07/07/1992 - Joint Meeting
\~:;~~,~;~~1~:::'i/C( ~<\\C~..:..~!:> 10 ;. .: I
t~ :I~:' ;, ,~., .' ".
~',: . ~. ;.~. , "
~:/ J
"
c'.I:.."
"
" .
~.;': '
t\,:'""
~ . i '
, ,
, ,
,
"
"
" ,
I j ,to
I . "I
I,
, '
<: ; .
, ' ,
, ,
,
", "\ ~
t .", ".
','
~t!~Y :"r,,;)\i;~;'~:~:;;:::,}C,;' .::' .
, ,
'.~
, \.." :
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT BOARD &' COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
July 7,1992
The City Commission, meeting as the Community Redevelopment Agency, together
with the Dowl!town Development Board, met Tuesday, July 7, 1992 at 5:31 P.M., with the
following lTIembers pre~ent:
, ,
Downtown Development Board:
Mary Vaughn
Sarah Caudell
,bennis Dean
Phil Henderson
Carol Horne-Warren
Lillian Trickel
Chairperson
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Absent:
, Walter Powell '
, Mem ber
Community Redevelopment Agency:
C<o"
, .
Rita Garvey
,Lee Regulski
Sue' Berfield
Richard Fitzgerald
I Arthur X. Deegan. II
,Chairperson '
Member
Member
Member
Member
.
Also Present were:
Michael J. Wright
Milton A. Galbraith. Jr.
Jerry D, Sternstein
CY,nthia E. Goudeau
Executive Director
City Attorney
Economic Development Director
Secretary
The meeting was called to order in the Chamber of Commerce Conference Room at
5:31 p.m.
, The City Manager opened the meeting by stating that two years ago the Downtown
Development Soard (DDS) and the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) agreed the DDB
would provide marketing for downtown while the eRA would provide money for bricks and
mortar. He stated today's meeting is to determine where to go from here.
It was stated there was a difference of opinion among the DDS members regarding
whether or not to have a recruitment program and how to split the budg,et.
l/
, 1
7/7/92
minDDCR7.92
, ,
, f.
, I
. "
J,
,. ~'),: ,::' ~. . ~" ,',. . c'
~l ", . , '. ~.'! . .
, ..
, ,.
~:,:: ~,
I' _,' T
"
,,'
,
, '
;
,$..nf~: . "., :
...~,1 , ..1.
, ' .
, "
i'
, .
r->, ' In response to a question, Tina Wilson, City Budget Director, indicated the DDB's
\.:.. , ' current year revenue was $156,212 and their total budget. $162,443.
A question was raised regarding whether the CRA could assist the DDB in paying
incentives for people to relocate to downtown and it was stated the CRA can not spend
money on relocation.
The City Manager indicated there are some incentives for which the CRA can pay,
however, he did not believe rent subsidies was one of them.
'I
1
An opinion was expressed that things have been accomplished by the CRA in the
downtown district. It was requested some short term goals be established.
In response to a question. 'he indicated he did not know if the CRA could expend funds
to renovate or remodel buildings if it does not own them. '
,
Discussion ensued regarding what the DDS members wished to do now. It was
, request!3d joint quarterly meetings with the CRA continue. There was an opinion expressed ,
that ,the boundaries should not be expanded as nothing has been accomplished in the current.
ones.
Concerns were expressed regarding the PearsonlThomas proposal for the recruitment
progr~m not having a better follow-up program.
, ,
, .E;;~
,'~.' ~\~)
Concerns were als.o expressed regarding "Anti-Fun" ordinances and that the codes
were not being enforced to maintain property standards.
In response to a question. it was ,indicated the Economic Development Director reports
to the City Manager arid his salary is reimbursed by the eRA. '
Discussion ensued regarding what the DOB sllould be doing and what has been
accomplished in the downtown district with ,differences of opinion being expressed regar9ing
accomplishments. It was stated all things done by Pearson/Thomas have been approved by
the DDB and there is now a full information package available for use by people wanting to
recruit downtown businesses. It was indicated there is alot more to offer now than two years
ago and there was a need to continue with an outreach program.
,In response to a question regarding what the CRA would be doing now, it was
indicated this would depend on' how the revisions to the Downtown Plan proceed and the
decisions rega~ding a new City Hall.
A question was raised regarding the responses to the Chamber's suggestions. It was
indicated progress has been made but the exact status would have t6 be followed up,upon.
It was indicated the DDS is looking to the eRA and the City Commission to determine
direction as it is felt downtown is at a crossroads. It was also indicated the Downtown
Clearwater Association is asking for funds from the DDB. Again it was stated the" Anti-Fun"
ordinances should be repealed ~
c'
minDDCR7.92
2
7/7 /9 2
1{i..W;", ., ,
'J
,
I ~ !
". I ".'
, I
. ~ I .
" .
. ,'.
,',
" ,
"
, "
, ,
: .' "\
. ~.'
. ,>.1'
: . . ~ . ,','. . '. t
l. : oJ' . ~
',' .<.' >~ c).'p'c .~,
. ~. + ,..
.: ..
, r,
, '
c~
Discussion ensued regarding what was needed in downtown and it was stated the
stores needed to be filled. .
Discussion ensued regarding how to accomplish this.
"
It was stated it was felt a weak link in the recruitinent program was the lack of follow-
up. Further discussion ensued regarding the need to 'follow-up on contacts with it being
suggested the downtown owners form ,a committee to assist in this.
, In' response' to a question, Mr: Sternstein reviewed how he handles inquiries. indicating
he does follow-up but that if the contacts are a result of the information packet that has been
produced. these contacts are handed over to Ms. Jean Sherry with Pearson/Thomas. He
indicated there is no inventory of vacant property and this is needed.
Discussion ensued regarding contacts and it was indicated there are approximately a
dozen with which the Economic Development Director has actually sat down and talked to.
Ms. Sherry indicated she had about 150 general leads. '
In r~spon~e to a question. he indicated he could not think of any of those that he had
talked to that additional community contact would have helped. It was indicated people did
not relocate due to the price of the property. It was indicated that when it comes to
, negotiating price. tl1at is turned over to the private 'sector.
(,.,.,!
. ~.'
;"'. '
Further discussion ensued regarding a committee working with private property owners
and it was indicated that if the committee is formed by the DDB. they would be subject to the
Sunshine Law'requirements.
It was also indicated there /leeds to be some caution regarding leads as many of them
need to be maintained in a confidential nature until the party is ready to m<.1ke their plans
public. A suggestion was made that the Chamber form a group of people to act as
ambassadors for the downtown.
In response to a question regarding other CRA/DDS relationships. it was indicated there
was no other community in which this type of arrangement exists.
In response to a question, it was indicated not all property owners are cooperative in
trying ,to negotiate price for propertie~ in downtown.
The City Attorney left the meeting at 6:45 p.m.
Discussion ensued regarding the need for the inventory of vacant properties as there is
a need to know what is available in order to know what direction to proceed. It was indicated
the City needs to get the material to the people making contacts 'and the follow-up is the
missing linl<. It was suggested tl~e eRA could act as a facilitator.
It was also indicated the City is attempting to develop a downtown plan that allows
maximum flexibility.
,>
L..
minDDCR7.92
3
717/92
, I
~ " . ' '
; , . ~
, .,
. .'.,i ..
L ;,
!';
#'!J,. ':<:.!~." .
1 Jo-%".. . ," '+
~;'. .tf~~ ~ .
~f:'. ~--: ';'. >,
~, ... . .'. ~
<'""f
. ~: .
~ " /
;.0
,"
i . ~
. '\ . .
, .,
!.'
I',
"
. .
. )
,~ .' -"
'i. '>
. '
, '
I " .
....f'", c
" ..:./~)~;:';''..:~ 1'!'1.':\J.'J~':>'~~~';:' '.,~ . ~.}: .'
r.....
, '1,.,,'
, Further discussion ensued regarding the need for the recruitment program with it being
indicated that space inventories are needed and there needs to be a tenant mix with the
owners of property being brought into the pl~n.
A question was raised regarding spending money outside of the districts and it was
indicated there, are times this is necessary. It was indicated the question now is how to spend
the monies to promote and develop downtown. It was indicated monies could be spent
oLltside the district if it were for the purpose of promoting downtown.
In response to a question, it was indicated most of the monies invested in the East End,
property was city money.
Discussion ensued regarding the need to establish methods to measure whether or not
the efforts are successful. The need for a marketing flow chart was expressed. It was also
stated the CRA needed to come up with some incentives.
A question was raised regarding whether or not the Economic Development Director
could do the inventory and it was indicated there are ongoing projects in which he is involved.
'It also depends on the City Commission's decision regarding a new City' Hall and the
Downtown Plan.
It was stated the Downtown Clearwater Association is requosting $40,000 from the
DDS. It was questioned whether or not this should be'done.
, (""""
, ,
, ;.i
, "
'Discussion ensued regarding' the need for downtown businesses to take advantage of
events tha't are occurring in downtown such as Jazz Holiday and concerts in Coachman Park.
An opinion was expressed that the recruitment program was needed and then monies could
be spent on promotion. .
Questions were raised regarding the eRA and downtown districts and where those
actual boundaries are as there are several maps that do not seem to coincide.
It was suggested the City once again investigate a one-way street system. It was
indicated this was addressed several years ago with it being found that the streets are too far
apart to have an effective one-way plan.
It was suggested another joint meeting be established and both boards were thanked
for their attendance.
, The meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
Lj"
minDDCR7.92
4
7/7 192