Wildflower property hearings
Boca Raton at last has scheduled hearings on the proposal for a restaurant on the Wildflower property. Aside from the city council’s collective frustration at the negotiations taking so long, the delay has created another potential problem. More about that in a moment.
The deal itself is what I reported in February. Hillstone Restaurant Group would pay Boca Raton $600,000 a year in lease payments for five years, with the payments rising every five years to nearly $700,000 annually in years 16 through 20. Over that period, the payments would total almost $13 million.
The city and Hillstone could renew the lease in five-year increments for another 25 years. Payments would start at almost $730,000 and rise to nearly $900,000. The city could get added rent if gross sales exceed targets, and the city would pay the property tax on the roughly 2.2-acre property along the Intracoastal Waterway just north of the Palmetto Park Road Bridge.
Boca Raton paid $7.5 million for the land in 2009 and owns it debt-free. So the revenue just from the first 20 years would more than return the city’s investment and provide new revenue just as the city is looking for money to maintain levels of service. Hillstone estimates 15 to 18 months for construction of what would be one of the company’s eponymous restaurants, not a Houston’s as the city and company first discussed.
Deputy City Manager George Brown, who has led negotiations for Boca Raton, explained in a memo that approval would require five actions. The council would have to approve a land-use change for part of the site, rezone that same portion, approve a conditional use by a restaurant of more than 1,000 square feet, approve the site plan and approve a long-term lease that effectively would amount to a sale of the property.
Based on the schedule Brown laid out, the project would go to the Planning and Zoning Board on June 9. The board will review the site plan and the other issues. A collective ordinance would be introduced at the June 14 council meeting, with the final public hearing at the July 26 council meeting. Because of the city’s summer schedule, that is the next meeting after June 14.
Because the key vote would come at what is normally the dead-low tide of city politics, expect the regular council critics to invent a conspiracy theory: Boca wants to ram this through when residents who live near the site will be gone.
Two points:
The first is that the council would have preferred to consider Hillstone’s proposal months ago. That sentiment was evident at the recent goal-setting session. The second is that snowbirds—especially those living here to escape income taxes in other states—can’t expect Boca Raton to operate only on their schedules. If an issue is that important, they can come back and show up.
At this point, the city and Hillstone are in a good place. Brown said that while both sides may have to make minor adjustments, “the fundamental terms have been finalized.” Hillstone General Counsel Glenn Viers told me Wednesday that there may be “a question of verbiage” in the agreement, but that there is “substantial agreement” on the main points. “I feel really good about that.”
Assuming no surprises in the review of the site plan or the lease, this seems like a good deal for the public and the best use for the site. Over 45 years, Boca Raton could receive at least $33 million while adding a downtown gathering spot that preserves public access with a walkway along the Intracoastal. That would meet the goal the council had when it approved the purchase.
And the petition
Now to that potential problem, which is probably more potential than actual problem.
Boca Raton residents opposed to the restaurant deal are circulating a petition for a vaguely-worded referendum that supposedly would restrict city-owned property along the Intracoastal to public use. These residents hope to get the referendum before voters in the August primary or the November general election.
If the city council approves the deal with Hillstone on July 26, it wouldn’t matter what happened with the referendum. If the Hillstone deal got delayed past August and the referendum got on the ballot and passed, that still might not be a problem because the city began negotiating with Hillstone two years ago.
And even if the petitioners get the required number of signatures, the council has final say on whether the ordinance gets on the ballot. Like the Florida Supreme Court with proposed constitutional amendments, the council could toss the referendum because it is deceptive.
The petition’s clear intent is to stop the Wildflower deal—that’s how residents are touting it—but the language doesn’t mention the property. If the petition read: “Should all city-owned land along the Intracoastal Waterway be reserved for public use even if that means depriving Boca Raton of possibly $33 million?,” it might be a little harder to get the necessary signatures.
Boca vs. park district wrap-up
Things didn’t go quite as planned Tuesday night at the Boca Raton Beach and Park District’s board meeting, but there nevertheless was movement on the long-running dispute with the city.
Chairman Bob Rollins had wanted the board to approve a letter detailing the district’s issues with the city’s proposed agreement between the two entities for operating the many parks in their joint system. Instead, board members listed their concerns, and the district’s attorney, Art Koski, will incorporate them in a proposed rewrite of the 30-year agreement.
Chief among the district’s objections, Rollins told me Wednesday, is the city’s wish to set all park fees. Because the district includes the area from Boca Raton’s western boundary to the Florida Turnpike, Rollins said, the district worries that the city’s fee schedule would fall heavier on non-city residents. Rollins said the city’s proposal also doesn’t adequately address youth sports.
Whatever the city thinks of it, however, the counterproposal from the district should get the two sides talking. That would be progress. Also, Rollins suggested July 25 for the long-awaited meeting between the city council and the district board. That is the date of a council workshop, and the council should comply. With luck, the city and district will be close enough to an agreement that they can discuss any remaining issues at that time.
Also on Tuesday night, the district board agreed to propose at its June 6 meeting promoting Briann Harms from assistant director to executive director. Koski has been the acting boss while also serving as attorney. The change would make the district’s operational leader someone who isn’t suing the city, and thus could make a resolution easier to achieve.
Height talks devolve
When two football teams wallow through a first half of penalties and botched plays, the announcer may say something like, “They won’t show this tape at youth clinics.” Similarly, they won’t show the middle hour of Tuesday night’s Boca Raton City Council meeting at good-government think tanks.
The subject was an ordinance to end the ability of developers to apply for extra height in certain zoning districts—notably the barrier island near Palmetto Park Road and Northwest Second Avenue. As Mayor Susan Haynie said in frustration at one point, the goal had been simply to protect residential neighborhoods that abutted areas zoned for commercial from intense development.
Sadly, the simple became tortuous. Property owners and their representatives complained that the change would unfairly restrict development. The council agonized over a proposed change from “shall” to “may” in the wording over allowing extra height. Robert Weinroth offered to end everyone’s misery with a motion to table the item. It failed.
So the council plunged on, offering changes that had City Attorney Diana Grub Frieser making changes on the fly—after she had advised the council that it didn’t matter whether the ordinance read “shall” or “may.” More motions were proposed. They failed.
Eventually, Weinroth brought back his motion to put off the decision. Like hungry travelers for whom a greasy spoon is the only option at 1 a.m., Weinroth’s colleagues agreed. Though the delay didn’t go down easily, rushing a decision could have caused major heartburn for the city. Instead, the only consequence was embarrassment.
Salaries
On that June 14 meeting council meeting agenda will be a new version of a charter change to raise salaries for Boca Raton’s mayor and council members.
Previously, the council approved for the Aug. 30 primary ballot a proposed increase from $9,000 to $38,550 for the mayor and from $7,200 to $28,766 for the council. Current salaries date to 1984. Voters twice have rejected raise proposals.
Robert Weinroth’s change would round off the new salaries to $38,000 and $28,000. More important, this proposal would not allow automatic annual increases. Weinroth said he considers those to be “appropriate numbers” but disagrees with the automatic raise, which would bypass the voters.
Whichever version council members prefer, they must pick one on June 14 or the city won’t get the language to the elections office in time for the primary.
