Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEOPW OMNI CRA 1996-03-18 MinutesCITY ov: tiAlAMI AND 13ARK WW oVEF60w" i SOUTHEW�� pREA 1 C�MUN►TY REDEVELOP%*NT MCY .. aim �TIN� HE�-C'C� � 18, 1g96 �F M� THE pFF6CE OF TH '� CITY CLERIC ®Y At t- PREPARED C1-vT iN� d MAN C Y � INDEX MINUTES OF OMNI COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING March 18, 1996 ITEM SUBJECT LEGISLATION PAGE NO. NO. 1. DISCUSS/MODIFY/APPROVE INTERLOCAL OMNI/CRA 2-36 COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN 96-1 METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, CITY OF OMNI/CRA MIAMI, AND THE COMMUNITY 96-2 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR OMNI/CRA OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AREA. 96-3 OMNI/CRA 96-4 OMNI/CRA 96-5 OMNI/CRA 96-6 3/18/96 2. DEFER TO NEXT MEETING DISCUSSION 36-37 APPOINTMENTS TO SELECTION REVIEW 3/18/96 COMMITTEE REGARDING SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN / PARK WEST BLOCKS 25 AND 36 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. 3. DEFER TO NEXT MEETING FUNDING DISCUSSION 37 REQUEST FROM DEVELOPER OF 3/18/96 POINCIANA VILLAGE CONDOMINIUMS. 4. DISCUSS CRA ATTORNEY'S REPORT DISCUSSION 38-41 CONCERNING ARENA TOWERS 3/18/96 APARTMENTS LITIGATION. 5. (A) DISCUSSION CONCERNING DISCUSSION 42-54 CONDITIONS IN VICINITY OF 3/18/96 HOMELESS ASSISTANCE SHELTER -- SCHEDULE ALAN SRVITZ FOR APPEARANCE AT COMMISSION MEETING TO REITERATE HIS CONCERNS BEFORE MANAGER AND POLICE CHIEF REGARDING SAME -- REQUEST ATTENDANCE OF ALVAH CHAPMAN (OR REPRESENTATIVE FROM SAID FACILITY), AND METRO—DADE COMMISSIONER ALEX PENELAS. (B) DISCUSSION CONCERNING OFFER BY OMNI TO DONATE SPACE IN ITS BUILDING FOR A SATELLITE POLICE STATION -- SCHEDULE ISSUE FOR COMMISSION MEETING. (C) DEFER CONSIDERATION OF RIVERSIDE STUDY / CONCEPTS REGARDING HOUSING / REDEVELOPMENT IN LUMMUS PARK AND OVERTOWN AREAS TO NEXT SEOPW MEETING IN OVERTOWN. (D) INVITE HIGH—RANKING MEMBER OF POLICE DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTATIVES FROM HOMELESS CENTER AND PERFORMING ARTS CENTER TRUST TO ATTEND FUTURE CRA MEETINGS. (E) DIRECT CITY ATTORNEY TO RESEARCH POSSIBILITY OF FINING ORGANIZATIONS FEEDING THE HOMELESS ON PUBLIC STREETS. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE OMNI COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY On the 18th day of March, 1996, the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) met at the Grand Condominium and Doubletree Grand Hotel, located at 1717 North Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida in regular session. The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Chairman Miller J. Dawkins with the following members of the Board found to be present: Chairman Miller J. Dawkins Vice Chairman Stephen P. Clark Board Member J.L. Plummer, Jr. ALSO PRESENT: Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk Maria J. Argudin, Assistant City Clerk Herbert J. Bailey, Executive Director Robert Friedman, Special Counsel ABSENT: Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Plummer led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. Chairman Dawkins: As Board Member Plummer explained to you, we have two members of the Board absent because they are in Tallahassee finding the money to keep your Miami Heat here. OIL. 5o, they will come back tomorrow with the money, and J.L. Plummer will go back up there and take it back tomorrow afternoon. Board Member Plummer: Also, for the record, the City Manager is also with the County Manager are up there, likewise for the same reason. I think they are. They called me this afternoon about 3 o'clock in Orlando, the little puddle jumper couldn't get out. So I think they made it at 5:30. NOTE FOR THE RECORD: Commissioner Carollo and Vice ayor Gort are in Tallahassee on City business concerning funds to keep the Heat in Miami. 1 March 18, 1996 e ram, NOTE FOR THE RECORD: On motion duly made by Board em er Plummer and seconded by Vice Chairman Clark, the minutes of the SEOPW/CRA meeting of February 26, 1996 were approved by the Board. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. DISCUSS/MODIFY/APPROVE INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, CITY OF MIAMI, AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AREA. Chairman Dawkins: Under discussion, item 3. Board Member Plummer: I have some questions that I need, I guess, Mr. Bailey to clarify for me. Is he here? Mr. Herbert J. Bailey: I'm here. Board Member Plummer: Oh, I'm sorry, I thought I saw you sitting here, then you changed on me. Mr. Bailey, on page one of the Interlocal, there are... is Dave Morris in here? Where is our Project Manager from the... Chairman Dawkins: Our Project Manager? Board Member Plummer: No, their Project Manager for the Performing Arts. Mr. Edward Marquez: Mr. Plummer, my name is Ed Marquez, I'm the Finance Director for the County. Board Member Plummer: OK. Can you speak for the County then? Mr. Marquez: Yes, I can. Board Member Plummer: OK. You are very much aware, are you that where it states up to 1.43 million doesn't mean that that's what you are going to get, and second of all, that predicated on what we know now, it's going to be more... it's going to be more... Chairman Dawkins: Where is that item that I don't want in there? Board Member Plummer: ...it's going to be more than... less than 680,000, and that it is not accumulative. Is that understood? Mr. Marquez: Understood, sir. Board Member Plummer: In other words, each year you will get whatever we receive but not to exceed the 1.43. Dave. 2 March 18, 1996 Mr. David Morris: Hello. Board Member Plummer: I rather have your boss on the record here. Vice Chairman Clark: You have a copy of the agenda, Herb? Board Member Plummer: Mr... no, that's not it. That's not it. All right. Chairman Dawkins: Here you are, Mr. Mayor. I'll get another one. Vice Chairman Clark: I got it. Board Member Plummer: Parker, is he here? I know he is here. OK, Parker. I had another question further back in the Interlocal, let me go to it, if I may. And that is on page 9, Herb. Chairman Dawkins: Wait, who's got a copy of the Interlocal? Mr. Bailey: Here you are. Board Member Plummer: Page 9. Chairman Dawkins: Page 9. Board Member Plummer: Right. Section C(a), I am wondering about the powers that are given to the County. Such as the power to determine... that they'll make a determination what is a slum and what is a blighted area. I think we had a very very bad scenario of recent, in which the park up in this particular area could not get funding because it was not declared a blighted area, and the County refused to do such. And yet, we the City wanted to do it so that we could get the money to in fact do the project for which the people had asked us to do and without that approval, we couldn't do it. So I am concerned, Mr. Bailey, about the County... Chairman Dawkins: Wait, now. You are going to Bailey, or are you going to him? See, you call this guy up, then he sits down, and then you go to Bailey. Board Member Plummer: All right, well. How about... let me... let me not make a mistake, I'll ask them both. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Good, good. And then you. Board Member Plummer: I'm also concerned actually of A, B, and C. B is the power to grant the final approval of the redevelopment plan. And the County reserves the right to authorize issuance of Revenue Bonds for our CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Chairman Dawkins: For our City, Miami. Board Member Plummer: Well, CRA. We are here as CRA. And that does concern me. Now, Dave, when I go back, I come back to the area... hold on Mr. Mayor, please. I go back to page 2, and there I am concerned about three quarters of the page down, "...In the event construction cost of the Performing Arts Center affect is due to delay or lack of diligence by the City...," if nothing better, that's offensive. Ms. Linda Kearson (Assistant City Attorney): That's out. Board Member Plummer: Well, it's not out in mine. 3 March 18, 1996 Ms. Kearson: It should be. That's why I am here. Board Member Plummer: To me, Dave, if nothing more than being... I don't know how to put it. It's offensive to me that lack of diligence on behalf of the City, I will not accept that terminology under any circumstances. Mr. Marquez: We'll delete it. Ms. Kearson: We'll do a paragraph. Mr. Marquez: Yeah, the... Ms. Kearson: If I might, Commissioner? Board Member Plummer: Please. Chairman Dawkins: Go right ahead, Madam City Attorney. Board Member Plummer: The Chairman is the one that said I could only talk to two, but I always like ladies to speak. Chairman Dawkins: No, but wait, now. I said you should talk to one or the other at the time. I did not say you should not talk to both of them. But I didn't want you asking one and asking the other, and don't wait until one answers the questions before you answer the other, and when we leave here, we don't have an answer. OK. Board Member Plummer: That might be the norm for you, but it is not for me. Chairman Dawkins: OK, now. But whenever the City Attorney has some wisdom to give us, the three of us will accept it. Board Member Plummer: So be it. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Thank you, sir. Board Member Plummer: Your wisdom, please. Ms. Kearson: Good evening, I'm Linda Kearson, Assistant City Attorney, I'm here to speak to that particular paragraph. I have reviewed it with the City Attorney, as well as with the County, and we had determined that is an unlawful delegation of authority. Therefore, the City CRA could not nor the City could agree to that. So that has to be deleted. Having said that, there is no reason for the City of Miami to be a part of this agreement as well because that was the only provision that pertained to the City of Miami. So that's why I came here, just to clarify that for the record. And I think we have been in contact with the Mr. Vidal, from the County, the City Mayor is also aware of this. Chairman Dawkins: So what you are saying is that when the CRA was dedicated as the Agency to bring about the redevelopment in the area, and the City of Miami signed -off, then the City Manager has no right making decisions for the CRA. Is that what you are saying? Board Member Plummer: No. Ms. Kearson: Well, well, what I am saying is... 4 March 18, 1996 Chairman Dawkins: Wait a minute. No, no, wait, J.L., you can ask... I'm asking her. Vice Chairman Clark: Please, let's go. Ms. Kearson: What I'm saying in this particular regard... Chairman Dawkins: No, but I want J.L. to understand, she can answer for me. Ms. Kearson: The City of Miami... the City Commission delegated all of its powers for the OMNI area to the CRA, if I am not mistaken. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Right. Ms. Kearson: That means that it's the CRA, this Commission, that acts on behalf... Chairman Dawkins: No, this Board. This Board. Ms. Kearson: ...this Board, I'm sorry. This Board that acts on behalf of the OMNI redevelopment district, which means that you are right. The City Manager does not have any authority with respect to the activities of... Chairman Dawkins: That's right. Ms. Kearson: ...the CRA Board, or the CRA District. And because this provision dealt with the City of Miami and we had determined it to be an unlawful delegation of authority, it should be deleted. Having said that, as I said, there is a reason for the City of Miami to be a part of this agreement. Board Member Plummer: My question is, do the City of Miami sign off to the CRA the zoning? I don't think so. Ms. Kearson: Well... Board Member Plummer: I don't think the CRA has zoning authorities. So that's why, Mr. Chairman, I disagreed because I think that they do have some provisions that they have to protect. Ms. Kearson: Well, I think that in any development, are you Commissioner or you are board member, or Mr. Plummer... Board Member Plummer: I'm here. I'm here. Ms. Kearson: ...in any development the City of Miami retains its zoning authority, its right to issue COs (Certificate of Occupancy). So that's with any document, any project. So there is nothing special about this necessarily. That's what I'm saying to you. So there was no reason... you know, you would have to follow whatever requirements are imposed upon a project in terms of getting its permits, in terms of getting a CO. So there is no reason for the City to have any particular obligation under this agreement. That is standard procedure. Chairman Dawkins: But in doing any development, the CRA must follow what the Charter dictates, and that is that the City of Miami is responsible for planning and zoning. Is that not right? That's right. 5 March 18, 1996 Ms. Kearson: That's correct. I mean, you would sit... that's correct. I mean, you have to follow set requirements. Board Member Plummer: Well, then let me go a step further. There... it refers in here to eminent domain. Ms. Kearson: OK. Board Member Plummer: Now, is that a power that the CRA has that they can give away to the County? Ms. Kearson: I don't know where it is referred to the... Mr. Bailey: No, the County has delegated the eminent domain privilege to the CRA for this district only. Ms. Kearson: ... to the CRA. Board Member Plummer: For this district only. Ms. Kearson: This district, that's correct. Mr. Bailey: Yes. Board Member Plummer: OK. Ms. Kearson: So that could be done. Board Member Plummer: Now, whoever wants to answer, I'm back to page 9. Chairman Dawkins: Stay there, Madam City Attorney. Ms. Kearson: OK. Board Member Plummer: Excuse me. Mr. Chairman, how do we... Mn Chairman. Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. Board Member Plummer: On page 2, do we then just follow the advice of the City Attorney... Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir... Board Member Plummer: ...and to delete that paragraph? Chairman Dawkins: If I... if there is a motion, I will see that it is carried. Board Member Plummer: I'll so move. Vice Chairman Clark: I'll second the motion. Chairman Dawkins: So, all right. So moved. Board Member Plummer: OK. Now... 0 March 18, 1996 Chairman Dawkins: So there is the three of us here, and the three of us vote for that. Board Member Plummer: Well, I made the motion and he seconded it, and even if you voted against us, we outvote you. I like that. Chairman Dawkins: See, he is trying to be... The following motion was introduced by Board Member Plummer, who moved its adoption: OMNI/CRA MOTION NO. 96-1 A MOTION TO MODIFY PROPOSED INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR THE OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AREA BY DELETING THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE CONTAINED ON PAGE 2, SECTION I -A: "In the event the construction costs of the Performing Arts Center are affected due to delay or lack of diligence on the part of the CITY's Building and Zoning Department; the COUNTY shall perform as to the Performing Arts Center, once the permits for the Performing Arts Center have been issued by the CITY, all supervisory functions with respect to such permits, including all inspections, and the issuance of any preliminary or final Certificate of Occupancy." Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Clark, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Miller J. Dawkins Vice Chairman Stephen P. Clark Board Member J. L. Plummer ABSENT: Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member Plummer: Anyhow, page 9, A, B and C, I'm concerned about. Who wants to answer that one? Chairman Dawkins: All right. Mr. Bailey: No, that's a matter. I can answer it, but I'd let our Attorney, Bob Friedman, take that item. Mr. Robert Friedman (Special Counsel): Paragraph A is a discretionary item that was added to this agreement. Paragraph B is discretionary, it was added to this agreement. Uh, paragraph C is permitted under the Redevelopment Law pursuant to Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes. The County has all the redevelopment powers to start off with. The County delegates the redevelopment powers to some extent, to the extent that they want to, to the City, which delegates them to this Board as the CRA. So what you have in "C" is the reservation to the County of the powers that they don't want to delegate. Board Member Plummer: OK, so you are saying that "A", "B" and "C" is optional? Mr. Friedman: No, well... Vice Chairman Clark: No, discretionary is what he is saying. 7 March 18, 1996 Mr. Friedman:... yes, it is discretionary. Board Member Plummer: OK. Chairman Dawkins: What does discretionary mean? Board Member Plummer: We can accept it or reject it. Mr. Friedman: Well, discretionary... Chairman Dawkins: I beg your pardon? Board Member Plummer: We can accept it or reject it. Mr. Bailey: Actually, what... Mr. Friedman: Well, let me, let me clarify that. Now, if you take paragraph C(a), OK... Board Member Plummer: Right. Mr. Friedman: ...that power to designate slum and blight is a reserve to the County under the Statutes. Only the County can designate the areas "slum and blight." Chairman Dawkins: OK. Mr. Friedman: OK. In "B," it's the same thing, County retains that right pursuant to the Statute, to approve the plan and sign off on modifications of the plan. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Go to "C." Mr. Friedman: And then in "C," the County... in "C," I think there is... it's good to clarify that they are not issuing the bonds, but they have the right to authorize the issuance of bonds. It's just a safeguard that the County has included in here. Board Member Plummer: All right, now let's go to the important one, "D" as in David, on page 10. And that is where they have the right to approve the acquisition, demolition, removal or disposing of property. Mr. Friedman: Yes, this is unlimited power. If you look at that section that is sighted in the Statutes, that is not a broad sweeping power to carry out this activities. Rather it is limited to a situation when there is not plan in effect. And there is a plan in effect, so really "D" doesn't have any true effect. Board Member Plummer: Do we have to accept "D"? Chairman Dawkins: You are saying delete it. Mr. Friedman: Well, I'm not saying delete it, I'm just saying that... Chairman Dawkins: Well, you are saying OK. You are saying OK, then. Mr. Friedman: ...I'm advising you that it doesn't have any effect in terms of the relationship because you already have a redevelopment plan in effect. 8 March 18, 1996 01A Board Member Plummer: So then... so we can delete it? Mr. Friedman: You could delete it or couldn't delete it. Board Member Plummer: We can delete it? Chairman Dawkins: But, wait. Wait a minute, but we pay you to tell us to delete it or not to delete it. Now, that's what I'm... that's what I am paying you for. Mr. Friedman: OK. I'm saying that it doesn't matter one way or the other. Board Member Plummer: Then I move... Chairman Dawkins: OK. Well, all right, then if I don't pay you Friday, does it matter or doesn't it matter? OK. You see, you can't have it both ways, now. You got to give it to me one way. Board Member Plummer: I'll move that "D" be deleted. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Is there a second? Vice Chairman Clark: Second. Chairman Dawkins: All right, so be it. OK. The following motion was introduced by Board Member Plummer, who moved its adoption: OMNI/CRA MOTION NO. 96-2 A MOTION TO MODIFY PROPOSED INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR THE OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AREA BY DELETING THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE CONTAINED ON PAGE 10, SECTION III-C(d): "The power to approve the acquisition, demolition, removal or disposal of property as provided in Section 163.370(3), Florida Statutes, and the power to assume the responsibility to bear loss as provided in Section 163.370(3), Florida Statutes." Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Clark, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Chairman Dawkins: Now, what else? Mr. Morris: Excuse me. Chairman Miller J. Dawkins Vice Chairman Stephen P. Clark Board Member J.L. Plummer None. Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort 0 March 18, 1996 Chairman Dawkins: Wait a minute. Wait, now. Mr. Morris: May I address that? Chairman Dawkins: Wait a minute. No, we have to wait until Mr. Plummer finishes, and then we... Board Member Plummer: Well, go ahead if it's on that particular because I just want to wrap with one other. Mr. Morris: Thank you. Chairman Dawkins: OK, now. OK, you want to discuss that one and all of them, or just that one part? Mr. Morris: Yeah, and in "D", in terms of its... whether it matters or not matters. From our point of view, what this is is a very specific issue of in any case where when... once the County has approved the plan, then the CRA can do whatever it wished to within the delegations to carry out that plan as I understand it. Vice Chairman Clark: Or to modify it? Mr. Morris: Modification to the plan, I believe will fall under one of the prior ones. The Attorney can correct me if I'm wrong on that, and that would come back to the County. Mr. Friedman: And the County has to approve the modifications. Mr. Morris: In the event that you go forth to do something that is outside the plan, my understanding of "D" is that says, "...Pursuant to the Statutes, that has to come back to the County..." because you don't have a plan in place. Board Member Plummer: That's what bothers me. Mr. Morris: But if you don't have a plan in place, if you are acting outside the plan, and you have no plan in place. Board Member Plummer: Dave, the thing that bothers me is that we have a plan in place right now, but we are already being told that we have to modify that plan to be in compliance with what is to go down the road tomorrow. And it bothers me that every time that we have a person down there, and I'm sorry, I am not going to mention any names, but I'll give you the example of the Orange Bowl. The financing of the Orange Bowl was held up by a Committee for over nine months. And I don't want to be at the mercy of the County or anybody else... Mr. Morris: I appreciate that. Board Member Plummer: ...for nine months tied up in Committee that I can't move and the people are screaming at me why don't you do something, and they don't want to hear from me the truth. And that is, I can't get the County to move. And that's why I find that. Now, I just don't feel that I want to be placed in a position that I can't do what needs to be done. I don't care if the County has an approval - you know - on the project and things of that nature. But I just have a problem with "D." Mr. Morris: Your attorney might be able best to answer the question of what I'm going to ask, but it is my understanding that if the City wanted to... if the CRA wanted to acquire real property 10 March 18, 1996 that was not in conformance with the plan, that the City could not do that using CRA fund... pardon me, the CRA could not do that using tax increment funds without an approval from the County, pursuant to State law. And I think that's what "D" says. Board Member Plummer: Well, let's leave it this way, we have deleted it. If in fact it's not in compliance with State law, then I'll have it be put back in. I'm not going to get in argument with the attorneys. Mr. Morris: No, its... Chairman Dawkins: That's it. Board Member Plummer: OK. My final word is very simply, Parker, I don't know if you are aware but I think one of the things that has been bothering all of us at the Performing Arts Trust, which I am now a member, is in fact that the County had not at this particular time, as of my last meeting, had not identified a second source of funding for the Performing Arts. Dave, you said you were ready to put on the record tonight what that source was, and I don't know if Parker is aware, but I became aware this afternoon and I think that everybody should know it. If you would put it on the record. Mr. Morris: In terms of the financing plan, and Ed Marquez can probably fill in more details than I can, but there is a secondary pledge behind the convention development taxes, and the Omni increment taxes, which would be the County's Countywide sales tax revenues. About 12 to 13 million... 13 million. Board Member Plummer: OK. Mr. Chairman, of the thing that I received, of course indicated to me that the... all of the groups that worked together, and in fact that they feel that this is something that they can work with, I really only have one other question. And I am concerned about so many groups that are going to be involved as an advisory board that are not really the people directly affected. And that is, for example, the something segment of the Chamber of Commerce. There was another group in there, there was about three or four different groups that were mentioned. What page is that on, Herb? Mr. Fred Joseph: Seven. Board Member Plummer: Page 7. Mr. Joseph: Excuse me, Herb. Board Member Plummer: You don't even look like Herb. Yeah, it says that the OMNI Task Force of the Greater Miami Chamber. The HUD Advisory Board, and other advisory groups, who without naming, who is the Citizens Advisory Group, I don't know who they are. And I would feel more comfortable if they were spelled out knowing that it was some of the people of this area that are directly involved. And I do that simply because at the Performing Arts Trust of the City's... second City Commission appointment to the Performing Arts Trust was held up by someone of the County Commission asking that a member of the area be placed on the Board in the City Commission slot. Now, the County Commission has about 12 slots, they've got about five at -large slots, and yet they saw fit to say, "Hey, City of Miami, we want your slot to be filled by somebody." And I sent back the message saying, "Hey, you got all of your slots, include one of you who are the Commissioner of this particular district, how come you didn't appoint somebody in this particular?" I would feel, Mr. Chairman, much more comfortable knowing who is on this Citizen Advisory Group, who appoints them, and I really question why the Chamber of Commerce and HUD Advisory Board have to be involved. So I'll take it from there, and I would like to have that paragraph deferred until it's further delineated. 11 March 18, 1996 Chairman Dawkins: Good. Board Member Plummer: It's not... it's not a... Chairman Dawkins: It's four... that's four or "D"? Board Member Plummer: That would be 4D-1, page 7. Chairman Dawkins: D-1. Board Member Plummer: D-1. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Board Member Plummer: And I'd like to defer that until we know not only... Vice Chairman Clark: Second the motion. Board Member Plummer: OK. Mr. Mayor, I'm sorry, Mr. Board Member. I'd like to say that until the time, I'd like to know who is going to appoint those people. And I'd like to know how many people are involved, and I want to make sure that it is people of this area, here, who are directly going to benefit or be detrimentally if in fact this doesn't go the way it should. So I would ask that D-1 be deferred until such time. Chairman Dawkins: A motion and a second. Board Member Plummer: And I am out. The following motion was introduced by Board Member Plummer, who moved its adoption: OMNI/CRA MOTION NO. 96-3 A MOTION TO DEFER SECTION II-D-1 OF THE PROPOSED INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR THE OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AREA ON PAGE 7 IN CONNECTION WITH THE CITIZEN ADVISORY GROUPS UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS PRESENTED TO THE CRA BOARD MEMBERS: 1. WHO APPOINTS THE MEMBERS OF THE CITIZEN ADVISORY GROUPS? 2. WHY WOULD THE GREATER MIAMI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND HUD ADVISORY BOARD HAVE TO BE INVOLVED? 3. HOW MANY MEMBERS WILL THE ADVISORY GROUPS HAVE? - SAID MEMBERS SHOULD BE INDIVIDUALS OF THE AFFECTED AREA. (Note: This motion was later rescinded by OMNI/CRA M 96-5.) 12 March 18, 1996 52 Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Clark, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Miller J. Dawkins Vice Chairman Stephen P. Clark Board Member J. L. Plummer NAYS: None. ABSENT: Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort Chairman Dawkins: So be it. OK. Mr. Joseph. Mr. Joseph: I appreciate CRA Member Plummer. My constituents were extremely surprised when they came up with the language that they did, the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce, they do not pay taxes, they are a membership organization. You have to pay to belong to them. They do not vote in this district. Then you had HUD Advisory, we have no idea. That is just a fictitious name, again no tax base, no vote power in this district. And we do appreciate your input and we brought this... and fortunately Commissioner Dawkins brought it up also before. Now, our own, our own Commissioner from the County had brought us in and said, "Yes, you belong on this advisory panel, but you'll have to get the City to do it." And we said, why? What are you to us if you are not our representative, if you don't represent the people in your own district, how can we have any input whatsoever? So we do appreciate it, and we are working hard trying to solve that. But what we would like is two members in this area, and we would like it put in writing so that, as you said, it is there forever. So that we don't have to look back at another day. Board Member Plummer: The only thing that I am asking for is delineation, who makes the appointments, and how many are there, and are there boundary restrictions, which I feel there should be. Mr. Joseph: I appreciate that. But I think the only boundary restrictions are the people that are paying. That's your district right here. They are the ones that you are asking what? A million four, or 600,000 or whatever number they want to throw out. Board Member Plummer: More or less. Mr. Joseph: But they are asking it to come out of our pocket, and no representation. And that's... I appreciate it. Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir, Mr. Goenaga. Mr. Manuel Gonzalez-Goenaga: I don't want to give my back to you, Commissioners. Chairman Dawkins: Why not, you should place the public, they... that's better. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Welcome. Vice Chairman Clark: If it comes out, it won't go back. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: No, I always come down, thank God. I learned from Job to have patience with the politicians. Well, when I came into this room, I saw and read "Trust Builders." 13 March 18, 1996 I sincerely hope that you read every single, and that's what is specifically is missing here. All these agreements are made out of our own pocket. Ultimately, we pay for everything, either on the right, on the left, on the front, or on the back. And we have our representatives here doing the best job they can. But of course, too many people involved, too many agencies, and I have to accept and to admit - I don't know about you, citizens - I do not have enough information. And I... and I am a very active person, I attend Dade County Commission meetings, and hopefully the people will vote for me next September. And... Chairman Dawkins: No commercializing. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: ...no, no, no. You see, I will never ask for financial contributions. I leave that to the existing proposed candidates. You got... but let me finish. Yes, what's wrong with it? Chairman Dawkins: You got two minutes. Board Member Plummer: Are you running for Mayor or Commission, I think they ought to know. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: No, no. I ran for Commissioner... Chairman Dawkins: You have two minutes. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: ...and I lost... Chairman Dawkins: You are off the point, you are out of order. You have two minutes. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: OK. Two... no, much less. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: ...I will finish by less... Mr. Clark, in his inauguration speech he said, which I again recommend here, and in that I fully agree. "Despasito se llega." So let's reconsider this slowly but surely. My mind is clear, theirs are confused. Thank you very much. Vice Chairman Clark: Muchas gracias. Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. Mr. Alan Savitz: Hi, how are you doing? Good to see you all here. Alan Savitz, just want to pass this out. Chairman Dawkins: OK, thank you. Board Member Plummer: Herb, this really has nothing to do with the interlocal. Mr. Savitz: This was a letter faxed to Chief Warshaw regarding the problem on North Miami Avenue between 11th and loth Street. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman, this is... at this time, it's out of order. It should be under number 8, it shouldn't be... this is the interlocal agreement. This has nothing to do with the interlocal. Mr. Savitz: Oh, shall I get up on number 8? 14 March 18, 1996 Board Member Plummer: Under other. Mr. Savitz: Oh, OK. Chairman Dawkins: Under other, if we are still here. Mr. Savitz: Thank you, I'm sorry. OK, I'm sorry to have jumped the gun. Vice Chairman Clark: Thank you very much. Chairman Dawkins: Are you going to speak to the point? Mr. Philip Yaffa: Yes. Chairman Dawkins: OK, come right on, sir. Mr. Yaffa: Good evening, welcome to the neighborhood. For the record, my name is Philip Yaffa, 1717 North Bayshore Drive, Miami. I just quickly perused this latest draft of the interlocal agreement, and I have the following comments I'd like to put on the record and have response to. First, in an abundance of paranoia, and I openly admit that it is paranoia, I am concerned on page 4, paragraph 4, why this sentence, which I don't recall on any previous drafts, has been added. And the sentence is, the last sentence of that paragraph, "The CRA may convey land to qualified nonprofit organizations." I've never seen that... Board Member Plummer: Wait, wait, wait. Page 4... Mr. Yaffa: Page 4, paragraph 4, the last... second to the last sentence. Board Member Plummer: Oh, OK. Mr. Yaffa: The CRA may convey land to qualified nonprofit organizations pursuant to State law and CRA procedures. Board Member Plummer: Wait, wait, wait. I'm sorry. Do you see where he is talking? Vice Chairman Clark: Yes. Chairman Dawkins: I see it. Board Member Plummer: Oh, up here, OK. Vice Chairman Clark: Convey land to a developer. Board Member Plummer: To a developer for fair value. Unidentified Speaker: No. Mr. Yaffa: No, the sentence... Unidentified Speaker: Next sentence. Vice Chairman Clark: The CRA may convey CRA acquired land to developer for fair value of the use in accordance with the plan. 15 March 18, 1996 IIN I. J.1 010) f' Ms. Kearson: OK. The second sentence. Mr. Yaffa: Well, the next sentence. Vice Chairman Clark: All right. Mr. Yaffa: The CRA may convey land to a qualified nonprofit organization. And again, I openly admit that I'm paranoid, but because I have never seen this language in previous drafts of this agreement, my paranoia makes me believe that maybe this is some subtle way of saying that the neighborhood and the CRA funds might be subject to SRO developments, or further homeless shelters, or other developments within the auspices of a nonprofit organization. And... Vice Chairman Clark: Mr. Yaffa, just a moment. Who drew... Who is the author of this? Chairman Dawkins: The County. Mr. Bailey: That language, Mr. Mayor, is standard in both of our CRA documents. It's also in the Overtown Park West. It simply means - and this also complies with the Statutes and with our Charter - the nonprofit organizations, and for the purpose of the plan, which only calls for redevelopment of housing and other commercial activities, they don't have the other public ventures in there, can be... we can convey land to them without bid. Well, that's also... yes, we can convey land to... if they do affordable housing. Ms. Kearson: Not now... it is not written that way. Chairman Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, would you take the chair. Vice Chairman Clark: Yes, sir. Chairman Dawkins: I, in the CRA district, have determined to do business with for -profit organizations. We cannot develop the area with strictly dealing with nonprofit organizations. And I move that that be deleted. Vice Chairman Clark: Is there a second? Board Member Plummer: Second. Vice Chairman Clark: All right, now you are at ease. Cast a unanimous ballot, Mr. Clerk. The following motion was introduced by Chairman Dawkins, who moved its adoption: OMNI/CRA MOTION NO. 96-4 A MOTION TO MODIFY PROPOSED INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR THE OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AREA BY DELETING THE SECOND SENTENCE OF SECTION II-A-4, CONTAINED ON PAGE 4, WHICH READS AS FOLLOWS: "The CRA may convey land to qualified nonprofit organizations pursuant to State law and CRA procedures. Guidelines for selection of qualified nonprofit organizations must be established by the CRA." 16 March 18, 1996 W Upon being seconded by Board Member Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Miller J. Dawkins Vice Chairman Stephen P. Clark Board Member J. L. Plummer NAYS: None. ABSENT: Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort Mr. Yaffa: OK. To continue. On page 6. Vice Chairman Clark: OK. Mr. Yaffa: The paragraph... the first full paragraph on the page beginning over three year period of time. It was my understanding that the negotiations of this agreement that the compromise that this agreement was to reflect was that our district over the next three years was to receive $400,000 a year, for a total of $1.2 million. And the quid pro quo for that was that we would agree to the $1.43 million being dedicated through the construction of the Performing Arts Center. That was my understanding of what the negotiations of the compromise was to be. This paragraph conditions that by, one, not providing a time table, it just says over a three year period of time, a total of $1.2 million will be given into the fund. It doesn't set out how that money each year should be delivered to the fund. And then there is a line that I found surprising, it says that provided such funds are available in the fund. Then it says that any tax increment funds collected in excess of the 1.2 should be remitted to the County for the Performing Arts Center project. Here are the various problems I have with this. One, is if people want to play games, we can delete the fund because if the County and the City don't allocate the money to the fund, then there won't be that money in the fund as the County and the City have done over the last seven years since this tax increment district was first established by City and County resolution. So unless the County and the City say, "We are committed to this," this line says, "Well, if you guys feel like it." And I take that back, if the County and the City Commissions feel like allocating the tax increment money to the fund that year, then they can do so. If they don't, we've got nothing out of this paragraph. Further, later on, and I'll get to that in a moment, we say that one... the first up to $1.43 million is committed. This paragraph says that the access of the 1.2 comes back to the County again. So now to me, this two paragraphs might read that since we know that this year at least we have $683,000 of increment, if we equalize this to $400,000, so right away the first year, I think the neighborhood is screwed out of $283,000. Because the County takes their money back. We are only getting four. Not only now for the next three years are they going to get their $268,000 of increment that is left over, we are funding more than the $1.43 million for the bonds because the bonds won't be issued for three or four years. So it just seems that this language, in my first reading of it right now says, "You'll get the money if we want to give you the money, and any excess money we are going to use the way the County sees fit to use it." And to me, that doesn't firm up the intent of what I thought the agreement was to be. Board Member Plummer: Can I ask a question, Mr. Chairman? Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Bailey, when we hear this number of 680,000, does that number include the removal of the two parcels of property, the one donated by the Herald and the Sears? Has that been deleted from the assessed value? 17 March 18, 1996 Mr. Bailey: That is a net amount that we expect to collect as of this year, yes. Board Member Plummer: So, that's... but the Herald property has not been donated to the i Performing Arts yet, has it? Mr. Bailey: I don't know. Board Member Plummer: Is it still on the tax roll, or is not? Mr. Morris: It's still on the tax roll. Board Member Plummer: OK. So how much more is going to come off, let's say just for that parcel? What is... how much is that on the tax roll? What I'm saying is, is 683 a real number, or is that piece of property, $100,000 in taxes, we are now down to 583. Mr. Bailey: That's what... Board Member Plummer: Is the Sears $50,000 and that's going to be another... I'm trying to be realistic. Mr. Bailey: There may be adjustments in the next taxable period, Commissioner. You are correct, but that is the amount that due and payable for this period. We don't know what the next period may be. Board Member Plummer: So in other words, if those two parcels, for example, come off the tax rolls... Mr. Bailey: Come off... Board Member Plummer: ...is down from 683... Mr. Bailey: And if we don't make any more values, you are right, we will get less probably the next year than what we are getting this year because we have the Plaza Venetia going condo, which means you got all those homestead exemptions are going to be adjusted. So we... it's possible that we will get less money next year than we get this year. But however, I just like to make one reference to Mr. Yaffa's comment, when this document is signed, the CRA will be in charge of the trust fund, not the County. Therefore, we have absolute control over how those funds in the trust fund will be disbursed. By law, they have to come through us under the trust fund. In fact, that's the reason we are trying to get this document completed so we can control the trust fund. Mr. Yaffa: So just so that I understand it, certainly I would love to be stand corrected, is that once this document is signed, the County or the City would not have any discretion in terms of the increment over the 1983 base. That money must come into the fund. Mr. Bailey: It must come under the trust fund by law. Mr. Yaffa: Why would you... why would the City want to give back our portion of those funds to the County? Mr. Bailey: I didn't say... I don't think that's the case, now. The reason that it happened before because we never had a document that gave the City the authority to manage the fund. That is why we are trying to get this document signed. And for many years we have not had that authority. 18 March 18, 1996 Vice Chairman Clark: Yeah, but, Herb, it says, "Any tax increment funds collected in excess of $1.2 million shall be remitted to the County for the Performing Arts Center. Mr. Bailey: That's for the trust fund. That's part of that 1.43. Mr. Yaffa: Herb, if my understanding, and I know it's not exactly right, but basically the County and City contributions to the fund of the excess increment are about 50-50, I think that... Mr. Bailey: It's not 50-50, the City contributes more. Mr. Yaffa: The City contributes more? Mr. Bailey: Yes. Mr. Yaffa: Well, under this language let's assume that the first year... let's assume at least for the tax year 1996, that we have $680,000 and that the CRA allocates 400,000, and that's out of their 683,000, a portion of that, a majority of that, you are saying, is the City's money, and the balance is the County's money. Mr. Bailey: Yeah. Mr. Yaffa: The CRA directs $400,000 of that to be sent back into our neighborhood projects, why would the City Commission want to give up their portion of the $283,000 excess back to the County? Mr. Bailey: We didn't say we would. Mr. Yaffa: Why don't we use it here in the neighborhood. Mr. Bailey: We didn't say we would. You are saying that. Mr. Yaffa: No, this document says that. Mr. Bailey: No, but that is only to the extent that we have to satisfy the 1.43. You have to understand that all of the money comes into a trust fund and it's managed as a trust fund allocation. Any moneys going from that has to be requested. The law also says the taxing authority can not get it back if there is indebtedness against the fund. We do intend to have indebtedness against the fund. So I think your fears of money going back to the taxing authority as I read this board correctly will not happen. Mr. Yaffa: OK. Out of, you know, the respect that I have for your interpretation of this, I'll defer that. Let me move on so that I don't take too much more time. On page 7, paragraph 4, I don't know if there is anybody in this room that doesn't question the number of hours and years that I have spent on seeing that the Performing Arts Center be build in the OMNI area, so I don't want this comment to be misconstrued because I think that the Performing Arts Center is the critical catalytic project for the area. On the other hand, we are talking about a funding obligation that's going to be occurring at least three years in the future. I do not want to be the seer to be able to predict what this country's economy is going to be like three years from now. I don't know that interest rates are going to be higher, or interest rates are going to be lower. But we know that when we speak of raising $11.908 million that that's a multiple of the tax dollars in the bond markets. Currently we are saying that under current bond market rates we can expect a 10 or 11 to one bonding capabilities over the existing dollars. Three years from now, there might be $15 per one, or it might be $7 per one. Therefore, I think the appropriate language will 19 March 18, 1996 be that we say that the issue bonds in an amount of... right now it says not less than 11.908. I think that 11.908 is this community's maximum obligation, and therefore, it should be the amount of not more than 11.908. Because perhaps our 1.43 three years from now might produce $15 million. And if that is the case, we don't need all of that. We want to contribute enough money to this Performing Arts Center so that they can bond no more than $11.908 million of bonds with a contribution of no more than $1.43 million. Board Member Plummer: I have just one slight problem there. I recall a year, a year and a half ago, when the bond market changed radically and the City rushed out in many many instances to refinance to get a better deal for the City. I think, Phil, if what you do is... you shall not exceed the 1.43, let the County do what they want. If they want to refinance and get a better deal for the County, which means then eventually for us, there's... we are not obligated for more dollars than what we are talking about. That is my area of concern. How they multiply it, or what they do with it, they understand that they are only going to get a maximum from us of 1.43. Mr. Yaffa: With all due respect, J.L., there is two sides to this equation though. One is what is... what are we going to contribute? What is in the Performing Arts Center budget for the construction of the facility? And in their budget they have said, "We want $11.908 million." Now, our tax dollars, our tax increment dollars are what's going to fund that 11.908. Board Member Plummer: That's correct. Mr. Yaffa: Now, if the bond market changes so that the district can reach 11.908 with only $800,000, why should we give up an additional $600,000? In other words, this money is for our neighborhood. Board Member Plummer: They are not giving it up. Mr. Yaffa: We want to be able... we want to come forward and say, "Listen, we are good, we'll commit up to $1.43 million to produce $11.908 million worth of construction bonds." But if the market changes, so that we can produce 11.908 the windfall ought to fall to the neighborhood and not to the Performing Arts Center. Chairman Dawkins: But... all right. But let's be fair. In the event that it goes the other way... Board Member Plummer: Yeah. Chairman Dawkins: ...do you want the County to tell us, "No, you made a deal but because it's this way, you don't have to pay the difference." Mr. Yaffa: No, we want... in this case we want our... Chairman Dawkins: Well, all right. So you, hey, you just can't have it... Board Member Plummer: You got it have it both ways, Phil. Chairman Dawkins: You got it have it both ways, Phil. You can't have it both ways. You got to be fair here. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman, that's why I said I think that we must be emphatic on the 1.43. Chairman Dawkins: OK. That's it. 20 March 18, 1996 K`� Board Member Plummer: And you know, if they can do a better deal for the County... Chairman Dawkins: That's it. Board Member Plummer: ...you know, cause... from day one, I've said the County is going to have a problem with O and M (Operations and Maintenance) on the Performing Arts. That they are going to have a real real problem of subsidizing the operation and maintenance of that facility. And let's... that's not in this agreement, and we are not obligated for it... Chairman Dawkins: OK. Board Member Plummer: ... so God bless them. Mr. Yaffa: OK. I will pass on that point, thank you for your response. My final comment. Board Member Plummer: You don't have to. You don't have to, I'm a member of the board. Mr. Yaffa: My final comment is on the same page section D, Citizens participation. Vice Chairman Clark: We deferred that. Chairman Dawkins: We deferred that. Board Member Plummer: We have deferred that. Mr. Yaffa: I just... no, I know, but I would just like again for the record... Chairman Dawkins: But we deferred it. Mr. Yaffa: I know, but I would like for the record, Mr. Chairman, that this be known, that this language comes in from a draft of this agreement done back in 1983... I'm sorry, 1987. Before there was this kind of community involvement and the only people that were championing the development of the OMNI area was a Chamber Committee called the OMNI Venetia Action Committee, not task force. The Chamber Committee is made up of residents and business that are interested on the OMNI area. I have no problem deferring, but it is one of the history of this... to know that this language is continued over the next eight years to be picked -up. Secondly, the HUD Advisory Board has actually no jurisdiction in this area that I am aware of, in this district. Mr. Bailey: They have to review the redevelopment plan. Mr. Yaffa: Oh, they do... OK. OK. Well, thank you very much for your time. Board Member Plummer: Phil, you can rest assured when we are a success, the Chamber will take credit for it. Chairman Dawkins: You want to respond? You want to respond? You are going to... Mr. Morris: I do want to address the issue of the one item you are considering deferring. Chairman Dawkins: CK Go ahead, sir. Mr. Morris: As it was just said, in terms of the Greater Miami Chamber Task Force, that is historical but that is really up to the CRA. The HUD Advisory Board is a County requirement 21 March 18, 1996 P} for all tax increment issues and that needs to stay. I am concerned if the item is deferred and needs to come back to the CRA for consideration again, that we will not be able to go forward with this at the County level because one of the conditions that the Manager has clearly said to the Commission when we come forward on tomorrow and Thursday on the whole Performing Arts Center issue, that all the financing pieces will be in place. If something is not in place, we may have to reexamine that and not be able to go forward. Vice Chairman Clark: Dave, but this all has to be rewritten. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Vice Chairman Clark: The whole thing has to be corrected because we can't just put defer down and that's part of the agreement, no. No, OK. It's not fair... Chairman Dawkins: OK. What I'd like... Vice Chairman Clark: ...for you or for us. Chairman Dawkins: ...OK. What I'd like, I would like to please stand, I am thoroughly disgusted with having this item before me this many times. OK. I have been with this since Joe Gernstein was here. We don't even know where he is. Board Member Plummer: He's got the original copy. Chairman Dawkins: So if... if you think, and I want the people to understand that I'm only asking if you think... if you think that we can go through here and say the things that we approve, and you can take them back to your Commission and don't come back with some... as you always come back with something inserted, and I don't know who on staff that has to write that can't take what we bring back, they just got to add something. But if we could say here like take out what the City Attorney said on page 2, now, you think that the County Commission can live with that? And this is only your thoughts, now. You have to go back to them for them to approve it. I understand that. Mr. Morris: We would have no problem recommending that deletion to the County Commission. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Now, what's the next page? Page 7. No, page 4. Page 4. On page 4, number 4, you have any problem with that one? Mr. Morris: No, that's totally up to CRA. That's a CRA issue. Chairman Dawkins: OK. All right, so we... that's it, that's out. The other one is page 7. Seven you said that - and I want to - be sure - that if we leave in the HUD Advisory, that the County may accept that. Mr. Morris: Right. That the HUD Advisory is required for the County, the rest is really citizens' input that the CRA would want. Chairman Dawkins: What is the pleasure of my board? Board Member Plummer: OK. Mr. Chairman, the reason... the reason that I asked for the deferment... Chairman Dawkins: Uh-huh. 22 March 18, 1996 Board Member Plummer: ...was the delineation is who will make the appointments, how many people will be, and what are the requirements for membership. So that was the only reason I asked for that. And now, Dave, I can't see where that would be a deal breaker. And all I am asking is for delineation. Chairman Dawkins: Dave. Dave, can you get with the County and send me... Mr. Morris: Sure. Board Member Plummer: OK. Mr. Chairman, let... can I try? Chairman Dawkins: Yeah, go right ahead. Board Member Plummer: OK. How about if we write into this document, Mr. Attorney, write in there that there shall be ten members of this advisory board, and the CRA will make all appointments. Is that... is that legitimate? Mr. Friedman: Do you want to give it a title, like... Board Member Plummer: I don't care what you want to do. That's what I pay you for. You want a title, I'll give you a title. I don't care, I'm just... That's the only reason I deferred it was simply to have a delineation so there's no questions later, who makes the appointments, how many there will be, and what are the requirements for... Vice Chairman Clark: That was your idea. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Wait, all right, now. Board Member Plummer: Yeah, that was my idea. Chairman Dawkins: Do you think the County will accept that? Mr. Morris: I... to the best of my knowledge... Chairman Dawkins: Yes. Mr. Morris: ...in working with this, as long as the HUD Advisory Board is in there, the rest of it is... Chairman Dawkins: OK, so we'll accept that. OK. Mr. Morris: ... as the CRA wishes. Board Member Plummer: Then I will accept it with a motion that says, "There shall be ten members of the board, they shall be appointed by the CRA, and they shall either live or work in the district." Mr. Joseph: Voting... Chairman Dawkins: OK. OK. Wait, hold it, now. Wait, you ought to wait. Wait, I'm trying to get a motion. Mr. Joseph: ... taxpayer. 23 March 18, 1996 Board Member Plummer: No, not necessarily voting. Chairman Dawkins: I'm trying to get a motion. I'm trying to get a motion. Board Member Plummer: No, not necessarily voting. There is not necessarily voting, Dave. Under discussion. Chairman Dawkins: Is there a second to the motion? Vice Chairman Clark: Yeah, I second the motion. Chairman Dawkins: Now, under discussion. Go ahead, Mr. Joseph. Mr. Bailey: I would just like to make a comment. Chairman Dawkins: Go right ahead, Mr. Bailey. Mr. Bailey: This citizen participation only pertains to the CRA, it has nothing to do in terms of the participation with the Performing Arts Theater. { Board Member Plummer: I understand that. ,n Mr. Bailey: OK. I just want that there will be no misunderstanding. Board Member Plummer: And I want you to understand also that there should be a term of office, are they staggering terms? I mean, all that is not here. Mr. Bailey: We will put a citizens participation plan with those parameters if you want. Board Member Plummer: Well, OK. Then ten members appointed by the CRA... Chairman Dawkins: And the... Board Member Plummer: ...to serve on one year terms. Well what is the pleasure of the Board? Chairman Dawkins: One and two years... one and two year terms. Board Member Plummer: Half of one year... five for one year, five for two years. Vice Chairman Clark: Don't have apoplexy, now. Just relax, you'll get heard. Chairman Dawkins: Uh-huh, OK. Go right ahead, Mr... Mr. Morris: I was going to suggest, from the County's point of view... Board Member Plummer: Yeah. Mr. Morris: ... those details - pardon, the word details is not - but those conditions on it are really up to the CRA Board. Chairman Dawkins: Uh-huh. Board Member Plummer: OK. But it's not... it's not spelled out. 24 March 18, 1996 ':7i Chairman Dawkins: We are going to spell it out. Ms. Kearson: But this is going to set certain terms and conditions. Mr. Friedman: That's why I want to give it a title. Call it the, you know... OMNI Citizens Board... Chairman Dawkins: OK. All right... All right... Ms. Kearson: Yes, something to... Mr. Friedman: ... to be established by the CRA. Chairman Dawkins: OK. You have that, Mr. Clerk? Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Yes, I do. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Yaffa... Chairman Dawkins: You have that, Mr. Clerk? Wait a minute. Wait a minute, hold it, hold it. Board Member Plummer: Before you have a heart attack, we have to call rescue and more tax payer dollars. Chairman Dawkins: He is not the Chairperson. Hold up. Board Member Plummer: I'm sorry. Chairman Dawkins: Hold it. No, stay there. Do you understand the motion, Mr. Clerk? Mr. Foeman: Yes. Chairman Dawkins: You have it down? Mr. Foeman: Yes, I do. Chairman Dawkins: OK. All right, go right ahead, Mr. Yaffa. Mr. Yaffa: For purposes of this agreement... for purposes of the interlocal agreement, if you just said to carry citizens' participation, the CRA should utilize the HUD Advisory Board and other community groups without delineation, because... Board Member Plummer: No, no. Chairman Dawkins: No, we will not say groups. No, no. We aren't going to say that. We are through with that. Board Member Plummer: No, absolutely not. Chairman Dawkins: We told you before we aren't going to do that. Board Member Plummer: Go have your heart attack and sit down. 25 March 18, 1996 Wk- Chairman Dawkins: We aren't going to do that. Mr. Yaffa: Let me tell you... let me tell you... J.L., let me tell the problem with your suggestion. Chairman Dawkins: We are not going to do that. Mr. Yaffa: I am in the process, and I have been for the last... Chairman Dawkins: That's wonderful. We aren't going to do that. Mr. Yaffa: Wait, let me finish. Chairman Dawkins: OK. We are not going to do that. Even if you finish, we are not going to do it. Mr. Yaffa: OK. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Call the roll, Mr. Clerk. Board Member Plummer: But wait, wait... Chairman Dawkins: No, no, no. Board Member Plummer: ...there is one other area of discussion. Chairman Dawkins: OK, you go ahead then. Board Member Plummer: Now, Mr. Joseph brought out about having to vote in the district. I'm opposed to that... Mr. Joseph: I... Board Member Plummer: ... now, listen to me why I'm opposed to it, please. Mr. Joseph: I'll modify that. Chairman Dawkins: No, you can't modify, it's not your motion. Board Member Plummer: I didn't ask you to, I'm going to vote against the voting. And the reason for it is, there are probably people sitting in this that own property in there who don't vote in... Mr. Joseph: Right... that's what we want. Board Member Plummer: ...that area. Mr. Joseph: We don't want advice.., we don't want homeless participation groups doing it, you are right. You are totally right. We want property owners and taxpayers in there because if it's just group participation, you'll have the Homeless Trust being on it. Board Member Plummer: OK. So we are deleting the Chamber of Commerce... Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. 26 March 18, 1996 +S >' Board Member Plummer: We are keeping in the HUD Advisory Board by the County regulations... '.^ Chairman Dawkins: And ten members. Board Member Plummer: ...and ten members to be appointed by the CRA. Chairman Dawkins: CRA. Board Member Plummer: Five for a one year term, five for a two year term. Chairman Dawkins: And then at the end of the... and then they all go to three years. Board Member Plummer: And also I am advised by the Attorney that I should put a proviso at the end that this will be determined at the next CRA meeting who those members shall be. And God help the lobbying efforts. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Any... any... OK. Call the roll, Mr. Clerk. Oh, wait a minute, do you want to say something on the motion, Mr. Parker? Mr. Morris: Is the motion just on that one piece? Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. The following motion was introduced by Board Member Plummer, who moved its adoption: OMNI/CRA MOTION NO. 96-5 A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND RESCIND PRIOR OMNI/CRA MOTION 96-3, WHICH HAD DEFERRED SECTION II-D-1 OF THE PROPOSED INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR THE OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AREA CONTAINED ON PAGE 7 IN CONNECTION WITH THE CITIZEN ADVISORY GROUPS; FURTHER MODIFYING SAID SECTION OF THE AGREEMENT TO CREATE THE OMNI CITIZENS BOARD WHICH: 1. WILL HAVE TEN MEMBERS, WHO SHALL BE NOMINATED BY THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA); 2. SAID MEMBERS SHALL EITHER LIVE OR WORK IN THE PERTINENT DISTRICT; 3. FIVE OF SAID MEMBERS SHALL SERVE A TERM OF ONE YEAR AND THE REMAINING FIVE MEMBERS SHALL SERVE A TERM OF TWO YEARS; SUBSEQUENT TO THE INITIAL TERMS, ALL MEMBERS SHALL SERVE A TERM OF THREE YEARS; 4. MEMBERS SHALL BE NOMINATED DURING THE NEXT CRA MEETING. 27 March 18, 1996 t Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Clark, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Miller J. Dawkins Vice Chairman Stephen P. Clark Board Member J. L. Plummer NAYS: None. ABSENT: Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort Chairman Dawkins: Now, on page 9, we've said... Board Member Plummer: Yeah. Chairman Dawkins: What did we say about that, Mr. City Attorney? Board Member Plummer: No, page 10. Chairman Dawkins: No, 9. Board Member Plummer: No, nothing we did because we were... we were bound by State Statute. Chairman Dawkins: But 10-C. Board Member Plummer: Ten, we deleted D. Chairman Dawkins: Huh? Board Member Plummer: We deleted D. Vice Chairman Clark: We deleted D. Chairman Dawkins: But C says, "The power to authorize the issuance of revenue bonds as set forth in Section, so, so..." And then you said that we would collect bonds for what now? Mr. Morris: I only spoke on Section D, I don't remember saying anything on C. Chairman Dawkins: I'm saying C, C, C, C. Mr. Morris: I don't remember saying anything on C. Chairman Dawkins: OK. But... Vice Chairman Clark: On D he spoke, and we deleted that. Chairman Dawkins: But the bonds that you are going to... the issuance of the bonds do they cover the Arena, do they cover the Port Authority expansion, do they cover Seaport expansion? Mr. Morris: If... it just... is CRA... 9: March 18, 1996 :u (' Chairman Dawkins: It's CRA only. Mr. Morris: ... that's all that's referred to. Chairman Dawkins: OK. All right. All right, on the 10, D on the 10, go right ahead. You wanted to say something? Vice Chairman Clark: It has been deferred. Mr. Morris: But you... you deleted 10. Board Member Plummer: Deleted. Chairman Dawkins: No, deleted. OK. Mr. Morris: I still have a concern with that, I already what that concern was, that I... in my discussion with our County Attorney, they feel that for non plan... if the CRA wishes to do something using tax increment funds in an area, or a purpose that is not covered by the plan, State law requires this language. That's my understanding, the Attorney... Board Member Plummer: Dave, Dave... Mr. Friedman: See, that's true, but the CRA can't do anything that's outside the plan anyway. Mr. Morris: I would only... I accept that and I understand that, if that is a real problem, but I would like to try to get agreement with you for is that if, in that area while it is deleted, if the attorneys decide that it is a requirement from a State law standpoint... Board Member Plummer: I said that. Mr. Morris: ...that it can go back in without coming back for more... more votes. Board Member Plummer: That was my intent, and I said that from the beginning. Chairman Dawkins: But... but now, the City Attorney's Law Department must say that you are correct... no, no... Mr. Morris: Ah... Chairman Dawkins: ...wait a minute, no, no, no. Now, listen let me run this, please. The City Attorney must say that they agree because they are dealing with your County Attorneys... Mr. Morris: OK. Chairman Dawkins: ... and the CRA Attorney must agree because he represents us. Mr. Morris: That's fine. I consider this to be a three-part agreement, the City, the County, and the CRA. Chairman Dawkins: That's right. Mr. Bailey: No, we don't agree with that. Chairman Dawkins: No, it's not, see. But since everybody at the County seems to want to run to the City Attorney, I want him to go there. 29 March 18, 1996 Mr. Morris: That's... that's fine. I... Chairman Dawkins: OK, no problem. OK? Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman, does that now conclude all the things we went through? Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. Board Member Plummer: I want of Dave... walk me through something, if I may. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Come on, Linda. Wait a minute, J.L. Ms. Kearson: Well, I don't think it's a three -party agreement, and that is... Board Member Plummer: It is not, it's a two-party... Chairman Dawkins: It is not. Board Member Plummer: ... But he wants three parties to look it over. Ms. Kearson: And he keeps saying... Mr. Morris: OK, I keep saying it... Chairman Dawkins: OK. We say two. Ms. Kearson: Yeah, but he wants to have three signators. Chairman Dawkins: Well, you put it on the record. Put it on the record. Ms. Kearson: I don't think it has to be a three -party agreement... Chairman Dawkins: No, you know it's not. Ms. Kearson: ...it could be Dade County and CRA. Chairman Dawkins: Thank you. Board Member Plummer: All right, walk me through, Dave, and maybe I'm a little dumb. I usually am. Mr. Morris: I doubt that. Board Member Plummer: Year one, OK. Year one, the County is asking for the purposes of multiplying bonds 1.43 and that's on infinitum up to that amount. OK. Am I correct? Mr. Morris: On years one, two, and three - and let me get that up added up here. Board Member Plummer: OK. Let's... let me change it then, the year three. The first year that we are obligated. Mr. Morris: Oh, OK. The first year, right, OK. 30 March 18, 1996 Board Member Plummer: Now, in that first year, we only have $683,000 coming into the till, OK. Now, the second year, let's say we have the same. What does the difference comes from? Between the 1.43 and the 683, who makes up the difference? Vice Chairman Clark: The County makes it up. Mr. Morris: The County makes it up, out of its secondary pledge or other revenues that are otherwise committed to bonds. Board Member Plummer: All right, now, does the County have the right to come back against the CRA and say, "Hey, we gave you approximately 800,000 in the year one, and in fact we are now wanting that money back because you have a surplus." Does the County have that right to do it? Mr. Morris: No, it's only 1.43 million per year max. Board Member Plummer: OK. So, in other words, in the second year if it's still 683 and we are 800,000 short, they are not going to accumulate over a period of the years? Mr. Morris: Right. Board Member Plummer: Each year stands on its own. Mr. Morris: Exactly. Board Member Plummer: OK. And when that year is completed, whatever... if it was a shortage, that shortage is made up by the County and the CRA is not obligated and we go on to the next year. Mr. Morris: Exactly. Vice Chairman Clark: Even though there will be a reduction in the assessable base because of the properties we spoke of earlier. You have to pick up that difference to. Right, Marquez? Mr. Marquez: If... if it's under 1.4 million... Vice Chairman Clark: You know what I mean? Chairman Dawkins: Yes, Mr. Mayor, uh-huh. Mr. Marquez: ...and there is a short fall, the County has to make it up. If in the next year it suddenly jumped to $2 million, the County would go up to a maximum of 1.43... Chairman Dawkins: Right. Mr. Marquez: ... and the balance stays with the CRA. Mr. Morris: Mr. Clark, there is no floor if they collect $100, that's it. Chairman Dawkins: Uh-huh. Vice Chairman Clark: OK. 31 March 18, 1996 Board Member Plummer: Thank you... thank you, sir. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Board Member Plummer: With the provisos, with the amendments, the whatever else, I move the interlocal. Vice Chairman Clark: Deletions, deferrals, and everything else. Board Member Plummer: Whatever else, I move the agreement as laundered here this evening by this Board. I so move. Vice Chairman Clark: Second the motion. Chairman Dawkins: OK. So what we are... under discussion. What we are saying is we will take what we passed on, give it to the Executive Director to put in form and give back to us, or give it to... or work with... and the City Attorney... I mean, our Attorney work with the County. How do we get this as a final, final package? That's what I'm trying to find out. Vice Chairman Clark: That's up to them. That's up to them now. Board Member Plummer: This is the final. Mr. Bailey: When we... Vice Chairman Clark: That's up to the people that put it all together because we didn't have anything final right in front of us. Chairman Dawkins: OK. That's... OK. Board Member Plummer: Whoa, whoa, Mr. Chairman. Dave, you better get up and talk. My understanding is that this is crucial to tomorrow morning's meetings of the County and the Performing Arts. How crucial is crucial? Mr. Morris: How crucial is crucial? If we don't have an approved interlocal, which I consider this with the amendments as an approved interlocal... Board Member Plummer: OK. All right. Vice Chairman Clark: All right, that's good. Chairman Dawkins: OK. See... Board Member Plummer: No, I was getting phone calls all afternoon. Chairman Dawkins: I won't have no problems with what J.L. is saying, but I want to say what I'm saying, OK. I asked you before we passed this if you could live... I mean, I'm sorry, if the County could accept those amendments that we made and you said that you thought they could. Now, in the event that they don't, we don't have no agreement. Mr. Morris: In the event... Chairman Dawkins: I mean, that's it, you are back to square one. 32 March 18, 1996 nor Vice Chairman Clark: That's exactly right. Chairman Dawkins: Now, OK. All right, thank you. That's all. Mr. Morris: We got to come back here. Chairman Dawkins: That's right. But if it's crucial, and they want to get it done, then they'll accept this and let's move on. Vice Chairman Clark: Did you vote on this? Did you call a vote on this? Mr. Foeman: No, I didn't. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Board Member Plummer, who moved its adoption: OMNI/CRA MOTION NO. 96-6 A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR THE OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AREA INCLUDING THE MODIFICATIONS AS CONTAINED IN OMNI/CRA MOTIONS 96-1 THROUGH 96-5. Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Clark, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. Mr. Joseph: So if it comes back... Chairman Miller J. Dawkins Vice Chairman Stephen P. Clark Board Member J.L. Plummer, Jr. None. Board Member Joe Carollo Board Member Wifredo Gort Chairman Dawkins: Then we.,, everything... Mr. Joseph: More language change again, then we are back to square one. Chairman Dawkins: That's right. Uh-huh. Board Member Plummer: Maybe we will throw the damn thing out. Chairman Dawkins: Uh-huh. Yes, sir, Mr. Goenaga, please. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: I wonder if the well paid employees and experts from the City of Miami, I hope they will be present tomorrow at the Dade County meeting. I will be there, and I don't get paid. 33 March 18, 1996 Chairman Dawkins: OK. All right, you can represent the City. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: No. Chairman Dawkins: Go right ahead, sir, Mr. Parker. Mr. Morris: Yeah, you... I may have answered something here of, let me make it real clear. Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. Mr. Morris: This is on our agenda for tomorrow. Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. Mr. Morris: ... but there is a request that it's going to be deferred until a time certain on Thursday because Miami Beach will be acting on Wednesday. Chairman Dawkins: Uh-huh. Mr. Morris: So I believe it will actually be heard, and I'm not sure what time certain it's going to be set. Chairman Dawkins: Uh-huh. Mr. Morris: But on Thursday. Chairman Dawkins: OK. All right, thank you, sir. Mr. Joseph: Can we find out when time -certain is? Chairman Dawkins: No, but we just have to go there and sit and wait. Mr. Joseph: No, he said he's going to ask for time -certain. Chairman Dawkins: The County... the County has to... but see that's the County Commission, I can't... you know... I don't know how they are going to run it over there. Mr. Morris: We... we... we will inform you as soon as we know, I know... Chairman Dawkins: OK. Mr. Morris: I know that the committee... the County Commission... a County Commissioner has requested, I think, 11:30. But I don't think... Chairman Dawkins: 11:30, Thursday. Mr. Morris: 11:30, Thursday is what has been requested, but I don't have an answer yet. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Vice Chairman Clark: OK. Very good. Chairman Dawkins: Thank you. OK. Anything else on the interlocal agreement? Mr. Bailey, do you have anything to wrap up? 34 March 18, 1996 Mr. Bailey: No, no, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Dawkins: Where is the Attorney? You have anything, Mr. Attorney? I'm sorry, you have anything to advise us on this? Mr. Friedman: No, nothing else on this, sir. Mr. Bailey: We'll have it cleaned up and typed and ready by tomorrow. Vice Chairman Clark: OK. We'd like to go with that right quick, too. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Item 4. Well, everything from 4 down deals with the Overtown... Vice Chairman Clark: Yeah. Chairman Dawkins: So what do we do now, go into the Overtown? Vice Chairman Clark: Probably have to, but if J.L. is not here. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Vice Chairman Clark: Where is J.L.? Chairman Dawkins: He'll be right back. Go right ahead. Mr. Joseph: Can I ask the Board on "Other," I have two items that I'd like to bring back after Overtown? Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. Mr. Joseph: Or do you want to address them first? Vice Chairman Clark: Let's get Plummer in here first. Mr. Joseph: OK. I'd like to have a chance to have "Other" after Overtown. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Mr. Joseph: Thank you. Chairman Dawkins: OK. All right. Is there a motion to move to the Overtown CRA? Vice Chairman Clark: So moved, Mr. Chairman. Board Member Plummer: What was that? Chairman Dawkins: A motion to go from now to the Overtown. Board Member Plummer: For a meeting, you mean? Chairman Dawkins: Oh, that's... where about? Vice Chairman Clark: Here. We are going to go now into the Overtown meeting. 35 March 18, 1996 ter,, Board Member Plummer: What did we do with these other items? Chairman Dawkins: They are the ones for Overtown. Board Member Plummer: Oh, OK. Would it be smarter in the future to have split agendas so it shows one and the other? Chairman Dawkins: Yes, of course. Or else have them all Overtown. Board Member Plummer: No, because if I look through this, I would thought that this is all the CRA one... NOTE FOR THE RECORD: Thereupon, OMNI CRA meeting was a lourne and SEDPW MA meeting was called to order. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. DEFER TO NEXT MEETING APPOINTMENTS TO SELECTION REVIEW COMMITTEE REGARDING SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN / PARK WEST BLOCKS 25 AND 36 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. Chairman Dawkins: No, but you can't do it all under there. OK. All right. We are now into the Overtown part of the CRA meeting. Item 4 deals with the Southeast Overtown Park West. Wait a minute, hold it. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Dawkins: You wanted to say something, sir. Oh, you wanted to say on the "Other." Vice Chairman Clark: He's under "Other". Mr. Fred Joseph: Under "Other." Chairman Dawkins: OK. Go right ahead, Mr. Bailey. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. I've made my appointment, and I am wondering why, did the others didn't make theirs, is that the problem? Chairman Dawkins: I don't know, you have to ask Mr. Bailey. Vice Chairman Clark: When did you make them? Board Member Plummer: I made them the last CRA meeting. Mr. Herbert Bailey: There were... Vice Chairman Clark: Who did you appoint, Benjamin? 36 March 18, 1996 er Mr. Bailey: There were two Commissioners... Board Member Plummer: No. Mr. Bailey: ...who said that they wanted to make their appointments at the next meeting. And I don't think that they are here, I think... Chairman Dawkins: OK. All right... Vice Chairman Clark: OK, let's... Mr. Bailey: We can defer that. Board Member Plummer: Well, for the record... for the record, you have mine, correct? Chairman Dawkins: All right, we defer that until the next meeting. THEREUPON, ITEM 4 WAS DEFERRED TO THE NEXT MEETING. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. DEFER TO NEXT MEETING FUNDING REQUEST FROM DEVELOPER OF POINCIANA VILLAGE CONDOMINIUMS. Chairman Dawkins: Five. Vice Chairman Clark: Herb, are we finally going to get started on this thing? Board Member Plummer: On what? Vice Chairman Clark: On this Overtown Poinciana Village. Board Member Plummer: Well, the problem, Mr. Mayor, if I may, is that they are looking for an outright bucket of money of $300 and what is 86,000? Chairman Dawkins: May I... May I, please. Mr. Plummer isn't going to vote for this, we may as well defer it because we only got three members. I mean... I mean, if he needs more... I mean more understanding or something. Board Member Plummer: I just... there's got to be more justification than what I've got here. Chairman Dawkins: OK. I... so it's deferred until the next meeting. THEREUPON, ITEM 5 WAS DEFERRED TO THE NEXT MEETING. 37 March 18, 1996 fa ':li a ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. DISCUSS CRA ATTORNEY'S REPORT CONCERNING ARENA TOWERS APARTMENTS LITIGATION. Chairman Dawkins: Six. Vice Chairman Clark: Update on the Arena Towers Apartment litigations. Who is here regarding that? Chairman Dawkins: Who is giving... Mr. Robert Friedman: I can talk about that. Chairman Dawkins: Go right ahead, sir. Board Member Plummer: OK. Mr. Friedman: Since the last meeting, there has not been any further action on this. I think, though, I'd like to clarify what actually is going on in this litigation with respect to the property where the Arena Towers is. The CRA - excuse me - is the landlord under the ground lease, and CRA has a leasehold mortgage. The lender has a mortgage, which is superior to the CRA's mortgage, and when the lender forecloses what happens is everyone who is inferior to the lender loses their right. It does not change the CRA's position as the landlord. The CRA continues to own the property, continues to be the landlord. The lender would step in and become the tenant. What we are looking at now is trying to figure out a way for the lender, once they become the tenant, to have to pay up the two CRA amounts owed by the current tenant. Board Member Plummer: Question. Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir, go ahead, Mr. Plummer. Board Member Plummer: Has any consideration been given or thought about of we buying the foreclosure? It might not be feasible, it might not be practical, but I'm asking has it been explored? Mr. Herbert J. Bailey: We have thought about it, Mr. Plummer. Board Member Plummer: Oh, I sure appreciate you thinking about it on the record so we would know. Mr. Bailey: All right, the amount the mortgagee claims is owed is $20 million on the property for unpaid mortgage payments and the balance of the mortgage. We only have, as a UDAG (Urban Development Action Grant) grant, involved five million. Two things, the equity there in terms of spending twenty or trying to find twenty, to spend to save five, on a grant, we didn't think was something that we could recommend. And the other real reason is that we don't have $20 million, nor do I think at the moment, we are in a position to apply for a mortgage up to $20 million to satisfy the lender. However... Vice Chairman Clark: What's it worth? What is the whole thing worth, Herb? 38 March 18, 1996 .aids j!.r Mr. Bailey: I would say, if I were buying it, I would give them $12 million. However, they claim they would probably sell it for about 16 million. That's 350 units. I think somewhere between 12 and 14 million would be a price that would satisfy the market as it is today. Chairman Dawkins: But Mr. Bailey, prepare something for each of us to purchase the building. When they want to purchase buildings they go to the Florida Sunshine Trust Fund - or what is that they go to? Board Member Plummer: The Sunshine Trust, yeah. Chairman Dawkins: The Sunshine Trust, we could go there and borrow money for that, like we do for everything else. Board Member Plummer: Well, Mr. Chairman, my problem I guess is more into the area of informational... Chairman Dawkins: Uh-huh. Board Member Plummer: ...I don't think Mr. Bailey - and I have great respect for him - has the right to make that decision for us, the Board members. Chairman Dawkins: Which decision? Board Member Plummer: I think... The decision is that we didn't want to pursue it. Mr. Bailey: Oh, we never made the decision, we just looked at the numbers. Board Member Plummer: OK. But I'm being... I'm being told... Chairman Dawkins: I agree. I agree. Mr. Bailey: No, we haven't made the decision. Board Member Plummer: OK. Chairman Dawkins: You are right, Commissioner Plummer. Board Member Plummer: I would like the buffet table placed before us, and we'll make the decision. Chairman Dawkins: Even though the table is empty, we'll put it before you. Board Member Plummer: With all of... well, hey, so be it. The cupboard is also bare sometimes. But I... Chairman Dawkins: I agree. I agree, J.L. Board Member Plummer: What I am saying is lay all options in front of this Board. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Board Member Plummer: And we will make the decision. Vice Chairman Clark: In addition to that, Mr. Chairman. 39 March 18, 1996 Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Clark: Mr. Bailey, give us some kind of a realtor's understanding of what the property is worth from their vantage point, what it is best for, what it sells for, and everything else. Give us a complete sale record on this. Mr. Bailey: We'll do that. We'll give you the full profile on the property. Vice Chairman Clark: Because we don't know if it's worth 16 million, or 15 million, or 10 million. Mr. Bailey: OK. Board Member Plummer: Well, Mr. Chairman, also I think one of the things that we are being shortsighted on is the fact of what's happening in that area. Now, if we look - and I was hoping some body would be here tonight to give us an overlook of what Mr. - for a lack of a better name - Mr. Dave Weaver's plan, that ties all of that area together, and let me tell you something, 12 million would be cheap to buy that 350 units, if, in fact, this plan has a chance of flying. So what I am saying to you is that these are things that are all pieces of the pie, that we need the whole pie. Mr. Bailey: Right. Board Member Plummer: Because, Miller, I am assuming that you have seen that plan, haven't you? Chairman Dawkins: Huh -huh. Board Member Plummer: Oh, you haven't. Chairman Dawkins: No, no. The only thing I'm seeing is, that it's amazing how certain projects they have to dot all the "I's" and cross all the "T's." Certain projects you don't need this. Now, that thing that Mr. Luft is coming up here with, you don't see nothing, you didn't say anything about that. The $500,000 that we are going to give away to the people in that other place, we don't need that. But it's certain projects that you need a whole lot of explanation on, and some of them we don't need any. Board Member Plummer: Well, you know, all I am saying to you is, in this particular case, that if we have all of the knowledge including, we might want to consider buying... Vice Chairman Clark: It's a potential, yeah. Board Member Plummer: It's a potential, that's it. And, I mean, it's not today. If you look at that today, Mr. Bailey, it's exactly... I would have concurred immediately that it is not worth it. But I think we have to look to tomorrow, and hope for tomorrow, that it's going to be a better day, and that, 'in fact, it might be worth considering 350 units of rental property, that we might want to take more serious considerations of buying the foreclosure. Chairman Dawkins: We will. Board Member Plummer: That's all I am saying. Mr. Bailey: We'll look at it and give you all the information. 40 March 18, 1996 � r1 Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir, Mr. Goenaga. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Well, I would like to know who is the lender because... Vice Chairman Clark: We don't know. Chairman Dawkins: We do not know. But we will get... give us your address and we'll mail it to you. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Well, what we need is all alternatives and... Chairman Dawkins: And full disclosure. Vice Chairman Clark: That is what he is going to work up. Chairman Dawkins: And full disclosure. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: ...and full disclosure, and you know the lender, if it is a bank, they don't want to keep the building, so they might sell it and take a tax loss. It is all part of negotiations, but you know we have to have all the information available. Vice Chairman Clark: You are right. You are right. You are right. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: And especially in this particular case where there is a land lease. You see, we can try to push the lender. The lender is the owner. I mean, he is the master, but we can deal. Because of the situation of the land lease, we can play games with them, and I know how to play games with banks. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Mr. Bailey: I have just one more... Chairman Dawkins: Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to take this time to acknowledge the presence of two people in here who will be your representatives, and who thought enough of this to be concerned to come out so that they will be knowledgeable. They become the ones responsible for this. Will the candidate running for this group, Commissioner... former Commissioner Barbara Carey, please stand. And the other candidate who's running for that seat decided that he, too, needed to know more about what you are doing here, decided to take his time to come out, Mr. Billy Hardemon. Thank you. OK. The next CRA meeting will be April 15. Now, listen closely because people say that we don't announce it, we don't put it in the paper, they don't know. I'm going to say here, now, the next CRA Board meeting is Monday, April the 15th at the Miami Arena in the VIP Room. Is there anything else? NOTE FOR THE RECORD: At this point, the next CRA meeting was scheduled for Monday, April 15, 1996, to be held in the Arena VIP Room. 41 March 18, 1996 W ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. (A)DISCUSSION CONCERNING CONDITIONS IN VICINITY OF HOMELESS ASSISTANCE SHELTER -- SCHEDULE ALAN SAVITZ FOR APPEARANCE AT COMMISSION MEETING TO REITERATE HIS CONCERNS BEFORE MANAGER AND POLICE CHIEF REGARDING SAME -- REQUEST ATTENDANCE OF ALVAH CHAPMAN (OR REPRESENTATIVE FROM SAID FACILITY), AND METRO-DADE COMMISSIONER ALEX PENELAS. (B)DISCUSSION CONCERNING OFFER BY OMNI TO DONATE SPACE IN ITS BUILDING FOR A SATELLITE POLICE STATION -- SCHEDULE ISSUE FOR COMMISSION MEETING. (C)DEFER CONSIDERATION OF RIVERSIDE STUDY / CONCEPTS REGARDING HOUSING / REDEVELOPMENT IN LUMMUS PARK AND OVERTOWN AREAS TO NEXT SEOPW MEETING IN OVERTOWN. (D)INVITE HIGH-RANKING MEMBER OF POLICE DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTATIVES FROM HOMELESS CENTER AND PERFORMING ARTS CENTER TRUST TO ATTEND FUTURE CRA MEETINGS. (E)DIRECT CITY ATTORNEY TO RESEARCH POSSIBILITY OF FINING ORGANIZATIONS FEEDING THE HOMELESS ON PUBLIC STREETS. Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. Mr. Mariano Cruz: No, I'd like to talk in that "Other" on the agenda. Chairman Dawkins: OK. He's first. Hold it. He's first for the "Other." No, and then you, Mr. Marina. No, this gentleman here. Come right on. Mr. Manuel Gonzalez-Goenaga: Do you think we will get refreshments... Chairman Dawkins: Get to Christmas. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Thank you, I will attend. Tax time. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Come on, sir. Mr. Alan Savitz: Honorable Commissioners, friends and neighbors. I'm here to try to find out why, since we built a $5 million homeless center, that we all agreed was needed somewhere in Dade County, that between 11th and loth Street - and I am concentrating on this even though there are many other areas I could go on - 13th Street... Vice Chairman Clark: Your business is located there? Mr. Savitz: No, my business is located near 20th Street. Vice Chairman Clark: OK. Mr. Savitz: ...and this area has nothing to do with my business, but I drive by it every day... Vice Chairman Clark: Very good. 42 March 18, 1996 Mr. Savitz: ...and I think it's a shame that we allow this. It's a discredit to Miami and all Miamians everywhere. We should be ashamed of ourselves. There are people sleeping there. I drive by there at 7 o'clock, 10 o'clock, 12 o'clock, after midnight, they are sleeping on the right side of the street, they sleep on the left side of the street. It's not humane, and it's not legal. And before the judge said, "Well, they don't have a place to go." But now they do have a place to go and the Chief has not sent anybody there to give them notice, in a nice humane way, that they have 24 hours to vacate or they'll be arrested. Now, another thing was we all sat together at that one Commissioners' meeting where the Chief of Police said he's going to have police patrolling the area 24 hours a day, and he's saying about 26 police officers or 42, and we were discussing the numbers. I've not seen one policeman patrolling that area. I do see police cars, but they are inside the building. But none of them are out patrolling, and that was one of the agreements. And it was an agreement in front of all of us. So what I am trying to wonder, for the good of the community, and so that when the tourists come in, and they drive down Miami Avenue, and go to the Arena, and the people come from Broward to go to the Arena. And also we are talking about that Arena Towers is failing. You stand on the corner of the Arena Towers and you see these people sleeping on the sidewalk. So there are many people that don't want to rent in that building because of that. So anyway, what I'd like to know is, is there a way that we can get together? I'd be willing to be a witness when the police go there, and go in front of the judge... Vice Chairman Clark: You've done the right thing. You've done the right thing. Chairman Dawkins: OK. OK. Vice Chairman Clark: You got this address to Chief Warshaw? Check with him first, will you? Chairman Dawkins: No, I will do better... Mr. Savitz: Well, could we have your support, too, sir. Chairman Dawkins: I will do better than that, I will schedule you for a public appearance at the City Commission, and you can tell the City Commission with the Manager and the Police Chief there. Vice Chairman Clark: All right, that's a good idea. Chairman Dawkins: And then we can all give you an answer without you going to one of us at a time. OK? Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman, I would hope... Chairman Dawkins: Uh-huh. Is that all right, sir? Vice Chairman Clark: Yeah. Mr. Savitz: Yes, sir. Chairman Dawkins: OK, thank you, sir. Board Member Plummer: I would hope that you would have either Mr. Alvah Chapman or one of the other peoples who represent the facility at that meeting. Vice Chairman Clark: And Alex Penelas, too. Chairman Dawkins: OK. 43 March 18, 1996 :G Board Member Plummer: And simply because, you know, the idea was - and we heard and were promised, as this gentleman said - that even though what was promised in the initial inception in reference to the police presence that was completely cut down and watered down, I don't think there is anybody there presently. Now, I have to tell you... Have you been through the facility? Chairman Dawkins: Well, he is worried about on the outside of the facility. Board Member Plummer: Have you been through the facility, sir? Mr. Savitz: No, sir. Board Member Plummer: You should go. Let me tell you. It is a first class facility. I'm scared it's too first class. But I am also wondering, the scenario that said that if they were picked up on the street and refused to go to that facility, that, in fact, you could go to jail. To my knowledge, that has not happened. I am also concerned about the fact that the second facility has not been started. Mr. Chairman, is getting restless, so I'll shut up and we'll discuss it at the other meeting called City Commission. Chairman Dawkins: Uh-huh. Mr. Savitz: OK, thank you for your patience. Chairman Dawkins: But I just need to know from you, are you discussing outside of the building, or inside the building? Vice Chairman Clark: Outside. Mr. Savitz: No, see... Chairman Dawkins: Are discussing conditions outside the building, or conditions inside the building? Mr. Savitz: No, outside the building. Chairman Dawkins: Well, don't go inside the building. Don't tell me anything about inside. You go outside and come to the City Commission. Have a good day. Mr. Savitz: Thank you. When will that City Commission meeting be? Will you let me know, please? Board Member Plummer: April... ask Walter. Chairman Dawkins: Walter, when is the next Commission meeting, sir? Vice Chairman Clark: Last meting in April. Board Member Plummer: No, there is only one in April. Chairman Dawkins: There is only one. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Twenty-six. Chairman Dawkins: April 26. 44 March 18, 1996 Board Member Plummer: No, March the 26. Chairman Dawkins: March the 25? All right, March the 25, and I will send you a letter, OK. Go right ahead, Mr... Board Member Plummer: No, whoa, whoa... March 25 is not correct. Mr. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): March 26th. Chairman Dawkins: Uh? Board Member Plummer: March is the 26th. Mr. Foeman: March 26th. April is the 25th. Chairman Dawkins: OK, March 26th, 25, 24, 26, you'll get a letter. Mr. Clerk, would you get his address and make sure that he is notified of the meeting. Yes, sir, Mr. Cruz. Mr. Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 N.W. 26 Street, in Allapattah. I am concerned, too, like Alan here, about the problem with the homeless. In 1995, I went to a CRA meeting at the Arena, I get one of the papers. And one of the projects there besides the project center and all that things, relocation of Camillus House 1996. So I want to know what the status of that is because the other day I read that Camillus House is building a health center in Overtown, 3rd Avenue and 5th Street... Vice Chairman Clark: Yeah. Mr. Cruz: ...and they are talking about the land being used, raze the buildings and the land being used for long-term development. But that place there, that 1st Avenue and 7th Street, and that concerns me because... I don't know. And the other concerns me because the other day in a meeting Livia Garcia, a homeless advocate by the City of Miami, spoke, and she said that a homeless facility is going to Allapattah, whatever, is a homeless office. And I understood at the meeting, at the James L. Knight Center when you approved the Homeless Assistance Center that one of the conditions was that no more facilities will be within the City limits. So I want to know what is the problem with that, because she is with the homeless. I could not talk to her because she left. And I don't have time during daytime because I deliver mail in the neighborhood and I don't carry a cellular phone because I don't work for the City of Miami. I am not a highly paid administrator that can use a cellular phone at all times. And the post office don't use a cellular phone. I have to use my own quarters. But I am concerned, and now talking about the Homeless Assistance Center, I went to the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) right there on Biscayne Boulevard, on 35th Street, and I asked them. They said, "No, they can't be forced to go to the places." If they are not a danger to themselves or to others, there is nothing you can do because I know an officer of the NET center in Allapattah, he rounded up some of the people at the produce market, and he told them, "Tomorrow I'm going to take you to the homeless center." Next day he came, there was nobody there to the homeless center. I go yesterday... I went to the Taco Bell on 36th Street, there is a lady there with a baby, and I went there and say, "Hey, listen, I can take you to the Christian Community Family Center on 1st Avenue and 37th Street, the old Rancho Motel there." No, she didn't want to go there. I go downtown to the County building, and you could see the people. I tell them, "Hey, I can take you to the 29th floor where you'll see Sergio Gonzalez, or..." He said we can go see the County Manager. All this trouble, we can send you to Beckham Hall. They don't want to go. So what is the sense of having all of these? How are you going to make the people go to the programs? Because I go right there, you go right there to the 2nd Avenue and 4th Street, to the State 45 March 18, 1996 building, I don't know, really. You go to the market just now, we got the same problem we got before. I don't know, really. And now they are talking about the relocation of the Camillus House. Where? Allapattah? I come here because many people from this neighborhood who are in favor of putting Camillus House in my neighborhood. Oh, I remember every body... Board Member Plummer: She is not here anymore. Mr. Cruz: I have the tape and the transcript. Board Member Plummer: She is not here anymore. Mr. Cruz: No. Who? Board Member Plummer: She is not here anymore. Mr. Cruz: She... no, no... whatever... or he or she, whatever, the people. And I got the tape of the meeting. Vice Chairman Clark: They are going to put her in Hialeah. Mr. Cruz: In any other place but the City, right? What about the second homeless assistance center. What is going up? What is going up, in Homestead? Chairman Dawkins: OK. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman, if it's not going up in the CRA, I would suggest we move on and will have that at the City Commission meeting. Chairman Dawkins: OK. All right. OK. Now, anybody else? Mr. Savitz: Yes, can I just say something that he said, which is very important. Chairman Dawkins: OK. This is it for you, now. Mr. Savitz: Yeah, and then I'll be finished. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Yes, you will be. Mr. Savitz: But this was a very good question that he raised, and that is what can we do? I've been in Portland, Oregon. I saw what they did. They have places for the homeless to go. The police went around with special teams and they would give them a little card and saying, "If you are still here in four hours, or three hours, or 24 hours, you'll be picked up and arrested." So what happens is that a lot of them, and I was in all the homeless facilities, there. I was in all the facilities, also in San Francisco, Portland, Oregon. I was in the one in Tampa, that beautiful one that they copied the one on 15th Street after. But the main thing is this, that the police in a humane way, no brutality, go up to them give them a notice. They don't move, they have the ability to arrest them. And a lot of these homeless people, you know what they do, they leave town because they don't want to be hassled. So... Chairman Dawkins: OK. The only thing we have that they don't have is Judge Adkins and the ACLU. If you get rid of Judge Adkins and the ACLU, you could put them in jail. Now, that's just that simple. Mr. Savitz: Well, we... 46 March 18, 1996 00) Chairman Dawkins: That's it, now. That's it. Mr. Savitz: ...we will go before him. Vice Chairman Clark: Come on let's... Chairman Dawkins: OK. Good. Thank you. All right, Mr. Luft. Oh, no, I'm sorry, you said you had something under "Other." Go right ahead, Mr. Joseph, please. Mr. Fred Joseph: Yes, we have an item that was brought before in regards to the satellite police station right here at the bottom of the Omni. Now, this concerns your area under the CRA. But the Omni has offered to give that space and put it in writing, and build out, probably somewhere around 60 or 70,000 and also fund the electric, the water, and the power, and the parking space, and everything else, come up to somewhere around $100,000, which I don't know where you would get it if we had it in another district. But this thing has been floating around since February the 6th. It has gone to the City Manager. It still hasn't been signed, and we are waiting to see some progress with it. I have a letter right here in front of me addressed on City stationary from City Manager, and we still don't have any knowledge of when this is happening. They want to put the gang squad there, the bicycle squad there... Vice Chairman Clark: They want to put a NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Office there. Mr. Joseph: They want to put a NET Office there. Chairman Dawkins: But you didn't get permission from the NET people. They run everything. Mr. Joseph: They cannot get permission from them, no. This is already been done. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Joseph, I inquired when I received a copy of that letter, and I think what they are trying to do is to eliminate just what we know as, in the past, as a mini - station, and make it a total office by the NET. That's what I was under the understanding as what they were trying to accomplish. Chairman Dawkins: But he did not offer it to the... OK. Nothing. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Mr. Joseph: No, I'm sorry. That wasn't what... I went back to Lt. Payne, and everything else has been... all... everything has been done, and everything has been ready... Vice Chairman Clark: What is that, Carlos? Mr. Carlos Smith (Assistant City Manager): I was going to say, Commissioner, that the police... I believe the police are trying to... Board Member Plummer: Identify yourself for the record. Mr. Smith: Carlos Smith, Assistant City Manager. Board Member Plummer: In charge of the NET Office. Mr. Smith: Yes. The police is going to set up a mini -station here. It's not the NET Office entirely that is moving this way. 47 March 18, 1996 Mr. Joseph: Correct, they were going to have the... you know, gang squad, a couple of other things, write reports, and we are still waiting. And I know that, you know, that's not your hat tonight as City Commission, but, you know, you are the City Manager's boss, I think. Or maybe is the other way around. Chairman Dawkins: It is. Other way around. Mr. Joseph: You know, if that is the way, then maybe we... where the County is trying to go, a strong mayor instead of a... here we have... Chairman Dawkins: That would be better. Mr. Joseph: ..a strong City Manager. Because we can't get a reaction. Why is that happening, as you CRA Board people? Vice Chairman Clark: Carlos, jump on this right away, will you. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Mr. Smith: I also suggest, Mr. Joseph, that you give me your phone number. I'll have an answer... Mr. Joseph: 579-9088. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Who is next? Jack. Mr. Joseph: Now, the other item. Excuse me, one other item. Chairman Dawkins: I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Mr. Joseph: One other item. You, as the CRA - and I was there, and you made them dot the I s"and cross the T s the Homeless Trust... Three things were supposed to happen: police protection, capacity was only supposed to be 350 - I don't think they've met it yet - the other item was another location. OK. You put two, but I just heard another Iocation. I don't see another one. Board Member Plummer: It was supposed to be two. Mr. Joseph: I don't see Homestead, I don't see permits pulled. And you people said in a period of time, you were going to pull their ticket. Chairman Dawkins: No, no, no. We said that they could not start this until they had broken grounds on the second unit. Mr. Joseph: Yes, that's true. But you also said it would be reviewed. Chairman Dawkins: And this Commission allowed them to build this without even breaking grounds on the second. Mr. Joseph: You gave the Omni... Chairman Dawkins: OK. No problem. Mr. Joseph: ... Venetia area residents your word... March 18, 1996 K, ell) Board Member Plummer: My motion was, and I was turned down. Chairman Dawkins: Yes. OK. Board Member Plummer: I made a motion that they could not occupy this one with a Certificate of Occupancy until the second one had broken ground and that motion was voted down. Chairman Dawkins: And I said don't break ground. Mr. Joseph: OK. But you also told us it would be under review again. You said to us, the members, and the constituencies in this building that it would be reviewed. When are you going to review any of those items? Mr. Smith: Commissioner, if I may again? I believe what was passed was that they would not be able to get a CO (Certificate of Occupancy) issued if another site had not been selected. Mr. Foeman: Carlos, would you speak on the mike. Vice Chairman Clark: Let's not go to deep into this thing now, we're running out of time. Board Member Plummer: No, we are going to address this at the City Commission. Chairman Dawkins: No, you are out of order, sir. We are going to handle this at the City Commission. This is not a City Commission meeting. It's a CRA meeting. Vice Chairman Clark: That's it. Chairman Dawkins: We can do it at the City Commission. I'll put you on. You want to be on the Commission agenda for this? Mr. Joseph: Thank you. Chairman Dawkins: All right, sir. Vice Chairman Clark: OK, Jack. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Go right ahead, sir. Mr. Jack Luft: Chairman Dawkins, we are here to ask... My name is Jack Luft, Community Development and Revitalization. We are here to ask your permission to present to you a Riverside Study and some concepts we have for housing and redevelopment in the Lummus Park, Overtown area. Vice Chairman Clark: The lights. Chairman Dawkins: OK. No, that's all right. I received a memo, and since the Manager wasn't here, I respectfully regret to tell you that this is a CRA meeting, and this should be discussed at an Overtown meeting where the people in Overtown can respond to it, and they are not here. So, we'll defer this until the CRA meeting in Overtown. Board Member Plummer: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Dawkins: Yes, sir. 49 March 18, 1996 Board Member Plummer: May I offer, and ask, in the future, that at these meetings Mr. Bailey invites a high-ranking member of the Police Department to be here? Chairman Dawkins: I'll do that. You don't have to do that. I'll do that. Board Member Plummer: And also that somebody from the Homeless Center be here. Chairman Dawkins: No, no, no. We can invite them, we can't demand that they come. Board Member Plummer: I said invite them, sir. OK. We can mandate the police. Chairman Dawkins: OK. That's right. Board Member Plummer: We invite someone to every meeting of the Homeless Center... Chairman Dawkins: Now, how high up do you want somebody from the Police Department? Board Member Plummer: Somebody that can speak for the Department. Unidentified Speaker: Chief Warshaw. Board Member Plummer: No, that's too high. Chairman Dawkins: No. Board Member Plummer: OK. Chairman Dawkins: OK. How low down? Board Member Plummer: Whoever the NRO (Neighborhood Resource Officer) is of this area is what I would say. OK. Chairman Dawkins: He can't speak for the police. Board Member Plummer: But I would like to see the police here. I would like to see the homeless people here, and I think it is of importance that someone from the Performing Arts Trust be here. At least be invited. Chairman Dawkins: OK. I'll invite all of them. Board Member Plummer: To all of the meetings. Chairman Dawkins: All right, I'll send a letter. OK. Go right ahead, ma'am. Ms. Eleanor Kluger: My name is Eleanor Kluger, and I own American Gift Corporation. I have been in the neighborhood for 30 years. I am also the representative, the neighborhood representative, for the Homeless Shelter. I attend a meeting once a month at the Homeless Shelter, and I must say that it is very well run. You have very professional people taking care. Board Member Plummer: Absolutely. Ms. Kluger: There are at present 270 residents there, and there is still room for more. But they cannot get them to come in to the Center... 50 March 18, 1996 r F r Board Member Plummer: One of the major problems. Ms. Kluger: ...and they might need our help, and there is one way of making sure that they do fill the Center to the 350 capacity. Because what we wanted the Center to do was to take the people from the street, from the downtown area. This was our main concern. This was to be an intake center and they were to be evaluated and sent on to others. Well, you have a professional group there. They are getting the evaluations. They are being rehabbed as best they can with the facilities and the monies that they have. But what they could do is to stop the feeding on the street. As long as your people, the people on the street... Chairman Dawkins: When you mean all, you mean our. Ms. Kluger: ... our people... Chairman Dawkins: OK, our people. Ms. Kluger: ...our people can be fed on the street by the churches and not be fined, then there is no need for them... Chairman Dawkins: You are right, I agree. Ms. Kluger: ...to go to the Center. Chairman Dawkins: To the Center. Board Member Plummer: Absolutely. Ms. Kluger: And this is what the center has been asking all church groups to donate their time, their money, their food and bring it right to the center. Chairman Dawkins: Now, you... Ms. Kluger: And therefore, people will be fed, people will be looked after professionally. Board Member Plummer: They don't want to do that because they don't get credit. Ms. Kluger: They don't want to do it. But you can fine the churches. You can stop them from feeding on public streets and on public grounds because that's were they are. If you go there Saturday mornings in our neighborhood you will see in the Omni area two to three hundred people being fed by church groups, and they are on public City property. And they are feeding them there, and they are also coming around with their wagons on public City property. And you can stop that, and that would help the Homeless Shelter do their job, what they were commissioned to do. Thank you. Board Member Plummer: At 10 o'clock at night they do it on Flagler Street. Chairman Dawkins: Madam City Attorney. Come on, come on. Madam City Attorney. Ms. Linda Kearson (Assistant City Attorney): Yes, sir. Chairman Dawkins: Would you ask the City Attorney for permission to do some research and determine that if the Judge said that we cannot touch the homeless people, if it is permissible for us to touch the people on the streets who are feeding them? 51 March 18, 1996 ter' Ms. Kearson: Yes, sir. Chairman Dawkins: See, because I mean, it's one thing. Go right ahead, ma'am. Ms. Teresita Gyori: My name is Teresita Gyori... Chairman Dawkins: Pull the mike to you, please. Ms. Gyori: My name is Teresita Gyori... Chairman Dawkins: Now, wait a minute, what are you speaking on, this is "Other." Ms. Gyori: OK. It's "Other." Chairman Dawkins: Now, if you are not to the point, I'm going to dismiss you till you come to the Commission. Ms. Gyori: OK. It's... OK, one of the things that I am requesting from this Board here is in reference to when moneys are being given for acquisition, for an example, Lummus or whatever... Chairman Dawkins: No, wait... wait, now... wait, now. Ms. Gyori: ...if it could be in detailed... Chairman Dawkins: You are out of order. I just told the gentleman, Mr. Luft, that I wasn't going to hear anything discussing the acquisition of land. Ms. Gyori: Could it be in general? Chairman Dawkins: Ma'am? Ms. Gyori: Could I go ahead and mention something in general when groups go ahead and... Chairman Dawkins: If you... but see... Yes, go ahead. Ms. Gyori: When groups go ahead and request for funding, can these corporations be checked, who these groups are, who is accountable for these moneys? You know, very soon the City of Miami is going to become a real estate business because every time, like - what is it March 14th meeting? - everything was, like, "Well, let's go ahead and buy if it defaults, we are on the subordination, we are second, we are third." You know, this sounds like a real estate business. Board Member Plummer: It's that nursing house. Vice Chairman Clark: No, it's the Theater Marti. Board Member Plummer: No. Ms. Gyori: If it's not the ACLF, it's something else. That's the only thing that I'm requesting, that when... Chairman Dawkins: Well, I am happy to see a concerned citizen. We need more like you and Annette Eisenberg. But you need to prepare a speech, for the lack of a better word, send it to us, and come before the Commission, and tell us at the Commission. 52 March 18, 1996 Ms. Gyori: I will do that. Chairman Dawkins: Where a legislation is supposed to occur to prevent these things. Ms. Gyori: Thank you, I will. Chairman Dawkins: See, just by coming to a meeting like this and airing your rights and your complaints, it don't do anything. Ms. Gyori: I agree, but when I understood that today was going to be in reference to another situation, I mean, I was... nobody told me about the meeting or anything. I felt... Chairman Dawkins: But see... but see, now, I can't let you do that. Ms. Gyori: Uh-huh. Chairman Dawkins: When you came to my office and said you were coming here to speak on this, what did I tell you? It would not come up. Ms. Gyori: Right. Chairman Dawkins: I told you. I said this would not come up. How do you know it won't come up? I said, "I'm the Chairman, I assure you it will not come up." And you still come here with it, OK. Ms. Gyori: He did try. Chairman Dawkins: All right, come on. Board Member Plummer: That shows you the strength of the Chairman, right? She is here. Chairman Dawkins: My buddy over here. Ms. Annette Eisenberg: Well see, I always knew that. Just to ease the mind of some of the people who are concerned about the Homeless Assistance Center, I am on the Board, and my committee... Chairman Dawkins: God help them. Board Member Plummer: Yeah. Ms. Eisenberg: Oh, they love me. And my committee is the Neighborhood Advisory Committee that Eleanor Kluger sits on. I do want you to know that we have been given 75 acres by the Defense Department in Homestead. We are going with it. But that's not why I am here. I would be very happy because I am also the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) representative to the Omni area. I would be very happy to go back to the center and ask them to appoint someone, which will probably be me, unless you don't want me. And I will be very glad to take back and answer any of the questions that you have. Chairman Dawkins: OK. Ms. Eisenberg: We are making every effort. Our neighbors... The newspaper just called the other day, they wanted to know how the neighbors feel about the Homeless Assistance Center. It 53 March 18, 1996 will appear in the paper. I don't think there is an immediate neighbor that has a complaint about the center. Maybe the homeless laying around the streets, but not the center. So if there are any complaints, please tell me and I'll help you solve them. We have opened this meeting, Mr. Clerk, as a CRA meeting, then we recessed and we went into the City Commission meeting. Did the Mayor close the meeting, the City Commission part of it? Board Member Plummer: We never opened it up. Vice Chairman Clark: I never opened it up. Ms. Kearson: We never opened it. Board Member Plummer: How do you close something you didn't opened? Chairman Dawkins: We had... we had... OK, I'll open it, then. I'll set the motion... Board Member Plummer: Well, excuse me, I think, Mr. Dawkins, to make it clear, we, as the CRA, voted on the interlocal, and that was taken care of. Now, when we adjourned the meeting of the CRA, then it's up to our Alcalde Grande to call a meeting of the City Commission. Vice Chairman Clark: I'll do it if they give me a chance. Board Member Plummer: I will move at this time that the CRA meeting has no further business, and we adjourn. So move. Chairman Dawkins: So be it. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE OMNI/SEOPWA CRA, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 8:39 P.M. Miller J. Dawkins CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: Walter J. Foeman CITY CLERK Maria J. Argudin ASSISTANT CITY CLERK 54 March 18, 1996