city of miamiegov.ci.miami.fl.us/meetings/2005/7/1105_m_city_commission_05-0… · commendation for...

Thursday, July 7, 2005

9:00 AM

Meeting Minutes

City of Miami

City Hall3500 Pan American Drive

Miami, FL 33133www.ci.miami.fl.us

City Hall Commission Chambers

City Commission

Manuel A. Diaz, MayorJoe Sanchez, Chairman

Angel González, Vice ChairmanJohnny L. Winton, Commissioner District TwoTomas Regalado, Commissioner District FourJeffery L. Allen, Commissioner District Five

Joe Arriola, City ManagerJorge L. Fernandez, City AttorneyPriscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk

REGULAR

Meeting Minutes July 7, 2005City Commission

CONTENTS

PR - PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS

MV - MAYORAL VETOES

AM - APPROVING MINUTES

CA - CONSENT AGENDA

M - MAYOR'S ITEMS

D1 - DISTRICT 1 ITEMS





PH - PUBLIC HEARINGS

EM - EMERGENCY ORDINANCES

SR - SECOND READING ORDINANCES

FR - FIRST READING ORDINANCES

RE - RESOLUTIONS

BC - BOARDS AND COMMITTEES

DI - DISCUSSION ITEMS

The minutes are transcribed verbatim. Periodically, agenda items are revisited during a meeting. "[Later..]" refers to discussions that were interrupted and later continued.

9:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Present: Vice Chairman González, Commissioner Winton, Chairman Sanchez, Commissioner Regalado and Commissioner Allen

On the 7th day of July 2005, the City Commission of the City of Miami, Florida, met at its regular meeting place in City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida, in regular session. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Joe Sanchez at 9:33 a.m., recessed at 12:33 p.m., reconvened at 2:43 p.m., and adjourned at 3:42 p.m.

Note for the Record: Commissioner Allen entered the meeting at 9:40 a.m.

ALSO PRESENT:

Joe Arriola, City ManagerJorge L. Fernández, City Attorney

City of Miami Printed on 7/15/2005


Priscilla A. Thompson, City ClerkSylvia Scheider, Assistant City Clerk

Chairman Sanchez: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to City Hall. Our meeting is being called to order. I believe we are waiting for one Commissioner to arrive. If you could please stand up and join me in a prayer.

Prayer and pledge of allegiance.

PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS

05-00646PR.1 CEREMONIAL ITEM

Name of Honoree Presenter Protocol Item Riverside Clean-up Volunteers Kabir Khiatani Chairman Sanchez Certificate of Appreciation Matt Tilghman Chairman Sanchez Certificate of Appreciation Will Stein Chairman Sanchez Certificate of Appreciation David Miranda Chairman Sanchez Certificate of Appreciation Ajay Uppalari Chairman Sanchez Certificate of Appreciation David Serota Chairman Sanchez Certificate of Appreciation Bradley Gampel Chairman Sanchez Certificate of Appreciation Officers Jose "Pepito" Pastor Commissioner Regalado Salute & Luis "Luisito Pla" Jorge A. Plasencia Commissioner Winton Commendation

05-00646 Proclamations.pdf

1. The City Kids Choir, who will be visiting Japan July 10 - 19, 2005 sang a cappella and were given tokens of appreciation by Mayor Diaz.2. Commissioner Regalado presented Police Officers Jose "Pepito" Pastor and Luis "Luisito" Pla with a salute for their singing show at the Smathers Plaza Senior Center; further recognizing certain members of the mounted patrol who were also present.3. Commissioner Winton presented to Jorge A. Plasencia, co-founder of Amigos For Kids, a commendation for extensive service to underprivileged children in the City of Miami.

Note for the Record: The Riverside Clean-up Volunteers were not present.

Chairman Sanchez: Our agenda today is a very light agenda. We should be out of here pretty early. We'll go ahead and go now to the order of the day, which is the presentation and proclamation.

Presentations made.

MAYORAL VETOES

NO MAYORAL VETOES

Chairman Sanchez: Having said that, we continue with the order of the day, and we do have no mayoral veto.

APPROVING THE MINUTES OF THE FOLLOWING MEETING:

Regular Meeting of June 9, 2005

Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman González, to APPROVED PASSED by the following vote.

Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner González, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Allen


http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/Legistarweb/Attachments/15721.pdf


Chairman Sanchez: We do need a motion to approve -- are we approving minutes of the following -- there's none, right?

Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): The regular meeting for June 9, 2005.

Chairman Sanchez: All right.

Commissioner Winton: So moved.

Chairman Sanchez: It's not here. We need a motion to approve the minutes. There's a --

Vice Chairman González: Second.

Chairman Sanchez: -- motion by Commissioner Winton, second by Vice Chairman González. Open for discussion. Hearing none, all in favor, say “aye.”

The Commission (Collectively): Aye.

Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say “nay.”

ORDER OF THE DAY

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Before we go -- we get into the consent agenda, let me read for the record, anyone acting as a lobbyist, pursuant to the City of Miami Ordinance 11469, must register with the City Clerk prior to engaging in any lobbying activity before City staff, board, and committees, and the City Commission. Also, any person who becomes boisterous will be escorted out of the Commission chambers --

Commissioner Winton: You mean like the Chief is now?

Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Any person wishing to obtain a -- an agenda, five days before the Commission, please contact the City Clerk's Office, and one will be provided for you, and of course, any person coming up to address the Commission must state your name and address for the record.

CONSENT AGENDA

05-00531CA.1 RESOLUTION

A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF SOUTH FLORIDA MAINTENANCE SERVICES, INC., THE LOWEST AND MOST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, RECEIVED ON APRIL 25, 2005, PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 04-05-029, FOR TURF GRASS MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR HADLEY PARK FOOTBALL FIELD, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, FOR A ONE-YEAR PERIOD, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR UP TO THREE (3) ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, AT AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,140, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,560; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT CODE NO. 0010000.580302.6.340.

Department of Parks and Recreation



05-00531 Legislation.pdf

05-00531-summary form.pdf

05-00531-award form.pdf

05-00531-tabulation of bids.pdf

05-00531-bid security list.pdf

This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.


R-05-0412


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF SUNSET FEED AND SUPPLY, INC., RECEIVED ON APRIL 20, 2005, PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 04-05-050, FOR THE PROVISION OF HORSE FEED AND SUPPLEMENTS, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, FOR AN INITIAL TWO-YEAR PERIOD, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR UP TO THREE (3) ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $19,956.93, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $99,784.65; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.290201.6.710.

Department of Police




05-00589-tabulation of bids.pdf

05-00589-award sheet.pdf


05-00589-Summary Fact Sheet.pdf



R-05-0413


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), ACCEPTING THE BID FROM VARIOUS VENDORS, FOR THE PROVISION OF PETROLEUM-DIESEL FUEL, PURSUANT TO SOUTHEAST FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL PURCHASING COOPERATIVE BID NOS. D104018B1 AND 05-A-120F, EFFECTIVE THROUGH MAY 31, 2006, SUBJECT TO ANY FURTHER EXTENSIONS OR REPLACEMENT CONTRACTS BY THE SOUTHEAST FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL PURCHASING COOPERATIVE GROUP, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASING, TO BE UTILIZED BY VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, ON AN AS-NEEDED CONTRACT BASIS, AT THE FIRM MARKUP ABOVE THE OIL PRICE INFORMATION SERVICE WEEKLY FUEL PRICE AS LISTED ON THE ATTACHED TABULATIONS, IN THE ESTIMATED, BUT NOT LIMITED AMOUNT OF $500,000, SUBJECT TO NECESSARY INCREASES BY THE CITY OF MIAMI; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL

Department of Purchasing















OPERATING BUDGETS OF THE VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, FOR SAID PURCHASES, AS NEEDED, SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS AND/OR BUDGETARY APPROVAL.

05-00590 - Legislation.pdf


05-00590 - Back-up letters.pdf

05-00590 - Broward County Agenda Item.pdf

05-00590 - Invitation to Bid.pdf

05-00590 - Purchasing Cooperative.pdf

05-00590 - Co-op Survey Sheet.pdf

05-00590 - Diesel Fuel Prices.pdf

05-00590 - Coral Gables Agenda Summary.pdf

05-00590 - Exhibit A.pdf

05-00590 - Exhibit B.pdf

05-00590 - Exhibit C.pdf



R-05-0414


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST ("TRUST") TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH CHRISTMAS DESIGNERS, INC., FOR THE PURCHASE, INSTALLATION, REMOVAL, BULB REPLACEMENT AND SECURE STORAGE OF A 50-FOOT HOLIDAY TREE FOR PLACEMENT IN BAYFRONT PARK, FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD, AT A FIRST-YEAR COST NOT TO EXCEED $81,103.90 AND FOR THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS (SECOND YEAR THROUGH FIFTH YEAR), AT AN ANNUAL COST NOT TO EXCEED $18,420, PLUS A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $23,800.41, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT EXCEED $178,584.31; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE TRUST'S OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETS.

Bayfront Park Management Trust



05-00591 Exhibit A - PSA.pdf

05-00591 Exhibit B.pdf

05-00591 Exhibit C.pdf

05-00591-recommendation.pdf

05-00591-summary sheet.pdf


05-00591-bayfront park letter.pdf

05-00591-outline minutes.pdf



R-05-0415


























A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING A GRANT TO THE MIAMI MUSEUM OF SCIENCE & PLANETARIUM TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SCIENCE MUSEUM AND PLANETARIUM FACILITY IN THE CITY OF MIAMI-OWNED BICENTENNIAL PARK, IN THE AMOUNT OF $700,000, APPROVED BY A REFERENDUM OF THE VOTERS IN NOVEMBER, 2001, AS A SPECIFIED PROJECT IN THE HOMELAND DEFENSE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT BOND PROGRAM; ALLOCATING SAID FUNDS FROM B-78502, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 333143 ENTITLED "MUSEUM OF SCIENCE - DEVELOPMENT IN BICENTENNIAL PARK;" AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROJECT CO-OPERATION AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, FOR SAID PURPOSE.

Department of Capital Improvement Programs/Transportation

05-00592-resolution.pdf

05-00592-exhibit.pdf

05-00592-exhibitA.pdf

05-00592-exhibitB.pdf

05-00592-exhibitC.pdf


05-00592-pre ordinance.pdf

05-00592-pre resolution.pdf



R-05-0416


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A LEASE AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT"), IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") AND CENTENNIAL EXPRESS INCORPORATED ("LESSOR"), FOR THE CITY'S USE OF APPROXIMATELY 1,326 SQUARE FEET OF WAREHOUSE/OFFICE SPACE WITHIN THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1251 NORTHWEST 36TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, SAID AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FOR: (A) AN INITIAL ONE-YEAR TERM TO COMMENCE ON THE DATE OF EXECUTION OF THE LEASE BY LESSOR AND LESSEE; (B) AN INITIAL MONTHLY RENT OF $1,105; (C) LESSEE TO PAY FOR ITS OWN ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTION AND TELEPHONE; AND (D) AN OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO SUCCESSIVE TWO-YEAR TERMS, SUBJECT TO THE NEGOTIATION OF RENT, WITH OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN THE AGREEMENT; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE AND EXECUTE NON-SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT AS NEEDED.

Department of Economic Development

















R-05-0417


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, TO THE LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND BISCAYNE BAY RESTAURANT (D/B/A RUSTY PELICAN) TO PROVIDE FOR: (1) AN EXTENSION OF THE BASE TERM TO EXPIRE ON OCTOBER 1, 2027, WITH TWO (2) FIVE-YEAR OPTIONS TO RENEW; (2) BASE RENT TO INCREASE TO $360,000, PER YEAR COMMENCING ON THE EXECUTION DATE OF THE AMENDMENT; (3) PERCENTAGE RENT TO INCREASE UPON THE EARLIER OF (I) COMPLETION OF THE REQUIRED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS OR (II) TWENTY-FOUR (24) MONTHS AFTER ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST BUILDING PERMIT, TO 7% OF GROSS REVENUES FROM $0 - $12,000,000, ANNUALLY AND 8% OF GROSS REVENUES OVER $12,000,000, ANNUALLY; AND (4) CONSTRUCTION OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BY LESSEE, AT ITS SOLE COST, WITH A COST OF NOT LESS THAN $3,000,000, INCLUDING SOFT COSTS, WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN THE AMENDMENT.







DEFERRED

A motion was made by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Allen, and was passed, with Commissioner Regalado voting no, to defer consideration of the execution of the lease agreement between City of Miami and Biscayne Bay Restaurant (d/b/a Rusty Pelican) until the Virginia Key Master Plan has been completed.

A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, but failed for lack of a second, to declare a citywide moratorium on all major development projects until Miami 21 (citywide master plan) is approved by the City Commission.

Chairman Sanchez: Let's go to CA.7. Commissioner Winton, you're recognized.

Commissioner Winton: I think that probably before I make my comments, I know that Mabel Miller here is to -- is here. I think she has something she would like to put on the record. I would like to hear what she has to put on the record before I make my comments relative to this issue. Mabel.












Mabel Miller: Someone else wishes to speak before me.

Blanca Mesa: Can I speak also?

Commissioner Winton: Um-hum.

Ms. Mesa: I think she wants me to go first. Hi. My name is Blanca Mesa. My address is 544 Fernwood Road, Key Biscayne, and I'm -- also work with Mabel Miller, with Friends of Virginia Key. I want to thank Commissioner Winton, first of all, for allowing this to go to public discussion. I appreciate that, and all the Commissioners, for the opportunity to speak today. Virginia Key, as you know, is a very place. It's a thousand-acre barrier island in an urban area very short on green space and park space, particularly waterfront park space, and there's tremendous public interest in anything that happens on the island, and this interest and vigilance has grown because, I'm sorry to say, the City of Miami, some officials, some administration has actually attempted, in the past, to give developers public parkland for resorts, to rezone parts of the island for things that would allow high-rise hotels; to strip the island of its deed restrictions, which have been in place for more -- almost a hundred years, that actually limit the uses to public uses only, public park uses, municipal uses, or marine stadium uses. All of those uses are established to protect the public interest in this publicly-owned island, so -- but the good news is that the City of Miami has finally agreed to do a master plan for the entire island that would include, in fact, the Rickenbacker Causeway, which is one of our most beautiful roadways, and this will also include extensive public participation. In fact, just a few weeks ago, Commissioner Winton, the Manager, the Mayor, and other officials made a very public promise to assure public participation in anything that happens on Virginia Key, and that the public, in fact, will dictate what happens on the island. Those promises and commitments really should be followed and honored, and it would be inappropriate -- today we have before you an amendment to the Rusty Pelican, which would expand the facility substantially. It would actually build a two-story -- a multilevel parking garage on a site that's one of the most beautiful areas of Virginia Key; has one of the most beautiful vistas to the Miami skyline. You know, those are the kinds of things that would be inappropriate, and the lease itself does not actually protect the public uses. This is land that was deeded to the municipalities, the County, and then the City, for -- with deed restrictions for public purposes, in 1929, and the lease amendments that you would be looking at today does not really address the public uses of that property. The lease calls for the construction of a multilevel parking garage for 120 cars, which would be a private parking garage for the use of the restaurants, as far as I can see from the lease amendment; a floating dock that's proposed would be closed in the evenings, every evening, for private parties for the use of the restaurant, so that's not a public use either. The new banquet halls are, of course, only for the private patrons, you know, of the restaurant, and the bay walk is public, but there's nothing in the lease that actually addresses public access to that bay walk, public parking for the public that would be coming to the -- so, as you see, there's lots of issues related to this lease I think that -- our recommendation is that it's premature to approve it today; at the very least, to go back and examine the lease for greater public access, public uses on this very important piece of waterfront land, and the other thing is you've hired a very prestigious landscape architecture firm to do this master plan. This is the kind of thing the landscape architecture firm can look at. They can look at the garage -- the siding of this garage, if there should be a garage there. They can look at other public uses. They can, you know, help you in trying to get a better lease agreement. I mean, the Rusty Pelican has been very fortunate to be able to do business on one of the most beautiful pieces of land, publicly-owned land in the City of Miami, and indeed, in the entire, you know, County, and they've done it for, you know, a base pay rent of only $48,000 a year. The fact is their lease doesn't expire until 2012, so the master plan is just getting underway. We don't see, you know, why there's such a hurry to get this going. You're going to get additional rent monies, which is very good, you know. Everyone agrees that you should get -- but the more than 300,000 of base pay rent that you'll get is really just a mere pittance compared to what the public is giving up on this land, and you know -- so for all these reasons, and I wanted you to really look at the details of this lease amendment because it really hasn't



been explained to the public, and there's really been no opportunity for any examination of the plans, and so you have this master plan that's going to cost a lot of money; you made a promise to the public, and I really feel -- I'm wrapping it up -- that you really should contemplate going back to the drawing board on this, and the other thing is, there is a state deed restricting the uses to public uses, so you will need to go before the governing board, so it's best that you have a plan that really addresses the public uses and protects the public interests. Thank you very much.

Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am.

Ms. Mesa: Do you have any questions? Did anyone have any questions?

Commissioner Winton: We'll, we're going to --

Chairman Sanchez: Yeah.

Commissioner Winton: I'd like to hear from Mabel, and then we're going to have a discussion.

Ms. Mesa: OK.

Chairman Sanchez: Let's -- we'll go ahead and have the public have opportunity to provide an input, and then, if there's any questions from the Commission --

Commissioner Winton: Right.

Chairman Sanchez: -- they'll be asked.

Ms. Mesa: OK. Thank you very much.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Next speaker. Ma'am, good morning. State your name and address for the record.

Ms. Miller: Good morning, Mabel Miller, 210 Sea View Drive, and I am the facilitator for the marvelous citizen group called Virginia Key Planning Coalition. We've made ourselves up. We're trying to keep up with you guys; you're so forward-looking. I must say that you're doing wonders with our community. I'm somewhat amazed at all the development. I've been here in Miami-Dade County for 57 years. I think I may have all of you beat, but I'm so pleased that you have seen fit to have your staff invite us to be represented on your citizen planning group, to work with your staff and with, if it's EDSA (Edward D. Stone, Jr. and Associates), the planning professionals, who have a wonderful reputation, because we're really moving forward, but we're just a little chagrined that you seem to feel it might be necessary to move forward with some planning before we do the planning, so I would like to prevail on you to delay the discussion of the Rusty Pelican. I saw you gave an award to a wonderful chap, let's see, Jorge Plasencio [sic], and he works with children; so do I. I'm a retired environmental educator for Dade County Schools. I worked in Virginia Key teaching kids about the natural resource since 1970s, and it is beautiful. By the way, you guys were invited to join us on one of the four car caravan tours that we took. This is how we mustered up all these wonderful people who have said “we will help you,” and we will, and listen, we've got people who are attorneys, who are bankers, businesspeople, real estate, research scientists, educators, and we are ready to help you, but I would like to ask you to seriously think about deferring a decision. After all, this business still has a long way to go on its lease. We know that the County owns the land, the park and recreation land on which we have the Seaquarium, and the County desires very much to keep that. Gosh, they get a million dollars a year income, and of course, we see the figures that are presented to you, but I would appeal to you, as sort of one of the old mothers of the City -- I'm a great-grandmother, by the way -- to think about this a little longer, work with us. Let us work



with you, and it'll come about. Rusty Pelican will be brought in appropriately, but to sort of jump the gun is a little alarming to us, so would you please consider either eliminating a discussion of that, putting it off till later, deferring it, and then we'll work from there. We'd all appreciate it, and we're very active citizens, and the things is, what's so interesting, you know, J. L. Plummer. J. L. was on this Commission for 28 years --

Commissioner Winton: Nine.

Ms. Miller: -- 29, excuse me, and he used to say to me, any time I'd get up there, Ms. Miller, do you live in the City of Miami? And I would say, no, I don't, but I have worked with thousands of children from the schools in this City, and I'll continue to work -- by the way, I am retired. I've never been busier in my life. We want to help you. You've asked us to come and help you, so please, seriously consider deferring. Matter of fact, the people from Rusty Pelican, we'd be glad to have them go on a tour, too. You let me know when you want to go, and we'll take -- we'll walk the territory. That's important. Any questions for me?

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Johnny, be -- OK. Anyone else from the public wishing to address the Commission, please step -- come up. Before we allow the next speaker, let me take the opportunity to recognize a dear friend, Judge Carole Kelly, who's here. Judge, I just want to take the opportunity to welcome you to our City Hall, and always a pleasure to see you. Good to have you here. All right. Sir, please state your name and address for the record.

Jean Robert: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Jean Robert. I live in the Model City area, and I'm a very concerned citizen and a resident that lives in that area for many a years, and I'd like to congratulate the Commissioners and everybody that's working in the development area. What a wonderful job you're doing in the City of Miami. The main reason I'm here today is because I live in the Model City area, where there's hardly no developments that's being developed at this time, but we do have a project that was --

Commissioner Winton: This is not Rusty.

Mr. Robert: -- planned 2003 --

Chairman Sanchez: Sir, I'm sorry. Is this pertaining to the Rusty Pelican or the --

Mr. Robert: No.

Chairman Sanchez: Then, sir, I can't allow you to speak on this item.

Mr. Robert: OK, thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: We -- we'll allow -- if the item is on the agenda, I will give you --

Mr. Robert: Yes, it is.

Chairman Sanchez: OK, then when we get to it, you'll speak on it.

Mr. Robert: Thank you, sir.

Chairman Sanchez: That way we maintain order of the day. Any other -- anyone else --

Mr. Robert: Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: -- wishing to address this item, please step forward. OK, ma'am, and then whosever next, just come up and state your name for the record.



Gina Menge: My name is Gina Menge. I live at 7866 Southwest 5th Street in Miami. I am here on behalf of the Urban Environment League of Greater Miami to ask that you defer today's Commission agenda item regarding the expansion of the Rusty Pelican lease. The Urban Environmental League opposes the amended lease that will allow for the expansion of the Rusty Pelican on Virginia Key. We believe no action on this proposal should be considered until such a time as the Virginia Key Master Plan is completed. The UEL (Urban Environment League) urges that once the Virginia Key plan is completed, an agenda discussion will be held so the public will have the opportunity to ask questions and participate. The new lease would allow for a new parking garage on the waterfront, a floating dock, and an expanded restaurant on public land. These are questionable uses for public, waterfront lands. Planning decisions should be carefully reviewed during the master planning process. Therefore, the UEL urges the City Commission to object to this attempt at scattered planning until the master plan for the Virginia Key has been completed.

Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Anyone else?

Peter Knezevic: Hi. Good morning. My name is Peter. I'm the general manager at Rusty Pelican, and I just would like to bring a few points for the public, OK. We -- for the last few years, we went through the extensive public Commission hearings that resulted into the public referendum two years ago, and people in Miami vote for the issue with 78 percent for and 22 percent against. We tried to proceed as soon as possible with the project. Unfortunately, a few other issue negotiating the final details of the lease (UNINTELLIGIBLE) backwards, and we are pretty much in the final stage of the closing, and we would like to make the Rusty -- (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Rusty Pelican better. It's basically a restaurant, private enterprise, but in the same thing (UNINTELLIGIBLE) people from Miami, public, tourists, transit, basically just are using the Rusty Pelican, and I would like personally try to make that place much better for everybody. Any questions, please let me know.

Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.

Commissioner Allen: Sure.

Chairman Sanchez: Anyone else?

Lucia Dougherty: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I wasn't actually here prepared to speak on behalf of this item because, you know, my involvement with the Rusty Pelican ended at the time that the referendum passed, but Peter was here, and I read it -- about it in the paper, and I think that for you all to defer this matter until after the master plan is completed would be a real injustice; injustice to the citizens who are now going to be making more money now in the next seven years, an improved facility -- it's not like there could be a use that would be better than a restaurant at that facility. I mean, is that not the best -- perfect use for that particular end of the island? So you've negotiated; you've had a public referendum. You've negotiated in the last two years a contract, which is very favorable to the City, and I can't imagine why you would want to defer that after all of these years, and I would urge you not to do that.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Thank you. Anyone else? If not, it comes back to the Commission. Commissioner Winton, you're recognized.

Commissioner Winton: I got a call from Mike Vasquez last night, and he was asking me about the whole Rusty Pelican thing, and last night, when he talked to me, I was in favor of moving this thing forward because I remembered some details, but I didn't remember them all, so I made a phone call after that and got the rest of the details, and the details that I remember were clear, and that is that we had extensive public debate on this issue, but it was, I don't know, four years



ago or something, a long time ago, about three or four years ago. The voters of the City of Miami had to address this issue, and they did vote in favor of it by 78 percent. However, the piece -- and so, last night, I was thinking, I don't know why we would defer. We've been through all of this, but what I forgot is that, in another meeting we all had, we voted to defer the execution of this lease because we wanted to wait until the master plan for Virginia Key was completed because it made sense. Interestingly, from the opponents here, I didn't hear anyone say we ought to bulldoze the Rusty Pelican and make it a passive park. I heard people say Rusty Pelican -- maybe they don't necessarily like it, but that there's probably room for a restaurant there, and I agree with that. I don't -- I'm not in favor of doing away with Rusty Pelican at all, but we did agree two years ago, or three years ago, that this ought to be deferred until we finish our master plan. The problem is -- this isn't debatable.

Ms. Dougherty: I understand.

Commissioner Winton: Excuse me, I'm --

Ms. Dougherty: I just want to remind you of something.

Commissioner Winton: The master plan, we thought was coming quickly. It didn't come as quick as we anticipated it would come, but it is in front of us right now, and if you all remember, probably almost five years ago, we had started a master plan for Bicentennial Park, at which point, the Florida Marlins decided they wanted Bicentennial Park for a baseball stadium, and we had the same kind of debate, maybe a little different. “You ain't putting a baseball stadium in Bicentennial Park,” that's how it kind of started, but we also made the point that we're not going to do anything with Bicentennial Park until we finish the master plan. If we didn't have the master plan process going right now, you know, I might be inclined, because it has been so long, to let this lease go forward, but one of the things that we have to keep in mind in government here, and the City of Miami, is that it isn't always about the money. Sometimes, and many times, it is about public access to places that are important. We're making a whole series of moves in this city that I -- that are unprecedented in that we are, in fact, with the Miami River Greenway, with the bay walk, with ordinance changes, a lot of things, changing radically the dynamic of the City of Miami at street-level, and trying to create a city that's going to be absolutely terrific forever. This is a private restaurant. We're going to be finished with the master plan in 18 months. Their lease goes to 2012, and from my viewpoint, it isn't about the additional $250,000 a year. It's about integrating what we do and how the Rusty Pelican fits into the comprehensive plan for redoing that entire island, and turning that into the jewel of Florida and our Central Park, and so, from my view -- and I like the Rusty Pelican. I don't have any intention of voting to do away with the Rusty Pelican at any point in time, but I don't think we need to rush into the decision to sign this lease. I do feel strongly we ought to wait and figure out design of garage, what the bay walk looks like. All of the questions that were raised here are questions we ought to address, and I think, because we have real professionals at the table now, I'm going to bet everybody here a substantial sum of money that, at the end of the day, we can end up with a much better product than we do if we sign the lease now, so I'm going to, after public comment -- I mean, after Commission comment, I'm going to introduce a resolution to table the adoption of the Rusty Pelican lease until we finish the --

Chairman Sanchez: Master plan.

Commissioner Winton: -- master plan for Virginia Key.

Commissioner Allen: Right. OK, Mr. Chairman.


Commissioner Allen: Mr. Chairman.



Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sanchez: Well, Commissioner Regalado, Commissioner Allen, for discussion.

Commissioner Regalado: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I think that Johnny's right. This is not about the money. This is just about the will of the people. Two years ago, the people voted 78 percent to extend the lease in exchange for several promises and plans, and enhancement, and yes, more money for the City of Miami, and the basic point that we made when we campaigned for this item on paid programs by the City and different programs, is that this will always be the property of the City of Miami, and the people voted 78 percent. We did campaign also for the parking surcharge, and the people voted 76 percent. We implemented immediately the parking surcharge, and the other item, which had to do with the members of the Commission, was implemented immediately, so this is not about the money. This is about the will of the people. You cannot delay or postpone the will of the people. The people who wanted different things had their chance to participate in the campaign, opposing, and 22 percent of the people voted against, but I'll tell you what, I will support Commissioner Winton's motion, but we have to use one rule for all the city. If we want to wait for the master plan to be finished in 18 month, and do the lease at that time, when everything is said and done about Virginia Key, we should also wait for Miami 21 to be finished in the next 18 months, and declare a citywide moratorium on major projects because it makes sense. It makes sense to declare a moratorium because the same reasoning that Commissioner Winton is using for Virginia Key should be used for the whole city. The City's paying good money. We're having community meetings, but at the same time, we are approving high-rises and major projects, so to me, I cannot understand that. It's either white or black. There is no half pregnant situation here. If we're doing a master plan for the City of Miami, I'm all for it, a moratorium, citywide moratorium on all major projects, beginning tomorrow, and I think that then we should start the process of finishing the master plan for Virginia Key, so as soon as Commissioner Winton makes his motion, Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion to declare a citywide moratorium on major projects until we finish the Miami 21 project.

Chairman Sanchez: When the appropriate time comes, you have all the power invested in you, as an elected official, to put forward any motion you would like. Commissioner Allen.

Commissioner Allen: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and for the sake of brevity, I'll just simply state that I endorse Commissioner Winton's statement. When I looked at this, at first blush, I was totally not in favor of voting against this. My preference is to defer this, and that's largely because of all the variables that were presented earlier. You have the Virginia Key Trust Master Plan that's on board; an architect has been hired. I think that entire complex, that entire area needs to be taken into consideration, which includes the Rusty Pelican. Now, to that end, the issue of whether or not this is an opportunity cost that's being lost here, or that we're missing, if you will, an opportunity cost. We will still be able to get market rate payments going forth, with this project being juxtaposed with the Virginia Key Trust Master Plan, so to that end, I think it's only fitting that this be deferred. I fully accept Commissioner Winton's suggestion. At this point, I don't have enough to make an informed decision in terms of approving this or disapproving this, so to that end, I would prefer to have this also deferred. Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's no motion on the floor. Vice Chairman González, you're recognized.

Vice Chairman González: Yes. I agree with Commissioner Regalado on the fact that this was approved by the voters by 78 percent, but also, Commissioner Winton make -- made a good point about waiting until they finish with the master plan. I cannot and I will not support a citywide moratorium because that would include my district, and let me tell you what happen. My district, my district, same as District 5, was neglected and denied the right to development for



years, and years, and years. While the rest of the city was getting new buildings, new roads, new sidewalks, new developments, new jobs, new everything, my district was denied that opportunity. Now my district is starting to see parity with other districts in the City of Miami. I will never, I will never support a moratorium that will include my district. If you want to ask for a moratorium in your district, I support you a hundred percent. Any Commissioners that want to declare a moratorium in their district, they can count on my vote, because you have to respond to your voters. I have to respond to the people that elected me. The people that elected me -- as Johnny says, I didn't get elected by a group; I got elected by a whole district, by people from three or four different neighborhoods, and they elected me because for years, and years, and years, they never had the opportunity to see the sun. Now, they're seeing the sun, and I'm not going to put a shadow on their sun today.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. No, no, wait. Listen, listen, with the issue -- we'll address that issue, if Commissioner Regalado makes the motion that he has so stated. At this time, the item that's on the discussion is just a lease for the Rusty Pelican. Commissioner Allen, would you like to speak on that matter more? Would you like to elaborate more?

Commissioner Allen: Oh, no. I would just -- quick query, and it should take a quick answer, short answer.

Commissioner Winton: But could we --

Chairman Sanchez: Is it -- but --

Commissioner Allen: Based on -- I'm just --

Commissioner Winton: -- stick to the Rusty Pelican part first?

Chairman Sanchez: Let -- just the --

Commissioner Allen: Yeah.

Chairman Sanchez: -- Rusty Pelican.

Commissioner Allen: That's what I'm saying. Right, right. I would like to move -- make a motion --

Chairman Sanchez: No, wait. There's no -- I have not spoken. As the Chair --

Commissioner Allen: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

Chairman Sanchez: -- speaks last. When I speak, I'll entertain any motion on the floor. For the record, there is no motion. There has been a public participation. It is being discussed; there is no motion. I would have liked to got a motion and a second, and then discussion, but we'll continue. Commissioner Winton, your arguments does have merit, and I do state that. I think what 78 percent of the voters that approved such a referendum, that was a referendum that was properly advertised. It was properly debated, and the people had an opportunity to go and cast their vote, the greatest right that they're invested in this great democracy of ours, and they approved it by 78 percent. I think that the lease extension -- the subject here is that we have to look at the entire language on the lease agreement, and I have some concerns with one, which is, of course, the deed restriction from the State, and that is that -- I think staff needs to address that issue because this was a referendum. This was an item that, I believe, has been very well crafted, very well reviewed, but there is issues here that I think the taxpayers need to know, and that is, one, if the State requires fees on a retroactive basis, whose responsibility would those fees be?



Laura Billberry (Acting Director, Economic Development): If I may --

Chairman Sanchez: And that's a question that I have for the Administration.

Ms. Billberry: -- explain the issue of the state deed restriction. Lori Billberry, Economic Development. Back when this item was originally before you and approved by the Commission, I did reference that there was a state deed restriction for public purpose. This building was originally built as part of a public purpose project in connection with the marine stadium operations, and it was meant to be a tourist-oriented destination. Since the City has not been operating the marine stadium since approximately 1992, it has been raised as a potential concern of ours that the State may not find us in compliance with the current deed restriction. The -- therefore, we would want to seek compliance from the State of this lease, or if, in the alternative, if we can't get compliance, to obtain a waiver of deed restriction.

Chairman Sanchez: So this is --

Ms. Billberry: It --

Chairman Sanchez: -- subject to?

Ms. Billberry: Yes, it is.

Chairman Sanchez: OK.

Ms. Billberry: This extension would be subject to. The State, however, it is their practice that they will not consider any requests from the City until they see all business terms of the lease, so therefore, we had to wait until after we get this amended lease done before we could approach the State regarding a compliance finding, and/or a waiver of deed restriction. The way it was negotiated in this amendment is that the parties would share 50/50 in any fees that may be due to the State, and there would be a cap on those fees, as it relates to the lessee. It would be one percent of their gross revenues per year, or 90,000, the greater of those two, and for the City, we would never be able to make less than our minimum base rent, which was 360,000. If that occurred, if the fees from the State did result in a violation of those caps, either party could walk away and not extend the lease. As it relates to the back fees, the State, today, could come after the City since we have not been operating the marine stadium since '92, and it is something that will have to be addressed, regardless of whether or not this amendment goes forward. If the amendment does not go forward, and even in the amendment, there is no obligation of the lessee to contribute to any back fees that may be due to the State. However, under the amendment, we did have a provision that, if back fees are assessed, that we would approach the lessee about paying 50/50, and they would have, again, the right not to seek the extended term or participate in those back fees on a 50/50 basis.

Chairman Sanchez: On the referendum that was put out for the voters, was there any mention of a parking structure and a floating dock?

Ms. Billberry: Those specific improvements were not listed. There was a requirement that the lessee improve $3,000,000 worth of improvements, including a public pedestrian walkway, or public bay walk.

Chairman Sanchez: Now, let me ask a question. By us -- if it's the wish of this legislative body to defer this item, does this jeopardize the issue with the State or with the lessee?

Ms. Billberry: Under the -- no.

Chairman Sanchez: No?



Ms. Billberry: Because we're going to have the issue with the State regardless.

Chairman Sanchez: Regardless, and what --

Ms. Billberry: And there is no commitment by the lessee to pay in any back fees at this time. The only benefit of this amendment, as it relates to those back fees, is if they choose to participate, then they would -- in a 50/50 basis, they could get an extended term still.

Chairman Sanchez: Because I could see some valid concerns on both sides, and let me just state this for the record. I would never go against the voters who went out and approved something because what you do is you open up doors where people could come back, and especially on the bond issuance, you would have people come back and say -- and I'll give you a perfect example, Little Haiti Park. Maybe there's a group that opposes that, and then they will come in front of this legislative body and make an argument, and therefore -- you know, the voters approved it. My biggest concern is, in looking at the overall concept of where Miami's heading, is that -- and I'm very aware of it because, as a matter of fact, the records speak for themself [sic]. It was my motion that asked for a master plan from Virginia Key when this issue was discussed in front of this legislative body, several, several years ago, so having stated that, I am very concerned with the future of that area there, but I also want to make sure that whatever the voters approved 78 percent -- that was approved by 78 percent, does not interfere with that. Now, if I have an assurance from the Administration that the master plan would address the parking structure, the floating dock, and overall, it would not interfere with them not getting their lease renewed --

Commissioner Winton: Extended.

Chairman Sanchez: -- because that's already been approved, I would have a concern on that.

Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sanchez: Yes.

Commissioner Allen: Chair --

Commissioner Winton: I want to be quite clear to everybody on both sides of this issue. I am not suggesting for a minute that we not, at some point in the future, exercise the will of this community. I am suggesting absolutely we exercise the will of the voters, and that is to extend a lease with Rusty Pelican. Clear about that.

Chairman Sanchez: So that moves forward.

Commissioner Winton: Now, the other point is related to this whole issue of public purpose. I think we have an opportunity to convince the State hands down that we have fulfilled the obligation of public purpose by taking this whole thought process about the Rusty Pelican and their expansion, and their whatever, extension, through a public process, and make sure we create the right public purpose access and viewpoint, and all that jazz, and if the public forum for designing the master plan for Virginia Key says, Rusty Pelican, this is what we want from a public purpose standpoint. This is what we're going to get from a public purpose standpoint; that goes to the Cabinet. They're going to have no question about it. I think we can strengthen our hand with the State dramatically by running this whole issue through the public process, and again, I want to state, I would not support -- I don't care who the opponents are -- I will not support the concept of not extending their lease.

Commissioner Allen: Right. Just one quick question --




Commissioner Allen: -- Mr. Chairman. Yes.

Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Allen.

Commissioner Allen: I, likewise, share Commissioner Winton's concerns. I am clearly in favor of extending the lease, but perhaps, it's just not the appropriate time, considering all the floating variables out there, but to that end, let me just ask you, has the Waterfront Advisory Board weighed in on this by any chance?

Ms. Billberry: Yes, they did. Back when this was originally presented to them --

Commissioner Allen: Right.

Ms. Billberry: -- prior to it being presented to the voters, they were not in favor of it. However, it did -- the Commission elected to proceed in presenting it to the voters. This amendment was presented to them, and they did agree to go forward with the amendment.

Commissioner Allen: Right, as of late. What I'm saying, as of late.

Ms. Billberry: Yes.

Commissioner Allen: That's the latest --

Ms. Billberry: They approved it.


Commissioner Allen: I'm ready to make a motion.

Chairman Sanchez: OK. I believe --

Commissioner Winton: OK.

Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, and then we'll put a motion on the floor, and we'll --

Commissioner Regalado: OK, question for the City Attorney: When the voters approve an amendment to the Charter, how long can the City prolong the implementation of the amendment; is it forever or is it a timetable? Is it reasonable time, two years?

Olga Ramirez-Seijas: Well, the ballot -- Olga Ramirez-Seijas, Assistant City Attorney.

Commissioner Winton: Olga, get to the microphone.

Commissioner Regalado: I can't --

Commissioner Winton: Microphone.

Ms. Ramirez-Seijas: The -- can you hear me?

Commissioner Winton: No, move the --

Commissioner Regalado: No.



Commissioner Winton: -- microphone in front of you.

Ms. Ramirez-Seijas: Can you hear me now? No? OK, well -- yes. Can you hear me?

Commissioner Winton: Yeah.

Ms. Ramirez-Seijas: OK. The ballot question was whether the voters authorized the City Commission to amend the Rusty Pelican lease. The City Commission asked the voters for authorization, and the voters authorized it. The voters did not direct or mandate the City Commission to amend it. They simply authorized it, and gave you the discretion to authorize the particular terms of the lease or not. There is no time limitation in the ballot question as to when you can or cannot, or will or will not execute an amendment.

Commissioner Regalado: And is it possible that the people from the restaurant could take legal action against the City for prolonging this?

Ms. Ramirez-Seijas: Well, I think legal action is always a possibility; whether they succeed or not is another issue. We have been negotiating in good faith. This is something that was brought forward to the City Commission through the voters, who've been negotiating, but the ultimate decision rests with the City Commission, and the City Commission has the discretion to approve an amendment or not.

Commissioner Allen: Thank you.


Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir.

Commissioner Winton: I would like to move -- and Madam City Attorney, you need to tell me whether it's a deferral, a continuance, or whatever other term I need to use, but to defer execution of this lease until such time as the Virginia Key Master Plan has been completed, and we've contemplated the public purpose issues relative to the extension of that lease.

Commissioner Allen: Second.

Commissioner Winton: So move.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion and a second. It's been -- the item is under discussion, so you're basically asking for an 18 --

Commissioner Winton: Well, what's the timeline on the Virginia Key Master Plan? I don't remember, frankly.

Joe Arriola (City Manager): It -- probably, you're looking at between 12 to 18 months, sir.

Commissioner Winton: That's what I --

Mr. Arriola: It all depends on the public input, and you know, how much time you want to dedicate to it.

Commissioner Winton: So it is -- so, Commissioner Sanchez, the answer is it's between 12 and 18 months. It could be 12 -- probably not less than 12, and not more than 18.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. That's the motion on the table.



Ms. Ramirez-Seijas: Mr. Chairman, the motion should be to defer consideration of the lease, not the extension of the lease --

Commissioner Winton: Thank you.

Ms. Ramirez-Seijas: -- because you have not considered it.

Commissioner Winton: Thank you for the correction.

Chairman Sanchez: As properly corrected by our City Attorney, the motion is on the floor. Any further discussion on the item? If not, Madam Clerk, roll call.

Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call. Commissioner Regalado?


Ms. Thompson: Vice Chairman González?

Vice Chairman González: Yes.

Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Allen?

Commissioner Allen: This is in connection with Commissioner Winton's --


Commissioner Allen: -- motion --

Commissioner Winton: Yes.

Commissioner Allen: -- with the correction. Yes.

Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Winton?

Commissioner Winton: Yes.

Ms. Thompson: Chairman Sanchez?

Chairman Sanchez: Because the public participation will only enhance it, and it's the property of the people, the people should have a say as to what the future of it is, so therefore, I say yes.

Ms. Thompson: The motion has been adopted, 4/1.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. We got to get one item out of the way.

Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.


Commissioner Regalado: If I may, a follow-up to the --

Chairman Sanchez: Your motion.

Commissioner Regalado: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. As a follow-up to the argument



presented by Commissioner Winton and supported by the City Commission, the public is being invited next week and two weeks from now to participate in public hearings regarding Miami 21.

Commissioner Winton: It's this week, right? It's this Saturday.

Commissioner Regalado: This Saturday, and I think it's (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- I've seen the flyers and the advertising in the paper. Hopefully, this will get to all the districts in the City of Miami, and the people will have the opportunity, as the Chairman said, to have public participation to enhance the City of Miami, so I -- my motion is to declare a citywide moratorium on all major projects until Miami 21, with public participation, is approved by the City Commission. That's my motion.


Chairman Sanchez: Wait, wait, wait, wait. There's a motion on the floor. If it has a second, we go to discussion. If it doesn't have a second, it dies on the floor.


Chairman Sanchez: Is there a second? Is there a second? The motion dies on the floor.


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT AWARDED TO MOTOROLA INC., PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 04-0730, ADOPTED NOVEMBER 18, 2004, FOR THE PURCHASE OF ADDITIONAL PORTABLE AND MOBILE RADIOS AND ACCESSORIES, FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF FIRE-RESCUE AND PUBLIC WORKS, UTILIZING PALM BEACH COUNTY CONTRACT NO. 02C-6CR, EFFECTIVE THROUGH OCTOBER 17, 2005, SUBJECT TO ANY EXTENSIONS OR REPLACEMENT CONTRACTS BY PALM BEACH COUNTY, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $235,777.80, INCREASING THE CONTRACT FROM $56,244 TO $292,021.80; ALLOCATING FUNDS FOR SAID INCREASE, FROM THE URBAN AREAS SECURITY INITIATIVE GRANT PROGRAMS II AND III, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 110111.280910.6.840, IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $32,552, FROM ACCOUNT NO. 1100143.280911.6.840, IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $154,959 AND FROM PUBLIC WORKS ACCOUNT NO. 001000.311002.6.840, IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $48,266.80; AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 04-0730, TO REFLECT SAID INCREASE AND THE ADDITION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AS RECIPIENTS OF SAID RADIOS.

Department of Fire-Rescue




05-00595 Exhibit A.pdf

05-00595 Exhibit B.pdf


05-00595 Exhibit D.pdf

05-00595 Exhibit E.pdf

05-00595 Exhibit F.pdf


05-00595-budgetary impact.pdf

05-00595-motorola proposal.pdf

05-00595-motorola equipment.pdf

05-00595-motorola form.pdf

05-00595-information.pdf

05-00595-invitation to bid.pdf

05-00595-2004 Florida Statutes.pdf

05-00595-EMS communication plan.pdf

05-00595-CDM1550.pdf

05-00595-palm beach letter.pdf

05-00595-invitation to bid Palm Beach.pdf

05-00595-invitation to bid Palm Beach attachments.pdf




R-05-0418


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE PROCUREMENT OF TWO BANDIT CHIPPERS, MODEL 1890 AND TWO BANDIT STUMP GRINDERS, MODEL 3200, FROM FLORIDA COAST EQUIPMENT AND ONE SKID-STEER LOADER BOBCAT, MODEL S-185, FROM BOBCAT OF METRO DADE, INC., INCLUDING ALL OPTIONS AND MAINTENANCE, PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. 04-05-073, DATED MAY 11, 2005, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, OPERATIONS DIVISION, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $169,400.60; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT ACCOUNT NO. 352296, B-30156.

Department of Public Works




05-00596-award sheet.pdf

05-00596-bid tabulation.pdf




R-05-0419































A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY YVONNE DAVIS, WITHOUT ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $60,000 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS AND SERVANTS, IN THE CASE OF YVONNE DAVIS V. CITY OF MIAMI, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, CASE NO. 02-15726 CA (27), UPON EXECUTING A GENERAL RELEASE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, ITS PRESENT AND FORMER OFFICERS, AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE SELF INSURANCE AND INSURANCE TRUST FUND, INDEX CODE NO. 515001.624401.6.651.

Office of the City Attorney


05-00597 - Cover Memo.pdf

05-00597 - Budget Memo.pdf



R-05-0420

Adopted the Consent Agenda

Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Allen, including all the preceding items marked as having been adopted on the Consent Agenda. The motion carried by the following vote:


Chairman Sanchez: All right. We'll go to the consent agenda, and usually --


Chairman Sanchez: -- what I do on consent agenda, I usually start with the City Manager. I'm going to start with Commissioner Winton this time. Commissioner Winton, you're recognized.

Commissioner Allen: Also --

Chairman Sanchez: Any of the items you wish to pull for discussion?

Commissioner Winton: I would like to pull the item on the Rusty Pelican for discussion.

Commissioner Allen: Good, same concern.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. That item is item number 7. CA.7 has been pulled for discussion. Any other item wishing to be pulled by discussion by any of the Commissioners or the City Manager?

Commissioner Allen: Just to reiterate, Mr. Chairman, I'm --

Chairman Sanchez: No, no. Is there any other items?

Commissioner Allen: No, just CA.7, as well.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Commission -- Commissioner -- Vice Chairman González.






Vice Chairman González: Yes. There is an item, which is from the City Attorney, which is a settlement --

Chairman Sanchez: Which one?

Vice Chairman González: -- on -- with the Department of Justice.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. CA.11.

Vice Chairman González: Yeah, I just --


Vice Chairman González: -- want to have an explanation on what it --

Chairman Sanchez: OK, CA.11 has also been pulled. Any other items from the consent agenda? Hearing none, let's go ahead and approve the remaining of the consent agenda. Is there a motion to approve the remaining?


Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion by Commissioner Winton. Is there a --


Chairman Sanchez: -- second?


Chairman Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Allen. The item is under discussion. Hearing none, all in favor, say "aye."


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries, and we have approved the consent agenda; two items have been pulled for discussion.


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A "PROJECT CIVIC ACCESS" AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT"), IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNDER THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT.





05-00606 Exhibit A - Agreement.pdf

05-00606 Exhibit B - Attachment I.pdf

05-00606 Exhibit C - Attachment J.pdf

05-00606 Exhibit D - Attachment K (1).pdf

05-00606 Exhibit D - Attach K (2).pdf

05-00606 Exhibit D - Attach K. (3).pdf




05-00606 - Cover Memo.pdf

Motion by Vice Chairman González, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.

Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner González, Sanchez, Regalado and AllenAbsent: 1 - Commissioner Winton

R-05-0422

Direction to the Administration by Chairman Sanchez to provide a report listing the top three priorities to address issues related to 9/11; further directing the Administration to provide an annual status report to ascertain compliance with the agreement authorized in file No. 05-00606 (Item CA.11).

Chairman Sanchez: All right. We go back to consent agenda. There was another item that was pulled on consent agenda, and I believe that is consent --

Vice Chairman González: CA.11.

Chairman Sanchez: -- agenda --

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): CA.11.

Chairman Sanchez: -- 11, and that item has been pulled for discussion. At this time, it's being addressed by Commissioner González -- Vice Chairman González. We have the Administration here to answer any questions on this item.

Vice Chairman González: It's that I just want to know what the -- what kind of agreement -- this is an agreement between the City of Miami and the United States of America, Department of Justice.

Henry Hunnefeld (Assistant City Attorney): Your Honor, I think I can --

Vice Chairman González: Pardon me?

Mr. Hunnefeld: Mr. Commissioner, I think I can address those questions.


Vice Chairman González: All right. Go ahead.

Mr. Hunnefeld: Hello. OK. I believe I can address those questions, Commissioner.

Vice Chairman González: What is the agreement all about? What kind of agreement are we --

Mr. Hunnefeld: This is an agreement with the federal government relating to the Americans with














Disabilities Act. That's an act from 1992, that required local governments, amongst other entities, to comply with very specific laws with regard to disabled individuals and access to programs and facilities. This is part of an overall comprehensive plan by the Department of Justice. We're about the 200th community that's been addressed since 1998, with regard to this. What they do -- they came specifically to the City of Miami. In November 19, 2004, they did a complete survey of our facilities. There have been lawsuits regarding this issue that had been addressed before. There will be another that will shortly be addressed again, but what they're doing is, from the Department of Justice's perspective, determining whether the City of Miami has been in compliance with that statute from 1992. They reviewed all these programs and so forth, found substantial amounts of compliance, but certain areas that needed further implementation of this statute. Because of that, the Administration -- I believe every department in the Administration spoke with the Department of Justice, either on their own, or through the City Attorney's Office, and met with us on these issues, and we agreed to comply on a certain timetable, so they gave us substantial timetables, and they looked at facilities. Some facilities may not be in our possession in two or three years from now, and they gave us flexibility with regard to all those things. This is part of a comprehensive plan by the Department of Justice to ensure compliance with this important statute.

Vice Chairman González: OK, my last question: are we in compliance now?

Mr. Hunnefeld: We are working towards compliance, satisfactorily, with the Department of Justice, as long as we go along with this (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

Vice Chairman González: Let's say -- let's rephrase the question. Is the Department of Justice satisfied with the actions that the City of Miami has taken in order to comply?

Mr. Hunnefeld: They are satisfied with the effort that we've given up until this point, yes.

Vice Chairman González: All right. Thank you so much.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Before we go any further, counsel, could you please state your name for the record?

Mr. Hunnefeld: Yes, Commissioner. My name is Henry Hunnefeld. I'm an Assistant City Attorney.

Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much. Commissioner Allen, you're recognized.

Commissioner Allen: Yeah, just two quick questions. You said some pretty important things. Let me just simply ask you this, the fact that we are now complying with these requirements, pursuant to a statute, does this, if you will, preclude any private attorneys going out there suing municipalities? Is that --

Mr. Hunnefeld: It's a very good point. It doesn't, per se, preclude it. It's not an absolute bar. Someone could file a new lawsuit. As I said, there is another lawsuit that's being resolved, and may be addressed shortly, but future lawsuits, one of the things that they would look at is, are we working along on a comprehensive timetable to address all of those issues.


Mr. Hunnefeld: There might be a small issue here or there, but it will be very difficult to have a system-wide failure that they're trying to address.

Commissioner Allen: Right, so is there a safe harbor period where you must comply by a certain cutoff period, once you receive a letter from a potential plaintiff?



Mr. Hunnefeld: Sadly, no. That was a provision that was advanced, but was not voted favorably. That was something that many municipalities wanted to have, a safe harbor period, but that was not granted. There is no safe harbor.

Commissioner Allen: Right, but this can --

Mr. Hunnefeld: But this helps us dramatically.

Commissioner Allen: Tremendously, right, yeah.

Mr. Hunnefeld: It helps us dramatically.

Commissioner Allen: OK.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Any --


Chairman Sanchez: -- further questions on -- I just want to clarify two -- three issues: one is this is basically done to avoid a burden, expenses on the City, and above all, try not -- you know, not to get into a litigation, and the other issue is the attorney general agrees to refrain from filing any civil suits against the City, correct?

Mr. Hunnefeld: That's correct.

Chairman Sanchez: On this matter. Now, the other question that I have, being that we've entered into this agreement, what are going to be the priorities of the City, and I've had the opportunity to read the remedial action, but I think that the issues that they need to focus on, what's going to be the priority, and what steps are going to be taken to address those issues, such as 9-1-1, the curbs that we have been sued in the past for not being ADA compliant, and then the other issue that I want to focus on is to make sure that the Administration, somehow, reports to this Commission to make sure that we are in compliance of this agreement with this -- United States of America because, I mean, we've entered into settlement here that we need to make sure that whatever we put on this legislation or this agreement, we comply with, so what I'd like to just get the priorities of what the Administration's going to focus on; maybe give me the top three, and then the other issue that I'd like to address to the Administration is to make sure that they follow up with an annual report to this Commission. It doesn't have to be in the Commission; it could be in writing, as to where we're at in the process. Because this is great, you know; they can't sue us anymore. You know, in the past, they've walked in here, if you don't have a bathroom that's ADA compliant, they sue you, and they have every right to because, you know what? We need to be in compliance with ADA, but once we enter in this agreement, I mean, it's going to be hard for other people to sue us because United States of America entered -- you know, Justice Department entered an agreement with the City, and I mean, those are high standards that we're --

Mr. Hunnefeld: Correct.

Chairman Sanchez: -- obeying, so --

Mr. Hunnefeld: That's correct, Commissioner.

Chairman Sanchez: -- I just wanted to state that.

Vice Chairman González: Mr. Chairman, I'll move CA.11.



Commissioner Regalado: Second.

Chairman Sanchez: CA.11 has been moved --


Chairman Sanchez: -- second, and still under discussion. Commissioner Regalado.

Commissioner Regalado: This, Mr. City Attorney, this does not preclude or prohibit Access Now to file individual suit against the City?

Mr. Hunnefeld: It doesn't prelude anyone from filing any lawsuits.

Commissioner Regalado: No, no, but access Now, as you know, has been suing business --

Mr. Hunnefeld: Many communities.

Commissioner Regalado: -- and the City itself, but this agreement with the Justice Department, will it isolate the City itself, as a government entity, from Access Now?

Mr. Hunnefeld: It will give us a strong defense against any lawsuit that someone like Access Now or the many other entities like them that have been filing lawsuits. It will be a strong defense against that because we will say we have a timetable already addressing the issues that you're challenging us on, and we're not required to do everything today. We -- it might take us six months, a year, three years or more, but we have a plan now, and that is one of the strongest defenses in federal court that I could make on these issues.

Commissioner Regalado: OK, thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. No further discussion on the item. It's a consent agenda. All in favor, say “aye.”


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say “nay.” Motion carries.

END OF CONSENT AGENDA



MAYOR AND COMMISSIONER'S ITEMS

CITYWIDE

HONORABLE MAYOR MANUEL A. DIAZ

DISTRICT 1

VICE CHAIRMAN ANGEL GONZÁLEZ

DISTRICT 2

COMMISSIONER JOHNNY L. WINTON

DISTRICT 3

CHAIRMAN JOE SANCHEZ

DISTRICT 4

COMMISSIONER TOMAS REGALADO

05-00598D4.1 DISCUSSION ITEM

A PRESENTATION FROM THE MIAMI NEIGHBORHOODS UNITED-PARKS COMMITTEE REGARDING PARK SPACE THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF MIAMI.

05-00598-Cover memo.pdf

05-00598-Submittal.pdf

Andrew Geo Miami City Hall compressed 070505.ppt

DISCUSSED

Direction to the Administration by Commissioner Winton to provide a projection of costs associated with the implementation of proposal presented by Miami Neighborhoods United related to parks with a breakdown of funding needed for each of the next five years, including in said estimate the effects of current development trends.

Chairman Sanchez: And we have an item that has been time certain at 11 o'clock, and we're getting to it at 11 o'clock, and that item is Commissioner Regalado's blue page.

Commissioner Regalado: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.


Commissioner Regalado: We have here representative of Miami Neighborhoods United, especially the parks committee, regarding park space throughout the City of Miami. The reason that I brought this in my blue page is because I thought that it will be easier than having the Miami Neighborhoods United meeting with each Commissioners and their staff, and trying to convey to the people of Miami their thoughts on park, and since parks now are a big issue, Bicentennial and Bayfront, and all the parks, Little Haiti, I think that they do deserve their time, so I think that we're ready for -- Mr. Hagen, Steve. Well, we have the president of Miami Neighborhoods United, Horacio Stuart Aguirre, and we welcome him and all the members of this




http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/Legistarweb/Attachments/15891.ppt


group that is an umbrella of all the neighborhoods association in the City of Miami. Welcome, Horacio.

Horacio Stuart Aguirre: Thank you very --

Chairman Sanchez: Horacio.

Mr. Stuart Aguirre: -- much, Commissioner Regalado. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sanchez: Yes. How long would this presentation take, half an hour?

Mr. Stuart Aguirre: My remarks will be about 40 seconds. I believe Mr. Hagen, the Parks Committee chairman of Miami Neighborhoods United, will keep himself to about 15 minutes. Would that be about right, Mr. Hagen, and then he would entertain questions from the Commissioners.


Mr. Stuart Aguirre: All right.

Chairman Sanchez: Sir, you have the floor.

Mr. Stuart Aguirre: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.


Mr. Stuart Aguirre: Good morning.


Mr. Stuart Aguirre: Mr. Allen.

Commissioner Allen: If I may ask you indulgence, can I just have perhaps a minute to take a restroom break, because otherwise, we'll lose a quorum.

Chairman Sanchez: We'll lose the quorum. All right, then we'll -- as a matter of fact, we might as well both go.

Commissioner Regalado: OK. All right. If you have to, you have to go, right?

Mr. Stuart Aguirre: Mr. Chairman, good morning. My name is Horacio Stuart Aguirre. I'm a resident in the City of Miami, proudly residing on the Miami River at 1910 Northwest 13th Street, Miami, Florida. It's my privilege and pleasure to speak to you and introduce the parks chairman on behalf of Miami Neighborhoods United, where I'm privileged to serve as president. Miami Neighborhoods United is a coalition of about 23 umbrella organizations, comprising civic and neighborhood associations in the City of Miami, and our remarks will be brief. We'll try to move it across very quickly. We know time is precious for you, and you have a busy agenda. Mr. Steve Hagen is the chairman of the parks committee from Miami Neighborhoods United. He's been ably assisted by Mr. Hadley Williams, also of Coconut Grove, and more than a few people who have helped him, including Mr. Joe Wilkins. With no further ado, I beg to introduce Mr. Steve Hagen, chairman of the Parks Committee, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Steve, state your name and address for the record.

Steve Hagen: Steve Hagen, 725 Northeast 73rd Street. That's in the Upper Eastside, District 2.



I just wanted to take a -- just very briefly, and thank Hadley Williams, who has done an incredible amount of work helping put all of this together, and make sense of the research that many of us did to bring this presentation to you today. There's probably 150 hours worth of research that went into this report, and I want to mention the members of the committee and the neighborhoods that they represent. Anne Stetson represents Sewell Park; Bruce Hammerstein from Oakland Grove Improvement Association, Bob Ferreira from the Village -- Coconut Grove Village Council; Del Bryan, who represents Poinciana Village Condo Association; Elvis Cruz, from Morningside Civic Association; Hershel Haynes, representing the Hadley Park/Model City Homeowners Association; Jack King, who is the Waterfront Advisory Board; Louise (UNINTELLIGIBLE), who is an attorney; Jay Veber, I'm not certain of his neighborhood, I'm sorry; Joe -- Spring Garden; Joe Wilkins from the Miami Roads Neighborhood Association; Judy Sandoval, from the Silver Bluff Homeowners Association; Nina West, from the Coconut Grove Village Council, and also the Buena Vista Historical Neighborhood Association; Robert Krulik, the Coconut Grove Village Council; and Sallye Jude, who's on the Parks Advisory Board. I had some prepared remarks, which I'm really going to eliminate to save a couple of minutes. Basically, what we're going to be talking about today are the deficiencies of Miami's parks, and we're not blaming you for inheriting a park system that is overwhelmingly deficient. However, you do have a great opportunity to improve the acreage of parks in the City of Miami. We do not intend to get into the details of, you know, what ball fields are missing lights, or anything like that. We are strictly here talking about the overall acreage and the amount of parks that we have in the City of Miami. Briefly -- you're looking at your outlines there, but this is for the benefit of those people that are in the audience here and watching this on television. We've broken this down into four parts. We are going to define the problems, and then we're going to suggest immediate, short-term, and long-term solutions that you have at your disposal. First off, we're going to look at the Miami -- the level of service compared to other cities. Level of service is -- when we talk about parks, is the amount of park space that's available, the amount of acreage that's available per a thousand residents, and then we're going to look at the current standards in the Comprehensive Plan, the current impact fees, the deficiency of those, the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan and Evaluation and Appraisal Report, and then we're going to look at the neighborhood participation in the Miami 21. Three charts here; this is the most important chart. This shows the high population density cities, of which Miami is one. There's 12 cities shown here. It's pretty easy to see the amount of acreage that we have, and the -- they break it down into the acreage available per thousand residents, and we were at 3.1 when this study was done in 2002. We've declined to 2.9 because we've added population. I believe that the City recounted their parkland, and took some land out that was being counted as parks, and so now we're at the bottom of the list -- well, we were at the bottom of the list. We're sliding further. In fact, between 2000 -- well, you could look at the percentage there. The median of high-density cities is 8.2 acres. Now, we've included the next chart here, which are medium-high population density cities, just to show you again that -- well, we would have tied with Fresno for being the bottom, but if we compare ourselves with the medium-high, we're still bottom on the list, and if we can include the medium-low population density cities, we are still the bottom of the list. We didn't include low population cities, but the fact is that Miami ranks 12 out of 12 for the high-density cities, and this slide's actually a little bit incorrect because we were including medium-high density cities, and if we included that figure, we would be 28 of 28. We're 55 out of 55, if you look at all cities. This is not a good position for the residents of this city, nor our visitors. Now, this is interesting. The Commission district breakdown.

Commissioner Allen: Mr. Chairman, are we allowed to break in and ask questions?

Chairman Sanchez: Well, why don't we allow --

Commissioner Allen: Because he's covering a lot of material.

Chairman Sanchez: -- the presentation --




Chairman Sanchez: -- then take notes, like I'm doing, and we'll ask --


Chairman Sanchez: -- questions. That way, we'll keep it in order. We've given you --

Mr. Hagen: That'd be great. Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: That way we don't interrupt your presentation.

Mr. Hagen: I had been using the figure off the top of my head that 85 percent of our park spaced lied -- laid in District 2, and then when we did the figures, I wasn't far off; 79 percent. I mean, it's pitiful that the four districts in this city have so little park space, and then we have the total acreage there. At the bottom, it says approximately 30 acres, or 50 percent is covered. This -- with some instructors. This actually refers to -- there's four asterisks on your list that I gave you referring to Bayfront Park. This one refers to Bayfront Park. Fifty percent of Bayfront Park is covered with cement. It's not a traditional park, as we would think of it. Watson Island is going to be covered with about 60 percent cement when that's finished, and technically, Watson Island's not even listed as -- it's listed in the City as parkland, but it's technically not a park. The new Haitian park in Little Haiti, it's already -- it hasn't even come out of the ground yet, and it's going to be covered, 50 percent, with buildings, so -- and this has been repeated over and over, where the -- just over the last year or so, we've added buildings to our parks and covering them up, so here we have 79 percent of our total park space in District 2, and what's important about this is that the residents from all over the City of Miami, over the years, through bond issues, specifically on Bicentennial Park and most of our parks, have paid tax dollars to pay for parks, and where are they? They're mostly in District 2. The Comprehensive Plan has no stated goal of how parks should be maintained, or the amount of plant material, or other features usually found in parks outside Miami. Now, for those people who are listening that don't know what a comprehensive plan is, this is Miami's Comprehensive Plan. It's all -- it's required by every municipality to have one. It lists goals, objectives, and policies, and the easiest way to probably describe what this is, is it's really the constitution of how a city is supposed to be run, and it's supposed to assure, from one administration to the next, that the level of service, the quality of life for the residents is maintained. Well, there's nothing in here that maintains park space in the City of Miami. We'll get into this later, but it's incredibly vague and not detailed. Only six and a half pages in this report about parks, compared to the city of Tampa, 36 pages. They go into very precise details as to how their parks are to be operated. The current standard in the Miami concept of neighborhood is deficient. Our current impact fees are deficient. These are the specific problems. Miami Comprehensive -- I guess we've been through this, haven't we? No, we haven't. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan and the Evaluation and Appraisal Report are deficient, and the Administration -- this is very important. The Administration did not seek any neighborhood participation in the setting of the Miami 21 goals. Here we are coming up on a meeting this Saturday that we're -- people from all over the City are going to be going to, but we were -- the neighborhoods were left out of formulating any of the goals of what's going to be occurring at these meetings. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan, what the initials stand for there, the Miami -- has no goal or objective to increase the amount of parkland, recreation space, or other thing -- or open space. The only thing it states is that the level of service will be a minimum of 1.3 acres of public park space per a thousand residents. Now, what does that mean? That means the population of this city could grow to over a million before any legal action could be taken to cause anybody to do anything. That's not the position we should be in. Miami impact fees on new construction do not provide sufficient funds for the purchase of parkland to even maintain the level of service that we had in 2002, and for those that are listening, impact fees are fees that are charged on new construction in the City of Miami, based on a per square foot basis. I have to just tell you that, if you put a



condo up in downtown Miami, 15 cents a foot goes into impact fees toward parks. Now, if you build that same condo and put it out in Flagami, they would pay 60 cents per square foot, but where's the logic here? Logic was that downtown has parks; therefore, they don't need to add any more. Flagami does not have parks, so we need to charge a higher fee. Well, as I said before, this is just simply wrong because taxpayers from all over the City of Miami have paid for the downtown parks, have paid for most of our parks, so it's like sending your money off to Washington, or Tallahassee, and not getting anything in return. There must be provisions that the 3.1 acres per thousand residents, through a combination of on and offsite public accessible green space be maintained. We're not maintaining that -- even that low average now. That would maintain us at the bottom of the list. There should be additional efforts to increase the 3.1 standard over time. Residents who live in the four districts west of downtown have paid for Bicentennial Park and other District 2 parks, but yet, they have no -- they have insignificant parks in their own neighborhoods. The impact fees collected for parks currently are not set aside for the purchase of new parkland. In fact, the impact fees that are collected now are being used for construction of facilities, and the impact fees vary according to the seven districts. Nonresidential buildings in all areas of the City, except in the downtown area, pay no fees toward parks. With every new building permit issued, our problem becomes worse and the cure more difficult. Besides our impact fees for parkland being extremely low, we have learned that the many impact fees over the last four years that have not been collected. We looked at the audit report of 05-010, $1,336,000 went uncollected, and I have not yet heard from the Administration that these fees have ever been collected. The Planning Department has not responded to Miami Neighborhood's request for open dialogue relating to visions of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report, and for those that are listening, an Evaluation and Appraisal Report is what's required by every municipality in the state to conduct, on a regular basis -- I believe the City of Miami's is seven years. You hire a consultant; they came on, they listen to people, but the report that went to Tallahassee did not reflect what the people of Miami wanted. No plan to acquire new parkland has been revealed beyond the Homeland Security bond program. That prog -- and that program money is being used substantially to construct buildings. Back on the comprehensive report, four out of five districts, your people that live in your districts, they came to these meetings, and they said, we want more parkland, and how did this get interpreted into the Comprehensive Plan? It was interpreted as more access to parks. The Administration did nothing to increase the number, to increase your standard, or anything else, and the Administration did not seek neighborhood participation in setting Miami 21 goals. We're now going to talk about some corrective actions, immediate and corrective actions, and assure -- to assure that Miami Neighborhoods United and other stakeholder participation and drafting, the revised Evaluation and Appraisal Report, and to assure neighborhood participation in Miami 21. Here's the immediate corrections we're suggesting. We ask this Commission to place a 45-day moratorium on the issuance of all new building permits larger than a duplex residential unit, in order that your Planning and Finance Departments can develop a new impact fee schedule. We recommend that the impact fee for parks be standardized throughout the City, so that you have a level fee so that everybody pays for their front yard. When you buy a single-family home, you pay a premium for a front yard, a backyard, and a side yard, but when you move into a condominium, where is your front yard? You may have a backyard on swimming pool on the top of the roof, but where's your backyard? We believe that every person who moves into the City should be paying a fair share towards parks. Property taxpayers all over the city have paid for downtown parks, and now the new residents of Miami need to pay their fair share towards parks. During the 45-day moratorium, this Commission should consider adding a requirement, such as Tampa, which requires 35 percent green space be left around buildings located on waterfront property. Tampa and other cities require ten percent green space to be included around other buildings that are away from the water. Impact fees collected must be set aside exclusively for the purchase of additional parkland. There must be a time frame for land acquisition and park improvement, and the process needs to be detailed in the Comprehensive Plan. This Commission must assure that impact fees for parkland purchase are segregated in a separate account, with transparent administration and oversight. Miami Neighborhoods United will work with the Planning and Finance Departments, and the Miami 21



consultants, and we're asking you to please instruct the Planning Department to work constructively with Miami Neighborhoods United on changes to the Evaluation and Appraisal Report, relating to the parks and recreation section. Please ensure that Miami 21 project puts in place a process for participation in drafting and review of the proposed plans, together with both the Miami 21 consultants, and the Planning Department. There is no such explicit process described in any Miami 21 materials made available so far. For instance, the public was told, on April 16, that there is already a model form based zoning codes for several areas of the City. Miami Neighborhoods United and other stakeholders need immediate access to such models, as we move into these discussions. As far as Miami Neighborhoods has been able to investigate, no contract has yet been signed to formally engage Duany Plater-Zyberk, and therefore, no scope of work, or other information concerning the contract, has been made available to the public. A more explicit, participative process should be incorporated into the contract; the issue of timely and broad participation in setting of goals and the planning process. It goes back to my earlier statement that the neighborhoods were not consulted about the goals of this program that you're moving forward on. Assure Miami Neighborhoods United and other stakeholders active, reoccurring participation in the drafting amendments to the parks and recreation section, and all sections of the Miami Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan. We all know that you regularly make changes to the Comprehensive Plan. Well, we're asking that Miami Neighborhoods United be informed of those, and be a part of the process. Ensure Miami Neighborhoods United and other stakeholders active participation in drafting Miami 21 goals, regulating plan, and the form base code. As I said earlier, four out of five districts express the need for more park space in their neighborhoods, but it didn't get included. Nearly every line of the Miami Comprehensive Plan needs revisions. As current goals, objectives, and policies, they're really inadequate, they're vague, and they're not measurable. If a teacher was doing a lesson plan, they would look at this, and they would say, well, yeah, it gives some goals, but it doesn't tell about how to get there. The plan needs details and time frames for achievement. Instruct the Planning Department to seek advice from our -- from your Parks and Waterfront Advisory Boards, and Miami Neighborhoods United. The City should work toward a commonly accepted goal of providing a park within one-half mile of every residence. This is a minimum. Trust for Public Land recommends a park within a quarter-mile because not everybody walks as quickly as other people. I mean, there are people that use wheelchairs. There are people that use walkers. Tax-cut dollars coming from new construction could -- from new construction should be put toward the purchase of land, and what we mean here is as all this new development goes up in Miami, you have a great opportunity to say, OK, we're going to commit a percentage of this new revenue that's coming into the City for parks because we're in a deep hole, and we have to dig our way out of it. This new money can be leveraged with state, federal, and private grants to be able to reach beyond our 3.1 acres. Tampa, just two years ago, got something like $20,000,000 from the State because they leveraged it. Establish a concurrency information center to provide information on capacities and levels of service to the public; Tampa has such a center. In fact, Tampa has an incredible software program that tracks not just goals, objectives, and policies, but procedures, right down to the department level, and it pinpoints what every department is supposed to be doing in order to achieve their goals, so level of service standard -- this is the long-term corrective action of acreage, which is competitive with either high-density cities. Establish an independent board to manage parks and recreation, and increase operation funding for parks. Miami's level of service standard for park land per thousand residents must be radically increased to a level of service somewhere between the average of high-density cities, which would be 8.02, and the median, which is 8.2. Miami Neighborhoods United will be conducting detailed investigations and analysis for discussion with the consultants and the Planning Department. An independent board should be given the management authority, including developing the budget for parks operation and maintenance, and including the disposition of park bond funds. Establish at least one park trust for every NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) area. I mean, we have -- I know there must be some other ones in the city. You know, we have Friends of Legion Park, and we try to look over that park as best we can, but every NET area really should have a community-based, neighborhood-based trust to watch over their parks and to become participative. Each trust group should be the liaison between the



neighborhood and the independent board. A separate parkland acquisition board should be -- should oversee land acquisition and improvements. Neighborhood trust groups can be elected by City residents, as is done in Minneapolis. Actually, they've gone even one step further. I was there just two weeks ago, and I watched a parade, and half of this parade was full of people who were running for various offices, various boards. They elect their board members in the city of Minneapolis. I think it's a board of 12 that they have on their parks board. No wonder that they have the best park system in the whole country. It's all on an elected basis, and they take great pride in their parks. Immediate action is necessary to collect park impact fees for purchase of additional parkland on a standardized basis for all over -- for all new development projects across the whole city. This is -- this must be done immediately. The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan was written many years ago, and it needs a complete rewrite, based on the City's current situation and future growth goals, and it needs to be -- I mean, you have the data. I've looked at it. I've seen the contractor's report that you hired, the Administration hired, but it wasn't listened to. It certainly wasn't listened to in regard to parks. The Comprehensive Plan needs a specific measurable goals and objectives, which detail the policies, so residents can be assured that the quality of life will not flounder from one administration to another. It gets back to my opening remarks. This is the constitution that the residents of Miami should be able to look to and be assured that there's going to be continuity between administrations in regard to our parks, in regard to public housing, and everything else that's mentioned in this -- you know, in the Comprehensive Plan. Miami 21 is a tremendous positive effort on the part of the Mayor and the Commissioners to create a wonderful vision for Miami and the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) regulatory infrastructure to accomplish it, but the devil is into details. Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Thank you. Commissioner Allen.

Commissioner Allen: Yes, Mr. Chairman, and I guess, Commissioner Regalado, I'm glad this is a discussion item because I was just handed this, so obviously, I don't want to belabor any points here, but whenever I look at things in statistical information, as I look at this -- what's the rule here? You're -- it seems like to me, your paradigm, your model is level of service per 1,000 persons, but does this -- and you list the number of cities, but does this take into account the landmass of cities because some cities are larger than others? And I could tell you, I travel, and I have clients in all these cities. It's an inexact parallel to compare Baltimore's landmass to Miami and come up with a formula per acre/1,000, so I don't want to debate that --

Mr. Hagen: Yeah.

Commissioner Allen: -- but it just -- I'm -- you know, I can tell you, when I look at things like that that -- but in any event, let me just move on to another point.

Mr. Hagen: Well, I can just comment on that real quickly. I could dazzle you with all kinds of other charts. They -- we can look at this in terms of percentage of land --

Commissioner Allen: Yeah, that's -- is that --

Mr. Hagen: -- and we still come in at the bottom of the list. Five percent of our land -- I don't have -- we -- I mean, we didn't include those charts --

Commissioner Allen: You know, when I say land size --

Mr. Hagen: -- but five percent of our land --

Commissioner Allen: -- the City boundaries landmass, land size, but it seems to me, your model is per 1,000 persons. I don't know if that's an accurate assessment. In any event, I guess the key issue here is that -- you're making some very good arguments. I do understand -- I, frankly, feel we should reassess the issue of the impact fees. Frankly, since I've been here, I think they're



woefully low, and so that's, you know, another topic for another day, but lastly -- and I'd like to hear from our Parks director, to weigh in on this -- but based on what you said, would this not require us to engage in some level of eminent domaining [sic] to acquire the type of land -- the parkland increase that you might need? I don't know. That's an open question. This is a discussion item, but clearly, I would like to have our Parks director weigh in on -- I don't know if you've just received this or -- this information.

Ernest Burkeen: Ernest Burkeen, director of Parks & Recreation. In addressing your question, I think the solution is we're already involved in having a master plan, and I think you have to let the master plan go forward, which is going to do surveys, assessments, and look at what you really have, and then the further planning will take place from there. You know, one thing you always have to realize is that parks are never done; they're for always evolving, depending upon the demographics, so I think the key thing is that, let the master plan go forward. It will solve a number of these questions, and we can address those things then.

Commissioner Allen: Right. OK. Well, I'm just curious. It's for my own purpose of understanding this whole thing. Mr. Parks Director, I mean, is this a common -- is it an agreement between both parties that the model for this is per 1,000 person, the level of service model, or is it landmass, other variables have to be included? I'm just trying to figure this thing out, just as a starting point.

Mr. Hagen: This is -- yeah, this is Trust for Public Land; comes out of Washington, D.C. I'd like to say, I could give you all kinds of other comparisons, but we come in at the bottom of the list on all of them.

Commissioner Allen: Yeah, but the reason why I'm saying, you take the city of Jacksonville; landmass, Jacksonville is huge, so would you use --

Mr. Hagen: Exactly. That's a low-density city.

Commissioner Allen: Oh, I -- OK.

Mr. Hagen: And Jacksonville would be -- would have been on the fourth chart, if I had given you the fourth chart. I don't think it's on the three.


Mr. Hagen: Yeah.

Commissioner Allen: But this -- so this isn't the only model, I mean, in terms of --

Mr. Hagen: Right. We --

Commissioner Allen: -- per 1,000. I mean, other factors.

Mr. Hagen: The important thing to look at is the high-density cities. That's what we are, a high-density city.

Commissioner Allen: OK. All right. That answers --

Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Winton.

Commissioner Allen: I'm just a little confused (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

Commissioner Winton: The -- one of the comments made by Steve is a comment that I



wholeheartedly agree with. In fact, I asked -- we directed the Manager -- I don't know, was it a month ago? -- to bring forward an ordinance, as fast as they can, to change the -- both the park impact fee for buildings, and to eliminate the green space benefit that high-rises get by putting their green space on the seventh floor, which absolutely is not public.


Commissioner Winton: And so, Mr. Manager, where are we, as it relates to that ordinance?

Joe Arriola (City Manager): The ordinance is going through the Law Department. I would imagine, after the break, you'll have it in front of you.

Commissioner Winton: September?

Chairman Sanchez: September.

Mr. Arriola: Yeah, some time --


Mr. Arriola: -- in September.

Commissioner Winton: OK, and --

Mr. Arriola: It's going to be the first -- probably, second meeting.

Commissioner Winton: OK, because I think that's a giant leap in the right direction because, the fact of the matter is, and one of the issues that we get saddled with, and that is -- and the public seems to have suddenly -- or some members of the public seem to have suddenly developed a serious case of amnesia, but six years ago, our city was bankrupt, and for 25 years, the voters of the City of Miami, the administration of the City of Miami, and the leadership of the City of Miami, worked over the course of 25 years to drive the City off a cliff, and we've been playing huge catch-up ever since; credit for that seems to be fading somewhat. I -- because we're -- there's a lot of revenue coming in, but it is -- we do have a grand opportunity to quickly fix a serious problem, and the issue is related to money, and we have to buy more land. It's that simple, and if you don't have money, you're not going to buy more land, and fixing the impact fee and taking away the bonus that major developers get for putting their green space on the seventh floor, that could be huge, virtually overnight, so that's point one. The second is that I would like to turn back to our Parks director because I think that since we're on parks, I would like to hear more details, I think the public would like to more -- hear more details relative to what our new Parks director has done with parks citywide, and what's happening with kids in our parks citywide, so if you don't mind, Mr. Burkeen, could you give us an update in terms of your assessment of the changes that's happened in our parks citywide?

Mr. Burkeen: Well, let me begin by saying that it's an old, old problem that you don't have enough space or enough land, and one of my key issues is that it doesn't do you any good to purchase land if you're not prepared to take care of it. It's a critical point that has to be underscored over and over again. If you're going to buy it, you have to be prepared to take care of it. Our focus has been pretty much on programs. We have a number of facilities, and why don't I just review just the number of facilities that we have; about 38 recreation buildings, 31 restroom buildings, 38 maintenance buildings, 24 shelters, 25 baseball fields, 16 football fields, 2 tracks, 70 basketball courts, 60 tennis courts, 12 pools, 66 -- 68 playgrounds, a roller hockey, 20 racquetball, 5 vita courses, and six volleyball courts. That's quite an inventory for anyone. Within that, we've got over 50 different programs for youth, which include ballet for kids, swim teams, arts and craft, judo, fitness, soccer programs, basketball programs. We have over 400



kids in the chess program. I can go on and on and on in the number of programs that we have. In addition to that, understanding that we can't do anything without volunteers, we have partnerships with over 50 different agencies that assist us in doing these programs, things we cannot do ourselves. We could never run a football program without the optimists. We could not do the baseball programs without the academies or the Boys & Girls Clubs helping us. It is a tremendous program that takes place in the City of Miami. We're servicing over 30,000 kids every year, which is a significant number.

Commissioner Winton: How many?

Chairman Sanchez: Thirty thousand.

Vice Chairman González: Thirty thousand.

Commissioner Winton: Thirty thousand kids a year?

Chairman Sanchez: A year.

Mr. Burkeen: Absolutely, and a lot of these programs are free, so the partnerships assist us. We have a tremendous after school program. We have a physical fitness program that we're running. We do nutrition with the physical fitness. We have swim teams that we've introduced. We're developing a scuba diving program. We continue to develop new programs for our kids.

Commissioner Winton: Don't we have computers in some of the parks?


Mr. Burkeen: We have computers in all the facilities.

Chairman Sanchez: All facilities have computers now.

Commissioner Allen: Which are functioning?

Commissioner Winton: So --

Mr. Burkeen: Which are functioning.

Commissioner Winton: Thank you.

Mr. Burkeen: In fact, as you know, we've redone a number of the football fields. We've redone Curtis; we've redone Hadley, Moore. We've redone Peacock. We continue to work to make this happen.

Commissioner Winton: So, the point is that the City has made great strides in making our parks usable, finally. Drug dealers are out; kids are in, which is the right thing, and I don't think there's any --

Chairman Sanchez: I don't think Steve argues that.

Mr. Hagen: Oh, no.

Commissioner Winton: No. No, no.

Mr. Hagen: I've -- we've had conversations, and I think Ernest Burkeen is doing a fabulous job in making the best of the small number of parks that we have.



Commissioner Winton: Excuse me.

Mr. Hagen: I mean, to get back to the --

Commissioner Winton: I think I have the floor.

Mr. Hagen: It's the access --

Commissioner Winton: I have the floor.

Mr. Hagen: -- to the parks.

Commissioner Winton: So -- and I don't think anybody's going to argue the point that we don't need more parks. We do need more. We need more parkland. We need more parks, and we need the funding on an annual basis to maintain and program the parks, which we have to deal with in the -- within the coming budget cycle, and so, I'm hoping that when we get this new ordinance in September, we make -- and by the way, Mr. City Attorney, can we make the ordinance an emergency ordinance so that it goes into effect immediately, as opposed to 30 days after a second reading?

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): If it's a land use ordinance, the statutes prevent you from passing that on emergency basis.

Commissioner Winton: Is it land use ordinance? I don't know the answer.

Mr. Fernández: The ordinance with regard to the change to the green space, that would be --

Chairman Sanchez: Land use.

Mr. Fernández: -- land use.

Commissioner Winton: OK, but it could go into effect then by November; is that not correct?

Mr. Fernández: Yes, certainly.


Mr. Fernández: It'll be very -- it'll be ready for you in September.

Commissioner Winton: And then that gives us an opportunity, so if we're -- if we -- you know what could be very helpful at that meeting is if, Mr. Manager, y'all can run some numbers in terms of projections, the impact that this would have in year one, year two, year three, year four, year five, based on what we think is happening from a development standpoint because that's going to be important to how we're thinking about budgeting for parks operations, and management, and programming for this fiscal year.

Mr. Burkeen: I would just --

Mr. Arriola: That's how we develop our structure of the fees, so we have those numbers available.

Commissioner Winton: OK, great.

Mr. Burkeen: I would just add one thing, and I'm going to say this again. Any development in



the parks has to be a measured response. You have to measure it so that it's sustainable. It can't be just good for a couple of years. It's got to last for a period of time, so any fund that's attached to it, it's got to be sustainable. Remember, in the municipalities, the funds for parks and rec. (recreation) has always gone up and down because parks and recs. can never compete with fire, police, and garbage for general fund dollars, so if there's a bad time in the city, what's going to happen is parks and recs. is going to lose, so you have to look at, whatever you develop, it's got to be measured and sustainable.

Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, and then I'll --

Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, to all of you for that information. I knew some of that, and some of -- is new. What I knew is that in most of the districts that I represent, which is west of 37th Avenue, is the largest part of District 4, we have a catch-22. You were mention that -- mentioning that the impact fees in Flagami is 61 -- I think it's 67 cents, while in Brickell, or downtown, it's, I think, 16 or 17.

Mr. Hagen: Fifteen cents, yeah.

Commissioner Regalado: Fifteen cents, so it's a catch-22. You have to really want it built in west of 37th Avenue to pay four times impact fee as you pay in Brickell, or would pay in downtown Miami. The little construction that there is -- if it's almost nothing, only on LeJeune, I don't know where -- how the money is being used, in terms of park. If it's -- if this was intended to acquire parkland, the 67 cents versus the 15 cents in Brickell and downtown, well, somebody forgot about it because there is no parkland, but in fact, the issue here, and I think everybody agree, Commissioner Winton has said, is not that we don't have active parks. We have, I think, I believe, the most active parks in the South Florida. That is something that we all know of just going by the park. It's just that we need more land. In the west of the city, if we don't have construction, there's no way that we can buy new land. The -- and one thing we need to say to the Parks director, and I'm sure that he knows that very well, is that we have very good employees in the Parks Department. They are -- I mean, they do things above and beyond the call of duty. Actually, in the next Commission meeting, I am bringing -- I wanted to place it on the agenda. I didn't have time, so -- an item for the Commission to approve $300 of my office budget to reimburse an employee of West End Park that had to spend that money to buy wood to finish something in the park because it happens that, on 2003, the City spent a lot of money fixing the roof in West End, and now it has leaks all over the place, and the children are getting wet, and good employees went and fixed that thing with their own money, so next time, next City Commission, I will ask the Commission to approve to reimburse that employee for the money that she spent. I hope that what you have presented to us will be considered piece-by-piece, item-by-item. Hopefully, in the budget process, there will be more money to operate the Parks Department. Yes, we have come a long way. At least now we have people that open the restrooms on Sundays in the park, which is something that makes sense, but it wasn't the normal thing to do, so I thank you guys, and hopefully, we will be looking at you for guidance in this and other matters.

Mr. Hagen: May I just add three things here at the closing?

Chairman Sanchez: Steve, we --

Mr. Hagen: We would like to be --

Chairman Sanchez: Steve.

Mr. Hagen: -- included in the draft that you're working with on the --

Chairman Sanchez: Miami 21?



Mr. Hagen: No, on the impact fees.

Chairman Sanchez: Comprehensive Plan?

Mr. Hagen: We've already done research on three different cities and how they do their impact fees. The second thing is is that one -- I heard here mentioned active, active, active parks, and that's just the problem with Miami. We don't have -- the only really one opportunity we're going to have in the City of Miami is Virginia Key, to have any kind of passive activity in parks, and that's a huge element that we're missing, and then the --

Chairman Sanchez: Steve, you need to conclude your presentation so we could continue.

Mr. Hagen: Yeah, and then the --

Chairman Sanchez: Please.

Mr. Hagen: Well, you just broke my train of thought on the third item.

Commissioner Winton: Well --

Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner --

Commissioner Regalado: All right. Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: -- González.

Vice Chairman González: No.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. I will speak last. Steve, you've made some very interesting points here, but I think you focused on one issue that I think that the Commissioners have expressed and people understand, and I know that you understand, and that's what we have inherited in the past. If you look at the budget and you see the process of the City, and what we inherited on a city that was financially in chaos several years ago, we've been able to turn that around. You have seen that our parks have constantly not improved not only on the service that we provide to our residents, but also on fencing, lighting, beautification, playgrounds, so -- but that is not the issue that you're addressing. The issue that you're addressing here is that we need to focus -- being that we're the city with the smallest amount of parks and green space in our city -- to focus on acquiring properties and moving forward to create better parks and bigger parks for our city. We have a golden opportunity that's in front of us now with Miami 21 that does address the parks; it does address the opportunity of Virginia Key being our Central Park that we're focusing on because not too many cities throughout our great nation have the opportunity that we have that, less than five minutes away, we have hundreds of acres of a natural area that we can convert into green space and park space for soccer fields, baseball fields, whatever sport you may want. We've also have done just about everything we can, based on the resources that we have, and you know, we're limited. You could come up here and promise the world. If you don't have what it takes to get it done and you don't have the money to do it, you're basically setting yourself to fail. We have, through the guidance of this legislative body, set aside -- as a matter of fact, we set aside parkland at Watson Island for a park when that's completed, and I forgot how many acres --

Commissioner Winton: Eight.

Chairman Sanchez: -- were set aside -- eight acres? Eight acres are set aside for us to create parks. Now, let's focus on my district, since you brought it up. It is the area that has the less



green space, and I constantly battle to turn everything that I can into green space, whether it's a linear park, or it's a pocket park, or it's whatever it is, I have consulted with the City Manager to find out every surplus property in my district to try to focus on creating those surcharge properties and little pockets that are along the river now with the greenway, to create little pocket parks, where people are walking down the green way. They're able to sit down; have a view of the river. I think that is the future (UNINTELLIGIBLE). The statements that you've made that I think have a lot of concern is, one, we need to focus on working with the citizens, with the Administration, to increase that impact fee to bring in more money to be able to acquire land. Yes, it's going to take eminent domain. It is a long process, but if it's done right, and it's done with the public participation, we will be able to accomplish great things for our city, but Rome wasn't built in one day. Rome wasn't conquered in one day, and certainly, the City of Miami is not going to do that, but I think that we're heading in the right direction when we're talking about putting together -- and you know, I would love to see the Administration work with all those to create more parkland throughout our city because I think that we've done an exceptional job, and I challenge anyone who wants to debate me on the services and the improvements that we've been able to do in our parks in the last couple of years. That's -- it's a nondebate [sic] on that, but, yes, I do think that we need to sit down, work -- get you involved in the master plan, get you involved, and all the homeowners to get them involved to see where we could address land and property -- and you know what, I've always been a Commissioner that has been very, very generous. I have focus to on my district, but there are times that I'm not able to do things in my district, and I've supported other districts, and I give you a perfect example. Little Haiti Park has been able to move forward by the generosity of some of the Commissioners here, who had money that we weren't able to use, and before losing the money, we passed it on to other -- that's what leadership is all about, so having said that, I praise you for the leadership that you've taken, but I think what the City has done with the Parks director and the new parks that are coming online -- whoever imagined, whoever imagined our city having a water park, a water theme park, that right now is like the biggest thing in town, when you walk around and you visit parks. Hey, when's the park going to be ready so I could go? But, you know, some people aren't very receptive to that, you know. Things -- ideas that you're going to create, park improvements that you're going to create in our city, some people aren't receptive to it, but you know what, at the end of the day, you do what you think is right, so I applaud you for your participation, and the only issue here is that, Parks Director, we need to work with organizations that are willing to work with us so we not only could improve our parks, but enhance and add green space to our city and parkland.

Commissioner Winton: And Mr. Chairman --

Chairman Sanchez: So having said that, I think this is just a presentation. There is no action being taken. Thank you so much. We'll continue with our agenda. We wanted to get you time certain. We gave you a time certain at 11, so we really appreciate it.

Mr. Hagen: Thank you, and we do look forward to working with your Planning and Finance Department --


Mr. Hagen: -- on these features.

Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much.

DISTRICT 5

COMMISSIONER JEFFERY L. ALLEN



PUBLIC HEARINGS

05-00599PH.1 RESOLUTION

A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED "BARNARD-PENT SUBDIVISION," A REPLAT IN THE CITY OF MIAMI OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN "ATTACHMENT 1," SUBJECT TO SATISFACTION OF ALL CONDITIONS REQUIRED BY THE PLAT AND STREET COMMITTEE AS SET FORTH IN "EXHIBIT A," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED, AND THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 55-8 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, AND ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLAT; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT; AND PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDATION OF THE PLAT IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.



05-00599-exhibit1.pdf

05-00599-exhibit1A.pdf





05-00599-request.pdf

05-00599-notice of public hearing.pdf

05-00599-memo.pdf

05-00599-notice.pdf

05-00599-legal description.pdf

Motion by Vice Chairman González, seconded by Commissioner Allen, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


R-05-0427

Chairman Sanchez: Let's go PH.1.


Chairman Sanchez: PH.1 is a plat, and it is a -- all right. It's a plat. It's a resolution. Is there a motion?

Commissioner Allen: This is a plat -- motion to -- I make a motion --

Chairman Sanchez: OK. There's a motion --

Commissioner Allen: -- to approve it.

Chairman Sanchez: -- by Vice Chairman González, second by Commissioner Allen. For the purpose of discussion, can we have the Administration just put something on the record pertaining to this resolution?

Stephanie Grindell: Stephanie Grindell, director of Public Works. This is a resolution accepting















the plat of Barnard-Pent Subdivision, located on the north side of Orange Street, between Matilda Street and Virginia Street.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Before we do that, let's -- it's a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none and hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission. Any discussion on the item? If not, it is a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries.


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DECLARING SURPLUS AND APPROVING THE SALE OF THE CITY-OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1360 NORTHWEST 8TH COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED, TO MKJ REALTY, A LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA; FURTHER ESTABLISHING EIGHTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($85,000) AS THE AMOUNT TO BE PAID TO THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") BY THE AFOREMENTIONED; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT"), IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM AND TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO CONSUMMATE SUCH TRANSACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT, WHICH TERMS MAY BE AMENDED BY THE CITY MANAGER AS MAY BE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO MEET THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY.








05-00601-memo.pdf

05-00601-notice of public hearing.pdf

Motion by Commissioner Allen, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


R-05-0428

A motion was made by Commissioner Allen, seconded by Vice Chairman González, and failed, with Commissioner Winton and Chairman Sanchez voting no and Commissioner Regalado absent, to deny the proposal declaring surplus and approving the sale of city-owned property located at 1360 Northwest 8th Court; further instructing the City Manager to establish a better public purpose of said property.

A motion was made by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman González, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Regalado absent, to table Item PH.2.











A motion was made by Commissioner Allen, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton absent, to reconsider Item PH.2.

Chairman Sanchez: All right, PH.2 is a resolution.

Commissioner Allen: PH.2. Mr. Chairman, in fact, PH.2, I'm going to offer a different motion. Obviously, I have terrible concerns with this particular proposed sale of alleged City-owned surplus property; it's going to a private entity. Furthermore, I've gone by and I've taken a look at this property. You know, as a suggestion, maybe we can use this as a pocket park, as opposed to selling it to a private entity, and I don't know if you're familiar, if you've taken a look at that area, what's juxtapose to that; there is a -- I believe a structure there that the guy is putting up for his condos. Are you aware of that?

Vice Chairman González: Um-hum.


Laura Billberry: The -- Lori Billberry, Economic Development. The adjacent owner is MKJ Realty, and they had requested this property so that they could assemble this lot with their property, in order to build a condo development on this site. As itself, it's not a developable site because it's only 2,900 square feet, and the purchase price would be $85,000.

Chairman Sanchez: Less than 7,500, which requires --

Commissioner Allen: Yeah, I know. Yeah, I understand all that, but could there not been a different use for that piece of property? I mean, I don't want to be -- I don't want us to establish a business practice whereby we're giving -- we make a designation that this is surplus City property; therefore, we give it to a private entity, and they could use it for their own private benefit. Is there some assurance in this that these particular development will be low- to moderate-income price points on the particular project? Because otherwise, we'll be guilty of giving property to a private developer, and he's --


Commissioner Allen: -- using it for a private purpose, not a public purpose, to a large extent.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Wait, wait, wait, wait. Mr. City Attorney, and then Commissioner Winton, please.

Commissioner Winton: And he'll probably answer it.

Mr. Fernández: Yes. With regard to that issue, Commissioner Allen, if the City were giving it at a reduced price, or were giving it with some other attachments, then typically, we always impose those conditions, but because the City's selling it at fair market value --

Chairman Sanchez: Market value.

Mr. Fernández: -- after two full appraisal --

Ms. Billberry: Excuse me, that's not the case in (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

Mr. Fernández: I'm sorry.

Ms. Billberry: This property is exempt under our City Charter. It was a property that was deeded to the City by the County, pursuant to a land that was available from the list of lands



available for taxes, so it is exempt from 29b of our City Charter. We did negotiate $29 a square foot on the property. The adjacent owner had just paid $40 a square foot on their adjacent site.

Commissioner Allen: On the adjacent site, they paid $40?

Ms. Billberry: Yes.

Commissioner Allen: And, however, they're acquiring this property for $29 --

Ms. Billberry: For $29.

Commissioner Allen: -- per square foot?

Ms. Billberry: Yes.

Commissioner Winton: Who?

Ms. Billberry: This site --


Commissioner Allen: That's quite a significant difference.

Commissioner Allen: Commissioner Allen, why don't we -- we need to make three motions --


Chairman Sanchez: -- approve, deny, or defer, so give me one.

Commissioner Allen: I would like to make a motion to, if you will, deny this; instruct the City Manager to look at this piece of property to see if it could be, for lack of a better description, established for a better public purpose, maybe a little small pocket park or something to that effect, because I do believe this property is located in the Highland Park District, is that correct?

Vice Chairman González: That's correct.

Commissioner Allen: Right, and I did notice the gentleman's property that's adjacent to that; he's going to be able to do even -- because it's juxtapose against the expressway, and he has this huge frontage, so down the road, he's going to avail himself of additional FAR (floor/area ratio). I just don't -- I just -- I'm just concerned that we're giving property, City-owned property to a private developer, who's using it for private purposes, not to benefit the public. If I had some assurance that this property will be conveyed and constructed for a low- to moderate-income affordable housing, no problem, but this one just doesn't strike me as being something that I would approve.

Chairman Sanchez: But when you say “affordable,” a commitment of --

Commissioner Allen: A price point.

Commissioner Allen: -- apartments or the entire building being affordable?

Vice Chairman González: It could be a house.

Commissioner Allen: It could be a house, anything; anything that's for the benefits of household with low- or moderate-income, because that's my concern.




Commissioner Allen: I don't want to get in -- I don't want to establish a business practice here of giving property to private developers, yeah.

Chairman Sanchez: Point well made. Commissioner Winton.

Vice Chairman González: I'll second the motion.

Commissioner Winton: I --

Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion and a second. It's under discussion, and it's for -- to deny, so Commissioner Winton.

Commissioner Winton: I chaired the Charter Review Committee that actually changed our Charter that the voters voted on to specifically allow this sort of transaction, and the reason for that is because we have these scattered sites -- you cannot build -- you can't build affordable housing, you can't build unaffordable housing, you can't build anything on -- and if you picture less than 3,000 square feet, from a practical standpoint, you're not going to get a pocket park either; it's too small, and so our Charter was changed, specifically, to allow for the sale at market value --

Commissioner Allen: I agree.

Commissioner Winton: -- those kind of sites that have no other use other than to the adjoining property owner, and the voters said yes, and so while I'm with you, I would like to see affordable housing every opportunity we get, this isn't one of those sites that's going to allow for that, nor will it allow, from a practical standpoint, the utilization of a little pocket park because it's too small. Now, the final point I'm going to make is about your point relative to market. It does seem a little mysterious to me that we have an established price point right next door, $40 a foot, and the City's selling theirs for 29. Now, that doesn't make any sense to me.


Commissioner Winton: It seems to me, if we're going to sell it to the developer to build a larger development, he ought to buy it for $40 a foot, just like he did the site right next door, but I don't think it works for the other two, which is the only reason I wouldn't be supporting that motion, because I think it's going to be detrimental to the neighborhood long-term.

Chairman Sanchez: Mr. City Attorney.

Commissioner Allen: Right. Well --

Chairman Sanchez: Wait. Hold on, Commissioner Allen.

Mr. Fernández: Yeah. In negotiating that price, while the -- perhaps, the going price for buildable lots would be "X" amounts of dollars, when you have a parcel of land that is not buildable, the logic behind reducing the price to get competitive -- you know, although the intent is to add it as part of a buildable lot and make it feasible to build --

Commissioner Winton: More.

Mr. Fernández: -- more, you know -- but those -- all of those issues were taken into consideration in the negotiations.



Commissioner Allen: Right. If I may, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. The item is still under discussion. There's a motion and a second to deny. Commissioner Allen.

Commissioner Allen: Yeah, just in furtherance of that, I actually went out and took pictures of it, but you know, everybody's making it out to appear to be it's just a small piece of property, but this is a huge swath of land --

Commissioner Winton: Three thousand square feet isn't --

Commissioner Allen: -- juxtapose to the expressway there, and frankly, there's residential properties just to the, if you will, south of that lot, and since we're in the business here of trying to put affordable homes in scattered lots, why not put a property there; it would be a smaller square footage, Commissioner Winton.

Commissioner Winton: You can't. Our Code won't allow you to build a house on a 3,000-square foot site.

Commissioner Allen: Well -- OK. Well, in any event, my position is, I just don't want to establish a business practice here whereby, as I look here, the guy who's just next door to it, obviously, he has ambitious plans, but it's going to a private entity, and as such, they're just going to expand their entire land base, FAR --


Commissioner Allen: -- you name it. I mean --


Commissioner Allen: -- this -- I need to have a public purpose, and so to that --


Commissioner Allen: -- I ask that we go ahead and pass --

Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion and a second, and it is to deny. At this time, Madam Clerk, roll call, because I think it's going to be a tie.

Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call. Commissioner Winton?

Commissioner Winton: No.

Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. Vice Chairman González?

Vice Chairman González: Yes.

Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Allen?

Vice Chairman González: To Deny.

Commissioner Allen: Yes, to deny.

Ms. Thompson: Chairman Sanchez?



Chairman Sanchez: No. All right, so the motion dies. No, it dies. First of all, I think the property is too low. I mean, you can't build anything on it. I think the valid argument that has been made here is, need a motion to direct the Administration to negotiate a better price for it, and maybe get -- come back with some more reasonable conditions for our approval, so having said that, I can't make a motion because I'm the Chair, but I mean -- Commissioner Allen --

Commissioner Winton: I'd make that motion.

Chairman Sanchez: You would make the motion?

Commissioner Winton: I'd make the motion that the purchaser of the land, which is the next door neighbor, be required to pay the same price they paid for the piece of property they already bought.

Commissioner Allen: And could we also add some additional terms there to determine that whatever the units are, that those price points -- and again, we can't influence the private market -- but those price points are considerate of the household incomes in and around that area.

Commissioner Winton: I'm going to guess it probably already is, but maybe -- is this --

Ms. Billberry: This is Carole Kelly. If you don't mind, if she has (UNINTELLIGIBLE) --

Mr. Fernández: A public hearing.

Commissioner Winton: Yeah, absolutely.

Mr. Fernández: Yes.

Chairman Sanchez: This is a public hearing.

Carol Kelly: Carole Kelly, 2640 Hilola Street, Miami. I am the managing member of MJK Realty. Just so you know, the swath of property is nonbuildable. It is a long strip. Even though you see the lot next door, nothing would be able to be built on this piece of property. Addressing your concerns as to the purchase price. Although the property next door we did buy for $40 a square foot, the property in that area is not going for that. The property next door to the one that we bought was going for approximately $20 a square foot, so within negotiations with the City, at $29 a square foot, we were paying well over what property in that area is going for, other than the one lot we purchased next door, which we needed. In terms of your issue regarding affordable housing, we are intending on building affordable housing on this unit.

Commissioner Winton: What was that last point you made? I'm sorry.

Vice Chairman González: So, I can --

Ms. Kelly: We are intending on building affordable housing in this area.

Commissioner Allen: Intending, so -- right, so the price points will be consistent with the household income --

Ms. Kelly: Correct.

Commissioner Allen: -- in and around that area?

Ms. Kelly: Yes, sir.



Commissioner Allen: Highland Park district.

Ms. Kelly: Yes, sir.

Commissioner Allen: Right, but it still begs the other question, the market rate in which you guys are purchasing this property. You just indicated on the record that you paid $40 per square foot, and there's a huge difference between 29 per square foot and $40 per square foot, so it seems logical that the City should get its best benefit from this transaction. It should be rightfully at 40 per square foot.

Ms. Kelly: Well, if you want to take the one piece of property in that area that sold for the highest, which is what we purchased for it -- we purchased, if you take the highest one piece property, then it would be 40, but if you take what the property's selling on there, on average, it's approximately $20 a square foot, so we paid high-top dollar for a tiny little strip of property that couldn't be used for anything else for the City.

Commissioner Allen: OK, so I don't know the comparables. That's your industry; you know that, but obviously, you have to meet a compromise. If 40 was the highest, you amortize that over the number of comparable prices that have sold, but then also contemplating what's taking place in the future there; that's going to also raise the market value, so to say $20 might be the appropriate figure at this point, I would probably disagree. I think it should be more north of 29 or $30, somewhere just short of probably $40.


Commissioner Allen: In other words, we could get a better deal. I think the City should be -- we should make a motion that the City go back and --

Chairman Sanchez: There is a motion already on the floor --

Commissioner Winton: There's already a motion.

Commissioner Allen: Right, OK.

Chairman Sanchez: -- stipulating to that.

Commissioner Allen: A better -- right, and I second that motion, OK.

Commissioner Winton: Could I --

Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Winton.

Commissioner Winton: How many units are you going to be able to build on the combined site anyhow?

Chairman Sanchez: They don't know.

Ms. Kelly: Only about 35 to 40. It'll be small.

Vice Chairman González: What they're doing --

Commissioner Winton: Oh, it's big.

Vice Chairman González: -- they're combining.



Commissioner Allen: You're combining.

Commissioner Winton: Yeah, exactly, right.

Vice Chairman González: That's why they're buying this strip of land --

Commissioner Winton: Because one of the thoughts going through --

Vice Chairman González: -- because they needed to build affordable units.

Commissioner Winton: -- my mind, Commissioner Allen --


Commissioner Winton: -- was that -- and I don't know -- because it's absolutely, you can pencil it out. You can do a calculation, and I don't know what the calculation is, because I haven't run it in my head, at all, but you may consider -- and the City Attorney may object to this -- giving the piece of land to the developer and requiring that one unit or two units or whatever the penciled-out benefit is there, assuming $40 a square foot value, whatever that penciled-in benefit is, that they reduce the price on a unit, or two units, whatever the math works out to that makes it more affordable by providing that land, which we do all the time, free land, to build more affordable housing. Now, that's an option. I'm just putting it on the table to think about, but I don't know what the right answer is.

Commissioner Allen: Yeah, I disagree with that option, respectfully. I'd like to continue with the motion that you put on the table, that the City --


Commissioner Allen: -- goes back and negotiate a better --


Commissioner Allen: -- purchase price.

Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second; it's been put forth on the floor. It is a resolution. The public hearing -- is there anyone from the public wishing to address this legislative body? Seeing none, hearing none -- yes.

Ms. Billberry: If I may, Ms. Kelly asked if there's anyway we can try and table this, maybe, and we can try and work through this? I don't know if you're comfortable with that.

Commissioner Allen: We have a current motion on the floor, and --

Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion on the floor that Commissioner stated, the motion still --

Commissioner Winton: But what's the advantage to tabling?

Chairman Sanchez: They might --

Ms. Billberry: To see if --

Mr. Fernández: Table it means you bring it back today before the meeting is over; deferred



defers to another meeting.

Commissioner Winton: I will withdraw my motion and resubmit a motion to table the item so that it could come back this afternoon.

Chairman Sanchez: And if it doesn't, we'll vote it down.

Commissioner Allen: But respectfully, we had a second on the motion.

Chairman Sanchez: He withdrew it.

Commissioner Allen: Oh, you withdrew your motion.

Commissioner Winton: I'm withdrawing my motion.

Commissioner Allen: Well, I -- because in addition to that, I like to reinstate your motion, if you will, Commissioner Winton, so we're back to square one again.

Commissioner Winton: But I think that I made --

Mr. Fernández: Well, a motion to table --

Commissioner Winton: I think I made a new motion.

Mr. Fernández: -- takes precedence.

Commissioner Allen: Because we're on the same page, Commissioner Winton.

Chairman Sanchez: Motion to table takes precedence.

Vice Chairman González: But we already have -- I don't know, Mr. Chairman. If you allow me.

Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir.

Vice Chairman González: We had a motion. We voted on a motion to deny this --

Chairman Sanchez: And he pulled a second.

Vice Chairman González: -- and that stands.

Commissioner Winton: Oh, we did?

Ms. Thompson: No, no.

Commissioner Allen: That's right, we did.

Ms. Thompson: No, no, no. No, no, no, no, no.

Commissioner Winton: No, we didn't vote.

Ms. Thompson: The motion to deny was a tie, so it --

Chairman Sanchez: So it died.

Ms. Thompson: -- died.



Commissioner Allen: Right, it died.

Vice Chairman González: Exactly.

Commissioner Winton: Yeah.

Mr. Fernández: It died.

Commissioner Winton: And so, then, I made a new motion, which I just withdrew.

Chairman Sanchez: Listen -- so you don't throw me off.

Commissioner Winton: OK, sorry.

Chairman Sanchez: There was a motion and he second it for discussion. He pulled his motion; your motion dies.

Commissioner Allen: Correct.

Chairman Sanchez: So he proposed a motion to table the item.

Commissioner Allen: Correct.

Mr. Fernández: Well, the -- you can only table a pending motion; you don't table pending items --

Commissioner Winton: Oh.

Mr. Fernández: -- and so by him pulling his motion --

Chairman Sanchez: It dies.

Mr. Fernández: -- there is no motion --

Chairman Sanchez: All right, there's no motion on the floor. Is there a motion?

Commissioner Allen: I'd like to make a motion to reinstate Commissioner Winton's former motion; that is to say that we direct the City Manager to go back and negotiate a better purchase price with respect to this property --

Vice Chairman González: Second the motion.

Commissioner Allen: -- in behalf of the City.


Mr. Fernández: Now, it will be appropriate for a motion to table that motion.

Commissioner Winton: So moved, so that they have an opportunity to maybe to do it this afternoon.

Chairman Sanchez: Maybe do it this afternoon.

Commissioner Winton: And if they don't do it this afternoon, it gets -- it goes on.



Commissioner Allen: Fair enough.

Commissioner Winton: Right?


Commissioner Allen: Yeah.

Chairman Sanchez: All right, so there's a motion and now we need a second --

Commissioner Allen: Oh, wait.

Chairman Sanchez: -- to table that motion.

Commissioner Allen: Right, so -- if I may, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sanchez: Don't confuse me.

Commissioner Allen: No, I don't want to get him confused, but it's our understanding, you're requesting tabling it, Commissioner Winton, so that we can work on a purchase price at that point?

Commissioner Winton: No, this afternoon --

Chairman Sanchez: This afternoon.

Commissioner Winton: -- and bring it back this afternoon --

Chairman Sanchez: And it --

Commissioner Winton: -- which may meet the motion that you're suggesting.

Commissioner Allen: Which is a higher purchase price.

Mr. Fernández: Right.

Commissioner Winton: Bingo.

Mr. Fernández: Exactly.

Commissioner Winton: That's what they want to do.

Commissioner Allen: Right, OK.


Mr. Fernández: Our meeting with --

Chairman Sanchez: Mr. City Attorney --

Commissioner Allen: All right. That sounds fair.




Chairman Sanchez: -- Commissioner Winton --

Mr. Fernández: Right.

Chairman Sanchez: -- has made a motion to table it; we need a second.


Chairman Sanchez: It is -- there's a second to table the motion that was put forth by Commissioner Allen.

Mr. Fernández: Motion to tables are not debatable, so you take an immediate vote.

Chairman Sanchez: Right. All in favor, say "aye."


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. The item has been tabled to this afternoon.

[Later...]

Chairman Sanchez: The City of Miami Commission is back in order, and we'll continue with our agenda. First item on the agenda was an item that was tabled earlier. We need a motion to bring it back up.

Commissioner Allen: Yes, Mr. Chairman, if you will.

Chairman Sanchez: Motion is made by Commissioner Allen. Is there a second?


Chairman Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Regalado, and the item is being discussed right now. That is PH.2, which was a declaration of surplus of property at 1360 Northwest 8th Court. All right, Commissioner Allen, you're recognized. Could we let the individuals that were here for that --

Commissioner Allen: Where are they?

Chairman Sanchez: They might be walking outside or --

Commissioner Allen: OK. Would you prefer me to continue to go forth or wait until they arrive or -- I'd just like to put something on the record regarding it.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Let's do something.


Chairman Sanchez: Let's do something. We'll get back to that one.

[Later...]

Chairman Sanchez: All right, PH.2.

Commissioner Allen: PH.2.



Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Allen, are you satisfied with --

Commissioner Allen: Yes. Mr. Chairman, if I may.

Chairman Sanchez: Before we do that, Mr. City Attorney.

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): Yeah, a point of order. Procedurally, Madam Clerk, the motion then that's pending now, that it's been taken off the table, was a motion to defer the item, and now my understanding is that there may be a different motion, so we need to dispose of the motion to defer so that you can deal with the motion to take action.

Chairman Sanchez: So, the appropriate motion at this time is a motion to reconsider.

Mr. Fernández: All right. That's correct.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. We need a motion to consider, so we could wipe out the original motion that was on the table.

Commissioner Allen: OK. If you will, Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to -- for reconsideration.

Chairman Sanchez: OK. Commissioner Allen makes a motion to reconsider.


Chairman Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Regalado. Is there any discussion on the item? Hearing none, All in favor, say "aye."


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. Therefore, the item has been moved for reconsider [sic], and there is no --

Mr. Fernández: Nothing on the table.

Chairman Sanchez: -- motion on the table --

Mr. Fernández: Correct.

Chairman Sanchez: -- so therefore, Commissioner Allen, you're recognized.

Commissioner Allen: Yes, Mr. Chairman, if you will, I'd like to make a motion to, if we will, adopt the original motion, which is a conveyance of surplus City property, located at the address as specified, pursuant to the original terms of the purchase/sale agreement, and to that end, I'd like to also add that I stand corrected because there was a misinterpretation on my part, particularly, as I looked at the aerial photo, it made it appear as if it was a larger swath of land, and so that's been cleared up to my satisfaction, so to that end, I'd like to have a motion --



Commissioner Allen: -- adopting --



Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion to approve PH.2, which is a resolution, second by Commissioner Regalado.

Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sanchez: It is a public hearing.

Ms. Scheider: That's the item as presented on the agenda then?

Chairman Sanchez: Yes, PH.2, as presented on the agenda.

Mr. Fernández: As presented on the agenda.

Ms. Scheider: Thank you.

Commissioner Allen: As presented, yes.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. It's a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission for any further discussion. Hearing no discussion on the item, it's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. OK. I have just been informed that Commissioner Winton is still in a meeting, and he should be joining us shortly.

10:30 A.M.

[Note: a sign language interpreter translated discussion related to Items PH.3, PH.4, and PH.5.]


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE, WITH PARCEL REVERTER PROVISIONS, OF CERTAIN CITY-OWNED PARCELS OF LAND, DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED, TO ROCKWOOD PROPERTIES, LLC., FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF FORTY (40) SINGLE FAMILY AFFORDABLE UNITS, TWENTY-ONE (21) TO BE SUBSIDIZED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI FOR ELIGIBLE LOW INCOME PERSONS; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, FOR SAID PURPOSE.

Department of Community Development




05-00602-public notice.pdf

Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Allen, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.

Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner González, Winton, Sanchez and AllenAbsent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado

R-05-0423







be back. Let's try to get some of these items out of the way, noncontroversial. All right, PH.2.

Commissioner Allen: Wait. PH (public hearing) --

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): Do you want to do time certain, 11 o'clock?

Chairman Sanchez: Oh, we have your time -- OK, let's get you out of the way. Your item is what?

Joe Arriola (City Manager): We have three items, Commissioner.

Chairman Sanchez: All right, let's get them out of the way.

Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): It begins with PH.3.

Barbara Gomez-Rodriguez: Barbara Rodriguez, Department of Community Development. PH.3, we are requesting authorization to transfer and convey 40 parcels of land to Rockwood Properties, LLC. These used to be the properties that we took back from BAME (Bethel African Methodist Episcopal).



Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion --


Chairman Sanchez: -- and a second. Before we open it up for discussion, it is a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public -- yes, sir. I never want to leave anybody out. Please state your name and address for the record.

Charles Cutler: Charles Cutler, 706 Northwest 4th Avenue.

Chairman Sanchez: Charles, always good to see you, buddy.

Mr. Cutler: All right. Thank you, sir. With some of the projects that's going on, in terms of affordable housing, I think that, with a lot of this affordable housing, the veterans are being overlooked. We've got a lot of disabled veterans that's coming back from Iraq and from Afghanistan that's disabled, and a lot of the houses that's being constructed now are not conducive to accommodate them with their physical limitations, so I just want to make the Commission aware that we are working and moving into that direction, and with some of this property that the City is conveying, I think that it would really be to our advantage and to our credit if we could specifically earmark some of this property to be used to develop housing for disabled veterans.

Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman --

Chairman Sanchez: Charles --

Mr. Cutler: Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: -- thank you so much.



Commissioner Winton: -- I thought that everything that gets built in the City today is required to meet ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements.

Ms. Gomez-Rodriguez: They are.


Commissioner Winton: OK, so it -- Charles, it'll meet their requirements. The question -- the other question is whether or not you can get the names of people that could be potential end users of these that are, in fact, veterans to --

Ms. Gomez-Rodriguez: Home buyers.

Commissioner Winton: -- Barbara and the appropriate organizations, and we'd be glad to help with that. I couldn't imagine --

Ms. Gomez-Rodriguez: Right.

Commissioner Winton: -- we wouldn't be glad to.

Ms. Gomez-Rodriguez: We can work with Mr. Cutler.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Thank you.

Mr. Cutler: OK, thank you, Barbara.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Public hearing is closed at this time, coming back to the Commission. I believe there's a motion and a second for the purpose of discussion. Any discussion on this item? I just have one question: What assurance do we have, and we need to put -- we need to, you know, be on top of them so they do produce, because in the past, we've had some situations where these organizations don't produce, so we need to supervise them, guide them in the right direction, and do everything we can; that we monitor them, and we make sure that progress is being done.

Mr. Arriola: We have a reverter language on the contract.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. I just want assurance on that.

Mr. Arriola: Yep.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. It is a -- is it a resolution?

Ms. Thompson: Resolution.

Ms. Gomez-Rodriguez: Three is a resolution.

Chairman Sanchez: It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."






A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF 29TH YEAR CLOSED OUT EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT FUNDS, IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $77,708.37; ALLOCATING SAID FUNDS TO CAMILLUS HOUSE, INC., FOR THE REHABILITATION OF EMERGENCY SHELTER BUILDINGS FOR THE HOMELESS, AS SPECIFIED IN "ATTACHMENT A," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH SAID AGENCY FOR SAID PURPOSE.







Motion by Commissioner Allen, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


R-05-0424

Barbara Gomez-Rodriguez (Director, Community Development): PH.4, we're requesting authorization from the 29th Year closeout of our Emergency Shelter Grant funds for a total of 77,708.37, and allocating said funds to the Camillus House, Incorporated, and that is for a new roof at the location of 2136 Northwest 8th Avenue, and kitchen equipment for the building located at 726 Northeast 1st Avenue.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Is there a motion?

Commissioner Allen: I move the item.


Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion by Commissioner Allen, second by Commissioner Winton. Before we open it up for discussion, requires a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed, for the record, coming back for any discussion. Hearing no discussion on the item, it is a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."




A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF 30TH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GRANT FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000, FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL CODE COMPLIANCE PROGRAM; ALLOCATING SAID FUNDS, TO LITTLE HAVANA ACTIVITIES & NUTRITIONAL CENTERS OF DADE COUNTY, INC., FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES, AS SPECIFIED IN "ATTACHMENT A," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED; AUTHORIZING THE









CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH SAID AGENCY FOR SAID PURPOSE.








05-00614-pre resolution attachment.pdf

05-00614-master report.pdf

05-00614-agreement.pdf



R-05-0425

Barbara Gomez-Rodriguez (Director, Community Development): PH.5, we're requesting approval to allocate an additional $15,000 to the Little Havana Acti --




Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion by Commissioner Winton, second by Commissioner Allen. Before we open it for discussion, it is a public requiring a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, all in favor, say "aye."



Ms. Gomez-Rodriguez: Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Thank you very much.













ORDINANCES - EMERGENCY

05-00615 Emergency OrdinanceEM.1 ORDINANCE

(4/5THS VOTE)AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, AMENDING CHAPTER 54 OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "STREETS AND SIDEWALKS" BY AMENDING SECTION 54-6.3(F) TO CLARIFY THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH INDEMNIFICATION, HOLD HARMLESS AND INSURANCE ARE REQUIRED BY THIS SECTION; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE.


05-00615-ordinance.pdf

05-00615-cover memo.pdf



12710

Chairman Sanchez: Let's go to EM.1. Let's try to get through a lot of these --

Commissioner Winton: Did we do PH.1 and PH.2?

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman.


Mr. Fernández: EM.1 and EM.2.

Chairman Sanchez: All right, EM.1, EM.2, let's get them.

Mr. Fernández: Yes. Ms. Grindell can also step up to the mike, if she needs to, but these are, in essence, two very brief amendments to ordinances that we're presenting because, as you know, we're engaged in litigation regarding our permits for demonstrations and the like, and we believe that by making these very small punctuation-type of changes to these two ordinances, EM.1 and EM.2, we will be able to posture a position ourselves in the federal courts, much more advantageously than we would otherwise if we had the language like this.


Vice Chairman González: Move EM.1.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion. It's an --

Commissioner Allen: It's a four-fifths.

Chairman Sanchez: -- ordinance requiring a four-fifths. We do have four-fifths, for the record. It's an ordinance, emergency ordinance. There's a motion by Vice Chairman González, second by --






Chairman Sanchez: -- Commissioner Allen. Before we open it up for discussion, it is an ordinance requiring a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Sir, are you speaking on this item?

Kent Harrison Robbins: Which number are we on now?

Chairman Sanchez: EM.1.

Mr. Robbins: Is this the -- amending the streets and sidewalks?


Mr. Robbins: Is this as to the 16th Street item?

Mr. Fernández: No, no, no.

Chairman Sanchez: No.

Mr. Fernández: No.

Chairman Sanchez: No, no.

Mr. Robbins: This is as to 16th Street.

Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Anyone else? Hearing none, the public hearing is closed at this time, coming back to the Commission. Any discussion on the item? It's an ordinance. Mr. City Attorney, read the ordinance into the record, followed by a roll call by the City Clerk.

The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.

Chairman Sanchez: Madam Clerk, roll call.

Ms. Thompson: First roll call. Second roll call.

Roll calls were taken, the results of which are stated above.

Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted as an emergency measure, 4/0.

05-00616 Emergency OrdinanceEM.2 ORDINANCE

(4/5THS VOTE)AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, AMENDING CHAPTER 54 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "STREETS AND SIDEWALKS" BY AMENDING SECTION 54-1, CLARIFYING THE DEFINITION OF "SPECIAL EVENT," THROUGH THE USE OF CORRECTED PUNCTUATION; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE.




Motion by Vice Chairman González, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.






12711

Chairman Sanchez: All right, EM.2. EM.2 is an emergency ordinance. It's a four-fifth motion -- vote. Is there a motion?

Vice Chairman González: Move EM.2.

Chairman Sanchez: Motion by Vice Chairman González. Is there a second?

Commissioner Winton: Second.

Chairman Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Winton. Before we open it up for discussion, it is an ordinance requiring a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission for discussion. Hearing no discussion on the item, Mr. City Attorney, read it into the record.



Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): First roll call. Second roll call.

Roll calls were taken, the results of which are stated above.

Ms. Thompson: The measure has been adopted an emergency ordinance, 4/0.



ORDINANCES - SECOND READING

05-00485 Second ReadingSR.1 ORDINANCE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 54/ARTICLE V/SECTION 54-190 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "STREETS AND SIDEWALKS/BASE BUILDING LINES/NONSTANDARD STREET WIDTHS," BY MODIFYING THE WIDTH OF THE NORTH SIDE OF NORTHEAST 16TH STREET BETWEEN NORTHEAST 2ND AVENUE AND BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.


05-00485-ordinance FR-SR.pdf

05-00485-summary form SR.pdf

05-00485-memo1 FR-SRpdf

05-00485-memo2 FR-SR.pdf

05-00485-memo3 FR-SR.pdf

05-00485-location sketchFR-SR.pdf

Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman González, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


12712

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Let's get back to SR.1.

Commissioner Allen: SR.1.

Stephanie Grindell: Stephanie Grindell, director of Public Works. SR.1 is an ordinance changing the -- reducing the zone street right-of-way on Northeast 16th Street from Northeast 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard, from 50 to 25 feet, and if I can explain a little bit about what this means.

Chairman Sanchez: Sure. Sir, this is the item you're here on, correct? OK.

Ms. Grindell: The street is currently built to a 25-foot right-of-way, and back in 1960, there was an ordinance passed that required that any street from that point forward would be required to be 50-foot in width, with some exceptions that were listed in the Code. Now, that requires that the property owners dedicate a portion of their property for the use of the public street. In this particular block, there's only two property owners; one is 1650 and one is 1601. The developer at 1650 asked Public Works to reconsider whether or not we would be expanding this right-of-way in the future, and we've decided that we would not be; it serves as a local purpose only, and so we're recommending that we reduce the street width. Additionally, the property next door, which is 1601, has been -- it's of historic quality, so we don't propose that --

Commissioner Winton: Is what?

Ms. Grindell: Of historic quality, so we don't propose that the street would be widened for that purpose, as well.











Chairman Sanchez: All right. Wait, wait, wait. Whoa, whoa. OK.


Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second. It is under discussion. It is an ordinance on second reading. Sir, it is -- the public hearing is open.

Kent Harrison Robbins: Thank you. Hello. My name is Kent Harrison Robbins. My offices are at 1224 Washington Avenue, Miami Beach. I came over the bay to speak with you, and I'm doing it more and more, and looking forward to the beautiful and -- skyline that you're enhancing with the --

Chairman Sanchez: I think you're going to be here quite often.

Mr. Robbins: Yeah, I look forward to it, and being a native of South Florida, I enjoy the improvements that are coming to the City of Miami, and I think you guys are doing a great job. I represent a corporation owned by two gentlemen, who had been residing in this city for many years, and they own a company called ZJ Audy Investments, Inc., and they own a number of properties in this -- in- and outside of this city. One of their properties is at the corner of Northeast 2nd Avenue and 16th Street, one of the only two properties that are being affected by this proposed change; we contend that it's going to adversely affect us, and let me explain to you why, but first I want to go through some procedural issues, and I would ask for the City Attorney to rule on an issue. Given that the impact on this --

Chairman Sanchez: Mr. City Attorney, Mr. City Attorney, they're directing --

Mr. Robbins: Given that the impact of this ordinance is on only two properties, I would request that this matter be handled as a quasi-judicial matter as against a legislative matter, and I'd ask for this -- for you to determine whether or not this is -- if we're proceeding in a legislative fashion or in a quasi-judicial fashion as to this matter?

Mr. Fernández: This is a legislative function of this board. You're making an amendment to the text; you're not applying to any particular property. The fact that particular properties were referenced and, you know, they may be alluded to. In essence, what's happening is a change to the text of the ordinance, which is a legislative process.

Commissioner Allen: Mr. Chairman, can I weigh in just quickly?


Chairman Sanchez: Well --

Commissioner Allen: Mr. City Attorney, because your point is, is that certain properties are benefiting from this, and only those properties, is that --

Mr. Robbins: Only two properties, and my property is being -- my client's property is being adversely affected; the adjoining property -- well, they're essentially circumventing the variance law instead of going with a -- the required setback of the base building line of 15 -- 25 feet from the center of the line. By making this change, their building, which is a 50-story building, will be setback only 12 and a half feet from the centerline, so we're -- our contention is that this should be treated as a quasi-judicial matter, and as you're probably familiar with -- I think your counsel -- as you know, the Lon Dorno (phonetic) U.S. Supreme Court decision said --



Commissioner Allen: Right, exactly. That's --

Mr. Robbins: -- that when there's --

Commissioner Allen: You're right. He's right.

Mr. Robbins: -- specific adversely affecting --

Commissioner Allen: He's right.

Mr. Robbins: -- only a limited number of properties and it applies as to it, it should be quasi-judicial in nature.

Commissioner Allen: Right. That -- he's right.

Mr. Robbins: And because of that, I would contend that this should -- the notice proceedings that occurred in the notice was defective. In fact, we did not receive any notice. If we had not made inquiry by seeing a little note on some plans at another matter, at another hearing, we wouldn't have even been noticed -- even been aware of this. There was no mail notice sent to us. There was no posting of the property. There was no fundamental due process provided to us. Yes, we made it here, but we didn't even have notice of the first hearing, and at the first hearing, there was already a determination made, so --

Commissioner Allen: Right. You're right, and Mr. Chairman, if I may. That's why I'm concerned. This is at second reading. Frankly, I was wondering where were you prior to this, but respectfully, he's making some very solid, legal arguments --

Ms. Grindell: If I may.

Commissioner Allen: -- and I don't want to be set up for another potential lawsuit, because he's right about that case he cited --

Ms. Grindell: Except that --

Commissioner Allen: -- City Attorney.

Ms. Grindell: -- they have already benefited, in that they're already on the base building line.

Mr. Robbins: No, that doesn't have nothing to do with -- we are on the base building line, and that's not the issue here. The issue here is notice. This has nothing to do with whether -- where we're located; it has to do with changing the base building line, which would allow a 50-story high-rise to be now be pushed 10 feet closer to the street than had been allowed, if this ordinance was not changed.

Commissioner Allen: Right, and arguably, we're benefiting a specific beneficiary of this; that's what he's saying, and in addition to that, he should have been --

Mr. Fernández: Well --

Commissioner Allen: -- noticed.

Commissioner Winton: Well, I think --

Commissioner Allen: I mean --



Commissioner Winton: -- you need to be directing your comments to --

Commissioner Allen: -- Mr. City Attorney --

Commissioner Winton: -- the City Attorney and not the staff.

Mr. Robbins: So, that's why I feel that this is a, in my opinion -- and I know that the counsel has to make that decision for you.

Chairman Sanchez: Well -- and let me tell you something. He is our City Attorney; he makes the decision, whether it's legislative or quasi-judicial --

Mr. Fernández: Correct.

Chairman Sanchez: -- and then we go from there. I mean, you could always --

Mr. Fernández: The --

Chairman Sanchez: The due process, you're entitled to go to -- take it further up the due process ladder.

Mr. Robbins: I appreciate that.


Mr. Robbins: And that's what I intend to do, so let me make my record --

Chairman Sanchez: And you will have every right to do that, sir.

Mr. Robbins: I appreciate that.


Mr. Robbins: Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: Mr. City Attorney.

Mr. Fernández: Yes. The fact that Northeast 16th Street happens to be the length it happens to be is really not the issue. The issue that you need to focus is that you're making an amendment to the text of the ordinance. The results of that, and who gets benefited, and who gets not benefited by it are secondary types of issues. I stand by my opinion to you, that this has been properly noticed. It has been advertised. It doesn't have to follow the same requirements of notice and advertising of a quasi-judicial proceeding, but the fact still remains that you need to get testimony from your staff with regard to --

Chairman Sanchez: And we will get testimony from our staff.

Commissioner Allen: That's what I wanted to get, Mr. City Attorney, because do we not have to establish, if you will, a findings of fact, since you're arguing that we're making a material text amendment to this?

Mr. Fernández: And --

Commissioner Allen: And that's my concern --



Mr. Fernández: -- the findings --

Commissioner Allen: -- because if it's not there, you're setting yourself up for a major lawsuit.

Mr. Fernández: No. Well, if I may, I think that the testimony's on the record, and you can have staff repeat it, that they have an engineer, your employee, has -- whom you have charged with the responsibility of deciding what streets will be widened, and for what purpose, for what use. They have determined that this street, in particular, as other streets in that area, which you have already passed similar enactments on, will never be widened by the City for no purpose, because of the use to which they're being put to now and in perpetuity. That is my interpretation of the testimony you heard.

Ms. Grindell: That is correct.

Commissioner Allen: OK, so that's the findings of fact, if you will, the testimony --

Ms. Grindell: Correct.

Commissioner Allen: -- to support this, so it doesn't appear that we're just singling out someone benefiting one specific property owner, or adversely affecting one particular property owner, correct?

Ms. Grindell: That's correct.

Commissioner Allen: All right.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Are you --

Mr. Robbins: No, I'm not finished.

Chairman Sanchez: You've stated --

Mr. Robbins: I'm beginning the procedural issues. Now, I have to go to substance, but --

Chairman Sanchez: OK. Well, go ahead and build your record.

Mr. Robbins: -- just to make certain that I have it. If we had notice, we would have been able to then place -- reasonable notice, we would have been able to put evidence into the record, and we would have been able to bring in a traffic engineer, an architect, to be able to present testimony, but having not had an opportunity either to even be aware of the prior hearing, nor have reasonable notice under the rules or under your notice provisions, as well as under reasonable notice, under due process, we haven't had that opportunity; therefore, we'd request a deferral of this matter, and really, there wouldn't be any harm doing that because under the Major Use Special Permit process, this whole building's going to come before you on the 28th, and you could hear this base building line issue at the same time as you can hear this Major Use Special Permit hearing, and it would not interfere with their ability to go forward with the project, so --

Commissioner Winton: Where's your client's property again?

Mr. Robbins: My property is the corner, and I think it was shown here. My client actually owns the corner of that property, Northeast 16th Street and Northeast 2nd Avenue.


Mr. Robbins: That property is a 40-unit affordable housing building with commercial -- 10,000



square feet of commercial space on the first floor. They have submitted and received permits for restoration of half the buildings; they are in the process of going forward with restoration of the exterior of the buildings, and they have a --


Mr. Robbins: -- plans all ready to go.

Ms. Grindell: I would like to state that the Transportation Department did review this area, and they concur with my findings.

Mr. Robbins: And I would like to cross-ex -- and also, if this were quasi-judicial, I understand I can't do it, but I would like to cross-examine the people who made these determinations, because there are certain fundamental --

Commissioner Winton: Well, that's already been ruled that you can't, so --


Chairman Sanchez: It's already been ruled.

Mr. Robbins: Yeah, I understand, but just for the record, I want to say I would have liked to had that opportunity.

Chairman Sanchez: As stated on the record. Commissioner Allen.

Commissioner Allen: Yeah, one last question. The issue of notice, was there sufficient notice relative to the affected properties?

Commissioner Winton: The Attorney already ruled on that, so --

Commissioner Allen: No, I want to hear it from staff, as to put some evidence on the record. City Attorney can -- but that's what I need to hear for my sake.

Mr. Fernández: Perhaps, what you need to walk is the Commissioner through the process that you engage in whenever you notice -- give notice for changes of this nature. You advertise in the Herald --

Ms. Grindell: For changes of this nature, we advertise ten days prior to the Commission meeting, and that was done for this.

Commissioner Allen: Wait, wait. I couldn't hear you. What did you say?

Ms. Grindell: For changes of this nature, we advertise ten days prior to the Commission meeting, and that was done for this item.

Commissioner Allen: Right, and that form of advertisement was what? Could you expound on that? Was what, a posting on the building -- adverse buildings in the area, or it's just a simple advertisement in a public --

Ms. Grindell: It's an advertisement in a public paper, and I'd have to check with Agenda to find out exactly how it gets advertised.

Mr. Fernández: Yes. Clerk has the notice.



Commissioner Allen: Right. OK.

Ms. Thompson: We do have a copy of the notice, wherein it was published in the Miami Daily Review on June 27, 2005.

Commissioner Allen: OK. Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: All right, sir.

Mr. Robbins: Now, I'd like to argue substance now, why this would not be appropriate. The base building line ordinance is very explicit as to the items that you are to consider when why a base building line is being put into place. In the ordinance, 54-186, it says base building lines are hereby established for the purpose of assuring that sufficient space occurs between street fronts of buildings and structures, to provide for natural light and circulation of air. We're contending that by bringing this building closer -- allowing this building that's being proposed by Ms. Dougherty's client, and bringing the building closer to the street, you're reducing the light, you're reducing the air, and you're reducing the space between storefronts and buildings.

Commissioner Winton: Excuse me. Can I interrupt you for one second? Mr. City Attorney --

Mr. Fernández: Yes, sir.

Commissioner Winton: -- I'm confused. I see no building in front of me. I don't see a MUSP (Major Use Special Permit) request in front of me. I only see an issue relative to a street closure. The arguments that he's making seem to me to be inappropriate, and arguments that he ought to make at the presentation of a MUSP hearing, if there is a MUSP; I don't know if there is or isn't. I have no idea, but I don't see any building in front of me, at all.

Mr. Fernández: You are not confused; you're very clear in your perception, and this Commission is being extremely indulgent in this legislative process, allowing this speaker to --

Chairman Sanchez: Build a record.

Mr. Fernández: -- try to confuse you --

Chairman Sanchez: Counsel --

Mr. Fernández: -- as to issues that are otherwise not confusing.

Chairman Sanchez: -- you can establish your record when the --

Mr. Robbins: I'm --

Chairman Sanchez: -- project is in front of us.

Mr. Robbins: No. Well, I think I need to establish it. What our contention is is this is, in essence, a circumvention of the variance requirements.

Chairman Sanchez: You've made that very clear.

Mr. Robbins: Under -- and by going forward with their MUSP -- and I'd ask you to take judicial notice of the pending proceedings that are going on in --

Commissioner Winton: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) public record.



Mr. Robbins: -- these very chambers, and will be heard in these very chambers under file number 2005-057, and project number MU2005-018. In fact, there is an intent to build a building instead of 25 feet away from the width, up to 12 and a half, and this is, in fact, accommodating that, and in fact, counsel, the counsel who is present here, Ms. Dougherty, is the representative of that building, so that's the reason why --

Chairman Sanchez: Counsel --

Mr. Robbins: -- I think we should address --

Chairman Sanchez: -- I've been very generous, giving you plenty of time.

Mr. Robbins: Thank you very much.

Chairman Sanchez: I think you need --

Mr. Robbins: So, I would contend that there has been no sworn testimony that I've been able to cross-examine to establish that, in fact, the purposes of the base building line have been complied with; that the issues of air and light and distance of buildings have been contended or shown to be a reasonable --

Chairman Sanchez: As stated on the record.

Mr. Robbins: -- relationship to this particular legislation.

Commissioner Winton: It's amazing.


Commissioner Winton: -- how you just continue to aggressively put your point on the record --


Commissioner Winton: -- when the Chairman suggested you not.

Chairman Sanchez: Go ahead with the presentation.

Lucia Dougherty: Mr. Chairman --

Chairman Sanchez: Well, before we do that, I think -- the Administration needs to put --


Chairman Sanchez: -- some things on the record.

Commissioner Allen: Yeah, she did.

Commissioner Winton: We already did.

Mr. Fernández: Do you have any questions of staff?


Mr. Fernández: Otherwise --



Commissioner Winton: Didn't I make a motion? Did I make a --

Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second --

Commissioner Winton: Is there a motion on the table?

Chairman Sanchez: -- but it's --

Commissioner Allen: Yeah, I --

Commissioner Winton: Then call the question.

Commissioner Allen: I asked questions, so we've established a findings of fact, if you will.

Chairman Sanchez: Listen, it is an ordinance that requires a public hearing. He had an opportunity. I was more than generous for him to state whatever he had to state. The gentleman stated whatever he wanted stated for the record. It's coming back to the Commission. Is there any further discussion?

Commissioner Allen: No.

Chairman Sanchez: OK, there's a motion and a second on the ordinance. Mr. City Attorney, read the ordinance. That's SR.1; it's an ordinance on second reading, and then, Madam Clerk, follow with a roll call.


Ms. Thompson: Roll call.

A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.

Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 4/0.

05-00617 Second ReadingSR.2 ORDINANCE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 37 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "OFFENSES-MISCELLANEOUS," TO AMEND SECTION 37-7, ENTITLED "SEX OFFENDER RESIDENCY PROHIBITION, TO ADD A 'KNOWN AS' DESIGNATION ENTITLED "LAUREN'S LAW" CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.




Motion by Vice Chairman González, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


12713

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Let's get SR.2.

Vice Chairman González: Move SR.2.





Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion --


Chairman Sanchez: -- for SR.2. Is there a second? There's a motion --


Chairman Sanchez: -- by Vice Chairman González, second by Commissioner Winton. Before we open it for discussion, it's an ordinance requiring a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission for discussion. Hearing no discussion, Mr. City Attorney, read the ordinance into the record, followed by a roll call.



Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.


Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 4/0.



ORDINANCES - FIRST READING

05-00603 First ReadingFR.1 ORDINANCE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 12613, ADOPTED NOVEMBER 18, 2004, FURTHER AMENDED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO. 12656, ADOPTED FEBRUARY 24, 2005, EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH PIVOTAL UTILITY HOLDINGS, INC., D/B/A FLORIDA CITY GAS, PREVIOUSLY NUI UTILITIES, INC., D/B/A NUI CITY GAS COMPANY OF FLORIDA, D/B/A FLORIDA CITY GAS ("FRANCHISEE"), UNTIL THE EARLIER OF 1) FEBRUARY 28, 2006, OR 2) THE DATE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ANY SUBSEQUENT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BY THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE FRANCHISEE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A FRANCHISE EXTENSION AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, FOR SAID PURPOSE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.


05-00603 Legislation FR/SR.pdf

05-00603 Exhibit A FR/SR.pdf


05-00603-summary form FR.pdf

05-00603 back-up letters FR/SR.pdf

05-00603 Franchise Exten. Agreement FR/SR.pdf

05-00603 Cert. of Incumbency & Signature FR/SR.pdf

05-00603 Insurance Approval FR/SR.pdf

05-00603 Previous Legislation FR/SR.pdf

Motion by Commissioner Allen, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.


Chairman Sanchez: All right. Let's try to get FR.1 out of the way. FR.1 is an ordinance on first reading.

Stephanie Grindell: FR.1-- oh, Stephanie Grindell, director of Public Works. FR.1 is an ordinance extending the short-term agreement with Pivotal Utility Holdings, formally known as NUI (National Utilities, Inc.) Utilities. This franchise agreement is currently under negotiation, and it's extension for six months to allow the negotiations to complete.

Commissioner Allen: I move the item, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion by Commissioner Allen, second --


Chairman Sanchez: -- by Commissioner --

Commissioner Winton: Yes, second.

Chairman Sanchez: -- Winton. It is an ordinance. It requires a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none,












hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission. No discussion on the item. Mr. City Attorney, read the ordinance, on first reading, into the record.


Chairman Sanchez: Madam Clerk.



Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 4/0.

Chairman Sanchez: FR.2.

Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman, could I interrupt for a second?

Chairman Sanchez: Sure.

Commissioner Winton: I have two meetings that are stacked up in my office, so I have to go. If y'all continue on --

Chairman Sanchez: No, no, no, no, we'll be back. We're going to recess till 2:30.



Chairman Sanchez: I just wanted to get as many out of the way --

Commissioner Winton: Because FR.3, I want to have real input.


AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 53/ARTICLE 1/ SECTION 53.1(B) OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "STADIUMS AND CONVENTION CENTERS/ IN GENERAL/ TICKET SURCHARGE ON PAID ADMISSIONS TO EVENTS/ RATE OF SURCHARGE," BY INCREASING THE RATE OF SURCHARGE PAYMENT ON PAID ADMISSIONS AT CERTAIN CITY OF MIAMI FACILITIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Department of Conferences, Conventions and Public Facilities

05-00604 Legislation FR/SR.pdf



Motion by Commissioner Allen, seconded by Vice Chairman González, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.


Chairman Sanchez: Let's go ahead and go on to --

Vice Chairman González: PH.3, right?

Chairman Sanchez: P -- no, PH.3 has already been done, and we go to ordinance on first






reading. I believe we have FR.2, which is a ticket surcharge increase. Is it -- can we -- hold on before we do this. Is anybody from Commissioner Winton's staff here? I believe there was one item that Commissioner Winton wanted to be here on, and I'm not sure if it's this one or the other one.

Commissioner Allen: I think you stand corrected. I think this was one of the items. Yeah, I understood FR.1 and/or 2.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Let's do something. Is it 3? All right, it's --

Commissioner Allen: Oh, it's 3?

Chairman Sanchez: Yeah, OK, it's FR.3, so let's go to -- let's do FR.2. I just want to make sure that we pause on FR.3, which is a zoning and planning fee. I believe he wanted to elaborate on that and be a part of that discussion. Sir, you may proceed with your presentation.

Dan Newhoff: Item FR.2. Dan Newhoff, assistant to the director for Department of Conferences, Conventions & Public Facilities. The item before you is an amendment to City Code 53-1 as it pertains to the City's ticket surcharge rates. We're proposing a rate restructuring, whereas the ticket surcharge would increase on tickets $30 and over by a $1 amount. Currently, there's a $1 surcharge assessed to tickets $30 and over. It would go from $1 to $2 under the proposed ordinance. The ticket surcharge ordinance has not been amended since the year 1988, so we're operating basically 16 years under the current ticket surcharge rates. Our department has requested a dedicated funding source to help augment our CIP (Capital Improvement Projects) budget. Lastly, since it is a citywide ordinance, I have Tim Schmand here from Bayfront Park. He's on board with the plan, as is his board, so it would be a citywide ordinance, but the Department of Public Facilities would be the majority of the beneficiary.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Need a motion and a second for the purpose of discussion.

Commissioner Allen: I'll make a motion for the purpose of discussion.


Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion on the record by Commissioner Allen, second by Vice Chairman González. For the purpose of discussion, Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized.

Commissioner Regalado: OK. What is the estimate? We're talking on Artime?

Mr. Newhoff: Artime is exempt. Community centers, banquets, conferences, and conventions are exempt. The tickets --

Commissioner Regalado: So, no Coconut Grove Convention Center?

Mr. Newhoff: Only concerts at Coconut Grove Convention Center.

Commissioner Regalado: Only in concerts.

Mr. Newhoff: Concerts.

Commissioner Regalado: And so the Knight Center?

Mr. Newhoff: The Knight Center, ticketed concerts.



Commissioner Regalado: OK. Do you have any idea of the amount of money that this would generate?

Mr. Newhoff: Sir, last year, the ticket surcharge for the Department of Public Facilities generated 190,000; this year we're projected at 200,000. When the Orange Bowl renovations are complete, that 200,000 will double for non-UM (University of Miami) events. UM has a dollar ticket surcharge that will not change by contract, so next year our projection would be about 275,000, but once the Orange Bowl has been renovated, that 200,000 that we currently generate will double between 350 and 400,000.

Commissioner Regalado: OK, but that would be -- did you say a dedicated sum for your department?

Mr. Newhoff: Yes, sir.

Commissioner Regalado: So, it would go directly to the department?

Mr. Newhoff: We're proposing that --

Commissioner Regalado: It would not go to the general fund; it would go directly to the department for --

Mr. Newhoff: It would go to our CIP budget.

Commissioner Regalado: For the CIP budget, but --

Mr. Newhoff: For the depart --

Commissioner Regalado: -- for the facilities?

Mr. Newhoff: Yes.

Commissioner Regalado: OK.

Chairman Sanchez: Any other questions?

Commissioner Allen: Well, you know, Commissioner Regalado pretty much asked the same question I was going to ask. It's going to be dedicated for CIP within your department, and just for the record, you guys have also considered the, if you will, adverse impact of this, raising the surcharge on tickets above $30; that's all been explained. You did take it into consideration. If you could put something on the record to that extent, please.

Mr. Newhoff: Well, what we did as a department, is the best we could, we looked at our competitors, and we found that the increase in the surcharge will be at or below at what the majority of --

Commissioner Allen: Comparable.

Mr. Newhoff: -- our competitors charge.

Commissioner Allen: Comparable, yeah.

Mr. Newhoff: Very comparable. It's not exactly apples to apples. Some -- the Miami Arena, Lockhart Stadium; there's some private -- Dolphin stadium's a private facility; they could charge



whatever they want to charge, so it's difficult to compare. We took input from our own customers. We took advice on (UNINTELLIGIBLE) other facilities, what they charge. We found no adverse effect. In other facilities, sometimes the ticket surcharge is built into the rate; other times, it's built into the parking fee, so it really isn't an exact one-to-one comparison, but we feel that we'll still be very competitive, even with the dollar surcharge.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Any further discussion on the item?

Vice Chairman González: No, I just have a question. What is the future, if there is any, of the Coconut Grove Convention Center? Because I know that we have been canceling events. For example, Cuban Nostalgia was cancelled this year. They did it at the Tropical Park, and there were thousands and thousands of people over there, and that's -- it's revenue that we're losing, and at the same time, I don't know what the future is, or what we're planning.

Joe Arriola (City Manager): We're booking things to 2007. December 2006, OK, so we're booking -- yeah, 2005 (UNINTELLIGIBLE). We're still booking all the way to December 2006. We're hoping that the Coconut Grove master plan will be finished before then, but even if it's finished before then, the -- whatever we're going to do with the Convention Center, we could still book into 2006.

Vice Chairman González: All right. Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: Any further discussion on the item? If not, it's an ordinance on first reading. Mr. City Attorney -- well, it's a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to address this item, please step forward and be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission. Hearing no further discussion, Mr. City Attorney, could you read it into the record, followed by a roll call?


Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Roll call.


Ms. Scheider: The ordinance passes first reading, 4/0.

Chairman Sanchez: Congratulations on your first ordinance.

Mr. Newhoff: Thank you. I look forward to spending the money.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. All right. FR (first reading) -- well, Commissioner Winton would ask us hold on to FR.3 till he's here.


AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 62/ARTICLE VI/SECTION 62-156 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "SCHEDULE OF FEES," BY CREATING A NEW SUBSECTION 62-156(D) ENTITLED "MANNER OF FEE PAYMENT;" ADDING A PROVISION THAT SETS FORTH THE REQUISITE MANNER OF PAYMENT BY CERTIFIED CHECK, CASHIER'S CHECK, OR MONEY ORDER FOR THE COLLECTION OF CERTAIN SPECIFIED FEES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Department of Planning



05-00605-ordinance SR.pdf

05-00605-Summary Form SR.pdf

05-00605-ordinance FR.pdf


Motion by Vice Chairman González, seconded by Commissioner Allen, that this matter be PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote.


Chairman Sanchez: Let's go back to FR.3, zoning and planning fee. We just wanted to give you an opportunity to join us, Commissioner Winton.

Commissioner Winton: I met with staff during the break --

Chairman Sanchez: Right.

Commissioner Winton: -- and I think they're going to make a modification. Is staff here to talk about this issue? Hello. No. Staff isn't here to talk about FR.3?

Chairman Sanchez: Well, staff should be here to talk about FR.3.

Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Manager, who's talking about FR.3?

Joe Arriola (City Manager): She was -- yes, she was there with you.

Commissioner Winton: Oh, she was in my meeting, that's right.

Mr. Arriola: She was in your meeting, sir.

Commissioner Winton: Yeah, she's probably -- maybe we can --

Chairman Sanchez: Want to get back to it? Let's just -- I mean, let's not waste time. We'll get back to it.

[Later...]

Chairman Sanchez: Let's go to FR.3. FR.3 is the item that Commissioner Winton's not here, but he said we could go ahead with it. It's an ordinance on first reading.

Ana Gelabert: Ana Gelabert, director of Planning. What we are requesting is a change on the Code in order to ask for change the way of payment to cashier's checks, certified check, or money order for planning permit fees. Those would be the permits that relate to Class IIs, Major Use Special Permits, and that sort of thing. We have -- what you have in front of you, it says that anything in excess of $100, we would like to change that on the floor to increase it to $25,000. Anything in excess of 25,000, we would like the payment, instead of being a personal check, to be in the form of cashier's check --


Ms. Gelabert: -- and money order.

Chairman Sanchez: That's reasonable.

Vice Chairman González: I'll move the item.







Commissioner Regalado: How many bounced check you got?

Ms. Gelabert: We had two checks that bounced for the excess of -- over $500,000, and what the purpose of the cashier's checks and this is to be able to --

Chairman Sanchez: And that should be --

Ms. Gelabert: -- avoid that.

Chairman Sanchez: -- be 500,000 reasons why you need to do this.

Commissioner Allen: And if I may, Mr. Chairman, could you repeat that modification again, please?

Ms. Gelabert: The modification is, on the ordinance that you have in front of you, we had first stated that we wanted that mode of payment to change, in anything in excess of $100. We're increasing that number to $25,000, and that's just to not --

Commissioner Regalado: When those checks bounce, did you took it to the State Attorney?

Ms. Gelabert: We were able to cash them on time, and we were able to get the money from the --

Commissioner Regalado: Oh.

Ms. Gelabert: Yeah, we do have the money. We were able to catch it before the building permit was issued --



Ms. Gelabert: -- so the Planning Department was --

Vice Chairman González: All right. I move the item.

Ms. Gelabert: -- able to do that.

Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second. Commissioner -- Vice Chairman González makes the motion. Is there a second?


Chairman Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Allen. Just on discussion on the item. I'm glad you changed the $100. It would have been an inconvenience for a lot of people that are getting small permits that would have to run to the store and get a cashier's check. It would have been an inconvenience for them, and I think it would have promoted more people doing things illegally, and I could understand that the amount now with the big developers, they got plenty of people they could pay to run somewhere and get a cashier's check or money order, so this is a step in the right direction. As you stated, it's 500,000 reasons why we needed this.

Ms. Gelabert: Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. It is an ordinance on first reading. It'll have a second reading. It's a public hearing. It's an ordinance. Anyone from the public wishing to address this issue, please step forward and be recognized. I'm shocked that there's nobody here, but all right. The



public hearing is closed, coming back to the Commission. Mr. City Attorney, read the ordinance into the record --

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): Yes.

Chairman Sanchez: -- followed by a roll call.

Mr. Fernández: As amended.




Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 4/0.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Before we go to pocket items, did we did everybody's blue pages? Yes, we did.



RESOLUTIONS

05-00607RE.1 RESOLUTION

A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION COMPUTING A PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE, AS DESIGNATED HEREIN, FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY"), FLORIDA, FOR FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2005 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2006; DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT SAID PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE TO THE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER AND THE TAX COLLECTOR TOGETHER WITH THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AT WHICH THE CITY COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER THE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE AND THE CITY'S TENTATIVE BUDGET FOR SAID FISCAL YEAR, AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.

Office of Strategic Planning, Budgeting, and Performance



Motion by Vice Chairman González, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


R-05-0429

Chairman Sanchez: So, let's go to the RE.1, which is the millage cap.

Larry Spring: Commissioners, Larry Spring, chief of Strategic Planning, Budgeting, Performance. Before you is a resolution establishing our millage cap for the --

Chairman Sanchez: This is the first of four resolutions that'll come in front of us, right?

Mr. Spring: Correct.


Mr. Spring: This particular resolution establishes our millage cap for the fiscal year, beginning October 1, 2005, ending October 30 -- September 30, 2006, and establishes our public hearing to discuss that matter at September 8 and September 22.

Chairman Sanchez: And basically, what this does is, doesn't allow you to go over that millage, but it allows you to reduce it --


Chairman Sanchez: -- in the other means, OK.

Mr. Spring: And it's being set at the same as the current millage.

Commissioner Allen: Right, the computation rate.

Mr. Spring: And operating and debt service.

Chairman Sanchez: OK. All right. Any of the Commissioners have any questions?

Commissioner Regalado: Did you say same as last year?





Mr. Spring: Same -- the --

Commissioner Regalado: The same cap.

Mr. Spring: The cap is being set at the current millage rate.

Vice Chairman González: But we will be able to reduce it.

Mr. Spring: You will be able to reduce it. It won't be --

Vice Chairman González: All right.

Mr. Spring: -- we will not be able to go higher than this.


Commissioner Regalado: OK. I have a question, Larry. I know it's too early to ask, but I think it's important because the County Manager went before the County Commission, and because of the raise in property values, County is getting a $171 million, additional dollars. Do we have an idea of how much the City's getting. It should be like more 20, 25.

Mr. Spring: Well, at this -- we haven't gone through and calculated our -- what we expect to use as our millage. I've not yet met with the Manager to go over that. In fact, we were supposed to be doing that tomorrow, but we have -- you know, we've received our certified tax base number from the County, which was -- our certified number is about $27 billion --

Commissioner Regalado: I see.

Mr. Spring: -- so, like the County, we have experienced a significant increase in our tax base.

Vice Chairman González: You said $27 million?

Mr. Spring: Twenty-seven billion.

Chairman Sanchez: Billon.

Vice Chairman González: Billon dollars.

Mr. Spring: Billon.

Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, that's the taxable property, but --

Mr. Spring: Right.

Commissioner Regalado: -- the County did receive -- the County is expecting to get be -- and this is not tax increase; it's because of the property -- the increase in the property value.

Mr. Spring: Right.

Commissioner Regalado: They are expecting $171 million, additional dollar because of the increase in property. I will figure that being the City, one of the biggest municipalities, we're talking maybe 20 million.

Mr. Spring: Probably in that arena, yeah, but I won't know -- I won't be able to calculate it.



Commissioner Regalado: No, I understand, but just to make sure that this is unexpected money for the County and for the City --

Mr. Spring: Because of the increase in the assessment.

Commissioner Regalado: -- because of the increase, and thanks to the property appraisal, but as to -- what I'm trying to establish is that the City is -- will be getting --

Mr. Spring: Additional --

Commissioner Regalado: -- more tax -- additional, unexpected money.

Mr. Spring: We will be getting additional tax revenues because of the increase in our assessed value.

Commissioner Regalado: Right.

Mr. Spring: Absolutely.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. What is our debt service?

Mr. Spring: Our debt service millage is --

Chairman Sanchez: Point 95.

Mr. Spring: -- .95, .9.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Any further questions on resolution RE.1?

Commissioner Allen: No. I would just --


Vice Chairman González: Move RE.1.

Chairman Sanchez: There is a motion by Commissioner -- Vice Chairman González. Is there a second?


Chairman Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Regalado. Does this require a public hearing?

Vice Chairman González: It's a resolution.

Mr. Spring: It's a resolution.

Chairman Sanchez: But it deals with the millage. It deals with the millage; I think it requires a public hearing.

Unidentified Speaker: Right. No?

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): It doesn't -- this is placing it on the trim notice. It's not --

Chairman Sanchez: OK, OK.



Mr. Fernández: -- necessarily setting it.

Chairman Sanchez: All right, all right. It does not require --

Mr. Fernández: So, it doesn't require a public hearing.

Chairman Sanchez: -- a public hearing. There is a motion and a second on the floor. All in favor, say "aye."




A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ("DDA") TO ESTABLISH A PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE OF ONE-HALF (1/2) MILL FOR THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2005 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2006; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING COMMUNICATION OF SAID PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE TO THE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER AND TAX COLLECTOR TOGETHER WITH THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, AS STATED HEREIN, AT WHICH THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER THE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE AND THE DDA TENTATIVE BUDGET FOR SAID FISCAL YEAR.

Downtown Development Authority



05-00608-downtown development code.pdf

05-00608-reso1.pdf

05-00608-reso2.pdf

Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman González, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


R-05-0430

Chairman Sanchez: Let's go to RE.2. RE.2 is the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) millage rate.


Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion. Is there a second?

Vice Chairman González: Second, second.

Commissioner Winton: And comment.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. It is under discussion. Commissioner Winton, you're recognized for discussion.

Commissioner Winton: Larry --








Larry Spring (Chief of Strategic Planning, Budgeting & Performance): Yes, sir.

Commissioner Winton: -- where's my projections?

Mr. Spring: Your projections for DDA?

Commissioner Winton: Revenue projections 10-year, 15-year. You took them back.

Mr. Spring: I sent them to you -- you have them.

Commissioner Winton: I do have them?

Mr. Spring: Yes, you do.

Commissioner Winton: When?

Mr. Spring: I sent them to you at least a month ago.

Commissioner Winton: No, no, no, we sent those -- those went back because -- and I met with you, and I said --

Mr. Spring: Right.

Commissioner Winton: -- I don't understand this; I need the back up for this; I'm not sure that the numbers are right, but you already --

Mr. Spring: It's in your office. You definitely have it. If you want, after this meeting, we could sit down and clarify it, but you definitely do have it.

Commissioner Winton: No, I can't do anything. I'm about to die, but next week --

Mr. Spring: OK.

Commissioner Winton: -- we do --

Mr. Spring: OK.

Commissioner Winton: -- because that's going to fit in terms of capital stuff that's going to be very important.

Mr. Spring: Absolutely.

Commissioner Winton: And that's all I wanted to know, and I'm done.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion and a second. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."




A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF FIRE SERVICES,

Department of Fire-Rescue



FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA; ESTABLISHING THE ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT RATE FOR FIRE ASSESSMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2005, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI FIVE-YEAR PLAN; PROVIDING FOR NEW DEFINITIONS; DIRECTING THE PREPARATION OF AN ASSESSMENT ROLL; AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SEPTEMBER 8, 2005, AND DIRECTING THE PROVISION OF NOTICE THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

05-00610 Exhibit A SUB.pdf

05-00610 Exhibit B SUB.pdf


05-00610 Exhibit D.pdf


05-00610-pre ordinance.pdf


Motion by Vice Chairman González, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter be ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote.

Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner González, Winton, Sanchez and AllenNoes: 1 - Commissioner Regalado

R-05-0431

Chairman Sanchez: And we go to our old friend, the fire fee.

Commissioner Winton: I think I could -- oh, I'm sorry. I remembered FR.3, and could tell you what staff said they're going to --

Chairman Sanchez: Well, we'll get back to FR.3. Let's go to the fire fee. All right, fire fee.

Larry Spring (Chief of Strategic Planning, Budgeting & Performance): Commissioners, before you, you have another resolution establishing our tax assessment on the fire fee. Again, similar to the millage setting, you also will have the opportunity to come back, at the September meeting, to reduce this fee, but this is establishing it for the purpose of the tax roll.

Chairman Sanchez: And it basically leaves it at 61 per single-family resident.



Vice Chairman González: But once again, we'll be able to reduce it.


Vice Chairman González: I'll move RE.3.


Chairman Sanchez: OK. There is a --

Commissioner Winton: I thought we were eliminating the fire fee. Just kidding.

Mr. Spring: You can.










Chairman Sanchez: All right. There is a motion and a second. All this does is establish a standard rate of 61 per single-family resident. There's a motion and a second.


Chairman Sanchez: Mr. City Attorney, on the --

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): Yes.

Chairman Sanchez: -- discussion item, I'm going to yield to you.

Mr. Fernández: Well, we need to put on the record, and Chief Kemp needs to just advise the Commissioners that the Appendix A is scheduled, and make sure that the City Clerk has the modified version. Minor, minor changes were made, and Chief Kemp can speak to that, in order for you to be able to vote on this item completely.

Maurice Kemp: Maurice Kemp, Deputy Fire Chief. As the City Attorney indicated, Appendix A has a minor correction under the building classification, in square foot ranges, we need to add under industrial warehouse, the 150,000 to 174,999 square foot; the rate should be $5,825, and under the 175,000 to 199,999, the rate should be 6,795, and under the bottom classification, which is greater than 200,000, it should be 7,766.

Chairman Sanchez: Does the maker of the motion accept the corrections or amendments? Does the maker of the motion accept --

Vice Chairman González: I -- no. I have a question before accepting the amendment.


Vice Chairman González: Does this amendment reflect any kind of increase over what is being paid now?

Chairman Sanchez: No.

Mr. Kemp: No, sir.

Vice Chairman González: All right. Then I accept the amendment.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Does the maker of the motion and the seconder accept the amendment? Who seconded?

Commissioner Winton: Did I second? If I seconded it, I accept. I don't know who did.

Chairman Sanchez: OK. All right, so it -- the maker of the motion and the seconder accepts the amendment on the resolution RE.3. Any further discussion on that? If not, it's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye." Anyone in opposition --


Chairman Sanchez: -- having the same right, say "nay." There is one "no." There's no -- for the record, you voted "no," correct?

Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no.

Chairman Sanchez: OK, he voted three times "no." Make it five times "no." All right. I guess the debate over cutting the fire fee comes later on at budget time, so we'll gear up for budget.




A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF SOLID WASTE SERVICES, FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA; DESCRIBING THE METHOD OF ASSESSING SOLID WASTE COSTS AGAINST PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI; DIRECTING THE PREPARATION OF AN ASSESSMENT ROLL; AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SEPTEMBER 8, 2005; AND DIRECTING THE PROVISION OF NOTICE THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Department of Solid Waste





05-00611-exhibitD.pdf

05-00611-exhibitE.pdf





R-05-0432

Chairman Sanchez: OK, RE.4. RE.4 is the Department of Solid Waste, and that's to maintain the --

Larry Spring (Chief of Strategic Planning, Budgeting & Performance): The fire fee.

Chairman Sanchez: -- cost at 325, which we committed to doing to the voters of the City of Miami, our commitment, when they supported the bond issuance.

Mr. Spring: Correct, and so before you again --


Vice Chairman González: I'll move RE.4.


Chairman Sanchez: Vice Chairman González makes the motion. It is second by Commissioner Allen. It is a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. OK.

Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I have a question of Solid Waste director.

Mario Soldevilla (Director, Solid Waste): Yes, sir.











Commissioner Regalado: We had had seven fires or eight in the trucks?

Mr. Soldevilla: Seven.

Commissioner Regalado: Seven. Do we still -- I mean, do we know exactly what is going on?

Mr. Soldevilla: We believe that the fires have been caused by hydraulic fluid leaks. In other words, have been a rupture of the high-pressure hose, and the hydraulic fluid hits -- makes contact with heat and it flares up.

Commissioner Regalado: It's seven out of -- the fleet is --

Mr. Soldevilla: 32.

Commissioner Regalado: 32. It's not a record, but it's a good average.

Mr. Soldevilla: We're looking into new trucks.

Commissioner Regalado: Are we like -- are we fixing this by ourselves or is the company -- does it have guarantee?

Mr. Soldevilla: The -- no. Of the seven units that have burned, three of them had been fixed, at no cost, by the company, but the remaining four are still here, and we are in the process of litigation with the manufacturer.



Vice Chairman González: I have a question. Today, the garbage hasn't been picked up in Grapeland Height. Could that be caused by this loss of trucks or --

Mr. Soldevilla: It's very possible. We have had -- you know, the reduction in the fleet causes delays in putting out the garbage trucks, and of course, it gets delayed, but so far, we have managed to pick up the entire city during -- you know, during the days and the time allotted to do so.

Vice Chairman González: In the case that we need to go into another schedule of pick-ups or changing the hours or -- you will be notifying the public, right?

Mr. Soldevilla: Of course, but so far, that has not been a necessity.

Vice Chairman González: No, no problem.

Mr. Soldevilla: It has been -- you know, it has taken a little bit longer, but --

Vice Chairman González: Listen --

Mr. Soldevilla: -- still within the day.

Vice Chairman González: -- I understand. All I want to know is, you know, if we're going to go in -- if you've got to change the system or go into alternative hours, or whatever, make sure that the people are notified so they know that the garbage is going to be picked up --

Mr. Soldevilla: We will do so.



Vice Chairman González: -- later in the day, or the next day, whatever, but the people know what is going on.


Mr. Soldevilla: Absolutely.

Commissioner Allen: Mr. Chairman, I have one quick question, as well. Mr. City Attorney, I don't know if this is appropriate or not appropriate, but could you summarize the status of the -- our legal position at this point, the litigation? Are we in active litigation now or contemplating it?

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): With?

Commissioner Allen: With respect to manufacturers of the trucks.

Mr. Fernández: We are getting ready to file the lawsuit. We have served them with notice. We have given them last opportunity. We're lining up our experts. We are getting ready to -- we're doing the research to find out how many similarly situated municipalities there are. We're gathering all that information, but the lawsuit should be filed within the next two weeks.

Commissioner Allen: OK, but they are willing to replace the trucks with --

Joe Arriola (City Manager): Not so.

Commissioner Allen: They haven't -- they're balking at that, as well.

Mr. Soldevilla: Yes.

Mr. Arriola: Absolutely.

Commissioner Regalado: Are these trucks the same make than the ones in Miami Springs or Fort Lauderdale?

Mr. Soldevilla: Fort Lauderdale has -- not Miami Springs. Fort Lauderdale has Lodals also, yes.

Commissioner Regalado: And they had fires?

Mr. Soldevilla: Fort Lauderdale, I believe, had one.

Commissioner Regalado: I mean, the National Transportation Board should be aware, because you know, they could easily recall these trucks. If there is a pattern, they have the authority to recall, and the company is then forced. I don't know if this is part of the litigation, but--

Mr. Fernández: It is.

Commissioner Regalado: -- I mean --

Mr. Fernández: That's part of our strategy, to use that muscle to get them to reconsider their position.

Commissioner Regalado: The only thing I have to say is that -- I mean, even because of the fires, the service is great, so you know, we really appreciate you.



Mr. Soldevilla: Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Any further --

Mr. Arriola: That's the one thing I wanted to bring up, Commissioner, is that he's been put under a lot of pressure the last month or so, and this man is doing a wonderful job, and his team is doing a wonderful job. They've really come to bat at a tough time.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. That's RE.4. There was a motion and a second, correct, Madam Clerk?


Chairman Sanchez: OK. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay."

Chairman Sanchez: And we move on to board appointments.

Mr. Fernández: Don't you want to come back to FR.3?

Chairman Sanchez: I'm sorry, FR.3.

Mr. Fernández: Ana Gelabert is here.

Chairman Sanchez: Well, Commissioner Winton is not here.

Vice Chairman González: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to defer all my appointments.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Let's go to the board appointments. We'll get -- we'll save that for last, the FR.3.


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY ("AUTHORITY") REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS (MIAMI JEWISH HOME AND HOSPITAL FOR THE AGED, INC. PROJECT) SERIES 2005 ("SERIES 2005 BONDS"), IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,800,000, FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 147(F) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986, AS AMENDED ("IRS CODE"); FURTHER APPROVING THE MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON JUNE 3, 2005, BY THE AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO SAID SERIES 2005 BONDS AND THE REFUNDING OF RELATED BONDS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE IRS CODE, AS STATED HEREIN.

Department of Finance


05-00612 - Exhibit A.pdf

05-00612 - Exhibit B.pdf

05-00612 - Exhibit C.pdf

05-00612 - Agenda Summary Form.pdf








Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Allen, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


R-05-0421

Chairman Sanchez: All right. We move on RE.5. Let's get you out of the way, and then we'll go to the other --

Vice Chairman González: Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sanchez: -- CA (consent agenda).

Vice Chairman González: I had pulled CA.11 for an explanation.

Chairman Sanchez: Yes, yes, we'll get to it.

Vice Chairman González: Oh, I'm sorry.

Chairman Sanchez: Let's get them out of here.

Vice Chairman González: I'm sorry.

Commissioner Regalado: Where is RE.5?

Chairman Sanchez: RE.5. RE.5, the -- I'm trying to get them out of here as quickly as possible. RE.5, are you ready?

Scott Simpson: Scott Simpson, Finance Department, City of Miami. We're here today looking for approval of the issuance of some conduit debt, and to discuss the transaction, we have bond counsel.

Chairman Sanchez: And the reason is we want to get you out of here as quickly as possible because you're charging us by the hour.

Albert Del Castillo: Mr. Chair, good morning, and members of the Commission. I assure you, this is not coming out of the City coffers. For the record, Albert Del Castillo, with the law firm of Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, 801 Brickell Avenue.

Chairman Sanchez: Always a pleasure to see you, sir.

Mr. Del Castillo: Thank you, sir. Here with us this morning, we have Pete Chircut, the City Treasurer and secretary of the Health Facilities Authority, Gary Akers, from Stifel Nicolaus, the financial advisor to the Health Facilities Authority, Lourdes Boue, the CFO (Chief Financial Officer) from the Miami Jewish Home and Hospital for the Aged, and Sanja Shank, vice president of SunTrust Bank. The specific action before you is adoption of a resolution that would approve, for the specific purpose of Section 147(f) of the Federal Income Tax Code, the issuance of $25,800,000 of the Health Facilities Authority's health facilities revenue bonds. The requirement comes about strictly as a peculiarity of the Federal Income Tax Code. In order for so-called private activity bonds to be able to be tax exempt, those bonds have to go through what is called a TEFRA (Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act) approval process. That requires a public hearing, after a duly noticed public notice of that public hearing, and then, ultimately, approval of the bonds, for TEFRA purposes, by the applicable elected representative, which in this case, would be this Commission sitting as a whole. On June 3, the Health Facilities Authority held the public hearing. Prior to that public hearing, on May 20, notice of the hearing



was advertised in the Miami Herald. Attached to the resolution that you're being asked to adopt this morning, there is, as Exhibit A, a copy of the advertised notice in the Herald. Exhibit B has the resolution adopted by the Authority, recommending to this Commission, after having held the hearing, that the Commission approve the bonds for purposes of Section 147(f) of the Federal Income Tax Code, and finally, Exhibit C has the minutes of that public hearing. Now, it's important for you to realize that your approval is limited strictly for TEFRA purposes, or in other words, for the Federal Income Tax Code. It is not an approval, per se, of the bonds under state law. That approval, and indeed, the actual issuance of the bonds, is done by the Health Facilities Authority, which is a wholly separate legal entity, established under the auspices of the Florida Health Facilities Law, and established by the City back in the 1970s, pursuant to resolution. Those bonds, when issued, will not be an obligation of the City whatsoever, but rather, will be limited and special obligations of the Authority, payable from the revenues that the Authority obtains from the true party in interest here, being the Miami Jewish Home and Hospital for the Aged, and then those bonds will then be credit enhanced by a letter of credit provided by SunTrust Bank. If there are any questions.

Chairman Sanchez: I -- well, it requires a public hearing. Before we bring it to the Commission, is there anyone from the public wishing to address this item? Please step forward and recognize -- and be recognized. Seeing none, hearing none, the public hearing is closed, coming back. Are there any questions on the item? I have a question, and the question is always very simple. Does the City have any liability on this issue?

Mr. Del Castillo: Absolutely not, Mr. Chair.


Commissioner Regalado: Question.

Commissioner Allen: I move --

Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized.

Commissioner Regalado: Question is to the City Attorney. First of all, I'd like to say that I visited several times your center. It's one of the jewels of the City of Miami. It's extraordinary, and the care there is extraordinary, but the question to the City Attorney is, what happen if this Commission or other Commission does not approve these bonds?

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): Then they are not able, if they choose to go through with it, to have the tax exception, but otherwise, they would have, if the City lends its good name to the transaction.

Commissioner Regalado: Right, so this bring us to the point of, like you wisely said the other day, the City Commission interfering in private business. When we were talking about ALF (Adult Living Facility) change of ownership, why does the City Commission have to interfere in a private entity that serve the public?

Mr. Fernández: This is no interference. The City Commission is being -- pursuant to state statutory authority, the City Commission is being accessed by a group of citizens, residents who do business in the City, that have a facility in the City, and they're coming to you asking to avail themselves of the privilege --

Commissioner Regalado: I understand, but what if other City Commission would not approve this issue? It would be hurting the business, right?

Mr. Fernández: Well, whether it be hurting or not is not the question. The question is do you



want to exercise your authority and your power to grant a benefit, not to punish. I mean, if you choose not to allow this to happen, you cannot be deemed to be punishing. If you choose to grant it, you will be viewed as granting a benefit.

Commissioner Regalado: OK, just wanted to make my point in terms of the -- another separate issue, but I don't have a problem with this at all.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Any further discussion? If not, it is a resolution. All in favor, say “aye.”


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say “nay.” It passes. Thank you so much.

Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): I'm sorry, Chair.

Mr. Del Castillo: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. I didn't hear a mover and a seconder. Did I miss that?

Commissioner Allen: I thought I second it.

Commissioner Regalado: I'll move it.

Commissioner Allen: I'll second.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. For the record, there's been a motion by Commissioner Regalado, second by Commissioner Allen. Madam Clerk, should we vote on it again?

Ms. Thompson: Yes, please.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. All in favor, say “aye.”


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say “nay.” Motion carries. Thank you.

Mr. Del Castillo: Mr. Chair, thank you very much.



BOARDS AND COMMITTEES

03-0234BC.1 RESOLUTION

A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE MIAMI STREET CODESIGNATION REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.

APPOINTEE: NOMINATED BY:

Chairman Joe Sanchez

Office of the City Clerk

03-0234 memo.pdf

03-0234 members.doc

DEFERRED


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE ORANGE BOWL ADVISORY BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.

APPOINTEES: NOMINATED BY:

Max Cruz Commissioner Tomas Regalado

Carlos Saldivar Commissioner Tomas Regalado


05-00057 memo.pdf

05-00057-resignation.pdf

05-00057 members.pdf



R-05-0433

A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Allen, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton absent, to appoint Max Cruz and Carlos Saldivar as members of the Orange Bowl Advisory Committee; further waiving the elector requirements in Code Section 53-123 by a four/fifths (4/5) vote of the members of the full City Commission, as it relates to Max Cruz and Carlos Saldivar; and further waiving the residency requirements in Code Section 2-884(a) by a four/fifths (4/5) vote of the members of the full City Commission, as it relates to Max Cruz and Carlos Saldivar.

Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Allen, board appointments?



http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/Legistarweb/Attachments/14933.doc





Commissioner Allen: Mr. Chairman, I think I, likewise, will --


Commissioner Allen: -- postpone -- defer my board appointments --


Commissioner Allen: -- as well.

Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado.

Commissioner Regalado: Yes. I have two appointments for the Orange Bowl Advisory Board, and one is reappointment, Max Cruz, and the other is Carlos Saldivar.


Commissioner Allen: I'll make a motion.

Chairman Sanchez: There's a second?


Chairman Sanchez: All right. Does he need any waivers?

Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Excuse me. Yeah, we need an elector waiver --


Ms. Scheider: -- which is a four-fifths vote.



Chairman Sanchez: It's four Commissioners on the dais, and the -- does the maker of the motion accept the waiver for the residency?


Ms. Scheider: Elector.

Chairman Sanchez: Elector.

Commissioner Regalado: Elector, right, because they do have offices in the City.

Chairman Sanchez: They have what?

Commissioner Regalado: They have their office in the City.

Chairman Sanchez: Oh.

Commissioner Regalado: Well, Max Cruz doesn't.

Ms. Scheider: Right.



Commissioner Regalado: But --

Ms. Scheider: Max Cruz is not --

Commissioner Regalado: -- Carlos Saldivar.

Ms. Scheider: -- a City of Miami registered voter, and so we need a waiver of that requirement.

Commissioner Regalado: OK. Carlos Saldivar is -- has an office. He's an attorney, and he just retired from the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigations), and he has an office in the Grove, so he has a City office, but he needs a residency waiver.

Ms. Scheider: I don't know about Mr. Saldivar, but Mr. Cruz needs the --

Commissioner Regalado: No, might as well do it both, because --

Ms. Scheider: Oh, OK. You -- so you want to do a waiver for both, just in case?

Commissioner Regalado: I mean, I guess. He has an office, but I guess he doesn't --

Ms. Scheider: We don't know whether he's a registered elector.

Commissioner Regalado: He's not -- I don't know if he's elector. Since he's a former FBI agent, you cannot reveal the address.

Ms. Scheider: Oh, I see. OK.

Commissioner Regalado: You know what I mean?

Ms. Scheider: Um-hum, OK.

Commissioner Allen: Very similar to my situation.

Commissioner Regalado: OK, so I'll move the waiver for both appointees.

Commissioner Allen: I second.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."




A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.






05-00316 memo.pdf

05-00316-applications.pdf

05-00316 members.doc

DEFERRED

Chairman Sanchez: I have the Urban Development Review Board. I would like to reappoint Hakki Koroglu.


Chairman Sanchez: I know I didn't pronounce it right, did I?

Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): It sounded close to me.

Chairman Sanchez: Close. Hakki Koroglu.

Ms. Scheider: Koroglu.


Vice Chairman González: They understand.

Ms. Scheider: Oh, and Ms. Koro --


Ms. Scheider: Excuse me. Ms. Koroglu does need a waiver of the term limitation, and that's a --

Chairman Sanchez: It require a four-fifths.

Ms. Scheider: It requires a five-fifths. That's a unanimous vote of the entire Commission.

Vice Chairman González: A unanimous --

Ms. Scheider: -- of the entire --


Ms. Scheider: -- Commission.

Chairman Sanchez: So we cannot make that appointment right now --

Commissioner Allen: No, we can't.

Ms. Scheider: Right now.

Chairman Sanchez: -- so we'll do it next Commission meeting.


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE VIRGINIA KEY BEACH PARK TRUST FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.








Vice Chairman Angel González

05-00317 memo.pdf


DEFERRED


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.



Commissioner Tomas Regalado


05-00321 memo.pdf



DEFERRED


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE PARKS ADVISORY BOARD FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.




05-00411 memo.pdf

05-00411-resignation cabanas.pdf

05-00411-resignation Seijas.pdf


DEFERRED


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON BEAUTIFICATION AND ENVIRONMENT FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED













HEREIN.

05-00474 memo.pdf


05-00474-nominations.pdf

DEFERRED


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL EMPLOYEES' AND SANITATION EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT TRUST FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.


Ron Thompkins AFSCME Local 871

Caridad Montero AFSCME Local 871

Rose Gordon AFSCME Local 1907

Waldeman Lee AFSCME Local 1907


05-00492 memo.pdf


05-00492-nominations.pdf



R-05-0426

Chairman Sanchez: Let's get BC.8. They have an attorney here that's very expensive. We've got to get him out of here.

Vice Chairman González: Which one is this?

Ron Silver: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ron Silver, attorney for the City of Miami General Employees' and Sanitation Employees' Retirement Trust, 407 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach, Florida, and I want you to know my granddaughter will thank you because it's her birthday today and this will allow me to participate in that.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. This is the board -- it's a --

Mr. Silver: It's a board appointment.

Chairman Sanchez: Board appointments, yeah, so are we ready for that?












Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second, and basically, the names that are proffered are the ones --

Mr. Silver: Yes, sir.

Chairman Sanchez: OK. There's a motion and a second. Anyone discussion on the item? Motion was made by Commissioner Winton, second by Commissioner Allen. No discussion on the item. It's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. Thank you.

Mr. Silver: Thank you very much.

Chairman Sanchez: Have a good one.

Mr. Silver: Appreciate it.


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE NUISANCE ABATEMENT BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.





05-00493 memo.pdf


DEFERRED

Chairman Sanchez: I would like to reappoint Robert Valledor, whose term limit also -- he also -- yeah, he also needs a --

Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Yes, yes.

Chairman Sanchez: All right, we'll do that at a later date.






A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.



Commissioner Johnny Winton


05-00494 memo.pdf


DEFERRED


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE ZONING BOARD FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.


Commissioner Jeffery Allen


05-00502 memo.pdf



DEFERRED


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE EQUITY STUDY COMMISSION FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.





Commissioner Jeffery Allen

Mayor Manuel Diaz









Mayor Manuel Diaz

05-00511 memo.pdf

05-00511 MEMBERS.pdf


DEFERRED


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION CONFIRMING THE APPOINTMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE OFF-STREET PARKING BOARD FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.


Thomas B. Jelke, PhD Off-Street Parking Board


05-00559-nomination.pdf

05-00559-resume.pdf

Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice Chairman González, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


R-05-0436

Chairman Sanchez: Any other item pertaining to any board appointments?

Commissioner Regalado: There is one from the Off-Street Parking Board. I will move the item if -- that's BC.13 --

Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): 13, yeah.

Commissioner Regalado: -- so I will move the item of the appointment of a member of the Off-Street Parking Board.

Chairman Sanchez: Thomas -- is that Thomas (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- ?

Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. It's not my appointment; it's the board appointment --


Commissioner Regalado: -- but I'm just moving the item.

Chairman Sanchez: I need a second.


Chairman Sanchez: There's a second. There's a motion by Tomas Regalado, second by Commissioner González. It's open for discussion. Hearing no discussion on the item, all in favor, say "aye."









Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries, and he is a City resident. OK. Any further appointments?

Commissioner Regalado: Is it the General Employees and Sanitation Employees?

Chairman Sanchez: We've already done that.

Ms. Scheider: That was done.

Commissioner Regalado: Oh, OK, fine.

Chairman Sanchez: That was BC.8.


A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.


Camilo Alvarado Boshell Chairman Joe Sanchez (Citizen Category)

Enid A. Lorenzo Commissioner Tomas Regalado (Citizen Category)


05-00583 memo.pdf


05-00583 MEMBERS.pdf

Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice Chairman González, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


R-05-0434

A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice Chairman González, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton absent, to reappoint Camilo Alvarado-Boshell as a citizen category member of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board.

A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice Chairman González, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton absent, to appoint Enid Lorenzo as a citizen category member of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board; further waiving the residency requirement in Code Section 2-884(a) by a four/fifths (4/5) vote of the members of the full City Commission, as it relates to Enid Lorenzo's appointment.

Chairman Sanchez: Hold on. Historic and Environmental Preservation Board. I would like to






reappoint Camilo Alvarado-Boshell.


Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a -- well, I can't make the motion.

Vice Chairman González: OK. I move --

Commissioner Regalado: I'll make a motion in behalf of the Chairman.


Chairman Sanchez: Motion is made by Commissioner Regalado, second by Vice Chairman González. Open for discussion. Hearing none, All in favor, say "aye."


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries, and that'll be it for my appointments, and now we'll move into the budget outlook, followed by any pocket items.

Commissioner Regalado: I need appointments here, because -- OK. Madam City Clerk, on the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board, I appointed Enid Lorenzo on the last meeting, but she does need --

Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Yes.

Commissioner Regalado: -- a waiver.

Ms. Scheider: Yes.

Commissioner Regalado: So, Mr. Chairman, if you allow, I'll move the waiver for Ms. Lorenzo.



Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion for appointment and waiver. There's a second. Motion is made by Commissioner Regalado, second by Commissioner Allen. All in favor, say "aye."




A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.


Carlos Saldivar Commissioner Tomas Regalado




05-00586 memo.pdf





R-05-0435

A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Allen, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton absent, to appoint Carlos Saldivar as a member of the Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority; further waiving the residency requirements in Code Section 2-884(a) by a four/fifths (4/5) vote of the members of the full City Commission, as it relates to Carlos Sladivar's appointment; and further waiving the elector requirement in Code Sec. 2-1013(b) by a four/fifths (4/5) vote of the members of the full City Commission, as it relates to Carlos Saldivar's appointment.

Chairman Sanchez: Any other appointment, Commissioner Regalado?

Commissioner Regalado: I have one for Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority, but it's not in the agenda, so are you going to bring it?

Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Yes, it is on the agenda, BC.15.

Commissioner Regalado: Oh. Oh, it is on the agenda. I didn't see it, sorry. Carlos Saldivar, with the same waiver.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion --

Commissioner Regalado: Waiver of resident.

Chairman Sanchez: -- with the same waiver, by Commissioner Regalado. Is there a second?


Chairman Sanchez: Second by Commissioner Allen. Open for discussion. Hearing no discussion on the item, all in favor, say "aye."








DISCUSSION ITEMS

05-00609DI.1 DISCUSSION ITEM

DISCUSSION CONCERNING A FINANCIAL UPDATE AND BUDGET OUTLOOK.

Office of Strategic Planning, Budgeting, and Performance

05-00609-Cover memo.pdf

DISCUSSED

Chairman Sanchez: OK. Let's go to the budget outlook, and then we'll go to any pocket items, if anybody's got any.

Larry Spring: Commissioners, Larry Spring, chief of Strategic Planning, Budgeting & Performance. As of our month end April, and for the record, this forecast also includes the impact of the mid-year appropriation that was made by this Commission. We are on track, as far -- in regards to our expenses citywide. Our revenues are actually -- continue to be ahead of budget. As of this period end, it was approximately about 3.7 million; most of that is attributable to charges for services category, particularly building inspections, Major Use Special Permits, and all of those revenues associated with the development that is going on in the City. Other than that, I have no other reportable conditions at this time.

Chairman Sanchez: OK. Any questions from the Budget Director? (UNINTELLIGIBLE) director.

Commissioner Regalado: Larry, remember the --

Chairman Sanchez: You've got so many titles.

Commissioner Regalado: -- letter that you all gave us several months ago with warnings from the Audit Committee?

Mr. Spring: Yes.

Commissioner Regalado: As to that letter, what can you tell us?

Mr. Spring: Are you saying in regards to --

Commissioner Regalado: In regards to the concerns that they had.

Mr. Spring: This is -- from the Audit Committee? Oh, oh, oh, yes.

Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, remember --

Mr. Spring: I can put that on the record. Actually, the Audit Committee, in their -- and actually in the financial integrity principals audit, had a question regarding our year-end variance of the fiscal year ended September 30, 2004. The City actually performed positively by approximately $28 million, so the forecasted use of reserve, which was initially forecasted at 33 million at the beginning of the year, we ended up only using 5 million. They wanted me to -- and actually, just this week -- went into a discussion with the Audit Committee regarding what made up that variance. When you look at it in total, we were approximately 6.3 -- we had a 6.3 percent positive variance over the amended appropriated budget, which, in my opinion, was within a reasonable range. On the revenue side, it was approximately a 2.2 percent variance, generally




made up of the increase in collections on charges for services; all of these development-related revenues; we had better-than-expected collections on our waste removal, the construction debris removal fees. On the expense sides -- and it totaled up to about -- approximately $10 million. Our parking surcharge also came in better last year by about $2 million to make up that 10 million. On the expense side, we performed better by about 18 million than expected, so that was our budget expenses versus our actual were $18 million less, and that was approximately a four percent variance there. Again, the largest of that variance was caused by the large number of vacancies that we had in the City. As this Commission knows, we do allow for an attrition, kind of a negative budget of about -- approximately $5 million. At the end of the year, it came in about nine, so we're about $4 million off there. The others were the impact of our directors actually operating their departments more efficiently, so utilities, telecommunications, supplies, and things of that nature where we performed better than expected. The other large category had to do with the executing of out-service contracts. We do, you know, in Public Works area, you know, we have the cast, base and cleaning services and things, water quality service. Some of those contracts were not able to get let out because of timing, and things of that nature, so that was an additional savings, so that pretty much made it up. The conversation at the committee was a very positive one. We talked about the things that the City's doing to help improve or rather, one, to establish what the reasonable range is because this was the first time it was ever cited, given the fact it was a positive variance, and in most organizations, when you have a positive operating variance, you know, your CEO (Chief Executive Officer), your board of directors are very pleased because that's money -- that's additional revenues, or a healthier bottom line. We talked about the ERP (enterprise resource planning) implementation, the iMiAMi project, and the technological enhancements that that will provide by way of forecasting. We'll have better, tighter controls over our position, budgeting, so we can get that vacancy number under control. We talked about their participation in the upcoming budget process. The entire Audit Committee will be at the budget workshop on July 26; they've all been invited, and they will probably participate in the Budget Estimating Conference that I do as a part of our overall budget process every year. This past year, Richard Berkowitz, who is the chairman of that committee, participated, but this -- I think this year we'll probably have more of those committee members participating in that Budget Estimating Conference, where they -- we talk about the assumptions that we use, our go-forward plan, and they present this Commission with a letter of their recommendations, like they did last year. I believe a lot of those concerns were long-range; pension, getting better control over our staffing, and our overall expenses. You know, they see what I see, the positive growth on the revenue side of the equation, so that was --

Commissioner Regalado: All of the condo buildings, all of the units are cable-ready.

Mr. Spring: I would assume.

Commissioner Regalado: Well --

Mr. Spring: I'm not sure.

Commissioner Regalado: -- that's what they say in their advertising. If they are cable-ready, does the cable company, Comcast, pay the surcharge to the City?

Mr. Spring: I would assume they would pay whatever communication service tax that would be applicable in that case.

Commissioner Regalado: I understand, but since -- my question is, are we monitoring the new buildings in terms of cable services?

Mr. Spring: I can't say specifically no, but I can -- you know, I'll go back to my shop and check to see what is being done. I have nothing specific that we've been doing to monitor if cable is



there or not.

Commissioner Regalado: No, no. I understand that, but I mean, are we following the cable? Since they have the monopoly in the City, it's very easy to check with them, you know.

Mr. Spring: Yes.

Commissioner Regalado: That's it.


Commissioner Allen: OK. Mr. Chairman, I -- we don't have to move this report. It was just a report.

Chairman Sanchez: This doesn't require any legislative action.

Commissioner Allen: Yeah, just a report.



NON-AGENDA ITEMS

05-00704NA.1 DISCUSSION ITEM

Discussion of problems on N.W. 34th Avenue and on N.W. 14 Street, with street pavement excavated, but work halted, and street floods causing great inconvenience.

Direction to the Administration by Vice Chairman González, to present to the Commission, at 2:30 p.m., a status report concerning when roadwork will resume on 34th Avenue.

Chairman Sanchez: We'll be back --

Vice Chairman González: Before we recess --

Chairman Sanchez: -- at 2:30.

Vice Chairman González: -- and we don't need Commissioner Winton. It's just --


Vice Chairman González: -- a question that I have, if you allow me?

Chairman Sanchez: Sure, you have the floor.

Vice Chairman González: Alicia, we continue to have floodings on 34th Avenue. Last week, about Wednesday or Thursday last week, I went by the project. There was a meeting going on between the engineers and the project manager, and I don't know, three or four guys. The engineer expressed that there was a problem on design -- on the design of the road. They came to an agreement that they were going to cut the asphalt between 100 and 200 feet, at two different places on 34th Avenue, and raise the level of the street so the water will flow. Remember the spot that we stood up, when we went there and we had a problem of flooding, and we come up with two different options, and you agree? OK. We still have that problem. Nothing has happened. No decision has been made. The street is torn up apart. The neighbors are calling asking when are we going to resume working there because there hasn't -- nothing has been happening since last Wednesday, OK. According to what happened at that meeting, there was a decision made that the level of the street need to be rising so we avoid the flooding, and they were going to take -- they were going to start doing the process the next day. Well, it has been a week; nothing is happening, and on 14th Street, I'm having the same problem; for a week, nobody has been working there. They have removed the sidewalks. They have removed the swales between 32nd Avenue and 33rd Avenue, and the neighbors are starting to call and ask what is going on, so please, if you could give me an answer by 2:30, I would really appreciate it, so I can call my constituents and tell them what the City of Miami is doing, all right? Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. The City of Miami Commission meeting stands in recess. We'll be back at 2:30.


Clarificatory statement by Commissioner Jeffery Allen that the number of hurricane-downed trees in Little Haiti is 17 and not 200, as was erroneously stated during the last Commission meeting.

Chairman Sanchez: Are we ready to proceed with PH.2?

Commissioner Allen: Yes, and Mr. Chairman, before you, could you have Ms. Grindell step



forward. Just for clarification purposes, you may recall, our last Commission meeting, there was an issue with respect to my concern, via the business practice and/or management practice relative to downed trees in Little Haiti. I think we need to correct the record, and if you can just put something on the record that there were only, if I'm not mistaken, 18 trees, not the 200.

Stephanie Grindell (Director, Public Works): The grant was to place 200 trees, but there were only 17 trees that were actually downed --


Ms. Grindell: -- due to the hurricanes.

Commissioner Allen: So, we do have money to --

Ms. Grindell: Yes, we do.

Commissioner Allen: -- cover those trees --

Ms. Grindell: I already have a work order in process.

Commissioner Allen: -- so therefore, the Little Haiti community will not have to wait.


Commissioner Allen: Based on a grant.





Discussion concerning covenant required from single family homeowners when applying for certain building permits.

Chairman Sanchez: There's one item that -- it's not a pocket item; I just want some clarification on it, and that item is that proper owners in Miami are being asked not to sign a covenant, running with the land for single house -- family houses -- homes, when they go out and pull a permit, and in that, we've gotten a lot of complaints, and “the undersigned agrees to permit the City Manager, through his designee, to enter the property and any structure located therein without advanced notice.” Could somebody explain that to me?

Joe Arriola (City Manager): I wish I could, but I don't know what you're talking about.

Maria J. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): I recently received -- our office recently received that covenant; that -- the language is overly broad --

Commissioner Allen: It is.

Ms. Chiaro: -- for what is necessary --


Ms. Chiaro: -- for the issuance of the permit, so we will work with the Administration to narrow that language to writ the inspection for the additions or for the changes that are being made by



the building permit --


Ms. Chiaro: -- but not have it so broad that we include a right to enter the property in perpetuity, or forever, and the entire property.

Commissioner Allen: Or without notice.

Ms. Chiaro: That's the way it reads right now.

Commissioner Regalado: That's what it says.

Ms. Chiaro: Yes, I know.

Commissioner Regalado: That the City had the right to enter the property in perpetuity.

Ms. Chiaro: Yes. Well, it says "always," and so --

Commissioner Regalado: I mean, like, that's worse than the Supreme Court.

Commissioner Allen: Right. It's going to be narrowly tailored --

Ms. Chiaro: Yes, so --

Commissioner Allen: -- as to the criteria.

Chairman Sanchez: I --

Ms. Chiaro: I think, when that --

Chairman Sanchez: -- wanted to ventilate the issue, discuss it, because we've received some concerns about it, so I just want to make sure it's being taken care of, because some individuals are saying the language, itself -- I mean, you know, the police, they come into my house, they need a warrant. Just because, you know, I'm putting a toilet, they're going to -- so we just need to clarify that and make the corrections needed.

Ms. Chiaro: We can tailor that language to be more narrowly directed to its expressed purpose.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. That's it. I just wanted to clarify that, and make sure that we address that issue. Anything else?

Commissioner Allen: Just a quick question. Would -- Madam City Attorney, would that require coming back before the full Commission? Are we making any substantive changes or anything?

Ms. Chiaro: I think the document was created administratively, and we recent -- we received it just as the article was in an article -- there was an article in one of the newspapers, and I got a phone call, as well, so you don't -- there isn't Commission action necessary. We'll consider the discussion today, direction to make sure that it's legally correct language.

Commissioner Allen: Well, in fairness, could -- once the language is fully drafted, could it be distributed to all the Commissioners before it's actually --

Ms. Chiaro: Yes, sir.



Commissioner Allen: -- incorporated --

Ms. Chiaro: Yes, sir.

Commissioner Allen: -- so that, perhaps, if we would need to weigh in on it? Thank you.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Any other item?

Mr. Arriola: It's kind of boring today, I'm sorry. I'm falling asleep in here.

Chairman Sanchez: It won't be boring next Commission meeting, I guarantee you that.

Mr. Arriola: Well, I won't be here, so that's OK.


Discussion concerning the completion of voluminous Commission meeting agendas prior to the August break; further stating that the Commission will either (1) begin the meeting on Thursday and complete the remaining items on Friday, or (2) work with the Administration to defer non-emergency items to September.

Chairman Sanchez: And before you say that, I want to state very clearly that the agenda powers lie within the Commission itself. The next Commission meeting will we be addressing the agenda to make sure there are a bunch of items. If we do have a voluminous agenda with items that are going to be controversial, we're going to give -- I believe we should do two things, as the Chair. One is, we could either have two meetings, Thursday and Friday to complete it, or we will take some of the items and roll it over into September, because it just sets a bad precedence -- and it happens every year, where before we go on vacation, they want to cram everything on that agenda, and it's bad policy, bad government, and I made it very clear that I would not allow it, so you understand, I'm making my position crystal clear. If we want to go through the entire agenda, I'll be more than glad to sit here with full Commission; we'll start it Thursday, and we'll finish it Friday. If not, I will sit down with the Administration and work with the Administration to rollover any item that is not an emergency onto September.

Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but Mr. Chairman --

Joe Arriola (City Manager): Don't worry, Commissioner. We're only --

Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me, Mr. -- September, it always happen. September is budget time, and then at 9 p.m., you know, we start the budget and we have to rush it and rush it and rush it, because all the carry-over of July and all that. I would rather do Thursday and Friday to finish everything, but that's the will of the Commission, but just -- this is just me. I don't have a problem of coming Thursday and Friday and finish everything.

Vice Chairman González: I would also agree to do Thursday and Friday --


Vice Chairman González: or -- whatever you decide, whatever you decide to do.

Chairman Sanchez: Oh, no, no, no, no, no. I do the will of this legislative body. I --

Vice Chairman González: You know --

Chairman Sanchez: I'm a team player.



Mr. Arriola: Commissioner, we only have 102 PZ (planning & zoning) items for the next meeting, but you'll be fine.

Chairman Sanchez: If it was up to you, we'd have 300.

Vice Chairman González: Let me tell you, I don't doubt it.

05-00702NA.5 RESOLUTION

A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), IN CONNECTION WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI CITY KIDS CHOIR INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE TO SISTER CITY KAGOSHIMA, JAPAN ("JAPAN EXCHANGE"), AUTHORIZING THE JAPAN EXCHANGE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO RECEIVE THE DONATIONS FROM INDIVIDUALS AND BUSINESSES IN THE AMOUNTS ON "ATTACHMENT A," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED AND TO ACCEPT FUTURE DONATIONS, ALL TO BE DEPOSITED INTO DEPOSIT REFUNDABLE ACCOUNT NO. 001000.000000.2220, FOR USES RELATED TO THE JAPAN EXCHANGE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT"), IN A FORM AND SUBSTANCE ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND TO THE RISK MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATOR, WITH COMMUNITY CONCERT ASSOCIATION, INC., A FLORIDA NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $80,000, FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF HOTEL, MEALS, TRANSPORTATION, INSURANCE AND OTHER RELATED MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES FOR THE JAPAN EXCHANGE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PAY JALPAK INTERNATIONAL AMERICA, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $65,000, FOR AIRLINE TICKETS FOR THE JAPAN EXCHANGE; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR'S INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL TO USE FUNDS IN ITS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 BUDGET TO ASSIST WITH FUNDING FOR JAPAN EXCHANGE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE ALL OTHER AGREEMENTS, INSTRUMENTS AND DOCUMENTS, ALL IN FORMS AND SUBSTANCE ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND TO THE RISK MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATOR, TO ACCOMPLISH THE JAPAN EXCHANGE; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PAY ALL EXPENSES RELATED TO THE JAPAN EXCHANGE FROM DEPOSIT REFUNDABLE ACCOUNT NO. 001000.000000.2220 AND FROM THE FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 BUDGET OF THE MAYOR'S INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL; ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Motion by Commissioner Allen, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


R-05-0437

Chairman Sanchez: All right. What is this pocket item, and it better be an emergency.

Vice Chairman González: Because the problem is, since we're talking about so many -- what you call it, moratoriums?



Joe Arriola (City Manager): Yeah.

Vice Chairman González: Developers are pushing their projects, “you know, please, hurry up. Don't leave me behind."

Mr. Arriola: I can't give you a finger, take your whole hand, Commissioner. I think we have one pocket item that I would like -- is it Jose -- Jose and Jessie from International Kids --

Chairman Sanchez: Jose and Jessie, step right up.

Mr. Arriola: Send them both up.

Chairman Sanchez: You're the next contestant on the Price is Right.

Vice Chairman González: Why did the resolution have to be so long? Couldn't they make it short?

Jose Mallea: Make it short.

Vice Chairman González: Concise.

Mr. Arriola: We had the Legal Department do it.

Mr. Mallea: Exactly.

Chairman Sanchez: Jose, why is this ordinance an emergency? Because really, it's -- it has an impact. It's $80,000 coming in from -- that the City Manager's going to have to come up with the money. Risk Management's going to have to come up with the money.

Mr. Arriola: You know, even though you have an 80,000 figure and a 65,000 figure, it really is not -- most of the money is being raised privately, so it's -- I think, what is it, 65,000?

Mr. Mallea: Right. The travel component, which is 65,000, will probably be covered half by the MIC (Mayor's International Council) budget --

Chairman Sanchez: But why is it an emergency?

Mr. Mallea: -- and half privately.

Chairman Sanchez: Why is it in front of us today; couldn't be in a regular meeting?

Mr. Mallea: Due to the fact that the kids are traveling very soon, and some of the issues that came up arose over the last week, and everyone has been working diligently to address them to make sure that these kids can travel. It's the City Kids Choir that was here early. The trip had originally been scheduled for the 10th, but has been postponed, and the date that they'll be traveling is likely going to be the 15th -- the week -- the 15th or very close to that day, which is next Friday. The Commissioners won't meet again until after that time, so we thought it'd be appropriate and the responsible thing to do would be to bring it before you in order to try to help them make this trip. That's the reason why there's a sense of urgency, due to the time constraint of when the kids travel, which is next Friday.


Commissioner Regalado: How many chaperons?



Mr. Mallea: The trip has -- and I'll -- if I'm not mistaken, seven chaperons? Seven chaperons, seven adults who are traveling. They include the choir director and her staff, and also one employee of the City, who is with the Parks Department, with FACE (Film Arts, Culture and Entertainment), film, arts, and --actually, cultural and special events, so -- who's been the person that's been coordinating a lot of the --

Commissioner Regalado: I mean, but is --

Mr. Mallea: -- efforts of the kids.

Commissioner Regalado: -- the choir competing in Japan or just traveling as an exchange?

Mr. Mallea: Well, you know, what it is, it's an international exchange. It's part of -- Kagoshima is the sister -- the oldest sister city of the City of Miami, and I think that's what Jessie was going to talk about.

Commissioner Regalado: And these are the kids that came from Kagoshima?

Mr. Mallea: They're -- that's -- there's an exchange. Kids are coming from Kagoshima.

Commissioner Regalado: No, I know. They came here --

Mr. Mallea: Our kids -- right. Our kids --

Commissioner Regalado: -- from Kagoshima.

Mr. Mallea: -- are now going to Kagoshima to sing there --

Commissioner Regalado: I mean --

Mr. Mallea: -- and the City Kids Choir is comprised of mainly minority and inner-city kids, as you saw, and for them, it's a chance of a lifetime to go abroad and have that experience.

Commissioner Regalado: But if they're going to compete, they should go to Vienna, not to --

Mr. Mallea: That's a good point.

Commissioner Allen: How many kids?

Mr. Mallea: It's 21 kids, 21 kids, and the amounts that you see before you, as the Manager had mentioned, a significant portion of it will be raised privately, and if you notice, the attachment in the back actually shows you the private donations that have already arrived and are on hand, so there's a special account that's created in order to put that money into that account, and then provide it to the nonprofit entity for their expenses. There's still commitments out there that will be collected over the next several weeks, so I believe it also states that it authorizes you to allow those monies to continue to arrive and continue to be dispersed to the organization in order to pay for their travel, but other miscellaneous items, including lodging, meals, transportation, and also insurance, which is a key component that also needed to be put in place.

Commissioner Allen: And if I may, this is pretty much cost effective. I see here, you said seven adults, and you have 21 kids, so I don't know. What if there were five adults and 21 kids? Does it make a difference in the number of adults, five versus seven, or are they trying to accomplish some sort of ratio, three kids for every one adult or -- ?



Mr. Mallea: One issue is with international travel, they like to keep a very close ratio because of the fact that they're going abroad and the dynamics of that, and also the seven adults that are traveling are all part -- a key part of the choir's effort, so they're either, you know, a musical instructors, the choir --

Commissioner Allen: But they are related.

Mr. Mallea: -- director, and the City of Miami staff person.

Commissioner Allen: OK, so it's not going to be a fun trip, so I'll make a motion. OK, this is -- the cap is 80,000.

Mr. Mallea: It's a cap, exactly, so -- and it doesn't require an allocation to go to the organization at this moment. All it authorizes is to allow for the expenditure in that amount, and that also includes the private sector contributions that will be coming in.

Commissioner Allen: Mr. Chairman, I'll move the item.


Commissioner Regalado: I'll second. Just a question.

Chairman Sanchez: Motion and a second for the record. Still under discussion. Commissioner Regalado.

Commissioner Regalado: All these are, I saw them, inner-city kids, right?

Mr. Mallea: Yes, sir.

Commissioner Regalado: Who paid for their passports?

Mr. Mallea: For their -- their parents. Their parents paid for the passports. Their parents also paid for, in some cases, luggage, and whatever clothing they needed, and --

Commissioner Regalado: Is that not a burden?

Mr. Mallea: A burden to the parents?

Commissioner Regalado: Yes.

Mr. Mallea: The parents, I believe, individually, felt strongly that they wanted their kids to participate, and decided to take it upon themselves to do that. We did work with them, with the U.S. Passport Agency, and also had worked with the Clerk at one point to help the kids with that, and help them facilitate the filling out of the paperwork and so on.

Commissioner Allen: Mr. Chief of Staff, are the kids all proportionately from the five districts throughout the City?

Mr. Mallea: That's a good question, Commissioner. I don't have the answer for that, but I -- if you want me to say that they're --

Commissioner Allen: Well, let me just ask: Are any kids from District 5?

Mr. Mallea: I'd say the majority are probably from District 5 --




Mr. Mallea: -- or at least half, so --


Chairman Sanchez: Any further discussion on the item? If not, there's a motion and a second. Mr. City Attorney, you want to elaborate on this?

Jorge L. Fernández (City Attorney): Yeah, just to make sure, a comment was made about why is this title of the resolution so lengthy, is because we're tackling all of the issues related to that. There are five separate, different authorizations that you're giving to the City Manager, working with the City Attorney and the Risk Manager, to make sure that all of the stages and all of the steps of this trip are covered, not only from a funding and insurance requirement, but also with all of the other attending issues that need to be addressed, so it's very thorough, very comprehensive. One vote by you assures that the City Manager can make this happen, or that you can make it happen with the delegation that you're giving to him.

Commissioner Allen: All right.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. Any further discussion on the item? If not, it's a resolution, all in favor, say "aye."



05-00650NA.6 RESOLUTION

A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,000, TO THE LUCY GARCIA PRO ARTE INTERNATIONAL, A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION PRODUCING COMPACT DISCS FOR DISTRIBUTION IN SENIOR CENTERS AND LIBRARIES WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE DISTRICT 4 SPECIAL EVENTS NON-DEPARTMENTAL ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.921054.6.289.

Motion by Commissioner Allen, seconded by Vice Chairman González, that this matter be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.


R-05-0438

A motion was made by Vice Chairman González, seconded by Commissioner Allen, and was passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton absent, to adjourn today's Commission meeting.

Commissioner Regalado: I have a pocket item.

Chairman Sanchez: You have a pocket item?

Commissioner Regalado: Yeah.

Chairman Sanchez: Go ahead.

Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, I have a resolution



authorizing the allocation of funds from the special -- District 4 special events nondepartmental account to the Lucy Garcia Pro Arte International Foundation, a nonprofit organization, producing different music projects, to be presented in compact disc for distribution in senior centers, within the City of Miami. These funds will come from the District 4 special events account.

Chairman Sanchez: What's the amount?

Commissioner Allen: I move the item, Mr. Chairman.

Commissioner Regalado: One thousand dollars.

Chairman Sanchez: One thousand dollars.

Commissioner Allen: I move the item.

Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion. Is there a second?


Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second. The item is under discussion. Hearing no discussion, all in favor, say "aye."


Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion carries. Are there any items or any pocket items? If not --

Vice Chairman González: Motion to adjourn.

Chairman Sanchez: -- I need the -- the appropriate motion is a motion to adjourn. All in favor, say "aye."




city of miamiegov.ci.miami.fl.us/meetings/2005/7/1105_m_city_commission_05-0… · commendation for...

Documents