Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Leases topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CRA delays Rafiki Tiki lease changes amid concerns about execution authority and reimbursement terms
Summary
The board voted to postpone action and direct staff to renegotiate the Rafiki Tiki lease after questions about whether an executive director had authority to sign a $900,000 tenant improvement allowance and concerns about permit compliance; the postponement passed 3–1.
The CRA board voted to postpone further action on the Rafiki Tiki restaurant lease and asked staff to return with a renegotiated agreement after the meeting uncovered disagreements over who signed the existing lease, the size of the tenant‑improvement reimbursement, and whether some work proceeded without finalized permits.
The tenant had offered to reduce a previously allowed reimbursement from $900,000 to $700,000, and a board member said he had previously discussed a voluntary reduction to $500,000. That offer prompted a wider review of the lease terms and the process by which the lease was executed.
"When we passed this resolution originally ... the executive director was going to bring back a lease for us to discuss and execute. He went and executed it without bringing it to us," Vice Chair Spiritis said during discussion, questioning whether the executed document carried board authority. CRA counsel said the executive director is not authorized to sign contracts above a stated threshold without board authorization, and the board heard that the signed lease may not be valid until signed by the CRA chair.
Council members also raised operational concerns about the site: whether some renovation work had building permits and whether the restaurant's weekend activities had created compliance problems with code enforcement and police.
Attorney Chris Smith told the board staff would prepare a new lease and that a final lease signed by the chair would be cleaner; the board asked staff to return with a revised lease and clarifications on reimbursement levels, parking, permitting and any first‑refusal language before executing or ratifying any action.
The motion to postpone and direct staff to renegotiate the lease passed 3 to 1, with Chair Guyton dissenting. Staff will return at the next meeting with a proposed amended lease for the board’s consideration.
