County administrator encourages board to proceed with details for Invitation to Negotiate for offers on property while discussions taking place
Benderson Development Co.’s interest in purchasing a Sarasota County-owned building located at 261 S. Orange Ave. in downtown Sarasota prompted a County Commission discussion this week about treatment of the lessee of that building and concerns about preserving historical structures.
If the commissioners were not interested in a sale, then an exchange of land so Benderson could secure the property was another option, Matt Osterhoudt, director of the county’s Planning and Development Services Department, told the board members on March 26.
The 261 S. Orange Ave. parcel is close to the County Administration Center standing at 1660 Ringling Blvd. in downtown Sarasota. In late 2021, Benderson Development paid $25 million for that property, plus two nearby parcels that have been used for parking for county employees and visitors. The county has been paying $1 million a year to lease the building from Benderson while work is underway on a new County Administration Center on Fruitville Road.
In the meantime, Benderson staff has been at work over the past few years on plans for redeveloping the downtown Sarasota property after county operations relocate. The latest timeline for the new Administration Center, as shown in a county document this month, calls for construction to be completed late this year.
Ultimately, the commissioners agreed on March 26 to take more time to decide how to proceed with the parcel located at 261 S. Orange Ave. Chair Joe Neunder stressed to county staff that he wanted to be able to talk with representatives of Architecture Sarasota, who are leasing the property from the county, before making any decision on advertising the property for potential sale.
On its website, Architecture Sarasota explains that it “stewards the legacy of the Sarasota School of Architecture and provides a forum for the education, advocacy and celebration of good design in the global built environment.”
During his presentation to the board members as part of their regular meeting on March 26, in Sarasota, Osterhoudt of Planning and Development reported that Architecture Sarasota has a five-year lease for the building that was executed in December 2023. The document provides for two, five-year renewals, Osterhoudt added, “upon mutual agreement.”
He did acknowledge that a new owner of the property could terminate the lease, but the commissioners could include safeguards for Architecture Sarasota in an Invitation to Negotiate for the parcel.
The county has owned what is known as the Scott Building since June 23, 1998, as shown in one of Osterhoudt’s slides.
“As a human being,” Chair Neunder said, “it’s important for me to reach out to the individuals that are currently there. … It wouldn’t take a long time. I think it’s important that we have these discussions with the current lessee there …”
Neunder said he wants to “make sure that … all the options are on the table …”
He added, “I just … need a little more time. I don’t really think it makes that big of a difference if it’s two weeks or a month at this point. … I will feel that I have done my research, I have done the right thing in speaking with Architecture Sarasota.”
“I agree with you,” Commissioner Tom Knight told Neunder. “We’re in no rush with this.” All five of the commissioners need to be comfortable with a decision about the best way to proceed, Knight added, noting his concern, as well, that more information is needed from Architecture Sarasota.
Commissioner Ron Cutsinger concurred, as well, on “taking a little more time,” so discussions could be undertaken with representatives of Architecture Sarasota.
Neunder also noted that he wanted to learn more “about the historical nature of the building.”
“I agree with you, Chair,” Commissioner Mark Smith also told Neunder. “I think it would be appropriate, out of respect for the folks that have been leasing the building for several years now, to meet with them and kind of get a feel for what they would think would be fair.”
An architect with decades of experience, Smith pointed out that the structure standing at 261 S. Orange Ave. is on the National Register of Historic Places, though he acknowledged that it is “prime real estate in downtown Sarasota.”
Osterhoudt of Planning and Development had noted that factor, as well.
If the board members ended up agreeing to the staff proposal for an Invitation to Negotiate (ITN), Smith added, he recommended that that historical status be acknowledged in that advertisement, as well as “consideration of working with the existing tenant.”
Smith said he believes that Architecture Sarasota has been operating out of the Scott Building for about eight years; its previous landlord, through a sublease, was the University of Florida.
“I have no issues with what Commissioner Smith is suggesting,” Commissioner Mast said. Nonetheless, she continued, she believes that any time the board members can put county-owned property back on the tax rolls, if the county does not need it, that is a financial “benefit to the community as a whole.”
In regard to the historic significance of the Scott Building, Neunder also told his colleagues and staff, “I live in the city of Venice. … If you want to see people that are very passionate about the historical nature and background of buildings, parks, etc., come on down to the city of Venice. We have a great culture of preserving our history down there.”
Again, Neunder said he did not want to make a decision that day on how to proceed.
Neunder also indicated that his colleagues had had one-on-one discussions with staff about the Benderson proposal prior to the March 26 commission meeting. However, he had not taken such an opportunity, he said, because the Sarasota County School District’s spring break was last week, and he was focused on family time, as he has three children.’
Structuring an Invitation to Negotiate
During his March 26 presentation Osterhoudt explained that he simply was seeking direction from the board about how to proceed in the wake of the Benderson proposal for the purchase of the Scott Building or a land exchange to secure ownership of it.
“Once the [county] move is made” out of the city of Sarasota, Osterhoudt continued, county staff no longer would have need for the building on South Orange Avenue.
Therefore, he said, the commissioners could authorize county staff to pursue an Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) process to sell the Orange Avenue parcel, with criteria they specified. After the ITN was advertised, Osterhoudt said, staff would expect completion of the initiative to take 90 to 120 days.
Staff would structure the ITN in accord with County Commission direction, Osterhoudt added. For example, he said, the board members could direct staff to focus on “the highest and best use of the property,” and they could set a minimum purchase price, as well as a maximum amount.
For another example, Osterhoudt continued, the commissioners could specify that they would like to see proposals include creative ideas for use of the property.
Finally, he pointed out, the board could reserve the right not to sell the parcel if none of the proposals was deemed acceptable.
“The board would see all proposals that came in,” Osterhoudt emphasized.
If the decision were made to sell the property, on the basis of one of the responses to the ITN, Osterhoudt added, staff would have to have the commissioners formally designate the parcel as surplus first, making it clear that the county had “no more operational need for that property.”
As the commissioners began talking about their disinclination to make a decision that day, County Administrator Jonathan Lewis told them whatever they decided to do “is fine.”
Nonetheless, Lewis emphasized to them, the proposal for the ITN “is not an action to get rid of the property. This is only an action to put it out and see who might be interested in [the parcel].”
The board members could direct staff to be certain that the ITN called for the new owner not to terminate the lease with Architecture Sarasota unless that organization was able to secure another home, for example, Lewis said. “We could do all kinds of things like that during negotiations,” Lewis added.
Further, Lewis stressed, “We wouldn’t know who’s interested [in the property]” without advertising the ITN, “or the terms [a potential new owner would be] willing to agree to.”
He added that he believed some discussion already had been conducted with leaders of Architecture Sarasota about the prospect that the county might not always own the Scott Building.
Then Lewis stressed again of the presentation that day, “This isn’t getting rid of the building.”
“This was an invitation that came from the private sector, right?” Neunder responded.
“Our staff came up with the process of,” Lewis began before Neunder interrupted him.
“Let me finish real quick,” Neunder said. “I think the public” — and the commissioners themselves — do not understand “the inner workings of the bureaucratic beast,” Neunder continued. Then he began discussing his belief in the importance of his talking with representatives of Architecture Sarasota.
When Commissioner Smith said he was not sure whether a motion was needed that morning to ask the staff to put the discussion on a future agenda, County Administrator Lewis recommended that the commissioners “solidify some of the parameters you would want to know” for Osterhoudt and the county’s Property Management Division, “as they engage in those conversations [so they] would make sure to hit those [criteria].”
Lewis added that he was not certain when the item could be placed on another agenda, but he suggested that address the topic again after the outreach that had been discussed had taken place.
Smith ended up making the motion to delay any action until a future meeting, and Commissioner Knight seconded it. It passed 5-0.