[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:19]
GOOD EVENING FOLKS AND WELCOME TO OUR WORKSHOP FOR MARCH 3RD. PLEASE STAND FOR OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COMMISSIONER POYNER.
[4.1 YBOR ALVAREZ SPORTS COMPLEX]
TOPIC FOR THIS EVENING. IT'S GOOD TO SEE EVERYBODY HERE IN SUPPORT. WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE FUTURE OF THE YBOR ALVAREZ. STAFF WILL MOVE FORWARDWITH LOOKING AT THE OPTIONS IN FRONT OF US. A >> THANK YOU. I THINK MR. MICHEO
LEAD US OFF. >> GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT THIS IS A REALLY HOT TOPIC AND I'M REALLY EXCITED TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION. SOME NIGHTS TALKING ABOUT YBOR ALVAREZ SPORTS COMPLEX.
HAS BEEN IN THE COMMUNITY FOR MANY DECADES AND A REALLY IMPORTANT PIECE OF LAND. ONE THING I WANTED TO REMIND FOLKS THROUGHOUT THIS PRESENTATION, THIS THE LAND SITS ON CITY AIRPORT LAND WHICH IS OBLIGATED LAND. IF WE DO DECIDE WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY WE DO HAVE TO SECURE OUR INVESTMENTS. IF AN AERONAUTICAL COMPANY WERE TO COME IN AND USE AIRPORT LAND, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE SECURE IT SO THEY DON'T TAKE OUR INVESTMENT SO IT'S IMPORTANT WE CONTINUE TO REMIND OURSELVES OF THAT. THIS IS ABOUT AGE 22 TO 23 PARCEL ACRE OF LAND.
THE SOCCER FIELD SITS ON THE (SIDE OF THAT PICTURE AND AT THE SOFTBALL FIELD IS ON THE RIGHT. MANY ORGANIZATIONS USE THIS. SOCCER IS THE MAIN USER OF THE SOCCER FIELDS AND WE USE IT SLIGHTLY AS A RECREATIONAL DEPARTMENT ON THE SOFTBALL SIDE WE RUN SOME PROGRAMS THROUGH THAT. THERE MAY GAMES ARE USED AT CENTRAL PARK. TONIGHT WE ARE GOING TO RECAP HOW WE GOT HERE. WE DO HAVE SOME NEW INFORMATION FOR YOU IN THE HOW TO MAKE YOUR DECISION. WE HAVE OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE ARE LOOKING FOR COMMISSION DIRECTION. WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO HAND OVER THE NEXT FEW SLIDES TO MR. NATE COYLE THE PROGRAM DIRECTOR TO DISCUSS WITH THE BOARD.
>> GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS, NATE COYLE AIRPORT MANAGER. WE HAVE SOME NEW FOLKS ON THE COMMISSION AND I WOULD LIKE TO WALK THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY OF THE PROJECT AND WHAT THIS MEANS TO US. WE HAVE AN AIRPORT THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN WORLD WAR II AND CAME BACK TO THE CITY. THERE IS SOME HISTORY OF TRANSACTIONS AND DISCUSSION OF OBLIG OBLIGATIONS. ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WE'RE THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT MANDATE THE USE OF PROPERTY. IT IS TO BE USED FOR AVIATION OR TO PRODUCE REVENUE TO BE SELF-SUSTAINING WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT. WHEN WE PUT YBOR ALVAREZ ON THEIR, IT'S NOT UNCOMMON THAT THIS TYPE OF SCENARIO HAPPENS. I THINK WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT THE LONG TERM THINGS SO WE ARE NOT JEOPARDIZED BY A SEASONAL INVESTMENTS. IF WE GO BACK TO 2013, THERE WAS A GENTLEMAN IN THE
[00:05:09]
COMMUNITY -- AT THE TIME THE FAA INVESTIGATED YBOR ALVAREZ IN THE CITY WAS TRANSFERRING ABOUT $100,000 A YEAR AND TO THE AIRPORT FOR THE USE OF IT. IT WAS CONSIDERABLY LESS LAND OF MARKET VALUE. IT HAS A LOT OF STRINGS ATTACHED AND AT THE FA RECOGNIZE WE ARE GETTING LESS THAN FAIR MARKET VALUE. YOU MAKE A BIG INVESTMENT ON THAT PROPERTY. SOMEWHERE IN 2014 AND 15 THE CITY STOPPED THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS SO NOW YOU HAVE A SITUATION WHERE YOU ARE IN AN INSURANCE VIOLATION. WHEN THIS DISCUSSION CAME UP IN 2022 A BIG DISCUSSION WAS HOW DO WE FIND APARTMENT IN ANSWER TO LOOK AT THE OPTIONS AVAILABLE WHETHER IT IS LEASING YBOR ALVAREZ, BUYING A PORTION OF IT. OVER TIME SINCE 2022 THEY'RE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF OPTIONS THAT CITY COMMISSIONS HAVE CONSIDERED. THE FIRST OPTION WAS INVENTORYING A LONG-TERM LEASE. ANOTHER OPTION THAT CAME OUT LATER WAS PURCHASING A PORTION OF THAT SMALL TERM VALUE. THAT WAS THE PREFERRED OPTION FOR SOME TIME. WE HAVE A PLAN TO PUT A T HAGER BUILDING ON THE SOUTH WEST. RECENTLY WE REAPPRAISED THE PROPERTY AND THAT IS WHERE THE HANGAR PROJECT HAD A TIMELINE. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF HISTORY AT LOOKING AT THE TIMELINE. THE NEXT LINE I BREAK DOWN THE OBLIGATED PROPERTY. THERE IS FEW OPTIONS FOR OBLIGATED PROPERTY IN THE FAC. THESE ARE DEFINED IN THE REVENUE POLICY AND YOU CAN ENTER INTO NON- AVIATION LEASE, USUALLY THAT IS AT FAIR MARKET VALUE. THEY WILL REVIEW IT AND THAT IT AND RELEASING OF DISPOSAL PROPERTIES. BUT THEN YOU GET THE PROPERTY OUT OF ALL OF THE STRINGS ATTACHED. THERE IS AN EXEMPTION THAT EXISTS IN THE COMPLIANCE MANUAL CALL THE COMMUNITY USE AND THIS IS HOW THE FA LOOKED AT THE INVESTIGATION IN 2013. SOME LANGUAGES CHANGED SLIGHTLY BUT THE CONCEPT AND COMMUNITY USE, YOU CAN USE LESS THAN MARKET FAIR VALUE AND IT IS GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY BUT THE STRINGS ATTACHED, YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONFIRM WITH THE FA. THE PROPERTY VALUE THAT YOU GET WHEN YOU PRODUCE MORE THAN THE EMBEDDABLE REVENUE, YOU CAN PROBABLY EXPECT THERE IS A SHORTER-TERM AND A LOT OF STRINGS ATTACHED. IT'S ONE OF THE ONES THAT YOU HAVE TO EVALUATE. THOSE ARE THE OPTIONS AND I JUST WANT TO REFOCUS.REALLY THE DISCUSSION IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY AND HOW
[00:10:08]
DO WE PROTECT THAT? DO YOU WANT TO PURCHASE THAT PROPERTY OR LEASE IT. AS I'VE MENTIONED, WE REORIENTED AND WE HAVE AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT GOING ON WITH THE FA. IF THE CITY MAKES THE DECISION TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY, ONE OF THE FIRST STEPS IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.YOU THINK THAT PROCESS IS DONE IN MARCH OF 2027. ANY QUESTIONS I COULD
ANSWER? >> YOU ARE SAYING IF THE CITY WERE TO PURCHASE IT THEY HAVE TO DO IT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY AND IN THIS CASE IT WOULD BE
DONE IN 2027? >> YES WE ACTUALLY STARTED AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT BASED ON USING A PIECE OF PERPETUITY SO WE STARTED THAT PROCESS ALREADY. I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION ABOUT THAT COMMUNITY USE BENEFIT.
GENERALLY THE USE FOR PERSONAL PROPERTY IS MARKET VALUE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS I CAN HELP ANSWER? SINCE OUR LAST DISCUSSION WE HAVE GOD BACK TO THE FA AND I'VE GONE BACK TO THE PROJECT HISTORY AND ALL OF THE HISTORICAL TRANSACTIONS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE AND THE TRANSITIONS REMAINED THE SAME. TRYING TO POKE AND PROD SO MAKE SURE THAT POSITION REMAINS
UNCHANGED. >> SO WE START MAKING THOSE LEASE PAYMENTS A
WHILE BACK BUT NOW THE FA WANTS US TO RESUME THOSE? >> I DON'T THINK THEY EVER STOPPED. THEY DID THE INVESTIGATION AND IT LOOKED LIKE AT THE TIME THE AIRPORT WAS NOT SELF-SUSTAINING. THE FA WAS NOT AWARE THAT WE STOPPED THOSE PAYMENTS. WE JUST WHAT TO PROTECT THE USE OF THE FIELD BUT NOW THE FA CUP AS IT IT SAYS YOU HAVE A PROBLEM AND YOU NEED TO FIX IT AND WE RECOGNIZE THE TIMELINE AND HOW LONG IS IT GOING TO TAKE TO FIX IT. I WOULD SAY IN THE CURRENT STATE OF US WORKING WITH THE FA TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE THEY HAVE BEEN VERY HELPFUL IN THAT PROCESS. THERE HAVE BEEN TWO SCENARIOS WHERE THE COMMUNITY IS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT AN ANSWER AND THERE IS A COMPLAINT FILED TO THE FA, IT MAY BE TOUGHER AND THEY ARE
WORKING WITH US TO RESOLVE IT. >> SO THE ORIGINAL
APPRAISAL WAS DONE IN 2022? >> , YES, I THINK SO.
>> DO YOU KNOW WHY THERE WAS NO MOVIE ON THAT APPRAISAL?
>> I LEFT IT IN 2022 SO THAT DISCUSSION OF PURCHASING THE PROPERTY I
WAS NOT HERE FOR. >> THE $3.5 BILLION TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY,
[00:15:37]
HOW LONG IS THAT ESTIMATE? >> THAT IS THE NEW
APPRAISED VALUE WE DID IN THE PAST COUPLE MONTHS. >> IT HAS TO BE CURRENT WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE PURCHASE SO WILL BE A CLOSER TO WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IS DONE WE WILL DO ANOTHER APPRAISAL SO THAT NUMBER COULD GO UP OR DOWN. IN ADDITION TO THE $1 MILLION WE ARE GOING TO NEED TWO APPRAISALS. AND THEY REQUIRE AN APPRAISAL REVIEW, A THIRD PARTY WHO LOOKS AT BOTH APPRAISALS IN WHICH WHAT IS MOST ACCURATE AND FAIR AND THAT IS THE PRICE WE ARE REQUIRED TO PAY AND THAT IS BASED ON THE
ACTUAL APPRAISED VALUE. >> AND WHAT IS THE COST OF ALL OF THE APPRAISAL?
>> THE MOST RECENT ONE WAS ABOUT $5000. >> IT IF THERE IS A MAJOR
FLAW THEY WILL POINT THAT OUT IN RECENT DISCUSSION. >> SO WHAT IS THE PURPOSE
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT? >> A FEW THINGS. WHAT IS IN THE COMPLIANCE MANUAL WHEN YOU ARE RELEASING PROPERTY FOR DISPOSAL, THAT IS A FEDERAL ACTION. ANYTIME YOU HAVE A FEDERAL ACTION THAT THE FA GETS INVOLVED IN, THERE IS DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
BECAUSE THE OTHER HALF CAME BACK AND WE IDENTIFIED THAT THEIR
WILL BE AN ISSUE, THAT IS THE OUTCOME. >> SO IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IMPACT THE APPRAISED VALUE?
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT FOR SURE. I DON'T THINK SO. >> WE HAVE SOME MORE SLIDES IF YOU WANT US TO CONTINUE ON WITH SOME MORE OPTIONS.
>> SO JUST TO REVIEW SOME OF THE NEW INFORMATION THAT WE FAILED, WE DID CONFIRM THE DEED RESTRICTIONS STILL REQUIRE FAIR MARKET VALUE SO WE HAVE TO PURCHASE IT. WE HAVE OBTAINED CONCEPTS AND PROBABLE CAUSE BASED ON THE COUNTY AND FEEL TO ROUGHLY 1.5 MILLION DOLLARS. ON A GOOD NOTE, THE EA ON THE EXISTING SOCCER SIDE IS TAKING A LITTLE BIT LONGER. SO WE ARE PROJECTING THAT THE FALL AND SPRING SEASON WILL CONTINUE. THE COUNTY WILL HONOR THE EXTENSION, THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. WE DID RECEIVE A SITE LAYOUT WITH DELINEATION FROM A CONSULTING TEAM. AND THEN WE HAVE CONSULTED ON SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THEY HAVE REVIEWED AS
WELL. >> SO THE SECOND BULLET, THAT IS TO BUILD IT?
>> YES. >> SO THE 3.5 BILLION IS THE ASSESSMENT AND ANOTHER 3.5 MILLION TO BUILD? SCYLLA TOLD US THAT IT BILLION DOLLARS?
>> YES THAT'S CORRECT. WE WILL GO THROUGH THE OPTIONS, WE TALKED ABOUT
[00:20:06]
THESE BEFORE AND THEN WE WILL GO FORWARD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. SO WE HAVE THE COMPLEX, WE GO THROUGH THE PROS AND CODS. NO LAND ACQUISITION COSTS AND FEELS USUALLY CONSTRUCTED. THEY WILL REINVEST THAT 7 MILLION INTO THE EXISTING FIELDS. CONSTRUCT ON THE AIRPORT LAND, THE PROS ARE CONTINUED USE, THE COBB ACQUISITION IS REQUIRED, OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE TO PURCHASE IT AND THEN THE FUNDING SOURCES. THE STATUS ON THAT IS WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT IF IT IS LONG-TERM FINDING AND ALSO OUR PZT AS I GO INTO A LONGER SLIDE AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROVIDES TIMING. WITH THE EA OF THE EXISTING SOCCER COMPLEX WE ARE BUYING A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME. RP Z ZONE WILL SHOW IN SLIDES COMING FORWARD INVENTED WETLAND IMPACTS.WE DID GET THOSE TO SHOW YOU. THE NEXT ONE IS CONSTRUCT ALL OF THE GOLF COURSE. LAND ACQUISITIONS, THE CITY ALLUDES THE GOLF COURSE.
MAJOR IMPACTS TO THE GOLF COURSE AND A TIMELINE OF THREE TO FIVE YEARS AND IT IS A LOSS OF GOLF REVENUE. THIS IS ESTIMATED $10 MILLION AS WE TALK ABOUT CONSTRUCTING AN ESTIMATED THREE COURSE YOU CAN JUST GO IN THERE AND TAKE OUT CERTAIN HOLES IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REDESIGNED.
>> WOULD WE BE FAIR TO ASSUME THAT THE COSTS FOR THE ROAD WOULD BE
3.5 MILLION? >> SIMILAR YES. THERE IS ALREADY EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE SO SOME OF THOSE COSTS WOULD BE LESS. I THINK WE ARE ESTIMATING ADDING THE PARCEL BEING HIGHER. IN DESCENDING ORDER OPTION D, THIS IS ONE THAT STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND, THIS IS THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE GOLF COURSE. THE PRO IS THE LAND ACQUISITION, NO LAND ACQUISITION REQUIRED. THE COD IS MOST COSTLY, ESTIMATED $10 MILLION, THREE TO FIVE YEARS AND FUNDS ARE NOT AVAILABLE AND DECLINING GOLF REVENUE.
THE TOP PICTURE IS OF THE WEST AND THERE IS FOUR TO FIVE SPECIFIC HOLES ON THE GOLF COURSE BUT THAT IS THE WEST AND IN THE LOW IS A PICTURE OF THE NORTH COURSE IN THE EXISTING FAIRWAY OF ONE AND SIX. IF YOU LOOK AT THE BOTTOM YOU CAN SEE THE MOUSE AND THAT IS THE WHY THAT IS CLOSEST TO THE CLUBHOUSE. OPTION C, WHICH WE DO NOT RECOMMEND IS CONSTRUCTION BEHIND SIMMONS PARK. THE PRO IS THAT WE OWN THE LAND, 35 ACRES. THE COD IS
[00:25:05]
THERE IS WETLAND IMPACTS. THE COST IS AROUND 4.5 MILLION. WE FOUND OUT A LOT MORE INFORMATION ON THIS PARCEL. THE PICTURE ON THE LEFT SIDE, YOU SEE THE RED OUTLINE, THE FURTHEST RP Z ZONE IS THE DEPARTURE AND THE WAY THAT IS A LITTLE BIT CLOSER IS FOR THE APPROACH TWO -- TWO. WHAT WE LOOKED AT IS THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER. THEY DO FIT THREE FULL-SIZED SOCCER FIELDS BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE FOOTBALL FIELD WITH PARKING.LOOKING AT MORE INFORMATION ON THE AIR, ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE ARE THE WETLAND DELINEATIONS. SO WHERE WE CAN PUT THE FIELDS ARE WETLANDS. REALLY THE ONLY AREA WITHIN THAT PARCEL IS THE VERY MIDDLE PIECE AND GETTING TO THAT IS THE PROBLEM. BUILDING A ROADWAY FOR THE RP Z, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS SOME ISSUES FOR THAT AS WELL SO STAFF IS NOT RECOMMENDING THAT. OPTION B, THERE IS TWO OPTIONS HERE. OPTION B STAFF RECOMMENDS CONSTRUCTION ON THE AIRPORT LAND. THE PRO FOR THIS IS THE COUNTY COMMITMENT OF 1.7 MILLION, THERE IS NO LAND CLEARING AND IT IS THE EXISTING SITES. THE CON IS THAT FUNDS ARE NOT AVAILABLE AND CHALLENGING TIMES, WE ARE LOOKING AT A COST OF ABOUT $6.6 MILLION. AS I HAVE MENTIONED BEFORE WE ARE LOOKING AT REVIEWING PURCHASE AGREEMENTS THROUGH THE FAA AND POSSIBLY EVALUATING LAND SWAP WITH THE SENTIMENTS PARCEL TO SEE IF WE CAN BRING THOSE COSTS DOWN ASSOCIATED TO THE PURCHASING OF THAT PROPERTY. AND OUR OPTION A, STAFF RECOMMENDS CONSTRUCTION ON THE COUNTY LAND. THE PRO IS NO LAND ACQUISITION COST AND THE COBS ARE OFF THE ISLAND, NO GUARANTEED CITY USE AND LOSS OF CITY FEELS FIELDS. WE ARE LOOKING AT A 12 TO 18 MONTH CONSTRUCTION OF THESE FIELDS. AT THIS POINT, WE ARE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION. ANY
QUESTIONS FOR MYSELF OR MR. COYLE? >> I HAVE A QUESTION.
GOING OFF ISLAND IS BASICALLY COST US 1.7 BILLION?
>> IT WOULD TAKE THE COMMITMENT OF $1.7 MILLION THAT THE COUNTY HAS PROVIDED AND THAT WOULD GO BACK TO THEM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF THE FIELD. >> SO IT IS A 3 MILLION-DOLLAR COST.
>> WE WOULD HAVE NO LAND ACQUISITION COST SO I BELIEVE THE COUNTY WOULD
BE REBUILDING THE THREE FIELDS THAT ARE EXISTING. >> OKAY. SO YOU ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THREE AND THREE, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT INTO?
>> I THINK IT CAN VARY DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU WHAT TO DO. THE COUNTY ARE BUILDING 3 FEET NO BETTMATTER WHAT AND THEIR PRICE RANGE IS ABOUT
[00:30:03]
$2 MILLION. THERE IS A ROAD THAT HAS TO BE BUILT, RETENTION PONDS AND A PARKING SO THAT $1.7 MILLION WILL GO TOWARDS THE FIELD IF WE DO NOTHING BUT IF WE WANT TO CONTRIBUTE ABOVE THAT IT IS ABOUT $2 MILLION.FIELD NUMBER FIVE IS $2 MILLION AND FIELD NUMBER SIX IS $4 MILLION.
>> IF WE DID SOMETHING LIKE THAT WITH WOULD THAT BE IT OUR INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT? >> CERTAINLY. BUT IT DOESN'T GUARANTEE IS USED
FOR CITY PURCHASES. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE ONE. OPTION B,
IS THAT ENOUGH PARKING WITH THAT LAYOUT? >> I THINK AS WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF REDEVELOPING THAT THERE IS PARKING ISSUES SO THAT
WOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. >> SO WE HAVE THIS LAY LAYOUT, AND I WENT TO APPRECIATE STAFF BECAUSE THIS IS ABOUT THE FIFTH TIME WE HAVE SEEN THIS LAYOUT. YOU SEE WHERE THE FIELDS ARE LAID OUT NOW IT IF YOU GO WHERE THE HAGER CZAR, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PURCHASING A PART OF THESE PARCELS AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS, THAT $6.6 MILLION, WE HAVE TO DIVIDE THE FEE TO 3.5. WHEN I ASKED MR. COYLE THIS MORNING AND THE SUGGESTION I HAVE SOME PUT IT ON THE TABLE IS IF WE FLIPPED THIS. IF WE TOOK WHERE THE HAGER'S ARE GOING TO BE AND PUT THEM OVER THE SOFTBALL FIELD, I UNDERSTAND SOMEWHERE WE ARE GOING TO LOSE. WE DON'T HAVE TO CONSTRUCT SOCCER FIELDS. IF WE CAN GET THE FAA AGREED TO ALLOW US TO GIVE UP THOSE FIELDS AND COME OUT TO THE ROADWAYS.
IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE CHALLENGING BUT EVERYTHING IS CHALLENGING. MY SUGGESTION IS WHY DON'T WE LOOK INTO
FLIP-FLOPPING. >> WHENEVER WE HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE FA, OUR DISCUSSION WHEN YOU ASKED TO RELEASE PROPERTY THEY WANT TO KNOW THE FUTURE CAPACITY. WHEN WE PRESENT A SLIDE THAT SHOWS A BUNCH OF HANGARS LIKE THIS, IT'S BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO TALK TO THE FA ABOUT THE JUSTIFICATION OF THIS PROPERTY. WE ARE HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH THE FAA AND WE HAVE TO JUSTIFY TO THEM THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH PROPERTY. I THINK TO SEE YOUR QUESTION, WHAT WE CAN DO IS PUT A CONCEPTUAL SKETCH
[00:35:03]
TOGETHER. OFTEN TIMES THERE ISN'T IT A FORMAL DISCUSSION AT AIRPORT DISTRICT LEVEL. THAT THE INFORMAL LEVEL YOU HAVE CONCERNS.>> SO UNDERSTANDING EVEN THE CORRECT CONCEPTS OF LEG SOCCER FIELDS OVER THE SOFTBALL FIELDS IS STILL NOT A GUARANTEE FOR THE FAA?
>> YES. BASICALLY WHERE WE ARE NOW THE FAA IS IN SUPPORT OF THAT CONCEPT.
I CAN'T PREDICT THE FUTURE OF THE FORMAL PROCESS BUT YOU ARE
CORRECT. >> I JUST LOOKING AT IT FROM A STANDPOINT OF CO COST, THE COST IT TAKES TO PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION. SO ME, WHAT I AM ASKING MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO LOOK AT IS IT IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME COST TO PURCHASE THE SOCCER FIELDS AND NOT PURCHASE THE SOFTBALL FIELDS. IT IS THE SAME COINCIDENCE AS IF WE MOVED SOCCER OFF OF THE EYELID. THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME THING IT IS JUST A MATTER OF GETTING THE FAA ON BOARD. I UNDERSTAND T-BALL AND SOFTBALL IS GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE HIT BUT WE HAVE JOE AND WE WILL IMPROVE THOSE.
AND I THINK WE CAN STRIKE A BALANCE. I UNDERSTAND THE FIELDS ARE A LITTLE OUTDATED AND IT MADE A LITTLE TLC BUT WE CAN DO THAT DOWN THE ROAD AND AT THE SAME TIME HAVE THE SAME COST. THAT'S MY THOUGHTS, I'M JUST
THROWING THAT OUT THERE. >> WHAT WITH THE TIMELINE LOOK LIKE FOR THE
PLANNING COST? >> IF IT IS JUST CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE
STAFF CAN DO THAT PRETTY QUICK. >> IF THEY ARE WILLING TO DO THAT THAT IS A NET SAVINGS OF AT LEAST $3 MILLION.
>> I LOVE THE IDEA, MY QUESTION IS WHAT IS YOUR PROPOSAL FOR PAYING? HOW
ARE WE GETTING $3 MILLION? >> IF YOU WANT TO KEEP SOCCER ON THE EYELID THAT IS THE ONLY WAY TO DO IT. THAT IS A COMMISSION DECISION. WE CAN START LOOKING AT THAT PROCESS AND FINDING A FUNDING SOURCE. THEN YOU DON'T HAVE TO SPEND $3 MILLION TO RECONSTRUCT FIELDS.
YOU TALK ABOUT SPENDING $2 MILLION, I'M LOOKING AT IT FROM A PERSPECTIVE
OF SPENDING $2 BILLION AT HOME. >> BUT IT'S NOT TOO
BILLION DOLLARS, IT'S FOR. >> I THINK THAT'S CORRECT, THE EEA IS A LONG PROCESS. I THINK THAT WAS SOMEWHERE AROUND
[00:40:08]
2024 WE WERE STARTING THE EEA. >> ENDED THAT EA STOP? I THINK THAT IS ANOTHER IMPORTANT REMINDER. WE WOULD HAVE TO START WITH
ANOTHER EA. >> YES, THAT ESSENTIALLY TELLS YOU THAT THE
TRANSACTION IS IN PLACE. >> COULD YOU DROP IT ON THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT
OPTIONS? >> WE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ADDED THERE IS AND THS SOME OTHER OPTIONS ON THE PURGES PURCHASES. PERHAPS THE LAND SWAP COMPONENTS WHERE WE ARE LOOKING AT THE SOCCER FIELD. THE AIRPORT DOESN'T HOLD THAT, THE FA DOES. AND THEN THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT OPTION, WE HAVEN'T GOT A RESPONSE ON THAT TO UPLOAD THE IMPACTS. GIVEN THE CONSIDERATION FOR THE TIMELINE ON RESTARTING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, WHAT IS THE TIME WE COLLECTIVELY KNOW THAT WE DON'T NEED THEM
ANYMORE? >> I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE THE SUMMER OF 27.
>> HOW MUCH PROPERTY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? ON EACH SIDE. WHERE THE CURRENT SOCCER FIELDS ARE NOW, HOW MANY ACRES ARE RIGHT THERE?
>> COMBINED IT IS RIGHT IS RIGHT 23 ACRES. >> OKAY AND IF YOU WERE TO FLIP TO COMMISSIONER AYSCUE'S PROPOSAL, WHAT WITH THE TAXA LOOK LIKE
FOR THE ROADWAYS? THAT IS THE CRITICAL PATH? >> YEAH. PERHAPS THAT TAX
COMES UP TO THE NORTH AND THE RIGHT. >> AND CAN WE GO BACK TO THE PROPOSALS? I ACTUALLY THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE OPTION THAT WE OUGHT TO EXPLORE. I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF WHAT IF'S IN FRONT OF IT BEFORE WE KNOW IT IS A WORKABLE SOLUTION. SO THE ISSUE WITH GOING
[00:45:01]
OFF-SITE, WE TALK ABOUT HOW THERE IS NO FIELDS ON THE ISLAND BUT THERE IS A HISTORY. WE DO HAVE PROPERTIES THAT CAN BE RIRECONFIGURED. THE SOCCER GROUPS, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. I DON'T THINK IT'S CORRECT TO SAY WE HAVE NO SPACE. WE COULD LOOK AT REHABBING THE FIELDS SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE SOME LEVEL OF SOCCER ON THE EYELID IF WE WERE TO END UP WITH A PROPOSAL THAT MAKES NO SENSE TO THE BUILD OUT. I THINK WE NEED TO REDIRECT THAT BECAUSE I DO THINK THERE IS SOME LEVEL OF SPACE.TO SAY THERE IS NO NONE I THINK IS INCORRECT. IF WE LOOK AT DOING A SWAP WITH THE FAA, LET IT STAY IN RECREATION OR WHEN IT CHANGED TO AIRPORT USE?
>> THE BIGGEST FOREIGN RP Z, I THINK IT DOESN'T MATTER FOR RECREATION
BECAUSE IT IS A PROTECTED SERVICE. >> SO W WOULD WE ACTUALLY
EXPAND THE RP Z? >> NO. LOOKING AT THEIR ORIGINAL APPRAISAL OF
THAT PROPERTY, THERE IS TO RP Z'S. >> BUT THE CITY HAS NO AFFECTED USE FOR THAT AS A CITY PROPERTY? IT CAN STAYS OLD RECREATION.
>> SO IF IT COST $2 MILLION TO BUILD SOCCER FIELDS AND YOU HAVE THREE SOCCER FIELDS ON THERE, IS THAT REALLY A 6 MILLION-DOLLAR COST?
I'M NOT SURE WE ARE CONSISTENT? >> WE ARE NOT. IF YOU JUST WANT FIELDS THAT ARE UNAPPROVED WITH A GRAVEL LOT, THEN YOU COULD HAVE 4.5, 4.8. BUT IF YOU WANT THE ROAD AND SERVICES AND LIGHT THEN YOU NEED AN
INCREASE IN BUDGET. >> I THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO PURSUE THIS IN DETAIL. GOING BACK TO THE TOTAL COST OF THIS, AT THE END OF THE DAY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT JOEY AND OBLIGATION BOND? THERE IS A LOT OF CONSIDERATION ABOUT THE TOTAL COST NO MATTER WHERE YOU DO IT AND MAYBE BY DOING THE SWAP YOU COULD REDUCE THE COST SIGNIFICANTLY THAT WOULD BE GREAT BUT IT IS
STILL A PROBLEM. >> I AGREE. I THINK BASED ON HOW I AM READING THIS WE ASSUME THE 1.75 MILLION, THE OPTION TO SWITCH PATHS AND A LITTLE AT THE TIME LIVES, WE ARE LOOKING AT 122 MILLION.
[00:50:11]
>> I DID PLAY A LOT OF SOCCER IN COLLEGE AND I COACHED HIGH SCHOOL VARSITY FOR 14 YEARS. I AM VERY INTERESTED IN THIS PROJECT AND I PERSONALLY THINK THE FUTURE GROWTH OF SOCCER IN THIS COUNTY IS OVER THE BRIDGE. IT IS A MASSIVELY GROWING SPORTS. IT IS THE BIGGEST SPORTS IN THE COUNTY AND IT'S GOING TO GROW EVEN MORE. I THINK THE FIELDS OUT THERE ARE GOING TO BE CRITICAL FOR THE FUTURE GROWTH. I DON'T THINK ANY FUTURE RESIDENT WOULD BE MAD AT US FOR MAINTAINING THIS SPACE. YOU ARE RIGHT, IT'S GREAT BUT WHERE IS THE MONEY? AND THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT. I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF GETTING A GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT AND TO CLARIFY WHAT THAT MEANS, WE BORROW A GIANT CHUNK OF MONEY, BUY THE LAND AND DO THESE FIELDS RIGHT AND THAT COMES OUT OF A DEDICATED DEBT SERVICE ON YOUR TAXES. RIGHT NOW IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR TAXES THERE IS AND LIED THAT SAYS ZERO. ID 2019 THERE WAS A PAYMENT BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS COMMISSION AT THE TIME .-DOT NA $.5 BILLION LAND CONSERVATION AND THEY GOT A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN $.5 MILLION. YEARS AGO THEY GOT A SOLAR BOND TO BUY EGAN'S CREEK. SO IF YOU DON'T LIVE IN THE CITY YOU SHOULD DEFINITELY VOTE FOR THIS OPTION BECAUSE YOU CAN'T VOTE FOR IT AND YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY. IF YOU DO LIVE IN THE CITY AND YOU WANT TO KEEP THESE FIELDS IN THE CITY, DOING WHAT'S UP WITH THE MONEY IT AT I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA HOW MUCH THAT WOULD COST AND WE COULD PRESERVE THIS LAND. MAYBE IT'S NOT ALWAYS SOCCER. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S HAPPENING. THE BOND IS DEDICATED TO WHAT YOU BONDED IT TO. SO WHAT'S OUR OPINION ON THAT? COULD A BOND REFERENDUM GET ON THE
BALLOT BY NOVEMBER? >> JUNE FOR NOVEMBER ELECTION AND MAY MAY FOR THE
AUGUST ELECTION. >> THEY ARE WORKING ON A COUPLE BONDS FOR THE
NOVEMBER BALLOT. SO IT'S DOABLE. >> BECAUSE WE ABSOLUTELY DO NOT HAVE $16 MILLION AND OUR BUDGET. BUT WE COULD SPREAD IT OUT IN
PEOPLE'S TAXES. KELLOGG WAS THE GREEN LIGHT BOND? >> 20 YEARS.
>> SO I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO TAKE IT DOWN A COUPLE LEVELS, PARTICULARLY WITH THE NUMBERS AS BEST AS WE CAN AND UNDERSTANDING WHERE THIS MONEY WOULD COME FROM. I ALSO THINK WE OUGHT TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT WHAT WE ARE CHARGING FOR THE USE OF OUR RECREATION FIELDS, PARTICULARLY SINCE A LARGE NUMBER OF THE USERS OF THIS ARE NOT RESIDENTS SO WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT FUNDING AS WELL. IF EVERYBODY WANTS THESE FIELDS ON AN ISLAND THEN
[00:55:06]
EVERYBODY CAN FIGURE OUT HOW CAPOTE UP SOMEBODY AT A BOND REFERENDUM. I UNDERSTAND WHY WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING THE ONES WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING BUT I WANT TO SEE ANOTHER TWO OR THREE LEVELS DOWN PARTICULARLY AROUND FINANCING AND BUDGET AND COST AND WHAT ALL THE OPTIONS FOR THAT COULD COME FROM. I DO THINK THAT COMMISSIONER ASKEY'S PROPOSAL NEEDS TO GETSOME LEGS AUDITS. >> THE FIELD, THEY ARE NOT THE GREATEST, RIGHT?
>> YEAH. >> SO IN THEORY IN A PERFECT WORLD WE WOULD
REWRITE? >> YEAH, I THINK IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT PURCHASE AND LOOKING AT HOW WE GET THEM UP TO STANDARD, IT DOES DRAIN
MUCH BETTER. IT >> BECAUSE I PERSONALLY DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE
THAT MUCH CHEAPER. >> I THINK THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO SEE THE NUMBERS
AND THE ANNOUNCEMENT. >> I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING TO LOOK AT THIS, GOAL NUMBER ONE IS WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF SOCCER. I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS. AT I WOULD HATE TO HEAR A ROADBLOCK FOR SOMETHING THAT WENT
VIABLE. >> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING TO DO AND OBLIGATION BOND YOU HAVE ALL OF THE COSTS LAID OUT. THIS IS THE COST, THIS IS WHERE THE
MONEY IS GOING AND THAT'S THAT. >> YES IT IS FEASIBLE TO GET IT DONE BY NOVEMBER AND THEY THOUGHT IT IS FEASIBLE.
>> WE COULD ALWAYS DO A SPECIAL ELECTION. >> SEEING THAT WE HAVE TWO MINUTES LEFT TO DO WE DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS TO GIVE STAFF DIRECTION?
>> YES. I LOVE THE LAND SWAP OPTION AND I AM ALL FOR BUYING IT AND WE CAN SEND ALL THE SOCCER PLAYERS DOOR TO DOOR TO RALLY THE CITY TO PAY FOR
IT. >> I JUST NEED TO SEE MORE DETAIL IN THE
FINANCES. >> DOES THAT SEEM SUFFICIENT?
>>
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.