Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEOPW OMNI CRA 1999-07-13 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON JULY 13, 1999 PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Walter J. Foeman/City Clerk THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SECTION 163.01, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND PART III, CHAPTER 163, FLORIDA STATUTES, CONSTITUTED ITSELF AS THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH THE FOLLOWING ISSUES: 3 5. RATIFY TECHNICAL CHANGES TO INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA). Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman. Board Member Plummer: Excuse me. Ladies and Gentlemen, Commissioner Teele has convened the meeting of the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Thank you. Chairman Teele: The meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency for Southeast Overtown Park West and the Omni Redevelopment districts is called to order. Mr. Attorney. Mr. Alex Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: The issues relating to the Interlocal Agreement are all technical, there are no substantive... Ms. Tejera, Ms. Tejera, we are waiting for you up here. Mr. Vilarello: There are no material changes... Chairman Teele: There are no substantive material issues. Will you just outline to the board what those changes are, and just by way of background to the board, the CRA has not had an Interlocal Agreement pursuant to the discussions... Board Member Plummer: Can I stop you, Mr. Teele, for a moment please? I think it's important with the TV on, that people understand what the CRA is. Chairman Teele: Yes, sir. Thank you, Commissioner Plummer. The City of Miami has, pursuant to State law over the last few years, ten years or so, a redevelopment authority, a redevelopment agency. That agency, initially, was for Overtown Park West and the Southeast Overtown and Park West areas. Subsequently, the Omni area was designated as a redevelopment district. So, technically, we are sitting as a redevelopment district of two separate districts and for all practical purposes, we have one Board of Directors and we treat those matters as one integrated agency. The CRA, therefore, relates to the Community Redevelopment Agency, and that designation is significant in accordance to the State law because it essentially provides in all of the taxes, ad valorem taxes that are collected within those geographic boundaries, over and above the amount of taxes that were collected before the agencies were created goes into a pot, and that pot is called the "Tax Increment Trust Fund." A long story short, the Southeast Overtown Park West Trust Fund is significantly in the red and will be so in the foreseeable future, and that the Omni tax district is in the black, however, 100 percent of all of the revenues from the Omni district have been pledged for the next, how many years, Mr. Attorney? Board Member Gort: Twenty years. 76 July 13, 1999 Mr. Vilarello: Until the satisfaction of the Performing Arts Center bonds are retired. Chairman Teele: For the Performing Arts Center bonds, which is, at least 20 years. So, essentially, we are operating with a very, very tight budget, very, very real limitations. The inter - development, Interlocal Cooperative Agreement, is the agreement that would govern the relationship of the CRA in carrying out its redevelopment activities and it is consistent with state law. To be very honest, this agreement should have been done 15 years ago when it was first created, and I think many of the areas that we have focused on in the past, the trouble areas would have had more clarity if we had had that. And so, this Interlocal Agreement is simply the Interlocal Agreement between the CRA, sitting as the CRA, subsequently, the City of Miami Commission will entertain the Interlocal Agreement. Both lawyers have opined that, actually, this is not necessary as a formality that it come back in that there are no substantial changes. However, in a fit of caution, we brought the matter back to the board for technical changes. The significant thing, however, is not this agreement, it's the fact that for the last nine months, ten months, the CRA has been rendered operationally minimized, because without that agreement, I as the Chairman, and the Executive Director, the Interim Executive Director, have agreed that we would not hire any staff until there had been an agreement with the City as well as with the Oversight Board. I think it's fair, Mr. Attorney, and Mr. Manager to say that the meeting with the City Manager, myself and other City staff persons including the Director of Development, of Community Development, Ms. Warren and the City Attorney, have cleared all issues with the Oversight Board, most issues that we know of, and that the Oversight Board has not necessarily pre -cleared this, but they were very much a part of the negotiations. The most significant factor, I think, stated singularly is that all future employees of the CRA will not be City employees, but will be employees of the CRA. Mr. Attorney, the City Attorney who is the official lawyer for all City agencies under the Charter, as you know, is augmented by Special Counsel to the CRA, and so we have both counsels here. Mr. Attorney. Mr. Vilarello: If I could just go over the modifications of the agreement and starting out with the point that you just brought up, Commissioner. The employees of the CRA will be independent employees of the CRA approved by this board as they are hired, including the Executive Director. You should consider that later in today's meeting. The agreement does however, provide that the City can detail employees to the CRA in order to avoid a duplication o expenses between the CRA and the City, and that detail will be considered by separate agreement between the CRA and the City Commission. The, it further provides that the Finance Department of the City of Miami will be the fiduciary of all the funds of the CRA, unless the CRA decides otherwise. At this point, the agreement itself provides that the Finance Department will handle all the funds subject to any future modification by the CRA. The agreement, one of the technical changes was that administrative expenses of the CRA will not use any CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds in order to avoid any confusion as to the appropriate distribution of the administrative expenses or allocation of administrative expenses to the City's annual allocation, and... Chairman Teele: That's subject to the ten percent cap. The City uses the full ten percent, and so the CRA would not have the availability of any CDBG funds for administrative purposes. Mr. Vilarello: Correct. And, finally, a related issue to that is the CRA wouldbe a sub -recipient rather instead of a grantee of HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) funds. And, perhaps, Ms. Warren, or actually, the Chairman might be able to more adequately describe the significant difference between a sub -recipient and the grantee. If there is any questions... 77 July 13, 1999 Board Member Plummer: Well, I guess, the first question is, if the CRA has no money, where is the money coming from to... Chairman Teele: Well, the issue is, the Interlocal Agreement. I mean, this is an authorizing document, not an appropriating document, and I think... Board Member Plummer: OK. Chairman Teele: ... one of the ways to get things really confused is to start talking about money when you are not really talking about money. Board Member Plummer: All right, I'll wait. Chairman Teele: I mean, it's a good question. A part of the agreement basically, and... Commissioner a part of the agreement addresses a minimum level of commitment. The City has main... The City has, the CRA's funding under State law envisions that the CRA would be self- supporting and its revenues would come from the tax increment district after a reasonable start-up period. And, when we say it doesn't have money, what we are saying, J.L., is that it doesn't have tax increment which is what this is all about, a tax increment funding, which is why redevelopment is so important. The business of the CRA is one thing to increase the tax base, and I think that's one of the things that has really gotten confused over the years as to what our business is. Our business as the CRA is to increase property values, and to the extent we go out and plant trees, to the extent we go out and redo sidewalks or lighting, or any of the infrastructure that increases the tax base, that's really what we should be in, and in a lot of ways, we sort of lost function. For example, housing is not a tax increment home run, in fact, housing is not a triple or a double, it may be considered just getting on base. If you look at, for example, J.L., the three blocks of land that we just took away from, that we just reclaimed in terms of the redevelopment over there, the issues that you were so concerned about. If we put housing on those three blocks as was planned, our tax increment would be something like seventy to one hundred and twenty thousand dollars ($120,000) a year. If we put commercial, our tax increment would be something between the magnitude of three and seven million dollars ($7,000,000) a year. So, the whole issue is, how do we get the tax increment to move? That's where we are missing. Historically, the City has funded the CRA, and this agreement would require that the City maintain its minimal historical funding. Board Member Plummer: And, that amount is? Chairman Teele: That amount is from any number of three sources. It is three hundred or so thousand in general... Why don't you read the exact numbers. Mr. Vilarello: It's on page six of the Interlocal Agreement. Program funds of, a little bit, slightly more than nine hundred thousand, general funds support of slightly below three hundred thousand, and Human Resources support of approximately three hundred and sixty-three thousand, and as I understand that, that is... Chairman Teele: Plus the CDBG, which is a totally different issue. Mr. Vilarello: The debt service. 78 July 13, 1999 Chairman Teele: Huh? Mr. Vilarello: And also the debt service. But, those are, as I understand it, the historical support that the City has provided to the CRA. Chairman Teele: And, I should say that, that Manager Warshaw, I think has been extremely balanced. I mean, there is some historical issue that may not have been necessarily right historically, and I think he's tried to balance the unique role that he has as Manager in terms of being responsible for the entire City, but recognizing, I think, the unique problems in the redevelopment area. The most important area, and I am glad the Finance Director is here, as it relates to sub -grantee, sub -recipient, and the fiduciary issue which I have said repeatedly, not- withstanding the fact that somebody still believes that forty million dollars ($40,000,000) is missing. And, if the money is missing, it's missing from the Finance Department, and the Treasury, because to my knowledge, the CRA has never written a check, and under this agreement, the CRA will not be writing checks, OK. So, if any money is missing, the thirty million, the forty million, it's missing from the City's Finance Department, and somebody needs to come forth at some point and clear the record as to where that money is, and if it's missing or if it's not. But, it's not missing from the CAR, CRA checking accounts because we have never had it. The important issue in this, as far as I am concerned, and I really would like to hear from the Manager, the Finance Director, is the recognition that while the CRA is designating the Finance Department as the fiduciary, and well we should, the ability of commingling money, Mr. Manager, the ability of commingling money is not available to the Finance Department. In other words, once the CRA enters into a contract with City whether it be general fund of the two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) year, at the end of the year, at the end of the year, the City's Finance Department does not have the authority to go in and sweep accounts from the CRA. You can sweep accounts from all City departments, but the CRA is not a City department. At the point in time that the CRA enters into a contract with Community Development and those funds are made available from Community Development to the CRA, which again, goes into the City's Finance Department books, that, those funds are obligated under Federal law, and I want to make sure that that's clear by everybody on the record. Ms. Julie Weatherholtz (Finance Director): I am Julie Weatherholtz, Finance Director. The way the City accounts for cash is called the "Pooled Cash Method." What this means is that there is one bank account, and the money goes into that bank account. The way that money is then segregated between various projects, funds, special revenue funds, CRA funds is through the general ledger, which is the computerized accounting system. So, at any given point in time, you could take all the cash accounts from all the funds, all the projects, theCRA money, you can add that all up to one number and that will balance to the bank account. So, therefore, there would be no sweeps at the end of the day, there is no clearing of any type of account or adding bank accounts together to come to one number. It's just a matter of on paper, in the general ledger, for those accounts that are associated with the CRA funds, that is how you segregate those funds from the rest of the money that's part of the pooled cash. In addition, what we would like to do is, on the annual financial statements, the CRA is considered a special revenue fund and that is how it's been reported on the annual month, on the annual financial report. It's just that on previous annual financial reports they have just been added to other special revenue fund and put in a column called "other." What we would like to do beginning with 1999, is have the CRA special revenue fund completely separate from any other special revenue funds so that, at any given point in time, you could open an annual report you can open the monthly financial report 79 July 13, 1999 and you will see the CRA activities at all times so that they will not be commingled with any other entity of the City. Chairman Teele: Ms. Weatherholtz, I think that's very helpful, but again, for the record, I just want to make it very clear that the CRA is a separate entity, and that the fiduciary relationship with the Finance Department is that, you are working for the CRA in the context of the fiduciary, and therefore, you have no, the Finance Department or the City, doesn't have an independent right to remove funds or close accounts or sweep funds. You know, for example, ITB (International Trade Board), at the end of the year if ITB has fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) in the account, the Manager has the authority to sweep those accounts. That will not be available under the CRA scenario in that we are a separate entity, and I think that's what you are saying with the special revenue report, that it will be a different accounting. Ms. Weatherholtz: Yes, yes. Board Member Gort: Can we do that for our office, too? Ms. Weatherholtz: No. Board Member Gort: I mean, last year we gave back twenty-five thousand. Ms. Weatherholtz: Your office is currently... Chairman Teele: You're talking about the Commission offices? Ms. Weatherholtz: Yes. Chairman Teele: You can't do that for us. Ms. Weatherholtz: Each Commission office is part of the general fund, so therefore it's not a special revenue fund, but each department is recorded by index code which does separate your particular office, say from another Commissioner's office. Board Member Gort: Yeah, but I think you can have the funds from one year to the next year. Ms. Weatherholtz: No, without total Commission approval. Board Member Plummer: What's the name of our new Finance Director? Chairman Teele: Are there any other questions? I mean, the... Board Member Gort: I have... Chairman Teele: Essentially, this is the same agreement that was approved in, in October? September, October? September, with the changes that have been noted. Ms. Warren, did you want to add or embellish? Ms. Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): No, the only... To answer your question, specifically about the Community Development funds, part of the agreement is that any 80 July 13, 1999 unutilized Community Development funds, on an annual basis, would come back to this Commission for reallocation back to the CRA. That was a part of what you agreed is, that the carry-over funds from Community Development would remain and would have to be authorized, I am sorry, by the City Commission and the... Chairman Teele: Would remain where? Ms. Warren: Would remain with the CRA. Chairman Teele: Right. Yes. Ms. Warren: And, again, but for the purposes of.. Chairman Teele: I mean, the reason for that is, it is impossible to do long-term financing if you are spending all your time trying to spend money on a calendar year. And, one of the frailties of government generally, and that's why capital accounts are so important, is that if everything has to be spent by year end, then, you don't ever, really engage in long-term development activities and that's one of the challenges that the CRA has. Ms. Warren: The only caution that I would have is, that the Community Development funds that you have allocated and that you may allocate in the future, have a life cycle, so the monies on the one hand, the Commissioner is correct in that you want to be able to do long-term planning by making sure that you can project your expenditures and your resources but, on the other hand, the planning has to be prudent in that it needs to spend the money on a time certain, because we have had some issues with too many years going by before monies are actually used once allocated, so I caution in that area. But, other than that, your summary is correct. Board Member Plummer: When does this Interlocal become in effect? Chairman Teele: When it's executed by the two parties. Board Member Plummer: Is that? Chairman Teele: And, technically, it could be executed almost, I mean... Mr. Attorney, you have opined that you don't think it's really necessary for this agreement in some ways to come back to the City Commission and the CRA, but in abundance of caution you asked that we consider doing that, that's what we are doing. Mr. Vilarello: That's correct. However, on the City's side of the equation, it still requires Oversight Board approval. We have met with the Chairman of the Contract Review Committee and he was part and parcel of the discussion, so we anticipate a quick review of the contract, but technically, we do have to get, on the City's side we have to get approval from the Oversight Board. Board Member Plummer: OK, but my... Chairman Teele: And... Commissioner Plummer. 81 July 13, 1999 Board Member Plummer: My next question, Julie. What is the balance of the account now, assuming we are going into starting, what is the balance now? Ms. Weatherholtz: I don't have that information with me, but when we develop the May monthly financial report, it will be in that document. Chairman Teele: It will be presented at the next CRA board meeting which we are trying to agree now, will be the last week in July, some time. Board Member Plummer: OK, so in other words, this amount of monies that we find here in this document, are they the monies operating presently, starting October 1 st? Chairman Teele: Those docu... Those numbers are totally meaningless from a fiscal point of view. Board Member Plummer: OK. Chairman Teele: From a fiscal point of view those numbers are meaningless. In terms of a baseline of the historical funding that the City has provided, that is what those numbers represent. Board Member Plummer: But, is it October 1, these numbers are going to become reality? Chairman Teele: No, these numbers are the historical funding of the CRA, City of Miami over the last five years, amortized or averaged, I think five years or three years, of the historical funding from the City to the CRA, that's all those numbers mean. Board Member Plummer: But, October 1st, the City is going to be obligated for something in this amount of money to the CRA. Chairman Teele: I... To the extent, yes, that's a fair statement. To the extent that the City has historically funded the CRA, and quite frankly, these represent historical debts that the City and the CRA have already entered into. Most of this money is, most of the money is payment of debt, outstanding bond debt. Board Member Plummer: Not including the 108. Chairman Teele: The 108, technically J.L., is not the CRA's debt. It is technically the City's debt. But, yes, not including the 108. Board Member Plummer: OK. So, then, I am assuming the Manager has got to be and prepared for the budget for these dollars from the City to the CRA, starting approximately October lst, that's what I am trying to get at. And, what I am asking, the other question, you said, well, I'll be getting later, is what is the balance of the account presently? Board Member Gort: My... I have a question. Chairman Teele: OK, and you'll get that later. Commissioner Gort. Board Member Gort: You finished, you finished, J.L.? 82 July 13, 1999 Board Member Plummer: Yeah. Vice Chairman Gort: My question is, this allocation of funds, my understanding since I have been here, every year we allocate "X" amount of money to the CRA. In other words, last year's budget that finishes now in September, funds are being allocated. Now, the way we have been running the CRA for the last six or eight months, I don't think we have utilized all the funding, because I think we only had one person... Chairman Teele: Well, that's a very important point. I take the position, is that, the funds that were allocated to the CRA for administration would not be used until there was an agreement. Technically, there is probably, the CRA budget for administrative purposes is probably fifty percent under budget or stated another way, saved. But it's really not saved, because the tasks that have be performed have got to be performed... Board Member Gort: No, I understand. Chairman Teele: Yeah. Board Member Gort: I think this is a balance that can be carried over to next year. That's what I want to say. Chairman Teele: That's right... Board Member Gort: OK, OK. Chairman Teele: ... and that's why I want to get Ms. Weatherholtz, because the dumb, the really thing that we don't want to do is put the CRA in a position like a lot of other agencies where they go out and spend money knowing that things have to be done. I can tell you right now, the biggest problem we have in implementing the last year program plan, is that we are probably two and a half million dollars ($2,500,000) short for the current year we are in, in terms of the program plan. Board Member Plummer: Well... Board Member Gort: Another question. The, my understanding is, in going through this agreement, from now on, any expenditure that will take place within the district, it will have to come in front of us, and it will have to be approved by us. In other words, what I am trying to do is, make sure, I understand we have agencies that work within the district, we are going to make sure that we are going to adopt a plan and those people comply with the plan that this board has put together. Chairman Teele: Right. Board Member Gort: They are in compliance with us. Chairman Teele: Right, and I think that's one of the missing elements of where we are. We have really not put together the joint plans yet, and the reason is, all we have been able to do is, put together the CRA plan. Again, I think, Manager Warshaw and the various departments, 83 July 13, 1999 particularly, the Parks Department, singularly the Parks Department, have really worked co- operatively, and I think, you know, J.L., you know the Margaret Pace Park... Board Member Plummer: Margaret Pace Park. Chairman Teele: ... is a classic example of how those agencies have really worked, you know, together in an initial point of view. But, all of the expenditures of the CRA come back before the board. But, I think one of the things that's important, is that the CRA is a state agency, and the one thing you don't want to do is make the CRA layered in bureaucracy as a City agency for that purpose. The time to really deal with the CRA budget is when you approve the plan and the budget. Sort of like the DDA (Downtown Development Agency) or any other organization, and what you really try to do is, grant to the Executive Director and the staff the ability to go ahead and get it done within the confines of the State procurement laws and the municipal laws. Board Member Gort: Teele, I think what I am trying to get at is, not to repeat the mistakes that have been made in the past with a lot of, CDBG funds have been spent, and I don't think they have been spent very wisely. I am not trying to get another layer of bureaucracy, on the contrary, I would like to expedite everything that would take place, but I would like to make sure that whatever expenditure takes place within those districts, are taking place in accordance with what we have adopted. Chairman Teele: And, in that regard, it will come back before... I think, the whole June, the July meeting, the last week is going to be layered with the kind of details that you are looking for. Board Member Gort: OK. Chairman Teele: Further discussions? Is there a motion? Board Member Plummer: Move it. Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Plummer... Board Member Regalado: Second. Chairman Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Regalado. All those in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Teele: Those approved say, have the same right. It's approved. 84 July 13, 1999 The following resolutions were introduced by Board Member Plummer, who moved its adoption: C��[ 7 ' �LY��i1i1l��T`►11��3t1a� AND SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO.99-11 A RESOLUTION (subject matter: ratifying the technical changes to the Interlocal Corporation Agreement between the CRA and the City of Miami). (Pending CRA Counsel) (Here follows bodies of resolutions, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the resolutions were passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None. 36. APPOINT RICHARD JUDY AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CRA - SALARY / BENEFITS/ANNUAL REVIEW. Chairman Teele: At the, two months ago, the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) directed that Commissioner Gort meet with Mr. Judy to determine his availability and the terms of his engagement, and at this time, the City Attorney has prepared the document. I think it's important to note that the salary that is being proposed is roughly half of the salary that the previous Executive Director made for the CRA. In addition, it also should be noted that Mr. Judy will not be an employee of the City, but an employee of the CRA. I do know that the City Attorney and I had a discussion, and I said for all practical purposes, Mr. Judy should be viewed as a City, as a department head, I think. And, so, when the chart was put together, other than the salary, and one or two things, he was given the benefits that all the other City department heads have at this time, and Commissioner Gort, I would ask you to present whatever report you would like to at this time, and... Board Member Gort: No, no. The reason is, I would like to go over it, because we have the base salary, we have the vacation sick days and personal leave, non -holidays and City holidays, insurance, reimbursement for the insurance. Considering that we have the 150/300 one time 85 July 13, 1999 equipment expenditure, car allowance, expenses allowances, but I would not accept the deferred compensation. Chairman Teele: OK, so, you are moving it with the exception. Board Member Gort: With the exception of deferred compensation. That was... Board Member Plummer: Second. Chairman Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Plummer, discussion? Further discussion? Let's put it on the record, what is Mr. Judy's long-term contract, Mr. Attorney? Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): It's a contract at the will of the CRA. Chairman Teele: So, he has no long-term contract. In other words, three CRA board members could get together and fire him, with or without cause? With or without cause? Mr. Vilarello: With or without cause. At the will of the CRA. He's an, it says that he's an "at will". He serves at the will of the CRA. Let me get you the exact language. Chairman Teele: And, I would only ask that the amend, that the resolution be amended to insert the words "with or without cause." Board Member Sanchez: "With or without cause." Chairman Teele: I understand that it... Board Member Plummer: Well, I, Mr. Teele. I would like to have, if I may, inserted in there that "each year he will be renewed based on an evaluation of the previous years action." I think that's very, very good. It keeps the people on their toes. Dick Judy, I have no problem with, but I think that in having the evaluation every year, subject to a renewal of an annual contract, if you are going to have a contract, not, not... Chairman Teele: I think that makes a lot of sense. Board Member Plummer: So, that's the only thing I would... Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney. Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. There is one additional issue that you, Mr. Chairman, had brought up that we did not incorporate in the resolution was that Mr. Judy is a job -basis employee to the extent... And, I think that's the best way to phrase it, he is... He has to work the number of hours necessary to get the job done, and I would like to incorporate that language into the resolution, with the consent of the Chair... Chairman Teele: OK, and that's fine. But, what this basically is saying is, that if he doesn't get the job done, one, he's subject to be fired. Now, I am not going to add this to the resolution, but I think it's only fair that if somebody does an outstanding job, that the entity should consider providing a bonus, but I am not going to write a bonus into it because that will be the story, "Judy 86 July 13, 1999 hired with the potential of making two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) a year," is how it will get written. So, I don't even want to deal with that, but I thinkif on one hand you are going to say somebody could be fired for not doing a good job, we should also adopt in principle the notion that... Board Member Plummer: Teele, I have no problem with him having some kind of a pension as such. But, I think twenty percent is a little high. Vice Chairman Gort: No, no. Board Member Sanchez: No, no, no. Chairman Teele: No. Board Member Sanchez: No, no, no. J.L. Chairman Teele: He took it out. The pension is... Board Member Plummer: I understand, but I am saying, I think there should be some kind of a, whether you want a pension or whatever it is, like with our City Managers. All of those... Chairman Teele: Well, I'll tell you what I would like to do. I would like to defer... Board Member Plummer: All right, all right. Chairman Teele: ... that issue until after we approve the budget in November or December, let's reopen that issue, if we haven't fired him. Board Member Plummer: Well, but I want to go on the record right now. Chairman Teele: Well, I am with you on that. Board Member Plummer: That as far as I am concerned, I think he would be entitled to such as we do with the managers who pay into the ICMA, whether they are here or at some other City, and he would have that as an ongoing. I am not in concurrence with twenty percent, but we'll talk about that at budget time as you say. Chairman Teele: Further discussions with the amendments as provided by Commissioners Gort, Commissioner... Board Member Plummer: The City Attorney wishes to be heard. Chairman Teele: ... Plummer, and read into the record by the City Attorney. Before we hear from the City Attorney, Mr. Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez, Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Sanchez: No, I just wanted to make sure that the language is stated "with or "without cause." Chairman Teele: "With or without cause." 87 July 13, 1999 Board Member Sanchez: OK, that the deferred compensation was scratched out by Commissioner Gort. Chairman Teele: Compensation was out and that he is job basis and his job does not entail him working a certain number of hours, but him performing certain tasks. Board Member Sanchez: Exactly. With a one year review every year... Chairman Teele: With an annual review. Board Member Sanchez: Review. Chairman Teele: And, let's just agree now that the annual review will be in October... Board Member Plummer: October 1. Chairman Teele: ... or November. Board Member Sanchez: October 1. Chairman Teele: October 1, OK. Beginning this October... OK. Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado: I just want to say that I have known Mr. Judy when he was airport director, and I hope that his relations that he made throughout the years will be put to work in, especially in the Overtown area. I always thought that the City should have contacts with the Consulates, the different Consulates here. I had an experience; a friend of mine, a Consul called me and said that people were coming to his Consulate saying "where should I invest?" A lot of people with Mercosur Treaty say that they want to use the City of Miami and I just would hope that Mr. Judy would try to bring to the Overtown area many of these people who are really eager to invest in the City. So, I think it is a wise decision of the board, and I hope that we can work with him. Board Member Plummer: Call the question. Chairman Teele: The question has been called. Further discussion? Mr. Attorney, we are going to vote right after your statement. Mr. Vilarello: Just one issue. There was a discussion about the renewal based on an annual evaluation. With the permission of the CRA, I would like to remove the word "renewal", it's just based on an... There will be an annual evaluation. I was advised that, perhaps that might be contract type -language, and I would like to avoid it. Chairman Teele: Mr. Friedman, anything? Mr. Robert Friedman (Legal Counsel): Agreed. Chairman Teele: No further questions. Call the roll. A motion by... 88 July 13, 1999 Board Member Plummer: Me. Chairman Teele: Commissioner who? Mr. Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Gort. Chairman Teele: Motion by Commissioner Gort, seconded by... Mr. Foeman: Seconded by Plummer. Chairman Teele: ... Commissioner Plummer. Board Member Plummer: Fine. Here again, Mr. Gort is infringing upon my district, but that's all right. The following resolutions were introduced by Board Member Gort, who moved its adoption: OMNI/CRA RESOLUTION NO.99-10 AND SEOPW/CRA RESOLUTION NO.99-12 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE OMNI AREA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (COLLECTIVELY, THE ("CRA") AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO APPOINT RICHARD H. JUDY AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CRA AND AUTHORIZING THE SALARY AND BENEFITS DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT "A" TO BE RECEIVED BY RICHARD H. JUDY IN HIS CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CRA. (Here follows bodies of resolutions, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Board Member Plummer, the resolutions were passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Board Member Tomas Regalado Board Member Joe Sanchez Board Member Wifredo Gort Board Member J. L. Plummer, Jr. Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None. 89 July 13, 1999 3 7 . DISCUSS REPEAL OF INDEPENDENT CRA AND U.S. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FUNDING POLICY, PROGRAM AND PROCEDURES REVIEW COMMITTEE -- SCHEDULE NEXT CRA MEETING FOR JULY 26, 1999. Chairman Teele: The final item is in light of the Oversight Board's... And, I should say this. The Oversight Board Chairman was very, very clear that he believes that there is a role for a CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). He believes there is a role for an independent CRA. He believes that the redevelopment areas of Park West and Overtown cry out for direction, and he has said that in his role as Chairman, he is going to review the budget of the City of Miami. And, J.L., I think this is very important for you to hear, that he is going to review the budget of the City of Miami, and Mr. Warshaw, I know, I hope you hear, please correct me if I misstate this. As well as the Community Development budget to ensure that adequate resources are going for this redevelopment effort. And, in that light, with the Oversight Board basically taking that renewed interest and responsibility, I think that the independent CRA Policy Programs and Procedures Committee is redundant, and I think rather than creating a second Oversight Board, we should just agree to let him exercise the interest that he's indicated and commit. Mr. Warshaw, I really wish you would say something on the record on this, if you would please, please. Board Member Plummer: Does that require a vote? Chairman Teele: No, it doesn't require a vote, but what it does mean is, that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare the repeal. Mr. Donald Warshaw (City Manager): I missed the very beginning, I had stepped into the back, so I was on the way in... Board Member Plummer: Ah, here is the Manager of the month. Mr. Warshaw: So, if you can just ask me one more time, sorry, I missed that. Chairman Teele: No, I said that in light... We are talking now about the repeal of the independent CRA and housing programming policies in light of the Chairman of the Oversight Board indicating that they are going to take a close look at the City budget and the Community Development budget to ensure the CRA is adequately funded, consistent with his notion that these are areas that really cry out for redevelopment. Mr. Warshaw: OK. Chairman Teele: And, I just wanted you to give that perspective because you were there, and since it involves him saying he's going to look at City funding, I just thought it might be better if they heard it from you, at least, in acquiescence to that. Mr. Warshaw: I don't have a problem with that. I am not exactly sure what you are asking me. was there, you're talking about the meeting with Robert Beatty? Chairman Teele: When he indicated that, in the future, that the Oversight Board would take a close look at how the City is allocating Community Development funds, and other funds with a 90 July 13, 1999 view toward insuring that the redevelopment of these areas, which he views is important, is carried out. Mr. Warshaw: Which we view is very important, absolutely. Chairman Teele: Which we all view, right. And therefore, it would be superfluous to have it independent. I am saying, in light of that, which I have never seen them before express any interest in this area, that it's superfluous or redundant to have this Independent Review Committee. Mr. Warshaw: I agree with that. Chairman Teele: Yes, yes. Mr. Warshaw: I feel that that's something that we should do as a City... Chairman Teele: Right. Mr. Warshaw: ... and particularly as we move forward. One day, there is not going to be an Oversight Board, and one of the things I have said and I am starting to say more of now, we need to begin to exhibit that level of independence and start to move forward on our own, so I concur 100 percent. Chairman Teele: Right, and I think, Mr. Attorney, therefore, you can prepare for first reading today the repeal of that. Now, don't that require two readings? Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. Chairman Teele: Contrary to Attorney Plummer's view this morning. Mr. Vilarello: Well, he actually... The Commissioner, actually, did have a handle on the Mason's Rules which most people don't, and... Board Member Plummer: I am a Catholic boy, so I can't be a Mason. Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, it is scheduled for the meeting of the 27th, for first reading. Chairman Teele: OK, and so that will be repealed in light of that. Mr. Foeman: OK. Board Member Plummer: I move to we adjourn. Chairman Teele: A motion to adjourn is always in order. Board Member Plummer: Is always in order. Chairman Teele: Can we agree, please, informally, on the meeting of the CRA the last week of July, please? 91 July 13, 1999 M Board Member Plummer: Monday night? Chairman Teele: Monday night, the 26th? Board Member Plummer: That sounds good to me. Board Member Regalado: No problem, but the 27th, we have a meeting here. Chairman Teele: Six o'clock Monday night, and we'll set a time and a place. There being no other business for the CRA, the CRA is hereby adjourned. THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION, IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ADJOURNED CONSIDERATION OF THE HEREINABOVE ISSUE, IN ORDER TO RESUME CONSIDERATION OF REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Plummer: Excuse me. Ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner Teele has convened the meeting of the CRA. Thank you. 3 8. AUTHORIZE USE OF JAMES L. KNIGHT CENTER AUDITORIUM BY ARIE KADURIE ENTERPRISES FOR "MANA" CONCERTS. Commissioner Plummer: Ladies and gentlemen, as requested... Oh, my God. Yes. I'll have to call you back, bye. Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Plummer: All right, Mr. Gort. Vice Chairman Gort: You know these presentations are very nice, but I want to know who is working in Allapattah right now. Commissioner Plummer: Obviously, nobody. Unidentified Speaker: We have somebody. It's opened. Commissioner Plummer: If you got Bo Lennard here, God help us all. What can I tell you. All right, let me, let Mr. Teele get finished before we start, OK. Unidentified Speaker: Sure. Commissioner Plummer: Mr. Manager, I have a thing here, I'll go ahead and do while we are waiting, if I may? This is from the City Administration, not mine. This is not mine. Vice Chairman Gort: No, I understand, but item sixteen is supposed to be brought back. 92 July 13, 1999