[*This meeting was joined in progress*] [00:00:07] BOARD MEMBER MCDONALD. BOARD MEMBER. PENNY. HERE. BOARD MEMBER. BROOKVILLE. HERE. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT. BOARD CHAIR. PENNY HERE. VICE CHAIR. BROOKVILLE HERE. BOARD MEMBER. KOVAS. BOARD MEMBER. HAWKINS. BOARD MEMBER MCCRYSTAL. BOARD MEMBER. MOSER AND BOARD MEMBER. NOBLE. OKAY, I'LL LOOK AT THE BOARD. THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. JUST HAVE THAT. JUST HAVE TO PAUSE. SO YOU KNOW, YOU ASK. I DON'T KNOW, CAUSE THERE'S NO COMMENT, RIGHT? HE WROTE AN ARTICLE. I DON'T REALLY CARE. WE ALL. CAN I GET APPROVAL [APPROVAL OF AGENDA] OF THE AGENDA? SO MOVED. SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND, MAYOR, DOES IT MATTER IF WE DON'T HAVE A QUORUM ON THE CRB? NO THERE'S NO ACTION ITEMS FOR THEM TODAY ANYWAY. OKAY ANY, ANYONE FROM THE AG. OKAY WE HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND. WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, WE CAN DO AN ALL IN FAVOR ON THAT. [APPROVAL OF MINUTES] ALL IN FAVOR? I. I GET APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. SO MOVED. SECOND. CAN I ASK FOR. GET ME BACK TO THE AUDIENCE? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. AND YOU WANT TO COMMENT? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AND DO I DO APPROVAL? THE SECOND ONE? OKAY, THAT COVERS ABOUT THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU, IF WE COULD GET AN APPROVAL FOR THE SECOND ONE. YEAH. MOVE TO APPROVE THE CRA MINUTES. OKAY. SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A WE HAVE A SECOND. ANYONE FROM THE AUDIENCE? I SEE NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OKAY NOW WE'RE GOING TO COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. ANY COMMENTS? ANY [COMMENTS BY BOARD MEMBERS (Non-Agenda Items)] COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS? I HAVE ONE SPEAKING FROM THE CRB. YES, SIR. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO LOSE THREE MORE MEMBERS AFTER THIS MEETING. I DON'T KNOW, MARY WILL TELL US SOME. IT WAS IT WAS A DECIDED TIME AGO THAT THE THREE TO ATTEND THE JOINT MEETING FOR THE DAY. BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE WHO HAVE MISSED TWO MEETINGS IN A ROW. THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN THE THIRD MEETING, RIGHT? I UNDERSTAND YOU'VE MADE THAT CLEAR. WE ALSO HAVE BEEN MEETING AND WE'RE I THINK IT'S ON THE NEXT CRA AGENDA TO ADDRESS WITH YOU THE ISSUE OF HAVING THE CRB MEMBERS, ATTEND THIS MEETING. THE TRUTH OF IT IS, IS THAT THE INTENTION TO HAVE TWO MEMBERS OF THE CRB MEETING WITH THE CRA ANYWAY, EFFECTIVELY PROVIDED THAT NOTICE, AND IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE A NEED FOR QUARTERLY JOINT MEETINGS, THEN THERE'S NO NO REASON TO HAVE MEMBERS OF THE CRB ON THE CRA. AND SO IT BECOMES DUPLICATIVE. BUT WHEN YOU TALK TO THE CRB MEMBERS AND I KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE NEWER MEMBERS, HE DRIVES FROM JUPITER FOR HIM. LAST WEEK, THEY HAD A CRB MEETING, AND ON THE CRB MEETING WAS THE HEIRS PROGRAM AND THE BURP PROGRAM. SO THEY WOULD HAVE DONE THE EXACT SAME TWO PRESENTATIONS THAT YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO DO TODAY. THEY'D HAVE TO SIT THROUGH IT, BUT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO VOTE. AND THEN. WELL, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DISCUSS AT THE NEXT MEETING. BUT MY POINT IS, ONCE AGAIN, YOUR MEMBERS, BECAUSE I THINK MARK AND I ARE AT LARGE, ARE NOT SHOWING UP TO MEETINGS. THEY'RE ACTUALLY YOU'RE APPOINTED BY THE CRA BOARD, BUT YOU GUYS ARE INVITED TO VOTE TODAY AND PARTICIPATE. HISTORICALLY, THEIR FEEDBACK HAS BEEN WE DON'T GET TO PARTICIPATE IN THE JOINT MEETING. WHY DO WE NEED TO GO? MR. MARTELL, CAN I JUST FINISH MY REMARKS AND YOU CAN. CORRECT. NO, I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THEY'RE NOT HERE TO SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. YOU'RE RAISING IT WHEN THEY'RE NOT. I'M RAISING IT BECAUSE THE SEAT, THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE CITY COMMISSIONERS HERE, AND THE CRA IS HERE, AND I'M JUST SAYING THAT IT MAKES IT VERY HARD AT THE CRB MEETING BECAUSE WE FIGHT TO HAVE A QUORUM. SO I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT YOU TELL YOUR YOUR PEOPLE COME AND IF THEY CAN'T COME, THEN APPOINT OTHER PEOPLE. I AGREE WITH YOU, TOM. THIS IS TWICE I'VE GOTTEN, [00:05:02] CRB MEMBER AND I GAVE IT YOU. EVEN WHEN YOU CHANGE IT, SOMETIMES IT DOESN'T WORK OUT, BUT IT IS SUMMER TIME. PEOPLE CAN BE GONE AND ON VACATION. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT YES. AND LIKE MIKE SAID, WE NEED TO BRING IT UP WITH WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME HERE. WELL, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE IS, I THINK THAT THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT BOARDS IS A VOLUNTEER BOARD AND PEOPLE ARE COMING FROM DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. IF YOU'RE HAVING IT IN THE DAY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE HAVING IT AT 4:00 OR WHATEVER, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE HAVE TO HAUL FROM WORK SOMEPLACE. THEY MIGHT NOT BE IN THE AREA. THEY MIGHT LIVE HERE, BUT THEY'RE NOT HERE ALL DAY LONG, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IF WE'RE HAVING PROBLEMS, WE MIGHT LOOK AT CHANGING THAT TIME TO AN EVENING TIME, AND WE COULD BRING THAT UP. YEAH, I THINK THAT MIGHT MIGHT HELP A LITTLE ITEMS. AND IT WOULD PROBABLY BE GOOD FOR RESIDENTS WHO WANT TO COME AND, YOU KNOW, FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING ON TO THAT MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO MAKE IT DURING THE DAY. MADAM MAYOR. YES. MARY, CAN YOU SEND ALL THE COMMISSIONERS THEI, THEIR APPOINTEES, ATTENDANCE RECORDS? I THINK THAT MINE HAS BEEN SHOWING UP, BUT I'M NOT POSITIVE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN TALKING TO HIM ABOUT THE MEETING. SO, FOR THE REGULAR MEETING, MAYBE NOT THE JOINT MEETING TODAY, BUT. NO. DO SO I'D JUST LIKE TO KNOW. SO. AND I NOTICED IT, TOO, I HEAR YOU, I NOTICED IT WHEN THEY'RE HERE, NOT I LOOK, I LOOK SO. OKAY. YES, MA'AM. MISS. JORDAN. YES. HELLO. I GET IT. SORRY. DID YOU WANT ME TO GO AHEAD? YEAH, I CAN'T SEE YOU. SO. GOOD AFTERNOON. I WAS GOING TO READ [3. APPLICATIONS FOR THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM FOR FY 2024 (RC): RESOLUTION No. 10-2024 CRA; A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING AWARD TO APPLICANTS FROM THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.] IT. OH, YOU CAN GO AHEAD THEN. I SHOULD. IT'S. OUR ACTION IS, THREE APPLICATIONS FOR THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT, REIMBURSEMENT RECOVERY, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. TYPICALLY, YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND READ THAT. I'M SORRY. YEAH. OF COURSE, MADAM MAYOR. THANK YOU. SIR. RESOLUTION NUMBER TEN DASH 2024 CRA. A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING AWARD TO APPLICANTS FROM THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS. SEVERABILITY. PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. CRA BOARD MEMBERS JORDAN PINKSTON, CRA PROGRAM MANAGER FOR THE RECORD, THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY'S BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM IS AN INCENTIVE PROGRAM DESIGNED TO ENCOURAGE VISIBLE EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AND TO ENCOURAGE PRIVATE INVESTMENT WITHIN THE CRA. THE PROGRAM PROVIDES A REIMBURSEMENT GRANT OF UP TO $10,000 OF PUBLIC FUNDS PER PROPERTY TO MATCH PRIVATE FUNDS TO PAY FOR THE DESIGN AND COMPLETION OF PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS. FUNDS ARE APPROPRIATED ANNUALLY BY THE CRA. THE PROJECTS ARE EVALUATED BASED ON FOUR CATEGORIES, INCLUDING. OVERALL VISUAL IMPACT OF THE PROPERTY, WITH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS, HOW THE PROJECT RELATES TO THE URBAN STREET AND IMPROVES PEDESTRIAN WALKABILITY, PRIVATE INVESTMENT TO GRANT RATIOS AND IMPROVEMENTS THAT HELP TO PRESERVE THE HISTORIC BUILDING. THE PROGRAM AIMS TO ENCOURAGE SHADE OVER PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS, IMPROVE CONDITIONS FOR WALKING AND PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITIES, AND WE AMENDED THE PROGRAM GUIDELINES TO ENCOURAGE BUSINESSES TO VOLUNTARILY UPGRADE LANDSCAPING AS PART OF THE OVERALL IMPROVEMENTS. THE CRA DID PUBLIC OUTREACH TO ENCOURAGE THE BUSINESSES TO APPLY FOR THE PROGRAM. OUTREACH EFFORTS INCLUDE AN ELECTRONIC NEWSLETTER TO THE CITY'S CONTACT LIST, DISTRIBUTING FLIERS TO LOCAL BUSINESSES, MAILING POSTCARDS TO LOCAL BUSINESS OWNERS, AND SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS SUCH AS TWITTER, FACEBOOK AND INSTAGRAM. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THE APPLICANTS HAVE BEEN FINDING IT INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT TO MEET THE MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PROGRAM. THEREFORE, STAFF EXTENDED THE DEADLINE TWICE THIS FISCAL YEAR TO ACQUIRE MORE VIABLE APPLICATIONS. THE CRA RECEIVED A TOTAL OF NINE APPLICATIONS. OF THOSE, ONLY FOUR APPLICATIONS ARE ELIGIBLE TO BE CONSIDERED FOR FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. NONE OF THE APPLICATIONS MET THE MINIMUM POINT REQUIREMENTS FOR FUNDING. HOWEVER, AFTER WORKING EXTENSIVELY WITH THE APPLICANTS, STAFF FEELS COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD WITH EACH OF THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS TO OFFER FINANCIAL SUPPORT AND FUNDING. THESE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT. OUR FIRST APPLICATION IS LOCATED ON LOT SEVEN THROUGH 15 ON SOUTHEAST OSCEOLA STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING GRANT ASSISTANCE FOR REPAVING AND RESTRIPING THE PARKING LOT. THE TOTAL ESTIMATED IMPROVEMENT COST WILL BE $24,000.20 $4,825. THE EXISTING PARKING LOT IS CRACKING IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS, AND THE STRIPING IS ALMOST NONEXISTENT. PROPOSED RESURFACING WILL INCLUDE LEVELING BASE ROCK, A [00:10:02] CONCRETE POUR RESTRIPING, AND NEW CURB STOPS. THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS QUALIFY FOR FUNDING UNDER OUR PROGRAM GUIDELINES. THE IMPROVEMENTS WILL HAVE A VISUAL, URBAN, STREET AND ECONOMIC IMPACT. THE PROPERTY IS IN THE OLD HISTORIC DOWNTOWN DISTRICT AS IT IS A HIGH PRIORITY AREA FOR THIS PROGRAM. THE PROPERTY IS ADJACENT TO OLD DOWNTOWN UNDERGROUNDING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND IS A CONTRIBUTING HISTORIC BUILDING TO THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN DISTRICT DEDICATION THAT THE CRA IS PURSUING. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. THE APPLICANT SHALL INSTALL LANDSCAPE SCREENING ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PARKING LOT EXIT AND THE APPLICANT SHALL INSTALL SCREENING TO COVER THE AIR CONDITIONING UNITS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING FACING THE COLORADO IN. THE SECOND APPLICATION IS LOCATED ON 400 SOUTHWEST SEVENTH STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING GRANT ASSISTANCE FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO ENHANCE THE CURB APPEAL AND MEET NEW CODE REQUIREMENTS BY ADDING A MONUMENT SIGN. THE TOTAL ESTIMATED IMPROVEMENT COSTS WILL BE $19,259. THERE'S CURRENTLY NO SIGNAGE IN FRONT OF THE BUILDIN. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING INSTALLATION OF A NEW CUSTOM DOUBLE SIDED STUCCO MONUMENT SIGN WITH ILLUMINATED LED LIGHT BOXES. THE SIGN FINISH MAKES THE MONUMENT IMPERVIOUS TO ROT, TERMITES AND MOISTURE FOR MAXIMUM DURABILITY. THE SIGN WILL BE CEMENTED INTO THE GROUND WITH GALVANIZED STEEL PIPES. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT IS ALSO MAKING SIGNIFICANT LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PROPERTY. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN CONSISTS OF NEW PALM TREES, SHRUBS, SOD, MULCH AND FLOWERS. THE IMPROVEMENTS BEGAN IN MARCH AND ARE EXPECTED TO BE COMPLETED BY THE END OF JUNE. THE TOTAL EXPECTED EXPECTED IMPROVEMENT COSTS FOR THE LANDSCAPING IS $51,045. THESE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS QUALIFY FOR FUNDING UNDER OUR PROGRAM GUIDELINES. THE IMPROVEMENTS WILL HAVE VISUAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT. THE PROPERTY IS IN A HIGH PRIORITY AREA FOR THIS PROGRAM, AND THE MONUMENT SIGN IS PART OF A LARGER LANDSCAPE PROJECT THAT WILL IMPROVE THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING AND SERVE AS A CATALYST FOR REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. THE NEXT APPLICATION IS LOCATED ON 420 SOUTHEAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR BOULEVARD. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING GRANT ASSISTANCE TO ENHANCE CURB APPEAL AND CREATE A TRANQUIL SANCTUARY AREA WITH ENTRYWAY RAILINGS, DECKING, LANDSCAPING, RESTRIPING AND A CARPORT. THE TOTAL ESTIMATED IMPROVEMENT COST WILL BE $22,300. THE EXISTING PROPERTY COULD USE A FACELIFT TO MAKE THE ENTRANCE MORE INVITING AND COMFORTABLE. THERE IS CURRENTLY NO SEATING FOR VISITORS OR SCREENING TO BLOCK THE EXPOSED UTILITIES AND TRASH CANS. PROPOSED LANDSCAPING WILL INCLUDE FLOWERBEDS TO THE ENTRANCE OF THE PROPERTY, SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY LOT AND FACING MLK BOULEVARD. FLOWERS AND GREENERY INCLUDE EVERGREEN SHRUBS, PURPLE IMPATIENCE, PURPLE SALVIA AND HEDGES WILL ALSO BE ADDED TO SCREEN THE EXPOSED TRASH CANS AND AIR CONDITIONING UNITS WITH ADDITIONAL SHRUBS, FLOWERS AND LANDSCAPING WILL ENCLOSE A NEW RAISED DECK WITH BENCHES FOR GUESTS TO HAVE A TRANQUIL SPACE TO RELAX OUTSIDE. THE CURRENT STEPS TO THE BUILDING WILL HAVE RAILINGS ADDED TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF VISITORS. A CARPORT WILL BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY TO COVER THE MORTUARY'S BUSINESS VEHICLES FROM THE FLORIDA SUN. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY IS ADJACENT TO THE MLK COMPLETE STREET PROJECT. COMPLETE STREET PROJECT. THIS PROJECT INCLUDES ELEMENTS THAT WILL CREATE SHARED USE PATHS FOR BOTH PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS. ON STREET PARKING, BIKE RACKS, HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS, AND MID-BLOCK PLAZA AREA. STREET LIGHTS AND LANDSCAPING. I'VE INCLUDED A SNIPPET OF THE IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED ON MLK IN FRONT OF THE ACTUAL PROPERTY. THESE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS QUALIFY FOR FUNDING UNDER OUR PROGRAM GUIDELINES. THE IMPROVEMENTS WILL HAVE A VISUAL, URBAN, STREET, AND ECONOMIC IMPACT. THE PROPERTY IS IN A HIGH TRAFFIC, VISIBLE AREA AND A HIGH PRIORITY AREA FOR THIS PROGRAM. AS MENTIONED, THE PROPERTY IS ADJACENT TO THE MLK COMPLETE STREET PROJECT AND WILL SERVE AS A CATALYST FOR REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY ON THE CORRIDOR. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THEN THE LAST APPLICATION IS LOCATED ON 11295 SOUTHEAST DIXIE CUTOFF ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING GRANT ASSISTANCE TO IMPROVE CURB APPEAL AND FUNCTIONALITY OF THE PROPERTY. TO INSTALL A NEW FENCE. THE TOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST IS $14,500. THE EXISTING FENCE IS 360FT, AND MOST OF THE FENCE BORDERS SOUTHEAST. DIXIE CUT OFF ROAD. THE FENCE IS IN DISREPAIR AND IMPROVEMENTS ARE NEEDED. THE PROPOSED FENCE WILL BE INCLUDED WILL INCLUDE A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE WITH NEW BOARD ON BOARD AND GALVANIZED POSTS EIGHT FEET ON THE CENTER, WHICH WILL ENSURE A MORE STABLE AND LONGER LASTING FENCE. THE IMPROVEMENTS WILL HAVE A VISUAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT, AND THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE GRANTS PRIORITY AREA, WITH A [00:15:05] FENCE ABUTTING ALONG DIXIE HIGHWAY CUTOFF. THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY COMPLETED LANDSCAPING IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE SIDEWALKS, SO NO SHADE TREES WOULD BE RECOMMENDED ALONG THIS ROAD. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ALL ELIGIBLE APPLICATIONS. STAFF IS SEEKING A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER TEN. DASH 2024. CRA AUTHORIZING THE AWARD AMOUNT FOR EACH APPLICATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. GRANT CYCLE. ARE WE LOOKING FOR A FOR A MOTION ON EACH PROPERTY SEPARATELY OR ON THE TOTAL? THAT'S UP TO YOUR DISCRETION. I'D MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. SECOND, ON ALL OF THEM. ON ALL OF THEM? YEAH. THANK YOU. NOW, CAN WE DO DISCUSSION FOR JUST A MINUTE? YEAH. WE WILL. I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT I'M ONE THAT BEATS A DEAD HORSE. SO HERE I GO AGAIN. BUT BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A HARD TIME FINDING PEOPLE THAT QUALIFIED FOR THIS, WHICH TELLS ME THAT IT'S NOT REALLY HITTING THE MARK IN SOME MANNER. AND I THINK THE PROBLEM THAT I SEE WITH THE PROGRAM IS THAT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE AWARD PER PROJECT IS TOO LITTLE FOR SOMEBODY TO REALLY MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE, UNLESS THEY'RE ALREADY DOING THE PROJECT AND WE'RE JUST GIVING THEM SOME EXTRA MONEY. AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT MAKES SENSE TO GIVE THEM EXTRA MONEY. IF THEY WERE GOING TO DO THE PROJECT AND CAN AFFORD IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS PROGRAM TO SEE IF THESE GRANTS SHOULD BE BIGGER, MORE FOCUSED ON WHAT THE STAFF CAN GO OUT AND FIND, POTENTIALLY GO OUT AND FIND LOCATIONS WHERE WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. AND THEN WE CAN, BECAUSE THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF CRA IS TO IS TO IMPROVE THE BLIGHT, WHATEVER, WHETHER IT'S ECONOMIC OR VISUAL AND INCREASE WHAT, WHAT WE'RE DOING THERE. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THE MONEY, I WOULD RATHER SEE US FIND PROPERTIES ALREADY AND GO OUT AND APPROACH AND SAY, LOOK, WOULD YOU WANT TO WOULD YOU BE INTERESTED IN THE GRANT AND THEN SEE HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING TO MATCH ON IT? BUT GIVING THEM ENOUGH DOLLARS THAT IT MAKES SENSE. AND IT'S NOT JUST THROWING MONEY AGAINST A PROJECT THAT'S ALREADY THEY WERE ALREADY GOING TO DO. I'VE ALWAYS BEEN BEEN FOR RAISING IT. AND WHEN I WENT OVER ALL THIS, I THOUGHT, WELL, MAYBE WE COULD JUST DO IT WOULD BE 30,000. THEY, WE RAISED IT TO 15. THEY, THEY PUT 15 IN IT AND THEY CAN WE CAN GIVE UP TO 15 IF YOU WANT TO START SMALLER. BUT I DO AGREE IN ANY OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? OH, I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THAT AARON HAWKINS IS HERE. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MADAM MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO KNOW HOW THE DECISION IS. I DON'T KNOW HOW THE DECISION IS MADE. SO YOU SAY YOU HAVE RECEIVED FOUR APPLICATIONS? ACTUALLY, I THINK YOU SAID YOU RECEIVED MORE THAN THAT, BUT ONLY FOUR QUALIFIED. NINE. RIGHT? RIGHT SO NONE OF THE APPLICATIONS MEET THE MINIMUM POINT REQUIREMENTS. SO ARE THERE FOUR ELEMENTS THAT ARE EACH EQUALLY WEIGHTED. HOW HOW DID YOU HOW WAS THE DECISION MADE. SURE. SO IN THIS SO THERE IS A METRICS THAT WE GO GO BY WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION PACKET. AND THAT'S HOW WE DETERMINE THE SCORES. BUT IN THIS CASE THERE WERE INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS. SO MEANING TWO OF THE APPLICANTS DIDN'T HAVE THEIR UPDATED BUSINESS TAX LICENSE. SO I COULDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. OTHER ONE HAD, DID NOT WANT TO MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T GET DRAINAGE QUOTES. SO THEY PULLED THEIR APPLICATION, ANOTHER ONE WAS FOR AWNINGS, WHICH WERE GOING TO BE ADDRESSING THAT IN THE COMING MONTHS WITH, REDOING THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT GUIDELINES. AND ANOTHER ONE WAS NOT GIVING ME QUOTES. SO THAT'S WHY IT GOES DOWN TO FOUR THAT I THINK WE'RE STILL ELIGIBLE, EVEN THOUGH THEY DIDN'T MEET GENERALLY ACCEPTED STANDARD METRICS IN CRAS FOR THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS OR WE HAVE THE CRB COME UP WITH THAT, OR YES, IT WAS BROUGHT BEFORE THE CRB AND CRA. I BELIEVE THROUGHOUT THE YEARS BEFORE MY TIME, BUT WE'VE BEEN USING THOSE METRICS FOR YEARS NOW. WE'VE CHANGED THE METRICS ALMOST EVERY YEAR FOR THE PAST DECADE. I BELIEVE. DID YOU SAY THAT THE AWNINGS WERE ARE THE AWNINGS ARE CURRENTLY NOT ALLOWED? I DON'T KNOW, THOSE ARE I DON'T REMEMBER. SO WITH THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION THAT CAME FORWARD, THEY WERE NOT ALLOWED BECAUSE THEY WERE JUST RECOVERING EXISTING AWNINGS. AND RIGHT NOW WITH THE GUIDELINES, [00:20:03] ONLY NEW AWNINGS ARE COVERED UNDER. BUT THAT IS GOING TO BE AMENDED. WE'RE IN THE PROCESS THAT'S COMING FORWARD SOON TOO. BUT AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THIS IS A GOOD USE OF MONEY. AND I'VE NEVER THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD USE OF MONEY. BUT SO HOW MUCH DO WE THROW AT THE WALL FOR A FEW BUSINESSES INSTEAD OF TRYING TO TAKE THAT MONEY AND USE IT FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE CRA? I MEAN, I THINK MARK IS RIGHT. THEY WOULD PROBABLY DO THIS WORK WITHOUT THIS MONEY, AND THIS IS NICE THAT WE'RE GIVING IT TO THEM. BUT IS THIS WHAT WE WANT TO DO OR DO WE WANT TO USE THE MONEY FOR SOMETHING ELSE? WE'RE GOING TO REDO IT AND KEEP GIVING MORE MONEY. WELL, IT'S ONLY GOING TO BE SEVERAL THE SAME, NOT THE SAME SEVERAL BUSINESSES, BUT 4 OR 5 BUSINESSES THAT ARE GOING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. SO IS IT BETTER FOR US TO USE THAT MONEY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE CRA? THERE WAS ANOTHER QUESTION I HAD TOO, THAT I THOUGHT INSTEAD OF FIVE 30,000 THAT WE SHOULD DO THREE INSTEAD OF FIVE AND KEEP IT AT THAT, BUT BE A LITTLE MORE MONEY. THREE YOU MEAN THREE BUSINESSES? YES. SO SO WE DECIDE THREE BUSINESSES OUT OF I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY ARE IN HERE. RIGHT. 200. THREE ARE THE ONES THAT WE'RE GOING TO SUBSIDIZE. THEY WIN THE LOTTERY. AND EVERYBODY ELSE WHO PAYS INTO THE CRA GETS NOTHING. I RATHER USE MONEY FOR EVERY. WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE IMPROVEMENTS, YOU WERE GOING TO DO, 30,000 IMPROVEMENT COSTS TO GET UP TO 15. NONE OF THE APPLICANTS SPENT 30,000. BUT NONE OF THESE PROJECTS WOULD HAVE REACHED THAT QUESTION. MADAM MAYOR, CAN I JUST ASK AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION? MR. MISTER POLICY QUESTION. HOW MANY? SO HOW MANY BUSINESSES HAVE BENEFITED FROM THIS PROJECT OVER THE COURSE OF ITS EXISTENC? IS WHAT I WANTED TO ASK 50 NOT INCLUDING THIS YEAR. AND HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU HAD TO ESTIMATE WE HAD REPEATING BUSINESSES? MAYBE 4 OR 5 OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. SO REALLY IT'S LIKE 45 BUSINESSES RATHER THAN 3 OR 4, BECAUSE YOU GOT TO THINK ABOUT IT LONG TERM. IT'S OVER THE COURSE OF THE TIME THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE IMPROVING THE CRA, BUILDING THE WEALTH OF THE AREA AND, YOU KNOW, HELPING THESE PEOPLE DO THAT. SO IT'S NOT REALLY THREE BUSINESSES A YEAR, BUT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT'S BEEN, WHAT, TEN YEARS AROUND THAT. SO IT'S 45 BUSINESSES OVER TEN YEARS. IT'S BEEN GOING ON SINCE 2016. OKAY. I THINK ONE OF THE PROBLEMS IS ARE WE FOCUSED ON BUSINESSES OR ARE WE FOCUSED ON LANDLORDS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, A LARGE PORTION OF WHERE THIS MONEY IS REALLY GOING IS TO LANDLORDS, NOT NECESSARILY TO BUSINESSES. SO THAT'S ANOTHER FACTOR. SO IF I'M A BUSINESS DOWNTOWN AND I WANT TO PUT A NEW AWNING IN, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY I GOT TO GO TALK TO MY LANDLORD AND SEE IF MY LANDLORD IS GOING TO PUT THAT IN. AND SO ANYWAY, I JUST THINK THIS THE STAFF HAS A BETTER HANDLE ON WHAT KIND OF IMPROVEMENTS WE CAN MAKE THAT WILL ACTUALLY ADD VALUE AND GET US MORE BANG FOR THE BUCK. YOU KNOW, IF I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SPENDING A DOLLAR TO GET A DOLLAR BACK, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT'S JUST A CHANGE. BUT IF WE'RE SPENDING A DOLLAR AND WE'RE GETTING $10 BACK, I'M OKAY WITH THAT. AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE I THINK THIS NEEDS SOME TWEAKING. I THINK THAT THAT THE STAFF NEEDS TO HELP IDENTIFY BUSINESSES WHERE IMPROVEMENTS TO THEIR PROPERTY, WHETHER IT'S THE BUSINESS OWNER OR THE LANDLORD, IS GOING TO MAKE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE DOLLARS WE GET TO KEEP. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. MR. BANAL, TO COME UP. AND HE DOES HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE. YES. YEAH. SO WE DO USE OUR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT, TO HELP US PROMOTE THE PROGRAM. AND THEY DO GO OUT AND IDENTIFY BUSINESSES THAT COULD BENEFIT FROM THE PROGRAM. BUT THOSE BUSINESSES MIGHT NOT BE READY TO INVEST IN THEIR PROPERTY. SO THEY'RE NOT COMING FORWARD. IT'S THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN SAVING MONEY THAT THEY WANT TO MAKE THE INVESTMENT IN THEIR PROPERTY ARE COMING TO US FROM FOR A MATCH. AND EVEN IF THEY'RE ASKING US FOR $5,000 AND THEY'RE PROVIDING $5,000, THEY COULD USE THEIR OWN FUNDING, THEIR OWN FINANCIALS TO DO OTHER IMPROVEMENTS. SO IT'S NOT JUST LIKE, OKAY, THIS IS IT. I'M JUST DOING MINIMUM IMPROVEMENTS. THE MATCH HELPS THEM TO DO ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THEIR PROPERTY. SO I THINK IT'S A BENEFIT TO PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE CRA. THANK YOU. I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. YES, SORRY. DO [00:25:06] YOU WANT TO GO FIRST? YEAH, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO FOLLOW UP. SO TOM, WHEN YOU INDICATED THAT THE METRICS ARE CHANGING ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS WELL, WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO ACHIEVE BY CHANGING THOSE METRICS? DOES IT GO TO MARK'S POINT TO THE CRA BOARD PAGE METRICS. BUT ON THE CRB BOARD, STAFF LOOKS AND SAYS PERHAPS WE NEED TO CHANGE THIS AND ALLOW THIS, NOT ALLOW THAT, BECAUSE AS YOU JUST SAID, THEY HAVE THE EXPERTISE. THAT'S FINE. I YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT THIS AS TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. THE CRA BOARD AND THE COMMISSION SAYS SPEND THE MONEY, WE HAVE TO SPEND THE MONEY. ACCORDING TO THE RULES. IF WE HAVE A BIGGER DISCUSSION AND A BIGGER DISCUSSION SAYS SHOULD WE BE SPENDING THIS MONEY ON THIS? THAT'S A DIFFERENT THAT'S DIFFERENT. AND SO I'M ALWAYS GOING TO I'M ALWAYS GOING TO IF STAFF MAKES THE RECOMMENDATION, I DON'T THINK THIS IS WORKING. LET'S DO THIS INSTEAD. I'M GOING TO SAY YES BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THE MONEY. I'M ASKING NOW WHETHER WE SHOULD. AND IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT CHANGED CRB A FEW YEARS AGO DECIDED THAT TANK IMPACT WINDOWS DIDN'T ENHANCE THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE IF YOU WERE DRIVING BY IN A CAR, THERE WOULD BE NO WAY TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT WAS AN IMPACT WINDOW OR NOT. IF YOU'RE TRYING TO BEAUTIFY THE AREA, THE CRA PLAN THE TYPE OF GLASS DIDN'T REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE. AS FAR AS BEAUTIFICATION, IT WAS JUST ENHANCING THE INDIVIDUALS BUSINESS. NOW, THERE WAS PRESENTATIONS DURING THAT SAME DISCUSSION THAT WILL ACTUALLY IT DOES BEAUTIFY OVER TIME. IT'S A BETTER PRODUCT, BETTER, ETC. DOESN'T WEAR AS MUCH, BUT THE BOARD AT THE TIME REACHED CONSENSUS THAT THEY DID NOT WANT TO SUPPORT A HURRICANE INDUSTRY. AND THEN ANOTHER TIME THERE WERE SEVERAL PEOPLE BECAUSE THE CODE REQUIRES DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES TO HAVE THE AWNINGS OUT THE SIDEWALK TO PROVIDE SHADE. AND THEN THE BOARD SAID, WE HAVE IT. THEY ALREADY HAVE A FRAMED AWNING. THEREFORE, IF THEY'RE JUST REPLACING THE CANVAS, THAT'S A REPAIR OF AN AWNING. AND THAT'S NOT A NEW AWNING. SO THEY VOTED TO MAKE IT. SO ANYBODY THAT ALREADY HAD AN AWNING COULDN'T GET IT REPLACED. THAT WAS THE MODIFICATION ALONG THAT THEORY. THAT WOULD MEAN THAT, LIKE THE GUY THAT ALREADY HAS THE FENCE WOULDN'T QUALIFY FOR A NEW FENCE BECAUSE HE ALREADY HAD A FENCE. IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF WHAT THE WHAT IS THE SUIT IS. YOU'RE LIKE, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES YOU JUST FEEL LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF PARTICULAR THING. AND AS A RESULT, THE BOARDS REACTED POORLY. YOU LOOK AT THE CRA PLAN ITSELF, THE TENSION OF CRA IS IT'S A PROMISE FROM THE COMMUNITY TO THE OUTWARD, WHETHER IT'S LANDLORDS OR TENANTS, DOESN'T MATTER. BUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO SAY, LOOK, WE'RE GOING TO DRAW A CIRCLE AROUND THIS AREA. WE'RE GOING TO DESIGNATE THIS AS A FOCUSED REINVESTMENT AREA. CITY IS GOING TO REWARD YOU FOR COMMITTING TO PUTTING YOUR BUSINESS THERE OR BUYING YOUR PROPERTY THERE. AND WE'RE GOING TO REINVEST ALL THE MONEY. AND THAT'S WHY THE GENERAL FUND REGULATIONS TO CREATE THE TIFF CAN ONLY BE SPENT CRA FULFILL THATTH MR. CAE EXTENT THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, YOU KNOW, THE PROGRAM DOESN'T NECESSARILY CHANGE THE WORLD BY ANY MEANS. AS FAR AS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY SPENT. BUT THE CONVERSE OF THAT COULD BE SAID AS WELL. IT DOESN'T BANKRUPT THE CRA EITHER, AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S SPENT IS A TOKEN OF THE APPRECIATION OF THE CRA TO SAY, LISTEN, I DON'T CARE HOW BIG OR HOW SMALL YOU ARE, YOU'RE IN THE CRA. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE BIG AND SMALL. AND INSTEAD OF LIKE THE RITA PROGRAM, WHERE YOU MIGHT GO TAX CREDITS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THIS IS JUST A SMALLER ONE, THE SMALLER GUY TO BE ABLE TO SAY, LOOK, WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND HELP YOU OUT. BUT AGAIN, IT'S ALL POLICY AND THE BOARD CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT. THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT I'VE SEEN SINCE 2016, AS IT RELATES TO THIS PROGRAM, IS FUNDAMENTALLY THE MATH. AND THAT IS, THERE ARE CERTAIN TIMES THAT CERTAIN PEOPLE KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. THEY WAIT TO DO IT UNTIL NOW. THEY GET THAT THEY DO IT, AND THEY WERE GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY. THERE'S PROBABLY A LIST THAT THE BOARD COULD GO AROUND AND IDENTIFY PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CRA THAT YOU SAY, YOU KNOW, THIS, THESE HOUSES ARE BLIGHTED OR THIS AREA IS BLIGHTED. WE COULD IDENTIFY THESE AND SAY, THERE'S NO MATCH. WE'RE GOING TO [00:30:04] GIVE YOU $5000 OR $7500 TO FIX THAT BLIGHT. IF THAT WAS THE INTENTION OF THE BOARD. I WANTED TO SAY, ALSO THAT SOME OF THE LANDLORDS, THEY'RE NEVER GOING TO FIX STUFF. I JUST DON'T WANT TO. SO SOME OF THE BLIGHTED BUILDINGS, THE LANDLORDS, I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD EVER, EVER FIX UP. SO MY GOAL IS TO WITH WITH A LITTLE MORE MONEY IS TO GIVE THEM THAT INCENTIVE TO FIX THE PLACE UP. GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER PENNY. I MEAN, YEAH, IT DOESN'T MATTER, AARON WAS REALLY FIRST. OH, GO AHEAD, AARON, I JUST HAD ANOTHER QUESTION ABOUT. I KNOW IT'S ABOUT BEAUTIFICATION, AND THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT, BUT ARE THERE ANY FIGURES? DOES THE CRA HAVE ANY FIGURES ON HOW MUCH OVER THE SPAN OF THIS PROGRAM'S EXISTENCE HAS COME BACK IN THE TIFF, LIKE HOW MUCH OF THE INVESTMENT HAS ACCOUNTED FOR THE INCREASE IN PROPERTY VALUES? SO I ACTUALLY DID DO SOME CALCULATIONS BASED ON THE BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION AT THE LAST MEETING. AND BY USING THE DATA PROVIDED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER, WE CAN ANALYZE THE ASSESSED VALUES PRIOR THE YEAR PRIOR TO THE IMPROVEMENTS, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022, THOSE WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE BERT PROGRAM HAD AN INCREASE OF 28.8% IN THEIR PROPERTY VALUES. SO EVERY YEAR IF YOU GO THROUGH AND BREAK IT DOWN, THERE IS AN INCREASE. THERE'S NEVER A DECLINE, SINCE 2016, I JUST PULLED THAT PARTICULAR YEAR BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF APPLICATIONS. AS AN EXAMPLE, BUT I HAVE AN ENTIRE SPREADSHEET I CAN SHARE WITH YOU. YEAH, THAT'D BE GREAT, IS THERE A BREAKDOWN OF, LIKE, DOLLAR SPENT PER DOLLAR RETURN THROUGH TAXES, WE ONLY HAVE WHAT THE PROJECT COST WOULD BE AND THEN WHAT OUR CONTRIBUTION WOULD BE LIKE THAT THAT TOTAL, AND THEN THE ASSESSED VALUES. BUT I DON'T HAVE LIKE A DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. JUST WONDERING. THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBER MARTIN, I'M JUST GOING TO MAKE ONE QUICK COMMENT. YOU KNOW, THE OTHER THING I WOULD ASK US TO THINK ABOUT? YES, THIS IS A QUICK ONE THAT'S TO THINK ABOUT IS DO WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM THE MONEY? COULDN'T WE LOAN THEM THE MONEY? I MEAN, WHY COULDN'T WE LOAN THEM THE MONEY AND THEN EARN A RETURN ON IT? COULD BE SMALL. 3, 2% INTEREST OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND LOAN IT TO THEM AND THEN, AND, YOU KNOW, THEN THEY COULD DO BIGGER PROJECTS AND WE WOULD HAVE BECAUSE PART OF THE PROBLEM HERE IS IN DOWNTOWN IS FINANCING. YOU'RE TALKING MIXED USE BUILDINGS. YOU'RE TALKING OLDER BUILDINGS. THERE'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY OUT THERE. IT'S EITHER IT'S EITHER DIRECT INVESTOR MONEY OR IT'S SBA. YOU KNOW. SO AND A LOT OF THIS STUFF DOESN'T QUALIFY IF IT'S MIXED USE, SBA DOESN'T QUALIFY. SO PART OF IT IS PEOPLE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THEY CAN REFINANCE TO GET THE MONEY TO BE ABLE TO DO SOME OF THIS STUFF. IF WE COULD PROVIDE INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, A BLANKET GRANT, IF WE PROVIDED UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT AS A LOAN, I THINK WE COULD ACCOMPLISH MORE. I DON'T THINK $10,000 A LOT OF MONEY, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF I'D WANT TO, MYSELF DO THAT BECAUSE I WOULD BE AFRAID I WOULDN'T GET PAID AND I'D END UP WITH SOME MESS ON MY HANDS. BUT DO YOU WANT US? YES, WE WOULD. WE WOULD NEED STAFF TO MANAGE, MANAGE THE BOND AND LOANING AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT I DO WANT TO MENTION THAT WE ARE BREAKING DOWN THE PROGRAM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT MORE, ELIGIBLE FOR, FOR APPLICANTS AND ALSO HAVE A LANDSCAPE PROGRAM THAT THEY'RE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE $5,000. SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT UP TO $15,000 THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN GET, SO IT KIND OF GOES WITH WHAT MAYOR IS SAYING UP TO $15,000 TO BENEFIT PROPERTY. GREAT, I LIKE THAT. OKAY. WELL, IF THERE'S NOT ANY MORE. YES, SIR. I WANT TO MAKE. WELL I JUST THINK FIRST, I DON'T KNOW IF MR. MORTEL IS A SOCIALIST OR COMMUNIST OR FREE MARKET HERE, BECAUSE HE REALLY CAN TAKE ANY POSITION. AND I GUESS THAT'S HIS TRAINING AS AN ATTORNEY. I DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE A POSITION. I WAS JUST POINTING OUT THAT HISTORICALLY, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'VE HEARD THE BOARD SAY. AND I ALWAYS HAVE A LITTLE LEVITY IN MY MEETINGS. BUT, YOU KNOW, I REALLY I, I BELIEVE WE COULD DO MORE FOR THIS BY TAKING THIS MONEY AND TAKING A SECTION OF THE CRA AND SAY, LET'S SPEND IT RIGHT HERE, ESPECIALLY FOR COMMERCIAL IN THE COMMERCIAL AREA. LET'S SPEND IT HERE. SO THAT WHATEVER WE COULD DO IT, WE COULD DO BREAK THE CRA INTO 6 OR 7 DIFFERENT AREAS AND SAY, WE'RE GOING TO SPEND 75,000 OR $100,000. ANOTHER PERSON'S PROPERTY ON THE CRA. NO, IN THE CRA FOR OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. INFRASTRUCTURE IS REALLY SOMETHING THAT BRINGS BACK [00:35:06] VALUE. OR SECONDLY, I WOULDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM IF WE DID A IF WE DID A SMALL ARENA PROGRAM FOR THESE INDIVIDUAL AREAS, BECAUSE IF WE'RE IF WE IF SUPPOSEDLY THESE BUSINESSES, THE 45 BUSINESSES THAT HAVE BEEN TOUCHED HAVE A 28, I THINK YOU SAID INCREASE, WHY NOT TOUCH A LOT MORE BUSINESSES BY SPENDING THE MONEY WITHIN A SPECIFIED AREA AND INCREASING IT BECAUSE OF COURSE, $50,000. BUT IF WE COULD DO 150, 200, $250,000, GIVEN WHAT WE CAN GIVE THEM, EITHER A READER READ A TAX BREA, OR WE COULD JUST DO THE INFRASTRUCTURE OURSELVES. SO I'M JUST FOR TRYING TO HELP EVERYONE, NOT JUST THOSE THAT HAVE HAPPENED ON THE PROGRAM. SO, MADAM MAYOR, YEAH, THIS IS A VERY WIDE RANGING DISCUSSION. AND IN THE CONTEXT OF THE CURRENT MOTION FOR APPROVAL. AND SECOND, I'M NOT SURE IT'S APPROPRIATE DISCUSSION. YEAH ANYTIME WE'RE GIVING MONEY TO AN INDIVIDUAL, BE IT A BUSINESS OR AN INDIVIDUAL, I AM MORE THAN ENTHUSIASTIC IN SUPPORT THAT THE CITY SHOULD BE EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THOSE GIFTS OR THOSE GRANTS AS YOU KNOW, WHEN WE DID MAIN STREET, I WAS I FELT THAT WE SHOULD BE FORCED TO REVIEW THAT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. SO I THINK CHAIR PENNY'S SUGGESTION IS A VERY GOOD ONE TO GO BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT THIS PROGRAM. WHAT WERE OUR GOALS? YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH PANEL? HAVE WE ACHIEVED THEM? IS THERE A BETTER WAY TO DO IT. AND A COMPREHENSIVE AND DETAILED DISCUSSION ON THOSE ISSUES. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOUR GROUP IS, WELL INFORMED. CHAIR AARON SETON CERTAINLY SEEMS TO BE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT OPPORTUNITIES THERE ARE. AND I WOULD WELCOME A, SUGGESTION FROM THE CRB TO THE COMMISSION REGARDING THIS PROGRAM, BOTH IN IT HAS IT ACCOMPLISHED WHAT WE WANTED IT TO AND WHAT IMPROVEMENTS CAN BE MADE? SO I THINK YOU WE ARE COMING TOWARD THE BOARD WITH THE WITH THE BURP AMENDMENT, THE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM. SO THAT WOULD BE A GOOD POINT. GOOD TIME TO DISCUSS. AND WE HAVEN'T BEEN. AND WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER YEAR CORRECT IN BETWEEN THE NEXT TIME. RIGHT. SO THE NEXT FISCAL CYCLE IS OCTOBER 1ST. GREAT. OKAY. WELL I DO HAVE A THERE'S NO MORE COMMENTS. I'LL GET, COMMISSIONER, BUT WE DO HAVE, APPROVAL BY, MARK VECCHIO, COMMISSIONER RICH, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD SPEAK ON THIS? WOULD LIKE TO. I SEE NONE. WE'LL HAVE A VOTE, A ROLL CALL. BOARD MEMBER. COLLINS. YES. BOARD MEMBER MCDONALD. YES. BOARD MEMBER. BROOKVILLE. YES. BOARD MEMBER. PENNY. YES. VICE CHAIR. RICH. YES. CHAIR. BRUNER. YES I JUST WANT TO COMMENT THAT WE ONLY HAVE ONE OTHER CRB MEMBER HERE, BUT I THINK HE ADDED QUITE A BIT TO THE DISCUSSION ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. SO THAT'S WHY IT MADE VERY USEFUL. CAN YOU CONTINUE TO HAVE CRB MEMBERS SIDE MARK? HOWEVER, THEY. TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE? I'M GOING TO SAY THAT OKAY, ALL RIGHT. WE'RE [4. HEIRS’ PROPERTY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (RC): RESOLUTION No. 09-2024 CRA; A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, APPROVING IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTERING OF THE HEIRS’ PROPERTY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.] GOING TO MOVE ON TO, THE HEIRS PROPERTY ASSISTANT PROGRAM. I'LL LET MR. BAGGOTT READ THIS. ALL RIGHT. ATTORNEY RESOLUTION NUMBER NINE, DASH 2024 CRA A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, APPROVING IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTERING OF THE HEIRS PROPERTY ASSISTANT PROGRAM FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. THANK YOU. PANEL GHANIZADA CRA DIRECTOR. FOR THE RECORD, SO THE CRA IS PROPOSING A NEW HEIRS PROPERTY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM TO PROVIDE LEGAL ASSISTANCE TO CLEAR TITLE AND PROPERTIES AND HELP FAMILIES STAY IN THEIR HOME. SO WHAT IS HEIRS PROPERTY, IT REFERS TO PROPERTIES, THAT'S PASSED ON BY INHERITANCE FROM THE OWNER, NEXT TO KIN OR, RELATIVES WITHOUT CLEAR TITLES, THIS OFTEN HAPPENS WHEN THE OWNER DIES WITHOUT LEAVING A WILL OR ESTATE PLANNING, AND IT'S TRANSFERRED TO MULTIPLE FAMILY MEMBERS, SOMETIMES THE PROPERTY OWNER CHOOSES TO LEAVE THE LAND TO MULTIPLE FAMILY OWNERS OF MEMBERS. BUT THE PROPERTY HAS NOT COMPLETED THE FORMAL [00:40:02] TRANSFER OF THE TITLE. AND SO THIS CAUSES TO HAVE A CLOUDY TITLE, MEANING THAT THEY CAN'T SHOW THE PROOF OF WHO THE OWNER IS. AND THERE ARE MULTIPLE OWNERS, SO THEY'RE FRACTION. THE PROPERTY IS OWNED BY FRACTION OF FAMILY MEMBERS. SO WHY IS THIS REQUIRED, IT'S GOOD TO HAVE CLEAR TITLES FOR BANK LOANS. FEDERAL GRANTS SUCH AS THE CDBG GRANTS, FEMA, DISASTER ASSISTANCE, HOME INSURANCE, OBTAINING ANY BUILDING PERMITS, FILING FOR HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, WHICH CAN HAVE, PROPERTY TAX SAVINGS ON PROPERTIES. SO WHY IS HEIRS PROPERTY A PROBLEM, WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN YOU HAVE HEIR PROPERTY, WE HAVE INCREASED DILAPIDATED HOMES, VACANCY DUE TO ABSENTEE OWNERS UNABLE TO OBTAIN LOAN TO UPKEEP THE PROPERTY, LACK OF HOME INSURANCE, SO YOU CAN'T COVER REPAIRS OR REBUILD HOMES IN THE EVENT THAT THERE'S A HURRICANE OR FIRE? CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE HOME. DIFFICULT TO RECEIVE AID FROM GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS, THEY'RE VULNERABLE TO LOSING THEIR PROPERTY BECAUSE OF UNPAID PROPERTY TAXES. AND THEN IT OFTEN AFFECTS THE COMMUNITY VITALITY. SO WHY DO WE WANT TO ADDRESS THIS? WE WANT TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE BECAUSE WE WANT TO KEEP, THE FAMILY IN THE WE WANT TO KEEP THE HOME IN THE FAMILY AND BUILDING GENERATIONAL WEALTH, WE WANT TO KEEP THE PEOPLE IN THEIR HOMES PRESERVING EXISTING HOUSING STOCK, STOCK, CAN HELP TO UPKEEP THE PROPERTY AND LIVING CONDITIONS. INCREASE EQUITY, COMMUNITY PRESERVATION AND REVITALIZE, LOCAL TAX BASE. SO HERE'S SOME DATA. I WAS ABLE TO GET SOME DATA FROM COUNTIES PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE ON HEIRS PROPERTY, THIS MAP SHOWS THAT WE HAVE ABOUT 31 PARCELS THAT ARE HEIRS PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CRA, I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IN MY PRESENTATION TO THE EAST STEWART HISTORIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND CRB, I DID REPORT THAT THERE WERE 46 PROPERTIES, THAT WERE AIR PROPERTIES. BUT AFTER REVIEWING THE LIST, I DID FIND THAT THERE WERE SOME ERRORS BECAUSE JUST BECAUSE THEY HAD THE WORD ESTATE IN THE NAME, IT WAS ACTUALLY PICKED UP IN THE SEARCH QUERY. SO, I DID CONFIRM WITH THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE AND REMOVED SOME OF THOSE, PARCELS THAT WERE PICKED UP BY ACCIDENT. SO IN REALITY, THERE ARE 31 PARCELS WITHIN THE CRA WITH WITH THE HEIRS, LISTING 31 DOWN FROM 46. THERE WERE 46 BECAUSE, THEY HAD THE WORD ESTATE IN IT. SO WHEN WE DID THE QUERY, IT JUST PICKED IT UP. BUT IT COULD BE JUST A REAL ESTATE LLC OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO WE REMOVED THOSE OUT OF THE LIST. SO, THERE ARE ACTUALLY 31 PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CRA. AND OF THOSE, 15 ARE WITHIN THE EAST STEWART NEIGHBORHOOD, THIS NUMBER DID NOT CHANGE FROM WHAT I PRESENTED TO THE BOARD, EARLIER THIS MONTH, SO THE CRA IS PROPOSING A NEW HEIRS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM TO ASSIST HOMEOWNERS TO GAIN CLEAR TITLE, ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES HAVE TO BE WITHIN THE CRA. IT IS A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM. SO THE INTERESTED HOMEOWNERS WILL HAVE TO APPLY FOR THE PROGRAM IN THE CRA, THE ELIGIBLE APPLICANT MAY BE QUALIFIED TO RECEIVE LEGAL ASSISTANCE AT NO COST TO THEM, AND THE PROGRAM IS INTENDED TO ASSIST HOMEOWNERS THROUGH THE PROBATE PROCESS SO THAT WE CAN CLEAR THE PROPERTY. CLEAR THE TITLE AND TRANSFER THE PROPERTY TO THE RIGHTFUL OWNER. UNCONTESTED MATTERS MEANING, THAT IF THERE IS SOME DISPUTE BY BY FAMILY MEMBERS WHO THE RIGHTFUL OWNER IS, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET INTO THAT, WE JUST WANT TO HELP. CLEAR, CLEAR THE TITLE THROUGH PROBATE PROCESS, THE PROGRAM, LIKE I SAID, DOES NOT COVER COSTS TO LITIGATE, RIGHTFUL OWNERSHIP, THE COST CAN VARY DEPENDING ON THE CASE, BUT, BASED ON SOME OF THE RESEARCH I DID, IT'S ESTIMATED TO BE APPROXIMATELY 1500 TO $3000 PER CASE. UPON APPROVAL OF THE PROGRAM, THE CRA WILL OBTAIN PROPOSALS FROM QUALIFIED PROVIDERS TO, FOR PROBATE LEGAL SERVICES TO ASSIST THESE PROPERTY OWNERS GAIN CLEAR TITLE, THIS WILL MANAGE THE PROGRAM, WILL REVIEW AND ACCEPT APPLICATIONS. ONCE APPROVED, THE CR WILL CONTRACT, CONTACT THE ATTORNEY OR LEGAL FIRM THAT'S BEEN SELECTED THROUGH THE RFP PROCESS AND BEGAN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT. THIS PROGRAM IS, YOU WILL SEE IT IN THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025. BUDGETING $25,000 FOR THIS PROGRAM. AND YOU WILL SEE THAT IN THE BUDGET HEARING IN SEPTEMBER. SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE CRB IS THAT THE PROGRAM SHOULD BE LIMITED TO PROPERTIES WITH THE ASSESSED VALUE OF $300,000 OR LESS AND MAXIMUM OF $3,000 ASSISTANCE PER PROPERTY. SO I [00:45:04] LOOKED AT THE ASSESSED VALUE FOR 2024 FOR ALL 31 PROPERTIES AND ALL OF THEM WERE UNDER 3000 $300,000, EXCEPT ONE, WHICH HAD AN ASSESSED VALUE OF 345,000. 430, THAT ONE IS IN THE HARBRIDGE. IT'S THERE, RESIDENTIAL CONDO BUILDING. ALL OTHER PROPERTIES ARE RESIDENTIAL, EXCEPT ONE PROPERTY IS COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE UNIT, SO TODAY I'M LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK ON THE ON THE PROGRAM AND, AND SOME DISCUSSION ON CRB'S RECOMMENDATIONS. AND WE'LL BE REQUESTING APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NUMBER ZERO NINE DASH 2024 CRA FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PANEL MADAM MAYOR, MADAM MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO JUST, HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THE MOTION ON THIS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN NEAR AND DEAR TO MY HEART FOR THE LAST TEN YEARS. MAYBE, MAYBE 15, I THINK IT'S THE MAIN REASON THAT, EAST STEWART, TO A LARGE DEGREE, HAS BEEN LEFT BEHIND IN THE LAST TWO RISES IN PROPERTY VALUES WE'VE HAD. BECAUSE IF YOU CAN'T GET CLEAR TITLE TO YOUR PROPERTY, YOU CAN'T BORROW AGAINST IT. AND EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE PROPERTIES ON THERE THAT AREN'T SPECIFICALLY LISTED, IF YOUR NEIGHBOR CAN'T IMPROVE THEIR PROPERTY, IT'S AFFECTING YOUR PROPERTY. AND SO EVEN YOU KNOW, SO I THINK THAT THAT REAL ESTATE VALUES AND WEALTH FROM REAL ESTATE TRANSFERS IS A HUGE WAY TO CREATE AND GENERATE WEALTH GENERATIONALLY. AND I THINK HE, STEWART, HAS BEEN LEFT OUT BECAUSE OF A SIMPLE TITLING PROBLEM. AND SO THAT'S WHY I REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT THE STAFF HAS DONE. I KNOW MIKE HAD SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THIS ISSUE, A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO LOOKING AT THINGS AND, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THAT MOTION WHEN THE TIME COMES. MAYOR DO YOU WANT TO GO? NO IF YOU MAKE THE MOTION, I'LL SECOND FOR DISCUSSION. WE CAN DISCUSS. ALL RIGHT. WE GOT IT. SO MADE. OKAY SO FIRST OF ALL, I LIKE THE PROGRAM. I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA, BUT I HAVE A FEW CONCERNS, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH A LOT OF THESE THROUGH, AS A PROCESS SERVER AND ALSO ASSISTING MY WIFE IN THESE KIND OF PROBATE MATTERS, DOING RESEARCH FOR. SO. SO THE PROPERTIES THAT, HAVE THE ESTATE OR THE STATE THAT MEANS THEY'VE ALREADY OPENED UP AN ESTATE. SO IT'S ALREADY BEING PROBATED. SO I THINK THERE'S A QUESTION IS IF THEY'RE ALREADY PROBATING AND PAYING FOR IT AND MOVING IT THROUGH THE PROCESS, THERE'S WHY WOULD WE JUMP IN IF IT'S ALREADY GOING THROUGH, NOW, UNLESS IT'S NOW, MAYBE IT'S STALLED. THE OTHER ISSUE IS WHAT HAPPENS, I THINK IS THAT WHEN SOMEONE DIES WITHOUT A WILL, IT THE AND, OUR ATTORNEYS CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG ON THIS, BUT, THERE'S ACTUALLY A STATE STATUTE THAT DETERMINES IT GOES TO, AND THERE IS A FAMILY TREE. KIDS. AND THEN IF SOMEONE DIES IN THE GRANDKIDS AND SO FORTH, AND WHAT CAN END UP HAPPENING IS YOU CAN HAVE MULTIPLE HEIRS AND THEN EVERYBODY WANTS TO GET PAID AND SO THEN YOU CAN END UP CAUSING THE FORCED SALE BY STARTING THESE, OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH ISN'T NECESSARILY A GOOD THING, HE DOES HOMESTEAD TRANSFERS. IF THEY DECLARED HOMESTEAD, IT TRANSFERS THE PROPERTY TRANSFERS TO ALL OF THE HEIRS IMMEDIATELY UPON DECLARATION OF HOMESTEAD. BUT I THINK THE REAL PROBLEM IS THE ONES THAT DON'T HAVE THE WORD ESTATE IN FRONT OF THEM, THAT MEANS THAT SOMEONE'S DIED. THEY NEVER TRANSFERRED IT. IT'S IN GRANDMA'S NAME. BUT GRANDSON IS LIVING THERE. OR, TWO GENERATIONS LATER AND THOSE AND THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WE DON'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT BECAUSE THEY'VE NEVER OPENED UP AN ESTATE, IT'S ACTUALLY CALLED. THE SEARCH. THEY. HE WAS SAYING HIS ESTATE CAME UP TO SOMEONE THAT ACTUALLY LIVES MORTEL REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS. RIGHT. BUT SHE ALSO THE ESTATE I SAW OFF TO THE LIST THERE WAS. THEY NARROWED IT DOWN TO THE ESTATE OF JOHN SMITH IN A STATE OF. IT'S NOT A HOLDING COMPANY, BUT THERE IS THE PROPERTY APPRAISER CAN PROVIDE US WITH ANY ACTUAL PROPERTIES THAT THEY HAVE WHERE SOMEBODY WAS THE OWNER AND NOW THAT PERSON IS DECEASED AND IT'S STILL THAT PERSON'S ESTATE. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE DATES, I DON'T THINK THEY'RE ON THIS SHEET, BUT WE CAN LOOK AT THE SHEET AND FIND WE CAN SAY ANYONE THAT THEY DEATH CERTIFICATE IS MORE THAN FIVE YEARS AGO, RIGHT? I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M KIND OF GETTING AT. AT, IS THAT WHAT WE'VE DONE? AND TROY, I THINK PART OF IT, TOO, IS THAT A LOT OF THIS STUFF IS TRANSFERRED OUTSIDE OF THE ESTATE. WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS QUIT QUITCLAIM DEEDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. YEAH, THERE'S THAT. AND SO WHAT'S THE MORE OF THE PROBLEM [00:50:03] IS YOU CAN'T GET A TITLE POLICY THAT'S REALLY WHAT THE ISSUE IS. YEAH. AND THAT LEADS TO, QUIET TITLE. RIGHT. AND THAT'S THE NEXT THING I WAS GOING TO GET AT IS I DON'T THINK, SOMETHING THAT HAS SERIOUS TITLE ISSUES, $3,000 IS NOT GOING TO COVER THE, THE COST OF THE ACTION TO DO THAT. IT'S, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN A LOT OF QUIET TITLES OVER THE YEARS. IN MY PROCESS SERVING WORLD. AND WHEN YOU START TRACKING DOWN 25 ERRORS, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY AND THE OTHER THING IS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T END UP, DOING IT FOR PEOPLE THAT BOUGHT TAX DEEDS, YOU KNOW, AS A BUSINESS. YOU KNOW, THEY BOUGHT A TAX DEED AND NEEDS A QUIET TITLE, AND WE END UP DOING THEIR QUIET TITLE FOR THEM. SO, BUT I THINK I THINK THAT YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY. MARK, EVERYTHING YOU SAID IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. I THINK THAT IT'S A THAT WE SHOULD. I JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE NARROW IT DOWN SO THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY HELPING THE PEOPLE THAT NEED TO GET HELP AND THAT, WE'RE NOT OPENING A CAN OF WORMS FOR THEM. THAT ENDS UP WE GO AND WE PAY $3,000, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW IT'S GOING TO NEED ANOTHER $15,000 OF LEGAL FEES, EVEN IF IT'S JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO TRACK DOWN 32 ERRORS THAT ARE LIVING ALL OVER THE COUNTRY, AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL MONEY TO PAY FOR IT. AND NOW THEY'RE IN A COURT ACTION. THEY'VE FILED A COURT ACTION, AND THEY HAVE REQUIREMENTS BASED ON THE COURT REQUIREMENTS. AS WELL. SO HOW LONG HAVE SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES SET AND NO ONE HAS ACKNOWLEDGED OR ANYTHING? I MEAN, IS THERE PROPERTIES THAT SET OVER THERE? TEN, 20, 30 YEARS? I DON'T HAVE THE RECORD OF THAT. I DID CHECK ON IF THEY PAID TAXES OVER THE YEARS, AND I DID FIND THAT THEY'VE BEEN PAYING TAXES. YEAH, THAT WAS A LOT OF GOOD QUESTIONS. THE ISSUE, I THINK, BECKY, IS THAT THE TAX IT'S NOT THERE ARE MANY I THINK THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THESE PROPERTIES OUT THERE WHERE PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN THEM RIGHT NOW, AND NOBODY'S ARGUING ABOUT ANYTHING. IT'S JUST WHEN THEY GO TO BORROW MONEY, THEY CAN'T BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET CLEAR TITLE BECAUSE SOMETHING HAS HAPPENED, TRANSFERS TAKING PLACE IN A PRIOR GENERATION THAT WASN'T LEGITIMATE OR THAT WASN'T DONE WITH TITLE INSURANCE. AND SO THERE'S NO CONFIRMED TITLE AND ENTRIES. RIGHT? IT'S PROBABLY AN EXPENSIVE PROCESS, BUT I DO THINK THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO SPEND MONEY ON THE GOAL HERE SHOULD BE TO GET IT TO A TITLE POLICY. IN OTHER WORDS, WE NEED TO GET IT TO THE POINT THAT AT SOME POINT IN TIME WE HAD CLEAR TITLE, WE HAD A TITLE POLICY, AND WE NEED TO GET TO THAT POINT. AND I THINK WE NEED TO SQUARE SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES AWAY. I JUST PULLED UP THE FIRST ONE AS AN EXAMPLE. YES, SIR. ON MARCH 28TH, 1996, THE PROPERTY APPRAISER ENTERED AN ORDER DETERMINING HOMESTEAD FOR VIOLA INGRAM. SO 1996 WAS THE LAST TIME IT SHOWS THAT IN THE SALES HISTORY AND AS A RESULT, IT'S BEEN PROBABLY BEING OCCUPIED BY AN HEIR OF THAT, VIOLA INGRAM. AS MR. MCDONNELL POINTS OUT, THERE MIGHT BE FIVE OTHER HEIRS THAT, HAVE AN INTEREST IN IT. BUT AS I'M READING THE PULLED UP THE ORDER JUST ON THE PROPERTY APPRAISERS, IT SAYS ON THE PETITION OF HELEN CHRISTIE IN ORDER DETERMINING HOMESTEAD REAL PROPERTY, THE COURT FINDING THAT ALL INTERESTED PERSONS HAVE BEEN SERVED PROPER NOTICE OF HEARING OR WAIVE NOTICE THEREOF. THE MATERIAL ALLEGATION OF THE PETITIONER. TRUE THAT THE DESCENDANT WAS DOMICILED IN MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA AT THE TIME OF DEATH, BUT THE DECEDENT WAS SURVIVED BY A SURVIVING SPOUSE AND BY LINEAL DECEDENTS, AND AT THE TIME OF DEATH, THE DECEDENT OWNED CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY ON WHICH THE DECEDENT RESIDED. IS A JUDGE THAT THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY. THE UNDIVIDED ONE HALF INTEREST OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND COMMENCING ITS STAKE, BLAH BLAH BLAH, GIVING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER CONSTITUTED THE HOMESTEAD OF THE DECEDENT WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION FOUR OF ARTICLE TEN OF THE CONSTITUTION. WELL, I WANTED TO SAY THAT, WITH BRUNO AND OUR ATTORNEY, MR. BAGGETT, THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO SPEND OVER 3000, YOU'LL KNOW WHAT TO DO AND TO GUIDE US. BUT THERE WAS ONE THING. WHEN YOU READ THAT MISS INGRAM, I KNEW MISS INGRAM VERY WELL. AND THAT WAS, THAT WAS A HABITAT FOR HUMANITY HOME. HOW DO THOSE WORK WHEN YOU. BUT THAT WAS YEARS AGO. AND ONCE YOU GET TITLE OKAY, OKAY. HE SAID, HE SAID YOU HAVE TO CALL. ALL RIGHT. WELL, IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE, MADAM MAYOR. YES. SORRY I DID ATTEND THAT PIECE. [00:55:04] SORRY. ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING. SURPRISED THE AMOUNT OF CONCERN THAT THIS PROGRAM CONTENT. SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR HERE. THIS IS COMPLETELY VOLUNTARY. NO OWNER OR FAMILY MEMBER HAS TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. CORRECT? CORRECT, CORRECT. IF WE DO GO THROUGH THIS AND IT DOES GET STRAIGHTENED OUT, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SELL YOUR HOME. THAT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT ON THIS PROGRAM, AND TO MARK'S POINT, IT'S NOT JUST LOANS. YOU CAN'T GET. YOU'RE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION. YOU'RE NOT YOU CAN'T GET DISASTER RELIEF FUNDS, YOU CAN'T GET HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE. SO THE ABILITY OF US TO HAVE THIS AND THEN SAY IF THERE IS A CONTEST, IF WE DO HAVE FEUDING FAMILY MEMBERS, MEMBERS, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET INVOLVED. CORRECT? REBECCA. CORRECT THAT'S APPARENTLY THE RULES THAT WE'VE SET FORTH. RIGHT. AND WE'RE ALSO, I GUESS, LIMITING IT TO $300,000 OR LESS THAN ASSESSED VALUE. NOW THAT WOULD BE THE ASSESSED VALUE ON THE PROPERTY APPRAISER WEBSITE, WHICH OBVIOUSLY IS NOT MARKET VALUE. BUT, AND I DID SPEAK TO A COLLEAGUE WHO DOES REAL ESTATE AND PROBATE IN THE AREA, AND SHE INDICATED ON AN AVERAGE HOUSE OF ABOUT 400 GRAND, THAT TITLE POLICY, ABOUT $1,000, THAT WOULD EAT UP A LOT OF PROFIT. BUT SHE ALSO INDICATED A LOT OF THOSE WOULD REQUIRE MORE PROBATE. YOU KNOW, ACTION. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANY DIRECTION FOR US TO PROVIDE TITLE INSURANCE. I MEAN, I THINK, I THINK THE INTENTION WAS TO DO A TO IDENTIFY THE OWNERS AND MAKE IT SO THAT THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, TO FINISH THE ESTATE. THESE PEOPLE ARE DECEASED. AND THERE'S A SUMMARY ADMINISTRATION NEEDS TO BE DONE IN ORDER TO TRANSFER THE PROPERTY TO THE AIR. YOU DO A SUMMARY ADMINISTRATION, RIGHT? YOU YOU OPEN UP A SUMMARY ADMINISTRATION. YOU SAY THERE'S THREE HEIRS, THERE'S NOBODY IN DISPUTE. THEY THEY ALL AGREE THAT THEY'RE THE HEIRS. AND THEREFORE YOU DO THE PROBATE THAT TRANSFERS THAT PROPERTY AND DOES A DEED THAT'S SIGNED BY A JUDGE TRANSFERRING THE ORIGINAL DEED FROM, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER THE OWNER IS TO THEIR THREE CHILDREN AND THREE UNDIVIDED INTERESTS OR WHATEVER IT IS. BUT BUT I THINK THAT'S WHY MY POINT IS, IT SHOULDN'T JUST BE ABOUT ESTATES. IN FACT, I COULD CARE LESS ABOUT THE ESTATE AS MUCH AS I CARE ABOUT THE CLEAR TITLE. I CARE MORE ABOUT GETTING A TITLE POLICY THAT SOMEBODY HAS GOING FORWARD. AND THAT'S THE KEY THERE ONLY ONCE YOU HAVE A TITLE POLICY CAN YOU WHO GETS THE TITLE POLICY OUT OF THE THREE HEIRS? THERE'S ONE PERSON LIVING IN THE HOUSE AND TWO HEIRS. I UNDERSTAND I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT THAT WOULD BE A CONTESTED SITUATION. YOU'RE RIGHT. BUT THERE ARE SITUATIONS OUT THERE WHERE THEY. QUITCLAIM DEEDS TWO GENERATIONS AGO, AND THERE'S A PERSON OCCUPYING IT, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A THEY CAN'T GET A TITLE POLICY BECAUSE NOBODY CAN NOBODY CAN GO BACK AND DETERMINE THE CLEAR TITLE ON IT BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER IT WAS NEVER CLEARED THROUGH WITH TITLE. I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS THAT THIS LIST OF NAMES WILL QUALIFY FOR THAT. WHAT WHAT THIS REALLY WAS, WAS THE SITUATION WHERE GENERATIONALLY, SOMEBODY MIGHT HAVE OWNED THE HOUSE IN THE 60S, AND THEN THEIR KIDS STARTED LIVING WITH THEM, AND THEN THEY PASSED AWAY. AND THEIR KIDS CAN IN SOME ONE OF THE CHILDREN CONTINUED LIVING THERE. AND NOW THAT PERSON HAS HAD A CHILD AND THEY'RE LIVING THERE AND IT DOESN'T. NO ONE HAS ANY REAL OWNERSHIP TO IT BECAUSE THERE WASN'T AN ESTATE DONE. I DON'T KNOW THAT THE CITY IS IN A POSITION TO BE ABLE TO BUY TITLE INSURANCE. WAIT, WAIT, WAIT TO BE BUYING THE TITLE INSURANCE. AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WE PUT A LIMIT OF $3,000 AS THE CRB. AND THIS COULD BE A VERY GOOD. BUT IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO SOLVE EVERYONE'S PROBLEM. RIGHT? AND IT'S NOT MEANT TO. AT THE SAME TIME, MARK WANTED TO INCLUDE TITLE INSURANCE, BUT IF THERE'S MONEY LEFT OVER, OKAY, AND SOMEBODY WANTS TITLE INSURANCE, IT'S PART OF THE $3,000. GREAT. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS IS ONLY TO HELP THOSE THAT REALLY COME TO THE CITY AND SAY, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT IT. AND THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN SOMEONE COMING TO THE CITY AND SAYING, WE NEED A NEW FENCE AND A NEW AWNING. HOW CAN WE HOW CAN WE GET THAT? WELL, I THINK THIS IS A MUCH BETTER PROGRAM BECAUSE IT'S ACTUALLY HELPING PEOPLE WHO ARE LOST. AND SO I THINK YOU HAVE YOUR SAFEGUARD AT $3,000. I IT'S NOT MEANT FOR EVERYBODY AND IT'S COMPLETELY VOLUNTARY, WHICH MEANS THEY HAVE TO ASK FOR INCLUDED IN THE PROGRAM. I, MADAM MAYOR, I AGREE THE ONLY [01:00:05] REASON I WAS BRINGING UP THESE ISSUES, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE KNOW ALL THE HAVE THE OTHER ISSUES COVERED, BECAUSE I DO THINK THIS IS A REALLY GOOD PROGRAM. I ACTUALLY REMEMBER TALKING WITH, A NAME FROM THE PAST, BERNIE CHRISTIE. WELL, BERNIE MALONE ACTUALLY, AND, AND I NEVER REALLY SPOKE TO JIM ABOUT IT, BUT I CERTAINLY SPOKE TO BERNIE MALONE ABOUT IT. TEN YEARS AGO, AND I'VE ACTUALLY EVEN TALKED TO MY WIFE ABOUT IT BECAUSE SHE DOES THESE TYPES OF THINGS ABOUT HOW IT WOULD WORK, AND AGAIN, MY ACTUALLY CONCERN IS THAT 3000 ISN'T ENOUGH. I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT THE GOING RATE FOR A, FOR A SUMMARY ADMINISTRATION IS 3500 TO 5000. SO AGAIN, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE SOME SKIN IN THE GAME RIGHT? YEAH. IT'S A $3,000 MATCH RIGHT. NO MATCH. IT'S JUST THREE JUST 3000 GO UP TO 3000. IF THEY WANT TO GO TO 5000 THEN THEY YOU KNOW THEY COULD PUT THE 2000. OH YEAH. AND THEN THE FIRST 3000. RIGHT. WHAT ARE THE EXPERTS. SO WE CAN GUIDE THEM. AND I THINK THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT HERE. YEAH. WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE AN ATTORNEY. THAT'S DOCTOR THE FLY BY NIGHT TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN. RIGHT. AND SO IF MAYBE YEAH THEY PROBABLY HAVE A COUPLE THOUSAND THAT THEY COULD USE FOR GETTING A GOOD TITLE TO GO OUT AND GET A MORTGAGE FOR 100,000. RIGHT. I WAS GOING TO ECHO THE SAME CONCERNS ABOUT THE REQUIRING THE TITLE INSURANCE, I ALSO WANTED TO BE CLEAR. SO IT'S NOT JUST THE IDENTIFIED HEIRS PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS PROGRAM RIGHT THERE COULD BE SOMEONE ELSE OUT THERE THAT WE DIDN'T CATCH. SO YEAH, IF WE FIND THAT THEY ARE HEIRS PROPERTY, THEY WOULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS PROGRAM. AND THEN I WANTED TO PROPOSE ACTUALLY INCREASING THE, LIMIT OF THE ASSESSED VALUE TO 400,000. AND I WANTED TO SHOW YOU WHY, THOUGH, IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE EASTPORT MAP. OKAY, SO THE HOUSES TO THE RIGHT THAT ARE IN THE LITTLE CUL DE SAC TYPE NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT'S SHERWOOD. AND THEN TOWARDS THE SOUTH OF THE, PARK IS SIERRA HEIGHTS. THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND SIERRA HEIGHTS, BOTH KIND OF OPERATE WITHIN EAST STUART. THESE COMMUNITIES KIND OF ACT AS TANDEM, AND THEY SUFFER FROM A LOT OF THE SAME ISSUES AS EAST STUART DOES. BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE HOUSES IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS, SOME OF THEM ARE MORE ARE NEWER, YOU KNOW, EASTERN HOUSES WE'RE LOOKING AT BUILT IN THE 60S. WE'RE LOOKING AT HOUSES HERE, BUILT IN LIKE THE 80S, BUT THEY SUFFER FROM THE SAME ISSUES WHERE A PAST GENERATION, SOMEBODY DIDN'T GET A CLEAR TITLE. AND NOW WE HAVE SEVERAL HEIRS OR WE AREN'T SURE ABOUT WHO OWNS IT. SO THAT'S THE ONLY REASON. BUT THEY ARE A LITTLE HIGHER UP ON THE PRICE BY ABOUT $50,000. SO THAT'S THE ONLY MORE THAN THREE, RIGHT? THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I WOULD I WOULD SAY THE ASSESSED VALUE AND NOT THE MARKET VALUE. AND SO THOSE AND SO THE GENERATIONALLY OWNED HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR YEARS, MOST OF THE HOMES IN EAST STUART FOR EXAMPLE, YOU LOOK AT THE ASSESSED VALUES AND LIKE THE 30,000, 40 EVEN LOOK 30, 40. MUCH OF THEM ARE A BUNCH OF THE. THERE'S VERY FEW, EVEN OVER 100,000, ON THAT LIST. AND EVEN LIKE, A HOME I OWNED FOR 24 YEARS. WHEN I SOLD IT, THE ASSESSED VALUE WAS 150. BUT IT SOLD FOR A LOT MORE THAN 400. SO. RIGHT. NO, I KNOW THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, THOUGH, IS THAT THE ASSESSED VALUE OF THOSE HOUSES ARE HIGHER BECAUSE THE MARKET VALUES ARE HIGHER. YEAH, BUT THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT EVEN REACHING ANYWHERE NEAR MOST OF THEM. THE 400 OR REACHING EVEN THE 300. I BET WE COULD PROBABLY PULL UP ANY ONE. AND AGAIN, I THINK WE START WITH A PROGRAM. IF WE SEE IT'S WORKING, WE CAN ALWAYS EXPAND IT. LET LET'S I AGREE, LET'S HELP THE MOST NEEDY. LET'S START HERE. AND JUST I WANT TO MAKE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT THIS STILL DOES INCLUDE LET'S SAY MIKE'S EXAMPLE. IF THE PERSON WAITS TILL THEY DIE, YES. THEN IT'S GOING TO BE PROBATED AND SOMEBODY'S GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT. AND THERE'S GOING TO BE ISSUES AND THERE'S BUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THOSE CASES, AND IT HAPPENS IN A LOT OF CASES, IS ABOUT TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE PERSON DIES. THEY SIGN A QUITCLAIM DEED TO THEIR SON. THEN THEY SIGN ANOTHER QUITCLAIM DEED TO THEIR DAUGHTER. THEN THEY SAY, AND SO AND SO A BUNCH OF THESE THINGS GET FILED AND SO IT'S NOT BEING PROBATED BECAUSE THEY DON'T OWN IT ANYMORE. IT'S JUST BEEN PASSED. BUT WHO WAS IT PASSED TO? SO THAT'S WHY I SAY CLEAR TITLE SHOULD BE THE GOAL. A TITLE POLICY SHOULD BE THE GOAL. THAT DOESN'T ALWAYS INDICATE IT'S AN ESTATE. IT COULD BE SOMEBODY WHO TRIED TO BYPASS THEIR ESTATE AND PASS THAT AHEAD OF TIME. RIGHT. MARK. THAT'S A QUIET TITLE, NOT A TITLE POLICY. YOU ACTUALLY THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT LEGAL PROCEEDING. WHERE THEN YOU HAVE TO GO AND FILE A LAWSUIT TO QUIET WHAT THEY CALL QUIET THE TITLE. AND SO THEN AND THAT'S ALL. AND THAT HAPPENS OCCASIONALLY IN THESE PROBATE MATTERS AS WELL. BUT WHAT THAT IS, IS A PROCEEDING WHERE THEY FILE A LAWSUIT, THEY SERVE ALL THE POTENTIAL OWNERS OR INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY, AND THEN THE [01:05:03] COURT DETERMINES WHO HAS TITLE AND, WHAT THEIR VESTED INTEREST IN. AT THAT POINT, THE TITLE IS CLEAR FROM THAT POINT ON, AND YOU CAN GET A TITLE POLICY. AGAIN, LET'S START WITH WHAT WE HAVE. AND I'M JUST EXPLAINING WHAT THAT I JUST, I HAVE ONE COMMENT. YES, $300,000. IS THAT FOR FISCAL FOR ASSESSED VALUE FOR 2024 THAT WE'RE GOING TO LOCK IT IN BECAUSE, FOR INSTANCE, IF THIS PROGRAM IS STILL GOING ON FOR 2 OR 3 YEARS, WE DO HAVE SOME PROPERTIES THAT ARE A LITTLE OVER 250 AND THEY COULD GO ABOVE. WELL, I THINK FOR RIGHT NOW, LET'S WE'RE GOING TO DO IT FOR THIS YEAR. OKAY. I'M GOING TO SEE IF WE HAVE WE MAY HAVE NOBODY. SO LET'S JUST GET IT DONE FOR THIS YEAR. AND THEN YOU CAN BRING IT BACK FOR AN AMENDMENT OKAY OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO WE DO WE, WE, ANY MORE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? WE HAVE A PEOPLE FOLLOWED BY, AND I'M SORRY, JUST ONE MORE POINT. YES, BUT NOW YOU ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO REACH OUT TO THESE TO THE PROPERTIES YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED, CORRECT? YES. WELL, THE WE'LL DO THROUGH NOTICES. RIGHT. AND MAKE SURE YOU EMPHASIZE THIS IS VOLUNTARY. RIGHT I WILL OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOARD MEMBER. ANY. SO ROLL OKAY. CRA, CHAIR BRUNER. YES. BOARD MEMBER. BRECKSVILLE. YES. BOARD MEMBER MCDONALD. YES. BOARD MEMBER. KAMPANI. YES. BOARD MEMBER. COLLINS. VICE CHAIR. RICH. YES OKAY. THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. GENTLEMEN * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.