT PROCESS OF BROWARD

COUNTY. >> THAT'S FINE, WE CAN REACH OUT.

>> IF WE DO COMMERCIAL THEY WILL HAVE TO BE LAND-USE AMENDMENT, AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY STAND ON IT. AGAIN, THEY BUT NOT NEGOTIATING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

>> AND WE NEED TO VOTE ONLY. [INAUDIBLE] WE NEED A VOTE. WE NEED TO KNOW WHETHER HERON BAYS RESIDENTS ARE GOING TO VOTE IN FAVOR TO WAIVE THE COVENANT.

TO ALLOW US TO EVEN DO WHAT WE WANT TO DO ON THE PROPERTY. ON THE PRESENT SHE SPENT $25 MILLION TO BUY THE PROPERTY, AND THEN THEY HAVE A VOTE AND THEY WROTE DOWN WHATEVER THE

BOARD -- >> SO YOU CANNOT VOTE -- I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS A BAD THING AND JUST ASKING A QUESTION. YOU CAN'T VOTE TO APPROVE A CONTRACT UNLESS THE HOA HAS DONE THEIR VOTE? OR IS THAT SOMETHING THE BOARD, SAY THE BOARD GIVES US IN WRITING THAT THEY APPROVED IT. IT'S JUST GOT TO VOTE. ART IMAGINE THAT TAKES A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME. WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO FORGO?

>> NO. I NEED TO KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THERE WITH THE COVENANT.

>> WHAT YOU WANT TO KNOW FROM THE RESIDENCE? >> YES.

I WANT TO WALK INTO THIS THING. IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEND $25 MILLION OF OUR RESIDENTS MONEY, WE MIGHT GET BACK, THAT I WANT TO KNOW THAT WE CAN DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN THE PROPERTY FROM

DAY ONE. >> KEEP THEM ON THE COVENANT DOES GO AWAY IN FIVE YEARS.

>> WE COULD WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME. I DON'T THINK IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO GET THE STAFF TO START WORKING ON THE DUE DILIGENCE.

>> I'M TRYING TO GET A TIMELINE. >> HEAR ME OUT.

TONIGHT SMITTY WAS TO GIVE STAFF THE ABILITY TO MOVE FORWARD IN NEGOTIATING A CONTRACT THAT WILL HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE US ANYWAY. WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS WE DO THIS, WE DO BOTH. WORK ON, IN FACT I WILL SUGGEST THREE!

>> THAT'S WHAT WE'VE ALREADY SUGGESTED. >> WE GATHER DUE DILIGENCE, WE SUGGEST THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER CONTINUE NEGOTIATIONS WITH NSID ON THE CONTRACT AND THAT WE ARE OPEN TO DISCUSSIONS WITH INTERESTED DEVELOPERS ON PARTNERING WITH

US. >> I NEED A TIMELINE THAT I CAN GIVE TO NSID.

ALL THE OTHER STUFF TO ME, I NEED TO GO BACK TO NSID AND SAY, THIS IS HOW LONG IT'S

GOING TO TAKE FOR US TO VOTE ON A CONTRACT. >> NANCY, HOW LONG IS IT GOING

[02:40:03]

TO TAKE TO GET ALL THAT STUFF? REALISTICALLY. >> THAT'S WHAT WE NEED.

>> WHAT WE NEED TO GET IS, IF WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD POTENTIAL CONTRACTOR TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SATISFIED AND ADDRESSED THE CONCERNS OF FOUR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION TO

APPROVE THAT. >> AND THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. WHAT DO YOU NEED?

>> I WANT TO LEAVE TONIGHT UNLESS WE SAID, HERE ARE THE CONCERNS WE HAVE AND HERE IS

STAFF TO ADDRESS THEM AND PUT TOGETHER THE LIST. >> THAT'S EXACTLY -- AND I WANT

TO KNOW HOW LONG THAT WILL TAKE. >> FAIR ENOUGH.

>> WHAT ARE YOUR ABSOLUTES, SO THAT WE CAN PUT A TIMELINE TOGETHER.

KEN'S ABSOLUTES HAVING THE RESIDENCE OF HERON BAY, VOTE ON THE COVENANT.

AND THAT WILL TAKE -- CLASS CANNOT BE DONE, THUS THE QUESTION.

>> HOW LONG DOES THAT TAKE? >> COME TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE.

SORRY. >> THE GENERAL MANAGER SENT THE GATHERING TO NANCY.

>> I HAVE A GUIDELINE. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A TIMELINE.

>> THE TIMELINE IS AND WHAT SHE SENT YOU. I BELIEVE IT WAS, WE HAVE TO HAVE A BOARD MEETING. AND THE BOARD HAS TO MAKE A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE WHATEVER

WE ARE PROVING.> CALENDAR TAKE? >> THAT WE HAVE TO WAIT I THINK BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE IT HERE. I THINK IT WAS 10 DAYS. WITHIN 10 DAYS WE HAVE TO MAIL IT OUT TO THE RESIDENCE.N THE RESIDENCE OF EITHER 30 OR 45 DAYS.

>> WE CAN GET AN ANSWER IN 30 DAYS. THAT'S WHAT THE MAYOR IS TRYING

TO SAY RIGHT NOW. >> I THINK WE ARE SHORTCUTTING OURSELVES.

EVEN IF WE COULDN'T GET THE COMMITMENT BEFORE WE SIGN THE CONTRACT -- THERE IS AN ABSOLUTE OUT WITH THE INVESTIGATIVE PERIOD. I READ IT, IT IS FOR ANY AND ALL REASONS. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GIVE JUSTIFICATION.

WE COULD JUST SAY WE DECIDED NO. >> HAVE ANTHONY EXPLAIN.> THAT IS WHAT I'VE READ. THE NUMBER OF DAYS HAS NOT BEEN AGREED UPON YOU BUT THERE'S AN

INVESTIGATIVE PERIOD THAT ALLOWS FOR THAT. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE CLEAR. IF WE SIGN A CONTRACT WITH THE HUNDRED DAYS OF INVESTIGATIVE TIMEFRAME.N THAT TIME YOU'RE PUTTING $250,000 AS A DEPOSIT DOWN IN GOOD FAITH.

AND DOES THE CONTRACT SAY THAT FOR ANY REASON, AND WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO GIVE REASON, LOOK

AND DECIDE WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT AND GET OUR MONEY BACK. >> LET ME SAY THIS.

BECAUSE I WANT TO CLARIFY THIS. I'VE NOT NEGOTIATING I GET A COPY OF THE CONTRACT.

AND I REVIEWED IT AND PROVIDED SOME INITIAL COMMENTS AND SOME SUGGESTIONS.

IT IS NOT SIGNED. THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT SPEAKS TO IT.

>> WHAT DOES IT SAY? >> THERE IS LANGUAGE THAT SPEAKS TO THE INVESTIGATION PERIOD. I NEED THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE CLEARER I BELIEVE WITH SOME OF MY TWEAKS THAT YOU CAN GET OUT OF THE CONTRACT DURING THE INVESTIGATION PERIOD.

YOU KNOW, OR PRIOR TO THE END OF THE INVESTIGATION PERIOD THE STATEMENT YOU HAVE AN INSPECTION PERIOD WHEN YOU BUY HOUSE. SOMETIMES YOU GET 15 DAYS TO RESPECT AND YOU CANNOT RETURN YOUR DEPOSIT. BUT I'M NOT AWARE OF ANYONE THAT HAS TAKEN A VOTE ON THAT ON NSID THAT SAYS YES, WE ARE GOOD OR THAT IS SIGNED PETER

WANT TO BE CLEAR, THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THIS. >> PART OF --

>> I HAVE IT RIGHT HERE I CAN READ INTO THE RECORD. >> NO, HE SAY THAT NO ONE FROM

NSID HAS SIGNED THE CONTRACT. >> THIS IS FROM THEIR ORIGINAL DOCUMENT.

>> HOW ABOUT WE JUST GIVE HIM THE ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE WITH THAT PROVISION AND IT?

THIS IS THEIR PROVISION. WE ARE NEGOTIATING. >> EITHER WAY.

WHETHER HE GOT IT NEGOTIATED IT'S FINE WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW FROM KEN, WOULD HE APPROVE THE CONTRACT IF THAT CLAUSE WAS IN THERE, BECAUSE AT THE RESIDENCE OF HERON BAY VOTE IT DOWN --

>> TO HIS LAWYER SO I KNOW THAT YOU APPRECIATE HEARING THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE, RIGHT? IF IT ANY TIME PRIOR TO THE TERMINATION AND INVESTIGATION. THE PERJURY IN SOLE AND ABSOLUTE DISCRETION, DETERMINE IS UNWILLING TO PROCEED WITH THE TRANSACTION FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER, PURCHASER MAY TERMINATE THE AGREEMENT BY NOTIFYING THE SELLER IN WRITING ON OR BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE INVESTIGATION PERIOD. UPON SUCH NOTICE -- FIXED AND LIQUIDATED COMPENSATION FOR THIS AND IT SHALL BE NULL AND VOID.

CRISP ANTHONY! IS, HE HAS NEGOTIATED ANYTHING AND HE CAN NEGOTIATE MORE.

>> IT ALSO HAS TO BE ACCEPTED. >> THAT'S WHY IT'S A NEGOTIATION.

>> RIGHT. AND PRESUMING -- >> ALSO KEEP IN MIND, WHICH I HAVE SAID, WE ARE BEING GIVEN THE ABILITY TO MATCH A DEAL. THERE'S LIMITATIONS.

[02:45:06]

>> LIMIT CLARIFY BECAUSE -- >> DIDN'T CHANGE. >> GIVEN THE ABILITY TO MATCH.

>> DIDN'T CHANGE. >> THE ACREAGE CHANGE. >> METHOD VALUE VALUE.

AND THE ACREAGE WENT FROM -- CCORDING THAT WAS THAT WAS THE CHANGE.

>> TIMEFRAME, I DON'T HELEN WOULD TAKE. >> A MINIMUM OF TWO MONTHS.

>> OKAY. >> THAT WOULD FALL WITHIN THE HUNDRED DAYS.

MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, WOULD YOU VOTE WITH THE STIPULATION THAT IF HERON BAY RESIDENTS

VETO THE BOARD, THAT WE CANNOT ACCEPT IT. >> I WOULD HAVE TO SEE ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS WE ARE NEGOTIATED IN THE CONTRACT. BEFORE WE VOTE TO APPROVE A

CONTRACT. >> UNDERSTAND THAT. I'M ASKING ABOUT THE ONE.

>> WITH THE CLAUSE IN THERE. MY MAIN CONDITION RIGHT NOW IS THAT I NEED TO KNOW THAT THE COVENANT AND THE EASEMENT STUFF THAT HERON BAY IS HOLDING ONTO, IS NOT GOING TO BE AN ISSUE IN THE SCENARIO. THAT IS A THIRD-PARTY THING I'M NO CONTROL OVER.

>> AND I 100 PERCENT AGREE WITH YOU. I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT.

I'M ONLY ASKING, CAN YOU VOTE FOR THE CONTRACT PRIOR TO THE RESIDENCE VOTING, STILL HAVING THAT 100 DAYS AND YOUR ONLY STIPULATION TO PULL OUT OF THE CONTRACT, WOULD BE THE HERON

BAY RESIDENTS VETOING -- >> NO. >> SO I CAN'T GO BACK TO NSID

-- >> WE ARE DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE.AND AT THE SAME

TIME, HERON BAY IS PUTTING TOGETHER THEIR VOTE. >> I DON'T KNOW JUST -- I'M HAPPY TO GO BACK AND DO THE NEGOTIATION. BUT UNDERSTAND, AS OF NOW, THAT WILL BE TOO LONG. THAT COULD POTENTIALLY JEOPARDIZE THE DEAL.

AND ALL I'M ASKING, IS THAT YOU CAN HOLD ONTO THAT, AND YOU CAN USE IT TO GET OUT OF THE CONTRACT. I'M ASKING YOU TO ALLOW US TO SIGN THE CONTRACT FASTER, CONTINUE WITH THE 100 DAY DUE DILIGENCE PERIOD AND IF THEY WILL HAVE THE VOTE WITHIN THE 100 DAYS, AND IF THERE VETOED, YOUR VOTE IS A NO. AND I'M FINE WITH THAT.

BECAUSE THAT COULD SAVE US THREE MONTHS AND IT COULD POTENTIALLY SAVE THE DEAL.

MAYBE IT WON'T HAVE A FACT I DON'T KNOW I HAVEN'T HAD A CONVERSATION.

>> I DON'T KNOW EITHER, THAT'S THE PROBLEM I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWERS.

>> BUT AGAIN, I THINK FOR TONIGHT THE ONLY ANSWER WE NEED TO KNOW IS THIS.

>> IS NOT. BECAUSE I HAD TO GO BACK -- >> I'M SORRY I'M TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE. I AGREE WITH YOU. NO ONE WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD IN THE ABSENCE OF SOME CONFIDENCE OR CONFIRMATION FROM THE HOA. BUT WE KNOW WE CANNOT GET THE INFORMATION WITHIN 30 DAYS, WE JUST KNOW. HE JUST SAID THEY WILL HAVE A

BOARD MEETING IT HAS TO BE -- >> THE RESOLUTION WE HAD READS, THE BOARD WILL INITIALLY VOTE ON OPEN BOARD MEETING ON WHETHER TO SUPPORT OR OPPOSE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

WITHIN 10 DAYS FOLLOWING THE BOARD INITIAL VOTE THEY WILL SEND TO EACH OF THE HOMEOWNERS, WITHIN HERON BAY, MATERIAL WITH DESCRIPTION. AND THEN, AT LEAST 50 PERCENT OF THE VOTING MEMBERS WITHIN THE HERON BAY COMMUNITY RETURN BALLOTS TO THE BOARD WITHIN 30 DAYS. WE'RE LOOKING AT A 40 DAY TIMEFRAME.

AND YOU KNOW, THE VOTE HAS TO COME BACK, WE HAVE TO HIT AT LEAST 50 PERCENT, AND THEN TO GO AGAINST ONE OF THE BOARD RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE HAS TO BE MAJORITY.

>> RICH, I KNOW THAT YOU KNOW THIS BECAUSE YOU ARE A SAVVY BUSINESSMAN.

I ALSO THINK WE CAN IMPRESS UPON NSID TO WORK WITH US. BECAUSE VALUES WE TALKED ABOUT TWO GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES. HEAR ME OUT. ON A RELATIVELY FAST] NSID 02 AND HALF TIMES AS MONEY ON THE PROPERTY AND THE NOTION THAT TO GET EVERYBODY ON BOARD MAY TAKE

AN EXTRA 10 DAYS OR 30 DAYS. >> NO, NO, NO. >> DISINGENUOUS.

>> IS NOTHING HE WON'T AGREE. I'M SAYING THAT THE ORIGINAL CONVERSATION WAS, THIS MEETING WOULD BE YES, THERE WOULD BE TWO OR THREE WEEK PERIOD AND THEN, PRESUMABLY WITHIN 30

DAYS, WE WOULD HAVE THE SECOND READING. >> NO DOUBT THAT NSID CONTROLS

WHO CAN SELL THE PROPERTY. >> BASED ON MY DISCUSSIONS AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE HAD YOUR

[02:50:04]

THEY WILL WORK WITH US ON THE PROJECT. >> CORRECT.

>> MARK LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION. SO, ON THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, IF THE BOARD VOTES NO, THEY DO NOT WANT TO REMOVE THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, TO

THE ALSO DIRECT TO THE RESIDENCE? >> YES.

EITHER WAY. >> EITHER WAY YOU NEED A RESOLUTION AND A VOTE.

>> SO THAT THE PRINCIPLE IS THAT THE BOARD MAKES THE DECISION, AND THE RESIDENCE

HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY YOU MADE A MISTAKE. >> BUT THAT'S ONLY FOR THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS. SELLING THE LAND AND EASEMENT --

>> THE EASEMENT, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO ACQUIRE AND SELL LAND. >> SO YOU COULD TECHNICALLY

HOLD THE EASEMENT AND NOT GIVE ANY EASEMENT. >> SURE, WE COULD.

>> THE EASEMENT ALSO HAS TO BE PART OF THAT DEAL. >> I'M JUST SAYING THAT IF AGAIN, FROM A NSID STANDPOINT, IF HERON BAY IS NOT HAPPY WITH THE RESULTS, YOU CANNOT NEGOTIATE AND THEN HERON BAY HAS THE ABILITY TO TALK ABOUT WHO HAS THE ABILITY TO CONTROL.

HERON BAY HAS THE ABILITY TO CONTROL THE EASEMENTS. >> THAT WILL BE PART OF THE

INVESTIGATIVE PERIOD. >> IT DEPENDS WHO YOU TALK TO ABOUT THE EASEMENT.

BECAUSE EASEMENTS ARE A GOVERNMENT ENTITY COULD TAKE THE EASEMENTS.

SO REALLY, THAT IS SOMETHING THE GOVERNMENT CAN JUST TAKE. >> RIGHT, BUT IF THEY'RE SELLING IT THEN THEY'VE LOST THE ABILITY. IF THEY SELL IT TO ONE OF THE TWO PROPOSALS. WE DON'T BUY IT, THEY SELL TO ONE OF THOSE TWO PROPOSALS.

>> CAN I SAY SOMETHING WITH EMINENT DOMAIN? YOU ARE WRONG ON EMINENT DOMAIN. YOU ALREADY HAVE ACCESS TO THE LAND.

EMINENT DOMAIN IS WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE LAND. SO THERE HAS TO BE A REASON.

THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE A REASON FOR EMINENT DOMAIN. >> LOOK I'M NOT SAYING --

WANTED TO BE REALLY DIFFICULT WITH ANYBODY, -- >> I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OR WHATEVER. BUT THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS ON THE TABLE IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

>> I THINK THAT'S WHY RIGHT NOW WE ARE TRYING TO GO DOWN THE PATH WE ARE TRYING TO GO DOWN.

>> ALL I -- >> WE HAVE TALKED, WE KNOW -- >> ALL I'M TRYING TO DO IS GET A TIMELINE. SO I CAN GO BACK TO NSID WITH A TIMELINE.

AND RIGHT NOW, I'M HEARING 60 DAYS, BEFORE WE CAN HAVE THE NEXT MEETING.

>> I WANT TO SAY ONE THING. I THINK WE CAN SHORTEN THAT. BECAUSE EVEN IF WE DON'T GET THE ANSWER FROM, EVEN IF WE LOOK AT THE ANSWER FROM HERON BAY WITHIN THE 30 DAYS, RIGHT? AT LEAST THEY INITIATED THE PROCESS. I CONSIDER YOU KNOW THAT WE ARE HERE ON THE DAYS TOGETHER, I WOULD NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DEAL, EVEN AFTER SIGNING THE CONTRACT, WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE A SECOND READING, CORRECT, ANTHONY?

>> JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE SECOND READINGS WOULD APPROVE THE CONTRACT.

AND THEN YOU EXECUTE. IF THAT MAKES SENSE. CHRIS WEAVER PERIOD OF TIME BETWEEN THE FIRST READING. BETWEEN WHAT WAS NEGOTIATED PRESUMABLY AT THAT POINT WITH NSID. WHICH I IMAGINE WE WILL NEGOTIATE SOME EASEMENT RIGHTS OVER THE WATER. THE HOA WILL BE WORK ON THE PROCESS WHETHER NOT THEY CAN GET THE RESIDENT WROTE. BUT THEY NEED FOUR VOTES TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS, AFTER SOME A CONTRACT, IF THERE'S AN INVESTIGATIVE PERIOD, HOW IS IT DETERMINED? DO AFTER VOTE AGAIN WHETHER TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT?

>> YES. YOU WOULD. IF YOU TOOK THE ACTION TO

APPROVE THE CONTRACT AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO -- >> SO APPROVE IT ON THE BASIS

THAT HERON BAY RESIDENTS WON'T VETO. >> THAT THE POINT I WAS GOING

TO MAKE. >> HOLD ON. WE CAN APPROVE THE CONTRACT THAT SAYS IN IT THAT WE THE INVESTIGATIVE PERIOD OF 100 DAYS, RIGHT? IF WE TELL ROD TOMORROW WE NEED 30 DAYS TO GET OUR DUCKS IN A ROW AND START UNDERSTANDING WHAT IT IS WE WOULD EVEN WANT TO CONTRACT TO BE PART OF THE NEGOTIATION.

THAT WOULD BE PART OF IT. THERE WILL BE INCLUSIVE. WE ARE LOOKING AT WHAT EASEMENTS WE MAY NEED. IN THAT PERIOD THE HOA STARTS THE PROCESS OF THE VOTE.

LET'S SAY WE VOTE ON THE CONTRACT AND WE STILL HAVE THE HOA APPROVAL YET.

I GET IT I AGREE WITH YOU AT A SCARY CONCEPT. BUT WE SHOULD SET UP ALSO A

[02:55:04]

I'M JUST SAYING. >> I'M FINE WITH THAT. MY POINT WAS, KEN JUST SAID IT WASN'T SOMETHING HE WAS WILLING TO DO. I'VE ZERO PROBLEMS WITH THAT.

>> LET'S START THE PROCESS. >> DON'T THINK ANY OF US WOULD VOTE, --

>> WE HAVE TO GIVE NSID A TIMELINE. >> LET'S SAY WE HAVE A VOTE AT THE 90 DAY PERIOD AND WILL ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. -- > LET ME SAY THIS BECAUSE MARK AND I'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE BOARD AND THE BOARD HAS TALKED ABOUT THIS OPENLY IN THE MEETINGS INCLUDING LAST NIGHT. IF WE WERE TO TELL THE BOARD THAT WE ARE CONTEMPLATING MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS POTENTIAL TRANSACTION, THE BOARD WILL IMMEDIATELY, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, TAKE A VOTE SAYING THAT IF THE CITY BUYS THE PROPERTY, THE BOARD AS A MEASURE OF FAITH, IN THE CITY, WILL WAIVE THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AND PROVIDE THE NECESSARY EASEMENTS FOR THE PROJECT TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD. IT IS A VERY VALI CONDITION TO MOVE FORWARD.

MY UNDERSTANDING, BEFORE WE EVEN GET TO SIGNING A CONTRACT OR FINISHED NEGOTIATING A CONTRACT WITH NSID, THE BOARD WILL IMMEDIATELY TAKE STEPS AFTER TONIGHT, THAT IF THE CITY IS THE PURCHASER OF THE PROPERTY, THE BOARD WILL TAKE A VOTE, THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BOARD VOTE WILL BE UNTIL THEY TAKE IT. JUST LIKE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH NSID WILL YIELD. --

>> I'M TRYING TO GET FROM KEN, WOULD HE ACCEPT BOARDING ON THE CONTRACT, UNDER THE

STIPULATION. >> WHAT YOU'RE ASKING -- IN FAIRNESS, YOU ARE ASKING FOR ONE NUANCE OF A CONTRACT THAT COULD BE MULTIFACETED. IN TERMS OF CONJUNCTIONS AND CONCERNS. LET'S START THE PROCESS! LET'S HAVE NEGOTIATIONS.ARK

AND THE HOA START THE PROCESS. >> SIMEON, I CANNOT START -- WE CAN'T START NEGOTIATIONS

WITHOUT HAVING A TIMELINE TO GIVE ROD. >> YOU CAN START NEGOTIATIONS

TOMORROW. >> ALSO ROD WILL START NEGOTIATIONS BUT HAVE NO IDEA HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE. BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE WILL DO.

>> YOU JUST HEARD HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE. >> THAT IS 60 DAYS.

>> CAN I SAY WORD HERE? YOU KNOW, THE WAY WE ALWAYS THOUGHT THIS WOULD GO WITH, WITHIN NSID, WE'VE ALL TALKED TO ROD AND REFER DIFFERENT THINGS.

BUT THE WAY WE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO GO WITH THE VOTE WAS, HE WAS GOING TO PICK THE DEVELOPER, TOLL BROTHERS OR EAST COAST AND AT SOME POINT AGREE ON THE LAYOUT.

AND THE LAYOUT WAS WHAT WE WERE GOING TO TAKE TO THE HOMEOWNERS.

SO IN THIS CASE, YOU KNOW, IN THIS CASE, AND I MEAN THAT'S -- YOU BEEN THERE.

WE DID THE TOWN HALL, WE SHOWED THE THREE NSID -- WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ME TO DO, AND I DON'T HOW THIS WILL GO. YOU'RE ASKING ME TO GO TO THE HOMEOWNERS --

>> I SAID THAT LAST NIGHT AT THE MEETING. >> SOMETHING I WOULD TRY TO PUT IN, BECAUSE WE WON'T HAVE A PICTURE, WE WON'T HAVE A LAYOUT, WE KNOW THAT.

WE TALKED ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS LIKE THIS IS GOING TO BE MIXED-USE OR -- I WOULD TRY WITH RICH AND NANCY. WE PUT THIS TO A VOTE WITH THE RESIDENCE, SOME KIND OF

GUIDELINE ON WHAT WE WILL ALL WORK TOGETHER -- >> NSID HAS TO APPRECIATE THAT.

>> MY OPINION IS -- >> A BLANK CHECK. >> IT IS HARD BUT WE ARE ALSO PUTTING ALL THE RESIDENTS OF PARKLAND MONEY ON THE TABLE. AND YOU CAN AGREE.

>> WE WILL INVITE YOU -- >> BUT I'M ALSO TELLING YOU THE REALITY OF IT.

IT BENEFITS HERON BAY MORE THAN IT DOES YOU KNOW, CYPRESS HEAD OR MAYFAIR.

SO, WHAT GOES THERE -- >> I THINK IT'S AN INVESTMENT FUTURE.

>> I DON'T DISAGREE. HOWEVER -- LOOK, WE CAN ARGUE UNTIL WE'RE BLUE IN THE FACE.

A BETTER PROJECT IS A BETTER BENEFIT ON HERON BAY THAN THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE

[03:00:05]

>> WE UNDERSTAND THAT BUT WE HAVE TO -- >> MARKET, JUST GOING TO LEAVE IT AT THIS. I THINK JIM IS THE ONE WHO SAID IT, IT'S A LEAP OF FAITH, RIGHT? WE ARE ALL SITTING HERE LISTING OF HOPING THIS GOES THE RIGHT WAY. IT IS NOT TO SAY THE RESIDENCE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE TO SAY, I DON'T HAVE A VISIBLE PLAN OR ANYTHING TANGIBLE, I WILL VOTE IT DOWN.

AND IF THAT IS THEIR PREROGATIVE THEN THAT'S THEIR PREROGATIVE! AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE REASON WE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION IS BECAUSE WE ARE ALL HOPING TO MOVE IN THE SAME DIRECTION. AND I WOULD HOPE THAT RESIDENTS OF HERON BAY KNOW THAT WE ARE NOT DOING THIS FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE BEST INTEREST.

>> UNDERSTAND BUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS YOU EXPECT ME TO GO TO THE BOARD TOMORROW AND HAVE

A MEETING AND -- >> I DID NOT SAY THAT. SIMEON SAID THAT.

>> WE WERE ACTUALLY HELPING TONIGHT. >> I THINK WE NEED WORDING IN

THEIR -- >> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT AT ALL.

YOU WOULD START THE PROCESS. >> START THE PROCESS, HE NEEDS THAT FROM US.

THERE IS NO START THE PROCESS. HE CANNOT TAKE A VOTE UNTIL HE HAS SOMETHING FROM US THAT SAYS

IT'S GOING TO BE THIS MUCH OF THIS AND THIS MUCH OF THAT. >> RICH, WE WON'T EVEN HAVE THAT AT THE END OF THE 100 DAYS!> HE JUST SAID THAT'S WHAT HE WANTS!

HOW ARE YOU GOING TO START THE PROCESS? >> NO, NO.

HOLD ON. I THINK WE ARE GOING BACKWARDS. >> WE ARE NEVER GOING TO GET YOU A PLAN BEFORE THE END OF PTHE 100 DAYS. WE CAN GIVE YOU SCENARIOS LIKE

I SAID. THERE ARE OPTIONS, RIGHT? >> I KNOW THAT.

>> THAT'S NOT WHAT HE WANTS. >> I KNOWS NOT WHAT HE WANTS BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS I

WANT! >> LOCAL. >> OKAY THEN WE JUST WASTED ALL

OF OUR TIME. >> EVEN IF SOMEONE WERE TO CONTRACT WITH NSID TOMORROW,

THEY WOULD NOT HAVE ANY AGREEMENT FROM THE HOA. >> YOU SHOULD BE TALKING TO

MARK, NOT ME.> I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT PRESSURE ON HIM. >> AND NOT TRYING TO PUT PRESSURE ON HIM AM JUST TELLING YOU WHAT HE SAID HE WANTS. I'M JUST TELLING YOU WHAT HE

SAID HE WANTS. >> WHAT I WANT AND WHAT I'M GOING TO GET ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. I'M TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO YOU, AND YOU KNOW!

>> MARKET, YOU HEAR US APPEAR. THERE ARE MULTIPLE COMMISSIONERS THAT WILL NOT MOVE WITHOUT CONFIRMATION FROM HERON BAY, THAT THEY WILL WORK WITH US.

AND IN WRITING. NOT YOUR WORD. SO IF WE CANNOT GET THAT, THEN

WE WILL JUST GO HOME. >> AND I AGREE WITH YOU, BUT WE HAVE TO PUT DOWN WHAT IT WILL BE IN WRITING. YOU JUST SAID HAS TO BE IN WRITING.

SO LET'S WORK ON GETTING THIS IN WRITING. >> WE CANNOT GIVE YOU, I WAS VERY CLEAR WITH YOU. WE CANNOT GIVE YOU SQUARE FOOTAGE IS IN WRITING, WE CANNOT GIVE YOU THAT.> GIVE ME SOMETHING. WE NEED A FEW DAYS HERE.'M NOT GOING TO THE BOARD TOMORROW. WHAT ARE MY VOTING ON?

LET'S YOU AND I IN WRITING AGREE. >> IT'S PRETTY SIMPLE.

IF THE CITY WERE TO DECIDE TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY, WILL HERON BAY WHERE THE COVENANT, AND WILL THEY PROVIDE ACCESS BY EASEMENTS TO THE PROPERTY, TO ALLOW FOR US TO DEVELOP IT AS WE DEEM FIT AS A COMMISSION? THAT IS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR.F I CAN GET A COMMITMENT TO THAT EXTENT, THEN I WOULD HAVE A LOT MORE CONFIDENCE IN MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PURCHASE OF $25 MILLION ON A PROPERTY WHERE WE ARE LOOKING TO DEVELOP IT.

AND WE WANT TO DO IT THE WAY IT WILL FIT OUR CITY AND IT'S GOING TO BE RIGHT.

BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER FACTORS INVOLVED IN THIS. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT ALL THOSE FACTORS, I BROUGHT OUT ALL THOSE FACTORS. BUT THE BIG STICKING POINT FOR ME, I NEED A COMMITMENT FROM HERON BAY AND THE PEOPLE IN RESIDENTS LIVING IN THEIR, THAT THEY WILL GIVE THESE THINGS TO THE CITY OF THE CITY IS WILLING TO DO THESE THINGS.

AND IF THEY ARE NOT, I'M FINE WITH THAT BECAUSE I'LL FALL BACK ON THE FACT THAT I STILL HAVE LAND USE, AND I STILL HAVE ALL KINDS OF OTHER STUFF WITH ZONING TO PROTECT THATPROPERTY.

>> RECENTLY WENT HERON BAY TO GIVE YOU THE -- >> YES.

>> OKAY . YES. >> OKAY.

>> INSTEAD OF THE MICROPHONE FOR US BECAUSE WE NEED TO CAPTURE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

>> GUYS, THIS IS WRONG. I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE PLACE TO BE DOING THIS.

WE ARE NEGOTIATING NOW. YOU KNOW, YOU AND I, WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS IN THE PAST SIX MONTHS. AND YOU GUYS CANNOT TALK TO EACH OTHER WHICH IS TERRIBLE.

>> I AGREE. >> UNDERSTAND THAT TONIGHT, YOU GUYS ARE DISCUSSING A LOT OF THINGS THAT I'VE DISCUSSED WITH RICHARD AND I DISCUSSED WITH SIMEON.

[03:05:05]

NOT TOGETHER, YOU KNOW WE DON'T SHARE. >> CAN BE FORESHADOWED, OUR DISCUSSIONS FORESHADOWED I CAN SEE THIS AS BEING A MAJOR ISSUE FOR THE COMMISSION.

>> ADJUSTING THE EASEMENTS AND -- >> I CAN'T --

>> YOU CANNOT ACT IN APPARENTLY. I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO.

>> WE CAN EITHER. >> I THINK IT IS FUN IF YOU WANT TO PUT THAT AS A CONDITION. AND THOSE ARE THE CONDITIONS AND WE CAN HAVE A BOARD

MEETING. >> I DON'T KNOW, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS NOW.

AT ANOTHER CAN'T BE PARAMETERS WITH THAT. I MEAN, THE NOTION THAT WE ARE GOING TO PUT X THEIR IS NOT COMPLETELY ACCURATE BECAUSE THIS BODY WOULD NOT APPROVE THAT. THERE CAN BE PARAMETERS TO GIVE MARK AND THE BOARD SOME COMFORT LEVEL, AS TO WHAT WE WON'T DO THEREFORE WON'T EXCEED. AND THOSE I THINK THAT WAS THE POINT OF THEM HAVING SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH NANCY. I GET IT, MARK, WE ARE ESSENTIALLY GIVING OVER THE COVENANT AND A BLANK CHECK ON THE EASEMENTS WITHOUT ANY RESTRICTIONS WHATSOEVER AND HE'S GOT A FIDUCIARY DUTY TOO. TO ME AS A RESIDENT HE HAS A FIDUCIARY DUTY. SO I GET THAT BUT THIS DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE THAT WE CAN'T PUT PARAMETERS THERE AND GET THE BENEFIT OF THE OF THE WAIVER OF THE COVENANTS AND EASEMENTS AS LONG AS WE MEET THOSE PARAMETERS.

>> AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT AT ALL. AS LONG AS WHATEVER IT IS THAT WE END UP WANTING TO BUILD THERE, IF THOSE PARAMETERS PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING,

THEN WE GOT A PROBLEM. >> I'M SORRY, MARK -- I WASN'T PRIVY TO YOUR CONVERSATIONS.

LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION. BUT NOW WE ARE ALL HERE AND WE CAN HAVE THIS.

YOU SAY WANT TO GIVE YOU THE EASEMENTS. MAYBE I'M MISSING SOMETHING.

>> HE IS LOOKING FOR MONETARY COMPENSATION. >> SO HELP ME HERE.

HERON BAY IS COMING TO ASSANGE HELP US OUT AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE IN THIS COMMUNITY, SOMETHING WE ARE HAPPY WITH HIM PROUD OF. BUT IF YOU'RE PUTTING FINANCIAL CONDITIONS ON IT FROM THE CITY, AT THE ASK, WHAT'S THE ACTUAL MOTIVATION? THE INTEREST OF HAVING US PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE RESIDENTS?

OR IS IT FINANCIAL REMEDIATION? I'M NOT ASKING YOU. >> LET ME INTO JACK.

AS A COMMISSION EVEN REPRESENT DISTRICT 1, I WOULD NOT BE PROPOSING INTERVENING IF I DIDN'T FEEL IT WOULD HELP ALL. I WILL THING IS JUST HERON BAY ASKING US.

>> AND I WAS GOING TO SAY EXACTLY THAT. THIS CONVERSATION, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE PUBLICLY WITH MARK BECAUSE WE ARE PUTTING IN FAR TOO MUCH OF THE SPOT.

HERON BAY, TO SIMEON 'S POINT, WE'RE NOT DOING THIS FOR HERON BAY.

WE ARE DOING THIS FOR ALL OF PARKLAND. THIS BENEFITS PARKLAND.

>> AND I DID NOT ASK HERON BAY, I DIDN'T ASK PARKLAND TO DO THIS.

SO I MEAN -- RICHARD AND I WERE BOTH TRYING TO WORK WITH NSID AND SIMEON AND WE BOTH CAME TO

THE SAME CONCLUSION THAT YOU KNOW -- >> LISTEN, I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, I KNEW HAD TO GO BACK TO YOUR PEOPLE. BUT I CAN TELL YOU THIS, IF THEY CANNOT WAIVE THE COVENANT, AND CANNOT GIVE US THE EASEMENTS, THERE IS LITTLE POINT IN ME VOTING TO SPEND $25 MILLION TO BUY THIS PROPERTY. AND I DON'T THINK THAT I CAN BE CLEARER THAN THAT. I THINK FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY, IF THE RESIDENTS IN HERON BAY THINK THAT THEY WILL BE JUST DOING THIS FOR THE RESIDENTS IN HERON BAY, DOES NOT WITH THIS COMMISSION IS ALL ABOUT. WE ARE DOING THIS FOR THE ENTIRE CITY. AND SO, THOUGHT PROCESS THAT GOES INTO THIS, HAS A LOT TO DO IT.AND IF YOU COME BACK TO ME AND SAY LOOK, WE CAN DO IT, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT

BECAUSE OF THAT LAND USE AND ZONING -- >> I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR THAT

WE ARE TRYING TO NEGOTIATE THIS EASEMENT THING RIGHT NOW. >> I'M NOT DOING THAT.

I'M TELLING YOU THAT'S WHAT WE NEED, GO TALK TO YOUR PEOPLE AND SEE WHAT THEY'RE WILLING TO

DO. >> LET ME EXPLAIN WHY WE HAVE THE EASEMENT DISCUSSION.

>> THIS IS, THIS IS GONE WAY OFF TRACK. IN THIS JUNCTURE, I'M FEELING THAT WE ARE AT AN IMPASSE. AND I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED TO SAY THAT WE ARE AT AN IMPASSE.

>> WHY WE HAD AN IMPASSE? >> BECAUSE I CAN'T GET ANYONE TO GIVE ME ANY CONCRETE

INFORMATION FOR TIMELINE TO GO BACK TO NSID. >> THIS BACKUP BECAUSE I WANT THIS TO FAIL, AND WE SNATCH VICTORY OR DEFEAT FROM THE JAWS OF VICTORY.

THING WAS VERY CLEAR WE ARE COMFORTABLE IN MOVING FORWARD ON MULTIPLE TRACKS MOVING FORWARD WITH NEGOTIATION OF THE CONTRACT, LOOKING FOR WITH ADDRESSING THE DUE DILIGENCE

REQUIREMENTS. >> WHAT IS THE TWO DILIGENCE? SO FAR FOR THAT HERON BAY, HAVE

[03:10:02]

THIS DONE. >> I NEED TO HEAR FROM STAFF. AS TO WHAT THE TIMELINE IS.

I'M LESS WORRIED ABOUT THE MARKET ANALYSIS THAN THE OTHER ISSUES.

>> WHAT ARE YOUR ISSUES, KEN 'S BIG ISSUE -- >> I DON'T WANT TO GET THE VOTE

THREE ÃTWO WHEN WE NEED FOUR TO GO. >> WHAT --

>> I DON'T KNOW YOUR NEGOTIATIONS. IN 30 DAYS, WHATEVER DAY WE PICK, JULY WHATEVER IT IS. COME BACK YEAR, STAFF WILL PROVIDE THE INFORMATION THEY

HAVE AND WILL GO TO ROD. I'M JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE. >> ARE WE ABLE TO VOTE IN 30

DAYS ON A CONTRACT? I WANT TO KNOW, >> AGAIN, ANTHONY, I'LL GO BACK TO PEER DOES 30 DAYS GIVE YOU ENOUGH TIME TO NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT WITH ROD?

>> THE CONTRACT IS DONE. >> NO, HE HAS THINGS HE PUT IN THERE.

>> WAS A CONTRACT ON QUICK WOMAN LOOKED AT -- >> HE REVIEWED IT.

YOU STILL HAVE TO REVIEW IT. >> LET ME GIVE YOU THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.

IN TERMS OF THE CODE OF WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE BEFORE YOU CAN TAKE YOUR FIRST VOTE.

>> WE NEED TO KNOW HOW LONG IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO GET THERE.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE NEED -- >> NEED TWO APPRAISALS, THE CONTRACT IS TO BE NEGOTIATED AND THE ORDINANCE NEED TO BE PREPARED TO PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR FIRST READING.

THAT IS THE MINIMUM MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS AND CODE. WHATEVER YOU NEED TO BE

COMFORTABLE TO VOTE ON THAT. >> LEFT THE MINIMUM. I GO BACK TO NANCY.

WHAT IS THE EARLIEST THAT CAN HAPPEN? FROM A COMFORT LEVEL?

>> I'M GOING TO ASK MY PURCHASING DIRECTOR BECAUSE OF THE APPRAISALS.

WHAT WILL BE A REQUIREMENT TO GET THOSE APPRAISALS? DO I HAVE TO GO GET THREE

QUOTES? >> THE APPRAISAL IS EXEMPT FROM THAT.

>> I CAN DO THE APPRAISALS IN 30 DAYS. >> 30 DAYS, AGAIN, GETTING PREPARED AN ORDINANCE, HAVING IT READY. WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO TO HAVE

THAT READY AS THE FIRST READING OF AN AGREEMENT. >> WE CANNOT TO THE FIRST

READING BECAUSE WE CANNOT GET THE HOA -- >> WE CAN STILL DO FIRST

READING. >> WE CANNOT BECAUSE KEN WILL NOT VOTE ON IT.

SO WE ARE GOING IN IT -- >> RIGHT, TO THE HOA POINT, IF THE HOA SAYING 45 DAYS?

>> NO. >> IS ROD COMFORTABLE WITH 60 DAYS?

>> US FROM TRYING TO GET A TIMELINE. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE I WOULD

HOLD UP ANYBODY FROM VOTING YES OR NO? >> AS LONG AS PROCESS EXCEPT FOR THE MARKET ANALYSIS. BUT JIM, YOU SAID YOU CAN DO IN A 45 DAYS?

>> YES IT WILL NOT BE FULL-BLOWN BUT WE CAN BE BASED ON THE SCENARIOS, WHAT THE

MARKET WOULD BE FOR THAT. >> SO 60 DAYS? >> THE TRAFFIC WOULD BE MINIMAL STUDY, HIGH-LEVEL. JUST TO GIVE YOU AN UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE NUMBERS

WOULD BE PEER. >> AND THEN IMPACT TO SCHOOLS BASED ON WHATEVER?

>> YES. SCHOOL IMPACT -- >> 60 DAYS.

>> THAT IS WITH THE INTENT THAT WE START NEGOTIATING TOMORROW. >> I DON'T WANT TO LET GRASS GROW UNDER OUR FEET. START WORKING ON ALL TRACKS TOMORROW.

>> WELL KNOW, WE HAVE 60 DAYS TO GET THE CONTRACT READY FOR IRST READING IN 0 DAYS.

CAN YOU GET YOUR STUFF IN 60 DAYS? [LAUGHTER]

>> NO YOU WEREN'T! [LAUGHTER] >> WHAT WAS A QUESTION?

>> WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HAVING A BOARD MEETING NEXT WEEK TO GO THROUGH THIS.

>> SO 60 DAYS IS REALISTIC?> FOR US, YEAH. >> OKAY.

>> I MIGHT INVITE SIMEON TO THE BOARD MEETING. [LAUGHTER]

TO NEGOTIATE WITH US. BUT YEAH. >> OKAY.

SO. >> IN TERMS OF 60 DAYS I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.

[03:15:02]

KNOW, >> WE CAN COME UP WITH A NUMBER.

I THINK FROM WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE NUMBERS YOU KNOW IS PROBABLY ON 60 OR 75,000 SQUARE FEET. SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE. IT COULD BE A LITTLE LOWER BUT WEAK BUT THAT IS THE GENERAL NUMBER. THEN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS YOU CAN GET FOR THAT. A COUPLE OF SCENARIOS BASED ON THAT.> NANCY CAN TALK WITH.

>> YES. I DON'T WANT TO COME OF SOMETHING THAT SAYS HALF A MILLION SQUARE FEET AND YOU GUYS ARE LIKE -- SOMETHING SMALLER LIKE --

>> NANCY -- >> YOU ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT PWHAT IS IN THE ANNEXATION AGREEMENT AND THE THREE UNITS PER ACRE DENSITY AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF THAT IS APPLICABLE TO THIS STUFF. WE NOT GOING TO SHOVE A 700,000 SQUARE-FOOT MALL INTO THE

SPACE. THAT IS NOT REALISTIC. >> RIGHT.

IT WOULD BE THREE UNITS PER ACRE, PLUS A SMALLER -- >> AGAIN, NANCY WILL --

>> A SMALLER COMMERCIAL PIECE. I TALKED TO BARBARA TODAY A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS.

THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUE WILL NOT BE AN ISSUE BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING IN FOR COMMERCIAL CHANGE. IF YOUR FOR RESIDENTIAL, THAT'S WHERE THAT KICKS IN.

BABBLE VERIFY AND GIVE HER A CALL IN THE MORNING. >> BUT MY POINT TO THAT IS,

THERE IS POSSIBLE RESIDENTIAL ON THE CORAL SPRINGS SIDE. >> NOT IF IT WOULD BE WORKFORCE

HOUSING. THAT'S ON THEM. >> IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY FROM

THREE YEARS AGO, IT IS RESIDENTIAL THERE AS WELL. >> RIGHT, SO WE DON'T EVEN KNOW

IF THEY WILL GO TO COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL. >> RIGHT.

>> I'M JUST SAYING, THAT PRESENTS THE OPTION FOR THEM, WHETHER OR NOT, THAT'S WHY SAID, KNOWING THAT, THEY MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT MINDSET OR DIFFERENT OPINION.

>> BUT WE ARE BUYING IT. >> WE ARE SELLING IT TO THEM. >> THEY MAY NOT WANT TO BUY IT.

THAT'S MY POINT. >> THAT WAS MY POINT. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT BASED UPON WHAT JIM IS SAYING THE PARAMETERS ARE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THEY MAY TURN AROUND AND SAY YOU KNOW WHAT? WE ARE BUILDING THIS.

>> RIGHT BUT THAT ONLY KICKS IN IF YOU'RE GOING FROM NONRESIDENTIAL LAND USE TO A RESIDENTIAL LAND USE. IF YOU'RE GOING FOR RESIDENTIAL USE TO COMMERCIAL LAND USE, AND THE REGULATIONS DID NOT APPLY. UNFORTUNATELY, THEY WILL PROBABLY MENTION AT THE COMMISSIONING BUT CANNOT REQUIRE YOU TO DO THAT. FORMER COUNTY EMPLOYEE.

>> OKAY. >> US ALSO HAVE THE TITLE SEARCH STARTED.

>> I WANT NANCY TO READ THE LIST AGAIN BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT GETTING THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS AGREEMENT ON THE BUYBACK AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT

WE'VE GOT ON OUR -- >> I WOULD SUGGEST NOT DOING THE TITLE SEARCH UNTIL WE ACTUALLY SIGN THE CONTRACT. THE CONTRACT PROVIDES FOR THE TITLE WORK AS PART OF WHAT IT

CURRENTLY STANDS. >> YOU ARE RIGHT. YEAH.

WHEN I READ THE LIST LET'S THINK ABOUT WHAT COULD GO TO THE 100 DAY PERIOD.

MEET WITH HERON BAY, HAVE THE PENDING LAWSUIT REMOVED, HAVE TWO APPRAISALS DONE ON THE PROPERTY, THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT AS PART OF THE 100 DAYS.

MARKET ANALYSIS, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT. ACCOUNTING PLANNING, GETTING WITH BARBARA. WE JUST TALKED ABOUT. TITLE SURVEY, WE CAN DO THAT IN THE 100 DAY PERIOD. GET APPROVALS FROM CORAL SPRINGS SO THAT THEY WILL BUY THEIR SHARE. THAT MEANS CORAL SPRINGS HAS TO HAVE A MEETING ON THAT ITEM.

JUST A MEETING FOR DISCUSSION. IF IT IS OKAY, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT THE 100 DAY ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL, THE 100 DAY ON THE TITLE SURVEY, AND TO THE OTHERS, I THINK WE CAN MANAGE IF OUR CONSULTANT IS OKAY WITH THAT MARKET ANALYSIS IN 60 DAYS.

>> AND THAT WILL BE PUT INTO A STAFF REPORT. >> THEY WILL PREPARE REPORT,

YES. >> DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH POTENTIAL DEVELOPERS? OR IS THAT SOMETHING WE ARE NOT ALLOWED?

HOW DOES THAT WORK? >> I THINK INDIVIDUALLY, WE SEE POTENTIAL DEVELOPERS, JUST LIKE

[03:20:02]

GETTING INPUT FROM DEVELOPERS? >> I MEAN, CAN WE NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT WITH A POTENTIAL DEVELOPER? I MEAN, DO WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCUREMENT PROCESS?

>> YOU CANNOT SELL, TO SELL PROPERTY COMPETITIVE BIDS NOT REQUIRED IF THAT'S THE QUESTION. NO, YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH A COMPETITIVE PROCESS.

>> SO, WE COULD TECHNICALLY SIGN A DEAL. WITH A POTENTIAL DEVELOPER.

>> BEFORE YOU ON THE PROPERTY? YOU CAN DISCUSS WITH THEM. >> AND THEORY.

>> YOU HAVE NOT EVEN BOUGHT IT YET. >> YOU CAN ASK THE CONTRACT TO BE ASSIGNABLE. WE CAN DISCUSS THAT WITH NSID. AND I GUESS YOU KNOW, SPEAK TO DEVELOPERS ABOUT WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS ARE TO EVENTUALLY GO ON THERE.

>> IF WE ARE -- >> GO AHEAD.> WE ARE HAVING A HARD ENOUGH TIME JUST BUYING

THE LAND. >> ONE MORE QUESTION. YOU GUYS DEAL IN A LOT OF

DIFFERENT THINGS. >> YES, WE DO. >> YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER NOW, BUT IN THE PROCESS OF THE MARKET ANALYSIS OR WHATEVER, ARE THE AGREEMENTS LIKE SIMEON WAS TALKING ABOUT AND AS THE MAYOR POINTED OUT NOT THE ACTUAL -- HAS TO BE SOME SORT OF FINANCIAL RENUMERATION. LIKE WHATEVER IT IS, -- BUT IS THERE SOME WAY IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, THAT YOU HAVE HAD OUT THERE THAT YOU CAN SEE THIS KIND OF WORKING TOGETHER WHERE THE LIABILITY OF THE CITY FROM A DOLLAR INCENSE STANDPOINT, IS MINIMAL.

>> I'M GOING TO ANSWER THEN ERIC WILL JUMP IN AND BEAT ON MY STATEMENT.

THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY PART OF THE PROCESS, AND YOU ALL ARE DECISION-MAKERS BUT I'LL TELL YOU, DOING WHAT I'M DOING FOR THE LAST, I WILL MENTION HOW MANY YEARS I'VE BEEN DOING IT.

AND THIS HAPPENED -- IF YOU DON'T HAVE CONTROL OF THE PROPERTY, SOMEONE COMES IN AND GIVES YOU A DEVELOPMENT -- YOU REACT TO WHAT YOU HAVE. WE PROBABLY HAD 10 PROPOSALS BEFORE WE FOUND SOMETHING THAT WAS ACTUALLY GOOD. IF YOU OWN THE PROPERTY, YOU CONTROL WHAT YOU WANT TO GET. YOU CAN MAKE THAT AS NARROW OR AS BROAD.

YOU CAN SAY, WE DON'T WANT ANYMORE THAN 100 UNITS, WE DON'T WANT MORE THAN X AMOUNT OF SQUARE FEET. LIKE TO MAKE A BROAD ENOUGH TO SAY THESE ARE SCENARIOS.WHEN YOU COME BACK WITH -- YOU CAN DICTATE WHETHER OR NOT YOU KEEP THE LAND OR SELL THE LAND, SELL IT FOR 50 PERCENT OF THE VALUE OR HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DO THAT. TO MAKE IT THE BENEFIT THAT

WORKS BEST FOR THE CITY. THAT'S KIND OF THE ANSWER. >> NO VETO?> NO VO THERE.

BUT AGAIN, THE MORE CONTROL, AND UNDERSTANDING OF LAND USE AND ZONING CONTROLS.BUT THE MORE CONTROL YOU HAVE OVER WHAT ACTUALLY YOU GET TO REVIEW, THE MORE POWER YOU HAVE TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS THAT ARE BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY. IN MY OPINION.

I'M NOT THE PERSON THAT'S GOING TO VOTE FOR THE 25 MILLION OR 30 MILLION WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS. BUT IF YOU HAVE SKIN IN THE GAME, IT'S A MUCH EASIER AND IN

MY OPINION YOU GET A MUCH BETTER PRODUCT. >> I WANT TO ASK ANTHONY THIS QUESTION ON THE RECORD BECAUSE I WANT TO BE CLEAR. THERE IS NOTHING TO PREVENT US FROM HAVING, WITHOUT COMMITTING TO WHAT WOULD ULTIMATELY PROVE IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING PROCESS, THERE'S NOTHING PREVENTING US FROM HAVING A DISCUSSION WITH AN INTERESTED

DEVELOPER ON POTENTIAL SALE. OR THEM BEING -- >> PREVENTING YOU? NO. AT SOME POINT DEVELOP APPLICATIONS WILL COME BEFORE YOU. UNLESS YOU PROCESS THEM YOURSELF.

YOU HAVE TO DISCLOSE EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS. BUT I WANT TO SAY THAT THERE IS ANYTHING PREVENTING YOU FROM HAVING DISCUSSIONS MAY BE REVISIT AFTER YOU PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. THERE COULD BE IMPLICATIONS BUT AT THIS POINT, ANYTHING WITH

DEVELOPERS. [INAUDIBLE] >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A

MOTION. IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU? >> I WOULD LOVE ONE.

>> I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE FORWARD TONIGHT TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF GIVING STAFF THE AUTHORITY TO NEGOTIATE THE CONTRACT. WE WOULD REQUEST 100 DAYS DUE

[03:25:02]

WHEN A LAND USE AND POTENTIAL USE BASED ON THE SCENARIO WE DISCUSSED.

WERE KIND OF SCENARIOS I SHOULD SAY, A RANGE AND JUST AS ONE APPRAISAL FACTUAL MARKET VALUE, THE ENVIRONMENT ALSO DID WE HOLD OFF UNTIL 100 DAYS INVESTIGATIVE PERIOD.

THROUGH THE MARKET ANALYSIS NOW DURING THE 60 DAY PERIOD, WE HAVE COUNTY PLANNING, THE TITLE SURVEY WOULD BE RESERVED TO THE INVESTIGATIVE PERIOD AND GET APPROVAL FROM CORAL SPRINGS

THAT THEY WOULD BUY THEIR SHARE. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A REALLY LONG MOTION AND A SECOND. ROLL CALL.

JUST -- WE'RE JUST MOVING FORWARD, NOT SIGNING A CONTRACT AND NOT DOING ANYTHING JUST EXPLORING.SO I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT PART OF IT. I REALLY NEED TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION BEFORE I CAN ULTIMATELY MAKE A DECISION. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM MOVING

FORWARD IN THAT REGARD. YES. >> PLEASE SHOW THAT PASSES

UNANIMOUSLY. [APPLAUSE] >> MOTION TO ADJOURN.

>> MOTION TO ADJOURN.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.