Good afternoon. Welcome to the City of North My Beach community, redevelopment agency meeting of July 16th, 2024. First, could we get a roll call? Yes. Board Chair Evan Piper. Here. Vice Chair McKenzie Fleurmon. He said he'd be late. Board Member, Fortuna Smokler. Present. Board Member, Michael Joseph. Here. Board Member, Daniela Jean. Here. Board Member, Phyllis Smith. Present. Board Member, Jay Turnoff. He said he'd be absent. Also, present is myself Adam Old and the Sierra Attorney's Chief is all good. Okay, thank you. Okay, well next would be public comment. So is anybody here this evening that wants to talk on any of the items? If so, come forward. What the record reflect, no one came forward. Next would be the minutes, so we need the approval for the minutes of the May 21st CRA board meeting. So I'll entertain a motion and a second to approve. Motion. Second. On favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you. Passes unanimously. All right. Next item is CRA-RA-R-20204-05. Approved a walk-wellness LLC SIP application and Mr. Old. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. This is a resolution of the chair and board members of the North Miami Beach Community Redevelopment Agency approving the strategic investment program SIP application for the property located at 2035 Northeast 163rd Street, controlled in long term lease by a walk wellness LLC for a SIP grant in the amount of $71,477.89. Authorizing the executive director to execute a SIP grant agreement with a walk wellness LLC, authorizing the executive director to do all things necessary for effectuation to effectuate this resolution and providing for an effective date. So this is a resolution our SIP program which has existed for a while is the larger of our four grants. and we're going to be able to have a larger of our four grants. This is a business that's been trying to open for many years in this location. I believe one of the commissioners are actually maybe two of the commissioners and one of the administration told me that they were having trouble visited the trouble visited the location earlier in the year and gave them the application for the SIP grant. They're opening a, it's called an infrared sauna experience. So it's a, it's called hot works. That's doing business name. And it's a it's a a sauna exercise program. So it loosens the muscles while you are exercising. The the the property manager, Holly is here. She could talk more about how the process works. This is a grant that covers 50% of their eligible investment. I know they've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on this process already. This is only for the new work that's happening. So I thought because this was a business that seemed to be almost ready to open, it would be worth bringing to the board to see if you guys would be willing to fund them so that they could finally get their door open and get a sign on the front and start having people come in and paying money. So that's pretty straightforward. If you'd like to hear from the business person she can come up and talk to you about it too. Okay. Do we have any? No, there's. I have a question. I believe we're voting eventually maybe tonight, if we have a time on a project right next to this. Is that what we're voting on in the regular meeting? Because where the bakery is. No, this is one. This is the yellow building. Yeah, it's between 20th and 21st, I believe. The other building is 1973, northeast 163rd. And it includes two buildings to the east. Is that the tower that you're looking at on the regular agenda? I think that's the block adjacent to this block. It's not the same block. Well, the other one is 1973 and this is 2035. So it has to be a buttinger within a storefront of it because they're going further east to the unit. So I think I can't remember the name of the tower but the tower is the cow bakery, the massage shop and the I think there's one more storefront that one more. The cow is the one that's 1973. Yeah, so it's cow and the two to the east. I just, I just, I just, and then there's a, there's a 20th street and then all of those buildings on 20th street are, it's a, it's a strip mall, so it's a lot of small little storefronts. So this, this is going to be in one of those strips. It's in the strip mall. We're advanced auto parties. To the east of there, but in that same building. In that same building. So there's a bicycle shop down by the east. Correct, yes. Yeah, there's a church, a bicycle shop, a bunch of different. It'll be in that strip center. That's right. And again we have the right to matching or we could lower that if we wanted. It's the will of the board. I mean traditionally I think the grant is considered a 50% match as the max. So you know I think my sense is they've put a lot more money than what they're putting forward on this grant. How much money do we have left to invest in other businesses? So we have enough to get us to the end of the year, even if we should get two more, two more of these big grants coming in. I think we can fulfill those. So I'm not too worried about running out of money at this point. We also now have the micro grant, which is funded from a separate line item that is fulfilling some of those people that are coming in for grants they're asking about the micro grant instead of the SIP grant. We do have one person who's in process of applying for SIP grant. That's the Crudo fish market on Westix, the highway. It's a complicated project and he's been sort of putting it to get his application together for a while. But I do expect he'll get that to us in the next month or two. And the last question is, when you get the three bids, does it each individual bid? In other words, you have three plumbing bids, you have three electrical bids. So I think the way that they're doing it is a three GCs, and each GC uses their own set of vendors and subs, but below them. But usually that does end up being three different set of vendors and subs but below them but usually that does end up being three different sets of vendors. So this was the three different, that was the conclusion. Yeah, so the CRA is not getting bids, the CRA is just reviewing the bids. Yeah, that they are getting right. Right. Receiving them is a good correct. I just want to make sure that. So, as you've seen three separate GC bids I believe that's accurate oh DNS has two separate GC bids on this one so yeah two requirement was three I think I think it's two we set that so if we think the two is not adequate, if you have one that's a high bid and one then the next one. How much was the other bid do we know? I assume we're going with one of the bids. Yeah we pay out on the low bid. So, and we've had the experience before where the person, the business owner will come with two bids, we'll say, okay, we accept this low bid, and then, you know, six months later, that contractor is no longer able to complete the work. They have to switch to a separate contractor, but we keep the low bid at the low bid. Unless that contractor is below the low bid, then we'll lower our amount we pay out. We pay out as a reimbursement. So, you know, we're always getting the lowest possible price. And if they choose to get a contractor that's then higher than the low bid then they eat the whole difference. Okay. Any other questions? Do we as a board want to discuss whether we should require three bids instead of two when it's a general contractor? Well, probably after this item's over. Of course, this is grandfathered in but I think we should discuss that. I think we need one general contract is involved three bids. Right, well, I mean, as a general rule, most people, even if it's for their own personal use and personal payment, are gonna get three at least three bids anyway. So, you know. I can tell you from my experience in the CRA as well as in just in the city and the county in general it's like it's getting harder and harder to get contractors to come out and give bids right now just because the pricing is pretty crazy and you know all of their increased prices are going into their increased costs. So I think I've heard this from the businesses as well as they have 10 calls out to contractors and only one has come and given them a bid. Okay. Maybe one thing to consider would just be, if we don't necessarily vote on it to make it a requirement, maybe make it where, you and your team strongly encourage more than two. Yeah, we can definitely do that. So maybe that would be a good. I think that's something we can do without any changes in the room. Right, and then this way in the event that there is a hard time getting bids, at least we're not creating a hard time. Or if it's over a certain threshold of a dollar amount that we require three bids, because like Adam just said, some of the contractors go out of business or they... What is the cap on this program? So the max grant amount is 250K for this program. So they're significantly below the max threshold. It's a 50% match. So if they were to get the 250K, that would mean they're putting in half a million dollars into the bill Yeah, which is pretty significant Probably if it's gonna be a half million dollar project. I mean you know at some point maybe if it's over 200,000 Then maybe it should be mandatory three bids. Yeah, I mean I'm happy to look at language just like that and take bring it back to you guys And Adam when's a completion date on this? Do you have an idea of that? I don't have it off the top of my head. Maybe Holly could tell me. Holly, would you like to come up and tell them a little bit about the project? Can I ask a question in the meantime? So for example, the toilet, it could either be collar or American standard. They're different pricing. Who is looking at that to make sure that they're picking really the American standard brands? I think it's called American Standard, right? That's one of them. Or if they're picking collar, which is high end. Yeah, I don't think we have a requirement for the sort of like standard of of finishings that they're getting. But I think, you know, most business owners are going to get the as least expensive as possible. that will still, you know, paying for half of it, I may get the more expensive. Well, they're still paying for half of it too. So I mean, I think, you know, at the end of the day, they're going to want to outfit their business in the most cost effective way that hits what they're, they feel their requirements are. I'm not seeing a lot of really fancy stuff coming in to the businesses we've funded. It's mostly like very widening the doorways, getting the plumbing in. All of that stuff is just by permit. The finishes, I think they're going to be probably best served if they're sort of functional. In a project of this type of scope, the difference between something that was upgraded and not upgraded, you are not talking any significant amount of money. So let's say for our human sake it was $500. You know it's not going to be like anything you know. It's not like it's high-end single-family home where you know you can have a better foster. I know but people and not no way are shapes saying this applies to you but some people oh well you know let me get to supply to you, but some people, oh well, let me get the better brand because half that is being paid for. I think, and my sense is that the business is very, very concerned with opening their doors. It's every month. There's not a plight of her. I'm just saying in future. It's, I think they would be, you know, they're gonna do what's on the shelf at the Home Depot the day they go, I think. So anyway, I'll let Holly introduce the project a little bit and talk about, you know, where they're at and what's taking them so long and where they hope to finish. Yes, thank you for having me. And my name is Holly Marietta. So Hotworks is a 24 hour infrared sauna studio. We are going to have eight saunas in there and you do workouts in them. So our claim to fame is more workout less time. So we have people burn in 650 calories in 45 minutes, doing a cycle, we have yoga, Pilates, and then we have a weight gym in the back as well. And you're also getting the infrared at the same time. So you're getting a recovery, sports recovery, muscle recovery helps with anti-aging, it has all kinds of benefits. So that's just a little bit about hot works. I was brought down to this project in November with the owner of AWAC, wellness. And I have a lot of construction background myself. I built the first one in Las Vegas, Nevada, hot works, and the owner construction company prior. So I can tell you that unfortunately the owner has been neglected by his original GC and he was too busy to follow up with anything and just kind of let the project go way beyond a budget of he's into this project for over $600,000. So just to throw that out there. So we appreciate anything that we can get back to help replenish anything. So we are hoping to get our certificate of occupancy any day. We're just waiting to finish some final things in the studio and with the, I'm talking with Danny and the city right now. So just have, since we changed GCs, we've had to change a lot of other paperwork and it just seems like it's one thing after another. So we wanted to be open months ago, almost two years ago, but now, hopefully we didn't give up and we want to serve the community and help everybody. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea like 10 times. But you got this certificate, if you're going to get this certificate, if you're walking. I think they're not going to get it until after this work is completed. So we have to fund the, if we're going to fund it, we would need to fund it now. Holly submitted this application, I think, you know, two months ago maybe. So we've been going back and forth on the details and trying to figure out what's what, but again, I don't want to hold them up on their work waiting for. No, we said that they're going to get certificate of law often to say this week. No, I think I'm hoping. Yeah, I think they're they're they're like we just got the sign up but still got we're going to get the electrical ran and. Okay. Two different sentences. One is they have to redo bathroom than the others. We're hoping to get the certificate of occupancy. So saying. Yeah, so I think when I visited and when she originally submitted her application, there was no bathroom. There was no bathroom. There was no bathroom. It was back down to the side. I think they've kind of been working forward through this. When she submitted her proposal, that was I think two months ago. And so we've been going back and forth with her of like, we need this, that and the other thing. But if it's not fair to me to say, say okay just stop working while we work on this proposal. So even if the work was done though Mr. Attorney it's quite a right for us to give a rebate. Is that correct? It wouldn't be the first time. I know but I'm here. Yes it is because the whole program is based on a reimbursement basis so the the work that's completed, the applicant pays the contractor and then we reimburse. We did that for the property on this case. On this case, but I just wanted to do it on record. Thank you. You're welcome. Okay. Any other questions, comments? Okay. So then I guess we're at the point of a vote. Motion to approve. Second. Okay, all in favor. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Okay, passes unanimously. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. All right. Next item, CRA-R-2024-6, approved purchase of single building. So this is, I'm sure, you know, we've discussed. I want to read the rest of the. The. The record first Adam. Yeah sure, sure. Sorry. The. The resolution is slightly altered from the one that we sent you in the mail. So this is the the this is a has One or two extra sentences title the title remains the same as that correct some additions in the body of the resolution all right so this is resolution number twenty to twenty four Dash six a resolution of the chair and board of the North Miami Beach for the acquisition of the property located at 16501 North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East 15th Avenue. North East with the city of North Miami Beach for the acquisition of the property located at 16501 Northeast 15th Avenue, North Miami Beach, known as the Singer Building for an amount not to exceed $1 million and a perpetual easement for 20 parking spaces for an amount not to exceed $18,000 per parking space on the adjacent city owned parking lot. Authorizing the executive director to execute the interlocal agreement and perpetual parking easement with the city. Authorizing the executive director to take all action necessary to implement the terms of the interlocal agreement and perpetual parking easement with the city and providing an effective date. So we've talked about this, previous meetings, I've talked about this individually with some of you. The CRA and you'll see an item six, we've been audited by the county for the past two years. They released their final audit report several weeks ago and I included that as a discussion item here. One of the big items in the redevelopment use of the property which was the CRA offices is not going to be completed in a timely fashion. My discussions with the city administration and the people that are working on the singer building right now, it seems like it's going to be difficult for that to be completed by the city in a timely fashion, just due to the constraints of the budget. You know, we have a new sort of finance system that's happening since the building was built. Capital improvements, we have some different items that are needing that capital improvement money in a higher priority. My goal is to make the city whole as possible. I really would hate to demand that the city pay the CRA 1.2 million dollars out of its general fund when I know that the city has a thousand other projects that are high priority and need that money. So my idea is if the CRA were to acquire the property, if the CRA could then give the city that million dollars that it, the city originally invested in the property, I believe that that would be sort of a win, win situation. Now I've heard discussions back and forth, like would it make sense to go out with a private developer to purchase the building from the city and maybe we would make a lot of money and they would build us everything we wanted. I don't know if that's true or not. I haven't seen a proposal with numbers behind it yet. I would hate to have anything we do tonight preclude that option if it is a viable option. So that's why I specifically put potentially a, there could be, the CRA could be authorized to do a P3 with this property that would then allow the sale to or disposition of the property to a private entity that would in exchange for building, you know, building potentially senior housing or a parking garage or any other number of types of options on that property. Of course, the city's budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the budget for the I think whether or not it's under the city's umbrella or the CRA's umbrella doesn't change much whether or not we can do something with a private developer, do something ourselves. All it does is sort of like remove the burden from the city and put it on the CRA to start the process. I'm trying to, I'm hoping that the CRA can take some of that burden from the city and also have had a lot of commentary about like things people are looking for in this area. Happy to continue this discussion. But this is the CRA's proposal to the city. The city can then take it or leave it, I guess, or we can come back and renegotiate. I'm happy to adjust the price on the floor here tonight. sort of take it or leave it I guess, or we can come back and renegotiate. I'm happy to adjust the price on the floor here tonight. If you guys think a million dollars is too little, too much, let me know, we can change it. We can, you know, allow me to negotiate it, or we can renegotiate it right here right now if you'd like. Okay, all right, thank you. Any comments? I'm going to be back to the meeting. I'm going to be back to the meeting. I'm going to be back to the meeting. I'm going to be back to the meeting. I'm going to be back to the meeting. I'm going to be back to the meeting. I'm going to be back to the meeting. I'm going to be back to the meeting. I'm going to be had a Zoom meeting and I thank both the attorney and the city manager and Adam for being in that meeting so that we could short out some different options. The thing is there is a developer that came to me that wants to develop on that piece of property, a senior program that will include North Miami Beach residents. So now we have to go to the city and we have to evaluate about the parking next to it how he could have parking for his building and still the city would have parking for their youth center and their field. The problem is it's so preliminary that an architect has been hired and a meeting is set forth for August to meet with North Miami Beach's developer. Head of planning and zoning and to meet with the architect to see exactly what could be done. Now comes the options of being a partner with the CRA or being a partner with the city or the CRA and the city sell the property and they become a P3 partnership for the parking lot. So there's options here. My suggestion when I like to do, the meeting is in August. I'd like to table this for one month until we find out more because here's the bottom line to it. If the CRA participates, luckily our attorney has done the same kind of thing in other municipalities because the city gets it back when the CRA is no longer a CRA. At that point is the developer going to give it back? No. So there's options of 100 to year, 99 year leases. Now is the developer willing to do that and can the developer get the financing with that? Or are we better off, which I'm beginning just until I get any other information differential? I'm beginning to say our best bet would be to sell the property to the developer and with the stipulation that there be a P3 on the parking lot. But to make a decision tonight to ask the city to sell their property to us, when we really don't have all the details about that, because here's a big question that little light bulb in my, to me this afternoon when I've been weighing back and forth what should I discuss what should I say to my board to help them make this decision and the biggest thing was if there was a profit of this property let's say a million dollars two million dollars because we sold it to an outside developer. Would the CRA be better off to get that profit? Or would the city be better off to get that profit? So that the city buys their share from the CRA? That's a big question. Because if you're going to be in partnership, whether BCRA or the city now gets very complicated in financing, in what's going to happen long term. And yet, the facility would still be available to our seniors with two separate entrances. So the fact that I've been working on this, and it means an awful lot to our city, especially in that corridor, we didn't realize how valuable that property was because at the end of the CRA and where our library is, that's a very important piece of property for North Miami Beach to make, to change the landscape there. It might even put a shot in the arm of the people that bought the 160th Street mall. So my feeling is that we should table this or be, I'm going to vote no until I find out more from the manager who was honest and said I'm a little prejudice I like the city to get the extra money and of course the CRA would feel the same way it would be up to us as a Board to decide which direction and I will add one thing because I want to be 100% if we if the majority vote yes the city Council still has to approve it. But I think even bringing it back in August, I still think, or, you know, there's deadlines with the CRA has to answer to their report that they're being looked at and we have used funds from the government, from the, from the COVID that if the CRA were to buy the city share, then the city has to use that money someplace else quickly before December 31st or we lose that million dollars. So it's a little more complicated than it looks like on paper. All right, so I have a question from Mr. All, first of all, the- Can I just add that the city manager is here if you have any questions for him. Thank you for attending. Okay. have any questions for him. Thank you for attending. Okay. Is there any downside in tabling this? So the reason why I put this on this agenda despite like I know there's still some questions about the ultimate use of the property is because I am aware of that December 31st deadline that the city is up against. And I also understand even when we pass a resolution that says, yes, it's okay, there's a lot of work on the back end when you're selling a property, especially if you're a government agency. And so I want to make sure that the city is able to receive its money in a timely fashion so happen when you're reallocating arpa funds like that. I do know in other cities I've been involved with the arpa funds are constrained through sort of committees and consultants that the federal government requires about it. I don't know if that's the case here. to sort of committees and consultants that the federal government requires about it. I don't know if that's the case here. But I would hate to have this process move forward and then not have time to reallocate the funds and they disappear. I believe that if the funds, if December 31st passes, and those funds then come back to the city, I actually don't know if they come back as arpa funds, or if they come back as just cash. If they're coming back as arpa funds, then there's no way to reallocate that, and I'm not sure where that leaves the city. So that's kind of what got me thinking about what's the way forward for the city on this building and the CRA, and that's why I thought that having the CRA complete this transaction quickly, it gives the city money. I think you're the board of both both both organizations. If your idea is that the CRA should get a pro-rated amount of the funding when we sell it, and the city should get some of that if it's sold to a private developer. You know, I think that's probably fine, and we can add that language in this. It's really, I think it's up to the body, what happens to it, and it's the same body in both places. So I'm happy to do whatever's best for the CRA and the city. And I think I'm not trying to force anyone's hand on this. I just want to make sure that I've done as much as I can to get it where it needs to go. And then, you know, if you guys have ultimately choose not to take it, that's that's can you very briefly explain the December 31st deadline situation. So the ARPA funding from it's a COVID relief funding from the federal government. It I believe it came down the first way of came down in 2022. It's very sort of broadly to use to address COVID relief. Different types of demographics were affected disproportionately by COVID, so low income people were affected far more than high income people elderly was affected far more than younger people. So, I think the federal government has allowed us to spend that money, has allowed you to spend the money on things like purchasing land. I don't know exactly what has to happen for that to be released that way, but by December 31st, all of the ARPA phones are supposed to have been fully allocated. Then you have two more years for them to be fully spent. And then after that, if they're not allocated, they come back to the federal government and if they're not spent of 2026, then they also come back. So that's the deadline as I see it. And obviously, I see it and you know obviously you'll want to have your legal council confirm what I'm saying but I think that's how it works. Mr. Chair. I had a question before we continue. If I may do the board chair. I think one of the beautiful things about being a commissioner or board member in this case is that we all have a vision for the city where we would want the city to go. And I want to applaud you for being proactive. I do also believe that the footprint that this particular building is on, overseeing a field where there are children, where we're trying to revive something for the families within North Miami Beach. I don't know if I want to see a high rise there. That's just the honest truth because you have kids and you have seniors and I don't know how well that mixes. The city has a strategic vision, a strategic plan for its parks and so on and so forth. So I do think the conversation is good to have but maybe a little bit premature because just like the city has a strategic vision that we're doing with FIU, we have come to the table and say, hey, this is the best idea for this particular area. I do know that we need senior housing. I do believe that we need to have be very proactive as it relates to how progressive we are. But I don't think that that particular location warrants for something of that. I don't know how big or what's the scope of the work, like you said. It's in the stages of an architect looking at what could be the possibilities, but I do want to caution us in our efforts to be proactive and take into the initiative, is that what's best for that area? And I don't know for me if I'm a parent bringing my kids to a soccer game or to a football game and have seniors, you know, it's a good entertainment for them to have a good view of the games, but from a safety perspective, from a risk perspective, I don't know how that works to have a residential right that smack of a community park. I do think that right now property is something that's very important for cities to have options as it relates to development, but I do understand that the Mishcon complex can be further developed to really enhance what we provide as it relates to recreation versus selling the family jewels for another high rise in a very small footprint that I don't know how tall this building will be to really maximize profit. But for me, when I think of a strategic plan, like we left to do when people bring ideas to the table, we love to say, let's workshop it. Let's workshop it so we can all participate in the outcome. I do think the city does need the funds. But I wouldn't, from this seat, seeing a development in that corner is an interesting perspective to have. So thank you. I have a question. Yep. Thank you. The building would be about 12 stories. And you know, as you said, it's the young and the seniors. And if you watch any of the programs on children's health and senior's health, that's the blend. But the parking is not adequate for many of the occasions at that field. So it seems to me to be a win-win. And I think a workshop's good. It's just preliminary. I did not even think it should come into that stage until there was actually the possibility of the meeting. But tonight voting on this, this is what we're voting on, whether the city owns it, buying it from the CRA, where we don't know where the city's going to get those funds. But if we vote for that, that would be another thing under the manager's umbrella in his budget. Or do we have the CIA on it? But here's a very interesting thing because some preliminary numbers were a thought of what the private entity would pay. And it's quite profitable. So if one of us are buying it from the other, we're buying it at the purchase price of three years ago. Was it three years ago? Two, it was 2021 December. So it's the purchase price of three years ago with no profit for either side, because we're buying it from each other. And I don't know that that's not something that hurts, whether it hurts the CRA or it hurts the city. There could be a million dollar or two million dollars profit or a million at least for each one or even more. And we're not taking that into consideration. And we've had a lot of calls with discussion about this Adam and I and he would like it to come forth, but it doesn't really, he can handle it if it waits one month. Yeah, I mean, I can handle it until the auditors tell me to snatch my money back from the city. And so, you know, for me, I'm just trying to avoid that happening. I'd really like to not have to come to you and ask for that money back. I agree with you like that we don't actually know what the current value of that property is. When we bought it, it was in use. It's been out of use for multiple years. I imagine that there's probably a not been an AC running in there for three years. It's probably got some old problems. I'm not sure how much of the structure was figured into the value of the price, but. Which brings up another issue is that whoever owns it's going to have to put another fortune into it. Correct. That's that's accurate. It's not just by the property in the CRA owns it. Now the CRA has to probably put another million if not more into it. And obviously in real estate, it's the three priorities, location, location, location. So I feel very strongly, and again, this is so preliminary, but we're so close, we'll have a much better handle on it in August. So that was what I wanted to take. What's the legal take on the implications if we don't make a decision today? Well, first I'd like to explain because this resolution doesn't, if you pass this resolution tonight, it doesn't mean the CRA is buying the property. Okay, this resolution essentially is an offer by the CRA to the city to buy the property. All right, it would have to be, it's to approve an interlocal agreement. So there have to be an agreement between the city and the CRA. So this is giving the city basically an option. One option, we could sell the property to the CRA, take care of the money we owe them, we'll get that money back. So this doesn't mean if you pass this tonight, that there is going to be a deal anytime soon, okay? It's merely an offer to purchase. So that's basically the legal implications of this resolution. So is it something where if we did that, it just sort of opens up the opportunity even not even setting a price per se, right? We're to be negotiated as you may. Correct. It's not too exceed price to negotiate it with the city. Right. And if we wanted to raise that, we could raise some, you know, obviously it's constrained by our current budget. So that's something we don't think about. And we don't have a, normally we do not have a C.R.A. meeting in August. It would be in September. I'm at the end of this meeting. I'm going to request we have an August meeting also. So, okay. So we either bring it back for the August meeting or approve this and let you all figure this out and come back to us as a commission. That is a CRA one. Well, ideally it would need to be approved by the commission, it might be a manager question, but if it was approved, if we moved forward over from the CRA tonight and then you negotiate. But we still have to vote on it as a commission. That's my question, That's my question. That's my question. So it's going to be an item that's going to come to the commission before there's an actual purchase done. And excuse me, Mario Diaz City Manager for North Miami Beach. Mayor, you're absolutely correct. Any type of passage of the resolution tonight would just enter a negotiation from the CRA into the city to then come back both to the CRA for adoption of whatever's negotiated and to the commission they get four or five four so we have enough so and then it will come to the commission for adoption as as the commission of the city of my North Miami Beach We I would probably say a million dollars is too low The art of funds that have been expended on this property is about 1.5 million dollars with regard to the additional Design and and all the other work that have been going on As your manager, I would say to at least recover what has been done. The timeline I think is important because we need to be able to encumber all funds with ARPA by the end of this year. Tonight on the agenda, you do have an item and a presentation from staff that will go through all of the funding that have been used and where we currently are with our second phase of those. Selling the singer building would give an additional 1.5 million for the commission to decide how they want to use it. We have an enormous amount of capital improvement projects that we need to continue to move forward. It's one of the reasons why the singer building is not moving forward is because we're limited on funds. So if that can be whether it's the developer, whether the CRA or anything, I think you have a plenty of options in front of you that you can definitely take advantage of. Okay. Any other questions? We're a little tight on time. So. So your suggestion would be motion to approve it and then it's going to come back to the commission anyways. Yeah. Motion to approve the opposite. Okay. You have a second. Commissioner Smuckler's second. And board members. So wait before I vote. So for clarification, we could vote to do as Commissioner Smith was saying or we can vote to when it comes back to us as a commission after we find out all the information. We can do what Commissioner Smith suggests that I can come back at the commission. I just want to make sure that all the options will be there will be there on the table. Okay. If there's a problem with the way of planning by opportunities to kill it along the way. Okay. So, and let me just add ask one of you to make a friendly amendment that it be not to exceed $1.5 million and then we'll negotiate it. I would say not to exceed the manager's discretion on the amount. Exactly. Well, there's no manager in this meeting. There's a number. We're in the resolution right now. 10 million. So if you want to do the 1.5, just amend the motion to change. I am in the motion to 1.5. You amend the director. And I'll second the amendment. All in favor say any opposed, pass it unanimously. Oh no almost passes Let the record no I understand everything and understand it was a total option, but I still am opposing till I have all the information In August. Thank you So thanks. I Think we're running up against the beginning of the cities meeting I don't know if you guys want to continue with the brief discussion. Okay. If we indulge you for like five minutes, can you, is there a possibility to do something? You're city manager. There's the audit item as well. Is it an audit report? Yeah. It's the audit report. Yeah. So, I mean, it's a discussion so we can either kick it to the next meeting or we can have it now. It's up to you. It's not time sensitive. We can kick it forward. Yeah, it's not. And you can read it. It has my sort of discussion of each item in there too. So I would recommend that and we can have it at the next meeting. And could we have these printed earlier, please? Okay. Yeah, we just forgot to put it on your desk. I mean, I needed earlier so that's okay. By the way, on your announcements, you're looking to do a meeting on August 24 PM. So there's also a resolution item on the City Commission agenda of possibly moving the August 20 meeting for the commission to August 27. So I mean that has not been determined yet. I make a motion to move it to the next commission meeting whatever date it is. Okay. Second. Yeah, make it right. Okay. All in favor say aye. Aye. Okay, perfect. Thank you. Motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn. And then the next CRA after that is to come. All right. All right. Thank you. Thanks everyone. Okay.