Who's the owner behind Residences at 400 Central, the tallest residential building on Florida's Gulf Coast?
The Brief
A luxurious new high-rise called Residences at 400 Central stretches 47 stories high in St. Pete.
The new condo building is owned by a 76-year-old self-made billionaire who started with a bodega in Harlem.
He first came to St. Pete more than 40 years ago.
ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. - Stretching 47 stories toward the sky in St. Petersburg, a luxurious new high-rise called Residences at 400 Central has quite the view from the top of the condo building.
The owner of what will be the tallest residential building on Florida's Gulf Coast has plenty of his own views.
RELATED: St. Pete condo building soars above city skyline, becomes tallest residential building on Florida's west coast
"People want to hear, people want to know what's going on, and I enjoy being on the air every day," said the owner, John Catsimatidis.
Dig deeper
He bought his own radio station, the iconic 77 WABC in New York City. He said he's neither left wing nor right wing.
"I am the middle," he said. "I was a Bill Clinton Democrat. What is Donald Trump? I don't think he's a Republican Republican, but I think he's a common-sense businessman."
What if his support of Trump loses the sale of one of his condos that starts at $1 million dollars?
Follow FOX 13 on YouTube
"I couldn't give a damn," he said.
The backstory
At 76 years old, Catsimatidis is a self-made billionaire who started with a bodega in Harlem and then diversified into other businesses early. He first came to St. Pete more than 40 years ago, and his wife is from the area.
Their new building at 400 Central Avenue has 301 condos, thousands of square feet of office space, retail space and two restaurants. FOX 13's Lloyd Sowers asked him where the people who work there would be able to live.
Local perspective
"You need affordable housing in St. Pete. You need an area to put up homes. If somebody's going to build a luxury building, let them contribute toward affordable building too."
READ:'Beetlejuice' iconic home is now available on Airbnb
Sowers also asked him if he was ready to do that.
"If required to," he said.
Catsimatidis is a partner in a minor league baseball team in New York, but would he get involved in the Tampa Bay Rays deal for a new stadium and surrounding development?
"We haven't talked to anybody in at least 60 days," he said. "If it's a good deal, I always look at it."
What's next
He's planning his own amenity in his new building, a radio studio to talk to New Yorkers about politics and maybe what it's like to live in the tower he built high above St. Petersburg. He said the building is 3/4 sold and residents should be moving in by September.
The Source
The information in this story was gathered through an interview with the owner of Residences at 400 Central in St. Petersburg.
WATCH FOX 13 NEWS:
STAY CONNECTED WITH FOX 13 TAMPA:
Download the FOX Local app for your smart TV
Download FOX Local mobile app:Apple |Android
Download the FOX 13 News app for breaking news alerts, latest headlines
Download the SkyTower Radar app
Sign up for FOX 13's daily newsletter
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
31 minutes ago
- The Hill
To fulfill their promises to voters, Republicans must govern like Democrats
Say this about Democrats: They know how to pass their agenda much faster than Republicans. Four-and-a-half months into the second Trump administration, Republicans have achieved next to nothing legislatively, despite its total control of Washington. Sure, President Trump has issued a slew of executive orders, but all of them will be repealed the moment a Democrat wins the White House. Laws are what really matter and stand the test of time. And despite endless talk about the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' Republicans are still weeks away from passing it. There's a decent chance they won't even be able to do it. Compare this Republican failure to Democratic success exactly four years ago. By this point in the Biden administration, he and Democratic majorities in Congress had already passed a major bill on a much faster timeline. The American Rescue Plan was a $1.9 trillion monstrosity that rewarded leftist special interests, trapped millions of people on welfare and stifled a stronger economic comeback — all while making America's mountain of debt even higher. Democrats showed the same speed the last time they controlled the White House and Congress. In 2009, they passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act — another pork-barrel, debt-heavy, anti-growth monstrosity — within a month of President Obama's inauguration. And that's just one of many big laws they had passed by this point. Democrats clearly felt the need to act — to show voters they would do what they promised. What are Republicans waiting for? Unlike Democrats, they have the benefit of supporting an agenda that will strengthen America. They want to cut taxes for families and job creators, spurring a new era of entrepreneurship and growth. They want to cut spending and reform entitlements like Medicaid and food stamps, connecting welfare to work. And they want to secure the southern border, protecting Americans from crime while restoring the all-important rule of law. It's the understatement of the year to say these policies are urgently needed. They should have been passed yesterday — or perhaps Jan. 21, the day after Trump returned to the White House. But Republicans in Congress are too busy bickering. The infighting is coming from multiple sides. On the one hand are conservative purists who say that Congress isn't cutting spending or taxes enough. On the other side are moderates who want less aggressive cuts and more carveouts for issues like state and local tax deductions. Neither camp is huge, but both have enough members to stop legislation in its tracks. After months of squabbling, it's an open question whether the GOP can make everyone happy and pass their bill. In the first Trump administration, the answer was no. Their bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare — the party's signature policy — was in limbo through July. And when it finally came to the Senate floor for a vote, the Republican majority still couldn't pass it. Imagine if that happened again — if the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' goes down to defeat in a month or two, killed by the party that authored it. Guess what: Democrats have the same kind of divide, between relative moderates who want a slightly bigger government and wacko leftists who want outright socialism. But they still find a way to get bills across the finish line. In 2021, they had basically the same slim majority that Republicans do now, but they papered over the differences to move America dramatically to the left. Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot. I personally tend toward the conservative purist position. But you know what I like better than a perfect bill? A bill that can pass. A bill that moves America in the right direction. Tax cuts, spending cuts and welfare reforms that are good enough. I recognize that they can be improved, and hopefully will be improved the next time Republicans are elected. By any stretch of the word, Republicans have an exceptional bill. It does so much of what they want — so much of what America needs. Perhaps most important, it keeps so many promises to the American people. Voters aren't stupid. When they vote for change, they want to see change. And in 2024, they voted for an enormous change. Halfway through 2025, voters are still waiting for Republicans to keep their promises. They can certainly be pleased with much of what Trump has done unilaterally. But they're still waiting for the important reforms — the kind that only Congress can pass. Democrats govern when they get the chance, even if they move the country in the wrong direction. If Republicans don't get their act together, and fast, it may be a long time before the American people trust them again. John Tillman is CEO of the American Culture Project.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Trump uncertain over whether to support senator's push to raise minimum wage
President Donald Trump signaled he was not sure about whether or not he would support a recent proposal led by GOP Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour. 'I haven't seen it. I'd have to speak to Josh. He's a very good friend of mine,' Trump said Wednesday from the Oval Office after a reporter asked whether he supported the move. 'That's interesting that Josh did that. You have to think about that one.' Advertisement Alongside Democrat Vermont Sen. Peter Welch, Hawley introduced the Higher Wages for American Workers Act last week. If passed, the legislation would more than double the current federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $15.00 per hour. Currently, at least 31 states require businesses to pay most workers above the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour — including Hawley's home state of Missouri. 'Some people agree with it. Some people don't,' Trump added while speaking to reporters from the Resolute Desk. 'You know, some people say it really turns away business, restaurants, clothes and a lot of things happen. Other people agree. I'd have to speak to Josh — he's a good guy.' Advertisement 3 If passed, the legislation would more than double the current federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $15.00 per hour. AP 3 Currently, at least 31 states require businesses to pay most workers above the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. Julia – Hawley has framed the raise to the minimum wage as 'a populist position.' 'If we're going to be a working people's party, we have to do something for working people,' the senator told NBC News after the bill was introduced last week. 'And working people haven't gotten a raise in years. So they need a raise.' Advertisement Hawley's somewhat surprising move to support an increase to the federal minimum wage follows other moves he has made in an effort to push an economic populist agenda. 3 Hawley has framed the raise to the minimum wage as 'a populist position.' Getty Images Hawley partnered with progressive Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in February, to introduce legislation that seeks to cap credit card interest rates at 10%. On Tuesday, Hawley voted alongside progressives like Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Sanders and against the majority of Republicans when he declined to support legislation that imposes regulations on the cryptocurrency market, which critics fear will benefit institutional players at the cost of smaller investors. Advertisement Hawley's office declined to comment for this story.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Donald Trump pushes forward on tariffs despite court challenges: What to know
WASHINGTON —President Donald Trump's trade agenda is about to enter a new phase, as the Republican moves forward − for now − with tariff hikes. In the face of mockery for repeatedly backing down from previous big tariff announcements, Trump is increasing tariffs on aluminum and steel imports to 50%. And his administration told nations in a letter this week that they have until June 4 to provide an update on the status of individual negotiations. The tariffs are expected to be a major topic of discussion during Trump's meeting on June 5 with Germany's new chancellor, Friedrich Merz, and in an as-of-yet unscheduled phone call that the White House says the United States president will be holding this week with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping. At the same time, court challenges threaten to keep his administration from enforcing county-specific tariffs. The legal challenges to Trump's tariffs in court have only been a minor setback, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in a June 1 appearance on "Fox News Sunday." "Rest assured, tariffs are not going away," Lutnick said, adding that even if higher courts upheld rulings that the law Trump cited to impose tariffs didn't grant him that power, the administration would find another legal power to use. Countries quickly came back to the table to negotiate deals after an appeals court allowed Trump's tariffs to remain in place while the administration makes its case. Trump has already started to pull some of those levers, announcing plans last Friday to double tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. Trump said a previously imposed tariff of 25% would increase to 50% on June 4. He signed an order formalizing the hike on June 3. The tariffs were expected to affect Canada, which is the largest supplier of steel and aluminum to the United States, and Mexico among other nations. The European Union promptly warned that it could expand a list of countermeasures it is preparing to go into effect in mid-July if a trade agreement with the United States is not reached. Canadian ambassador to the United States Kirsten Hillman told USA TODAY in an interview that the increase was "unideal" but Canada's steel and aluminum exports have other markets that producers have already started to pivot to where they remain in demand. The higher tariffs will be "very negative for the U.S. economy" and for trade between the two countries, Hillman said. She predicted that the hike would lead to "a wall" being erected between the countries for the two metals, prompting shortages and increased costs for Americans. "Those are really costs that are going to be borne by Americans through price increases in everything from cars to home goods, anything that's manufactured with those two metals, which is an awful lot of what we use in our everyday lives," Hillman said. In a separate escalation against America's trading partners, the office of the United States Trade Representative pressed countries to respond by June 4 with their best offers to avoid higher country-specific tariffs. Trump had previously told countries they had until July 8 to cut deals with the United States as part of a 90-day pause on so-called "reciprocal" tariffs he imposed and then halted earlier this year. A universal tariff of 10% that Trump put on most nations at the same time remains in place, as do the tariffs he put on Mexico, Canada and China that were tied to his efforts to combat illegal immigration to the United States and the flow of fentanyl. After a draft of the letter leaked to Reuters, two senior administration officials told USA TODAY that it was not a final notice. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt also sought to downplay the significance of the correspondence at a June 3 press briefing, where she told reporters, "This letter was simply to remind these countries that the deadline is approaching, and the president expects good deals, and we are on track for that." It was not immediately clear which nations received the letter. Hillman told USA TODAY that Canada, whose minister for trade with the United States Dominic LeBlanc is currently in Washington for talks, was not among them. The meeting is a continuation of the conversation that took place between Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, the ambassador said, and was not expected to immediately produce a major announcement. Trump currently has a higher tariff of 25% on products not covered by a trade deal between the United States, Canada and Mexico, and a 10% tariff on potash (a kind of fertilizer) and Canadian energy products that are not exempted under the agreement. The administration has said it is talking about deals with more than a dozen countries but none have emerged so far outside of a framework agreement with the UK. The president last month threatened, and then backed off, a threat to impose a 50% tariff on the European Union, as trade talks with the bloc continue. The EU declined on June 2 to comment on the reported USTR letter. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer is currently in Paris negotiating with trading partners, the White House said on June 3. Trump will also speak to Merz of Germany on June 5 when the leader visits White House for the first time since his May election. Leavitt told reporters that Trump has been "very direct" in his talks with foreign leaders and had told them "they need to cut deals" with his administration. "He's unafraid to use tariffs to protect our industries and protect our workers, but he wants to see these tailor-made deals be signed," Leavitt added. Trump is also expecting to speak with Xi of China this week, the White House has said. The president last week accused China of violating an agreement between the two nations to deescalate their trade war. China fired back that it was the United States undermining the deal that saw the U.S. reduce a 145% tariff to 30% while negotiations take place. Leavitt affirmed to reporters on June 3 that call between the leaders was likely to take place this week but declined to provide additional details during her briefing. A spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in Washington declined to comment on the possibility of a call, the status of negotiations and whether Beijing had received the letter from the United States' trade representative. The tariffs have faced numerous legal challenges since Trump began rolling them out shortly after taking office. Most recently, the U.S. Court of International Trade paused tariffs that Trump imposed without congressional approval only to have the ruling temporarily blocked by a federal appeals court. A U.S. district court also blocked Trump tariffs from hitting two toy manufacturers at the end of May. The Trump administration appealed that decision on June 2. In another case, a judge on June 2 dismissed a challenge from the state California, saying the filing belongs in the international trade court that is based in New York. The decision will allow California to bring its case to another appeals court. In a series of TV appearances on June 1, administration officials said they were confident courts would ultimately side with Trump. But if a judge rules against the administration, there are "other alternatives that we can pursue as well," the president's National Economic Council director, Kevin Hassett, said in an interview on ABC News' "This Week." He offered provisions of U.S. trade law that give the executive branch the power impose tariffs on imports Trump deems a national security threat or in response to unreasonable or discriminatory trade imbalances as potential options. "This is something we've been studying from 2017 on," he said. "We picked the best way. It's going to be upheld in court." This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump pushes forward on tariffs despite court challenges: What to know
