[00:00:01] GOOD EVENING. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL WORKSHOP. THURSDAY, AUGUST 4TH, 2022 AT 5 P.M. TO ORDER. PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE. PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. ROLL CALL. COMMISSIONER IZRAEL HERE. I'M HERE FOR HERE. HERE. VICE MAYOR CUTLER HERE. MAYOR WALKER HERE. PLEASE SHOW WE ARE ALL HERE AND PRESENT. BEFORE WE GET ON TO THE TOPIC. I WOULD LIKE TO BRIEFLY. WELL, PROBABLY WON'T BE BRIEF. SOMETIMES I TEND TO BABBLE TOO MUCH. BUT THERE WAS AN ARTICLE WRITTEN TODAY BY A REPORTER WHO WE DID SPEAK. IN 2020, MY COMPANY DID A PROJECT FOR NCID. WE DID SOME BUILDING IDENTIFICATION SIGNS THROUGHOUT THEIR THERE COMPLEX. THE CONTRACT WAS FOR $19,450. WE WERE OUR OUR COMPANY WAS AWARDED THE PROJECT IN OCTOBER OF 2020. WE FINISHED THE PROJECT PROJECTS WE MAKE SIGNS THEY MANUFACTURE USUALLY TAKES A FEW MONTHS TO GET THOSE COMPLETED. SO IT SPILLED OVER TO 2021. I OWN A SIGN COMPANY. WE WE DO BUSINESS. SOMEWHERE IN THE ARTICLE, IT TRIED TO INSINUATE THAT BECAUSE I DID A PROJECT FOR NCID, SOMEHOW MY DESIRE TO BUY THE HERON BAY GOLF COURSE WAS BECAUSE MY COMPANY, WHICH THE SALE WAS 0.004% OF MY YEARLY REVENUE. THAT'S 0.004% OF MY YEARLY REVENUE WOULD SOMEHOW PERSUADE ME TO BUY OR TO ADVOCATE FOR THE CITY OF PARKLAND TO BUY THE GOLF COURSE. IF, IN MY OPINION, THERE WAS A REASON FOR ROD AND I TO WORK TOGETHER IN HIS $19,450 CONTRACT TO MY COMPANY, WHICH WAS PROBABLY $2,500 IN PROFIT. I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE NOT BEEN OUTSPOKEN TO SAY THE CITY OF PARKLAND SHOULD BUY THE HERNE BAY GOLF COURSE. I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE SAID, I SUPPORT YOU SELLING IT TO EAST COAST. BUT I DIDN'T DO THAT. I DIDN'T DO THAT FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. ONE OF THOSE REASONS WAS BECAUSE I BELIEVE, LIKE SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES UP HERE OR MOST WHATEVER, THAT THE CITY OF PARKLAND SHOULD CONTROL ITS DESTINY TO THE BEST OF ITS ABILITIES. THE CITY OF PARKLAND. BUYING THE HERNE BAY GOLF COURSE ALLOWS THE CITY OF PARKLAND TO CONTROL ITS DESTINY INFINITELY MORE THAN ZONING CODES, ESPECIALLY WHEN THOSE ZONING CODES. ARE TIED TOGETHER WITH AN ADJACENT CITY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE LOSE SIGHT OF. AND IT'S BEEN SAID NUMEROUS TIMES. YES, WE DO HAVE COMPLETE LAND AND ZONING AUTONOMY FOR THE AREA IN PARKLAND. AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO MAY OR MAY NOT BE FAMILIAR WITH THAT LAND, NOT ALL OF THE LAND IS IN PARKLAND. SOME OF IT IS IN CORAL SPRINGS. AND CORAL SPRINGS HAS AN INFINITELY DIFFERENT CODE AND OUTLOOK ON WHAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT WANT TO DO WITH LAND. IT'S ON THE EDGE OF CORAL SPRINGS, SO I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR CORAL SPRINGS AND I AM IN NO WAY, SHAPE OR FORM BEING DEROGATORY TO THEIR CITY. BUT IT'S ON THE EDGE OF THEIR CITY. IF SOMETHING IS ON THE EDGE OF YOUR CITY, A LARGE CITY, DO YOU HAVE THE SAME ATTENTION TO DETAIL AND THE SAME IDEAS THAT YOU WANT TO PROTECT WHAT YOUR CITY IS AND WHERE IT'S HEADED? I WOULD SAY MORE THAN LIKELY NO. NOW I COULD BE WRONG, BUT I WOULD SAY MORE THAN LIKELY NO. SO IN THE 21 ACRES. OF THE LAND WE'RE LOOKING TO PURCHASE THAT IS IN CORAL SPRINGS IS. [00:05:02] IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE AS FAR AS CORAL SPRINGS IS CONCERNED. OUR LAND, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS IN THE IS IN THE HEART OF. OUR CITY, IT'S STILL ON THE EDGE. BUT WE'RE A DIFFERENT MAKEUP. OUR CITY IS SMALLER. WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH COMMERCIAL. YOU COULD ARGUE THE DENSITY, BUT OUR DENSITY IS LESS SO. OBVIOUSLY WE CARE MUCH MORE WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT LAND BECAUSE IT AFFECTS OUR TRAFFIC. IT AFFECTS OUR SCHOOLS. AND IT DOESN'T AFFECT THAT IN CORAL SPRINGS. I'M GOING TO ADDRESS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT A LITTLE BIT. I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN A PROPONENT OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. IS IT BECAUSE I HAVE A SIGNED COMPANY OR IS IT BECAUSE I'M A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER? OR IS IT BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITY OF OUR CITY AND I WANT TO DO EVERYTHING I CAN TO ENSURE OUR CITY IS TAKEN CARE OF FOR YEARS TO COME. WHETHER IT'S THE SCHOOLS, WHETHER IT'S TAXES, WHETHER IT'S TRAFFIC. AND MY OPINION ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IS. IT SERVES A PURPOSE. DO I WANT MALLS HERE IN PARKLAND? NO. BUT IT SERVES A PURPOSE. I HEAR FROM RESIDENTS. DAILY. WE LOVE PARKLAND, AND THESE ARE COMING FROM SURVEYS THAT WE'VE DONE IN OUR BRANDING. WHEN I'M OUT IN THE FIELDS, I HEAR DAILY. WE LOVE PARKLAND. WE JUST WISH THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE TO DO. WE GOT TO GO TO BOCA. WE GOT TO GO TO CORAL SPRINGS. WE GOT TO GO TO FORT LAUDERDALE. WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TO DO. BUT YOU ALWAYS HEAR WE LOVE PARKLAND. BUILDING A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY DOES NOT MEAN IT'S GOING TO TARNISH PARKLAND BECAUSE PARKLAND IS GOING TO DO IT DIFFERENTLY. BECAUSE WE ALWAYS HAVE. SO YOU CAN LOOK BACK ON HISTORY AND SAYS, WELL, WHO'S TO SAY IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN DIFFERENT? COMMISSION. VICE MAYOR KUTLER IS THE HISTORY BUFF HERE IN PARKLAND, AND HE WILL BE THE FIRST TO TELL YOU WE'VE ALWAYS DONE IT RIGHT. WE'VE ALWAYS FOUGHT CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPMENT. EVERYONE DOES, AND THAT'S OKAY AND THAT MAKES SENSE. BUT IT'S MY JOB AS THE MAYOR TO LOOK FORWARD AND SAY, HOW CAN I PROTECT PARKLAND NOT ONLY TODAY, BUT TEN YEARS, 15 YEARS FROM NOW? STONEMAN DOUGLAS IS 489 STUDENTS OVER ENROLLED. HOW MANY COMMISSIONERS OR HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU THINK COULD RATTLE OFF TO YOU THE OVER ENROLLMENT AND UNDER ENROLLMENT IN PARKLAND AND CORAL SPRINGS SCHOOLS LIKE I CAN. IT'S BECAUSE I STUDY THIS. I CARE ABOUT THIS. I'VE BEEN WORKING EVERY SINGLE DAY ON THIS PROJECT TO TRY TO FIND OUT WHAT CAN MAKE EVERYBODY A LITTLE HAPPY BECAUSE NOT EVERYBODY IS GOING TO BE ALL HAPPY BECAUSE THAT CAN'T BE. AND THAT'S OKAY. BUT THIS PROJECT IS IMPORTANT FOR MANY REASONS. THE RESIDENTS WERE HESITANT. ABOUT THE PROPOSED SELECTED DEVELOPER. WHY? I DON'T KNOW. AND IT DOESN'T MATTER. THEY WERE HESITANT. THEY BEGGED FOR HELP. PARKLAND WHAT CAN YOU DO TO HELP US? PARKLAND. SAID, WELL, WE CAN'T DO NOTHING. WE CAN HELP YOU WITH THE ZONING CODES. WE CAN HELP YOU WITH THIS. AND IT GOT TO THE POINT WHERE IT WAS LIKE, WAIT A SECOND, WE CAN HELP YOU AND WE CAN CONTROL OUR OWN DESTINY. 100%. AND I SAY 100% BECAUSE JUST LAST WEEK AND WE'LL GO OVER THIS WHEN WE DO UPDATES. WE HAD NANCY AND I HAD A MEETING WITH THE CORAL SPRINGS COMMISSION. THEY WERE ABSOLUTELY WONDERFUL. WE HAD A FABULOUS DISCUSSION. I THOUGHT THEY WERE INSIGHTFUL. THEY ASKED GREAT QUESTIONS. IN THE END. THEY SAID, THIS SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT IDEA. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR TWO CITIES TO WORK TOGETHER TO BUILD SOMETHING SPECIAL, NOT JUST FOR PARKLAND, BUT FOR CORAL SPRINGS. BUT WE DO IT TOGETHER. WE'RE MINDFUL OF EACH OTHER'S NEEDS, WANTS AND DESIRES. BUT THAT GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOMETHING TOGETHER. AND THAT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT. [00:10:03] BECAUSE IF PARKLAND GOES OFF AND DOES ITS OWN THING, THEN CORAL SPRINGS GOES OFF AND DOES ITS OWN THING, WHICH I WOULDN'T BLAME THEM TO DO. THEY HAVE THEIR OWN THOUGHT PROCESS. THEY HAVE THEIR OWN NEEDS WITHIN THEIR CITY. SO THEY HAVE TO DO WHAT'S BEST FOR CORAL SPRINGS, AND PARKLAND HAS TO DO WHAT'S BEST FOR PARKLAND. BUT IF WE CONTINUE TO TRY TO WORK TOGETHER, WHICH WE HAVE A FANTASTIC RELATIONSHIP WITH CORAL SPRINGS, FRANK BABIN, SCOTT BROOKE, THE REST OF THE COMMISSION. FANTASTIC. SO WE HAVE A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY. MIXED EMOTIONS TODAY FOR ME TO ONE OF THE THINGS I PRIDE MYSELF ON IS MY HONESTY. MY TRANSPARENCY AND MY ETHICS. THERE WAS NOTHING UNETHICAL WITH WHAT I DID. I HAD NO OBLIGATION TO TALK ABOUT WHAT I DID. I DID A PROJECT TWO YEARS AGO FOR NAKED. WE WEREN'T EVEN TALKING ABOUT HERON BAY TWO YEARS AGO. BUT IF SOME WOULD LIKE ME TO LET EVERYONE KNOW ABOUT ALL THE PROJECTS I DO THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY, I'M HAPPY TO SEND A LIST. I CAN KEEP A LIST TAB ON THE TOP OF MY FACEBOOK PAGE SO PEOPLE CAN SEE THE HUGO BOSS WE'RE DOING IN CALIFORNIA AT AEROPOSTALE WHAT WE DO OVER HERE, THE BOCA REAL ESTATE INNOVATION CENTER, THAT THAT WE'RE WORKING ON RIGHT NOW. THE. VEOLIA WATER SYSTEMS PLANT THAT WE'RE DOING THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY AND CANADA. I'M HAPPY TO TELL EVERYBODY ABOUT THE PROJECTS THAT I DO. I THINK IT'S FUN. I LOVE MY JOB. I HAVE A LOT OF EMPLOYEES. WE LOVE WORKING AT BERGEN STEIN. I'VE BEEN DOING IT NOW FOR 30 YEARS AND I HOPE TO DO IT FOR MAYBE ONLY A COUPLE MORE YEARS. BUT SO THE BOTTOM LINE IS I STILL WANT TO CONTINUE WITH THIS PROCESS BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY OF PARK. WHETHER OR NOT IT PASSES OR FAILS SHOULD NOT BE DICTATED BY A FEW SELFISH RESIDENTS. MY VIEWS ARE MY VIEWS. BUT I TAKE THE CITY AS A WHOLE AS WHAT DRIVES ME AND WHAT MAKES MY DECISIONS. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU MY OPINION AND TELL YOU WHAT RICH WALKER WOULD LIKE TO SEE. BUT I LISTEN TO THE RESIDENTS. I AM OUT ON THE FIELDS. I AM OUT THERE TALKING TO PEOPLE EVERY SINGLE DAY. AND I LOVE IT. AND THAT IS WHAT HELPS ME DEVELOP MY IDEAS AND MY PLANS AND MY GOALS FOR THE CITY. SO WHEN I SAY SOMETHING. IT'S COMING FROM OTHERS. IT'S COMING FROM SURVEYS I READ, WHETHER IT'S THE HERON BAY INTERNAL SURVEY, WHETHER IT'S THE MARKETING SURVEY. I LISTEN TO EVERYTHING. THAT IS WHAT I DO. I AM DETAIL ORIENTED AND WHEN I SAY I'M GOING TO DO SOMETHING, I DO IT ALL THE WAY. I WILL NEVER, EVER DO ANYTHING HALF ASSED. THAT'S A PROBLEM I HAVE SOMETIMES BECAUSE I TEND TO WORK A LITTLE TOO MUCH. MY WIFE DOESN'T EXACTLY LIKE THAT, NOR MY KIDS, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS. THAT'S WHO I AM. SO I BELIEVE I ADDRESSED MY REASONING FOR COMMERCIAL. OUR FINANCIAL PEOPLE TELL US ALL THE TIME, IF WE DON'T FIND ANOTHER STREAM OF REVENUE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO RAISE TAXES. MAYBE SOME RESIDENTS WANT TO PAY MORE TAXES. I DON'T WANT TO IF I CAN AVOID IT. BUT MAYBE THERE ARE THOSE WHO WERE QUOTED IN THE ARTICLE TODAY WOULD LOVE TO PAY EVERYONE'S FAIR SHARE OF TAXES. MAYBE THAT IS WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE. MAYBE THEY WOULD LIKE THEIR KIDS TO SIT ON THE FLOOR WHEN THEY EAT LUNCH AT MST. I DON'T WANT THAT. AND I'VE WORKED WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD. AND WHEN I SAY I, I MEAN WE BECAUSE WE ARE DOING THIS TOGETHER. WE HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD, WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO TRY TO DRIVE THE NUMBERS DOWN. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE SAY, WELL, WHY AT THE END OF LOXAHATCHEE DID YOU TRY TO CHANGE THE AGE RESTRICTION? [00:15:05] WELL, BECAUSE I LOOK AT EVERYTHING. I LOOK AT HOME VALUES. MY JOB IS TO MAKE SURE WHEN YOU PURCHASE YOUR HOME FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, IT'S GOING TO BE WORTH MORE THAN IT IS TODAY. THAT IS MY JOB. AND IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN I'VE FAILED. WHETHER IT'S ALL ON ME OR NOT IS IRRELEVANT. THAT IS HOW I TAKE IT. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR ME TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND. THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT GO INTO DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE. WE DON'T JUST MAKE A DECISION OFF THE WHIM BECAUSE WE FEEL LIKE DOING THAT TODAY. YOU KNOW, WE TALK A LOT IN STRATEGIC PLANNING ABOUT OUR FUTURE PLANNING. WELL, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS PROJECT IS. THIS PROJECT IS FUTURE PLANNING. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT THE SCHOOLS? WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT REVENUE? WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT SOME NEEDS OR SOME WANTS THAT PEOPLE WANT? THAT PEOPLE WANT TO GO TO A RESTAURANT OR WHATEVER, AN ICE CREAM PLACE OR WALK AROUND, WHATEVER IT IS. AND KUDOS TO ROD COLON. WE COULD BE TALKING TODAY ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF 210 ACRES. AND HERE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT 65 ACRES, AND WE'RE WILLING TO DISCREDIT FATHERS, HUSBANDS. WITH JUST FLAT OUT LIES. AND THAT TO ME IS DISAPPOINTING. THE $19,450 CONTRACT WAS A CONTRACT I WAS AWARDED IN 2020. I DON'T DENY IT. IT IS NOT UNETHICAL. I OWN A BUSINESS. I DO BUSINESS. I'M SURE OTHER PEOPLE WHO OWN BUSINESSES DO BUSINESSES. WITH WHOMEVER. I HAD NO LEGAL OBLIGATION TO DISCLOSE THAT I DID THAT PROJECT. SHOULD I HAVE SAID SOMETHING? YEAH. PROBABLY. BUT GUESS WHAT? IT'S 0.004% OF MY REVENUE. I'LL BE HONEST. I DON'T REMEMBER EVERY PROJECT THAT I DO BECAUSE I DON'T DO EVERY PROJECT THAT I HAVE. I ACTUALLY HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO DO STUFF FOR ME. I WILL HAVE NO ONGOING PROJECTS WITH ASIDE FROM THAT PROJECT FORWARD. I HAVE NOTHING IN THE HOPPER NOW. I WILL NOT HAVE ANYTHING LATER. IF AND WHEN THIS IS SUCCESSFUL AND WE BUILD A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. I WILL PLEDGE THAT I WILL SOLICIT AND PERFORM NO WORK, WHETHER IT'S IN PARKLAND OR CORAL SPRINGS, AND I DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT. BUT THIS IS NOT ABOUT MONEY FOR ME. WELL. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY TO GENERATE SOME REVENUE. SO I DON'T WANT TO MISSPEAK, BUT I AM NOT TRYING TO LINE MY POCKETS AND IN THE ARTICLE. I TOLD MR. NORMAN. I TOLD THEM, I PLEDGE THAT I WILL NOT DO ANY WORK. AND HE SAID, YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT PLEDGE RIGHT NOW. I SAID, ABSOLUTELY, I'LL MAKE THAT PLEDGE BECAUSE THIS IS NOT ABOUT MONEY. AND THEN I WENT ON TO SAY. BUT LET'S LOOK AT WHAT THIS PROJECT REALLY IS. I SAID IF. SOMEONE WERE TO DO ALL OF THE WORK. YOU'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT $200,000. IF I DO $5 MILLION A YEAR, THAT 200,000 IS NOT BAD. BUT WHO'S TO SAY ANYBODY'S IS GOING TO GET ALL THE WORK? AND WHO TWIST WORDS THAT WAY. I DON'T NEED THE MONEY. SO I DON'T WANT THE MONEY. SO THAT HAS NEVER BEEN A DRIVING FORCE FOR COMMERCIAL. BECAUSE. ARAB SURVEYS SHOW IT. OUR BRANDING SURVEYS SHOW IT. THE RESIDENTS ARE ASKING FOR SOME COMMERCIAL. THEY'RE ASKING FOR IT. I'M TRYING TO DELIVER OUR FINANCIAL PEOPLE. TELL US. YEAR AFTER YEAR, WE HAVE TO CONSIDER ANOTHER STREAM OF REVENUE. WHAT OTHER REASONS WOULD YOU NEED TO WANT COMMERCIAL OTHER THAN THAT? SO I DON'T WANT TO TALK TOO LONG BECAUSE I'M SURE THERE'S. MORE REPORTERS WRITING SOMETHING ELSE. SO WE'LL SEE WHAT COMES OUT NEXT TO SEE. MAYOR WALKER IS WHATEVER HE'S DOING. [00:20:04] SO AT THIS POINT, WE'RE GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO WHAT THIS WORKSHOP WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED FOR. WE ARE GOING TO GET AN UPDATE FROM FROM NANCY AND ANTHONY ON THE. I'M JUST GOING TO KEEP TALKING AS I KNOW YOU WANTED TO. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY WHAT WE'RE. SO WE'RE GOING TO GET AN UPDATE ON THE INSIDE CONTRACT. WE'RE GOING TO GET AN UPDATE ON NEGOTIATIONS WITH HERNE BAY. WE GOT THE APPRAISALS HERE. I THINK ANTHONY SAID YOU GOT THERE SOME TITLE WORK OR SOMETHING YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME UPDATES ON. WE'RE GETTING AN UPDATE ON THE CORAL SPRINGS COMMISSION MEETING THAT WE HAD. THAT'S THAT'S IT. AND THEN JUST AS A REMINDER, I KNOW WE ALL WE ALL KNOW THIS, BUT THIS IS MORE FOR EVERYONE ELSE THAN IT IS FOR FOR YOU GUYS. YOU KNOW, WE'RE POLICY MAKERS, SO IT'S OUR JOB TO SET PARAMETERS. RIGHT. WE'RE NEGOTIATING WITH BAY OR WE'RE NEGOTIATING WITH SID OR WHATEVER. WE SET PARAMETERS. WE SAY, WELL, I'M NOT PAYING ANY ANY MORE TO THIS AND I'M NOT PAYING ANY MORE IN THIS AND AS LITTLE AS THIS. AND THEN STAFF GOES BACK AND FIGURES OUT THOSE DETAILS, OR I'M WILLING TO GIVE, YOU KNOW, THESE BERMS OR THIS LAND OR WHATEVER DEALS IN THE CONTRACT IT IS FOR US TO TO PUT THAT POLICY, THE HIGH LEVEL INFORMATION TO NANCY AND ANTHONY, WHO ARE FANTASTIC, BY THE WAY. I KNOW I ANNOY NANCY ALL THE TIME BECAUSE I COME INTO HER OFFICE AND SAY, OH, ANTHONY, NOT SO MUCH. BUT SO THAT'S THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE. I'M EXCITED TO HEAR THE UPDATES AND I'M EXCITED TO CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION AS AS A COMMISSION. AND I APOLOGIZE TO ALL OF YOU FOR TAKING TOO MUCH TIME. BUT I FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE I ADDRESSED EVERYTHING, AND I BELIEVE I DID. AND IF I DIDN'T, I'M SURE IT'LL BE ANOTHER ARTICLE IN THE MORNING FROM WHOEVER, WHOEVER WANTS TO DO SOMETHING. AND AND IF ANYBODY WANTS FOLLOW UP TO THIS CONVERSATION, MY EMAIL IS ARE WALKER AT CITY OF PARKLAND DOT ORG OR YOU CAN CALL ME 9733901453. SO, NANCY, I'M TURNING IT OVER TO YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MAYOR. [4.A. Discussion regarding the purchase of a portion of Heron Bay Golf Course] WE SET THIS WORKSHOP BECAUSE I WANTED TO PULL US ALL TOGETHER TO PROVIDE THE UPDATES WHERE WE ARE AND TO CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION ON THIS POTENTIAL PURCHASE OF THE LAND. SO AT OUR LAST MEETING, I HAD A LIST OF TWO DO'S, AND I WANT TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE ARE WITH THOSE TWO ISSUES. ONE OF THE ITEMS WAS TO OBTAIN TWO APPRAISALS IN FRONT OF YOU. I HAD GIVEN YOU THE APPRAISAL I RECEIVED. WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING A SECOND APPRAISAL, BUT THE APPRAISAL IN FRONT OF YOU IS GOING TO SHOW YOU THAT THE PROPERTY AS IS MEANING AS IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED WITH NO EASEMENTS AND ACCESS. SO IT'S AS IS IS WORTH 19.13 MILLION. NOW IF THIS PROPERTY IS IS BUILT WITH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, AS WE HAD DISCUSSED, AND IT'S BASED ON ITS HIGHEST AND BEST USE, THE APPRAISAL CAME IN AT 30.27 MILLION. SO THIS IS IN LINE WITH THE AMOUNTS THAT WERE SHARED FROM NCID BECAUSE THEY DID FORWARD ME ALL OF THEIR INFORMATION. SO I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT THIS IS THIS IS IN LINE. NOW, THE NEXT ONE IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY, THE PHASE ONE, IF EVERYTHING LOOKS DIRECTED. THIS EVENING, I'M GOING TO PROCEED WITH GETTING THAT PHASE ONE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY COMPLETED. THEN, OF COURSE, WE'RE DOING A MARKET ANALYSIS. SO AS YOU KNOW, OUR LAST MEETING WE HAD CGA HERE TO PRESENT TO YOU, AND I WENT AHEAD AND GAVE THEM DIRECTION TO CONDUCT A MARKET ANALYSIS. THAT MARKET ANALYSIS WILL BE READY IN ABOUT TWO WEEKS. SO IN ORDER FOR THE COMMISSION TO FEEL COMFORTABLE KNOWING WHAT IS VIABLE PER THIS ANALYSIS, I AM GOING TO SCHEDULE ANOTHER WORKSHOP WITH YOU ALL SO WE CAN MEET AGAIN AND GO THROUGH THAT MARKET STUDY. CGA WILL BE PRESENTING TO YOU. WE'RE LOOKING AT A WORKSHOP AND I'LL. I'LL SOLIDIFY IT ALL. I'LL HAVE MARCELLA GET WITH YOU TWO TO CONFIRM, BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT A WORKSHOP ON THURSDAY, AUGUST 18TH. I'M GOING TO BE THROWING THESE DATES OUT TO YOU BECAUSE THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE HAD TOLD NCID GAVE US 60 DAYS. THE 60 DAYS IS UP ON AUGUST 30TH. [00:25:02] SO IF WE ARE MOVING FORWARD, OBVIOUSLY THE WORKSHOP THEN WOULD BE ON AUGUST 18TH. THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN THEN AND THE 30TH TO DO THE ACTUAL AGREEMENT AND FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE PURCHASE. SO I WILL BE SHOOTING OUT THESE ADDITIONAL MEETING TIMES WITH EVERYBODY TO GET IT TO MOVE FORWARD, IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION. SO THE MARKET ANALYSIS THEN WILL BE ITS OWN WORKSHOP ON THE 18TH AT 6:00. THEN WE RECEIVED A QUOTE RECENTLY FOR THE SURVEY. I DON'T WANT TO MOVE FORWARD, OBVIOUSLY, WITH THE SURVEY UNTIL I KNOW THAT THIS IS GOING TO MOVE FORWARD. THE SURVEY QUOTE IS NORTH OF 50,000. SO I DON'T WANT TO SPEND THOSE MONIES. AND I THINK THAT SURVEY CAN EASILY BE ACCOMPLISHED WITHIN OUR 60 DAY DUE DILIGENCE THAT WE'RE WORKING ON WITH THE AGREEMENT WITH NCID. ANTHONY WILL TALK ABOUT THE TITLE AND THEN WE DID. WE MET WITH NCID AND WE WILL OBVIOUSLY GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION ON THAT CONTRACT AND AGREEMENT. SO THINGS ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT. WE ALSO MET WITH THE HERON BAY HOY. WE HAD A VERY GOOD MEETING AND THAT IS ALSO MOVING FORWARD. AND THEN THE MAYOR AND I MET WITH THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS. I HAVE TO SAY, AFTER THAT MEETING I WAS EXTREMELY EXCITED. IT WAS A REALLY GOOD ENERGY FROM THE COMMISSION AND THE WILLINGNESS TO WANT TO PARTNER WITH US TO MAKE A PROJECT WAS SO EXCITING TO ESTABLISH A PARTNERSHIP AND THEY WERE COMPLETELY ON BOARD AND TO COME TOGETHER AND TO KIND OF DECIDE AS A UNIT WHAT WOULD BE BEST FOR BOTH CITIES TO OCCUR IN THIS AREA. SO THAT WAS REALLY EXCITING TO GIVE YOU ALL KIND OF AN IDEA. THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE LAND IS 25.41 MILLION. SO CORAL SPRINGS PROPORTIONATE SHARE WOULD BE AROUND 7.1 MILLION. SO THAT WOULD BRING THE PURCHASE PRICE TO US AT 18.2 MILLION. SO WE CAN ALWAYS KEEP THAT INTO CONSIDERATION BECAUSE AGAIN, IT WAS A VERY POSITIVE MEETING AND DEFINITELY HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND EAGER TO SEE TWO CITIES WORKING TOGETHER TO ACCOMPLISH ONE GOAL, WHICH DOESN'T HAPPEN TOO OFTEN. SO THAT IS MY UPDATE. I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO ANTHONY TO SHARE WITH THE NCID CONTACT IN THE HERE AND BAY REQUIREMENTS. RIGHT. THANK YOU, NANCY. ANTHONY SIROCCO, CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE RECORD, AS WAS MENTIONED, WE DID MEET WITH WITH THE HOA BOARD REPRESENTATIVES. I ALSO THOUGHT IT WAS A A GOOD, PRODUCTIVE MEETING. WE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THE COMPONENTS OF A POTENTIAL AGREEMENT. AND FOLLOWING THAT MEETING, I DID PREPARE A PROPOSED TERM SHEET THAT I SHARED WITH THEIR COUNSEL, WHO DID PROVIDE ME WITH SOME FEEDBACK ON THAT TERM SHEET PRIOR TODAY BEFORE THE MEETING. SO I'LL JUST GO THROUGH SOME OF THE COMPONENTS OF THAT TERM SHEET. WE DISCUSSED THE POTENTIAL WAIVER OF THE GOLF COURSE USE RESTRICTION COVENANT. WE DISCUSSED AND EXCUSE ME, HERON BAY PROVIDING SOME EASEMENT EASEMENTS AND EASEMENT LOCATIONS. THE HOA REPRESENTATIVES REQUESTED THE IMPOSITION OF A NEW COVENANT ON THE PROPERTY, AND THERE WAS SOME DEBATE AND DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE IN THAT COVENANT. AND I'M SURE THE HOA WOULD WOULD PROBABLY WANT MORE THAN, THAN WHERE WE ENDED UP. BUT WHAT WE DISCUSSED WAS PUTTING IN SOME, SOME PROTECTIONS ABOUT HEAVILY LANDSCAPED BUFFERS, PARTICULARLY BETWEEN THE ANY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD GO ON, ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS THERE. AND I KNOW NANCY WORKED WITH STAFF TO GET SOME INFORMATION ABOUT SOME SPECIFICATIONS FOR THOSE BUFFERS, WHICH WERE ALSO INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT TERM SHEET THAT I SENT OVER TO THEM. ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS WAS DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS THAT ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF PARKLAND WOULD GO THROUGH ALL THE APPLICABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS PROCESSES SUBJECT TO THE APPLICABLE PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND THEY HAVE REQUESTED THAT THAT GO IN THE COVENANT. I DON'T NECESSARILY I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE. AND OF COURSE, WE TALKED ABOUT CONSIDERATION AND COMPENSATION, TRYING TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE, AGAIN, I'M SURE THE HOA WOULD PREFER MORE THAN THE NUMBERS THAT WE WERE DISCUSSING, BUT KIND OF WHAT IS YOUR BOTTOM LINE MINIMUM? AND AT LEAST THE NUMBER THAT WAS THROWN OUT THERE WAS WAS 500,000. BUT THERE WAS ALSO A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR THE CITY TO GET ONE ACRE OF THE APPROXIMATELY 4.11 ACRES OF PROPERTY THAT SID OWNS AT THE WEST END OF TRAIL'S END. A COMMITMENT ON THAT. [00:30:01] I KNOW THAT THEIR ATTORNEY HAS ASKED US TO TO MAKE THAT MORE OF A SOLID COMMITMENT TO GIVE THAT TO THEM. BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT COMMITMENT YET IN WRITING, SO THAT MAY BE DIFFICULT TO ACCOMPLISH. BUT ESSENTIALLY THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT ON THAT. I KNOW I'VE SENT AN EMAIL TO YOU ALL EARLIER TODAY TO THE COMMISSIONERS WITH THIS INFORMATION, SO I'M JUST GIVING AN OVERVIEW OF THAT. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR, I PRESUME, BECAUSE I'M NOT AWARE THAT THAT THE HOA BOARD HAS TAKEN ANY VOTES YET. SO I PRESUME THAT ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO BE AGREED TO, IT NEEDS TO GO TO THE HOA. THEY WOULD NEED TO VOTE ON IT. AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AT LEAST ONE OF THE COMPONENTS, WHETHER IT BE THE. COVENANT OR THE EASEMENT WILL GO THROUGH SOME SORT OF MEMBER VOTE AS WELL, BASED ON WHAT THEY SAID. AND I DID DISCUSS WITH THEIR ATTORNEY PREVIOUSLY THAT IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, THAT HE WOULD PROVIDE AN OPINION TO THE CITY, THAT ANY NECESSARY APPROVALS THAT WERE NEEDED ON PURSUANT TO THEIR DOCUMENTS AND THEIR GOVERNING RULES AND RESTRICTIONS WERE TAKEN. IF WE DO PROCEED IN THAT REGARD. SO THAT'S REALLY THE HERRON BAY HOE DISCUSSIONS AND THE TERM SHEET. AND SO I'LL SWITCH GEARS AND TALK ABOUT THE DISCUSSIONS. WEEKS AND WEEKS AGO, WE DID RECEIVE A PROPOSED CONTRACT FROM NCID. AT THE TIME I WAS ASKED TO PROVIDE SOME PRELIMINARY COMMENTS AND OF COURSE WE HADN'T YET MET WITH THE HO. WE DIDN'T HEAR YET FROM ALL THE COMMISSIONERS AND THE COMMISSION, AND WE HAVE SINCE DONE THAT. SO WE DID MEET WITH NCID WEEKS AGO AND OF COURSE WE HAD SOME MEETINGS AFTER THAT TO SEE WHAT ELSE WE MAY NEED TO PROPOSE IN THAT CONTRACT. BUT I WOULD SAY THE THREE PRIMARY PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT THAT WE HAD SENT OVER TO THEM ARE RELATED TO ONE, PROVIDING ACCESS EASEMENTS ACROSS SOME OF THEIR PROPERTY, PARTICULARLY ALONG NOB HILL. THEY INDICATED THAT THEY COULD PROVIDE US ACCESS EASEMENTS ALONG NOB HILL, BUT NOT NECESSARILY HERON BAY BOULEVARD. SO AS PART OF THAT, WE DID PROPOSE ACCESS EASEMENTS IN THE AGREEMENT ALL ALONG. NOB HILL AND I INCLUDED EVERY PARCEL, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD BACK FROM THEM YET AS TO WHICH OF ANY OF THOSE PARCELS THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CONVEY TO THE CITY AS PART OF THIS TRANSACTION. SO THAT WAS THE ACCESS EASEMENT. ADDITIONALLY, IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT NCID RECEIVED CERTAIN RIGHTS FROM LENNAR WITH RESPECT TO THE GOLF COURSE COVENANT. AND SO WE HAD REQUESTED THAT WHATEVER RIGHTS THEY RECEIVED, WE WANT WITH RESPECT TO ANY PROPERTY THAT WE PURCHASED. SO WE PROPOSED LANGUAGE IN THAT REGARD. AND THEN BASED ON SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS THAT OCCURRED AT THE LAST COMMISSION MEETING WHERE THIS ISSUE WAS DISCUSSED AMONGST THE COMMISSIONERS, THE ISSUE OF LIKE THE POTENTIAL TO ASSIGN THE CONTRACT CAME UP. SO THERE WAS DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT. WE DID PROPOSE THAT IT COULD BE ASSIGNED AND PROPOSED THAT IF BE ASSIGNED, THEY WOULDN'T UNREASONABLY WITHHOLD THAT ASSIGNMENT. YOU KNOW, THE RESPONSE FROM FROM THE ATTORNEY IS THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO AGREE TO THAT. AND THAT IT WOULD NEED TO BE ANY ASSIGNMENT WOULD NEED TO BE IN THEIR SOLE DISCRETION. SO THOSE ARE THE THREE PRIMARY COMPONENTS I KNOW, COMMISSIONERS, YOU ALL HAVE THE PROPOSED REVISIONS THAT WE SENT TO THEM. I DID GET AN INDICATION THERE'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE SOME TWEAKS, BUT I HAVE NOT RECEIVED THAT BACK YET FROM THEIR ATTORNEY. SO THOSE ARE THOSE TWO AGREEMENTS GOING TO THE TITLE WORK. WE DID REQUEST THE TITLE WORK. WE JUST GOT THAT BACK WITHIN THE LAST DAY OR TWO. SO WE'RE STILL ANALYZING THAT. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY, MOST OF WHICH WERE WE WERE EXPECTING AND THAT WE WERE AWARE OF. THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO TRACK DOWN, BUT AT THIS POINT, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT PREPARED TO SAY EITHER EVERYTHING IS ALL GOOD OR THERE'S A MAJOR PROBLEM. IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE. AND PROBABLY WITH THE NEXT FEW DAYS, I'M GOING TO HAVE WORKING WITH MY REAL ESTATE DEPARTMENT TO PREPARE A REPORT TO THE COMMISSION TO GIVE YOU A SUMMARY OF THOSE ITEMS. AND THEN ONE ADDITIONAL THING THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING WAS MEETING WITH THE PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY FOR THE THE FEW RESIDENTS WITHIN HERON BAY WHO FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST NCID. WITH RESPECT TO THE COVENANT, I DID SPEAK WITH THAT ATTORNEY, REACHED OUT TO HIM, AND IT WAS DISCUSSED THAT WE WOULD HAVE A MEETING AND I SENT SEVERAL FOLLOW UPS. SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THAT, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD BACK FROM HIM IN QUITE SOME TIME TO SET UP THAT MEETING. SO I DID FOLLOW UP A FEW TIMES, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT LEFT OFF. MAYBE HE'S ON A NICE VACATION. SO THOSE WERE THE I THINK THE PRIMARY AREAS THAT THAT I WAS INVOLVED WITH TO ADDRESS. AND OF COURSE, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY ALL HAVE, ANYBODY WHO'S WHO SAID YES. AGAIN, COMMISSIONER BRYER, I DON'T WANT TO TIE UP AND GO BACK, BUT I WILL JUST SAY I CONTINUE TO BE HONORED TO SERVE WITH THE FOUR GENTLEMEN TO MY LEFT ON THIS DAIS. AND I ALSO WANT TO CAUTION THOSE WHO WHEN YOU TAKE SHOTS AT GOOD PEOPLE WHO HAVE RUN FOR PUBLIC OFFICE, WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET IS BAD [00:35:07] PEOPLE RUNNING FOR PUBLIC OFFICE. AND I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. IN TERMS OF THE APPRAISAL, I WAS A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED BECAUSE OUR AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE SHOWS THAT WE'RE PURCHASING SIX 65.029 ACRES, BUT THE MARKET ANALYSIS SHOWS A MARKET ANALYSIS OF ONLY 63.76 ACRES. AND IT WASN'T CLEAR TO ME, BASED ON THERE NOT BEING ANY MAP ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, WHETHER OR NOT THE SAME PARCELS THAT WERE PURCHASED. ARE THE PARCELS THAT THEY'RE ANALYZING, BECAUSE CLEARLY THERE'S A DISCREPANCY OF ABOUT TWO ACRES OR AN ACRE AND A HALF. YES, LET ME EXPLAIN THAT. SO. ONE OF THE PARCELS IS ACTUALLY A SPLIT OF AN EXISTING PARCEL. SO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS CALCULATED BY KIND OF DOING A DRAW ELEMENT ON THE PROPERTY. APPRAISER SO IT'S ESTIMATED. SO WE'RE OFF ABOUT 1.1 ACRES, AND THE APPRAISAL HAD GIVEN ME A PRICE PER ACRE. SO IF WE DO KNOW WHAT THE EXACT ACREAGE IS, ONCE WE DO OUR SURVEY, IT'S 300,000 ACRE. SO WE CAN ADD FOR THAT ONE ACRE, 300,000 ONTO THE 19 MILLION NUMBER. AND THAT WOULD BE PROBABLY THE BALLPARK. WHAT I ALSO DIDN'T SEE NO, I WAS JUST GOING TO TO CLARIFY THAT AT THE TOP OF THE DOGLEG ORIGINALLY, THE VERY TOP OF OF THE DOGLEG, WHERE THERE'S POTENTIAL POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL, THAT PORTION WAS NOT INCLUDED IN ANY OF THE SALES. AND THEN WHEN THINGS GOT SHUFFLED AROUND, THAT PORTION WAS INCLUDED. SO IT GOES. SO NOW THE LAND THAT WE'RE PURCHASING ON THAT DOGLEG GOES ALL THE WAY UP. SO I THINK YOUR CALCULATIONS WERE LIKE 5.3 ACRES, BUT IT COULD BE SIX POINT WHATEVER. BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, SO THAT PORTION BECAUSE THAT'S TIED TO ANOTHER LOT. RIGHT. BUT WHAT I ALSO THINK THANK YOU FOR THAT. WHAT I ALSO DIDN'T SEE IN THE MARKET ANALYSIS AND MAYBE IT'LL BE IN THE SECOND ONE WE GET OR IN THE FULL APPRAISAL WAS ANY DISCUSSION EXCUSE ME OF. THEY TALK ABOUT THE PROPERTY BEING ANALYZED BASED ON AN AS IS AND BEST USE FOR ITS CURRENT ZONING. BUT THEY DON'T DISCUSS ANY OF THE COVENANTS, ANY OF THE LACK OF EASEMENTS OR ANY OF THE OTHER ISSUES IN DETERMINING THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. I IMAGINE THOSE MAY HAVE THAT IS IN THE AS IS. SO THOSE ARE WHAT'S WHAT'S EXISTING. SO HE HE PRICED IT WITH THE 19 ONE AS IS WITH THE COVENANTS WITH LACK OF ACCESS. NO MENTION OF THAT IN THE IN THE MARKET ANALYSIS, BUT I PRESUME THAT'LL BE EVEN FURTHER. THIS IS THIS IS YEAH, THIS IS APPRAISAL. SO THE MARKET ANALYSIS IS GOING TO BE ON WHAT WHAT COULD BE BUILT THERE AND SURVIVE AND BE A GOOD ASSET TO THE CITY. AND THAT WILL BE IN THE WORKSHOP ON THE 18TH. AND THEN THE OTHER ISSUES THAT I HAD IS DO WE HAVE ANY UPDATE ON ON THE STATUS OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE PROPERTY? NO, AS SOON AS THE DIRECTION IS GIVEN, I'M GOING TO DO THE I GOT A QUOTE AND EVERYTHING. SO I'M READY TO GO ON THAT ENVIRONMENTAL PHASE ONE STUDY. I DID GET AN A SIDE STUDY FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL COMPANY, AND I WAS ACTUALLY VERY SURPRISED TO SEE THAT IT WAS CLEAN. SO IT IS A GOLF CART GOLF COURSE WITH CLEAN, CLEAN OF LAND. SO A PHASE TWO WASN'T REQUIRED. THE PHASE TWO IS ONE THAT IS MORE TIME CONSUMING. SO AS SOON AS I GET A GOOD FEEL THIS EVENING, I'M GOING TO MOVE FORWARD TOMORROW WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL. WE HAVE ESTIMATES FOR A THE COST OF THE PHASE ONE ENVIRONMENTAL AND B, THE TIMING OF IT. YES, SIR. SO THE COST OF THE PHASE ONE ENVIRONMENTAL IS 2500, AND WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THEM DIRECTION TO PROCEED TOMORROW. AND IT WOULD PROBABLY TAKE A COUPLE OF WEEKS, BUT IT WOULD DEFINITELY FALL WITHIN OUR DUE DILIGENCE TIME FRAME. SO I'M NOT AS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. AND WE ARE USING A COMPANY THAT WE HAVE USED BEFORE. YES, WE HAVE A SIDE USE. IS THAT. OH YEAH. WE, WE WOULD NEVER USE THE SAME COMPANY. WE'RE USING OUR OWN COMPANIES THAT WE'VE USED IN THE PAST. AND I KNOW THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSIONS REGARDING THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED PARKING LOT THAT NCID WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN FOR ACCESS TO THE PASSIVE PARK AND THE MEMORIAL. AND I KNOW, ANTHONY, YOU HAVE SOME COMMENTS IN THERE, SO MAYBE THESE WILL BE BEST ADDRESSED FOR YOU. ARE WE ABLE TO FASHION IN A PROPOSED CONTRACT THAT THAT LOCATION OF THE PARKING LOT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO GOOD FAITH DISCUSSIONS AND A GOOD FAITH AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES? AS I KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CORAL SPRINGS COMMISSION RAISED IN THE IN THE WORKSHOP THAT I LISTENED TO AS WELL. [00:40:07] AND I HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY AND CERTAINLY READY, WILLING AND ABLE. AND I'M SURE HE'LL GET BACK TO ME EVENTUALLY TO DISCUSS IT WITH WITH SYD'S ATTORNEY. BUT WE DID PREPARE SOME LANGUAGE BASED ON SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS THAT OCCURRED THAT PRIOR TO THE SELLER CONSTRUCTING THE PARKING LOT, THAT THEY AGREED TO COORDINATE WITH THE PURCHASER OR THE SUCCESSOR AND INTEREST TO PURCHASER, WHICH COULD BE CORAL SPRINGS AT ONE POINT ON THE ON THE SPECIFIC LOCATION ON THE PARKING LOT. SO THAT IS LIKELY TO BE SUBJECT TO FURTHER DISCUSSIONS. BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT AT LEAST THE PRELIMINARY RESPONSE THAT I GOT IS THEY WERE NOT OBJECTIONABLE TO THAT. ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES, AND I'VE EVEN HAD A RESIDENT APPROACHED ME ABOUT IT AFTER THE CORAL SPRINGS WORKSHOP, IS IT IS THE INTENTION THAT WE AS A CITY, IF WE WERE TO GET APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS CONTRACT, WOULD BE BUYING THE TOTALITY OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN HAVE SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS THAT WE WOULD WORK WITH THEM ON, POTENTIALLY EITHER SELLING THEM THEIR PORTION OF THE PROPERTY OR PARTNERING WITH THEM TO HAVE THAT PROPERTY, PROPERTY IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PARKLAND PORTION DEVELOPED THROUGH SOME SORT OF JOINT. AGREEMENT. IS THAT. IS THAT RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT, YES. SO WE WOULD NOT BE SELLING THE PORTION OF PROPERTY TO CORAL SPRINGS WITHOUT ANY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THEY WILL APPROVE GOING ON THAT PROPERTY. IS THAT. WE HAVEN'T GONE THAT FAR IN THE DETERMINING DISCUSSIONS. BUT JUST TO JUST TO CLARIFY, THEY WANT TO DO A HARMONIOUS PROJECT TOGETHER. SO IT WOULD, YOU KNOW. HOW THE FINANCIALS WERE ULTIMATELY WORKED OUT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT OBVIOUSLY THE ATTORNEYS AND THE CITY MANAGERS WOULD WOULD FINALIZE. BUT THEIR INTENTION WAS TO DO A PROJECT, ALL OF US, TOGETHER, SO THAT THEY'RE NOT DOING THEIR OWN THING AND AND WE'RE NOT DOING OUR OWN THING WELL. SO A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WANTED TO JUST ADDRESS IN THAT REGARD AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN A BY A CONCERNED RESIDENT IS THAT WE WOULDN'T BE WITHOUT ANY STIPULATION ABOUT WHAT GOES THERE SELLING THAT PARCEL TO CORAL SPRINGS UNLESS IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE BOTH AGREED AS TO HOW IT WOULD BE DEVELOPED. IS THAT CORRECT? AGAIN, THEY WERE TOTALLY ON BOARD AND WORKING TOGETHER AND DOING A PROJECT, ALL ENCOMPASSING PROJECT TOGETHER AND AND HOW THE FINANCIALS WERE WORKED OUT. MAYBE IT WAS A DEVELOPER THAT JUST PAID US AND IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONAL REVENUES, CORAL SPRINGS WOULD NOT HAVE TO LAY OUT ANY MONEY POTENTIALLY, OR MAYBE THEY PAY THEIR UP FRONT. IT'S THAT THOSE DETAILS WERE KIND OF LIKE. WE'LL FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHAT WE'LL DO LATER. AND IS IT ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WOULDN'T BE RESTRICTIONS ON US AS THE PURCHASER IF WE WERE TO DO THIS IN PHASES OR STEPS WITH REGARDS TO THE SALE OF THE PARKLAND PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TO A DEVELOPER, IS THAT RIGHT? IN FACT, HOW WE WHAT WE ULTIMATELY DO WITH IT, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT POINT. MAYBE BECAUSE COMMISSIONER SARAH ACTUALLY BROUGHT UP THAT HE DIDN'T WANT TO RUSH. HE WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS THE RIGHT THING AND ALL THOSE THINGS. BUT MAYBE THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION THAT WE ASSUME WILL BE RESIDENTIAL, WE JUST CUT IT AND SAY, OKAY, LET'S HOW WE DO OUR FINANCIAL ENGINEERING IS SOMETHING WE CAN TALK ABOUT LATER. AND AGAIN, I THINK IT'S A GREAT POINT TO SAY, LOOK, WE CAN RECOUP SOME OF OUR MONIES BACK FASTER BECAUSE WE CAN SAY, OKAY, WE'RE ONLY WORKING WITH CORAL SPRINGS FOR THE COMMERCIAL PORTION. WE, WE, WE GO AHEAD AND PUT THE CANAL AND THAT DOGLEG, LET THE RESIDENTIAL GET BUILT AND BE A PART OF HERON BAY. AND THAT'S MONIES THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET BACK FASTER BECAUSE RESIDENTIAL DOESN'T TAKE AS LONG WHEN YOU HAVE TO CHANGE THE LAND. THAT'S A TWO YEAR PROCESS, IS WHAT I'M TOLD. RIGHT. AND THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE THE FINANCIAL BURDEN TO THE CITY OF PARKLAND, CORRECT? ON AN ON A ON A PORTION, EXACTLY. YEP. I'LL HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS, BUT I'LL DEFER TO MY COLLEAGUES AND THEN I'LL COME BACK. WE WENT UP. JORDAN. JORDAN PUT HIS FINGERS UP FIRST. SORRY, VICE MAYOR, REAL QUICK, I ALSO JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT. MAYOR, I GREATLY APPRECIATE THE WORDS YOU GAVE AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING. I, MORE THAN ANYONE, TRUST, RESPECT AND KNOW YOUR INTEGRITY. AND I THINK EVERYONE HERE SHOULD BE SO FORTUNATE TO HAVE SOMEONE LIKE RICH AT THE HELM OF OUR CITY, BECAUSE WHAT HE DID TODAY IS NOT EASY. AND NOT ONLY IS IT NOT EASY, IT'S RARE. SO I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT UPON ALL OF US TO RESPECT THAT, APPRECIATE IT, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE MEDIA DOES. AND FORTUNATELY, WE LIVE IN A DAY AND AN AGE WHERE SHOCK, VALUE AND CLICKS MATTER MORE THAN FACTS AND REALITY. AND THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS. BUT I APPRECIATE IT AND THANK YOU FOR THAT. [00:45:01] THAT'S SOMETHING THAT TO BE REALLY PROUD OF, TO BE ABLE TO COME FORWARD LIKE THAT. A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE, I HAD THE SAME QUESTION AS YOU, COMMISSIONER BRIER IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S GREAT TO HAVE A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS, BUT THE ONE THING I'D BE CONCERNED ABOUT IS THINKING ABOUT LONGEVITY. AND, YOU KNOW, IT MAY BE A PARTNERSHIP TODAY THAT WE CAN REACH AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CURRENT COMMISSION, BUT THAT DOESN'T REALLY HELP US. 20 YEARS FROM NOW, IF A NEW COMMISSION COMES IN IN CORAL SPRINGS AND THEY DECIDE THEY WISH TO HAVE A NEW USE FOR THAT PROPERTY. SO I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER EVALUATING WHETHER IT'S THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT WE CAN PLACE ON THE LAND AFTER PURCHASING IT AS A WHOLE AND NOTHING TOO BURDENSOME OR ANYTHING ENCUMBERING THEIR ABILITY TO USE IT, BUT AT LEAST TO KNOW THAT ON A GOING FORWARD BASIS, IT'S NOT JUST A TEMPORARY AGREEMENT. SO IF I CAN JUST COMMENT ON THAT. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH WITH YOUR COMMENTS ON THAT AT ALL, BUT. CORAL SPRINGS WOULD LIKE TO BUY THEIR PORTION OR BE PART OF THEIR PORTION FREE AND CLEAR. SO MAYBE IN PART OF OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM, WE SAY, HEY, AS A TEAM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND JUST FINALIZE WHAT THIS IS. YOU KNOW, YOU WANT TO KEEP IT COMMERCIAL, WHATEVER WE DECIDE TO DO. I WOULD IMAGINE AGAIN, WE HAVEN'T NECESSARILY HAD THAT DISCUSSION, BUT DURING OUR COOPERATION IN BUILDING THIS PROJECT THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO KIND OF SAY TO CORAL SPRINGS, LOOK, WE NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE SECURITY THAN THAN THAN YOU DO. AND I THINK THAT'S A GREAT POINT TO SAY, LOOK, ONCE WE COME TO A FINALIZED PROJECT, CAN WE KIND OF LIKE SOLIDIFY THAT FOR FOR YEARS TO COME? I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA AND A GREAT POINT. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE WORKSHOP, I WOULD IMAGINE CORAL SPRINGS WOULD. BUT THEY DON'T WANT IT BEFORE, RIGHT? THEY DON'T WANT THEY DON'T WANT PARKLAND PUTTING RESTRICTIONS ON THEIR LAND, WHICH OBVIOUSLY MAKES TOTAL SENSE. I GET IT. AND THAT'S WHY I'M EXCITED TO HEAR THAT THEY WERE SO WILLING TO ENGAGE IN THAT KIND OF MUTUAL PARTNERSHIP, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED HERE. EVERYONE'S KIND OF A LITTLE ON EDGE CHICKEN AND EGG OF MAYBE IF WE ACT TOO QUICKLY, WE'RE GOING TO BACK OURSELVES OUT OF A RIGHTS OR OBLIGATION. SO THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR. ANTHONY, JUST A COUPLE OF POINTS ON THE AMENDMENTS. ONE I THINK IS ALSO TO COMMISSIONER BROWDER'S POINT ABOUT THE PARKING LOT. YOU KNOW, IT SAYS THAT THEY WOULD THE BUYER OR EXCUSE ME, THE SELLER WILL COORDINATE WITH THE PURCHASER ON THE LOCATION, THE PARKING LOT. UNFORTUNATELY, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT MIGHT BE STRONG ENOUGH FOR THIS TYPE OF AGREEMENT, BECAUSE COORDINATION IS NOT REALLY AN OBLIGATION. IT'S KIND OF ILLUSORY IN THAT SENSE WHERE THEY COORDINATE AND WE DON'T AGREE ON SOMETHING. I DON'T WHAT HAPPENS NEXT. UNDERSTOOD. AND I WASN'T DIRECTLY PART OF ANY OF THE DISCUSSIONS. SO IT WAS IT WAS REALLY BASED ON SORT OF A LITTLE BIT OF OF THE TELEPHONE GAME, BUT I PLAN ON HAVING THAT DISCUSSION WITH THEIR ATTORNEY. GOOD. YEAH, I KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH BECAUSE THE SAME THING WITH THE ASSIGNMENT, YOU KNOW, IT'S WE WANT IT TO BE WITHIN REASON, IN GOOD FAITH, AND THEY WANT IT AT THEIR SOLE DISCRETION. BUT, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, THOSE ARE GOING TO BE NEGOTIATED OUT. BUT I THINK FOR A PARKING LOT, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IN ORDER FOR US TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A MEANINGFUL MACRO DESIGN PLAN, I DON'T THINK WE CAN DO THAT WITHOUT SOME SECURITY OR KNOWING THAT IT MAY NOT BE WE'LL NEVER BE IN THIS AREA OR IT COULD ONLY BE HERE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES AND PARAMETERS. YEAH, I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TO HAVE STRONGER LANGUAGE, BUT I WAS TOLD THAT THIS WAS PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO THEM. SO YEAH, WE'VE GOT TO WORK WITH THEM A LITTLE BIT, BUT BUT WE'LL CERTAINLY FOLLOW UP WITH, WITH THAT REQUEST. WELL, AND IT WAS AND I MENTIONED IT BEFORE, BUT I'LL REITERATE IT WAS A SPECIFIC CONCERN OF THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS BECAUSE IT IT MOST IMPACTS THEM AS TO WHERE THAT PARKING LOT GOES, BECAUSE IT ALSO IMPACTS THE VALUE OF THE LAND OF THE CORAL SPRINGS PORTION AS WELL. YEAH. AND YOU KNOW, JUST TO YOU KNOW, I HAVE I DID SPEAK WITH NCID TODAY AND THEY MET WITH CORAL SPRINGS AND THEY. THEY UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS AND THEY OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT IN WRITING YET. ANTHONY'S GOT TO WORK OUT THOSE DETAILS, BUT THEY THEY WERE WILLING TO WORK AND WE'LL PUT THAT IN WRITING IT. SO WHENEVER THAT GETS WORKED OUT. BUT THEY UNDERSTOOD FROM CORAL SPRINGS WHAT THEIR DESIRE WAS. AND SID'S CONCERN IS THAT THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF THE THE ROAD THAT GOES TO THE PARK, BECAUSE THEY WANT A ROAD, OBVIOUSLY, FOR THE MEMORIAL AND THEY WANT TO ENSURE THAT THEY OWN THE PARKING LOT. SO THAT'S THAT'S THEIR THEIR CONCERNS. OKAY. AND THEN THE OTHER COMMENT I HAD WAS AS THE ACCESS EASEMENTS PORTION OF THE CONTRACT, I THINK WE MIGHT NEED TO CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL AS TO ACCESS EASEMENTS IN WHAT REGARD, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE SOME ACCESS EASEMENTS THAT ARE JUST FOR WALKING PATHS ONLY. YOU HAVE SOME THAT FOR EMERGENCY USE ONLY. AND I KNOW WE HAD TALKS IN THE PAST ABOUT MAYBE THE NEED FOR A BRIDGE OVER CERTAIN OF THE WATERS OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S GOING TO BE NECESSARY FOR THE INGRESS EGRESS. BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON THAT, BECAUSE THERE MAY BE SOME PEOPLE IN THEIR MINDS SAYING, WELL, YEAH, WE'LL GIVE YOU A WALKING BRIDGE, YOU CAN WALK FROM NOB [00:50:03] HILL, OR YOU CAN MAYBE ONLY ACCESS IT IN THE CASE OF AN EMERGENCY WHERE YOU HAVE FIRE TRUCKS, ETC.. BUT I THINK JUST TO SAY OF TO ACCESS EASEMENTS, STANDING ALONE MIGHT NOT BE ENOUGH. SO I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON THAT. YEAH, AND UNDERSTOOD. AND JUST TO POINT OUT AND YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY CAUGHT THIS, BUT I MEAN, WE BROKE IT DOWN BASICALLY BETWEEN THE NOB HILL EASEMENTS AND THEN THE EASEMENT AT THE END OF TRAIL'S END THERE ON THAT PARCEL. BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF EASEMENTS PROPOSED WITHIN THAT NOB HILL EASEMENT. THE WAY WE DID IT, JUST TO BE CLEAR FOR BOTH SIDES, WAS TO ACTUALLY PUT AN AERIAL PHOTOS AND THEY'RE PRIMARILY ALONG THE WATERWAYS THERE NEXT TO NOB HILL, AND IT'S MADE UP OF A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT PARCELS. SO I'M EAGER TO GET INTO THAT CONVERSATION WITH THEIR COUNSEL. WHEN THE TIME COMES, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF FUN, I'M SURE. AND THEN THE LAST THING I THINK WAS JUST GOING BACK TO KIND OF THE OVERALL CONCEPT OF I LOVE HAVING NOW THAT THE MARKET VALUE AND THE MARKET VALUATION BECAUSE IF WE'RE LOOKING AT A $7 MILLION, I GUESS FEE OR BUYING PURCHASE AMOUNT FROM CORAL SPRINGS AND IT'S QUOTED AT 19 MILLION AS IS, I MEAN THAT BRINGS YOU TO ABOUT 26 MILLION ALREADY AT THE ACTUAL AMOUNT OF THE FEE WE'D BE INCURRING. AND THAT'S NOT INCLUSIVE OF THE VALUE WITH THE ENTITLEMENT. SO I MEAN, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH NOW WITH ACTUALLY THE MARKET VALUATION. I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT STEP HERE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF OUR OBLIGATION TO THE CITY AND OUR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY WITH OUR FINANCES. SO THIS, I THINK, GIVES ME A LOT MORE COMFORT KNOWING THAT WE ARE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS AND NOTHING'S DONE YET, BUT THAT WAS GOOD TO SEE. IN TERMS OF THE HERON BAIT TERM SHEET, I DON'T GENERALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ANY OF IT. I THINK EVEN IN SPEAKING ACTUALLY I MET WITH TOLL. THEY REQUESTED A MEETING WITH ME AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THOUGHT WAS INTERESTING IS THEY EVEN SAID THAT THEY WOULD COMMIT TO THE EXTENT IF WE WERE EVER TO REACH AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM TO PAYING THE 500,000 HOA FEE. SO THAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS ALSO GOOD TO KNOW THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO WORK WITH THE HOA TO FIND A NUMBER THAT IS, I THINK, REASONABLE FOR EVERY PARTY AND ALSO FIND A WAY, HOPEFULLY FOR THE CITY NOT TO HAVE TO BE THE ONE TO INCUR THAT ADDITIONAL COST. BUT FOR THE ACTUAL RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, I, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF IT, BUT THE THE THINGS ABOUT MINIMUM INSTALL TREE HEIGHT OF SIX FEET TO 20 FEET, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WE KNOW WE CAN COMMIT TO OR IS THAT I DON'T REALLY KNOW THE DETAIL WITH WHICH HOW THAT'S GOING TO GET PLAYS. THAT IS, WE MET WITH OUR ARBORISTS, WE SAT DOWN, WE WENT THROUGH THE PLAN, WE WENT THROUGH THE CODE. AND THIS IS SOMETHING WE ARE VERY COMFORTABLE WITH. ALL RIGHT. AND FOR NOW, THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANK YOU, ANGUS. OKAY, VICE MAYOR, YOU CAN GO NEXT. UNLESS YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. NO, THANK YOU. AND I ALSO WANT TO SAY, WITH ALL DUE CANDOR, RICH, THAT I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS EARLY, EARLY ON, THIS IS NOT AN EASY JOB. IT IS IT IS A JOB WHERE YOU ARE CONSTANTLY FORCED TO BE IN THE PUBLIC EYE. AND MANY TIMES THERE ARE A LOT OF HATERS OUT THERE. AND, YOU KNOW, I'LL HEARKEN BACK WITH BOB TO THE TIME WHEN, YOU KNOW, IN 2018 WE HAD THE SHOOTING. AND, YOU KNOW, NO MATTER WHAT WE DID, WE WEREN'T DOING THINGS RIGHT. AND, YOU KNOW, I COMMEND YOU FOR STANDING UP FOR YOUR PRINCIPLES. APPRECIATE IT. YOU KNOW, I I HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY, OBVIOUSLY, TO DIGEST A LOT OF THE MOVING PARTS THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE. I JUST GOT THE APPRAISAL TONIGHT ON THE DESK. YOU KNOW, I'M VERY HAPPY TO SEE THAT THE NUMBERS SEEM TO COME WITHIN THE RANGE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RELATIVE TO THE PURCHASE PRICE. I WAS CONFUSED ABOUT THE DISCREPANCY ON THE LAND ISSUE, AND I AM A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED ABOUT THE HYPOTHETICAL THAT THEY'RE USING. YOU KNOW, THE $19 MILLION IS ESTIMATED ON THE BASIS OF THE FACT THAT THERE IS A COVENANT IN PLACE AND THAT NOTHING CAN BE BUILT FOR FIVE YEARS. SO THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE SAYING. THE LAND VALUE IS THERE AND WITHOUT THE ABILITY TO HAVE EASEMENT ACCESS, IT'S ALSO APPRAISED AT THAT AT THAT VALUE. SO THAT'S GOOD TO UNDERSTAND. AND I UNDERSTAND ALSO THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF ASPECTS TO THIS THAT WE STILL DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION ON. AND I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN LAID OUT IN TERMS OF WHAT WE DON'T HAVE COMPLETED OR WHAT WE DON'T KNOW YET. SO OBVIOUSLY, I CAN'T FACTOR THAT INTO ANY KIND OF DECISION MAKING PROCESS TILL WE DO HAVE THAT. I DO WANT TO TAKE A STEP BACK, THOUGH, AND HAVE A SORT OF AN UNDERSTANDING ON ON THE DAIS ABOUT SORT OF THE HIGHER LEVEL THINKING RELATIVE TO [00:55:08] PARTNERING WITH CORAL SPRINGS. YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T ACTUALLY SAT DOWN WITH THEM FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT WE AS A COMMISSION WANT TO DO WITH ANY KIND OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THAT PROPERTY. CERTAINLY, I HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY FEEDBACK FROM THEM ON WHAT THEY WANT TO DO FROM A COMMERCIAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE PROPERTY. AND I SHARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT COMMISSIONER BRYER BROUGHT OUT RELATIVE TO HOW DO WE ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE MAINTAIN IT? AND THEN, AS JORDIE POINTED OUT, SOMEHOW OR ANOTHER, PROTECT OURSELVES FROM ANY FUTURE ISSUES WITH OTHER COMMISSIONS OR OTHER DESIRES ON THEIR PART. SO I'M NOT CLEAR HOW THAT ALL WORKS OUT. I DON'T THINK IN MY MIND I CAN'T REMEMBER ANY TIMES WHEN OUR CITY IS ACTUALLY PARTNERED WITH ANOTHER CITY TO DO A DEVELOPMENT DEAL, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVER BEEN IN THE DEVELOPMENT BUSINESS BEFORE. SO HOW DOES THAT ALL WORK OUT FROM A HIGHER LEVEL PERSPECTIVE? SO IF I COULD I DON'T SEE US AS BEING THE DEVELOPER. I SEE US AS. GIVING GUIDANCE TO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. HAVING A DEVELOPER WITH THE SKILL SET THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, PROVIDE US WITH THOSE, PROVIDE US WITH THAT SKILL SET. PROVIDE US WITH WHAT OUR OUR OUR MARKET MAKEUP IS GOING TO BE. WHAT WOULD BE A SUSTAINABLE PROJECT? I THINK THOSE THAT'S WHAT THE EXPERT IS FOR. WHAT WE WOULD DO IS AS A AS A COMMISSION TOGETHER. AGAIN, MY OPINION WOULD BE WE SET THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, KNOW WHAT IS IT? DO WE WANT SOME RESTAURANTS? DO WE WANT SOME ENTERTAINMENT? WHAT EXACTLY ARE WE LOOKING FOR WHEN IT COMES TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT? ONE OF THE THINGS I BROUGHT UP AT AT THE WORKSHOP. MY BIGGEST WELL, ONE OF MY BIGGEST CONCERNS WAS THE IMPACT TO SCHOOLS. SO COMMERCIAL TO ME WAS SOMETHING THAT IS WHY I AM LOOKING TO TRY TO PUSH COMMERCIAL BECAUSE OF THOSE IMPACTS. THEY WERE VERY RECEPTIVE TO COMMERCIAL. IN FACT, COMMISSIONER SARAH WAS VERY IN TUNE AND THEY ALL SAID COMMERCIAL IS WHAT WE WOULD PREFER. ANOTHER CONCERN THAT I HAD WAS I KNOW THE MARRIOTT IS NOT IN OUR CITY, BUT I BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT COMPLEMENTS THE MARRIOTT SO THAT THE MARRIOTT HAS A BETTER YOU KNOW, YOU HEAR RUMORS THAT IT'S GOING TO DO THIS OR IT'S GOING TO DO THAT. RUMORS ARE WHAT RUMORS ARE, BUT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO TRY TO HELP THE MARRIOTT IN SOME WAY SO THAT IT CAN SUSTAIN ITSELF A LITTLE BIT BETTER. MAYBE IT'S A, YOU KNOW, LIKE WE TALKED WITH FRANK, MAYBE SOME SORT OF HEALTH AND WELLNESS SALON, WHATEVER, SOME TYPE OF SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO COMPLEMENT THE MARRIOTT. AND THAT WOULD BE AT THE HAIR BAY SIDE. AND THEN JUST EVEN SOME COMMERCIAL WITH WITH SOME MINIMAL ENTERTAINMENT WOULD ALSO SUPPORT THE MARRIOTT TO SOME DEGREE. MAYBE THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP IT, OR MAYBE IT'S FINE AND WE DON'T NEED TO HELP IT. BUT THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS BECAUSE AGAIN, I WANT TO SEE THE MARRIOTT STAY A HOTEL AND NOT CHANGED ANYTHING ELSE. SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS I TALKED ABOUT. AND AGAIN, AS FAR AS WHAT HOW WE WOULD WORK, I WOULD IMAGINE WE WOULD HAVE SOME SORT OF WORKSHOP TOGETHER AND KIND OF FLESH OUT THOSE OR FLESH OUT AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S FLESH OR FLUSH THOSE IDEAS AND TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WHAT IS IT THAT WE WANT TO SEE? AND AGAIN, IF THAT WORKSHOP WAS ANY INDICATION OF THEIR WILLINGNESS TO COOPERATE AND WORK TOGETHER, I THINK WE WOULD HAVE A FANTASTIC WORKSHOP TOGETHER TO KIND OF TALK ABOUT BOTH OUR GOALS AND AND WHAT OUR CITY WANTS AND NEEDS. SO, YOU KNOW, AND THEN AGAIN, TO TO COMMISSIONER ISRO'S POINT HOW THOSE DETAILS IN THE END, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S A COVENANT THAT WE WRITE TOGETHER AS A GROUP OR WHATEVER IT IS, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I THINK, UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, DUE TO THE TIME THAT SOME OF THESE THINGS WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A WILLING PARTNER ON THE OTHER SIDE. SO IT'S WE HAVE TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF LEAP OF FAITH AND SAY, LOOK, THERE IS THAT WILLINGNESS THERE. WE CAN DO SOMETHING TOGETHER AND THEY WANT IT TO HAPPEN. AND WE KNOW, LOOK, IF ALL ELSE FAILS, WE STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO WHAT WE WANT. BUT AGAIN, MY MAIN FOCUS WAS TRYING TO MAKE SURE THIS STAYS A COHESIVE, HARMONIOUS PROJECT SO THAT ALL OF US DO NOT GET HURT. ANTHONY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN, ON THE CORAL SPRINGS SIDE, WHAT IS THAT ZONE FOR? [01:00:08] YOU KNOW, FROM A DEVELOPMENTAL STANDPOINT, IF IF WE WERE TO IF WE WERE TO BUY THE PROPERTY AND THEN WE WANTED TO BUILD COMMERCIAL, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT THEY'RE RIGHT NOW INTERESTED IN IN THE COMMERCIAL END OF IT AS OPPOSED TO A RESIDENTIAL TYPE OF PROJECT. BUT IF WE WERE TO TRY TO DEVELOP SOMETHING TOGETHER AND IT WOULD FALL APART, ARE WE GOING TO THEN HAVE ISSUES LATER ON WITH DOING WHAT WE WANTED TO DO WITH THE PROJECT, IF IT'S ZONED A DIFFERENT WAY THAN WHAT WE WANT TO PUT THERE? SO THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE CONSIDER IF, IF, IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO WORK OUT A DEAL WITH, WITH CORAL SPRINGS TO DO SOMETHING TOGETHER, THEN YES, WE WOULD QUOTE UNQUOTE HAVE ISSUES BECAUSE THE SQUARE PORTION WHERE PRESUMABLY THE COMMERCIAL WOULD GO, EIGHT OF OF THAT EIGHT ACRES OF THAT AREA IS THEIRS. SO IF WE STILL DECIDED TO DO SOME SORT OF COMMERCIAL ELEMENT THERE, THOSE EIGHT ACRES, THEY COULD PRESUMABLY DO WHATEVER THEY WANT. BUT TO THAT END, IT ONLY MAKES SENSE IF WE'RE ABLE TO COME TO A CONSENSUS TO DEVELOP A PROJECT THAT MAKES SENSE. IT ONLY MAKES SENSE FOR THEM TO TAKE THAT MINIMAL AMOUNT OF ACREAGE AND JOIN WITH US AND AND AGAIN, MAKE IT A HARMONIOUS PROJECT. SO IT DOES FIT. BUT I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS AND THERE ARE PITFALLS. BUT NO, THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING ABOUT THE ZONING, BECAUSE BECAUSE EVEN IF IT WERE, IT WERE A ZONED COMMERCIAL, FOR EXAMPLE, AND WE WANTED TO BUILD COMMERCIAL THERE, THEN WE WOULD JUST GO TO THEIR COMMISSION AND THEY'D HAVE A HARD TIME FIGHTING US TO, TO BUILD COMMERCIAL. BUT IF IT'S OWN RESIDENTIAL, IT'S AND WE WANT IT ZONED THE SAME. WE DID ASK THAT QUESTION. YEAH. AND THEY WOULD ALSO HAVE TO DO EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED TO DO, GO THROUGH A LAND USE ON THAT EIGHT ACRES. HOWEVER, THE OTHER PORTION IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT CURRENTLY HAS THE CLUBHOUSE ON IT. SO IT'S COMMERCIAL. I THINK GOLF COURSE, THEY HAVE A DESIGNATION, SO THAT WOULD JUST GO THROUGH OTHER ZONING PROCESS. THERE'S SEVERAL ISSUES THAT COULD ARISE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ON THAT. YES. AND TO BE CLEAR. RIGHT, ANY DEVELOPMENT IN CORAL SPRINGS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO CORAL SPRINGS DEVELOPMENT, ZONING. MY UNDERSTANDING IS MOST OF THE PROPERTY IS LAND USED CURRENTLY AS RESIDENTIAL THAT'S IN THERE. SO AGAIN, SIMILAR TO HERE, RESIDENTIAL, MAYBE A LITTLE. BUT THE POSITIVE. BUT THERE'S STILL PROBABLY ZONING ZONING CHANGES THAT MAY BE NEEDED. SO LAND USE IS ONE THING. ZONING IS IS THE NEXT LEVEL DOWN. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, THERE IS SOME THERE IS SOME PROVISION IN THE BROWARD NEXT, THE BROWARD COUNTY LAND USE PLAN THAT ALLOWS FOR IT'S CALLED FLEX UNITS. SO EVEN THOUGH A PROPERTY MAY BE HAVE A, LET'S SAY, RESIDENTIAL LAND USE, THAT IT COULD ALLOW A LIMITED AMOUNT OF COMMERCIAL WITHOUT NECESSARILY GETTING LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT. AND JUST TO BE SPECIFIC, I THINK IT'S LIMITED TO TEN NO MORE THAN TEN ACRES. AND ALSO THE USES ARE LIMITED. IT'S MORE OF NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL. SO I DON'T I DON'T BELIEVE ANY OF THE THE PROPOSALS, AT LEAST AT THIS POINT, THAT WERE PROVIDED AS PART OF THE RFP WOULD QUALIFY UNDER THAT PROVISION. BUT BUT OBVIOUSLY, FACTS MATTER. AND WHAT ULTIMATELY GETS PROPOSED AS DEVELOPMENT WILL NEED TO BE EVALUATED BASED ON THE THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THOSE APPLICATIONS. BUT MANTHA ANTHONY AND I HAVE ONE QUESTION RELATED TO THIS AND I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERJECTING. BUT MUCH LIKE WE ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A COMMISSION VOTE AND I BELIEVE A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE TO PURCHASE THIS LAND, ARE WE REQUIRED TO HAVE THAT SAME VOTE TO SELL ANY PORTION OF THIS LAND TO CORAL SPRINGS? SO I KNOW WE SPOKE BEFORE ABOUT SALE AND COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCESSES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. YOU COULD PUT IT THROUGH A COMPETITIVE BID OR YOU COULD NOT. THAT IS YOUR CHOICE. JUST GIVE ME A SECOND HERE. LET ME PULL UP MY NOTES ON POTENTIAL SALES. THE REASON I ASK THAT IS I THINK IT ALLEVIATES THE SAME CONCERN I HAVE THAT VICE MAYOR CUTLER HAS, WHICH IS IF THERE IS NOT AN AGREEMENT AND COMMISSIONS CHANGE, PEOPLE RESIGN FROM OFFICE, PEOPLE GET ELECTED, PEOPLE GET FAILED TO GET REELECTED IF THERE IS NO LONGER A CONSENSUS AT THAT POINT. IF IT WERE TO COME BEFORE US AS A BODY BEFORE WE AGREED TO FINALIZE ANY SALE OF THE PARCEL. OBVIOUSLY THAT GIVES US SOME GREATER CONTROL AS WELL. YEAH. YEAH. SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, PURSUANT TO OUR CHARTER, THE SALE WOULD REQUIRE AN ORDINANCE IN A FORFEITS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE AT A REGULAR MEETING. IF THE PROPERTY IS IN EXCESS OF 50,000, WHICH OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD. OKAY. THAT'S OKAY. COMMISSIONER MYERSON, YOU'RE UP. FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS. AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, WE ALL PUT OURSELVES OUT IN THE PUBLIC EYE. IT IS WE CAN GET SCRUTINIZED. I MEAN, YOU'RE SHAKING HANDS WITH SOMEBODY AND NEXT THING YOU KNOW, IT'S IT ESCALATES TO WHEREVER IT MAY BE. [01:05:06] SO I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR I CALL IT STEPPING UP, BEING HONEST WITH US, BEING HONEST WITH THE RESIDENTS. I STILL BELIEVE THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE RECOURSE OR WHATEVER THE THE THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO SAY. BUT WE ALL KNOW THAT GOING IN. I MEAN, THAT'S WHY WE SERVE. WE KNOW WE'RE UNDER THE PUBLIC SCRUTINY. AND SOMETIMES WE JUST HAVE TO HAVE A HARDER SKIN THAN ANYBODY ELSE. AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE IT'S OKAY FOR ME TO TAKE THE HIT, BUT YOU'VE GOT A FAMILY OF FIVE OR SIX. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT WHETHER THEY'RE IN SCHOOL OR HERE, OVER HERE OR SOMETHING, AND ESPECIALLY YOUR KIDS, THAT'S WHERE, YOU KNOW, IN ALL OF US HAVING KIDS, I MEAN, THAT'S WHERE IT TAKES THAT'S WHERE THE CHALLENGE IS. IT'S OKAY FOR SOMEBODY TO YELL AND SCREAM AT ME. I'M OKAY WITH THAT. I'M A BIG BOY AND I THINK YOU ARE AND EVERYBODY ELSE HERE. BUT WHEN IT AFFECTS YOUR FAMILY, THAT'S WHERE IT'S UNFORTUNATE. SO, YOU KNOW, IF ANYBODY OUT THERE HAS COMMENTS LIKE YOU SAID, YOU GAVE THEM YOUR CELL PHONE NUMBER, YOU GAVE ME YOUR EMAIL. DIRECTED AT RICH WALKER OR ANY OF ANY ONE OF US. I MEAN, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT LOVE ME AND PEOPLE THAT MAY NOT BE THAT FOND OF ME. SO SAY IT ISN'T SO. WELL, EXCEPT THE SEMI AND BREYER FAN CLUB. BUT. BUT BE HONEST. I MEAN, DON'T DRAG IT OUT IN THE MUD. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M HOPING THAT THIS WILL COME OUT TO BE, WHATEVER IT MAY BE. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT AS AS FAR AS THIS HERON BAY THING, THERE ARE A LOT OF MOVING PARTS AND THEY JUST SEEM TO CONTINUE TO MOVE EVERY MINUTE OF THE DAY. AND TO ME, THAT GIVES ME A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN. IT GIVES ME A LITTLE BIT OF PAUSE BECAUSE WE'RE MOVING FORWARD IN A TIMELINE THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION BY A SPECIFIC DATE WITH A LOT OF UNKNOWNS. YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT WHAT WE DO HERE IS BUYING SOMETHING FOR A GOVERNMENTAL PURPOSE. THE GOVERNMENTAL PURPOSE IS BASICALLY, FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, IS THAT WE'RE BUYING A PIECE OF PROPERTY TO PROTECT THE INTEREST OF THE RESIDENTS. WHEN I LOOK AT OUR ZONING CODES OR ZONING CODES, WHETHER IT BE OUR LAND USE CODE OR ZONING CODES OR EVEN THE COUNTY'S CODES, IT SAYS EXACTLY THAT. IT'S WRITTEN IN THERE TO PROTECT THE INTEREST OF THE RESIDENTS, THE ROADWAYS, THE PROPERTY VALUES. IT'S ALL WRITTEN IN THERE. SO THAT'S WHERE I AM. AND AGAIN, I LOOK AT THIS AND GO. YOU KNOW, WE TALK ABOUT THE TERMS OF OF HERON BAY. I BELIEVE HERON BAY HOE MAY BE IN A BETTER POSITION. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT I'M NOT CHOOSING ONE DEVELOPER OVER ANOTHER. BUT AS WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST, WHEN SOMEBODY PURCHASED AS A PIECE OF LAND AND WANTS TO COME IN AND DEVELOP IT. WE'RE SITTING THERE IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT. WE'VE HAD NEGOTIATIONS WITH DEVELOPERS WHERE YOU TALK ABOUT SCHOOLS. THEY'VE CONTRIBUTED TO OUR EDUCATIONAL FUND, WHERE WE BUILD EVERGLADES, THE 24 CLASSROOM ADDITION. IT DIDN'T COME OFF THE PRICE OF THE PURCHASE OF WHATEVER IT WAS FOR THEIR LAND. THEY ALREADY PURCHASED THE LAND. THEY SAID, HOW DO WE DEVELOP IT? WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO? HERE'S WHAT IT IS. BECAUSE, AGAIN, I WAS HEARD, YOU KNOW, THE CORAL SPRINGS COMMISSION WAS SAYING, YEAH, MAYBE SOMEBODY WILL BUILD AN ADDITION, DOUGLAS OR WEST GLADES. WELL, A DEVELOPER COMES IN THAT COULD BE PART OF THE CONVERSATION. THE MEMORIAL SITE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WOULD COST. MAYBE IT'S JUST THROWING OUT A FIGURE OF 5 MILLION, 4 MILLION, 2 MILLION THAT COULD BE IN THE NEGOTIATION WHEN DEVELOPER COMES IN AND THEY SAY, LOOK, WE WANT TO SIT THERE AND TAKE THE LAND THAT'S ZONED AS RESIDENTIAL AND WE WANT TO MAKE IT COMMERCIAL. WELL, AS PART OF THAT, HERE'S WHAT WE'D LIKE IN A DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT. SO I LOOK AT IT AS TO GO. I PERSONALLY THINK WE ARE IN A BETTER POSITION NOT PURCHASING IT THAN WE ARE IF WE DO. AND LOOK, I KNOW STAFF HAS GONE THROUGH A LOT OF WORK. I KNOW. AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE IT. AND I KNOW THEY'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH WITH HERON BAY, BUT I JUST LOOK AT THIS AND I'M JUST GIVING YOU MY OPINION. AND I'VE SPOKEN TO RESIDENTS, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WANT COMMERCIAL. THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT RATHER HAVE IT KEPT GREEN. THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WANT MIXED USE. I MEAN, VERY SIMILAR TO THE THE HERON BAY SCENARIO. BUT I THINK WE'RE IN A STRONGER POSITION NOT PURCHASING THE PROPERTY. [01:10:02] THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT CORAL SPRINGS IS, INTEREST ARE. WE'RE GOING TO BUY THAT. NOT KNOWING WHAT THEIR INTEREST IS. IT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T WORK WITH THEM. IT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T HAVE A COLLABORATIVE WORKING PROCESS WITH CORAL SPRINGS, DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T. OUR COMMISSION AND THEIR COMMISSION SIT HERE WHEN A DEVELOPER COMES AND SAYS, HERE'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO ALL TOGETHER AND MAKE A DECISION. I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE UNPRECEDENTED. SO THAT'S JUST MY $0.02, AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE MY THOUGHTS ARE. SO I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT. SO I JUST I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT TO YOUR COMMENT, AS FAR AS PURCHASING IT, WE HAVE THE SAME. RIGHT AND SECURITIES AND ZONE USE, WHETHER WE OWN IT OR WE DON'T, BUT WHEN WE OWN IT. WE HAVE THAT MUCH MORE BECAUSE NOW WE HAVE. WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO WORK WITH CORAL SPRINGS BECAUSE THEY'RE INVESTED IN THIS PROCESS WITH US. WE CAN GO TO ANY DEVELOPER AND WE CAN IN ORDER FOR THE LAND USE TO BE CHANGED. WE'RE GOING TO WANT THIS. WE STILL HAVE ALL THOSE OPPORTUNITIES. BY OWNING THE LAND. THE DIFFERENCE IS WE HAVE THAT MUCH MORE BECAUSE WE THEN OWN IT. RIGHT. BUT WE STILL HAVE THOSE OPPORTUNITIES, WHETHER WE OWN IT OR WHETHER WE DON'T. I MEAN, IF WE OWN THE LAND AND WE GO TO A DEVELOPER AND SAY, JUST AS ARGUMENT'S SAKE WISE, I THINK IT WAS COMMISSIONER ISRAEL SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH TOLL BROTHERS AND THEY WOULD BE ENDING UP, YOU KNOW, IF THERE WAS SOME AGREEMENT, WHATEVER IT MAY BE, THEY WOULD END UP, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO SAY REIMBURSING, BUT COVER THE COST OF THE OF THE TERMS THAT THE HOA WANTED. THEY'RE IN BUSINESS TO MAKE MONEY. THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT OFF THEIR PRICE SOME WAY OR ANOTHER. OR IF THEY DON'T TAKE IT OFF THE PRICE OF PURCHASE, THEY'RE GOING TO INCREASE THE PRICE OF WHAT IT IS FOR SALE. WE DEALT WITH WHEN THE FALLS CAME IN, THEY DECIDED THAT THEY WANTED A C.R.A. BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANT TO. THEY WANTED TO EMBED. THEY DIDN'T WANT TO CHARGE FOR THE PRICE OF THE HOMES. THEY DIDN'T WANT TO INCREASE THE PRICE, BUT THEY WANTED TO EMBED IT INTO A NON AD VALOREM TYPE OF TAX. IT ALL COMES DOWN TO DOLLARS AND CENTS. SOMEBODY IS NOT GOING TO PAY ME. THERE'S AN APPRAISAL HERE FOR 19 MILLION. I THINK HERON BAY CID'S APPRAISAL THAT THEY HAD A YEAR AGO OR WHATEVER IT WAS, WAS I THINK THEY HAD 34 MILLION WAS THEIR TOP PRICE. WE'RE NOT BUYING IT AS A DEVELOPER. WE'RE BUYING IT AS IS. HERON BAY IS INSIDE IS BUYING IT AS THEY BOUGHT IT, AS IS THEY PAID 150,000 A. THEY PAID 150,000 A. AN ACRE. THEY TURNED AROUND AND SAID, WHO WANTS TO BUY IT? HERE'S WHAT WE KNOW. WE PUT OUT A BID. THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO ACCEPT WHOEVER THEY WANT AND THEY BASE IT UPON WHAT THAT MARKET VALUE IS GOING TO BE. WE'RE NOT BUYING IT AS IS BECAUSE AS THE CITY WE HAVE, PART OF THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH HERON BAY IS TO GET THE COVENANT AND GET THE EASEMENTS. SO WE'RE NOT BUYING IT AS IS BECAUSE WE'RE IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS NOW WITH HERON BAY AND AS A CITY WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE ALL THE CODES. SO WE ARE NOT. WE COULD CHANGE THE CODES ANYWAY, BUT. SO. BUT TO YOUR POINT, WE'RE NOT BUYING IT AS IS. SO YES, WE CAN CHANGE. WE'RE NOT BUYING IT AS IS. THAT'S NOT ACCURATE. IS THAT WHEN I SAY BUYING IT, AS IS THE THE INTENT IS WE'RE NOT GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO EITHER. AND AGAIN, WE EVEN HAVEN'T EVEN DISCUSSED THIS IN WHAT WE'RE I MEAN, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT IN A BROAD PICTURE, BUT WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED SPECIFICALLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY IN THE SENSE OF ARE WE PUTTING IT OUT FOR AN RFP OR ARE WE GOING TO USURP THE RFP PROCESS OR ARE WE GOING TO WORK IN A PARTNERSHIP, A A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP DEAL? I MEAN, WE HAVEN'T EVEN GOTTEN THAT FAR INTO THAT FUTURE OF WHAT THE INTENTION IS GOING TO BE. AND YEAH, MY CONCERN WITH WHAT BOB'S SAYING ALSO IS THE FACT THAT IF WE PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. AND WE WANT A DEVELOPER TO COME IN AND DEVELOP IT. THEN THEY'RE IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT RELATIVE TO ASKING US FOR THINGS BECAUSE WE WANT THEM TO PAY US THE MONEY TO RECOUP THOSE MONIES. AND SO AND SO IT PUTS US, AGAIN, FROM A NEGOTIATION STANDPOINT WITH A DEVELOPER IN A POSITION WHERE WE'RE NOT IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT ANYMORE. THEY ARE ONLY IF WE NEGOTIATE IT WITH ONE DEVELOPER. I MEAN, THAT'S I MEAN, TO SAY YES, IF WE JUST SAY LET'S BUY IT TODAY AND WE'RE DEFINITELY GOING TO WORK WITH TOLL BROTHERS. [01:15:07] WELL, YEAH, THEN WE LOSE OUR LEVERAGE. BUT NO, THAT'S CLEARLY WHAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO. OBVIOUSLY, TOLL BROTHERS HAS BEEN A GOOD PARTNER IN HELPING US FIGURE OUT AND ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS. BUT WE NEED TO DO WHAT'S BEST FOR PARKLAND SO IT DOESN'T. WE HAVE ALL THE NEGOTIATION ABILITIES. WE DON'T LOSE ANY NEGOTIATING ABILITY BY BUYING THE LAND. WE JUST NEED TO FIND THE RIGHT PARTNER TO DEVELOP IT WITH. AND THAT RIGHT PARTNER IS GOING TO GIVE US THE BEST OFFER THAT THAT HELPS ALL THE RESIDENTS SO THAT THAT PART IS. YOU KNOW, WE DON'T LOSE ANY NEGOTIATING ABILITY. I JUST WANT TO JUMP IN HERE BECAUSE I THINK, BOB, JUST TO PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE. YOU'RE RIGHT IN THE SENSE THAT WE HOLD THE SAME CONTROL AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE MAYOR IS SAYING TO DETERMINE WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO GO THERE, WHETHER WE BUY IT OR WHETHER WE JUST ARE, FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, GOVERNING IT AS THE CITY THROUGH OUR CODE. BUT BY PURCHASING IT, WHAT WE HAVE IS NOW MORE CONTROL OVER WHAT WE DO WANT THERE. AND I THINK THAT'S BEEN THE GIST THIS ENTIRE TIME, IS THAT IF WE WERE TO JUST SIT BACK AND ALLOW THIS SALE TO GO THROUGH AND NCID SELLS IT TO WHOEVER THEY WISH, IT'S ALREADY NOW ZONED, THEY CAN PROBABLY. WELL, LET ME TAKE A STEP BACK. THEY'RE STILL GOING TO BE THE ISSUE OF THE COVENANT. AND SO TO THE EXTENT THAT IF SOMEONE ELSE NCID WERE TO DEAL WITH SOMEONE ELSE, WE RUN THE RISK OF THIS PROPERTY SITTING IDLE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS THAT IT TURNS INTO JUST AN EYESORE AND A WASTE OF TIME AND POTENTIAL TAX MONEY THAT WE COULD BE ACCRUING OVER THOSE FIVE YEARS. BUT TWO, IF WE SIT BACK, THIS THING ULTIMATELY COULD BECOME A MASSIVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. AND NOW THERE MAY BE SOME PEOPLE IN THE CITY WHO SAY, WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT? THAT'S GREAT. I PERSONALLY AM FEARFUL OF THE SAME CONCERNS. I THINK THE MAYOR HAS IS OVERBURDENING OUR CITY IN TERMS OF THE SCHOOL, THE RESOURCES WE HAVE, OUR PARKS, THEIR FINITE SIZE. I MEAN, THERE'S ONLY WE DON'T HAVE MUCH MORE ROOM ASIDE FROM THE 36 ACRE PARK, WHICH HOPEFULLY IS GOING TO STILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE US THE CAPACITY OVER THE YEARS TO COME TO FOR OUR GROW AND OUR BUILD OUT. BUT THE REALITY IS, IS THAT I DON'T KNOW IF OUR CITY CAN WITHSTAND AN ENTIRE PROJECT OF JUST SOLELY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT IS LIKELY WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE WERE TO SIT BACK AND THEN NCID IS GOING TO SELL TO A DEVELOPER WITH THE HIGHEST DOLLAR USE. A DEVELOPER IS GOING TO WANT TO MAXIMIZE THEIR PROFIT, AS YOU SAID, AND IN DOING THAT, THEY'RE GOING TO USE WHAT'S AVAILABLE TO THEM. AND MY CONCERN WOULD BE THAT IF WE DON'T HAVE SOME CONTROL OVER WHAT WE DO WANT NOT TO TELL THEM WHAT WE DON'T WANT, WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH SOMETHING WE DON'T WANT. SO I AGREE AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S AN ACCURATE THING TO SAY THAT IF WE DON'T PARTICIPATE IN THE PURCHASE AND HAVE CONTROL, THAT WE END UP IN THE SAME. WE SHOULD END UP IN THE SAME PLACE REALISTICALLY AS IF WE WERE TO TAKE CONTROL. AND DON'T FORGET WITH THE RESIDENTS, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THERE GOES OUR TAX BASE. YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN TOLD BY OUR FINANCIAL PEOPLE TIME AND TIME AGAIN WE NEED TO FIND I MEAN, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT IT IN OUR BUDGET PROCESS. WE NEED TO FIND OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE. WE HAVE TO. SO THIS IS AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT. AND LET'S LET'S NOT FORGET I KNOW SOMETIMES HERON BAY DOESN'T WANT TO HEAR IT, BUT THEIR RESIDENTS, NOT JUST HERON BAY, BUT RESIDENTS ALL OVER THE CITY. BEGGED US TO MOVE THIS WAY, AND THIS IS WHY WE'RE HERE. WE'RE ALSO HERE BECAUSE WE'RE DOING WHAT THE RESIDENTS ARE ASKING US TO DO. YES, THERE ARE THOSE WHO SAY, DON'T YOU HAVE. OF COURSE IT'S A RISK. IT'S A RISK NOT BUYING IT AND IT'S A RISK BUYING IT. BUT TO ME, THE RISK OF BUYING IT GIVES US MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO CONTROL. MAYBE WE DECIDE IN THREE YEARS WE CAN'T WAIT. WE NEED TO RECOUP OUR MONEY. LET'S JUST DO RESIDENTIAL. IF THAT'S WHAT WE DECIDE TO DO, THAT'S WHAT WE DECIDE TO DO. BUT WE'LL OWN IT. WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT. MAYBE WE SAY, WELL, WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT. WE GOT THIS AWESOME OFFER FROM WHOEVER DEVELOPER. RIGHT. BUT BUT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE TWO BIDS AT NCID. HAVE BOTH OF THEM INCLUDE COMMERCIAL? CORRECT. YEAH. ONE HAS MORE COMMERCIAL THAN THE OTHER. IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT. AND AGAIN, NCID HAS SPECIFICALLY EXPLAINED IN THEIR BID. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET WHATEVER'S THERE. RIGHT NOW, NCID HAS ONE CONTRACT SIGNED. AND ITS EAST COAST BUILDERS. SO IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH SITTING UP HERE TODAY AND SAYING, I DON'T WANT TO BUY IT, EAST COAST CAN BUY IT, THAT'S FINE. AND IT IS WHAT IT IS. BUT THE RESIDENTS HAVE SPOKEN UP. AND THEY'RE ASKING US TO HELP THEM. AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HELP THE RESIDENTS AND SECURE OUR FUTURE FOR YEARS TO COME. [01:20:04] SO IT BOILS DOWN TO. WE HEAR THE RESIDENTS. WE TOOK ACTION. WE'RE MOVING FORWARD AND TRYING TO PURCHASE THIS LAND TO PROTECT THEM. BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE FEARFUL OF EAST COAST Y, WHATEVER. THAT'S TRUE. WELL, IT'S IRRELEVANT, BUT IT'S REAL. THEY HAVE THAT THEY HAVE THAT CONCERN. SO SINCE THEY HAVE THAT CONCERN. RIGHT. BUT IT'S IT'S FOR US. AND YES, WE CAN WE CAN CONTROL IT. AND, YOU KNOW, AND TO JORDAN'S POINT, OC FINE. EAST COAST IS SPENDING $25 MILLION ON PROJECTED X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS IN COMMERCIAL. YOU KNOW HOW THEY FIGURED OUT THEIR NUMBERS I HAVE NO CLUE ON. OR NOT. OR NOT. MAYBE IT'S ALL RESIDENTIAL. WHO KNOWS WHAT? WHO KNOWS WHAT THEIR ULTIMATE PLANS ARE? NOBODY KNOWS. AND AGAIN, OWNING IT. OWNING IT ALLOWS YOU TO DICTATE EXACTLY WHAT WILL BE RIGHT. SO I'LL GIVE YOU THE SAME CASE SCENARIO THAT WE HAD OVER BY. PARKLAND RESERVE. YOU HAD THE WHATEVER IT WAS, WHAT WAS THE PARKLAND VILLAGES, KEN? THE THE COMMERCIAL PIECE, RIGHT. SAME THING, SAME IDEA. THEY WERE GOING TO DO A MINI MEISSNER PARK, WHATEVER IT WAS, IT SAT THERE. AND AGAIN, I'M MAKING THE ASSUMPTION THAT EVEN THOUGH WE MAY HAVE AND SAY THIS IS WHAT WE'D LIKE, EVENTUALLY WE CAN HAVE TO SELL IT TO SOMEBODY. SO THEY HAVE IT, THEY SELL IT, THEY GO IN THE MARKET TANKS OR WHATEVER IT IS. THEY THEY DON'T HAVE MONEY. THEY FILE BANKRUPTCY. IT'S LEFT EMPTY. I MEAN, THAT'S HAPPENED BEFORE IN THIS CITY. AND I'M SAYING IS THAT I DON'T HAVE A CRYSTAL BALL. I DON'T THINK ANY OF US DO, BUT I HAVE ONE. IT JUST DOESN'T TELL THE FUTURE. WE CAN DEBATE THIS ISSUE ALL DAY LONG. IT'S JUST THAT, AS I SAID, THIS IS MY MY OPINION THAT I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE MORE CONTROL OVER THE PROPERTY THAT'S THERE THAN WE DO IF WE BUY IT. BECAUSE AGAIN, THEN WE'RE LOCKED INTO COMING TO SOMEBODY AND SAY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO DEVELOP HERE? AND THEY GO, SURE. WE KNOW THAT YOU HAVE A TIMELINE OF THREE YEARS TO GET TO TO SELL IT. BUT WE HAVEN'T SAID THAT WE HAVE A TIMELINE OF THREE YEARS. BUT IT'S BEEN OUT THERE TO I MEAN, I'VE ALREADY BEEN REACHED OUT BY ANOTHER DEVELOPER WHO'S INTERESTED IN DISCUSSING THE OPPORTUNITIES OF OF PURCHASING THAT LAND. SO THERE ARE THERE ARE DEVELOPERS ALREADY WILLING AND READY TO BUY IT. AND MORE WILL COME BECAUSE I JUST GOT A CALL THE OTHER JUST YESTERDAY FROM A DEVELOPER WHO SAID, HEY, WHAT CAN I DO TO GET A PIECE OF THAT? WE HAVE CORAL SPRINGS WHO WANTS TO PARTNER WITH US TO DO SOMETHING TOGETHER, WHICH GIVES US ADDED SECURITY BECAUSE WE HAVE A WILLING PARTNER TO TO WORK TOGETHER. SO THERE IS SOME ADDED SECURITY THERE. BUT LOOK, I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR WORRIES. BUT AGAIN, TO ME, IT'S. WE WE HAVE MORE CONTROL OWNING IT FOR SURE. AND IT'S IT'S SOMETHING THE RESIDENTS ARE ASKING. THIS WASN'T AN IDEA THAT I CAME UP WITH. YOU KNOW, IT WAS ONE AGAIN, LIKE ALL OF MY IDEAS. IT'S I'M LISTENING TO WHAT THE RESIDENTS ARE SAYING. AND I SAID, WELL, OKAY, WELL, IF THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TELLING ME THAT WE HAVE TO DO, I NEED TO DO IT. AND IF IT DOESN'T WORK, THEN IT DOESN'T WORK. BUT IT'S BUT IT'S I HAVE TO I SERVE THE RESIDENTS AND AND I'M SURE THERE'S PEOPLE WHO SAY DON'T BUY IT. BUT Y YOU KNOW, AGAIN, YOU HAVE TO ASK PEOPLE, WHY DON'T YOU. KNOW, WHAT IS THE FEAR? AND IF YOU CAN IF YOU CAN HELP THOSE FEARS ALONG TO WHERE YOU ERASE THOSE FEARS, THEN THEN IT'S NOT A WORRY. BUT IF YOU JUST HAVE THOSE FEARS IN A BOX AND YOU DON'T WANT TO LISTEN TO THE POTENTIAL UPSIDE, THEN IT IS ANY ANY DEAL, ANY, ANY INVESTMENT THAT YOU MAKE. THERE'S A POTENTIAL UPSIDE. THERE'S A POTENTIAL DOWNSIDE FOR SURE. YOU KNOW, I JUST ALSO WANT TO GO BACK TO THIS BECAUSE, BOB, I MEAN, LOOK, I THINK YOU'RE DOING EXACTLY WHAT YOU SHOULD BE DOING, BUT ALL OF US SHOULD BE DOING IS ASKING QUESTIONS AND POKING HOLES AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE RISKS ARE HERE. I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS WHOLE POINT IS ABOUT. BUT IN TERMS OF THE MOVING PARTS, YOU KNOW, FROM WHERE WE WERE THE LAST MEETING TILL NOW, I'D HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT BETWEEN THE MARKET STUDY, THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE HOA AND EVEN WITH SID, I'M GAINING CONFIDENCE THAT WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. OBVIOUSLY THERE'S STILL A LOT THAT REMAINS TO BE DETERMINED AND THIS AND THAT, BUT FOR HOPEFULLY FOR PURPOSES OF TODAY'S WORKSHOP, WHAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE AWAY FROM THIS IS THAT WE HAVEN'T SIGNED THE CONTRACT YET. IF WE DO SIGN THE CONTRACT, IT MEANS WE STILL HAVE 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF SIGNATURE TO DO OUR INVESTIGATION PERIOD. [01:25:04] IN THAT TIME, WE CAN BACK OUT FOR ANY AND ALL REASON. WHATEVER IT IS, IT DOESN'T MATTER. SO WHILE TODAY WE HAVE THOSE CONCERNS, I DON'T WANT US TO LET THOSE CONCERNS THAT ARE STILL BEING WORKED THROUGH BE A REASON NOT TO CONTINUE FORWARD THE PROCESS, BECAUSE IN MY VIEW, THERE'S NO HARM IN MOVING FORWARD. SO IT'S GREAT TO IDENTIFY THE ISSUES, PUT THEM ON THE TABLE, ALLOW EVERYONE TO STILL PROCESS THEM AND WORK THROUGH IT. BUT I JUST HOPE I'M HOPEFUL THAT AS A COMMISSION, WE CAN UNDERSTAND THAT JUST BECAUSE THERE ARE RISKS AND UNKNOWNS DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT IT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN. I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF POINTS TO THAT ISSUE, NUMBER ONE, AND I HEAR I HEAR COMMISSIONER MYERSON LOUD AND CLEAR, AND I SHARE CONCERNS. EVEN THOUGH I'M IN FAVOR OF MOVING THIS FORWARD, I DO SHARE CONCERNS BECAUSE THE CITY SHOULD NOT BE IN THE POSITION OF RISKING SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL DOLLARS OF THE TAXPAYERS WHEN ULTIMATELY THE TAXPAYERS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BEAR THAT BRUNT IF THE MARKET CHANGES OR ANYTHING ELSE. I SHARE THOSE CONCERNS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO DO THOSE THINGS IF WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT MOVING THIS FORWARD TO MITIGATE THAT RISK. ONE OF THE THINGS I'M STILL CONCERNED ABOUT WHEN I SEE THE DOLLAR VALUE IS MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE IS A CONTRACT SIGNED AND THERE WAS ANOTHER CONTRACT POTENTIALLY TO BE SIGNED BY THE OTHER DEVELOPER. BUT IT'S FOR A DIFFERENT PARCEL OF LAND. IT'S NOT FOR THE SAME ACREAGE, IT'S FOR A LARGER ACREAGE OF LAND AT THE SAME DOLLAR VALUE. SO MY CONCERN IS WE ARE WE ARE. THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS PROCESS, AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, IS TO MATCH THE OFFER THAT SID WAS RECEIVING FROM TWO OTHER DEVELOPERS WHO THEY HAD NARROWED DOWN FOR THE SAME ACREAGE. WAIT, WAIT. HEAR ME OUT FOR THE SAME ACREAGE OF LAND. THE SAME PARCELS UPON THE SAME TERMS. AS I UNDERSTAND IT. AND THIS IDEA IS STILL SOLICITING ADDITIONAL BIDS FOR THE SAME PROPERTY, BUT THAT THE TWO FINAL DEVELOPERS THAT IT CAME DOWN TO THEIR PROPOSAL TO BUY THE LAND FOR 24, FOR TEN OR WHATEVER IT WAS, WAS FOR ADDITIONAL PROPERTY, WAS FOR NOT FOR 65 ACRES. AND SO I WANT TO MITIGATE THOSE RISKS. SO I WANT TO FIND OUT, NUMBER ONE, IF WE'RE MATCHING PROPOSALS, LET'S MATCH APPLES TO APPLES, NOT APPLES TO ORANGES. SO LET'S MATCH THE PROPOSAL, GET THE SAME ACREAGE. NUMBER TWO, I WANT TO FIND OUT IF WE GET THE ASSIGNMENT. AND THIS IS SOMETHING FOR ANTHONY. IF WE GET THE ASSIGNMENT FROM THE HOA OF THE COVENANT PURSUANT TO AN AGREEMENT, WE REACH THE HOA. DOES THE CITY HAVE THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE THAT COVENANT AGAINST THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY? MEANING IS THE CITY PUT IN THE SHOES OF THE HOA SO THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE THAT COVENANT AGAINST WHOMEVER ELSE OWNS LEASES OR ANYTHING ELSE THE REMAINDER OF THAT PROPERTY. BECAUSE TO ME I WOULD WANT THAT AND WE NEED TO GET ASSURANCES FROM ANTHONY THAT WE'RE PUT IN THAT SAME POSITION, BECAUSE ONE OF THE OTHER CONCERNS I HAVE IS THERE ARE MULTIPLE PARCELS THAT ARE NOT WITHIN THE PRESERVE, THAT ARE NOT WITHIN THE MEMORIAL GARDEN OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT NCID CONTINUES TO OWN. THAT MAY BE SUBJECT TO THEIR BELIEF THAT IT SHOULD BE FURTHER DEVELOPED ON THE LINE. AND I WANT TO PUT THE CITY IN A POSITION THAT WE KNOW WHO OUR NEIGHBORS ARE GOING TO BE AND WHAT OUR NEIGHBOR IS GOING TO BE, BECAUSE IT WILL CONTINUE TO IMPACT NOT ONLY THE RESIDENTS OF HERON BAY, BUT THE RESIDENTS OF PARKLAND AT LARGE. CAN CAN I JUST GET CLARITY ON THAT ONE? YOU WANT THE COVENANT. I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. SO I WANT A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANT. LET'S START WITH THE EASY ONE, RIGHT. IF WE ARE ABLE TO REACH AN AGREEMENT WITH THE BAY HIGHWAY THAT THEY ARE GOING TO NOT TERMINATE, BUT A SIGN OVER THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT THEY HAVE FOR ANOTHER FIVE PLUS YEARS ON THE PROPERTY, ON THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, ARE WE AS A CITY ABLE TO ENFORCE IT IN THE SAME CAPACITY AS THE HARAMBEE HOE? SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE CONTEXT THAT WE WERE DISCUSSING WITH RESPECT TO THE COVENANT WAS THAT THEY WOULD WAIVE THEIR RIGHT TO ENFORCE THE COVENANT WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY THAT WE WOULD BE PURCHASING. AND I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. IT'S A LITTLE MORE I DON'T WANT THAT. WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH THEM AND THEY WOULD NEED TO AGREE TO IT. WE ARE BEING ENTRUSTED IF WE'RE ABLE TO REACH AN AGREEMENT WITH THE WAY WE ARE BEING TRUSTED BY HARINGEY TO THEIR FINANCIAL DETRIMENT, TO DO THE RIGHT THING WITH REGARDS TO THE PROPERTY. AND I BELIEVE THAT WE WILL BE PUT IN A BETTER POSITION IF THE HOA COVENANT THAT THEY HOLD NOW IS ASSIGNED TO US RATHER THAN WAIVED. BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE WILL THEN BE IN A POSITION TO STAND IN THEIR SHOES AND SAY MUCH LIKE THEY CAN RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING ON THIS PROPERTY FOR FIVE YEARS, INCLUDING THE ADJACENT PARCELS. AND SO WE SHOULD WE SHOULD EXPLORE THAT. SIMEON. JUST TO CLARIFY ON THAT. NO, YOU'RE NOT SAYING THAT WE CAN SELECTIVELY PICK AND CHOOSE IF WE WANTED TO DEVELOP, BUT WE DIDN'T WANT ANYBODY ELSE TO DEVELOP. I THINK WE WOULD WAIVE THE COVENANT IF WE WERE TO DEVELOP. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S ACCURATE, KEN, BECAUSE IF WE HAVE A COVENANT THAT SAYS NOTHING CAN BE PUT ON THE LAND OTHER THAN A GOLF COURSE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, AND THERE IS [01:30:03] SOMEBODY THAT COMES NOT BUYING. WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO ENFORCE THE COVENANT AGAINST THOSE PARCELS. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF WE DECIDE TO DEVELOP THE PORTION THAT WE DO BY AND WE ARE WAIVING OR NOT ENFORCING OUR OWN COVENANT, THEN WHY WOULDN'T THAT BE A WAIVER OF THE COVENANT? WELL, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE WAIVER MAY BE SEPARABLE. IT MAY BE SEVERABLE. WE'D WANT TO FIND THAT ANSWER OUT FROM ANTHONY, BECAUSE IF IT'S SEVERABLE, ANOTHER IF IT'S SAYING YOU CAN DEVELOP A PORTION OF LAND HERE, I MEAN, I CAN ENTER AN AGREEMENT WITH YOU OR I'M NOT GOING TO ENFORCE MY COVENANT HERE, BUT I'M GOING TO ENFORCE IT ON THE REST OF THE PROPERTY. THAT PUTS US IN A BETTER POSITION AND ENSURES THAT WE'RE DOING WHAT BAY IS TRUSTING US TO DO, WHICH IS GOVERNING WHAT IS GOING TO GO ON ALL OF THE LAND, NOT JUST THE PORTION THAT WE'RE PAYING, THE MORE. THE MORE IMPORTANT QUESTION, THOUGH, IS, IS THAT INSIDE, WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE LAND, SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE USING UTILIZING A LARGE PORTION OF IT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WHAT THEY'VE CARVED OUT NOW FOR SALE FOR THEIR DRAINAGE PURPOSES AND FOR AN OPEN PARK AND EVERYTHING. SO WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO DO IS TO HOLD THEM TO THAT AS OPPOSED TO WORRYING ABOUT THEM SELLING ANY OTHER PORTIONS OF IT. WELL, IT'S TWOFOLD. NUMBER ONE, THEY'VE CARVED OUT EIGHT ACRES OF LAND IN THIS AGREEMENT THAT IS EXCLUDED, THAT IS BEYOND THE 40 ACRES OF LAND THAT IS WITHIN HARAMBEE THAT THEY'VE TALKED ABOUT MAYBE TRYING TO SELL OR MAYBE TRYING TO DEVELOP. EAST COAST BROUGHT UP IN A MEETING THAT THEY WANT TO DEVELOP THAT 40 ACRES OF LAND. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE BEING PUT IN A POSITION WHERE WE'RE IN NO WORSE POSITION THAN THE HERON BAY HIGHWAY IS, WHICH IS WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE THAT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT GOING FORWARD. SO WE SHOULD WE SHOULD ANALYZE THAT. THE OTHER ISSUE IS I WANT TO GET BACK TO THE PURCHASE PRICE. MY UNDERSTANDING AND WE SHOULD ANALYZE THE TWO CONTRACTS THAT WERE SENT OUT TO THE TWO DEVELOPERS SAYING, HEY, IF YOU'RE WILLING TO BUY THIS LAND FOR 25, FOR TEN UPON THESE TERMS, WHETHER YOU CALL IT A CONTRACT, A CONTRACT IN WAITING, YOUR BACKUP CONTRACT, WHATEVER ELSE, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MATCHING THOSE PROPOSALS. ITEM FOUR ITEM. BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE'RE GETTING LESS ACREAGE OR DIFFERENT ACREAGE THAN THOSE PROPOSALS. AND I DON'T WANT TO OVERPAY. WE'RE ALREADY OVERPAYING, BUT I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO OVERPAY EVEN MORE FOR WHAT WE'RE GETTING. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE THE OTHER CONCERN AND IT GOES BACK TO WHO OUR NEIGHBOR IS GOING TO BE IF WE'RE GETTING LESS ACREAGE, WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE REMAINING ACRES, WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE EXCLUDED ACRES? IS IT JUST GOING TO BE A PORTION OF LAND FOR THE PARKING LOT? IS IT GOING TO BE A PORTION OF LAND ON TRAIL'S END THAT SOMETHING ELSE IS HAPPENING WITH IT? WE DON'T HAVE CONTROL OVER BECAUSE THE DEVELOPERS WERE BUYING THAT LAND. WE'RE APPARENTLY NOT. NOT NOT ALL THE DEVELOPERS. WELL, WE NEED TO FIND THE FIVE. YEAH, I HEAR I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. THE OTHER ONE IS MY UNDERSTANDING AND I'M READING FARAI AS WE GET IT NOW, RED LINE. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IN DOING THIS AND THIS GOES BACK TO THE COMMENT THAT COMMISSIONER ISRAEL JUST SAID TO COMMISSIONER MEYERSON IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS PROCESS IF WE DETERMINE AFTER WE SIGN THE CONTRACT THAT WITHIN THE 60 DAY DUE DILIGENCE PERIOD, WE DON'T WANT TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT OR WE DON'T WANT TO FINALIZE THE CLOSING. WE GET OUR DEPOSIT BACK, NO HARM, NO FOUL. THE AGREEMENT IS NULL AND VOID. BUT I ALSO UNDERSTOOD FROM OUR PRIOR WORKSHOP THAT IF AFTER THAT PERIOD OF TIME WE DECIDE THAT WE DON'T WANT TO GO FORWARD, WE LOSE OUR DEPOSIT. THAT'S THE RISK WE'RE PUTTING UP. OUR DEPOSIT GOES HARD. I'M READING THIS AGREEMENT NOW AND THE LANGUAGE THAT THAT MAY NOT BE THE CASE AND MAYBE I'M READING IT WRONG, BUT I'M READING FOR A THAT IF WE DECIDE NOT TO CLOSE, WE'VE WAIVED OUR RIGHT OF TERMINATION UNDER THE CONTRACT. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE HELD IN A SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE ISSUE WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CLOSE. I'M OKAY IF WE MAKE A CONSCIOUS DECISION AFTER THE 60 DAYS THAT WE LOSE OUR DEPOSIT. BUT I DON'T WANT TO MAKE A DECISION IF THE WORLD CHANGES BETWEEN NOW AND THEN THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE BOUND BY CLOSING ON THE CONTRACT. SO I NEED THAT. AND IF IT'S NOT THERE, FINE. WELL, LET'S LET'S NEGOTIATE IT. YES. NO, I MEAN, IT'S THERE AND I THINK IT'S THERE TWICE. I ADDED IT SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE YOU CAN LOOK AT 12 B PURCHASER DEFAULT NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING ANY LANGUAGE OF THE CONTRARY HERE IN THE MAXIMUM LIABILITY THE PURCHASER HAS WITH RESPECT TO DEFAULT BY PURCHASER HEREUNDER IS THE LOSS OF THE DEPOSIT NO OTHER DAMAGES RIGHTS REMEDIES WILL BE AVAILABLE TO. AND BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY EVEN STATED IT TWICE, BECAUSE THAT GOES TO A MITIGATION, RIGHT? IF WE DECIDE AS COMMISSIONER, AS COMMISSIONER ISRAEL SAID, IF WE DECIDE THAT WITHIN THE 60 DAYS WE WANT TO PULL OUT, SOMETHING CHANGES OR WE REVEAL SOMETHING IN OUR PHASE ONE OR SOMETHING ELSE, WE'RE OUT OF THE CONTRACT NULL AND VOID PARTIES OVER. IF WE DECIDE AFTER THE 60 DAYS THAT SOMETHING COMES UP OR SOMETHING HAS MATERIALLY CHANGED, WE LOSE. OUR DEPOSIT IS THE WORST CASE SCENARIO. AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN I'M FINE WITH THAT. I HAVE ANOTHER ISSUE. WE HAVE A. [01:35:02] THIS GOES TO THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. ARE WE ABLE TO GET ANY CLARITY? THE HOA IS ASKING US FOR A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. IS NCID WILLING TO PROVIDE THE CITY WITH A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AS TO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE WITH THAT 150 ACRES AND ANY OTHER PORTION OF LAND THAT THEY OWN, BECAUSE THAT'S YOUR YOUR COMMON VICE MAYOR. MY UNDERSTANDING IS IN THE INITIAL PROCESS OF THIS THAT WAS DISCUSSED AND VIABLE MEANING THAT THE THE NCID HAD HAD GONE OUT AND USED A BOND TO ACQUIRE THAT PROPERTY FOR STORMWATER MITIGATION. ARE THEY WILLING TO GIVE US AS PART OF THIS TRANS ACTIVE, RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS SAYING WE'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN THAT PROPERTY FOR STORMWATER MITIGATION? WE SHOULD WE SHOULD LOOK INTO GETTING THAT BECAUSE MY OTHER CONCERN IS WE TALKED AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT GETTING AN ASSIGNABLE CLAUSE, ABOUT GETTING A CLAUSE THAT SAYS THAT AS LONG AS THEY CLOSE ON THE SAME TERMS, WE AS A CITY HAVE THE ABILITY TO FREELY ASSIGN THIS CONTRACT TO A THIRD PARTY. AND NCID DIDN'T JUST SAY NO. THEY SAID NO UNLESS IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION WE APPROVE THE ASSIGNEE, WHICH TO ME IS IS IS PROBLEMATIC. IF NCID IS GETTING THEIR TERMS PAID IN FULL, CLOSED IN 100 DAYS, AND GETTING ALL THE MONEY THEY WANT UPON THE TERMS THEY WANT. WHY SHOULD THEY CARE ONE IOTA WHO OTHER THAN THE CITY OF PARKLAND IS GOING TO OWN THAT PROPERTY? AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. IT'S CAUSING ME CONCERN AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD ADDRESS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK HAVING IT IN THEIR SOLE DISCRETION, THE ABILITY TO TELL US WHO WE CAN ASSIGN IT TO IF THAT PARTY IS WILLING TO CLOSE ON THE SAME TERMS IN THE CITY, IS VETTED AND APPROVED THEM. WHY THAT CAN'T BE FREELY ASSIGNABLE. I MEAN, THE ASSIGNMENT IF IF WE HAVE A CONTRACT TO SELL IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE, WE COULD VERY EASILY JUST. BUY IT AND SELL IT. THE ASSIGN ABILITY IS I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THE ASSIGN ABILITY. I THINK WE'RE READING TOO MUCH INTO THE ASSIGN ABILITY. I THINK THE ASSIGNED ABILITY DOES LEAVE US LESS NEGOTIATING ABILITY BECAUSE. I DON'T THINK SO. BECAUSE. WELL, IT DOES BECAUSE WE WE ALSO HAVE TO WORK WITH CORAL SPRINGS. SO ASSIGNING IT AND IF WE DECIDE SOME DEVELOPER COMES UP AND WE WANT TO ASSIGN IT TO IT, IF THEY DO A GREAT PLANT, WE BUY IT AND SELL IT. HERE'S HERE'S I THINK THE POINT THAT'S BEING OVERLOOKED AND THIS GOES TO WHAT COMMISSIONER MEYERSON SAID IS THERE MAY BE PARTIES INVOLVED WHO MAY BE IN A BETTER POSITION TO NEGOTIATE A FINAL DEAL, INCLUDING THE TWO CITIES, IF IT'S IN THE HANDS OF A THIRD PARTY AND IF WE HAVE A FREELY ASSIGNABLE PROVISION IN OUR CONTRACT, WE'RE ABLE TO GOVERN THAT. IF WE DECIDE, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE ON THE PROPERTY AND THEN SELL IT IN PART OR WHOLE TO A THIRD PARTY OR MULTIPLE THIRD PARTIES, FINE, WE HAVE THAT ABILITY. BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE AN ASSIGNABLE PROVISION IN OUR AGREEMENT, WE LOSE THAT RIGHT WHATSOEVER. RIGHT. BUT IN ORDER FOR US TO ASSIGN IT AND TRULY DO THAT, WE WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, WHAT WHAT WE WANT TO DO, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO SELL IT, IN MY OPINION. AND COMMISSIONER SARAH SAID A SIMILAR THING AT AT THE WORKSHOP. WANT TO TAKE YOUR TIME, MAKE SURE YOU'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING. SO FOR FOR ME, ASSIGNING IT TO ANOTHER DEVELOPER JUST IT'S TO ME, IT'S A HASTY DECISION. IT'S MERELY, YOU KNOW, JUST IT'S NOT TAKING YOUR TIME AND MAKING SURE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT DEVELOPER. AND I THINK BY US OWNING IT, IT ALLOWS US TO SAY WE HAVE WE TAKE OUR TIME. WE EITHER DO AN RFP, WE DON'T DO AN RFP, WE DO AN UNSOLICITED BID. WHATEVER PROCESS THAT TAKES, WE HAVE ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD TO DO IT MAKES IT MAKES THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY MORE VALUABLE IF WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO FREELY ASSIGN IT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, TO PUT IT INTO SOME SEPARATE ENTITY. HEAR ME OUT IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS FOR ANYONE ELSE. AND SO I'M JUST MAXIMIZING OUR LEVERAGE AND MAXIMIZING OUR VALUE FOR WHAT WE'RE PAYING $25 FOR. AND THE NOTION THAT ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY IS GOING TO TELL US, YOU CAN'T ASSIGN IT TO ANYONE UNLESS WE LIKE WHO YOU'RE ASSIGNING TO. IT JUST TO ME HAS NO RATIONALE. I GET IT. I JUST I DON'T SEE I JUST DON'T SEE THE VALUE IN THE ASSIGNMENT. WELL, I JUST DON'T SEE. IF YOU TALK TO ANYBODY IN REAL ESTATE, HAVING A CONTRACT THAT'S FREELY ASSIGNABLE IS MUCH MORE VALUABLE THAN HAVING A CONTRACT. THAT'S NOT ASSIGNABLE. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. BUT MY POINT IS. WE WANT TO TAKE OUR TIME AND MAKE SURE WE'RE MAKING THE RIGHT DECISION FOR OUR CITY. SO BY PICKING A DEVELOPER IN 60 DAYS WITHOUT HAVING PLANNING AND ZONING DISCUSSIONS, WITHOUT HAVING TO SIT DOWN WITH CORAL SPRINGS, THAT TO ME WOULD BE A HASTY DECISION. I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT'S NOT A MORE VALUABLE CONTRACT, BUT THAT'S IF YOU'RE JUST PURELY TRYING TO FLIP IT AND MAKE X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS IF YOU'RE TRYING TO BUY IT FOR THE LONG TERM. YOU'RE NOT EVEN THINKING ABOUT US. BUT WE'VE ALSO TALKED ABOUT IT AND INCLUDING AT THIS MEETING THAT WE'VE WE'VE APPRECIATED THAT THE DOGLEG UNDER ALL OF THE PROPOSALS HAD SOME COMPONENT OF RESIDENTIAL. [01:40:02] AND THE NOTION THAT WE COULD ASSIGN A PORTION OF THE CONTRACT FOR FOR THAT TO A THIRD, YOU JUST BUY IT AND SELL IT. I UNDERSTAND. BUT YOU'RE ADDING ON COSTS THAT MAY NOT HAVE TO BE ADDED ON, BUT BUT IT'S CERTAINLY MORE VALUABLE. THE OTHER THING IS I ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT THE PROPERTY LOOKS LIKE NOW. THE PROPERTY IS AN EYESORE. CONTINUES TO BE AN EYESORE. I KNOW THEY'RE WORKING ON 150 ACRES, BUT WE SHOULD REACH SOME SORT OF GOOD FAITH INTERIM AGREEMENT WITH NCID AS TO HOW THE REMAINDER OF THAT PROPERTY CONTINUES TO BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO PRESERVE THE ESTHETICS, THE CHARM, THE SMALL TOWN FEEL OF PARKLAND. BUT WE'VE LOST IT WITH REGARDS TO WHAT I THINK IS IS IMPROPER MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPERTY. AND THAT'S NOT ONLY THE 40 ACRES THAT IS NOT BEING DEVELOPED AS PART OF THE PASSIVE PARK, BUT IT'S THE REMAINDER OF THE GOLF COURSE THAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO SELL. AND SO WE SHOULD HAVE SOME DISCUSSION WITHIN NCID AS WE GO THROUGH THIS, WHETHER IT'S A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY, WHETHER IT'S A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE HOA OR SOMEONE THAT THE PROPERTY FROM AN ESTHETIC STANDPOINT IS PROPERLY MAINTAINED DURING THIS ENTIRE PROCESS BECAUSE IT'S NOT RIGHT NOW. I MEAN, WE COULD DO THAT TODAY. THAT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH NEGOTIATIONS. WE CAN CALL UP ROD NOW AND SAY, LOOK, A.D., YOU NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB. SO, I MEAN, THAT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO NECESSARILY WITH THE NEGOTIATIONS. WE JUST WANT NCID. SO IF ROD, YOU'RE LISTENING, THE CITY PARKLAND IS ASKING YOU TO DO A BETTER JOB OF MAINTAINING THE GOLF COURSE. I THINK IT GOES TO IF YOU CAN FOLLOW THAT UP WITH AN EMAIL TOMORROW, NANCY, THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED. I THINK IT GOES TO WHERE WE'RE IN GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATIONS. WE'RE DISCUSSING A TRANSACTION. I'M NOT EVEN I'M NOT MAKING I AGREE 100%. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT. BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT NEGOTIATION. THAT'S JUST TELLING THEM THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO HAPPEN. SO WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO COMMISSIONER MEYERSON. SORRY TO INTERJECT. SO I GUESS FOR ME TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE NEXT STEPS ARE RIGHT NOW. COMMISSIONER MYERSON DOESN'T WANT TO MOVE FORWARD. KEN STILL HASN'T GIVEN A CLEAR INDICATION YET, WHICH IS FINE. JORDAN. COMMISSIONER. ISRAEL. AND. AND SIMEON. YOU GUYS HAD INDICATED YOU WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THE PROCESS FURTHER. WHAT MORE? I GUESS THIS IS REALLY A QUESTION TO YOU, NANCY. WHAT MORE DO YOU NEED? YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A THAT WE HAVE THE HAIR AND BABY TERM SHEET FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO MOVE FORWARD. IS THERE SOMETHING IN THAT TERM SHEET THAT JUMPS OUT AT YOU AND YOU'RE NOT INTERESTED IN OR SOMETHING DIFFERENT? YOU WANT TO CHANGE. SO WE CAN JUST KIND OF GIVE SOME DIRECTION ON THE HARE AND BAIT DISCUSSIONS. SO I GUESS OTHER THAN THE ONES I POINTED OUT, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE. I'D LIKE TO SEE AN ASSIGNMENT RATHER THAN A WAIVER OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. I'D RATHER I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT WE DISCUSS WITHIN SED THE NOTION OF SOME RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FOR THE LAND THAT THEY'RE MAINTAINING, THAT THEY'RE RETAINING POSSESSION OF AND HAVE THOSE OTHER POINTS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. I LIKE COMMISSIONER BREYER'S POINT. I AGREE WITH THE ASSIGNMENT AS OPPOSED TO THE WAIVER OF THE COVENANT. AND THEN TO TO COMMISSIONER OR VICE MAYOR CUTLER AND COMMISSIONER MEYERSON. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT STAFF CAN PROVIDE EITHER OF YOU TO TO RAISE YOUR COMFORT LEVEL IN IN MOVING FORWARD AND POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE RIGHT NOW, WE ONLY NEED THREE AT THIS POINT, ANTHONY, TO MOVE FORWARD. SO YOU'RE NOT VOTING OR GIVING DIRECTIONS, BUT WE NEED AT LEAST A MAJORITY TO GIVE DIRECTION, TO MOVE FORWARD. I MEAN I MEAN, IF EVERYBODY SAID, NO, YOU'RE CRAZY, THEN WE WOULDN'T MOVE FORWARD. RIGHT. AND, YOU KNOW, KEEP IN MIND, YOU ALL MADE A VOTE AT A MEETING TO CONTINUE ALONG THIS PROCESS. AND AT SOME POINT THERE WOULD LIKELY BE ANOTHER VOTE ULTIMATELY TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE. IT'S GOING TO NEED THAT ORDINANCE WITH A 4/5 AFFIRMATIVE VOTE AND THE CONTRACT WITH NCID WOULD NEED TO BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THAT ORDINANCE. BUT FOR FOR FOR ME, THIS IS FOR ME PERSONALLY. I WANT TO MOVE FORWARD. I WANT TO PURCHASE IT. SO I WANT TO KNOW WHAT WHAT CAN BE DONE TO GIVE YOU A HIGHER COMFORT LEVEL. VICE MAYOR CUTLER AND EVEN IF THERE IS ANY HIGHER LEVEL COMFORT. COMMISSIONER MEYERSON THAT TO UNDERSTAND OR TO HAVE THE SAME OR PROBABLY NOT THE SAME FEELING I HAVE, BUT MAYBE A CLOSER FEELING THAN I HAVE. SO THE LAST MEETING WE HAD, I VOTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DUE DILIGENCE PROCESS. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WE'VE GOT ONE OUT OF TWO APPRAISALS DONE. THAT'S NOT DONE. THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY IS NOT COMPLETE. [01:45:04] THE MARKET ANALYSIS IS READY IN TWO WEEKS. HAVEN'T SEEN THAT YET. SO THAT'S THE FIRST THREE THINGS WE HAVE. WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION YET. I'M STILL OF A MIND THAT I WANT TO SEE ALL THE INFORMATION BEFORE I'M GOING TO MAKE A DECISION. AND I'M AND I'M FINDING THAT I'M JUST TRYING TO GET CLARITY FOR STAFF AND MYSELF. AND THEY'VE ALREADY SAID THAT THEY'RE WORKING TOWARDS GETTING THOSE THINGS AND THEY HAVE TIMEFRAMES SET FORTH. SO I'M STILL OKAY WITH WITH THAT ASPECT OF IT. I AGREE WITH SIMEON ON THE ASSIGNMENT AS OPPOSED TO THE WAIVER. I THINK THAT THE ASSIGNMENT ASPECT THAT HE TALKED ABOUT WITHIN CED IS ALSO A VERY CRITICALLY VALUABLE ASPECT TO ANY CONTRACTUAL NEGOTIATION ON ON THE REAL ESTATE. SO I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. AND I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO WHAT I SAID IN THE FIRST MEETING WITH HERON BAY. YOU KNOW, THIS IDEA OF THIS COMPENSATION OF HALF A MILLION DOLLARS TO THEM, PLUS GIVING THEM AN ACRE OF PROPERTY FOR WHATEVER REASON, AGAIN, STRIKES ME AS DISINGENUOUS. WE'RE DOING THIS FOR HERON BAY PREDOMINANTLY, AND I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE ARGUMENTS THAT WE'RE DOING IT FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE CITY AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS IS PREDOMINANTLY FOR HERON BAY AND THE IDEA THAT WE HAVE TO PAY THEM MONEY FOR EASEMENTS TO DO THIS PROJECT WHEN WE'RE DOING IT FOR THEM, STILL VERY MUCH STICKS TO MY CROSS IN TERMS OF THE TERMS ON THE TERM SHEET. THAT'S THAT'S A PROBLEM FOR ME, THE NEW RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ASPECTS WHICH AGAIN, I JUST GOT THIS FROM ANTHONY LITERALLY TODAY, I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE AS LONG AS IT'S NOT SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT FROM OUR CURRENT CODE AND AS LONG AS OUR ARBORIST THINKS THAT THIS IS THIS IS GOOD AND WE'VE GOT APPROVALS FROM OUR BUILDING PEOPLE, THEN CERTAINLY I AGREE. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THEM HAVE AS MUCH BUFFER AS POSSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN PRIVACY AND ALL OF THAT KIND OF STUFF. SO I DON'T I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT KIND OF STUFF. BUT, BUT I, I, I'LL GO BACK TO THIS IDEA OF COMPENSATING THEM FOR DOING THIS KIND OF STICKS IN MY CRAW. SO THAT'S WHERE I'M AT. VICE MAYOR, I HAVE A THOUGHT AND I'LL TALK TO MARK. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO NEGOTIATE HERE AT A MEETING, BUT I HAVE AN IDEA WHERE WE MAY BE ABLE TO SOLVE YOUR PROBLEM AND THEIRS. AND I'LL DISCUSS IT WITH MARK BECAUSE THERE MAY BE ANOTHER WAY TO ANOTHER WAY TO FASHION THIS, WHERE WHERE THEY'RE STILL PROTECTED FROM A FINANCIAL ASPECT. BUT THE CITY IS NOT THE PARTY OUTLYING THE CASH. NANCY, DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE AT THIS JUNCTURE? YES. MY GOAL AT THE NEXT WORKSHOP THAT IS GOING TO BE PLANNED ON THE 18TH IS TO OBVIOUSLY PRESENT THE MARKET ANALYSIS TO EVERYONE, HOPEFULLY HAVING THE SECOND APPRAISAL COMPLETE AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY PHASE ONE. IF NOT, THOSE WILL DEFINITELY BE DONE WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, PROBABLY FOLLOWING THAT. IT'S JUST A LOT TO GET DONE IN THAT SHORTER TIME FRAME. BUT BUT NO, THAT'S. THAT'S IT FOR. FROM SAID. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO. SO AT THIS POINT, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GO FORWARD WITH THE SECOND ENVIRONMENTAL CORRECT OR YOU ARE THE FIRST ENVIRONMENTAL WILL DETERMINE IF THE SECOND ONE IS NEEDED. THAT'S I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GOING FORWARD WITH THE FIRST 50 GRAND TO BECAUSE NOT AT THIS TIME. THE 50 GRAND WAS FOR THE SURVEY. IF IT'S NEEDED, THEY ARE THE SURVEY IS IS VERY PRICEY. SO BUT I DON'T WANT I DON'T WANT DOLLARS TO DICTATE PUTTING US IN A HOLE TIME WISE. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. I KNOW WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE SURVEY AND THE PHASE ONE. AND I DON'T WANT WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT DOING THE SURVEY. WE'RE NOT DOING THE SURVEY. YEAH. BECAUSE THE SURVEY ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO THE SURVEY, NANCY SAID SHE CAN GET DONE IN A TIME FRAME AFTER THE PURCHASE. YEAH. YEAH. AS LONG AS WE HAVE A I WOULD RATHER YOU LISTEN IT'S LIKE ANYTHING ELSE AND I KNOW THE DEVELOPERS DID THIS TOO. THEY'VE SPENT MONEY ON THEIR PROPOSALS TO KICK THE TIRES ON A POTENTIAL DEAL. WE'RE DOING THE SAME. I'D RATHER SPEND SOME MONEY AND NOT PUT OURSELVES IN A HOLE FROM A TIME PERSPECTIVE. AGREED. YEAH. BUT YOU'VE ALREADY LAID OUT THIS. THIS IDEA THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE BUYING APPLES TO APPLES AS OPPOSED TO SOME. I THINK THAT IS CRITICAL. I THINK THAT IS CRITICAL BECAUSE BECAUSE WE HAVE ALL SEEN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, THE ACREAGE AND THE PLACEMENT OF THE ACREAGE, I'M SURE I'M SURE WE CAN GET COPIES OF THE OTHER CONTRACTS. SO IT SHOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM AND CLARITY AS TO WHAT PARCELS THOSE INCLUDE. YEAH, I WOULD THINK THAT'S SOMETHING ANTHONY CAN GET. HE'S BEEN ON THAT. YES. OR NANCY OR WHOMEVER. ALL RIGHT. SO EVERYBODY ELSE IS GOOD. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, DO WE WANT TO MOTION TO ADJOURN? ALL RIGHT. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.