Facilities and Construction Committee - Regular Meeting

Welcome to facilities for June 10, 2026. Entertain a motion to approve the minutes from 8-6.

Move it.

Do I have a second?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Entertain a motion to bring the F items to the floor.

Move it. Second.

All in favor? Aye. Mr. Perez, how are you? Good afternoon.

I am fine, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon, board members.

To start, I just want to let you know that there's a significant amount of pressure on us. Even though you have more items than usual, I expect us to perform.

I'm always here to perform, Mr. Chair.

F1, please.

F1 is authorization to finalize negotiations and execute a lease agreement with Everglades Community Association, Inc., a not-for-profit corporation for use of classroom space by the Migrant Education Program located at 38,000 Southwest 193rd Avenue, Florida City.

Colleagues, any questions on F1? F2, please.

F2 is approval of Memorandum of Understanding with the Omni Community Redevelopment Agency, approval of Transaction and Development Agreement, and development at SBAO, School Board Administration Office, Conveyance Rider with 1370 Northeast Second LLC, for district-owned property located at 1370 Northeast 2nd Avenue, also known as Parcel 7, and authorization to negotiate related future implementation agreements in support of the district's strategic redevelopment framework for the full downtown assemblage. That was a mouthful.

Any presentation or just a reading of the item? No, just a reading of the item. Okay. Colleagues, any questions? Dr. Banos-Mendigo? Yes, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is an item that is near and dear to me and my constituents. When we first began discussing the future of these downtown properties, I was very clear that this could not simply become a real estate exercise. These are Miami-Dade County Public Schools assets. and any redevelopment strategy has to begin with our responsibility to students, families, and the communities we serve. That is why I have continued to insist that I-PREP Academy remains central to this work. I-PREP has needed a real long-term solution. It is a successful school with significant potential, but we must and we cannot continue to treat its facility needs as secondary. If we're serious about the future of public education in downtown Miami, then the expansion of I-PREP should be front and center. As it relates to parcel seven, I recognize that the next phase will be complex and that the city, the CRA and the district will all have important issues to work through. As those negotiations move forward, and as a district board member, I would request bi-weekly updates so I understand where things stand and the progress that is being accomplished. For me, the priorities are clear. Any future space for I-PREP must be safe, appropriate, and truly workable for the school. In closing, know that I prep and the community remain my number one priority. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Dr. Benesmen. Colleagues, any other comments? I'll jump in, see no comments. Excuse me. We've been discussing this for some time, and the more we develop I'm gonna use that term, the more this advances, the more complicated it becomes, right? I mean, one of the things I was gonna ask for is some kind of infographic to keep these pieces, because now all of a sudden, it is parcel seven, it is IPREP moving to another location, it's a fire station, it's an MOU with City of Miami, And one of the things I've been consistent about, whether it's Homestead High School down south, whether it's your I-PREP, or whether it's Hialeah High, the imaginations we're doing to get to these outcomes are gonna put us, or have put us, years in wait to getting them accomplished. So to your point, Dr. Bendis, I would love to figure out a way how to move the definition on I-PREP, especially given the location you guys have identified for it. because if it's tied to the pace at which this is moving, we're never gonna see it. We're never gonna see it. I still, I have a couple, I have the item here, I have the briefing fact sheet, and I have some notes that I want to go over, just because as I'm reading it, I was writing it last night, or actually the day before last, and this says the agreement now before us moves the district from planning into the initial implementation phase And I disagree with that because essentially we are still planning what happens with the school board administration site. And while there is some movements associated with parcel seven, which I've often said, move parcel seven, let's move that forward. I still don't understand how the entire assemblage somehow handicaps or not doing the entire assemblage or putting into this MOU, which is simply just for planning purposes, limits our sale of parcel seven. And throughout the item, it talks about, it's a guiding framework, it's a guiding framework. And I have no issues with some of the conversations with regards to parcel seven, I think that should move forward. I still don't understand how, if in the absence of this MOU, some of the CRA TIF financing wouldn't be deployable in the Omni CRA area, which is designed to be. I don't understand. You know, for example, that is to say, if hypothetically this MOU was not here and we were simply approving the development agreement for parcel seven, would Russell Gabbard, would Crescent Heights not be able to avail themselves of the benefits of the CRA without the MOU framework? And in my opinion, the answer is yes, because everybody else has availed themselves of the CRA benefits. And if we're going to move IPREP, do we need the framework to move the IPREP? I've got a lot of questions and I don't want to belabor the point. I know everyone's tired. It's been a long day. But despite I need to see, I would like to see the flow chart that essentially gets developed with the steps, exactly. The next steps, because all that we've been told is that we need this, we need this, we need this, it's a framework, it's a framework, it's a framework. Now we're introducing other components, dealing with the city of Miami, with the relocation of a fire station, and, you know, I don't know. I'm a developer and a land use and zoning attorney, and I don't fully understand how this works. And I've asked repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly, and the only thing everyone can tell me is that this is necessary for the CRA to be available to help with the future developer of our downtown assemblage. We're sitting on a billion dollars worth of property. CRA is going to help no matter what. I mean, that's just my opinion. And as they look at what they're gonna spend their bond money on, I have yet to see them come forward and say, yes, we're committed to this, yes, we're committed to that. We're saying this is a framework for future planning, except that there's movements going forward and it's a cumbersome process, there's gonna be a lot of things. I have a lot of questions. I have a lot of questions. I don't necessarily know they're gonna be addressed now because they haven't been addressed so far. And they have nothing to do with parcel seven. I think that this board has said that that parcel is, reaches its maximum development potential by the adjacent property owner, and the board already agreed to what's gonna go into that site. I still am missing the part where the CRA deploys its stuff through an MOU that it couldn't be done without the MOU. So I guess that's a question somehow, if you guys want to take another stab at it, because what I've been adamant against is somehow we're delegating our responsibility of planning this site and IPREP to the CRA and now extension to the city of Miami because it involves a fire station that interferes with our decision. Let's sit down and have a workshop and say, this is what we want to do. These are the steps that we're going to get it done. And we have planning professionals on board that why does this have to be squared in the auspices of the CRA, even if the CRA by its nature is already available to support our development within its boundaries. So that's sort of where I'm at because I'm just confused.

Well, Mr. Chair, it's a lot to unpack. I'll try to provide some feedback. So there are two components to this entire project, right? Two areas that have to be unencumbered for our nine acres, nine and a half acres to be developed. The district, I mean, the school board's priority from our workshop in November was I-PREP. IPREP is the mission. Phyllis Wheatley is the mission. Our offices are part of that, but secondary. So the big picture here is IPREP. And we need to have in place a framework with the Omni CRA so that we can guide, we can direct where the value that's going to be unlocked by the redevelopment of these properties, where they go. We need them to go to IPREP. We need them to support the construction of IPREP. We need them to go. And then the second question to that is, where do we locate IPREP? We don't have anywhere in this assemblage where to locate I-Prep. We could. We don't have any field space, amenities, and things like that that they're suffering from now that they would like to, parents would like improved. So the logical choice is Miami Park. That brings in the city of Miami along with the Omni CRA. We have had long conversations with them. The initial attempt was to have it on the east side of the Miami Park property where there's a parking lot. During these last conversations, they asked that, hey, I think you should consider the fire station side. It's on the west side of the park. You're right. That is an added layer of complexity now. And we need to see how that would work, how I-PREP would work on that end. That is a very complicated intersection. But that is the key point. The driver with Russell-Galbert and Crescent Heights, that goes back to 2022. We all know there's a lot of water under the bridge there, a lot of history. We've gone back. We've looked at the deal again. We're bringing the deal forward with a few minor revisions. The value of the deal has increased from 2022. We're actually getting more value than we were in 2022. However, the piece that you referenced, the Omni CRA, is that we need to be involved in the negotiations between Crescent Heights and the Omni CRA's TIF agreement because we don't want the Omni CRA to over-leverage themselves and give away our TIF on our property to Crescent Heights. And then when we develop these 9.5 acres, we have an issue then not unlocking the value that we need for I-PREP.

Can I pause? One second. Let me pause you right there for a second. So what you're saying is that without the MOU, the property that we're selling to Russell Gobbin, whatever CRA is willing to pledge, because that's a separate conversation in terms of, because it's only a portion of it, whatever incremental financing is available in the ether that they're willing to commit, whether from bond or for direct coffers that they've got, you are anticipating through Justice MOU developing that for, applying that for IPREP.

For the nine and a half acres, yes.

For the nine and a half acres? For the nine and a half acres. Okay, because part of the conversation is, well, we have a development agreement, or we have a sale with Russell Galveston, with Crescent Heights, right? And we can put whatever conditions we want in that agreement. And so if it's a condition on him with the CRA that those funds could be approved. What I'm seeing is this MOU is becoming like Noah's Ark, where it's supposed to carry everything, everything on it. And what I'm concerned about is that, and look, I've seen this, I've seen it happen, and by the way, Crescent Heights is an expert because he's done massive projects too, but if we're trying to get to a path to I-PREP, then let's get to a path to I-PREP, right? Let's pick the school, let's find the money, and then afterwards, we can backfill whatever that we applied to I-PREP with money that's generated from the sale of this project, which I don't know when that is going to happen because that's part of the planning phase that we're bringing the CRA into before we've gotten there. It might take an assemblage this size with the displacements and everything else, it is going to take years, years, before we see a dollar of the sale or the proceeds from the CRA from this site. So what I'm saying is while I understand that this ultimately creates the mechanism to leverage, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, I want to get a direct path for her. I want to get to a path where we say I-PREP is going to Miami Park. All right, so how do we isolate that? And if all of a sudden the condition is this fire station thing, okay, well, we've got to leverage that part out. Because what I'm seeing is just, and this goes to the top of my conversation, I just don't see how in due course we get to the outcome that we want. If not, I'll probably come to the end of my term and that IPREP will not be built because it requires the sale of this spot and whatever CRA funds, however, either direct coffers or bond proceeds be applied to that school. Tell me, what's the fastest route to get to I-PREP?

Where we are today, right now. To go any other direction would set us back. At this point, the Parcel 7 deal is before you for approval, and the next step is I-PREP, is to start the conversation with the Omni CRA, is to start the conversation with the city to get some type of interlocal agreement set forth and get the TIFN out, the the TIF agreement between R9 1⁄2 acres and the Omni CRA. Those are the two next steps. That's why we're right here right now. I mean, that is the next step. If this were not to pass, then we would just be set back, but we would have to still go through those same steps. If IPREP needs to be kept in this location... The only area that it could be kept in is Miami Park, and the city needs to work with us on that approach. If not, then we would have to go back to the drawing board and see where we locate I-PREP. Board Member Geller.

Since I have a similar professional background to the committee chair, through the chair, always, I have some of the same questions. Now, Mr. Perez, you and I had a a long talk about this last week, and I appreciate that you took a lot of time to put kind of a supplemental memo together for me, and it was helpful. I wasn't here when this stuff was initially approved, so I'm still playing catch-up every step of the way, but let me just say clearly, because your last comment was, if this was not approved, I haven't heard any of my colleagues, nor am I saying that this should not be approved and we should go back to the drawing board. I think it's long past that. So when I say I have questions, it's not should we do this? It's how this is going to be implemented. It's what are the steps to get us. I mean, I'm looking at the supplemental memo, and these are the things that are important to the school board, one of which, not just IPREP, I mean, how many times has my sister on this board talked about Phyllis Wheatley? How many times has she made clear what a priority that is to the community? And I'm going to support my colleague and sister on that. But My question, I mean, let me ask you the simplest little question that still confuses me. Parcel 7, as I understand it, is across the street. And now we're talking about 100,000 square feet of space, which I yet to have not seen why that's enough. I know it's, what, half of what we have here. So I don't know, is it enough? I'm waiting to see. If there was something that came out, you know, Friday or yesterday, you said something was coming out that shows that it's enough, what is it that's not going to be here? If it's not going to be HR or finance or something, what's the implication of not having them where the superintendent and the board are located? So those are very granular questions, but My simplest one of all is, if parcel seven's across the street, what parcel are we sitting in right now, and when does that come into play? Where is that one being conveyed? I know it's part of the assemblage. When does that one move? And if you could, I want to get to a point here, but just could you answer that one little thing for me?

Sure. So part of... Part of the framework and the memorandum of understanding with the Omni CRA is that we would now negotiate that TIF agreement for the parcel that you're sitting in and within the next six months bring back a recommendation to the board on how these nine and a half acres are going to be redeveloped. In what way are they going to be redeveloped?

And what parcel is this we're sitting in?

Mr. Geller, I don't actually know the name of the actual parcel, but I can get you that information. This is basically the SBAB administration building.

The most important thing, look, I don't want to delay this or slow it down or have it fall apart or anything. This is a good idea. We have an asset. We're trying to maximize it, and I understand just parcel 7 is like $27 million, right? My only concern is it seems like we're delivering on a significant part of what we're bringing to the table up front right now. And as much as I want to prioritize a location for IPREP, which we're going to need desperately, and doing something appropriate to respect the name, the legacy, and the community of Phyllis Wheatley, I don't want to see us doing all the giving up front and having everything else we'll negotiate at a later time. I'm not as worried about negotiating the TIF with OmniCRA. That's not to say I'm not worried about it. What I'm worried about is, is it for sure that our 100,000 square feet in a building that's going to be, what, maybe, is it 30, 40 stories, something like that? If we're going to be floor 11, I'm worried about, is it enough space? Who's going to fit there? Does that have to grow over time? What is it that we're sending out to other school board locations? And I'm very concerned about how we're going to access that space. Are we sharing elevators with 30 floors of condominiums? Every time we try to park, are we going to be parking on 9 and 10 of the pedestal going all the way up? Are we going to have separate elevators? These kinds of little granular things, I'm just concerned that when If we hand over that deed to $27 million of value and all this other stuff is to be negotiated, I'd like some additional clarity and some attention to these details where we know what we're getting when this thing comes to fruition. 100,000 square feet, maybe that's plenty, maybe that's great, but please show me that and show me why we're not giving up our leverage over things like elevators and where the parking is and how we access this space once we hand over $27 million of value to somebody.

Yes, Superintendent.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So going back in history, when this was first started in 2015, this was all a conversation about SBAB. And this board has changed the narrative. That's where we were able to kind of rescue any opportunity, and it became everything about IPREP and Phyllis Wheatley. Really IPREP, IPREP, IPREP. Mr. Geller, I understand where you're coming from, but really this is not really about we can handle what we can do with the SBAB and we discuss other options, right? This has to be like Mr. Perez says. We are at the point where we can accelerate the delivery of I-PREP right as soon as we can. We've been very delayed with this because of And, you know, I mean, the fact that we're here right now, to be honest with you, a couple of years or a year and a half ago when I went with Dr. Bendos Mendingal to the city and we spoke, we might have lost it at that point and not been able to be here today. So my concern really is not I think we can work out the SBAB, the sharing of the facility, the parking. At the end of the day, we're going to end up monetizing that one way or the other. The progress that we've made thus forth, the MOU that's in place, we've had workshops, but absolutely, if we have to provide a flow chart that provides greater clarity, timeline expectations, or where we think we're gonna be, then we're prepared to do that, right? Sometimes we just speak, but we don't show. And so I believe that we can go back and take a careful look at displaying Most of the majority of what we're discussing now, so it becomes clear. You know, we had workshops, but this is really complicated. It's really complicated, but I think we are at a good point to be able to take the next step. I do feel like Mr. Perez, that if we don't at least engage in the next step, we're going to really delay this entire process. delay it to the point that I don't know where we're going to end up again. But that's all, Mr. Espino, that's what I wanted to include there.

Follow up, Mr. Chair. I don't want to take other people's time, but I would just ask, if nothing else, if it could be possible to at least include even in general language, when we describe some of these things that are gonna happen, where we talk about the 100,000, we talk about the term structured parking is used, it says elevators, it doesn't say a thing about it. If we could, I'm not asking for plans, I'm not asking for the count, but if we could at least include In this some between now and next week, not even to delay it, but if they would agree to some kind of more general language, but not the complete yawning. chasm that's there that would say that you know it's got to be. appropriate for our use. It's got to be something that 30 floors of condominiums are not interfering with our ability to use and that our parking has got to be accessible to the auditorium as well as to other spaces. And if you could develop at least those kinds of more specific guidelines that they're agreeing to in advance, I'd settle for that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yellen. I just want to address real quick your comment, Mr. Superintendent, and I appreciate that because I understand that there's been ebbs and flows in this conversation with changes of the board and everything else. From my perspective, the flow chart is important because there's not one way to get to IPREP. And Dr. Benos-Mendigal, forgive me for overstepping, it's your school, your district, but there's multiple ways to get to IPREP. And we should be in a position to say, yes, through this model, it'll take five years to get to IPREP. And we should be able to decide, if Dr. Benos-Mendigal wants to proceed that way, that we got to get to a model in three or in two. Because at the end of the day, it's been seven or so that at least I'm aware of that I-PREP has been waiting to come upon. The other thing that concerns me is I would be in a totally different posture if we knew what we were doing with this assemblage already, meaning that we're moving over there, we're doing these other things. I have, and I've said this from the beginning, and the executive director I know, so it's not a knock on them or his predecessor, it's from the beginning I have felt like we are attaching ourselves and our planning responsibilities to our CRA by them letting us know that this is the way to maximize the money that comes out of your property as opposed to what we want to see with this. And using some of these other attributes to it, I prep and feel sweetly, as the thing that instigates the next movement, even if it's the last thing to be addressed. So all I'm saying is that, yes, absolutely, a flowchart, timeframes. We should be able to see that a decision made today means for Dr. Bernas-Mendigo, three, four, five, six, seven years before an IPREP comes up out of the ground. That's significant. And the answer and the question is, is there an alternative that gets us there faster, even if it means coming out of pocket and figuring out how to get to it? and I've said that about Homestead High, I've said that about I-PREP, and I've said about Hialeah High, because either we're individual districts where only we pull in our own funding for it, or we're a district that pulls together when there's a significant need that individually we can't manage on our own, right? So that's, you know, because if I don't have any major capital and we all put in all of a sudden to get her the 40, 50 million dollars that she needs or Robert another 80 million dollars for Hialeah High or Homestead to get you the foot in the ground, the nail in the ground, that's what it's going to take. I just think that we're putting all these things in there on a process that's taking this long. I don't want to be around this table four years from now, five years from now saying, man, if we would have just looked at alternatives, we could have gotten the IPREP faster. Whatever we generate from this site, it'll be for the benefit of the district overall. But if I prep as a destination, we've got to get there as fast as possible. Yes, Dr. Ochoa.

Yes, Mr. Osuna, and I just want to say something, right, because you have mentioned the concern about the CRA driving the train and us not having enough input and negotiation power, and we heard you. You've brought this a couple of times, and in the conversations with Raul and the team, that has been the issue. We are... advocating for our land what we need to do and there's been pushback and we continue to do that so I don't want the impression that we are not moving and articulating and advocating as part of this negotiation for what we need. I believe we can deliver a flowchart I believe what Mr. Geller was requesting Raul told me we basically have that maybe we have to make it more concrete and specify it more and And so we're prepared to do that before the next board meeting. But again, we are now in the best place. And I know you say it's taken a while, but it has. But since if you look at it, we've moved incredibly fast after we were able to recover the possibility, not when it was canceled, because this has been. a project like it never stops. So we can provide the flow chart before the board meeting and we can also provide a more descriptive or more illustrative approach to what Mr. Geller is requesting.

Thank you. Madam Chair.

Yes, thank you very much. And of course, Mr. Chair, thank you. This is your area in your arena, so thank you for your expertise. And to Board Member Bendros-Meningal, I know that this has been your plight for so many years. It feels like it was like 10 years ago that we started with this entire scenario. As a matter of fact, We were almost ready to go at one point in time, and I asked a question about the appraisal. Do we have an appraisal? And the appraisal had been done years prior to, which ended up being a huge amount that we would have lost if we had not addressed the issue of the appraisal. So that was something that held it up because we are all gonna look out for the best interest of this entire school district, not just like you said, Board Member Espino, not just our own areas that we represent, but all of them. because, again, this benefits our students. And I recall Dr. Gallin, I had the issue of the appraisal, Dr. Gallin had the issue of the Omni scenario and the deadline, which was December, if you recall. And this is from memory, I may be off a little bit, but I believe it was December. And if by December the situation had not been resolved, we were gonna be done with that Scenario, so we've been dealing with this forever and of course we wanted to move on because we want I prep and Phyllis Wheatley And I know the superintendent has has shared that that's his priority as well. I thank you for that But this is very This is extremely comprehensive this this is going to take a a lot more understanding before we're able to get to Wednesday. So in addition to what you said you're gonna provide, Mr. Superintendent, I personally am gonna ask for another meeting, person to person meeting, so that I can go through and ask as many questions as I need to before Wednesday, because there are a lot of areas still that need more responses from administration and questions that are gonna come from the board. So that when we get to the board meeting on Wednesday, then we have all of the information, hopefully, that we need to have to make the best decision possible for all those that we represent. But I do have to emphasize one more time, Phyllis Wheatley is part of this process, but the main one was IPREP. And the person that was next to you, Mr. Superintendent, you said it, at that meeting, was Dr. Bendros Mendingal. And if you recall, we had the parents The parents from that school, from IPREP, all come to speak to us and thank us for everything that we have been doing to try to get them their new facility, which is the number one and should be the number one priority right now. So I personally am going to request a meeting next week prior to Wednesday so that I can go over the questions I have. But after or when you meet with us to bring the additional documents that you just alluded to. So I appreciate that. And that's all I have, Mr. Chair, for this time.

Madam Chair. Mr. Chair, Madam Chair, yeah, I just wanted to add you're absolutely correct with what you stated regarding the value of the property. We did reassess it, but also the value of the deal went up. So from 2022 until present, we have an additional $11 million of added value to this particular deal, and all that information is in the actual board item if you guys want to look at it.

Thank you. Thank you.

Vice Chair Colucci, do you have one or two to speak? No?

Yes, but I don't know where to begin. And this is not, that's why I've been listening so closely, because this is not definitely, by any stretch of the imagination, my area of expertise. But just following along and listening, it seems like we're going into things, maybe correct me if I'm wrong, without having some sort of an idea, a plan, a framework, and I think that's what Board Member Geller was referring to when he said, you know, we don't have an idea of what we're looking at, and then I feel like we're gonna get further into negotiations And then to come back to the board, and then maybe we say, hey, I think that's in the essence of efficiency, not something prudent. If I can ask some of my colleagues on the board that are more versed in this, because I really am not, and Mr. Perez as well, am I correct in that assumption that as we go through this process, these things will come back to the board through the chair?

So yes, through the chair, Ms. Colucci. There are two parts to this item. You have the parcel seven, Crescent Heights development, which includes our main school board offices. That deal is pretty much wrapped up. There's still one more item that needs to come back to this board, to the questions that Mr. Geller answered. I checked, they're not in the exhibits, but we do have plans that identify all our layout, our elevators, all of the questions that he asked are there. So that is pretty much already completed. The second step, and you mentioned framework, is the MOU with the Omni CRA. So that is actually laying out the framework as to what comes next. If approved by the board, we will sit down with the Omni CRA and work out an agreement that we bring back, two agreements. One, an interlocal agreement between the Omni CRA, us, and the City of Miami for the use of Miami Park, where I-PREP will be relocated to. And number two, a TIF agreement between the school district and the CRA on the value that this property is going to unlock. As you all know, these are tax-exempt properties, These properties are not generating any property tax. They're government property. Once they get redeveloped, all that property tax that will be generated goes to the Omni CRA. So we want to make sure that since it's our land, all those dollars that are being generated are now going to our priorities. Number one, Phyllis Wheatley. Number two, I mean, number one, IPREP, number two, Phyllis Wheatley. Those two educational components is the mission that we were tasked with, and we want to make sure that the value that this assemblage unlocks goes to that. So that's what we need to work on with the Omni CRA. Bring that back to you. So these are the steps. Bring that back to you for approval. Bring the inner local of the city of Miami and the Omni CRA in the district. back to you for the relocation of IPREP at Miami Park, and then within 180 days or six months of approval of this, we think we can do it a lot sooner than that, bring back to you the vision of this assemblage, this redevelopment, and what it would look like, what we're expecting, what type of workforce housing, what mixed use, you know, so we can start to prepare an ITN that we control. We control the whole process of the issuance of this solicitation for these properties, and it's not being controlled by the Omni CRA.

So through the chair, basically we're looking at four months, 180 days, correct? No, yes. 180 days is six months. Six months, yes. I'm sorry, my math is off. My brain at this time is... I know, for everyone, I assure you. So we're looking at six months now of more process, which for it to come back to the board to then decide through the chair... For me, and this is just my honest opinion, I like having, and I know you've been gracious and very helpful in communicating with me, but sometimes when I hear the questions of other colleagues that are more well versed, I am better suited to follow up and understand this a little bit more. So I'm really engaged in this conversation because of that. I feel like I'm always learning, I'm always able to grasp things better. Sometimes with a question that's phrased in a way that I wouldn't think of asking. So one of the questions that board member Espino asked was getting all of these other, you know, the city of Miami and all of these other, was this initially, I don't ever recall this through the chair.

So through the chair, yes. This was the initial plan from day one? The initial plan with the fire station and all of that? Yeah, I don't recall that. I was just going to add.

Excuse me. Yes, yeah, I don't recall anything about a fire station relocation or anything. So those are things that are, like, getting put in there before, you know. Okay, go ahead. Through the chair. You can continue.

Oh, no, through the chair, Ms. Colucci, absolutely. The deal is the same for the exception of Omni CRA was, I mean, IPREP was going to be located on the east side of Miami Park, and those discussions are still to be had. The Omni CRA came back now and said, would you consider relocating it on the west side of Miami Park? On the west side of Miami Park is where their fire station is. It's the one right here by Miami Avenue where the train tracks are. So they were saying, can you look at relocating it there and then maybe, yeah, expanding. We're going to need some of the park because we just can't do it on the fire station. And so that's the only difference that has been added. Along with that, if we do move in that direction, there was they want to include a new fire station within our nine and a half acre development here. So that is the difference from the way it was planned before.

I'm done for now. I'm just processing because it's a lot of information.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Yeah, I'm also trying to like, and from the beginning, I was like, I'm glad we have board members that understand this a lot better than I do from the beginning. But as Vice Chair Colucci said, in trying to get as up to speed as possible and listening to some of my colleagues and their questions helps me formulate, you know, some of the questions I have. So I'm not gonna reiterate a lot of what's been said. I'm following and I understand why we are where we are. I understand that it's next steps. I understand things will continue to come to us. I'm happy about that, right? So I think what I'm left with after hearing everyone just goes back to something that board member Espino said that I'm not sure that was answered, which is, Was there or is there any other way to get to I-PREP that doesn't seem to take as long as it's going to take? I don't know if that question was really fully answered. I heard, right, many years ago you were tasked with we need to resolve And I know a lot of what's taken a long time has been out of our control. I know that, right? I know the history of that. So just sitting where we are now, is there any other way to get there faster other than continue with the process that we have through the chair?

So the main issue that we have with I-PREP, it's... there is a monetary issue, right? But more importantly with I-PREP is location. Is where in this Midtown Arts and Entertainment District, our center area, can we find land to build I-PREP. That is the biggest obstacle that we have. The only area available to us is Miami Park. We don't own Miami Park. The city of Miami owns Miami Park. So we want to partner with them to build the school adjacent to the park so that they can have their amenities. That is, it's not so much the dollars, even though the dollars are critical, because it will be an expensive project but the dollars are where we are sitting it's where do we build it where and that is the more critical piece and that is the biggest obstacle and if not in miami park then we would have to explore our properties where would we build iprep the closest locations to sbab in this area are phyllis wheatley site or paul lawrence dunbar k8 site those are the closest available properties that we have that we could maybe locate IPREP at. So that is the biggest obstacle, Ms. Blount.

Through the chair. So the MOU with the CRA and Parcel 7, that's the funding source, and then working in conjunction with the city is for the location, essentially. Absolutely.

More importantly is that interlocal, yes.

Right. And we've explored other options like those other campuses, but now you're talking about getting rid of those schools and moving I-PREP to a location that may not be favorable to other families.

And thank you, Mr. Chair. And I just want to add that I want to thank also Dr. Bender-Smilingall for going with me to the city. And we've been informing the parents, right, about these steps that we intended to take. And so that's part of an important component of everything that we've discussed with the board. So we're left with making sure that we provide, I believe, enough details with maybe some points that need clarification as we move into Wednesday because maybe, you know, like Ms. Colucci is saying, you know, we all learn from questions that everybody asks. We do as well, honestly. You know, sometimes we don't think about certain angles that you may be thinking Mr. Espino hasn't. And so as a result of that, I think we've collected enough information to really provide answers to those questions so that we're all clear, right? Like right now, Mr. Perez speaks to not the funding, it's really about the location, how limited we are. That's an important piece to acknowledge and kind of understand. So we'll try to make it, we'll try to create a flowchart or a visual with all these critical elements that will provide clarity at this point. Mr. Espino?

Just a quick follow-up. And you might have said this, Mr. Perez, when you called me. Why moving from east side to west side? What's in it for them? Are we at a loss by moving east to west? Because you had mentioned that now access in street would also be limited. Yeah. Pros and cons, right? And why the request for us to consider moving to another location that now complicates because of a fire station?

Through the chair. It's a negotiation, Ms. Blanco, and their fire station currently has a lot of capital needs. So they threw that out at saying, you know, if you relocate on that side and build a new fire station for us in your assemblage, you know, then again... They own the property, so these are negotiations that are gonna be ongoing, so we have to see if that is something viable to us, even location, where the fire station would be probably would be in one of our outer parcels with a building, residential building over it. Cost, they would probably more than likely absorb those costs, but they need, you know, it's like a trade of spaces, so we'll give you this space, and then we'll build a fire station on your space, but again, Like I stated earlier, for us, it's location, it's land. And if we get to a point where that's not viable, then it's not viable.

Just to clarify, because when you started with your, through the chair, when you started with your response, it seemed, and I don't remember the words, it's been a long day, but it seemed like we'd be paying for the fire station, but then you said no, at their cost. So it's more about providing land for their new fire station.

It's a land, sort of a land swap. They pay for the fire station. We build our school on the old fire station's location.

But that hasn't been finalized. I'm sorry.

No, no, no, keep going.

That hasn't been finalized. That will come back to us. But it's part of an MOU and how tight are we to that MOU.

An interlocal agreement. Through the chair, this starts the process. They want to, you know, it's like everything. They want to make sure the school board is committed, that this is something that they want us to move forward with so that we can then enter into those conversations and negotiations and bring back agreements.

And for us, I'm sorry. Keep going. For us moving to the fire station side, you did mention transportation, where the street is, presented some initial concerns. What exactly are the concerns? What are we looking at? How does it impact us versus the east side?

That will be closely looked at now, but yes, superficially, just from my take, it is a very busy intersection. It has a lot of traffic, vehicular traffic, but it also has trains, and it has Brightline, and it has all of that that goes through there. That road dead ends at that avenue. It doesn't exit. So these are things that we will now look at with our design professionals to see how If possible at all, how parent drop-off would work, how parent pickup would work, how big of a space we would need, how high would this facility be, all of that would be looked at.

But in approving this item, are we already committing to an MOU that puts us on that side?

No. No. No. Absolutely.

It just kind of commits us to consider it.

Yeah. The MOU is not binding and does not commit the board to any of it.

Right, because it just sounds like it's a high level, it's complicating the process a lot more to have to move to that side of the park. I had forgotten I already had that visual of the bright line, and that's ridiculous as a parent, I would say, to drop off a kindergartner there, you know?

Yeah, I mean, through the chair, as far as the agreements, Ms. Blanco and the board, I mean, we have a number of these that we take. We work with the counties. We work with municipalities. where we build on their property, they build on our property. To the level that we're discussing today, no. But it's not foreign to us. There are a lot of aspects that are familiar, and then there's some just bigger aspects that we need to deal with.

And I understand and I appreciate how complicated this is. My issue is, for example, and I know there's CRA funding to bear. If Miami goes out for its fire and police bond, there's going to be leverage, there's going to be some monies associated with that. My issue is that, for example, if you do the fire station side, you can't close down that fire station demolition until there's another one in place. Because you need a basic level of service for the area. And so, for example, if it's relying upon the future redevelopment of a building where that's gonna be incorporated in, I'm just saying, I'm looking at this thing and I think we all want the same thing. I really do. And we're all trying to figure out how to leverage as much of the value of the land that we're on for the benefit of our students as possible. I'm saying to you, I know what it is to develop a decade-long project. It's going to take that long. It's going to take that long. So, I mean, I would, to your point, to your point exactly, I would want to know if there's a possibility of getting, I'm sorry to say this, getting Dr. Bredesen to go on new I-PREP in two, three years, all right, then maybe it's about we have to pay more over here and leverage less of our resources here and we'll backfeed it another way because I'm just saying I think it's going to take a long time.

The question, Mr. Espino, and I agree with that methodology that you're saying absolutely 150%, but the question is where? Where do we build it? No, I agree. Because if we don't want to pursue this route and not, again, like I mentioned, and not try to partner with the city, then we don't have anywhere available space here unless we want to take one of our parcels and create a one-story field with a school. That would be probably the only areas. We would have to carve it out of our nine-and-a-half-acre assemblage.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Pinot. And again, I just want to clarify, right? This is the... the fire station here does not mean that we are automatically We are just, we have to share with the board what they mentioned to us because we, and what we're doing here is requesting a step, the approval of a step for us to even engage in those conversations as we move forward. But this is very preliminary. Ms. Calucci's right, right? The fire station just came up. So what we're doing is, and it came up recently. It's not like it's been sitting there for weeks. So we had the obligation to mention it as a, consideration point that they want us to look at it. And, you know, Mr. Espino, like you, I'm worried about that, right? Because of one thing, then you delay the other. That's part of the conversation as well. You know, we're going to give you this, but then is it going to be pending on something else? No. Then that means the delay of the school, the delivery is even more complicated. So this is really a first step in us being able to say, you know what, we're ready to engage and discuss the possibilities of what we have to do. Yes, Madam Chair.

Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Chair. And thank you to everyone for the conversation we're having, because this is extremely important. So obviously, anything and everything that happens has to come back to this board for final approval. That's a given. We are now in the conversation stage. Now I'm going to ask a question. Obviously, there's no land. We know there's no land. other than the options you've given us, unless we go to our own sites, which I don't think is what the IPREP parents would like to see. Based on my experience, having sat here and listened to parent after parent after parent, listening to Board Member Bendrels-Meningo for years addressing this issue, And one superintendent and another superintendent, because there have been two superintendents that have dealt with this issue, and I've sat here with both of them. So we've heard this story many, many times over. Everyone wants the best for our children and the best outcome for IPREP. Obviously, they're the ones that are mainly being impacted. And true, the fire department issue is a recent one that has come up for conversation. And location-wise, just the Bright Line alone, when I just got on the Bright Line not too long ago, it was a nightmare. you know, the traffic area around there. You remember that, Mr. Superintendent, we got on it together, right, to go to Tallahassee. So I can only imagine the poor parents of our students, our little ones, having to deal with that every day. But that's up for negotiation. That's something we are going to be discussing with whomever the powers to be are over there. So my question to you, Mr. Superintendent, The same way that this board advocated in Tallahassee for the funding that we did not have, and we went from point A to where we are right now, which is a much better place than where we were, again, because of all of us going out there to advocate for our students and for our schools. Can we do the same thing here in this arena? And if the answer is yes, whom do we need to speak with? Is it elected officials, commissioners that are in the city of Miami? If so, whom? Whom do we have to speak with? Because I know that We've advocated before for other things. So is that something that you would, at this point, be recommending or be open to?

Through the chair, Madam Chair, I would probably recommend not at this point.

Okay.

That's why I'm asking that question. Because we want to begin those conversations. But ultimately, this will be in front of the OMNI CRA board. and then the City of Miami Commission. So those are the entities at play when these agreements come to fruition or come for approval. So as we further get into those conversations and we provide additional briefings, I think that that might be the appropriate time for you or for the board to advocate and reach out to those particular entities.

Thank you, and that's exactly why I'm asking that question, because I needed to have your input on this particular arena. And Board Member Bendrels-Meningo, again, I know that you are the ones that are gonna talk about on what side the school would be, right? Option A or Option B. Board Member Bendrels-Meningo, I know you've been in communication with your parents from I-PREP. Are the parents from IPREP at all aware of these new options and the whole thing with the fire department and everything else that has come about recently or not?

The PTA was informed of it. So they are aware. I don't believe they are aware of all the details and all the options still that are available. Again, the same as we're conversing here. It's not set in stone, it's a conversation, it's a negotiation, but we first need the authority from the board to move forward and have those conversations.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Glad you asked that question, Madam Chair, because I've asked that when there are meetings, I keep hearing the word we, we, we, and I'm concerned that if my parents were to have met me at the park, They asked me some of these questions. I don't know if I would have been able to answer them to the degree that you are, so I'm going to ask again. When we're having meetings that pertain to items that occur in District 2, my whole staff is in here now, and they will do the calendar bit and Say to me, honorable, you've got to go to a meeting to talk to the parents. I haven't talked to the parents in a bit. I haven't been to a PTA meeting in a bit. Because this is crucial. We all know who my parents are at I-PREP, we know. So I'm gonna ask again, I'm being redundant. I'm gonna ask again, as Madam Chair just asked the question. And I believe you all will say, yes, she has asked us to make sure she's included in these meetings so that I can become a part of we. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you.

Forgive me. Okay. Well, there's information. There's some homework you guys have for us, and we look forward to receiving it before the board meeting.

Perhaps through the chair, as we go through these negotiations or you go through the negotiations, is there a way that we can be updated throughout so that we don't get to this point where we are going, well, where did this come from? Because that's six months from now. Is that possible through the chair?

Yeah, Dr. Rodgers.

Thank you, Mr. Espino. Absolutely, Mrs. Colucci, this is so complex, and the need for the board to be informed, I see it. I see it. It resonates. We will do that. Absolutely, we will.

just to kind of piggyback on what Board Member Colucci said, and not on email and writing, like maybe as part of new business during this committee, right? Just because I benefit so much from hearing my colleagues and their questions and their interpretations that just something in writing might be a little bit overwhelming anyway, and I would still need to ask questions. So I don't know if maybe we could do that.

We can fold that in. Through the chair, Mr.

Chair. I'm sorry, Mr. Superintendent.

No, I just wanted to point out that it is, it's actually in the recommend of the item, it's recommend five, that we update the board regularly throughout the entire process.

And so what we'll do is that, let's qualify the regularly by doing like an update at every committee meeting. Is that, would that be appropriate?

Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. F4, please.

F4 is the approval of a master development agreement, participation and revenue sharing agreement, and ground lease with Housing Trust Group, LLC, pursuant to ITN 24-014CM ground lease opportunities on school board-owned properties for the redevelopment of the Goodwill site located at 24375 South Dixie Highway, Homestead, Florida.

Thank you. This is one of four parcels that we've been thoroughly working through in my district, and so I'm really grateful for all the work done there. I'm glad to see with this month's agenda, we'll dispose at least of three out of the four and hopefully next month the fourth so that we can, everything we're talking about, move into doing it and get these agreements in place and get shovels in the ground. Thank you.

Some are easier than others, yes.

Any other comments, colleagues? Okay, F6.

F6 is rejection of Blue Nest development for the 224th Street site pursuant to ITN 24-014CM, ground lease properties on school board owned land.

Any comments? F7.

F seven is authorization to execute a revoke book revocable license agreement with the Department of off street parking of the city of Miami, also known as the Miami parking authority for use of the board owned parking facility located at 1610 Northeast First Court.

F 26.

F26 is authorization to amend the architectural engineering project consultant agreement with SBLM Architects PC by adding MEP Engineering Inc. as a mechanical and electrical engineering sub-consultant for the remaining term of the agreement.

F41.

Skipped over F27, Mr. Chair.

Oh, forgive me, I'm sorry, F27.

F27 is authorization for a one-year extension of the construction manager at risk CMR miscellaneous agreement for projects with construction budgets up to $4 million each under the same terms and conditions and fees as the original agreement with the following firms, Mexal and Unitec.

CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Perfect. Thank you. Now F41.

CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. F41 is the change order confirmation approval item.

I do have one comment, colleagues, if nobody else has anything. Raul, at JCB, we have the change, and again, if you don't have an answer right now, that's fine. You can get it back to me later. We had scoreboards. We had the items listed here, but there was also a conversation about inverting two rooms, the gym and the dance room, which was going to require a change to the flooring because of the way that it was poured, and that was a request from the school, and we discussed it, but Look into it and let me know.

Yeah, I'll go back and check. I believe we are making the switch, but it was at no cost. But I'll go back and give you an answer.

Because I do know that the gym floor was poured, I think, like two inches lower. Yeah, there was a depression.

But I think what we asked was that we keep the dance floor in place, put a different floor on top, so in case we ever want to reconvert that room back to a dance.

Okay, cool. Thank you. Colleagues, anybody else want to add 41?

Authorization to approve the pre-qualification of contractors for educational facilities, construction.

Excellent. Seeing no other comments, entertain a motion for the F items. All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed? Any new business for my colleagues? Yes, Dr. Bernos-Mendigo.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm inquiring about 2111 Northwest 41st Street, 94. 2111. No, I don't think so.

Northwest 41st Street.

90 Florida 331. Did anyone tell me what's happening there?

This came from the community. Through the chairman, Dr. Bendris-Mindingo, I'm not aware of anything related to that address. You mentioned 2111? Northwest 41st Street? Let me look into it and I'll get back to you, ma'am.

Dr. Benesmenig, will that exhaust your comments?

Yes, sir.

Okay. Mayor Blanco.

Just a follow-up question, Mr. Perez, to a conversation we had. If you don't have an answer now, that's fine, but just your reminder sitting in front of me with Robert Morgan and the auditorium.

I have the information in my e-mail box, Ms. Blanco. I will get it to you either later today or tomorrow.

That's perfectly fine. Thank you.

Yes, I'm sorry, Mr. Chair and Board. Yes, the maintenance comprehensive report and the GOB update have been provided in the app packet. If there are any questions, I'll be more than happy to answer them.

Just a quick congratulations on closing another five projects since last month. I want to see them all closed fast. Thank you.

We're trying, Ms. Santos. Well done, well done. Office of Community Partnership Education and Business Access. Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair. The report for the GOB from CEPIBA was submitted. If there's any questions, I can answer them.

You know, Dr. Amica Roberts has the best position, because it's at the literal very end where everyone's like, ya no mas, no more, please, waving the white flag. We're going to move her to the front. We're going to move her to the first. Seeing no other business, entertain a motion to adjourn. Move it. All in favor? Aye. That concludes our meeting.