06/06/1991 (2)
li~~-t:'"
r 1,", c,
..' . :: . ~.'.. ... ; .~' ~ .
.
'.
~..
CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING
Maas Brothers Property Acquisition
June 6, 1991
The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met in Special Session in the
Commission Chambers at City Hall. The meeting was called to order at 4:00 P.M.
with the following members present:
Rita Garvey
Sue Berfie1d
Lee Regu1ski
William Nunamaker
Richard Fitzgerald
Also present were:
Michael J. Wright
M. A. Galbraith, Jr.
Cynthia E. Goudeau
Mayor/Commissioner '
Vice-Mayor/Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
The purpose of this special meeting was to take action faT' the acquisition
of the Maas Brothers property.
Item #1 - Interfund loan to eRA for Maas Brothers Property Bid.
Staff is proposing an interfund loan for the purpose of allowing the CRA
to bid on the Haas Brothers property. This loan will be made from the Penny for
Pine11as Infrastructure Tax Funds included in tha special development fund. The
Myrtle Avenue extension project wi 11 be deleted and other projects wi 11 be
rescheduled as necessary to provide the necessary cash flow.
If the property is acquired, the City and the eRA intend to solicit public
input regarding the ultimate use of the property, including a referendum as to
whether or not City general obligation debt should be issued to retain the
property for use as a park or for other municipal purposes. If such general
obligation debt is approved, the interfund loan will be included in and repaid
from the proceeds of such debt. If general obligation debt is not approved and
the CRA decides to retain the property, other tax exempt or taxable debt will be
pursued including the repayment of this interfund loan. If for any reason such
external debt is not completed the loan shall remain outstanding until forgiven
by the City, repaid by the eRA or until the purchased property is sold or
otherwise disposed of by the eRA. Any remaining balance on the loan will be
payable at the time of and from the proceeds of such sale or disposition.
ccspmtg
1
6/6/91
"
'-'
.
.
.
The City Manger reported two appraisals had been received for the Haas
Brothers property; one of $3 million and the other of $3.5 million. Both
appraisals indicated the site is not viable for retail use with one indicating
an institutional or suite hotel use being feasible. There is no value to the
structure and there is liability due to asbestos being in the building. The
asbestos is not harmful to people shopping there but would become a problem if
the asbestos was disturbed for renovation. The asbestos removal wou1d cost at
least $300,000 and removal of the building would be an additional $350,000.
In response to a question, the City Manager indicated if the City is
successful in acquiring the property the proposal is to seek public input to
decide to what use the property should be put; either extend Coachman Park or
redevelop. He stated the recommendation is structured in order to give
flexibil ity to the City. The property 'is heavily mortgaged at this time.
Discussion ensued regarding which entity should buy the property. Concern
was that there was conflict between the City Commission and thefr role as the
CRA. The CRA is for development purposes and purchase by the CRA would invite
resale of the property as well as zoning and variances to permit development.
The City Manager again indicated that his proposal was based on giving
flexibility as to the disposition of the property as public sentiment is not
known at this time. It was' indicated that once the property has been purchased
by the City, resale and development restrictions will be imposed.
Further discussion ensued regarding which entity should be purchasing the
property. Concerns were expressed that the main reason for purchasing the
property would be to protect the ba,yfront, in which case, the City should be the
entity which purchases it.
Two citizens spoke in support of the City obtaining the property rather
than the CRA, with one expressing concerns that should the eRA purchase it, the
citizens would not have input as to the final disposition of the property. One
citizen spoke requesting that the upper portion of the property remain on the tax
rolls in order to increase the tax base.
Discussion ensued regarding whether or not the City should purchase the
property.
Questions were also raised regarding once the building is removed whether
or not the hole which would be left could be filled. The City Attorney indicated
the Commission could agree on a reasonable interpretation of the Charter, which
would still be subject to judicial review.
Commissioner Regulski moved that an offering bid of $1.9 million be ma1e
by the City of Clearwater from its General Fund. The motion was duly seconded
and upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Regulski, Berfield and Nunamaker
voted "aye". Commissioner Fitzgerald and Mayor Garvey voted "nay". Motion
carried.
ccspmtg
2
6/6/91
, ( .. , ~. It. . . ,f ~ +' "\ .' . t
'.
.
.
. .
.' ...'\
It was indicated the profosed purchase agreement would be forwarded to
Allied Stores, but they would a so be proposing Q purchase agreement which will
come back to the City Commission for approval. .
The eRA meeting scheduled for immediately after this meeting was 'canceled
due to there no longer being a need for eRA action regarding the Haas Brothers
site.
The meeting adjourned at 4:55 P.M.
ATTES';[ :;
~.~ /d.- Prt. __
..- ~ .
, ,
,\
ccspmtg
...;~
6/6/91.
.,.,u"1
3
-. .
"
. "
.,> '.J:
~ '.: ~~
, "'J.
'. ; ~ " '::~~"~:'~;:i.}?!~:
01..,' ",0 ....'-.~r.'.~.ii:h..\