HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEOPW OMNI CRA 2001-06-14 MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR
SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST AND OMNI DISTRICTS
On the 14TH day of June 2001, the Board of Directors of the Community Redevelopment
Agency for the Southeast Overtown/Park West and Omni Districts of the City of Miami met at
City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida.
The meeting was called to order at 3:16 p.m. by Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr., with the
following Board Members found to be present:
Board Member Wifredo Gort
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
ALSO PRESENT:
Carlos A. Gimenez, City Manager, City of Miami
Frank Rollason, Assistant City Manager, Operations, City of Miami
Dena Bianchino, Assistant City Manager, Planning and Development, City of Miami
Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk, City of Miami
Sylvia Scheider, Assistant City Clerk, City of Miami
Linda Haskins, Director, Finance, City of Miami
Dipak Parekh, Executive Director, CRA
1
June 14, 2001
MODIFY RESOLUTION NUMBERS 01-30, 01-31,>01=32, 01'-33 01-34; 01-1; ,-, 01=36, 01-1
37, 01=;38 AND 01-39, BY SUBSTITUTING ACCOUNT.NUMBERS DETAILED THEREIN;
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman, Chairman Gort, could we -- with your permission, could we
convene a very brief meeting of the ...
Board Member Gort: Go right ahead.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Teele: Mr. Manager, would you just stay right where you are, please, and, Dipak,
would you just take the podium. Mr. Chairman, with your permission, could we just have a brief
CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) meeting on some technical issues?
Board Member Gort: Go right ahead.
Chairman Teele: Chelsa, I need an agenda. Mr. Chairman -- I'm sorry. Mr. Manager and Mr.
Attorney, pursuant to some scrivener's errors and a litigation that was initiated as Chairman of
the CRA, I called this meeting today for 2:15. The time is now 3:18 to take up three special
items that were agenda. Those three items involved scrivener's errors regarding budget codes
relating to CRA projects. The second item relates to a requested amendment to address an
existing resolution relating to the study that has been mandated by the County regarding the
restatement and the study of the CRA boundaries, and the third item is to receive a report from
the City Attorney regarding litigation that has been initiated against the City of Miami, and the
CRA. Dipak, would you please explain Item Number 1, which is the scrivener's errors.
It's related to minor budget code designation for previous CRA board resolutions, and would you
provide a satisfactory explanation on the record?
Dipak Parekh (Executive Director, CRA): Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: As to how this occurred, and assurances that it won't occur again?
Mr. Parekh: Absolutely. Good after afternoon, board members. My name is Dipak Parekh,
Executive Director of the CRA. On May 21", the board approved a previously authorized
mandate for consulting services for the Marlins Stadium site location. On that number of
different resolutions, from 1 through 10, had an account code, which had since lapsed, and
therefore, we are substituting for the South East Overtown Park West Tax Increment Funds. So,
we're moving and changing from the account code, which was used, was 799126.456262.9792
and account code 689001.550108.6270. The sufficient funds are there to actually abate all the
different costs for the consultants.
Commissioner Teele: The issue here is that included in our resolutions, pursuant to board
instructions, are the requirement that the minor code budget code be included, which is a good
2 June 14, 2001
requirement. The problem is, is that the wrong minor code was used.
Mr. Parekh: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: OK. So, that's the essence of what the request is. And I would ask for a
motion to approve the scrivener's error.
Board Member Winton: So moved.
Board Member Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Objection? Discussion. Commissioner Sanchez.
Board Member Sanchez: No discussion.
Chairman Teele: All right. Is this objection? All those in favor say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): "Aye."
Chairman Teele: Opposed?
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
SEOPW/CRA 01-71
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
MODIFYING RESOLUTION NUMBERS. 01-30, 01-31, 01-32, 01-33, 01-34,
01-35, 01-36, 01-37, 01-38 AND 01-39, BY SUBSTITUTING THE ACCOUNT
NUMBERS DETAILED THEREIN WITH ACCOUNT NUMBER
689001.550108.6.270.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
3
June 14, 2001
Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
rd
June 14, 2001
z l9: MODIFY RESOLUTION-yT1UMBER`�0;1=""51-BY` INCLUDING :IN. SCOPE. OF SERVICES'
TO; BE PERFORMED':.CONSIDERATION OF, ADJUSTMENT OE, CRA BOUNDARIES EBY
CREATION, OF NEW; `THIRD CITY OF MIAMI COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
§AGENCY BY DESIGNATING AS ADDITIONAL 'CONSULTANTS FORITHIS'�`PROJEC.T.�
RICIiA JUDY AND GUILLEI I ' :;OLMEDILLO;, AND BY PROVIDING THAT TOTAL
COST OF ALL.CONSULTING SERVICES BE HOI;LAND AND KNIGHT LLP, WALLACE
ROBERTS "AND TODD- LLC, RICHARD JUDY AND=-.GUILLERMO. OLMEDILLO.:FOR .
THIS PROJECT SHALL BE $
Chairman Teele: Regarding Item Number 2. We have before us a resolution that essentially is
mandated by the state law and the County. As you are aware, the County reviews the budget of
the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) annually, as does the City. A part of that review
this year includes a review to determine whether or not we're operating pursuant to our plan,
which is pursuant to Chapter 163. Mr. Attorney, would you apprise the board of the instructions
from the County regarding Chapter 163, Redevelopment Plan Update?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): With regard to some issues that we brought before the
County, and changes that we wanted to address with regard to the CRA (Community
Redevelopment Agency), they instructed us -- and it's consistent with the State statute -- the fact
that our master plan had not been revised since, I believe, 1982, and that before they would
consider any of the modifications that we were reviewing, including certain budget approvals,
and imminent domain powers, that they would first need to see a revised master plan approved
by the CRA board.
Chairman Teele: So, at this last board meeting, the CRA approved the master plan. I think
Commissioner Winton had recommended it. Moved it forward, and it was not objectionable at
all. In fact, I think the scope of work, which will be on the next board agenda, which is
scheduled, I suppose, for June the 251'', we will be approving that scope of work of the main
consultants. The purpose of this amendment is to provide for additional instructions to the
consultant to look at the feasibility of a third redevelopment district, which, in effect, would be
available to the City and the County. Included in the request is a request that two consultants,
specifically, be engaged to look at that phase of the study. Those persons include Mr. Dick Judy,
who has really become an expert in 163 and has a very distinguished record of representing the
CRA as well, as the County, and Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo, who was an assistant -- do we have a
resume on Guillermo?
Board Member Gort: He works here at the City. Head of the Planning Department and head of
the Planning Department for Dade County.
Chairman Teele: He worked for the City for how many years?
Board Member Gort: I think over 10 years.
Chairman Teele: Over 10 years. And he went on be the County Planning Director for some 10
years. He is now in private practice with the Swerdlow Corporation, and, most appropriately, he
was recently named by the County as their lead person to study redistricting of the boundaries of
1 June 14, 2001
the County Commission. The purpose of ensuring that Guillermo or someone of his capacity is
there is that anything that we do in this area is going to require the County approval, if anything.
A study is a study and a study is not a plan. And what we're doing is to ensure that a plan be
presented to the board to the Mayor -- to the Manager. Now, I want to just say this to the
Commission, because I was the one vote against the Marlins Stadium, and I don't know if the
press is here. They're probably not. This study, if and when this Commission decides to take up
the Marlins Stadium, will be extremely beneficial to the Manager and the Commission, as an
option, as a possible tool in assisting in financing of a stadium. I am telling you right here, right
now, I'm not for the stadium on the river. I probably will not vote for the stadium again. I will
be the 4-1 vote again, if it comes up. But this study will greatly assist those that may want to
have a stadium and may want to have a stadium on the river. It doesn't do anything but provide
the management and the Commission with an option as to whether or not to do that. And it is
properly a part of an updated plan in that those are the parts of the alternative analysis that you
go through in updating your plan. Do you create another district? Do you reduce your district?
Do you expand your district? Those are the things that you do as a part of 163 in updating your
plan. The only thing that I would like to say is that the instructions that I am asking the
executive director, if this board approves it, is not to approve or create a district or propose a
district that would be modeled after Omni and Southeast Overtown, but a district pursuant to 163
that would use a different model, more like the DDA (Downtown Development Authority)
model, one that would involve private property owners as well, which is a different model than
one that the City of Miami has. But I'm not prejudging that we even will propose it or it makes
sense or that we'll do it, but merely the right to study it and to bring it back to the management
and to the City. Obviously, the things that should be added to this resolution would be further
requiring that the preliminary report be done in consultation with the City of Miami Planning
Department. And would you accept that as a part of a motion, Commissioner Winton that you
would make?
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Chairman Teele: With the amendment requiring that the preliminary report be prepared in
conjunction with the City of Miami Planning Department? Is there a second?
Board Member Regalado: Second.
Board Member Sanchez: Discussion.
Chairman Teele: Discussion. Before we have discussion, could we -- I just would like for the
Manager to at least react to it because what we're talking about is something that is not within the
CRA existing boundaries, under Chapter 163 you are required to study outside of your
boundaries, as well as within your boundaries, at least the contiguous portions to it.
Vice Chairman Winton: Before you ask him to respond, I have a thought about this, and that --
I'm a hundred percent in favor of doing this analysis. I think it's very important and I think it's
overdue. I think there's been discussion about it in the past and I like the idea a lot. I don't
understand why the City isn't paying for this. Because this is outside the tax increment district of
the existing CRA boundaries, and not just adjacent, but potentially a fair amount outside, and this
2 June 14, 2001
is something the City really needs to do this. This study needs to be done.
Chairman Teele: Well, this is the problem, Johnny, on this. First of all, we're required to do a
restatement of our existing boundaries. One of the things that you study in the restatement are
boundary adjustments, contractions or expansions, so it's properly something that could be done
there. Can the City do this independently? Absolutely. Could the City fund this even with the
CRA? Absolutely. But the truth of the matter is, given the close relationship between the City
and the CRA that has existed over the last two years, you know, we've never argued about
money because it, on one hand, we're spending money and on the other hand, we're receiving
grant money from the City. So, you know, I would hope that the City would consider, as a part
of the next year's budget, reimbursing for this, but I don't think -- you know, this is a -- this is
something we've got to have completed within the next 60 days, at least this part of it, and by the
time we get around and making a budget adjustment and all that, you know, it's the frustration
that we all have about how long it takes studies to get done. So, I would hope that the City would
consider would consider reimbursing for it, and I would hope that the City literally would direct
this phase of the study. Literally direct it.
Vice Chairman Winton: So would I.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Manager, this has not been properly, fully vetted with you. I had an
opportunity, five minutes ago, to discuss it briefly with you, and I know you raised some policy
concerns about TIF (Tax Increment Funds), and I think you -- may be a good time to put it on the
record.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As a general policy, this
administration is not in favor of creating any more TIFs. However, we have absolutely no
problem with the issue being studied, and if there's evidence that says that it makes good sense
for it to happen, you know, that will be your policy decision as a Commission when you
convene as a Commission. But I'll restate it again. That this administration is not in favor of
creating any more TIFs in the City. There are obvious operational concerns and future revenue
to operations (inaudible).
Vice Chairman Winton: And I'll tell you. I think that -- and I understand where he's coming
from, and Miami Beach is a classic example, where they established a fairly significant number
of tax increment districts, but -- and they recaptured one hundred percent of the increment, and
therein lies the problem. And, so, when we get ready to deal with this from a policy standpoint,
I'm going to be leaning to -- in a direction that allows the increment district to only capture some
percentage. Maybe it's 50 percent; maybe it's 60 percent, maybe it's 40 percent. I don't know.
We have to figure out what the needs are there. And the rest of the increment is captured by the
general fund of the City so that the City can continue to provide the ongoing and escalating
demands on service that Economic Development is going to bring. So, I don't think that, at least
from my view point, I'm certainly not going to be looking at a hundred percent increment
because I understand how that ties the hands of the City to provide very needed basic
fundamental services once economic redevelopment takes off.
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman, if I may? And I concur with that. Maybe there is a formula where
3 June 14, 2001
we can take care of the infrastructure and also take care of the increasing, demands for services
that have to be funded out of the general fund (inaudible).
Chairman Teele: For the purpose of full disclosure -- and I know, Commissioner Sanchez, you
want to weigh in on this. For the purpose of full disclosure, the notion of this TIF was something
strongly endorsed and proposed by former County Manager Merritt Steirheim. They wanted it
first as a way to pay for the Miami Circle. They wanted it secondarily as a way of paying for the
dredging for the Miami River and I opposed it. I don't know if they've formally -- I mean, I've
had two meetings with Merritt. Both meetings were about this TIF. If this -- if a district were
formed, I would imagine that there would be at least four infrastructure items that would be
considered for a policy purpose. The first and the foremost would be the Marlin Stadium or
some type of financing backdrop or guarantees on a secondary pledge basis for that. That would
take three to four to five years before there would be any real impact on dollars. So, it doesn't
change the number, but it would release City dollars down the road significantly if it were there.
The second issue is the dredging. The third issue is the Circle and the fourth issue would be the
green ways that we're going to wind up getting hit with anyway. And, so, I think -- you know,
the greenways and the Marlins are certainly justifications to look at this as a way of avoiding --
as a way of paying for certain capital expenditures. But I generally concur, one hundred percent,
with everything that the Manager just said, that TIFs generally are not good instruments for
municipal governments, except to carry out a purpose where we know government is just not
going to get around to it, and I think, candidly, the Overtown area is a very clear example of why
you should have a TIF because they'd never get addressed. I think the Omni was done solely for
the benefit of the County, for the performing arts stadium, and that's also another example of a
TIF that we ought to try to end as soon as the funding for the Marlins -- for the Omni. In fact,
we ought to look at how we can bond it -- take it over and eliminate it it and just take up those
dollars and be through with it. So, on the motion. Commissioner Sanchez, you had a concern.
Board Member Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have one concern. Within 60 days the
executive director will provide was a report, a primary scope of the budget for the above -
described service. What are you anticipating this costing -- this study's costing? I mean, because
you're basically asking me to approve something that just has a dollar sign and a blank sign, and
I'm not comfortable with that.
Mr. Parekh: Board members, we will be coming back again to the CRA board with the full
scope of services, which will be delineated by the number of different partners and consultants.
Chairman Teele: In 10 days, on the 251h of June.
Mr. Parekh: So, you will have that at the next board meeting for further discussion.
Chairman Teele: This is simply to negotiate a contract and to prepare it so that they can bring it
to us within 10 days.
Board Member Sanchez: For final approval
Board Member Gort: It's going to come back for approval.
4 June 14, 2001
Board Member Sanchez: For a final approval from the --
Chairman Teele: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Board Member Gort: Right. It's going to come for final approval to us.
Board Member Sanchez: Well, I just, you know -- hey, I don't feel comfortable with just voting
on something that has a dollar sign and a blank line.
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't blame you.
Board Member Gort: I don't blame you. I would do the same -- that's why it's coming back.
Chairman Teele: All right. And the only thing that I would also ask that amend, that it come
back to the CRA through the City Manager, within 60 days. In that way, we can ensure that, you
know, we're not getting the first bite. That it come back through the management's office, and
that would be through the Planning Department and the Manager's office. Is there further
amendments or objections?
Board Member Sanchez: I would like the resume of that gentleman, which I don't know.
Chairman Teele: All right. Chelsa, where is Guillermo Olmedillo? He was the City Planning
Director for 10 years.
Board Member Sanchez: Guillermo Olmedillo.
Chairman Teele: Olmedillo. Do we have his resume?
Mr. Gimenez: You're talking about Guillermo Olmedillo?
Chairman Teele: Yes.
Mr. Gimenez: OK.
Chairman Teele: Chelsa, where -- these people all hide when there's a meeting.
Mr. Parekh: We will get it to you.
Chairman Teele: Where is Gloria? All these -- OK. We'll get it today, within a matter of
minutes.
Board Member Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
5 June 14, 2001
Chairman Teele: All right. Further discussion? And, Commissioner Winton, I really think, that
as a way of saving money, you should look at using some of the similar services that the County
is using in our redistricting effort, which I assume you're looking at as a part of your Charter
Review because there's only one way to count the numbers, the same numbers. All those in
favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
Chairman Teele: Opposed?
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
SEOPW/CRA 01-72
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (THE "CRA") MODIFYING
RESOLUTION NO. 01-51, AS PREVIOUSLY MODIFIED, BY INCLUDING
IN THE SCOPE OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED CONSIDERATION OF
AN ADJUSTMENT OF THE CRA BOUNDARIES BY THE CREATION OF A
NEW, THIRD CITY OF MIAMI COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY, BY DESIGNATING AS ADDITIONAL CONSULTANTS FOR
THIS PROJECT RICHARD JUDY AND GUILLERMO OLMEDILLO; AND
BY PROVIDING THAT THE TOTAL COST OF ALL CONSULTING
SERVICES BY HOLLAND AND KNIGHT LLP, WALLACE ROBERTS &
TODD, LLC, RICHARD JUDY AND GUILLERMO OLMEDILLO FOR THIS
PROJECT SHALL BE IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $ ;
FURTHER REQUESTING THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO REPORT
TO THIS BOARD WITHIN SIXTY (60) DAYS ON THE PRELIMINARY
SCOPE AND BUDGET FOR SUCH SERVICES; AND FURTHER
REQUIRING THAT THE AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH
DOVER KOHL & PARTNERS AND THE CONTRACTS WITH ALL OTHER
CONSULTANTS ON THIS PROJECT TO BE IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
6 June 14, 2001
Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Board Member Wifredo Gort
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
7 June 14, 2001
20. CANIILLUS HOUSE. TO DEVELOP PLAN AS TO HOW THEY, WILL UTILIZE NEW
FACILITY SERVICES:
Chairman Teele: And the final is to receive a report from the City Attorney.
Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado
Board Member Gort: Yes.
Board Member Regalado: Before we listen to the City Attorney, on the last board meeting, I
requested that the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) staff will start looking into the
possibility of different sites for Camillus House. You know, if we want to be in on the spotlight,
on the front page, then we will let this go on, but before there is a crisis, we should at least have
some sites and options and possibilities because this is going to be a very controversial issue, and
it's for the CRA to participate and help the City. What the CRA is doing here is helping the City
and helping the City Commission, which eventually would have to make a decision. So, Dipak
is anything that...
Dipak Parekh (Executive Director, CRA): Board Member, we have met with Camillus House
twice, and they are in the process of delineating a number of different sites, not...
Chairman Teele: Then what we read the paper is not true. I thought they had designated a site.
Mr. Parekh: Yes, but they were also looking at potentially any other sites within also the CRA
and see whether the CRA could actually assist the Camillus House in locating them within our
particular area. I expressed to them that, at this particular moment in time, the amount of land
that we're looking for, we're in litigation with a number of different partners. So, therefore, we
could not really make a decision on that particular site.
Chairman Teele: With all due respect, sir, I would ask that the issue of the siting for the
Camillus House be a part of the 25th agenda.
Mr. Parekh: OK.
Chairman Teele: And Camillus House and that the Camillus House be invited, along with our
lobbyist, a representative. I received a call from Washington -- in fact, two calls from
Washington yesterday from different Congressmen and they -- the Camillus House was in
Washington this week. Congressman Young, Bill Young, who's a very close friend, is extremely
excited. They're talking several millions of dollars of money, and, in fact, it's my understanding
that our lobbyist or our representative was in their company. I've not received a report from you
or from them, but Congressman Young's office did report that this CRA lobbyists was there with
them. So, we need to figure out what we're doing. We apparently are doing our job, but
Commissioner Regalado is one hundred percent right, and I personally want to say this. I don't
think we should have the Camillus House anywhere that they're not wanted, and I think we need
1 June 14, 2001
to look to try to find unanimous consent of a location.
Board Member Gort: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gort.
Board Member Gort: My understanding is -- and this is something we've been doing for quite a
few years now. My understanding is, their services and type of service have changed and they're
willing to even make more changes, and when they come on the 215t, make sure they come with
a plan on how they're going to utilize the new facility they hope to build. All right. I think it
would be very important to know what kind of activities will be taking place because my
understanding is, we've seen the facility been built in different places within the City and so far
they look all right, but I want to make sure we know.
Mr. Parekh: Absolutely.
Board Member Regalado: But, Willy, remember, this is not about the kind of services. This is
about perception, and perception is what creates the crisis.
Board Member Gort: Right.
Board Member Regalado: I'm telling you that ...
Board Member Gort: No. I know that. Believe me, I receive the same phone calls you guys
have. We all receive the same phone calls and the same -- that's why it's important that they
explain and if there is a perception like -- unfortunate, something that City of Miami is, you
come up with an idea and before you can explain what the idea is, there's all kinds of
(unintelligible) different perceptions and rumors going around about how things are going to be.
So, we want to make sure that it's nice and clear and everybody understands because we're going
to have a lot of issues coming up in here that we have to make sure that everyone understand
very clearly.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to put an issue on the record here about Camillus
House because, if you remember, at the CRA board meeting -- I don't know, three or four or five
months ago -- when the issue of Camillus House first came up, I recused myself from any
discussions about Camillus House. You'll notice I haven't done the same thing here. And the
reason I had to recuse myself in the past is because one of the real estate agents that worked for
WinCo Realty Partners had represented Camillus House in a number of their transactions for
many moons, and, so, we were in -- my company was in a position to make money, so the City
Attorney said I can't participate in any dialogue about Camillus House because of that. When the
particular site that -- and, Commissioner Teele, I'd like you to hear this. When that particular site
was -- that they have under contract was put under contract, it was put under contract with the
realtor who worked for my company. The day that he told me that, I won't tell you what I said,
but I went home. I came back the next morning and said, Peter, you have to move your license
away from my company, and that move took a substantial amount of money directly out of my
pocket instantly, .and -- but the reason I did it is because I felt very strongly that what the
2 June 14, 2001
Camillus House wants to do is going to be good for our community over the long-term. What
they do today is bad for our community. What they're going to do is going to be good for our
community, and I realize that I would have to be a leader in this debate on the Camillus House
move and not a Commissioner or a CRA Board Member who had to go to the back room and
wait for the dialogue to be finished. So, that real estate person that used to be employed by my
company is no longer employed by any company and now works for someone else. So, I no
longer have a conflict of interest and no longer have to recuse myself from any dialogue about
Camillus House. And, so, I wanted each of you to know that. There are those who have already
called all the media people out there to announce that I have this great conflict of interest and I
just wanted you all, as individuals, to understand very clearly where that position is.
Board Member Regalado: So, you are the...
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, just a few...
Board Member Regalado: You are -- so, Johnny, you are the first casualty, but not the only one.
Chairman Teele: Well, we need -- we've got a long agenda, but I want to just say this. I really
do think that what the Camillus House is doing now is totally different from what they've been
doing, and if there is an appropriate area in the district that I represent, I'm going to say it right
here right now, I'm not going to object. If there is an appropriate area. I think, however, that in
sitting the Camillus House, where the CRA has tremendous powers outside of our district, under
the state law, we have authority to go outside of our district as it relates to relocation of entities
that are in our district. The CRA should be extremely positive, but I do think we should seek a
location that has unanimous consent of the CRA board and the City Commission board if
possible. And I think that should be the instructions to the Director that we should work toward
finding unanimous consent on that.
Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Teele: And I don't object in my district as long as it's an appropriate location.
Vice Chairman Winton: Nor in mine.
Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, what I said several -- what I said several weeks ago in
the meeting is that the CRA should help Camillus House. I mean, the fact that a particular site
seems to be controversial, doesn't mean that we don't want Camillus House. We do and the CRA
has the resources and the manpower -- and this is why I requested that the staff will look into it.
And, Dipak, I really urge you to come up with something. Is it June 251" or...
Chairman Teele: June 241" or the 25'". Monday.
Board Member Regalado: June...
Chairman Teele: Monday, June 25"'
Board Member Regalado: So, we know because we need to know.
3
June 14, 2001
Chairman Teele: All right. And the resume of Mr. Olmedillo has been passed out and it reflects
that he has a very distinguished record in Housing in Venezuela from the -- appears to be '67
through '80 and from '85 to '95, he worked for the City as the Chief of Zoning and Neighborhood
Planning and as the Director -- Deputy Director and Director of Planning and Zoning, and that he
was the Director of the Department of Planning, Development and Regulations at the County.
So, I just want to put that on the record since it was raised.
0
June 14, 2001
p ,:.
21�. CITY ATTORNEY TO Z PR, , PARE --_RESOLUTION ,RELATED TO CURRENT
,LAWSUITS BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY: AGAINST CITY; TO ` PREVENT ;;FURTHER
9NALOGOE �8ETWEEN MANAGER AND ATTORNEY OF CITY; WITH, MANAGER.AND
'ATTORNEY 'OF MIAMI-DADEN:COUNTY„EXPECT FOR ,MATTERS PERTAINING TO
LAW;AND ORDER, ANY EMERGENCIES; ANI) SERIES OF OTHER MATTERS:`Y -.; Q
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, and we need to get out of here.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, you asked me to present a report to the CRA
(Community Redevelopment Agency) board with regard to litigation that was commenced by
Miami -Dade County. Miami -Dade County filed a lawsuit on June 111h -- that was Monday --
against the City of Miami and the CRA seeking to extinguish the interest of the City and the
CRA and three lots in the Overtown Park West community redevelopment project. These
parcels are blocks 36, 45 and in 56-N. I don't have a document to show you exactly the location
of those lots. The complaint further claims that the development did not timely ensue and that
the parcels needed to automatically revert to Miami -Dade County. There are significant factual
issues involved in this case, including the significant improvements and dollars spent by the City
and the CRA to improve those lots to the current condition, and to the extent that they are a part
of two developments that had taken place on that property, which have not gone through,
through no fault of the City or the CRA, and obviously it's at a very early stage in the litigation.
We have significant defenses to the County's claim and we'll pursue those defenses.
Chairman Teele: Under the law, does the County have the duty to arbitrate before they file a
lawsuit?
Mr. Vilarello: Florida Statute requires the County -- any local government that is intent on
entering into litigation with another local government to first notify the other government and
enter into a mediation process in order to avoid the unnecessary expenditure of attorney's fees.
Dade County has, in the past, failed to comply with that. There are attorney's fees that are
chargeable to a party of local government that does not do that.
Chairman Teele: So, if we go out and hire lawyers, the -- it is probable or possible that the legal
fees would have to be paid by the County as a result of failure to comply with that statute?
Mr. Vilarello: With regard to failure to comply with that statute, not necessarily with regard to
them (inaudible) litigation.
Chairman Teele: Well, I would hope that we would have a battery of lawyers ready for a board
approval of June 25, as it relates to the CRA on the matter. And it would be my intent in the
context of a Commission meeting to instruct you to prepare a resolution to be acted upon today
that, in effect, creates a circumstance where the Manager and the attorney will work with the
Manager and attorney of the County, and that expect for matters of emergency that there will be
no further discussions with the two staffs. You don't sue people and then talk about how you can
work together, and -- I mean, I'm willing to exempt the Marlins Stadium. The Marlins Stadium
discussion on that, but as far as I'm concerned, except law an order matters, public safety
matters, and a series of other matters, including the Marlins Stadium, we need to just basically
June 14, 2001
pull up the drawbridge and say we're not going to talk because you're not going to sue us -- this
is the second lawsuit, and one thing is for sure, the County is serious. We're talking. And, so,
this is a CRA meeting, so we should discuss it in the context of a Commission meeting later on
today, but I'm going to ask, Mr. Attorney, you prepare a resolution that prevents a whole lot of
dialogue on a lot of stuff and that we could basically get ourselves focused on what's in the best
interest of the City because it's clear to me that the County is doing what's in the best interest of
the County. Are there any other matters, Mr. Director, to come before -- and will we have the
agenda packets out as well -- ahead of time for the -- for Commissioner Sanchez and the board?
And it's going to be a financial meeting primarily, is that right?
Dipak Parekh (Executive Director, CRA): Primarily, it is, yes.
Chairman Teele: OK. Consistent with the mid -year adjustments. Thank you very much. Are
there any other matters to come before the CRA? If not, the CRA meeting is adjourned and
thank you very much, Commissioner Gort -- Chairman for allowing us to take up...
Board Member Gort: My pleasure.
2 June 14, 2001
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 3:50 P.M.
ATTEST:
Walter Foeman
CITY CLERK
Sylvia Scheider
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR.
CHAIRPERSON
(S E A L)
June 14, 2001