The World of Jimmy Star Publications Inc. 1940 E Sunrise Blvd Fort Lauderdale FL 33304 +1 954.828.

9979 Call Center worldofjimmystar@yahoo.com www.wojspubs.com CONTACT: Jimmy Star, +1 954.399.1599, worldofjimmystar@yahoo.com

For Immediate Release

The Pompano Beach CRA Sits on Illegally Seized Lands and Fails to Provide Real Community Redevelopment
Pompano Beach, FL, October 10, 2011 The Pompano Beach Community Redevelopment Agency still seems stymied about what to do with the vast amounts of prime real estate property they stole from residents over many years, and how to go about so called community redevelopment. An August 11th Pompano Forum article by Rebecca Dellagloria reported that the Pompano Beach Community Redevelopment Agency was hosting a panel of experts from the Urban Land Institute and developers to recommend development strategies for the Hammondville Road corridor within the citys northwest community redevelopment area and would include a public session to afford the community a chance to speak. Unfortunately for the public, the article released the same day as the beginning of the public session, affording residents little time to make themselves heard in this latest go around. This may be just part of a larger problem, as according to many disenfranchised residents, no matter how many meetings are held over the last decade, community redevelopment has been anything but, and has hurt rather than helped the community. The Pompano Beach Community Redevelopment Agency may still be haunted by the fact that it had no authority to exist as an agency according to a 2007 Broward County Court ruling in the Pompano Beach Community Redevelopment Agency v. Derriek Phillips case, when it had been taking property long before 2007 and even continues to do so since. In the ruling, Broward County Court Judge John T. Luzzo writes, Broward County is a home rule charter county. Any community redevelopment powers not specifically delegated by it to the City of Pompano Beach were reserved exclusively to the governing body of the county pursuant to section 163.410, Fla. Stats. (2005). Broward County, by Resolution dated October 14, 1980 ... delegated certain powers pertaining to community redevelopment to the City of Pompano Beach. This Resolution authorized the City of Pompano Beach to establish community redevelopment districts and delegated to the City of Pompano Beach the power to condemn property for these districts. Broward County did not, however, authorize the City of Pompano Beach to further delegate these powers to a Community Redevelopment Agency. Specifically absent from Broward Countys delegation of authority to the City of Pompano Beach was the authority to create a Community Redevelopment Agency pursuant to section 163.356, Fla Stats (2005). Now this idea of the Pompano Beach Commission having authority to delegate a community redevelopment area, but not having the authority to create a community redevelopment agency, still seems a bit confused within the Pompano Beach city limits. First case in point is the fact that there still exists a Pompano Beach Community Redevelopment Agency. How could that be after such a ruling where the agency was denied its petition to take Derriek Phillips property on the grounds that the Petition in Eminent Domain was filed by a community redevelopment agency which was never specifically authorized by Broward County and called jurisdictionally defective. How come the land seized by the unauthorized Agency was not returned, and how could the agency not only continue to exist, but continue to take other properties all the way into 2011? These questions remain unanswered in the minds of residents and the Pompano Beach Community Redevelopment Agency has not helped to clarify the issue.

1 of 4

To go further, many wonder whether the Agency wishes to keep the issue very confused, for its own benefit. The Pompano Beach Community Redevelopment Agency recently launched a new website, http://www.pompanobeachcra.com, and in its own About CRA page, it seems to confuse the difference between a Community Redevelopment Agency and Community Redevelopment Area. The site reads, What is a CRA? A Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) is a dependent district established by City government for the purpose of carrying out redevelopment activities that include reducing or eliminating blight, improving the economic health of an area, and encouraging public and private investments in a CRA district. The CRA is governed by State Statutes, Chapter 163, Part III. So, according to the website, an agency is a district (area). Or to be more clear, they give the definition for a community redevelopment area (district established by a city government) as the definition for the agency. This could be seen as very convenient in the face of the 2007 ruling acknowledging the authority for an area, but not for an agency. Throughout official materials, often the initials CRA are used interchangeably, sometimes to stand for the geographic area, and sometimes referring to the agency, and sometimes remaining unclear to which they refer. And so what is the big deal anyway between area or agency? Well it comes down to the chain of authority from State to County to City, and to ideas of accountability of government and transparency of government. When a City Commission (comprised of elected officials that are sworn to represent the voice of their constituency and the Constitution) creates a community redevelopment area, the commission may use the power to take lands from residents according to the law, and is accountable to the law and to the public through the publics power to vote. However, when the commission delegates what is thought of as a very sensitive and special power to take private lands from citizens to a separate, appointed agency, then the public loses its voice as it has no power to vote for or against agency members. The lack of a check and balance of the agency by the public opens up this power to be used corruptly. City commissions also have strict regulations for conducting official business, such as Floridas Government in the Sunshine Law, which refers to official business being conducted openly and publicly (in the sunshine), which may or may not be the case for a separate agency. In the recent Community Redevelopment Agency v. Gil Eriksen Properties LLC case, prime multimillion dollar historic non-blighted prime property on Hammondville Road was taken by the Pompano Beach Community Redevelopment Agency without any due process. The Jimmy Star Grand Castle Showrooms and Entertainment Complex sat on Gil Eriksen Properties four lots and included two historic buildings, ample parking, and a large garden grounds area for outdoor events. The historic property was originally a beacon of civil rights, and was restored at great expense by Gil Eriksen Properties to became again a mecca for socially conscious art, entertainment and fashion as envisioned by the famed fashion designer Jimmy Star. The business held community events, hired from the community, provided residence to employees, benefitted local charities, and was an anchor to draw more privately funded development within the area. Gil Eriksen Properties was not allowed to defend against the Pompano Beach Community Redevelopment Agencys taking at trial, and was ordered to sit in the back of the courtroom mute with no representation or ability to respond to the taking. Documentation of the case reveals endless corruptions such as the Community Redevelopment Agencys attorneys mother presiding as a judge on the case and the CRAs attorney lying to judges and committing filing frauds (all discussed in more detail here). The result is a once restored and well-maintained historic property that combined residential and commercial uses and brought international fame and business to the city, now stands empty, abandoned, and a mere shell of what once was (one of the buildings was entirely demolished, and one stands pilfered and decimated) and has become a home to vagrants, prostitutes, and drug dealers. Yet on the CRA books the property is listed as being rented out to a private fraternity which also interestingly enough receives grants from the CRA for northwest community redevelopment area incentive programs. The fraternity does not occupy the building, which is now inhabitable, nor has the fraternity improved the property. And so back to the meeting about the Hammondville Road development, what was it supposed to accomplish? Well, according to the August Pompano Forum article, the meeting is to develop a plan to encourage retail and residential development, capital improvements, and historic preservation of the area.

2 of 4

Hmmm, sound familiar? The problem is, according to Floridas eminent domain procedures, this plan was already supposed to be specified and in place, before private properties are taken. Going back to another interesting part about that 2007 Derriek Phillips ruling is that it was found that the CRA would take property under the auspices of providing affordable housing, but with no actual specific plans for how it was going to accomplish that. The ruling states specifically, the CRA failed to prove with specificity that it had a public purpose in redeveloping the area with affordable residences. The testimony at trial shows there was no objective standard of what would be built on the subject property. Testimony further shows that all of those issues would be addressed later which is insufficient as a matter of law for the taking of private property. So even now in 2011 the CRA just convened another meeting to determine what it should do with properties taken years and years ago, when it should have already had plans in place long ago. In the meantime, where there once was no blight, and the objectives the community redevelopment agency now claims it desires to meet were already met, the Community Redevelopment Agency has in effect created blight. So it seems the Urban Land Institute has been brought in to fix quite a mess and it remains unclear how development on these lands can even proceed without legal repercussions from disenfranchised residents that had their properties taken by an unauthorized agency. Those named to attend the redevelopment meeting were Carla Coleman, executive director of the Urban Land Institute for Southeast Florida and the Caribbean, Neisen Kasdin, former mayor of Miami Beach and vice chairman of the Miami Downtown Development Authority, Thomas R. Kohler, principal at RERC Strategic Advisors in Orlando, Bruce Terzsch, principal at RLC Architects at Boca Raton, Tony Tella, president of the Meranth Company in Deerfield Beach, Suri Yaffar, principal of Zyscovich Architects in Miami, Douette Pryce, president of Pryce Resources in Sewalls Point, and Rafael Rodon, executive vice president of Flagler Development in Coral Gables. For more information on Pompano Beach CRA Gate visit: http://www.wojspubs.com

3 of 4

###

4 of 4