MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OF FEBRUARY 22, 2002, AT 3:00 P.M. PRESENT: Chair Carolyn J. Mason, Vice Chair Mary J. Quillin, Members Richard F. Martin, Lou Ann R. Palmer, and Mary Anne Servian, City Manager Michael A. McNees, Secretary Billy E. Robinson, and City Attorney Richard J. Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Chair Mason Chair Mason called the meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to order at 3:00 p.m. Secretary Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. APPROVAL RE: THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE PALM WALK PROJECT - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I) #1 (0080) through (0096) CD 3:01 through 3:02 Karen Hartman, Director of Downtown Redevelopment, Department of Redevelopment and Development Services, came before the CRA and stated that specifics of the Palm Walk Project were presented to the CRA at the February 12, 2002, Special CRA meeting; that a motion to approve the First Amendment to the Agreement for the Disposition and Development of Property (Agreement) to extend the time limits in the Agreement for up to 45 days is requested. On motion of Member Servian and second of Member Palmer, it was moved to approve the First Amendment to the Agreement for the Disposition and Development of property. Vice Chair Quillin asked if the developer has provided the City any additional information at this time? Ms. Hartman stated that the developer has met with Staff to discuss the parking configuration for the Palm Walk Project to assure compliance with the Zoning Code (1998 ed.) and is diligently attempting to expedite the investigative period to meet the deadline in the First Amendment. BOOK 2 Page 1147 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1148 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the original Agreement provided for a deadline of December 26, 2001. Ms. Hartman stated that at the February 12, 2002, Special CRA meeting, the CRA authorized an extension of 45 days to expire April 1, 2002. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the understanding was the developer would provide additional information to the City prior to a decision to extend the deadline by 45 days. Ms. Hartman stated that is correct; that assuring compliance with the Zoning Code (1998 ed.), the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan (City's Comprehensive Plan), and other regulatory requirements continues; that the developer will be making a presentation to the Development Review Committee (DRC) on March 20, 2002, sO everything will completed to the extent possible the next time presented to the CRA. City Manager McNees stated that some requirement for information has been overcome by events; that the developer has advised conduit financing, i.e., financing with the City's backing, will no longer be sought and believes other preferred financing opportunities are available; therefore, the financial information is no longer required for City evaluation; that the financing is being privately pursued; that the main remaining issue is parking requirements. V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that considerable information has been provided to Staff by the developer; that considerable progress has been made. Member Palmer stated that financing is no longer an issue; that the remaining issues are parking and traffic concurrency; and asked if the Palm Walk Project can be presented to the CRA prior to April 1, 2002? Ms. Hartman stated that the Palm Walk Project can be presented after the March 20, 2002, DRC meeting. Member Servian stated that the news is good. Vice Chair Mason called for a vote on the motion to approve the First Amendment to the Agreement for the Disposition and Development of property. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Servian, yes; Quillin, yes; Mason, yes. City Manager McNees stated that language is included in the previously adopted motion to extend the agreement with Palm Walk concerning the requirement for Palm Walk to provide certain financial information associated with the bond issues; that Palm Walk is no longer requesting City-sponsored financing; therefore, Palm Walk may no longer be interested as a private enterprise in revealing financial data; that the CRA may wish to reconsider the action taken. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the project is not a private development but rather a redevelopment project; that reviewing the financial data would be appreciated; that the CRA is dedicating land; that the developer should prove evidence of financial viability; that the parking garage will be completed first; that the parking garage should not be developed and the rest of the project remain undeveloped. Member Palmer stated that Staff is sensitive to the necessary information; that conduit financing is no longer being sought; that the developers do not have any problems with providing the requested information. 2. DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL RE: ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD BY RESOLUTION APPROVED RECOMMENDING COMMISSION ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION AS REVISED ESTABLISHING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADVISORY BOARD AND DEFINING DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES (AGENDA ITEM II) #1 (0096) through (2800) CD 3:02 through 4:10 Karen Hartman, Director of Downtown Redevelopment, Department of Redevelopment and Development Services, came before the CRA; referred to the proposed Resolution to establish the CRA Advisory Board developed by the CRA's Special Legal Council included in the Agenda backup material; and stated that the proposed Resolution is presented to the CRA for discussion. BOOK 2 Page 1149 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1150 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the "Whereas" clauses are taken from the original Resolution establishing the CRA and indicate the history of the establishment of the CRA. Ms. Hartman stated that is correct. Member Palmer stated that the Purpose and Duties of the CRA Advisory Board as indicated in Section 4 (b) of the proposed Resolution as follows should be more fully developed: (1) To review proposed public-private redevelopment projects and recommend to the CRA whether financial or other assistance should be provided to any such project; (2) To review the proposed annual work program and make recommendations to the CRA concerning such program, recommend project priorities to the CRA and recommend incentives to further the redevelopment efforts and carry out effectuate the purposes and provisions of the Redevelopment Act; (3) To consider any matters referred to the Advisory Board by the CRA; and (4) To receive comments from members of the public interested in redevelopment of the Community Redevelopment Area and to report such information to the CRA. Member Palmer stated that the CRA Advisory Board should provide advice concerning the development of Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for development projects within the CRA boundaries, review responses to the RFPs, and make a recommendation to the CRA; that Section 4 (b) (1) should be broadened to include other types of recommendations such as consistency with the City of Sarasota Downtown Master Plan 2020 (Downtown Master Plan 2020); that the expectations of the CRA and Administration should be Clarified. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the term incentives" should replace the term financial" in Section 4 (b) (1). Chair Mason stated that the term "other assistance" includes incentives. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the term incentives" includes many different types of assistance; that the CRA should explore alternative incentives rather than financial assistance; that using the term "financial" means monetary assistance will be the first consideration for assistance. Member Martin stated that the point is good. Vice Chair Quillin stated that providing advice regarding the development of and recommendations concerning RFPs should be included in Section 4 (b). City Manager McNees stated that the language is intentionally broad; that involvement with RFPs is intended; that Section 4 (b) (3) includes any matters referred by the CRA; that keeping the language broad is preferred to allow maximum latitude to the CRA. Vice Chair Quillin stated that some misconception could result if certain specifics are not identified; that one reason the previous CRA Advisory Board is no longer in existence is the original Purpose and Duties assigned to the CRA Advisory Board was too broad and general; that the previous CRA Advisory Board was disbanded; that specifics are necessary to keep the CRA Advisory Board focused on the duties in relation to the CRA. City Manager McNees agreed but stated that the language "any matter referred * by the Agency" is intended to keep the CRA Advisory Board focused on matters referred by the CRA rather than on matters the CRA Advisory Board decides to consider. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the CRA Advisory Board should have the latitude of identifying issues which should be recommended to the CRA for consideration. City Manager McNees stated that the concern earlier expressed was the previous CRA Advisory Board considered matters outside the scope of the Purpose and Duties; that the CRA Advisory Board should be able to consider any matters considered important if the CRA approves; that the CRA Advisory Board can present a recommendation to the CRA for approval; that the CRA is in control of the agenda and work of the CRA Advisory Board. Member Palmer stated that advisory boards often begin to direct Staff and encumber Staff's time, albeit with the best intentions; that significant financial implications can result from requiring a Staff work product by virtue of a motion; that BOOK 2 Page 1151 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1152 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. the CRA Advisory Board should request the CRA's approval to initiate a major project sO direction is received; therefore, more precision is required in Section 4(b); that a general statement of scope is good; however, some specificity is required to assure CRA approval is obtained prior to direction to Staff. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the CRA Advisory Board is in a unique position as no Staff is provided; that Staff assistance will be defined by the CRA; that the Director of Downtown Redevelopment is the only Staff assistance provided the CRA Advisory Board; that bringing in other City Staff will require Commission approval; that a CRA budget should be developed and include the purchase of City Staff time; that the CRA could have Staff funded through tax increment financing (TIF) funds, which is not appropriate at this time; that the CRA does not have a budget to fund Staff at this time. City Manager McNees stated that any desired limitations on City Staff can be incorporated in the proposed Resolution if desired. Vice Chair Quillin stated that a determination cannot be made until a work program is developed and required Staff time is estimated. City Manager McNees stated that the primary concern is not the enabling proposed Resolution but rather determining appropriate staffing in the future. Member Palmer stated that the proposed Resolution does not indicate the Staff support provided; that legal counsel has not been identified. Vice Chair Quillin stated that legal counsel is Special Legal Counsel David Cardwell. City Manager McNees stated that staffing is not identified in any of the enabling ordinances for other advisory boards but is rather addressed administratively. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the CRA Advisory Board is unique and not an advisory board to the Commission but rather the CRA; that Special Legal Counsel was hired for the CRA; that a request was previously made for a budget for the CRA. Ms. Hartman stated that the composition of the CRA Advisory Board should be a focus at this time; that the financial issues should be addressed in the City's budget for fiscal year (FY) 2002/03; that realistically, the City does not have the fiscal resources to accommodate the possible broad scope of the CRA's activities; that the establishment of the CRA Advisory Board was defined in the same section in the Downtown Master Plan 2020 as a private/public partnership policy is defined; that the CRA Advisory Board will consider public/private development projects to provide an evaluation and review; that the consideration should be threefold: 1) the composition of the CRA Advisory Board, 2) the fiscal element which will be addressed in the FY 2002/03 budget, and 3) the purpose as defined in the Downtown Master Plan 2020 which defines public/private development projects. City Manager McNees stated that reference can be made to adequate and appropriate support as provided by the City Manager's Office and the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk. Member Palmer stated that concerns previously identified were if the City Manager is the CRA Executive Director and if the City Attorney is the CRA legal counsel; that the CRA's Special Legal will not be present for all meetings of the CRA Advisory Board, which will be involved with many issues requiring legal representation; that resolution of the concerns is not required at this time; that involvement of the CRA Advisory Board in RFPs is vital and should be identified in the proposed Resolution. Chair Mason stated that the CRA's consensus is to include language concerning review of RFPS for development of property in the Community Redevelopment Area. Member Martin stated that language should indicate the CRA Advisory Board will review RFPS and responses. Ms. Hartman stated that the language should indicate development, review, and recommendations concerning RFPs. Chair Mason stated that is correct. Member Martin stated that a consideration is the composition of an effective CRA Advisory Board and referred to Section 5, Composition, of the proposed Resolution as follows and asked the reason for the suggested representation: BOOK 2 Page 1153 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1154 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. (a) Two citizens who are residents of the Community Redevelopment Area; (b) An owner of land used for commercial purposes in the Community Redevelopment Area; (c) An individual involved in planning, design or construction in the Community Redevelopment Area; (d) An individual who is a transportation protessional; (e) A representative of the Economic Development Board; and (f) A citizen-at-large. David Cardwell, Special Legal Counsel to the CRA, came before the CRA and stated that CRA Advisory Boards Statewide are comprised of from five to over twenty members; that seven members was an arbitrary number; that the number can be changed. Member Servian asked the method used to determine the composition of the CRA Advisory Board? Attorney Cardwell stated that the suggested composition of the CRA Advisory Board is a combination of experience with other CRA advisory boards and consideration of entities unique to the City such as the Economic Development Board; that the attempt is usually to obtain a cross section of commercial interests, property owners, business people, and some professional representation such as architects or engineers; that some CRA advisory boards have no membership requirements but generally have a cross-sectional representation; that the effort of identifying members may focus on specific requirements rather than the best representation if the requirements are too specific; that the CRA may wish to consider if the criteria should be rigid or a cross section of interested stakeholders. Member Servian stated that the concern is a possible effort to identify members with specific backgrounds which may be difficult. Attorney Cardwell stated that conflicts of interest have arisen as a concern in other urisdictions; that a specific provision in the State Statutes allows the CRA members to own property or be engaged in business in the Community Redevelopment Area; that the same provision does not extend to a CRA advisory board; that CRA advisory boards are not addressed in the Redevelopment Act in the State Statutes; however, a CRA advisory board member is subject to the State Code of Ethics; that a question which has arisen is if a member of a CRA advisory board can enter into a development agreement for personally or family-owned propertyi that the concern is the identification of the member's agency as the CRA is by State Statute separate and distinct from the City; that CRA members are appointed by the City, which creates the CRA advisory board; that the question is if the City rather than the CRA is the member's agency; that the State Ethics Commission will likely render an opinion regarding the question; that the State Code of Ethics also provides the appointing authority by an extraordinary, i.e., two-thirds vote the ability to waive the conflict for an advisory board member; that conflicts of interest are of particular concern if specific qualifications are identified. Member Palmer stated that the previous CRA Advisory Board was comprised of nine members including one member of a neighborhood association, one person of a civic group, one member of a cultural, religious, or educational group, two citizens-at- large, three persons who are members of either the Downtown Association of Sarasota, Inc., the Greater Downtown Chamber of Commerce, or other similar business associations or a property Owner in the Downtown area, and one resident of Census Tract One; that the previous CRA Advisory Board was excellent. Ms. Hartman stated that the CRA can add or delete from the proposed composition of the CRA Advisory Board as desired. Member Martin stated that a member with a financial or banking background should be included; that a member with a background in planning and design as well as construction should also be included; that the result is a nine-member CRA Advisory Board which is suggested for discussion. Ms. Hartman stated that the CRA's consensus appears to include three individuals each of which has a background in either: 1) planning and design, 2) construction, or 3) banking or finance. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the proposed Resolution includes two residents from the Community Redevelopment Area; that only one resident from the Community Redevelopment Area should be included as a citizen-at-large also represents the entire community. BOOK 2 Page 1155 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1156 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Chair Mason stated that the CRA's consensus is to include one resident from the Community Redevelopment Area, one member with a background in banking or finance, one owner of property in the Community Redevelopment Area, and one member with a background in planning and design. Vice Member Quillin stated that the City has transportation professionals; that a member should be included from the Transportation Management Organization (TMO) which is important to the CRA Advisory Board. Ms. Hartman asked if the requirement for a transportation professional should be changed to the TMO representative? Member Martin stated yes. Member Palmer concurred but stated that the TMO representative should not also represent another entity. Chair Mason stated that the CRA Advisory Board will be chosen by the CRA. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the concern is for the future; that the representative from the TMO can be the TMO Executive Director. Member Palmer stated that consideration should be given to a member who is a Downtown merchant; that marketing will be an issue for the CRA. Attorney Cardwell stated that one member has been suggested as a landowner who may not operate a business Downtown and asked if Section 5 (b) should be expanded to include an operator of a business in Downtown or if a separate member should be added? Member Palmer stated that the preference is for a landowner and operator of a business; however, the CRA Advisory Board should not become too large. Vice Chair Quillin stated that a representative from the Economic Development Board could have a business or retail background and bring significant experience to the CRA Advisory Board; that making the CRA Advisory Board too diverse may result in problems; therefore, a commercial landowner or a merchant is suggested rather than both. Member Palmer stated that the composition of the CRA Advisory Board can be flexible; that individuals with professional expertise in areas of importance to redevelopment should be appointed. Chair Mason stated that hearing the CRA's consensus, members who represent the following shall be appointed to the CRA Advisory Board: an Economic Development Board representative, a citizen- at-large, and an individual involved in construction. Member Servian asked if a representative of the social services agencies should be appointed? Chair Mason stated no. Vice Chair Quillin agreed; and continued that the citizen-at- large will not be limited to the Community Redevelopment Area; that the citizen-at-larye can be an architect or a real estate agent. Member Servian stated that Downtown is utilized by many individuals using social services; and asked if coordination with the social services agencies should occur? Member Martin stated that coordination with the social services may be advisable as many Downtown issues are social issues and involve social services; that a representative of social services may assist the CRA in dealing with the concerns in the Community Redevelopment Area. Ms. Hartman stated that the focus of the CRA Advisory Board should be the goals as established in the Downtown Master Plan 2020, which is not social-service driven; that the composition of the CRA Advisory Board should reflect the focus. Member Palmer stated that the background of the member resident in the Community Redevelopment Area or citizen-at-larye can be involved in social services; that professionals have been identified for membership on the CRA Advisory Board. BOOK 2 Page 1157 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1158 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the CRA is not concerned with social issues, which is a Commission responsibility; that the CRA Advisory Board is concerned with the Community Redevelopment Area; that the focus is not on the social but rather redevelopment issues Downtown. Ms. Hartman stated that the understanding is the composition of the CRA Advisory Board as agreed by the CRA is: A resident of the Community Redevelopment Area An owner of land used for commercial purposes in the Community Redevelopment Area An individual involved in planning or design An individual involved in construction A representative from the Transportation Management Organization A representative from the Economic Development Board A citizen-at-larye A citizen from the financial institutional market A merchant from the Community Redevelopment Area Ms. Hartman continued that the CRA Advisory Board will therefore be comprised of nine members. City Manager McNees stated that the social services and the redevelopment issues are treated independently; that many actions concerning social services affect redevelopment; that the City is relatively small; that many interested persons have diverse backgrounds; that the opportunity is the appointment process and the CRA's opportunity to recognize people involved in different spheres; that a specific seat at the table may not be necessary; that identifying social services and redevelopment as separate issues perpetuates the problems. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the CRA Advisory Board is not a Commission board to deal with Citywide issues; that the CRA and the CRA Advisory Board are focused on a specific area and on implementing the Downtown Master Plan 2020; that the social services issues can only be addressed by the Commission; that the CRA may not implement legislation concerning social, services, which is an issue for the Commission; that the CRA and the CRA Advisory Board should be focused, which will assist the City in addressing other issues. City Manager McNees stated that the suggestion is not for the CRA Advisory Board to address social issues but rather to have an understanding of the social issues which helps insure the work is as successful as possible. Member Palmer stated that a seat for an individual with interest in commercial real estate has not been identified. Member Servian asked if such an individual can be appointed to the seat for an owner of land used for commercial purposes? Member Palmer stated no; that a commercial real estate broker is contemplated. Vice Chair Quillin stated that a concern is a potential conflict of interest if a commercial real estate broker is specifically identified; that a real estate broker should not be on the CRA Advisory Board. Member Palmer disagreed. Mayor Mason stated that the CRA previously reached a consensus for a nine-member CRA Advisory Board; and asked if the suggestion is to increase the number of members? Member Palmer stated that adding more members is not necessary; but stated that all interests should be represented; that a seat to which a developer can be appointed has not been identified. Member Servian stated that a developer can be appointed to the seat for an individual involved in construction. Member Palmer stated that clarification is being sought. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that the term construction" provides more latitude than the term developer." BOOK 2 Page 1159 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1160 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Attorney Cardwell stated that the seat can be designated for an individual involved in construction or development as the term construction" could be defined as being limited to a general contractor. Vice Chair Quillin and Member Martin, Palmer, and Servian agreed. Member Palmer asked the CRA's view concerning the appointment of a commercial real estate broker? Member Martin stated that a number of seats can be filled by an individual with real estate experience; that the CRA will review applications and appoint the members to the CRA Advisory Board; that the CRA should recruit individuals with the desired skills including social services consciousness, real estate experience, etc.; that individuals in the community have diverse interests and backgrounds; that the proposed composition of the CRA Advisory Board is acceptable. Chair Mason stated that many people in the community are not singularly focused; that a perfect composition for the CRA Advisory Board may not occur the first time and can be modified. Vice Chair Quillin stated that designating a seat for a real estate broker or realtor is a concern due to conflict-of- interest issues; that a commercial landowner is buying and selling property; that designating a seat for a real estate broker or realtor is not in the City's best interest. Member Palmer stated that any member of the CRA Advisory Board could have a conflict of interest; that the question is if the CRA will be restricted from appointing an individual in the real estate business. Member Servian stated that many City residents have a real estate license. Vice Chair Quillin stated that a separate seat should not be designated. Member Palmer stated that the language should not preclude the appointment of a real estate broker or realtor. Chair Mason asked if an individual with a real estate license can fill one or more of the proposed seats? Attorney Cardwell stated that a realtor can be appointed to the seat for a citizen-at-large; that a realtor who also is a landowner or a resident can be appointed. Vice Chair Quillin asked if a provision allowing subcommittees should be incorporated in the proposed Resolution? Member Martin stated that the opportunity to appoint subcommittees is in the Bylaws. Vice Chair Quillin stated that a subcommittee of real estate brokers can be established to review the feasibility of proposals. Secretary Robinson asked if the CRA's consensus is to add the phrase "or development" to the seat designated for an individual involved in construction? Vice Chair Quillin and Members Palmer and Servian stated yes. Member Martin agreed; and stated that subcommittees and ad hoc committees can be appointed; that as much knowledge as possible should be obtained in the decision-making process. Attorney Cardwell stated that personal experience is interested individuals will participate even if not appointed to the CRA Advisory Board. Member Martin stated that the process is public. Member Palmer referred to Section 6 which indicates applicants "must be residents of the City of Sarasota" rather than the "Community Redevelopment Area" and should be qualified further. Member Servian stated that applicants should be residents or property owners of the Community Redevelopment Area. BOOK 2 Page 1161 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1162 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Member Palmer stated that the citizen-at-large need not be a resident of the Community Redevelopment Area. Vice Chair Quillin stated that is correct. Attorney Cardwell stated that CRA Advisory Board Members could be residents or property owners in the City; that the phrase "be engaged in a business or profession in the City," which is consistent with the language in the Redevelopment Act, can be added to Section 6. Member Martin asked if the defined area should be the City or the Community Redevelopment Area? Attorney Cardwell stated that the suggestion is to provide for some seats for residents or property owners in the City as some seats have been limited to individuals in the Community Redevelopment Area; that the first criterion is individuals who are residents, owners, or engaged in business in the City; that the second criterion is the specific seat requirement. Vice Chair Quillin stated that some seats are reserved for citizens who are residents of the Community Redevelopment Area; that one seat for example is designated for: An owner of land used for commercial purposes in the Community Redevelopment Area. Attorney Cardwell stated that three seats can be for members who have interests outside the Community Redevelopment Area providing the flexibility for Citywide representation as follows: A representative from the Transportation Management Organization A representative from the Economic Development Board A citizen-at-large Attorney Cardwell asked if the seat designated for a citizen from the financial institutional market should be limited to an individual from the Community Redevelopment Area? Member Palmer asked the recommendation of Special Legal Counsel. Attorney Cardwell stated that the decision is a policy decision; that most other CRA Advisory Boards are interested in Citywide representation. Member Servian stated that the representation should be Citywide. Attorney Cardwell asked if information concerning financial disclosure is provided upon application? Secretary Robinson stated yes. Vice Chair Quillin asked if the requirement for financial disclosure should be included in the Bylaws? Attorney Cardwell stated that the requirement is from the State Statutes; and referred to Section 6, Application Procedures, of the proposed Resolution as follows: at the time of applying to be a member of the Advisory Board, the applicant shall be notified by the city auditor and clerk of the requirement for the individual, if appointed to the board, to comply with financial disclosure and conflict of interest laws. Member Palmer referred to Section 7, Terms, of the proposed Resolution as follows: Advisory Board members shall serve for three (3) year terms, with no more than two full terms permitted, however, for purposes of staggering reappointments, three (3) of the initial members will have one (1) year terms, three (3) will serve two (2) year terms, and three (3) will serve three (3) year terms. Member Palmer stated that the term limitation should be for a total of six years consistent with other City advisory boards. BOOK 2 Page 1163 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1164 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Secretary Robinson stated that board members may serve a maximum of two full terms; therefore, an appointment to a partial term does not count toward the maximum. Attorney Cardwell stated that the term reappointments" should be changed to "two full terms." Vice Chair Quillin stated that the Downtown Master Plan 2020 extends to the year 2020; that 3 three-year terms provide for nine years of service; that 2 three-year terms provide for six years of service; that long-term planning is necessary; that the desire may not be to change the composition of the CRA Advisory Board at six years. Member Palmer stated that the members appointed for one- or two- year terms can serve two additional to full three-year terms. Vice Chair Quillin stated that continuity rather than consistency with other advisory boards is desired; that the CRA Advisory Board will be in existence for 18 more years; that the opportunity to assemble a good team should not be limited; that someone's ability to serve should not be limited. Member Palmer stated that the term limits as proposed are preferred. Vice Chair Quillin stated that terms should be realistic. Secretary Robinson stated that the CRA could appoint individuals from the most important occupations or with the most important expertise for the longer terms. Member Palmer stated that the citizen-at-large can be appointed to an initial one- or two-year term allowing longer service. Chair Mason stated that hearing the CRA's consensus, CRA Advisory Board members will be able to serve for 2 full three- year consecutive terms. Attorney Cardwell referred to Section 8, Vacancies, of the proposed Resolution as follows: Vacancies occurring on the Advisory Board shall be publicized, but need not be advertised, in a publication of general circulation within the Community Redevelopment Area. Attorney Cardwell stated that another city in the State took advantage of a newspaper's consistently reporting vacancies on the CRA Advisory Board rather than paying for newspaper advertising. Member Servian stated that Section 8 provides flexibility. Secretary Robinson asked if the definition of a newspaper of "general circulation in the redevelopment area" includes the Sarasota Herald-Tribune? Attorney Cardwell stated yes; that the legal definition of the term "a newspaper of general circulation" is important. Secretary Robinson referred to Section 9, Attendance and Removal, of the proposed Resolution and stated that the Sarasota City Code (1998 edition) includes attendance requirements; that a recommendation will be made to revise the City Code attendance requirements during the workshop scheduled to review advisory boards; that the same requirements should be imposed on all advisory boards. Attorney Cardwell stated that a phrase can be added "in accordance with City policy for attendance and removal." Secretary Robinson stated that the general rule is absence exceeding 25 percent of all scheduled meetings in a given yeari however, the term "a given year" is not defined. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the attendance policy of the Sarasota/Manasota Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) previously referenced three consecutive meetings and now references three meetings; that members are notified and replaced if three meetings are missed. BOOK 2 Page 1165 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1166 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Member Palmer stated that three meetings may not be missed in a 12-month period; and asked if absences can be excused? Vice Chair Quillin stated that a recommendation can be made to reappoint if unusual circumstances arise. Chair Mason stated that another meeting is scheduled to attend; passed the gavel to the Vice Chair; and left the Chambers at 4:10 p.m. Attorney Cardwell stated for information that the proposed Resolution was developed to establish the CRA Advisory Board rather than an ordinance as for other advisory boards; that the proposed Resolution can be changed to an ordinance if desired. Member Palmer stated that the action is by the CRA. Attorney Cardwell stated that the Commission will take the action to establish the CRA Advisory Board; that the appointments will be made by the CRA. City Attorney Taylor stated that all other advisory boards are created by ordinances codified in the City Code; that the proposed Resolution can be adopted if the Commission does not desire the establishment of the CRA Advisory Board be codified in the City Code. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the CRA Advisory Board should be kept separate from other City advisory boards. City Attorney Taylor stated that the general provisions of the City Code may be applicable; therefore, an ordinance may be desired. Vice Chair Quillin stated that a proposed Resolution referencing the City Code can be adopted. City Attorney Taylor stated that a proposed Resolution will therefore be adopted. On motion of Commissioner Servian and second of Member Palmer, it was moved to approve recommending Commission adoption of the proposed Resolution establishing the Community Redevelopment Board Advisory Board and defining duties and responsibilities as revised. Motion carried (4 to 0) : Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Servian, yes; Quillin, yes. 3. DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL RE: : BYLAWS FOR THE SARASOTA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD APPROVED WITH CHANGES AS NOTED AND PROVIDE A REVIEW BY THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PRIOR TO FINALIZATIONI AMENDED THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION CREATING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD TO PROVIDE FOR REMOVAL OF A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD BY A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (AGENDA ITEM III) #1 (2800) through #2 (1240) Karen Hartman, Director of Downtown Redevelopment, Department of Redevelopment and Development Services, came before the CRA and stated that the proposed advisory board shall be known as the Community Redevelopment Area Advisory Board; that the CRA Advisory Board Bylaws specifically define the functions and duties in Section 3, Purpose, Article I, Bylaws, as follows: 1. To review the Community Redevelopment Plan from time to time and when necessary recommend to the CRA any changes to the plan; 2. To make recommendations to the CRA on plan implementation, including developing an annual work program, setting project priorities, and developing incentives to further the redevelopment efforts and carry out and effectuate the purposes and provisions of the Act; and 3. To receive input from members of the public interested in redevelopment of the Community Redevelopment Area and to report such information to the CRA. Ms. Hartman stated that Section 3 will be revised to include review and recommendations concerning responses to Requests for Proposals. Vice Mayor Quillin stated that hearing the CRA's consensus, Section 3 as revised is approved. BOOK 2 Page 1167 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1168 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Secretary Robinson stated that the phrase "newly revised" should be added to Section 2, Supervision; Rules of Procedure, Article II, Bylaws, as follows sO the latest revision is always referenced: To provided for the orderly and efficient conduct of its meetings, the Advisory Board shall follow Roberts Rules of Order Member Palmer referred to Section 2 as follows: The Advisory Board shall be subject to the direct supervision of the CRA staff and the CRA Governing Board Member Martin stated that the CRA Advisory Board should receive the support of Staff and the supervision of the CRA, which is the governing board. Ms. Hartman stated that the phrase "of the CRA staff and" can be deleted. Members Martin and Palmer agreed. Attorney Cardwell stated that another CRA in the State did not wish the CRA Advisory Board to create the Agenda; therefore, Staff was directed to prepare the Agenda which was dictated by the CRA; that Staff rather than the CRA Advisory Board should create the Agenda. Member Palmer stated that members of the CRA Advisory Board should be able to add items to the Agenda; and asked if Staff's responsibility to orepare the Agenda can be added to the Bylaws? Attorney Cardwell stated yes. Vice Chair Quillin stated that hearing the CRA's consensus, Section 2, Article II, Bylaws, shall be revised as follows: The Advisory Board shall be subject to the direct supervision of the CRA Governing Board Member Palmer referred to Section 3, Number; Article II, Bylaws, as follows: The Advisory Board shall consist of such number of members as the City Commission may determine from time to time by proposed Resolution setting forth the composition of the Advisory Board. Attorney Cardwell stated that a proposed Resolution adopted by the Commission establishes the composition of the CRA Advisory Board. Member Palmer asked for clarification of Section 4, Appointment and Qualifications, Article II, Bylaws, as follows: The City Commission shall appoint the members of the Advisory Board. Attorney Cardwell stated that the CRA rather than the Commission should appoint the members of the CRA Advisory Board. Member Palmer stated that the requirements of financial disclosure and conflicts of interest of the State Statutes is important; and referred to Section 8, Financial Disclosure; Conflict of Interest, Article II, as follows: Members of the Advisory Board shall comply with the financial disclosure and conflict of interest requirements of laws of the State of Florida. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the City Auditor and Clerk should be the Secretary and referred to Section 4, Role of Secretary, Article III, Bylaws, as follows: It is the duty of the Secretary to (a) keep the minutes of the proceedings of the meetings of the Board, (b) provide all notices in accordance with the provisions of these Bylaws or as required by law, (c) post or cause to be posted all meeting notices as required by City procedures and notify members, (d) maintain custody of the Board records, and (e) in general perform all duties from time to time as may be prescribed by the Chair or the Board. Attorney Cardwell stated that the title of Article III can be changed to Officers and Secretary. Secretary Robinson stated that the Chair and Vice Chair of the City's advisory boards are not called officers; that the purpose BOOK 2 Page 1169 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1170 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. of the title of Article III, Bylaws, Officers, is not understood. Vice Chair Quillin stated that CRA Advisory Boards are different from other advisory boards; that the CRA in Delray Beach, Florida, has Staff, office space, etc.; that the identification of titles is to keep the separation between City government and the CRA. Attorney Cardwell stated that some CRAs are separate from City government and some are not. Member Martin asked for clarification. Secretary Robinson stated that an officer of a corporation, for example, denotes more power than is afforded the Chair and Vice Chair of a CRA Advisory Board; that the designation of officers may not be necessary. City Manager McNees stated that the title of Article III can be changed to Chair and Vice Chair. Member Servian stated that the title can be Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary. City Manager McNees stated that the Secretary is not appointed as a member. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the Secretary is responsible for keeping the minutes, noticing the meetings, etc. Attorney Cardwell stated that the CRA in some other cities expects the Chair to do more than preside at meetings; that the Chair of the Advisory Board is always at the CRA meetings to advise of the activities of the CRA Advisory Board; that the Chair of the CRA Advisory Board may also attend other public meetings and workshops, etc., as a representative of the CRA. Secretary Robinson stated that typically the Chair or two other members of an advisory board may call a special meeting and referred to Section 2, Role of Chair, Article III, Bylaws, and Section 3, Special Meetings, Article V, Bylaws, as follows: Section 2, Article III: The Chair shall preside at all meetings and hearings of the Advisory Board and shall have the duties normally conferred by parliamentary usage on such officers. The Chair shall call special meetings, serve as the Advisory Board liaison to the CRA Governing Board, represent the Advisory Board at public hearings and presentations, and shall perform such other duties as are customary for the Chair. Section 3, Article V: Special meetings may be called by the Chair at anytime provided adequate notice is given pursuant to Article 5, Section 4. The Chair may also call a special meeting when requested to do sO in writing by a majority of the members of the Advisory Board, the CRA Governing Board or by a CRA staff member. Vice Chair Quillin stated that Staff should also have the ability to request a special meeting. Secretary Robinson stated that the following sentence can be added to Section 2, Article III, Bylaws: The Chair may also call a special meeting when requested to do sO in writing by a majority of the members of the Advisory Board, the CRA Governing Board or by a CRA staff member. Member Palmer asked for clarification of Section 4. Attorney Cardwell stated that Section 4 shall be revised to indicate the City Auditor and Clerk shall serve as Secretary to the CRA Advisory Board. Member Palmer stated that the responsibilities should be identified. Secretary Robinson stated that Section 4(e) as follows may not be appropriate: in general perform all duties from time to time as may be prescribed by the Chair or the Board. Vice Chair Quillin stated that Section 4 should be rewritten. BOOK 2 Page 1171 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1172 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Member Martin stated that the title of Section 6, Election of Officers, Article III, Bylaws, should be changed to Election of Chair and Vice Chair. Secretary Robinson stated that the word "calendar" should be added to the following Section 6, Article III, Bylaws, to avoid confusion with the fiscal year: Officers shall be elected annually at the first regular meeting year. Member Palmer stated that the following in Section 6, Article III, Bylaws, should be deleted: The Secretary shall have no vote. Member Palmer stated that the following language in Section 6, Article III, Bylaws, should be revised for consistency: Officers shall be seated immediately following their election. Attorney Cardwell stated that all references to the term "officers" shall be changed to Chair and Vice Chair. Secretary Robinson stated that the City Code provides the Chair of other advisory boards can only serve one consecutive term; and asked if the Bylaws of the CRA Advisory Board should include the same language. Vice Chair Quillin stated that hearing the CRA's consensus, the language in the City Code concerning consecutive terms for the Chair shall be incorporated in the Bylaws; and continued that members should not be able to serve on other City advisory boards. Attorney Cardwell stated that a prohibition against serving on other City advisory boards could be incorporated in the proposed Resolution if desired. Member Palmer stated that the restriction should be against membership on other City advisory boards. Member Martin stated that an amendment to the proposed Resolution is required. Vice Chair Quillin stated that is correct. Member Palmer asked for clarification of Section 9, Removal or Resignation, Article III, Bylaws, as follows: The Advisory Board may remove an officer at any time with or without cause by the affirmative vote of a majority of the Advisory Board members present and voting at a duly constituted meeting of the Board. An officer may resign at any time by delivering notice thereof to the Advisory Board. A resignation is effective when the notice is delivered to the Advisory Board unless the notice specifies a later effective date and the Advisory Board accepts the future effective date, the pending vacancy may be filled before the effective date provided that the successor does not take office until the effective date. Attorney Cardwell stated that in several instances a desire was to remove a member and not indicate the reasons in public; therefore, the language of "with or without cause" is suggested rather than having a requirement to prove cause. Member Palmer stated that the reference is to removal from the position of an officer and not a member of the CRA Advisory Board. Attorney Cardwell stated that is correct. Member Palmer stated that the CRA would have to remove CRA Advisory Board members. Vice Chair Quillin stated that is correct. Secretary Robinson asked if the vote should be a majority or two-thirds vote? Vice Chair Quillin stated that a City advisory board recommended the Commission remove a board member in the past; therefore, the provision causes concern; that the ability to remove an officer should be by a supermajority vote; that the ability to remove an officer without cause is a concerni that personal experience includes being removed from a City advisory board without due process by either the advisory board or the Commission; that removal as an officer should be a recommendation from the CRA Advisory Board to the CRA for action. BOOK 2 Page 1173 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1174 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Ms. Hartman stated that personal experience is the CRA rather than the CRA Advisory Board normally removes a CRA Advisory Board member. Member Palmer stated that the CRA Advisory Board elects the leadership and should be allowed to change the leadership. Member Martin stated that an officer remains a member of the CRA Advisory Board. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the next step is removal from the CRA Advisory Board. Member Martin stated that removal from the CRA Advisory Board is the responsibility of the CRA. Vice Chair Quillin agreed. Member Martin stated that a possible solution is to require a supermajority which provides a safeguard. Member Palmer stated that the CRA Advisory Board should not be able to remove a member under any circumstances. Member Martin stated that a supermajority of a nine-member board is six members and provides an additional safeguard. Vice Chair Quillin and Member Palmer agreed. Member Servian asked if the CRA Advisory Board should recommend removal? Member Palmer stated no. Vice Chair Quillin stated that a member is not being removed from the CRA Advisory Board; that removal from the position of an officer is within the CRA Advisory Board's purview. Secretary Robinson stated for clarification that the term for officers is one year. Vice Chair Quillin referred to the following from Section 9, Removal or Resignation, Article III, Bylaws: An officer may resign at any time by delivering notice thereof to the Advisory Board. Member Palmer stated that the reference is to the position as an officer rather than member. Attorney Cardwell stated that is correct. Secretary Robinson stated that notice should be directed to the Secretary who can place an item to select a new officer on the Agenda. Vice Chair Quillin and Member Palmer agreed. Member Palmer stated that the CRA Advisory Board should accept the resignation; however, the notice should be delivered to the Secretary. Vice Chair Quillin stated that is correct; and continued that hearing the CRA's consensus, Articles I through III as revised are approved. Member Palmer asked for clarification of the operation of and the latitude afforded the CRA Advisory Board subcommittees. Attorney Cardwell stated that typically only the larger CRAS have advisory board subcommittees; that no five-member CRA advisory board has subcommittees; that 20-member CRA advisory boards must function through subcommittees; that typically subcommittees may be appointed to handle special projects or meet with other groups; that subcommittees are typically ad hoc and are appointed as necessary rather than as on-going subcommittees. Member Palmer stated that subcommittees are subject to Florida's Government-in-the-Sunshine Law (Sunshine Law). Attorney Cardwell and Secretary Robinson stated that is correct. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the indication subcommittees are subject to the Sunshine Law should be included in the Bylaws. Member Martin stated that the provision has been included and referred to Section 4, Rules and Procedures, Article IV, Bylaws, as follows: BOOK 2 Page 1175 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1176 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. The committees shall be subject to the same parliamentary procedures as the Advisory Board and shall comply with Florida's Government in the Sunshine Law, Section 286.01, Florida Statutes. Member Martin stated that the term "appointed" was previously used; however, in Section 2, Members, Article IV, Bylaws, the reference is to "elected" as follows: The members of each committee shall be elected by the Advisory Board for such term and shall have qualifications as the Advisory Board may desire. Attorney Cardwell stated that the word should be "appointed." Member Palmer asked for clarification of the word "term" in Section 2. Attorney Cardwell stated that a subcommittee should be created for a term or purpose after which the subcommittee is either dissolved or extended by the CRA Advisory Board. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the CRA Advisory Board should have the latitude to extend the term of a subcommittee if desired. Member Palmer that the word "term" usually refers to a period of time, which is the reason for the confusion. Ms. Hartman stated that the phrase "specified time" can be utilized if desired. Vice Chair Quillin agreed; stated that the word "term" implies a specific period of time; and continued that Section 3, Removal, Article IV, Bylaws, as follows refers to subcommittees: The Advisory Board may remove any committee member with or without cause by the affirmative vote of a majority Advisory Board members present and voting at any meeting of the Advisory Board. Member Servian asked if a supermajority vote should be required? Attorney Cardwell stated that requiring a supermajority vote is consistent with removal of an officer and asked if a supermajority vote should be required? Vice Chair Quillin and Members Palmer and Servian stated yes. Member Martin stated that a quorum can be established with less than the total membership. Secretary Robinson stated that the supermajority can be defined as of the members present. Member Palmer stated that a supermajority of the entire subcommittee should be required if the desire is for a supermajority vote. Secretary Robinson stated that generally the requirement is for two-thirds of the members present. Vice Chair Quillin stated that action can be taken without a supermajority of the full board, which can result in abuse. Secretary Robinson stated that problems can result if vacancies exist on the board. Vice Chair Quillin stated that removal provisions are a concern. Member Palmer stated that a supermajority can be required of the total number of members currently on the board; that vacancies would not be counted. Vice Chair Quillin stated that a supermajority is not required to appoint subcommittee members. Attorney Cardwell stated that is correct. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the issue of a supermajority is only a concern upon removal of subcommittee members. Attorney Cardwell asked if the requirement should be for a supermajority of the then-total number of subcommittee members? Vice Chair Quillin and Members Martin, Palmer, and Servian stated yes. Member Martin stated that the CRA Advisory Board may not be able to meet once a month or may have no business to conduct and BOOK 2 Page 1177 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1178 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. stated that an alternative to Section 1, Meetings, Article V, Bylaws, as follows should be developed: Regular meetings of the Advisory Board shall be held on such day, time and place as may be determined by the Advisory Board and at a minimum once a month. The purpose of the meetings is to discuss and to then prepare recommendations and advice to the CRA on matters brought before the Advisory Board. Attorney Cardwell stated that the phrase "as determined by the board or Staff" can be inserted. Vice Chair Quillin stated that hearing the CRA's agreement, the phrase "as determined by the CRA or Staff" will be incorporated in Section 1, Meetings, Article V; and continued that the CRA Advisory Board should meet in the Chambers sO the meetings can be videotaped and broadcast on AccessSarasota, Channel 19 AccessSarasota) that the phrase "time and place as may be determined by the Advisory Board" should be changed to specify the Chambers. Member Palmer stated that the meetings should be in a public place; however, the CRA Advisory Board may wish to meet at public locations other than the Chambers; that generally, meeting in the Chambers should be encouraged; however, the meeting location need not be specified in the Bylaws. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the meeting Location should be specified sO the meetings can be televised. Secretary Robinson stated that regular meetings can be in the Chambers; however, special meetings can be at a location determined by the CRA Advisory Board. Member Palmer agreed; and asked if the reference to the quorum requirement of Section 2, Quorum and Voting, Article V, Bylaws, as follows is for a majority of the active members: At all regular or special meetings of the Advisory Board, a majority of the membership of the Board shall constitute a quorum. Attorney Cardwell stated yes. Secretary Robinson stated that the phrase "or by two board members or by Staff" was added to the proposed Resolution and should be added to Section- 3, Special Meetings, Article V, Bylaws, as follows: Special meetings may be called by the Chair at anytime provided adequate notice is given pursuant to Article 5, Section 4. The Chair may also call a special meeting when requested to do sO in writing by a majority of the members of the Advisory Board, the CRA Governing Board or by a CRA staff member. Secretary Robinson stated that the reference to notice in Section 3 is redundant and should be eliminated. Vice Chair Quillin agreed. Secretary Robinson stated that the reference to "and Publication" in the title of Section 4, Notice and Publication, Article V, Bylaws, as follows is not necessary. Notice and Publication: The Secretary shall give notice and keep records of each meeting of the Advisory Board and any of its committees. Notice of meetings shall be posted in City Hall and other appropriate locations as recommended by the Advisory Board and as required by law. Vice Chair Quillin stated that hearing the CRA's agreement, Section 5, Open Meetings, and Section 6, Minutes, Section V, are acceptable as recommended; and continued that Section 7, Location, Article V, should indicate regular meetings will be held in the Chambers. Attorney Cardwell stated that the following language can be added: Regular meetings of the board will be held in the Chambers whenever possible. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the concern is primarily for meetings of the CRA Advisory Board rather than the subcommittees. BOOK 2 Page 1179 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1180 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Secretary Robinson stated that the meeting facilities at the Federal Building will have the same broadcasting capability as the Chambers. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the studio of AccessSarasota has the same broadcasting ability. Ms. Hartman stated that the CRA Advisory Board takes a subordinate position to the Commission and the CRA in scheduling the Chambers; that the Chambers may be occupied by the Commission or the CRA. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the concern is the ability to broadcast the meetings. Member Martin stated that the phrase "and is to be recorded for video broadcast whenever possible" can be added. Vice Chair Quillin agreed; and continued by asking for comment concerning Section 8, Meeting Agenda, Article V, Bylaws, as follows: The agenda for each meeting of the Advisory Board, or any of its committees, shall be outlined by the Chair and submitted to the secretary for preparation. Any Board member, in the course of an Advisory Board or committee meeting, may place an item on the agenda by submitting it to the Chair for forwarding to the Secretary prior to the deadline for publishing the notice of such meeting. Secretary Robinson stated that generally Staff, and not the Chair, develops the Agenda for advisory boards. Member Palmer stated that Section 8, Article V, provides any board member may place an item on the Agenda. Secretary Robinson stated that Staff should prepare the Agenda; however, any member of the CRA Advisory Board can add an item to the Agenda. Member Palmer agreed. Vice Chair Quillin asked if an Agenda should be adopted and referred to Section 9, Order of Business, Article V, Bylaws, as follows: The order of business at regular meetings shall be: Roll Call Adoption of the Agenda Adoption of Minutes from Previous Meeting Communications Old Business New Business Citizen Comments Adjournment Secretary Robinson stated that Roberts Rules of Order as amended adopts an order of business; that Section 9, Article 9, can be deleted. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the CRA's consensus is to approve Article VI, Amendments, as follows: Amendments to these Bylaws shall be either (i) proposed by the Advisory Board and submitted to the CRA Governing Board for review and approval, or (ii) prepared and approved by the CRA Governing Board. Any amendment to these Bylaws shall not be effective until approved by an affirmative vote of a majority of the CRA Governing Board members present and voting after the proposed amendment has been listed on the agenda and submitted to the CRA for review and discussion. Member Palmer stated that receiving a copy of the Bylaws as rewritten would be appreciated. On motion of Member Servian and second of Member Martin, it was moved to approve the Bylaws for the Sarasota Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board with changes as noted. Member Martin as the seconder of the motion, with the approval of Member Servian as the maker, amended the motion to provide for a review of the Community Redevelopment Agency prior to finalization. Secretary Robinson referred to Article VI, Amendments, which indicates amendments to the Bylaws are not effective until BOOK 2 Page 1181 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1182 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. approved by the CRA Governing Board; and asked if the CRA Advisory Board will be required to officially adopt the Bylaws? Attorney Cardwell stated no; that the Bylaws are adopted by the CRA; that the CRA Advisory Board could submit a request to amend the Bylaws; however, the CRA is required to approve any amendment. Vice Chair Quillin called for a vote on the motion to approve the Bylaws for the Sarasota Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board with changes as noted and as amended to provide a review by the Community Redevelopment Agency prior to finalization. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Servian, yes; Quillin, yes. On motion of Member Servian and second of Member Palmer, it was moved to amend the proposed Resolution creating the Community Redevelopment Advisory Board to provide for removal of a member of the Community Redevelopment Agency Board by a supermajority vote of the Community Redevelopment Agency. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Martin, yes; Palmer, yes; Servian, yes; Quillin, yes. Member Palmer asked the procedure for accepting applications. Secretary Robinson stated that the Commission must adopt a proposed Resolution creating the CRA Advisory Board; that applications will be accepted in the same manner as for other advisory boards. 4. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CRA TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM IV) #2 (1240) There was no one signed up to speak. 5. OTHER MATTERS/ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS (AGENDA ITEM VI) #2 (1240) through (1630) CITY MANAGER MCNEES: A. distributed information concerning the status of House Bill (H.B.) 1341 in accordance with the request of Mayor Mason and stated that the Commission has already taken a position concerning the issue; that no additional Commission action is necessary at this time. Vice Chair Quillin asked for a legislative update. David Cardwell, Special Legal Counsel to the CRA, came before the CRA and stated that the Florida Redevelopment Association (FRA) is opposed to an amendment recently added to H.B. 1341; that an agreement with the Association of Counties was anticipated; that an amendment was drafted; that some concessions by the FRA were anticipated; however, none of the provisions desired by the FRA were incorporated into the proposed amendment to H.B. 1341; that the effective date was advanced from October 1, 2002, to July 1, 2002, which is unacceptable; that no relief related to grandfathering is provided; that the city most impacted is Tallahassee, Florida, which is interested in creating a Downtown Community Redevelopment Area; that the required finding of blight probably cannot be completed by Tallahassee by October 1, 2002, and definitely not by July 1, 2002; that a meeting is scheduled with the Florida League of Cities and the Association of Counties to develop a solution; that H.B. 1341 will be heard by the Council for Smarter Government the week of February 25, 2002, and may go to the floor of the State House of Representatives shortly thereafter; that the Council for Smarter Government is a combination of committees including the committees to which the bill has already been presented; that the Chair of the Comprehensive Planning and Local Government and Veteran Affairs Committee is the primary contact in the Senate and has indicated the bill will not be Agendaed until an agreement is reached between the cities, the counties, and the community redevelopment agencies; that the effective date is the most important provision. Attorney Cardwell stated that Volusia County passed a Resolution revoking all delegations as of January 1, 2037, and took back any authority to expand or extend CRAS of any cities with existing CRAs in Volusia County; that the cities in Volusia County are considering a challenge to the action; that if not resolved, the cities in Volusia County may be contacting the CRAs of other Charter Counties for support. Vice Chair Quillin asked the effect of H.B. 1341 on the City? BOOK 2 Page 1183 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. BOOK 2 Page 1184 02/22/02 3:00 P.M. Attorney Cardwell stated that the primary effect would be if the City decided to extend the CRA's term; that a grandrathering provision was drafted but not included in the amendment to H.B. 1341; that no reference is made to grandrathering CRAS existing prior to July 1, 2002; therefore, existing CRAs could become subject to the provisions including the new definitions; that the other concern is a possible expansion of the Community Redevelopment Area; that the delegation of powers to the City from the County was geographically specific; therefore, an expansion requires the approval of the County at which time the City is subject to the new requirements; that the request was to subject the expanded area to the new definitions; however, such language. was not included in H.B. 1341; therefore, an argument can be made the entire area is subject to the new definitions if the Community Redevelopment Area is expanded, which is a concern; that new proposal for inclusion in H.B. 1341 is: These amendments are not intended to impair any ordinance, resolution, interlocal or written agreement effective prior to July 1, 2002, that provides for the delegation of community redevelopment powers. Attorney Cardwell stated that the indication is a grandfathering clause is not necessary for existing CRAs; however, a grandfathering Clause is necessary for existing delegation actions; that the application of the provision is not known. Vice Chair Quillin stated that the CRA is willing to assist in any way possible. Attorney Cardwell stated that Broward County, which began the initiative, is no longer supportive of H.B. 1341 as new Community Redevelopment Areas are limited to 40 years; that Broward County is interested in limiting new Community Redevelopment Areas to any term desired and therefore does not support the bill; that proponents of CRAs have always been on the defensive and have not been able to get on the offensive; that the motto of the 1845 State flag is: Let us alone; that flags with the motto will be distributed at upcoming legislative committee meetings. 6. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM VII) #2 (1630) the There being no further business, Vice Chair Quillin adjourned Special meeting of February 22, 2002, at 5:10 p.m. MARY J. QUELIN, VICE CHAIR ATTEST: - Bl Rabunser BILLY ROBINSON, SECRETARY BOOK 2 Page 1185 02/22/02 3:00 P.M.