HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEOPW OMNI CRA 2002-07-29 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI
I] El
t
-4 mob
i
• s
i
W0 1
!, mkmw
MEETING
MINUTES
OF MEETING HELD ON JULY 295 2002
PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL
Priscilla A. Thompson/City Clerk
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR
SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST AND OMNI DISTRICTS
On the 29th day of July 2002, 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
the Old Miami Arena, VIP Room, 701 Arena Boulevard, Miami, Florida.
The meeting was called to order at 5:14 p.m. by Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr., with the
following Board Members found to be present:
Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Board Member Angel Gonzalez
ALSO PRESENT:
Carlos A. Gimenez, City Manager, City of Miami
Frank Rollason, Assistant City Manager, City of Miami
Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney, City of Miami
William R. Bloom, Special Counsel, CRA, City of Miami
Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk, City of Miami
Sylvia Scheider, Assistant City Clerk, City of Miami
Annette Lewis, Executive Director, CRA, City of Miami
David Hernandez, Director, Construction Management, City of Miami
Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director, Planning & Zoning, City of Miami
Anna Rojas, Chief Deputy Clerk, City of Miami
An invocation was delivered by Chairman Teele, who then led those present in a pledge of
allegiance to the flag.
1 July 29, 2002
.., ,. 1. ,
1. DEFER CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ACCEPTANCE OF PRELIMINARY 2003
BUDGET FOR DISCUSSION; PROPOSED RESOLUTION RECEIVING MONTHLY
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF MAY 31 AND JUKE 30, 2002; AND PROPOSED
RESOLUTION RECEIVING DRAFT AUDITED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND MANAGEMENT LETTER AS PREPARED BY KPMG.
Chairman Teele: Ladies and gentlemen, the meeting scheduled for today, July 291h, is called to
order. For the record, the Chairman notes the absence of one board member. Is there any matter
which any member would like deferred or not taken up?
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Is this on? I have a suggestion on the -- I forget what agenda items they
are, but the ones related to -- I think there's agenda items in here related to audits.
Chairman Teele: Item 7.
Vice Chairman Winton: And this year's financials and budget, and all that stuff.
Chairman Teele: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Winton: And the thought that I have -- because there's a lot of stuff in all of this,
and there's a lot of hard work going on right now in pulling all of these pieces together. And my
suggestion is that we take all of this stuff, which would be the 2000 audit, which includes the
management letter; the 2001 audit, with the management letter, the year-to-date financials for
this year, the budget for next year, and combine all of that into "the" agenda item for our
September board meeting, so that we would have a board meeting that's essentially just
dedicated to the whole financial thing, and we can focus on all of that. Make sure that our
auditors are here, any other people that we need here, would be present to answer any of the
questions that we have about the whole -- from a historical perspective and prospective position
related to our financials, and leave here, at the end of that meeting, with a clear cut picture of
both history and future and action steps to do whatever we need to do, particularly, tied to the
management letters.
Board Member Sanchez: Is that in the form of a motion?
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, it's a discussion.
Board Member Sanchez: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's not a motion.
2 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: I certainly don't have an objection, as long as it's a special meeting near the
beginning of September and not at the end. And the problem -- and the challenge becomes, we
have an obligation to transmit to the City of Miami a budget --
Board Member Sanchez: A budget.
Vice Chairman Winton: By when?
Chairman Teele: -- to coincide with the final budget hearing.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, what's the timing of that?
Chairman Teele: So, we would need to have a special meeting within the first two weeks of
September.
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): Well, we have one scheduled for the 9`h, September
9t". (INAUDIBLE) OK. It's the final 2002 budget. That's the only item that I would ask that
gets addressed or authorized today. That's in conjunction with the completion of the audit,
because a few of the numbers changed in terms of the beginning balances. And in order to finish
the year and get, you know, properly -- from an operating standpoint, I would like to visit the
fiscal --
Chairman Teele: Well, I don't have a problem with that, as long as we can revisit it on the 9`h
Vice Chairman Winton: Exactly. Because going through all of these other issues is going to
help us. You know, we're going to get some answers to questions, and we're going to have
some thoughts about things that may impact the budgets. So, I agree with you, Commissioner
Teele.
Ms. Lewis: Well, that's -- we're talking about the fiscal year that we're in. I'm not talking about
2003.
Chairman Teele: No. But what I'm saying is this, as long as we can take that item up again on
September the 91h __
Ms. Lewis: Not a problem, sir.
Chairman Teele: -- I don't have a problem.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: I think that works. So, the motion, then, would be to defer items 5, 6, 7, and 8.
Vice Chairman Winton: Not 8, because 8 is I Ith Street.
3 July 29, 2002
VA,
Chairman Teele: We would only take up 7B and 7C today, with an understanding that it would
come back to us on the 7`" -- on September 91", as well.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Board Member Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: That's a motion by Commissioner Winton, second by Commissioner Sanchez.
Do you understand the motion, Madam Director?
Ms. Lewis: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: Further discussion?
Board Member Sanchez: None.
Chairman Teele: All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 02-127
OMNI MOTION NO. 02-59
A MOTION TO DEFER CONSIDERATION OF:
ITEM 5: PROPOSED ACCEPTANCE OF PRELIMINARY 2003 BUDGET
FOR DISCUSSION;
ITEM 6: PROPOSED RESOLUTION RECEIVING MONTHLY FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AS OF MAY 31 AND JUNE 30, 2002; AND
ITEM 7A: PROPOSED RESOLUTION RECEIVING DRAFT AUDITED
SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND MANAGEMENT
LETTER AS PREPARED BY KPMG.
4 July 29, 2002
Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Board Member Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
5 July 29, 2002
2. STATUS ON SEARCH FOR NEW CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.
Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Yes, sir.
Board Member Regalado: Before we proceed, I'd like to give you a report on -- as you all know,
I was charged with the responsibility of working on the search for a CRA (Community
Redevelopment Agency) Executive Director. We are now in the process of compiling the
information that the City of Miami Human Resource Department will use to draft the job
description. On Tuesday, July 16`", I sent an email requesting input from each of the members of
this Board. As of now, we have received one response from Board Member Johnny Winton. So,
at the end of this week, the process will move forward. I will submit the information to Human
Resources, to draft a job description that will be advertised to the public. If you --
Board Member Sanchez: My office responded to that. I just --going to clarify right now.
Board Member Regalado: OK. Tony, we need to find out, anyway. If you all wanted to -- for
me to wait before we get --
Board Member Sanchez: We did respond.
Board Member Regalado: You did respond. So, we need to -- we have two board members, and
we need to -- so, Mr. Chairman, if you -- we will tomorrow, and the rest of the week, get back to
the other members of the Commission. So, Commissioner Sanchez has already responded. So --
and we need Commissioner Gonzalez, and your input, if you want to, on this matter, and then
we'll send. We have already identified some addresses and publications, where we can publish
advertising on this matter. So, the process is going and it's going well. So, when we get the
input from the board members, I'll notify you and we will proceed. So, that's the only thing I
wanted to mention, just for the record, that we are working on this.
6 July 29, 2002
M
3. PROVIDE CASH AND IN -KIND GRANT TO MUSIC FEST MIAMI, $25,000, FOR
ANNUAL MUSIC FEST EVENT SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE FROM AUGUST 30 TO
SEPTEMBER 1; PROVIDE THAT IN -KIND PORTION OF $5,000 IS FOR RENTAL OF
MIAMI ARENA FOR AUGUST 30', 2002 EVENT AND SAID LOCATION.
Chairman Teele: All right. Item number 1 of the Consent Agenda. I note the presence of
Commissioner Carey, who's here, I think, on item number 4 --
Board Member Sanchez: Four.
Chairman Teele: -- and item number 17. And, Commissioner, it's a pleasure to have you here.
Is there anyone who would like to move item number 4?
Board Member Sanchez: So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
Board Member Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved for its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-128
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST (SEOPW) COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) PROVIDING A CASH AND IN -KIND GRANT TO MUSIC
FEST MIAMI IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000 FOR THE
ANNUAL MUSIC FEST EVENT SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE FROM
AUGUST 30 TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2002 (LABOR DAY WEEKEND);
FURTHER PROVIDING THAT THE IN -KIND PORTION OF $5,000 IS
STRICTLY FOR THE RENTAL OF THE MIAMI ARENA FOR THE AUGUST
30TH, 2002 EVENT AND SAID LOCATION.
7 July 29, 2002
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Carey, do you feel the need to say anything?
Board Member Sanchez: Thank you.
Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler: (INAUDIBLE) I'm going to stay until the meeting is
over.
Chairman Teele: No. We're delighted that you do it.
Commissioner Carey-Shuler: Thank you very much.
Chairman Teele: Certainly hope you have a book -- someone has provided her with a full book
of the agenda, please.
Board Member Regalado: And, I Commissioner Carey, I -- last year, I think that you were very
successful on the festival. I think that this year, though, we should make a more concerted effort
in the media. Because I think that, you know, we can get a lot of free publicity from Miami Fest,
and that would draw people. So, I think, you know -- and I offer myself to give you some
advice, in terms of who to contact in the different media outlets.
Commissioner Carey-Shuler: Thank you. I accept graciously, and we (INAUDIBLE). Again,
thank all of you, and I certainly accept that, and would love to meet with you. We do have
someone working with us, with the media and, certainly, we'd like to sit down with you so that
we can do a better job with the media, so that we can highlight the City of Miami and what's
going on Labor Day weekend for the working people here. So, I look forward to getting with
you. And thank all of you for the wonderful support for this signature event for downtown
Miami. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: And thanks for all your hard work, too.
Commissioner Carey-Shuler: I'd tell you some of the things we're doing, if you'd like. Thema,
you want to tell them some of the media things that we're doing? I do know that we -- last year,
8 July 29, 2002
1.. <1,0,
Convention and Business Bureau targeted 14 different markets outside of Miami to highlight the
festival, and we did have a number of folks come in here from that media campaign. But I think
we need to also do more in town. This is Thema, who's part of staff, and she can tell you some
of the media things we're doing.
Thema Campbell: OK. Thank you, Commissioner. I don't know if any of you have been
listening to Love 94 this weekend, but our media campaign started this weekend on Love 94.
They've been announcing the festival all weekend long. We've got tons of phone calls in the
office. The phones were flooded. We also have almost every major radio station in Miami -Dade
County, from Love 94, Hot 105, WEDR, and all the Spanish radio stations are working with us.
They're all our radio partners. We have The Miami Herald, The Miami Times, all the
community newspapers, but we welcome any other input that you have to help us highlight this
event more in the media. Are there any other questions? OK. Thank you so much. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: OK. Thank you very much.
Ms. Campbell: You're welcome.
9 July 29, 2002
1. ",.or
4. ACCEPT REPORT FROM CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REGARDING CRA
DIRECTIVES; REPORT FROM DIRECTOR OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT;
REPORT FROM POLICY AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATOR.
Chairman Teele: Item number 1, 2, and 3 is here for information purposes. Is there a motion to
accept items 1, 2, and 3, accepting reports?
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Board Member Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor --
Vice Chairman Winton: I would like to comment, if you don't mind. I went through items 1, 2,
and 3, and I have to say, Commissioner Teele, that this was really -- it helps immensely putting
the bigger picture into perspective, in tracking what we're doing. I thought it was just terrific.
So, my hats off to your for thinking of this stuff and getting it in. I think it's going to be a big
help to all of us.
Chairman Teele: Well, I guess I want to pass through that, directly to the staff, David
Hernandez, and the consultants. I think the important thing here is that virtually all of the
information is certainly available and, perhaps, we need to get more of this information presented
up at the beginning of the year, the budget. And each of the projects that's contained in here, for
example, are being carried forth in our capital budget for almost three years, with few
exceptions, going back to the planning document, which takes place -- which took place on -- in
'98. But, in any event, we have the motion and the second. All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 02-129
OMNI MOTION NO. 02-60
A MOTION ACCEPTING THE FOLLOWING REPORTS:
1. REPORT FROM THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REGARDING CRA
DIRECTIVES.
2. REPORT FROM THE DIRECTOR OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT.
3. REPORT FROM THE POLICY AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATOR.
10 July 29, 2002
(Here follows body of motion, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Board Member Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
11 July 29, 2002
5. APPROVE AND TRANSMIT ADJUSTED BUDGET OF SEOPW COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING 2002 TO COMMISSION AND
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY.
APPROVE AND TRANSMIT ADJUSTED BUDGET OF OMNI COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING 2002 TO COMMISSION AND
MIAMI-DARE COUNTY.
Chairman Teele: Now, we've agreed to -- temporarily to defer items 5 and 6, 7A. Seven-B, Ms.
Lewis.
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): Seven-B is --
Chairman Teele: With the understanding, now, this is going to come back on the 9th, again.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's correct.
Ms. Lewis: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Chairman Teele: Moved and --
Board Member Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All in favor say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-130
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST (SEOPW) COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) APPROVING AND TRANSMITTING THE ADJUSTED
BUDGET OF THE SEOPW COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING 2002 AS DETAILED IN EXHIBIT "A" TO THE
CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY.
12 July 29, 2002
, - 4
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Teele: Seven-C.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Chairman Teele: Is there --
Board Member Sanchez: Seven-C -- wait a minute. Seven-C -- OK. Is that --
Ms. Lewis: It's the Omni portion.
Vice Chairman Winton: This is the Omni CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), as
opposed to the --
Chairman Teele: It's the Omni CRA.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- Southeast Overtown/Park West.
Board Member Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
Board Member Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
13 July 29, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. OMNI 02-61
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OMNI
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) APPROVING AND
TRANSMITTING THE ADJUSTED BUDGET OF THE OMNI COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING 2002 AS
DETAILED IN EXHIBIT "A" TO THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION AND
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzdlez
Chairman Teele: Now, those items will -- are requested to come back.
14 July 29, 2002
6. INSTRUCT CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO MEET WITH APPROPRIATE CITY
STAFF, AS WELL AS WITH COUNTY'S PUBLIC WORKS STAFF, TO DEVELOP JOINT
PROJECT AS IT RELATES TO NORTHWEST 11TH STREET PARKING PROJECT.
Chairman Teele: Item number 8. Is Mr. --
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): Cesar Calas and David Hernandez.
Chairman Teele: Is Mr. Calas here? Is he here? I didn't see him.
Ms. Lewis: Hernandez.
Chairman Teele: Huh? David? Why don't we just take a minute and -- could you go very
briefly over item 8 here, David?
David Hernandez: David Hernandez, Director of Construction Management, CRA (Community
Redevelopment Agency). Cesar Calas is in a meeting and he's -- probably should be coming
here shortly. But anyway, let me overview what I Vh Street -- what I'm trying to accomplish
here on 1 lth Street. Eleventh Street is basically the heart of where the Entertainment District is.
Eleventh Street is a thoroughfare that we're speaking about, somewhere between Northwest 2nd
Avenue, all the way out to about Northwest 3rd Avenue -- from Biscayne to 3Td Avenue, I'm
song, Northwest. The purpose of this is basically to go ahead and rebuild, somehow, and rebuild
11 th Street. And it would be very -- the street is about 70 years old. I think that what we need to
do is work together with the Department of Public Works, with CRA, and together we need to
come up with a plan to rebuild this street, and to put back those dollars that, you know, we've
collected. And it is the heart and soul of that Entertainment District. And my recommendation
with 11 th Street is, basically -- again, it's a 70-year-old street. We need to upgrade the utilities.
It's an old street. And my recommendation is really to implement a highway improvement
project along this business corridor. And I urge the support of the CRA board to, basically, work
together with the City of Miami Manager and the Public Works Department, so that, together, we
could implement this project.
Board Member Regalado: Question.
Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Lewis: Go ahead.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez, Commissioner Regalado.
Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, looking at the report that I have -- I have a report here
for cost estimate of one point four million dollars ($1,400,000). And, then, on another page that
I have, following that page, it's a total two point seven million dollars ($2,700,000). I would like
to -- an explanation as to what is the difference -- I mean, what is it exactly that you're doing.
You're talking about paving and redoing the curbs and gutter and sidewalk on what -- you're
looking at about what, three quarters of a mile?
15 July 29, 2002
M
Mr. Hernandez: Correct.
Board Member Sanchez: And it's one point four million dollars ($1,400,000)? I mean, that's --
Mr. Hernandez: That would be just, basically --
Board Member Sanchez: I think that's a huge cost.
Mr. Hernandez: That would be a -- just, basically, rebuilding the street, replacing curb and
gutter, sidewalk, existing -- you know, put in new paving, add drainage, landscaping. The rest of
the other costs will be more into giving it the other side, which is the uplift. Basically, it would
be more like including security --
Board Member Sanchez: Fine.
Mr. Hernandez: -- including --
Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Hernandez, that's fine.
Mr. Hernandez: OK.
Board Member Sanchez: But, what I would like --
Mr. Hernandez: OK.
Board Member Sanchez: -- is -- if every project under a project accounting, you know, time
certain, cost certain, and project certain. If the project is going to cost one point four million
dollars ($1,400,000), then that should include everything, not throw a number one point four
million dollars ($1,400,000), and then, later on, have another number of "X" amount of dollars.
Now, I still think -- and it needs to be broken down -- I think that's a pretty huge cost for three
quarters of a mile, you're going to spend one point four million dollars ($1,400,000). Well,
forget -- that's one point four, and then two point seven. It's just a caution that I have. I'm
concerned with --
Mr. Hernandez: No. The two point seven is including the one point five. Your construction is
one point five.
Board Member Sanchez: OK. So, one point four million dollars ($1,400,000) is just the road.
You're going to pave the road. And then the rest --
Mr. Hernandez: Rebuild the road.
Board Member Sanchez: Rebuild the road.
16 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: Hold it, Mr. Hernandez.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: You need to ,low down and explain the difference between repaving a road --
Board Member Regalado: Yeah. What is rebuilding?
Chairman Teele: -- and rebuilding a road. It's a world of difference, Mr. Hernandez.
Mr. Hernandez: Rebuilding -- in reference to rebuilding the road, you would take -- the road
right now is about 70 years old. It would, basically, remove the existing asphalt that's there, the
existing line block base, the existing sidewalks that are broke, the existing drainage that's there,
and we would rebuild the road by putting in brand new drainage, new asphalt, new sidewalks,
new lighting, new curb and gutter.
Board Member Sanchez: OK.
Mr. Hernandez: Now, that's rebuilding.
Board Member Sanchez: Are you doing any underground work?
Mr. Hernandez: Yes.
Board Member Sanchez: OK.
Mr. Hernandez: That would include underground work. In other words, we would, at that
moment in time, work with the utility companies so they could come in and upgrade those
utilities. For instance, their water mains, the electrical mains -- I mean, their electrical lines. If
there's any gas mains up.
Board Member Sanchez: Let -- I think you've answered my question.
Mr. Hernandez: OK.
Board Member Sanchez: So, it's one point four million dollars ($1,400,000) --
Mr. Hernandez: Correct.
Board Member Sanchez: -- for the road repairs that you're going to do?
Mr. Hernandez: Road improvements.
Board Member Sanchez: All right, road improvements. That's three quarters of a mile. The
Harlemon Park project in my district, which was five blocks by six blocks, everything that
you're doing here, basically, was done there. It was one point three million dollars ($1,300,000).
17 July 29, 2002
Now, on the other side of the two point seven -- I'm baffled with global security, 1 month, one
hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000). There are some things here that --
Sarmiento, seventy-two thousand dollars ($72,000). So, you're also going to be putting
benches?
Mr. Hernandez: Correct. In other words, the proposed construction is one thing, and the
elements --
Chairman Teele: The project.
Mr. Hernandez: -- is the other.
Unidentified speaker: Correct.
Chairman Teele: The road is one element of the project.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind. I'm in the same quandary that
Commissioner Sanchez is in, and that is, when I turn the page and look at the two point seven
million, you know, the page before is one point four, and -- and, David, this stuff ought to be --
so that everybody's clear, you know, it should -- page 2 of the -- or page 3 of the text says, "Cost
estimate in bold print. The estimated cost of this improvement," which is partially, or -- well, let
me back up a step. As far as I was concerned, the cost of the improvement was defined here.
So, as far as I knew, the cost of this thing is one point four million dollars ($1,400,000). Then,
you turn the page and you look at this other stuff, and the construction cost of something alone is
one point five. The problem isn't what we're doing. The problem is how we're showing what
we're doing. We have to show things so that everybody sitting in the audience, and those of us
who have to set the policy and be held accountable for the dollars, know precisely what we're
doing, and we can look at it and it's crystal clear. This -- you explaining it to me -- I understand
what you're saying. I can't figure it out from this. I can't tell the difference between what
you're describing and what this two point seven million dollars ($2,700,000) says. So, we just
have to get better at presenting the information. There isn't -- there's probably not going to be
an argument, but we can't tell, because we jumble this stuff up and it simply isn't clear. My
recommendation is that y'all provide -- and, Mr. Chairman, you may want us to take some sort of
action, because maybe something --
Chairman Teele: Well, the action requested -- I guess that's what I'm a little bit confused about.
The action that is requested is -- this is background information. The action requested is to
request the City Commission to take this project, to redefine it, to refine it, and to implement it.
The CRA, again, as I view it, should not implement any project that the City can best implement.
And that's why most of the projects that we implement, for example, the utilities, are done
through the Public Works Department. I think the thing that's missing -- and I'm glad
Commissioner Carey is here, because I've said this before. The thing that's missing is that we
have the problem of seeing ourselves as City of Miami, but we're not City of Miami when we sit
here. We're a redevelopment authority, and we should be drawing on the State of Florida, on
Miami -Dade County, and the City, equally. And I think the recommendation should be to
request the City Commission and the County Commission to come -- to work with us on this
18 July 29, 2002
project. And if the County DOT (Department of Transportation) can implement it -- I mean, if
the County Public Works can implement it, I don't have a problem. Because the numbers are
just budget estimated numbers. These are not contract numbers. These are budget estimated
numbers based upon the various components. But what the CRA is saying is, here are the
components we want. For example, if the City does this, they would not put in the kind of
benches that we would put in. They would not put in the kind of lighting.
Mr. Hernandez: That is correct.
Chairman Teele: And the lighting is going to be determined, not by us, but more so by the
property owners. I mean, that's the different role that we play.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, it should be determined by the master plan or developer --
Chairman Teele: Or the master plan --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- that has input from the property owners.
Chairman Teele: Which is the planning consultant, which is in the midst of doing that in terms
of all of that. So, the -- I take to heart all of the concerns that are raised, but I would ask that we
look at the recommendation, and why it's before. And it is -- it reads here, "To request the City
Commission to instruct the Manager of Public Works to implement the highway improvement as
a priority, because the business corridor is a lifeline of survival of the 24-hour Entertainment
District." What it does not talk about is dollars.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: OK. And that's the big issue to me is, is that I don't think that the CPA should
be asked to pay for anything other than those enhancements, you know, over and above what the
City would normally do. I mean, this is a street. If it rains, it's under water. I mean, whether
we're here or not, the City Public Works Department has an obligation to do it. The one point
four million dollars ($1,400,000), which is the estimated cost, based upon so many linear feet. I
think it's 3.75 per linear foot, at 50 foot wide industrial street, 3,900 blocks. You know, those
numbers will work themselves out, based upon a bid. Maybe we're high. Maybe we're low.
But that number is the number that I think the City should be responsible for. And without
getting directly into it, that's sort of what we think that the CRA staff and the City staff ought to
be trying to do. Now, whether -- you know, there's no talk about money here. Whether this
comes from the impact fees or whether it comes from the so-called parking surcharge, which is
where I think this money should be coming from, is parking surcharge -- I mean, those are the
kinds of things that we expect staff to get on. The real issue before us is, do we want to endorse
this project as a CRA Board, and put our full weight and responsibility behind it, and instruct our
staff to work with the City staff to come back with a plan, to do this on a priority and expedited
basis? Commissioner Regalado.
Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I think that concerns expressed by Commissioner
Sanchez are the concerns that we all have, because we see these numbers and we don't
19 July 29, 2002
ter„ -�. ,00
understand exactly the nature of the expenditures. However, my concern, because -- as a matter
of fact, we're not approving any money right now, although, it may look that we are approving
or endorsing something that is more expensive to do here, than in other areas of the City. My
concern is what Commissioner Winton said. You know, you're not presenting, the right way, the
right thing to do. And let me tell you, if, as a board member, I have to make a decision to spend
any money to fix that street, in order to help the Entertainment District, as a board member of the
CRA, I will not hesitate. However, when you bring that to the City Commission, you have to
look at the big picture. You have people crying in Little Haiti, in West Little Havana, in East
Little Havana, Flagami, for streets and sidewalks and all that, and you need to have a good
presentation, you know, with all the details. I would suggest to you that you take pictures of that
street, as it is right now --
Mr. Hernandez: They're attached to your -- with all due respect, they are attached to your --
Board Member Regalado: OK.
Mr. Hernandez: OK.
Board Member Regalado: But -- no, no. I'm talking for the City Commission.
Mr. Hernandez: OK.
Board Member Regalado: Not for the CRA Board. And make a presentation of what it is and
what it should be, and what that street will do for the Entertainment District. In that way, you
know, us and the people would understand the need to move forward on that project. Do I
support the concept? Yes, I do, as a CRA board member. The Entertainment District is one of
the crown jewels that we can present as the work of this agency. However, I'm uncomfortable
with the amount attached, because we don't know. I mean, like --
Mr. Hernandez: Again, these were just ballpark estimates.
Board Member Sanchez: Who made these estimates? Who made these estimated costs? Was it
Mr. Hernandez: Well, I made the original estimated costs. The attachments are, obviously -- on
the back of the attachments, obviously, they're enhancements. Depending on what type of --
again, it depends on what trees you put in, it depends on what we decide our planning
consultants decide what type of trees to put in, what type of lighting to put in or, you know --
again, if we're going to put some type of benching or we're not going to --
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: May I make a suggestion here? And that is, staff go back and -- unless
there's something time sensitive here -- but rework this and put in -- separate the costs into two
categories. Category one would be the baseline stuff that -- where you have so ably articulated
20 July 29, 2002
the fact that the City, with its tax dollars, should have done "X" amount just in terms of baseline
kind of stuff, period. That's one piece of the -- and that ought to be articulated on a line item
basis, like you did the total thing back here. And that's a subtotal. The second subtotal is going
to be all of the enhancement work that the CRA should be responsible for providing the dollars
for, and if we can recruit some more money, hallelujah, and that's a second subtotal, with a
grand total. And then it's going to be clear to us what the money is going to be going for. And a
second part is that on the bottom of the second page, there is something about the chilled water
plant, located -- and that's tying into the chilled water plant. It isn't clear to me -- there is a
suggestion there. It isn't clear to me that whether or not that suggestion on the chilled water
plant is rearticulated, in terms of dollars, on the second page summary or not.
Chairman Teele: It's not. There are no dollars associated with that, yet.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. But as we read this stuff, then, in the future, if you have that
suggestion in here, put in there, so that we're clear, "there are no dollars associated with this. It's
just something we're researching." And then we're all clear on that. But I would break these
two things into two component parts. And unless we need to take an action today, you could
bring that back, rearticulate it. If we need to take an action today, then bring it up and --
Chairman Teele: I would think that the action that's really needed is to instruct the Director to
meet with the appropriate City staff, and to develop a joint --
Board Member Sanchez: Absolutely.
Chairman Teele: To instruct the Director to meet with the appropriate staff, and to come back, in
September, with a joint project. And to meet with County staff, as well Public Works staff, as
well.
Board Member Sanchez: OK. So move that.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: Further discussion. Just on the point. The reason is is that, I think, one of the
things that we don't do a really good job here is bragging and touting. The area here has seen a
ten -fold increase in taxes. In other words, in the last four years, you can pull property by
property. The taxes have gone up times ten, and yet, the -- we have an obligation. We heard this
over there within the Omni District, with Eugene Rodriguez. Well, in this area -- I guess they're
passing out --
Ms. Lewis: (INAUDIBLE) the numbers are listed in item 5 of the agenda, where there's a
spreadsheet showing, from inception to date --
Chairman Teele: This is Omni. This is the Omni (INAUDIBLE)
Ms. Lewis: -- of both the Southeast Overtown/Park West, which is two separate assessments,
and the Omni. So, they're a part of the rest of them.
21 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: In any event, the taxes are really going up. We're going to have to provide
some services, clearly some services to the property owners. The important thing is, I think --
the thing that most folks want are the basic things that government provides, better roads, better
sidewalks, better lighting, bet*tir security, better policing. And, obviously, the thing that just
keeps coming back and back and back is parking. I mean, you know, we heard this over there
when we had our board meeting in the -- at Big Time Studios. I don't know if you've driven by
there. As you know, Bad Boy is going to be -- you know, we've been very fortunate to have two
major films there, over the last 90 days, through the summer. But the biggest problem you've
got over there is the lack of parking. I mean, people are parking on grass. And, thank God, we
have a NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) office that's got their head screwed on right
and they're not over there ticketing people. But the fact of the matter is, is that we've got some
serious problems in the Design -- in the Movie District and in the Entertainment District, and
that's one of the things that we need to focus in on. I would very much like to see the City and
the County sit down with us, as quickly as we can, on this. The real big issue is the water main,
to be very honest, and where they are on that -- where that project is, water and sewer. So, we
have a motion. We have a second. Is there further objection or discussion? All those in --
Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, just a question. On this picture taken on July 171h, 1 lch
Street, between Northwest 2nd Avenue, Northwest 3rd Avenue facing west, who's doing
construction there? Is it WASA (Water and Sewer Authority) or --
Board Member Sanchez: That could be anybody.
Board Member Regalado: -- AT&T (American Telephone & Telegraph), or who is it?
Ms. Lewis: Construction on that block, right now, is being done by Club Space.
Board Member Regalado: What?
Ms. Lewis: Club Space. They're doing construction. They are on that block.
Mr. Hernandez: Which picture are you referring to, Commissioner?
Board Member Regalado: This one, I Ith Street, between Northwest 2nd Avenue, Northwest 3rd
Avenue. The street is half closed. So, it has barricades on half of the street. So, my question is,
is it AT&T, WASA, or what kind of -- or private --
Mr. Hernandez: That particular picture is the construction that's being done on -- between 3rd
Avenue and 2°d. That's the Solomon Yuken Arena Square, placing of the water main on the
side.
Board Member Sanchez: Eleventh Street?
Mr. Hernandez: This is I lth Street, between 2nd and 3rd Avenue. What they're doing is -- that's
Miami -Dade WASA working outside there, working for that new building that's being --
22 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: Well, why don't you say that doesn't relate to the subject that we're on right
now.
Mr. Hernandez: Correct. That's just a particular subject. That's just construction.
Board Member Regalado: Well, to me, it does, because it's -- I mean, if they go ahead and do
some kind of work and then they patch that the wrong way, or if they're going to fix the whole
sidewalk, you know, we need to be involved. Because, after all, we're going to do the whole
proj ect.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager, Operations): No. We put a moratorium on there,
Commissioner. And we would get with the different utilities, and we would let people know that
we're tearing the street up for rebuild, and they would have the time to come in and put the
things in they've got to do. The chilled water thing is just something I want --
Chairman Teele: Wait. Let's clear up the --so that we don't -- if Mr. Hernandez is right -- I
can't fine -- could I see the picture you're looking at?
Vice Chairman Winton: Here. Here.
Board Member Sanchez: It's got a date on it. It's 7-17-2000, I think.
Board Member Regalado: Seven -seventeen.
Ms. Lewis: They all have that.
Board Member Sanchez: Two thousand two.
Ms. Lewis: But this is on 2na Avenue and 3ra.
Board Member Regalado: Second Avenue and 3ra
Chairman Teele: Well, I don't know how this picture is -- oh, OK. This picture is 11`h Street,
west of the railroad tracks, west of the club district, but it's a part of the subject matter of I Ith
Street.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: In other words, we're not going to do what Miami has always done, that is, fix
11 `h Street to the railroad track and stop. If we rebuild 11 `h Street, the recommendation is that we
rebuild it from Biscayne Boulevard all the way over to --
Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely.
Chairman Teele: What is it, 51h Avenue or 41h Avenue? How far is this going?
23 July 29, 2002
..,
Mr. Hernandez: My recommendation was to 3rd Avenue, but --
Chairman Teele: To 3rd Avenue, or somewhere west of 3rd Avenue. This is actually -- and Mr.
Yuken is here. This is actually construction along the 3rd Avenue and 11 th Street.
Ms. Lewis: Between 1Oth and 11t'
Chairman Teele: And this is Mr. Yuken's work that's going on, unrelated. It's -- he's actually, I
guess, redoing the water lines and -- is that what you're doing, Mr. Yuken?
Solomon Yuken: Electric and water lines.
Chairman Teele: Electric and water lines. And, again, it's just one of those problems where the
streets just haven't been rebuilt. They're 70 -- you know, way, way behind.
Mr. Hernandez: Again, it is a 70-year-old street, and, obviously, it is the lifeline of the
entertainment district.
Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question.
Chairman Teele: On the question -- motion. All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right.
The following motion was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 02-131
A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO MEET
WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY STAFF, AS WELL AS WITH THE
COUNTY'S PUBLIC WORKS STAFF, TO DEVELOP A JOINT PROJECT AS
IT RELATES TO THE NORTHWEST 11 TH STREET PARKING PROJECT;
FURTHER INSTRUCTING THE STAFF TO COME BACK WITH SAID
PROJECT AT THE CRA BOARD MEETING SCHEDULED FOR
SEPTEMBER.
24 July 29, 2002
M
(Here follows body of motion, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Board Member Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: It dawns on me, just now, when we were talking about this capital
improvement project, and the fact of the matter is, that the lion's share of the work that we're
going to be doing within the CRA districts are, frankly, capital improvement projects. And we
haven't had any dialogue, at a board level, about issuing our own bonds with the revenue stream
that we have been able to generate, and the future revenue stream that might be coming. And
with interest rates so low, do you think it's time that we have some sort of, at least, debate about
that, or have you thought about that, at all?
Chairman Teele: Actually, there's been a series of correspondence, e-mails between the
Manager and the CRA. And we had intended, I think, to bring that up at this Board meeting, but
I would -- what I think is appropriate is that we schedule that issue as a part of the financial
discussion --
Vice Chairman Winton: Great.
Chairman Teele: -- in September. There's two issues, the reissuing of the existing debt for
which the City has the principal responsibility for, and then the 108, as well as the reissuance of
bond. But you're 100% right. The rates will never be as low as they are right now. So, the time
to have that discussion is now. And that discussion also is a discussion that has to be held with
Miami -Dade County, because their concurrence, clearly, must be sought and approved on that.
So, again, Commissioner Carey, we're very pleased that you're here to understand that.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, we'll have that discussion in September --
Chairman Teele: On September -- what is the date, the 9thq
Vice Chairman Winton: -- the whole financial budget question.
25 July 29, 2002
Ms. Lewis: September 91h
Chairman Teele: September 9th
Vice Chairman Winton: Great.
Ms. Lewis: And for the record, we have met with Dade County on several other issues, but we
did speak briefly on the bonds. You know, redefeasing and reissuing, as well as, Section 108.
We're meeting with some folks to give us some insight as to --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, in addition to Section 108, there's --
Ms. Lewis: -- how to prepare that package.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- You know I don't know -- I'm not an expert in this whole municipal
bond business, at all, but it's clear that our revenue stream is climbing dramatically. And so, I
don't know if we can -- if, in issuing the bond, we can look to future revenue stream -- growth in
the revenue stream, just that which we have, to determine the maximum amount of bonds we can
issue. I don't understand that stuff, but it's certainly something I'd like to look at.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, we approved, I guess, three meeting ago -- two
meetings or so ago instructing the Director to bring in underwriting and bond expertise, and they
have been having those meeting to do that. The word, though, in a nutshell is, we're coming off
of a revenue stream of about 125 to one hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) a year.
Now, based upon the things that are going on and things that are going very dramatically, the
Club District is very much a part of that. The controversial parking lots in Overtown have
dramatically changed the property values around it. And the kinds of development that we're
talking about, taxes are going up, up, up, up, up very rapidly. As a result, we're looking at,
probably, collecting close to -- what's the right number, Ms. Lewis, one point eight?
Ms. Lewis: For?
Chairman Teele: Southeast Overtown/Park West.
Ms. Lewis: Southeast Overtown/Park West is totaling, City and County, approximately two
million, sir.
Chairman Teele: Well, they're still working the numbers. I talked to Joel, the tax appraiser.
They can't believe --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. That's a big number.
Chairman Teele: They cannot believe the numbers that are coming in for Southeast
Overtown/Park West.
Vice Chairman Winton: We could probably do (INAUDIBLE).
26 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: But this is the problem. Unless and until you have -- you know, when you
look at the history of this organization and you look at where we are now, and you then look at
the future, no bond firm is going to, basically, say that this is a clear trend. I mean, this may be
an anomaly. Obviously, the k'nds of things that we're adding onto the overlay -- you know,
we've got a hundred issues that we're dealing with all the time, that we're tweaking to make this
district move. For example, one of the things that I want to make Commissioner Regalado aware
of, before we have a fight, is we have a resolution before the City asking that the roach mobiles
not be allowed in our overlay district, you know. Because as the -- when there was nobody
there, no roach mobiles were there. And we were pushing to get a Pizza Hut built, et cetera, et
cetera, et cetera. We had a big pizza company almost ready to come in. They look out, they see
all the roach mobiles, they're not interested in investing seven, eight hundred thousand dollars
($800,000) when the guy's got a roach mobile out there. So, one of the things we're going to be
asking the Commission, you know -- and I supported the watermelon man going around or
whatever, you know. But we have to be very, veryjealous and guard this district, and ensure that
everything that we're doing is going to try to create more property values and increase the
values. Because if we don't continue to move the values up, then what Commissioner Winton is
talking about, just won't be available. I don't think there's any question that we can go to the
market now and raise some dollars. I just don't know that they're going to say --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- based upon two million dollars ($2,000,000) is where you are and where you
want to be. But an important component of that, I think, is the fact that -- is that the Park West
area is finally doing what was envisioned in the mid `80s would happen, and that is, that the
development would start on Biscayne Boulevard and go into Overtown. And, clearly, that
development is beginning to track that. And one of the reasons we're very -- so bullish on 11 th
Street is, contrary to what I had dreamed and hoped of 8th Street and 9th Street and all that other
stuff -- you know, as biologists say, "Life will find a way."
Vice Chairman Winton: "Create its own forum."
Chairman Teele: creates its own forum." So, is it true in the marketplace? And the marketplace
will create its own forum. And, so, the real opportunity, you know, we're working on is on 14th
Street, which is going to be the hot street where everything is going to happen as this thing
continues to develop. So --
Vice Chairman Winton: But I could tell you, you know, if you think about with only two million
dollars ($2,000,000). If you could float 15 to twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) worth of
bonds, and all of that goes into infrastructure improvements, the immediate return would be
huge, because I think we would see an incredible amount of private sector money flood into that
area, because they can see that government is paying attention. We've cleaned up the stuff we
need to clean up. And there have never been, never -- well, never -- since I've been in the City
of Miami, I've never seen this many developers looking for an appropriate opportunity, as we
have looking in the Core, in Park West, in Omni, in Omni West, but there's a heck of a lot of
nervousness out there. And, so, if we step to the plate with infrastructure improvements, where
27 July 29, 2002
you had -- where you improved water and sewer and put in new sidewalks and lighting and
landscaping, just basic infrastructure improvements, the private sector is going to say, "A
hundred million dollar ($100,000,000) investment, the City's putting this kind of money in,
they're taking care of business," I've got no problem doing that. And I think we'd see just a
tremendous amount of stuff that would be very, very beneficial to the whole area.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner -- Mr. Attorney.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): As we go through the master plan process, the restatement
of the master plan, this is where these critical components need to be included within the master
plan. The CRA has incredible power, if those components, if those elements are included within
our master plan. And, ultimately, when we get to the point of issuing debt, it's critical that our
interlocal agreement with the County, with the City is well stated, so that we can go through this
process relatively seamlessly, once that master plan contains all those components you just
mentioned.
Vice Chairman Winton: And not to take up all the time here, but Ms. Lewis made reference to
Section 108 money, and that's another thing that I understand virtually nothing about, except that
I've read a couple of things about it recently and heard a little bit about it. Is there a real
opportunity -- doesn't the City or the CRA or both have a very significant 108 capacity that's
underutilized or unused or whatever?
Chairman Teele: I would rather -- the CRA has no 108 authority. The 108 authority is with the
entitlement cities. The City has 108 authority. We have a tremendous obligation, which we
have endorsed, that we will assume with Parrot Jungle, which is, I would assume, 20,000,000 or
so there. I would be very uncomfortable committing or discussing what the City commitments
are in this forum, without the experts being here, other than to say that the City has formally
committed to -- and the federal government has approved the fact that the City has committed a
108 process, as a part of the Five -Year Plan to the CRA, upwards of 15 to twenty million dollars
($20,000,000). So, that --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, could we get some sort of -- I don't understand that process. So,
could we get a little lesson in it somewhere, either --
Chairman Teele: I think --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- at a Commission meeting or here.
Chairman Teele: I think the way to do it is to get that lesson in the Commission meeting.
Otherwise --
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Chairman Teele: I mean, I think -- you know, we have to be careful that, while we are
Commissioners, we're not here as Commissioners, which is --
28 July 29, 2002
M
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: -- one of the things that the public, I guess, is always confused about. But
we're here as board members of a body, and I think we would be, you know, better off letting the
City Commission and the Manager brief us on the 108 processes.
Vice Chairman Winton: Frank, you're representing the City Manager?
Mr. Rollason: That is correct.
Vice Chairman Winton: Could I request that you talk to the City Manager about potentially
putting a discussion item? I guess I could do it on my blue pages. So --
Mr. Rollason: No. We could put it on as a discussion item.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, I'd love to have a discussion at the next --
Mr. Rollason: One zero eight presentation?
Vice Chairman Winton: -- City Commission meeting.
Mr. Rollason: You want to do that in September?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. So that I can understand what our capacity is, how you can use
this stuff. Because it seems to me there might be a really good economic development tool that I
simply don't understand and would like to understand.
Chairman Teele: I would strongly recommend that we put it on in October. Because I think, if
you put it on in September, you're going to get a lot of confusion about general funds and people
Mr. Rollason: After the budget?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, that's fine then. Yeah. No problem.
Mr. Rollason: All right. First meeting in October.
Chairman Teele: You know, the --
Vice Chairman Winton: I haven't understood it for three years, so an extra month isn't going to
hurt anything.
Mr. Rollason: All right. We'll put it on as a discussion item in October.
Chairman Teele: Item --
29 July 29, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Thanks.
Mr. Rollason: Presentation on the 108 process.
30 July 29, 2002
7. AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ACCEPT BID PROPOSAL RECEIVED BY
COMMUNITY ASPHALT CORPORATION, $1,438,167.90 FOR NW 3an AVENUE
EXTENSION OF NW 9TH STREET PEDESTRIAN MALL — PHASE III.
Chairman Teele: All right. Item number 9 is the accepting of the bids on the 11 th -- on the 91h
Street Mall. Cesar, are you -- who's staffing on this?
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): Sir, I have a revision to that resolution, and I'm
proposing to amend it, subject to compliance with Community Development as funding source
rules.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, this is 9th
Board Member Regalado: So, we -- Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: This is item number 9.
Board Member Sanchez: Item number 9.
Board Member Regalado: (INAUDIBLE)
Chairman Teele: If you --
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm going to move for discussion.
Chairman Teele: Discussion.
Vice Chairman Winton: I've got a question.
Chairman Teele: Moved -- motion. Second?
Board Member Sanchez: Second, for discussion also.
Chairman Teele: All right. If you're aware of the 91h Street Mall that is by the Lyric Theatre,
that project was, I guess, the signature project of the Black community -- of the African -
American community, during the Summit of the Americas, and was done with an extraordinary
effort on the part of people who were former residents. One of the things that's missing are the
medallions that were designed, that could not be moved, that were stolen overnight, but the
consultants assured us that they could not be taken. But the 9th Street Mall has become the focal
point for anything positive and exciting, all the way back to the Heat having their annual Turkey
Give -a -way. Most folks think about a mall, they think about Burdines or Zales or some shop.
This is a pedestrian mall, and it was funded, initially, as a project that I funded, as under
Secretary of Transportation, as the last of what is called an "Urban Initiative." And it was
funded with Federal DOT (Department of Transportation) dollars, the first phase. There are the phase that is -- the phase -- I should not call it the first phase. It's actually the third phase the second phase, the phase -- the first phase west of the railroad track. Actually, the first phase
31 July 29, 2002
is between the railroad track going east toward Northeast Second Avenue, where the NET
(Neighborhood Enhancement Teams) Office is that has the Ellipse, et cetera. All of the
development was on the east side of the railroad track. So, the 91h Street Mall, from the railroad
track going west, to 2nd Avenue, which was a three million dollar ($3,000,000) project, as it sits
there now, was funded as an 1,rban initiative, to encourage people to use the Metro Rail. And
then this phase picks up from 2nd Avenue and goes to 3rd Avenue. Commissioner Sanchez,
question.
Board Member Sanchez: Commissioner --
Chairman Teele: Winton.
Board Member Sanchez: Are you done?
Vice Chairman Winton: Go ahead.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, Commissioner Sanchez. Either way.
Vice Chairman Winton: Annette, when you came to my office, I thought that -- didn't I ask to
get tied to this a copy of the budget page so we could see where this money was coming from
and where it fit, in terms of our overall budget, and that it was budgeted, that the cash was
available, so that we could see that, or did I not ask that question on this? I don't --
Ms. Lewis: You did ask that question. And a draft was sent today, because I was out sick on
Thursday and Friday.
Vice Chairman Winton: But that -- and the reason I'm -- because it's important to have it here. I
mean, I didn't see the draft today, so -- but I want that kind of stuff in here so that, if there's
somebody from the media sitting in here that wants to look at -- well, you guys just spent one
point four million dollars ($1,400,000). How do you know you have the money? Where's the
money coming from? Show me where it is in your budget that you've already approved. Those
-- I picked this package up. I pulled the two pages of -- pieces of paper out of it. I hand it to him
and say, here it is. Boom. Done. But we don't have that. We're just kind of looking here, and
going on faith, that we -- that y'all, within staff, have taken all the right steps, have followed
everything you need to follow, and it's there. And we can't take that stuff on faith. We have to
have all that stuff in these packages, so that anybody out there who asks us a question, we've got
an answer readily available. And we're not simply saying, "Well, I'm sure they've done the
right thing here," which is what we're forced to do with this. So --
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, you're absolutely right on the point. This item has
been approved by this Board at least five times, and we need to go back and get all five
resolutions. So --
Ms. Lewis: That this --
Chairman Teele: Hold it.
32 July 29, 2002
M
1>�O
Ms. Lewis: I'm sorry, sir.
Chairman Teele: Don't cut me off on this. And I think part of this has to do with the fact that
we've got to document the records, as the board members are saying. But this item has been
approved --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: -- specifically, at least on three occasions, as a part of the 3rd Avenue Business
Corridor. It was -- it is the largest project in that, going back to 1999. And, Ms. Arscott, I think,
you know, you're the person that Ms. Lewis should instruct to get all these resolutions up, all
these public hearings. It's gone before two town hall meetings. And the problem, of course, is it
takes us so damn long to do anything, that things seem to be new. But this project was approved
in '99 -- '98.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, the 9th Street Mall's been a big priority, too.
Chairman Teele: Well, that's what the --
Vice Chairman Winton: Third Avenue and 9th Street, right. I mean, they're both major
priorities.
Board Member Sanchez: Since day one.
Chairman Teele: And the --
Vice Chairman Winton: And it's about transparency.
Chairman Teele: And the way this project reads in the document, it is the 3rd Avenue extension
to the 9th Street Mall. That's the way it reads in all of the budget documents going back to '98,
and approval in '99 and 2000 and 2001, which is the 3rd Avenue extension to the 9th Street Mall.
In other words, this is the part of the 9th Street Mall that ties the 91h Street Mall from Biscayne
Boulevard, if you will, to 3rd Avenue.
Vice Chairman Winton: I know exactly what it is, I mean, and understand the project, and know
that we voted on it. I'm just talking about us getting better at a system here that creates absolute
transparency, where all the questions can be answered easily, and people aren't sitting around
scratching their head. And I can tell you, also -- and this is my problem. No one else's. But I'm
the one that has to deal with it. My memory is about as lousy as it's ever been in my entire life.
I would swear --
Chairman Teele: But you shouldn't have to rely on your memory. You shouldn't have to rely
on your memory.
33 July 29, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: -- that I have Alzheimer's. Well, that's exactly right. There's so much
stuff. I can't remember this stuff. And when it's in writing, I can remember. So, end of story.
Ms. Lewis: OK. Then --
Chairman Teele: I just would like to say -- refresh the Board's -- the 3rd Avenue, three million
dollar ($3,000,000) project consists essentially of two projects, the parking lots and the 3d
Avenue extension to the 91" Street Mall. Those projects have been approved at least three times,
where, at the town hall meeting, everybody has signed off on it. But, there is no reason why the
documents and the information is not before us right here, right now. So, I don't take any
exception from the Board's concern. Commissioner Sanchez.
Board Member Sanchez: Well, the item was bidded and there were two companies that bidded
the project. Now, my question is, the 1.4, is that going to include lighting? Is that going to
include landscaping? Is that going to include -- or is that just --
Cesar Calas: That includes the whole thing.
Chairman Teele: Your name for the record.
Mr. Calas: Name, Cesar Calas, H J Ross and Associates. Commissioner, it includes the pavers,
you know, with the designs. It includes lighting. It includes sidewalks. It includes
(INAUDIBLE) and resurfacing. It includes trees -- new trees in the whole area. The whole
thing.
Vice Chairman Winton: But it -- excuse me. Commissioner Sanchez, do you mind if I jump in
here one second?
Board Member Sanchez: Sure. It's not in here.
Vice Chairman Winton: Cesar, that's the whole point in --
Board Member Sanchez: You've got to --
Vice Chairman Winton: The prior agenda item, you had an itemized list of stuff we were
spending the money on to get two point seven million dollars ($2,700,000). In this one, we get
the resolutions, the timing, the budget that shows "here's how much we budgeted," this is when
it was budgeted, this is when it was approved, this is when it was budgeted. That's a line item
that's in your budget, and a detailed listing of what goes into adding up to one point four three
eight million dollars ($1,438,000). That's right there. Boom. A part of the package. All we
have to do is turn the page and look, and we're done. This is just kind of "Well, let's go spend
one point four million dollars ($1,400,000)." It's awful. And I thought I made the point to you
all, when you were in my office the other day talking about it, and I thought -- and I said, it's
very important, when we get to the Board meeting, to have this stuff in front of us. And then
we're not -- don't look like we're just approving something because we're here. So -- sorry, Joe.
34 July 29, 2002
Board Member Sanchez: You've answered my question, but just -- you know, documentation is
so important, you know. When things aren't properly documented, it opens the doors for
questioning, and people inquire as to why you're spending "X" amount of money? What are you
getting out of it? In other words, it's like going to the market. If I go to the market and I buy
fish, I want to make sure it's fresh fish, you know. That's basically all that we're asking here.
So, that is included, landscaping -- it makes a difference, if everything's included, to one point
four million dollars ($1,400,000). You're telling me, OK, this is just repaving the road or road
construction, one point four.
Mr. Calas: (INAUDIBLE) make sure it includes everything.
Board Member Sanchez: Everything?
Mr. Calas: Yes, sir.
Board Member Sanchez: So, on the record -- OK.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Calas.
Mr. Calas: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: It does not include everything.
Vice Chairman Winton: What does that mean?
Chairman Teele: It doesn't. I mean, I think, in fairness to the staff, this item -- I'm looking at it
now -- was approved on 98-14. It was approved by the City, as well, because we had to get City
approval to do this in '98. And it was a part of an expedited process in '99. The item, Cesar,
that we needed to have before us was an item that we approved about a year ago, which
approved the bid document, where all of that stuff was in here, you know. We approved a bid
document that approved you to go out to bid. So, I mean -- you know, part, again, of the
problem or the process is, this item has been before this Board. And all of that information, no
matter how bulky it is, it needs to be presented to the Board. Now, the reason that I take
exception --
Board Member Sanchez: We have to change. We've got to be off the record. They're going to
change the tape.
Chairman Teele: The reason that I take exception from you saying "It includes everything," is
that the 1.4 is the bid price, is that right?
Mr. Calas: That is --
Chairman Teele: That's the --
Board Member Sanchez: It was the lowest bid.
35 July 29, 2002
Mr. Calas: It's the lowest bid.
Board Member Sanchez: Right.
Mr. Calas: The lowest, responsible bid.
Board Member Sanchez: Right.
Chairman Teele: OK. But there are other activities associated with this project that have been
identified, which we have not -- we said we would not bring forward, until we had cleared the
Core project. But you've got fencing. Does that include all of the fencing?
Mr. Calas: We have a budget amount for that, sir.
Chairman Teele: But it's not a part of the 1.4?
Mr. Calas: It is one part -- part of the 1.4.
Chairman Teele: It is part of the 1.4?
Mr. Calas: Yes, sir. It is included in that, as an allowance.
Chairman Teele: OK. Then I stand corrected. So, that was placed in as an allowance?
Mr. Calas: That's correct, sir.
Chairman Teele: OK. So, the actual construction of the road itself is about what, 800,000?
Mr. Calas: The --
Chairman Teele: The mill work.
Mr. Calas: If you take into consideration the plans, approximately five hundred thousand dollars
($500,000), sir.
Chairman Teele: OK. All right. And I just think it's important that those documents be before
the Board, even though they've been here before, we approved them before. We approved them
when we authorized you to go out with the bid. And what we're doing now is approving the bid
submission or the bids that came in. But we did approve you to go out for the bid on this, and we
approved it, I think, probably about two times, that I know, because we had changes, and it came
back to the Board. So, there needs to be a legislative history. And I think part of the reason that
the staff is assuming too much, perhaps, is it's been here at least five times, on five different
occasions. But that is no reason to short cut the process or the information. Further discussion?
All this is, is approving, as the lowest responsible, responsive bidder, the apparent low bidder.
But it will not go forward, until there are some other public hearings associated, as I understand
36 July 29, 2002
it, with the City process. Because it does anticipate CD (Community Development) dollars, and
there is an environmental impact process, which we read all about, that has to be completed, as
well.
Vice Chairman Winton: That statement, Commissioner Teele, makes my point so clear, because,
you know I know I've been through all of this, and I remember -- but I remember kind of the
fuzzy of it. I have no idea where the one point four million dollars ($1,400,000) is supposed to
come from. So, had you not made that statement just now, and you would have called a vote and
I would have voted, "Yes, we're going to spend one point four million dollars," I would have
assumed that that one point four million dollars ($1,400,000) is coming out of the TIF (Tax
Increment Fund) money. And that assumption would have been wrong. And that's the reason
it's important to get this summary package put together so that we know exactly how much
we're spending, where the money's coming from, if it's coming from different sources, we know
what amount is coming from each source, and we know that it's been approved in a prior
resolution, we know that it's been in our budget, and we know that the dollars are there. And
that's the -- I mean, then we're home -- then we look good. Sorry.
Chairman Teele: Further discussion? All those in favor, signify by the sign of "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: Those opposed?
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-132
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST (SEOPW) COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO
ACCEPT THE BID PROPOSAL RECEIVED BY COMMUNITY ASPHALT
CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,438,167.90 FOR THE NW 3'm
AVENUE EXTENSION OF THE NW 9TH STREET PEDESTRIAN MALL —
PHASE III; FURTHER AWARDING THE BID TO COMMUNITY ASPHALT
CORPORATION AND INSTRUCTING GENERAL COUNSEL TO PREPARE
THE NECESSARY LEGAL INSTRUMENT.
37 July 29, 2002
M
MM
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Teele: All right.
Vice Chairman Winton: Could I -- I want to say one more thing about this. Could you all bring
the model, that I just described on this issue, back to the next board meeting? In fact, I kind of
jumped ahead of myself. I would like you to put the model together, that I just described, using
this as the example, and bring that to me at my Commission office. Let's sit down and walk
through the model, so I can see how it flows. We'll make whatever modifications we need to
make to the model, and then we'll bring the model back to the Board, at the next board meeting
so that the Board can look at the model of something we've already acted on, and make their
recommendations to how we set that model up. And then we'll have a model for all of these
projects that we're spending money on, from this point on.
Ms. Lewis: So, then, sir, the item, even though it was sent over to you, obviously too late, for
you --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I haven't seen it, and I went through all my mail this morning. So
Ms. Lewis: So --
Vice Chairman Winton: I mean, this afternoon.
Chairman Teele: Ms. Lewis.
Ms. Lewis: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: I think -- is this what you're talking about?
Ms. Lewis: Yes, sir. And that --
Chairman Teele: This isn't -- that isn't going to get it. This isn't going to get it. So what we
need to do is agree on a model. But I'm prepared to bet anybody that this Board has approved
38 July 29, 2002
this project seven times, in one way, shape or form. And the model is going to show that. Every
time it's come before this Board, it needs to be there, starting with the budgets, starting with the
P Avenue Corridor, starting with the approval to go out and bid it, the two modifications on the
bid. Get all of that information. And I think one of the things the model is going to show is that
it just takes too long to get projects done, and that's sort of the frustration.
Board Member Sanchez: Yeah. But, Commissioner Teele, that's also good project -cost
accounting. I mean, that report there will show us exactly time certain, project certain, and cost
certain, and, basically, where you're at. In every major project that we do, we should,
somewhere along the line, whether it be in six months or whatever it may be, we should have
updates, exactly where they're at, whether we're behind, whether we're ahead, whether, you
know -- perfect example is the park. I mean, you know, we need to know where we're at on
these projects. When we get tangled up, what is it that we need to do to get the project going
back? I mean, just because we vote on a large sum of money and throw out the project, then we
just, you know, go along our merry way --
Chairman Teele: Well --
Board Member Sanchez: -- until somebody tells us, "Well, it's been -- it's done, and now we're
going to be collecting TIF on it."
Chairman Teele: Well, let me just say this. This project's got to come back, believe it or not.
It's got to come back, because the contract's got to be issued. And it'll take -- it has taken an
average of what? How long does it take to get the contract back up here? So -- I mean, this
same project is going to come back again. So, even -- it came up for the bid -- and I'm not
complaining. I'm just simply saying --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): We'll have it back for your next meeting.
Vice Chairman Winton: Whoa. That's pretty fast.
Chairman Teele: That's unbelievably fast. But in any event --
Vice Chairman Winton: We'll take it.
Chairman Teele: So, when the project comes back with the contract, we need to have a total
history of this, every time it was approved, the budgets that it was approved in, and start that as a
template, based upon --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: -- what Commissioner Winton is asking for. And it's going to be painful in the
beginning, but I think it will be very helpful to everyone.
39 July 29, 2002
,
Ms. Lewis: And, sir, just to explain, that was just offering a format. That's not necessarily the
report. As you see, the cover memo is for you to review and comment, sir. And that's not the
entire history of that particular project, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, we'll --
Ms. Lewis: It's just for format purposes.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- we'll work together on this, and you guys can bring the stuff in and
we'll -- because I think it's important that we meet, you know, like we did the other day.
Because, you know, when we get the heads together, we can figure out some pretty good stuff.
And that's all I'm saying. So, thank you.
40 July 29, 2002
8. DEFER PROPOSED FORGIVABLE LOAN TO W.H.E ENTERPRISE FOR FEES
RELATED TO BUILD -OUT OF FACILITY LOCATED AT 1756 NORTH BAYSHORE
DRIVE.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Board Member Sanchez: Item 10.
Chairman Teele: Item number 10. Ms. Lewis, item number 10.
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): Item number 10 is a resolution authorizing the
Executive Director to rent a forgivable loan to W.H.E. Mr. Richard Haylor is present, or he
should be present to make the request. And he's requesting for Sax on the Beach, A.K.A., is
requesting a loan of forty thousand dollars ($40,000).
Board Member Sanchez: Is he present? If he's not present --
Ms. Lewis: He had intentions of being here.
Board Member Sanchez: -- I would move to defer the item.
Chairman Teele: Well, let me just say this. On February 141h -- and, again, you've got to read
through all this stuff -- on February 14th, the Board adopted a motion, 02-19, which directed the
Executive Director to schedule up to fifteen thousand dollar ($15,000) loan, with no interest,
and/or a grant, to assist in water and sewer payment, provided proof that the funds have been
expended, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. It further authorized the Director to enter into --
Vice Chairman Winton: It's a new piece.
Ms. Lewis: Additional information. Subsequent to that, on March 25th, a grant was provided in
the amount of twenty-nine thousand dollars ($29,000), to --
Board Member Sanchez: So, that's --
Ms. Lewis: -- for their WASA (Water and Sewer Authority) fees.
Board Member Sanchez: So, that's 15,000, 29,000?
Ms. Lewis: No, sir.
Board Member Sanchez: Now, it's an additional 40,000?
Ms. Lewis: The initial request was for 15,000 for the WASA --
Board Member Sanchez: Right.
41 July 29, 2002
Ms. Lewis: But once we met with WASA and met with Richard Haylor, the owner of the
business, the assessment for the addition was twenty-nine thousand dollars ($29,000). And that
amount was awarded, in the form of a grant, on March 25`", sir.
Board Member Sanchez: And row they're back for an additional 40,000?
Ms. Lewis: That is correct, sir.
Chairman Teele: Well, this is a matter that Commissioner Winton is going to have to bring it
forward, when he's ready to --
Vice Chairman Winton: And, he's -- his total cost in this whole WASA thing for that restaurant
is a hundred and forty thousand dollars ($140,000).
Chairman Teele: No. The total cost of WASA, I thought, was 29 -- 30,000.
Ms. Lewis: That's correct.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, is that -- oh, OK.
Ms. Lewis: And that was --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I misread this then.
Ms. Lewis: And that was a grant that was given in March.
Vice Chairman Winton: Ms. Lewis and I had this discussion in my office. And the struggle that
I had, while I'm a big -- you know, I'm hugely supportive of getting these new businesses
opened up. The struggle I had is that we don't have any apparent guidelines to determine which
businesses will get the support and which ones won't. And the real concern I have is that, if we
open this door, then under what pretext do we deny anyone else who's opening any business and
comes to us and says, "Well, you know, it's going to cost me two hundred thousand dollars
($200,000) to open this business, and I want fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) from the CRA
(Community Redevelopment Agency)." And I see people in the audience, listening very
carefully right now, wondering how they can come get a 30 or 40 or fifty thousand dollars
($50,000) for whatever project it is they're opening. And so -- so, it makes me -- well, I think
the people at Sax on the Beach have, in many ways, been a pioneer, and maybe that's part of
how we get at this answer. And I'm kind of thinking out loud. But when I was talking to staff
about it, we didn't come to -- nobody could give me the hook that said, here's -- or did you give
me the hook?
Ms. Lewis: For the job creation and retention?
Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- but everybody's going to talk about job creation and retention.
And so -- because every new business that comes in, the fact of the matter is, every single one of
them is going to have new employees, and that's going to be new jobs. And I'm just concerned -
42 July 29, 2002
- while I would love to help them, I'm very concerned about how we go about doing that.
Because I don't want to open the floodgates to everybody, and have no rational reason for
saying, "Are you (INAUDIBLE)? You know I'm not going to help you guys." "Well, you
helped them. Well, how come you won't help me?" "Well, because I liked them better than
you." I mean, that's not a good way to be doing this. So, I'm struggling.
Chairman Teele: Let me help you with this. First of all, I think that the City Planning
Department, which we've asked to come back with this, holds the key to this, Ana. We've asked
the Planning Department, and we've recognized a part -- one of our strategies, a very discreet,
but a very important part of our strategy, is to create a Jazz and Blues Entertainment District or
another overlay entitled Jazz and Blues District, this in both Overtown and in Park West. That
was one of the things. And that was the so-called Memphis trip, which, I guess, has been put on
hold. But a very important component of what it is we're trying to do is carve out voids that
exist in Miami -Dade County, and put them somewhere in the redevelopment area, as a way of
fostering development. If Ana -- if the Planning Department came back with a Jazz and Blues
District overlay and recommendations -- I don't know where you all are on that, Ana. I know
that you all have gotten the motion request from us about a year ago or so and the City for the
Omni area.
Ana Gelbert-Sanchez (Director of Planning and Zoning): On that particular one, we have to still
meet with the CRA. I know we were trying to meet --
Chairman Teele: But we do have an open dialogue on that, right?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Definitely, sir. You have asked them and -- yeah, we're working on it.
Right now, we were going to schedule the meeting that I just understand that it has been put on
hold. In addition to that, the CRA, but it has been informal, have had discussions on it. But you
did make the request, in looking at the whole area for new districts, especially the Jazz District.
Chairman Teele: Well, I think one of the things that needs to be a part of the report, when it
comes back, are incentives for the district. And that gets to -- and, again, we're sort of operating
parallel. It's very clear, in looking and going through the planning process, that when you get
into -- when someone comes to Miami and gets in a taxi and says, "Take me to the Jazz District,"
where do you take them? Where does the taxicab take someone in Miami? There is no such
place and there is no such thing. You know, everybody can talk about one or two clubs. The
most famous one, I guess, is there on the Miami River.
Board Member Sanchez: Tobacco Road.
Ms. Lewis: Tobacco Road.
Vice Chairman Winton: Tobacco Road.
Chairman Teele: Tobacco Road. But what we're talking about is creating a Jazz and Blues
District. The idea was that we would have two overlays, one in Overtown, which we asked that
that be designated as a little bit different nuance -- some nuances to that. And then one in Park --
43 July 29, 2002
one in the Omni area, with the understanding that Park West is not appropriate for that, because
we're looking at a party district there. We already have that. So, what we're hoping to do is to
get three or four jazz clubs clustered around each other where people know that it's a jazz
district. One of the things that was talked about two years ago, in this regard -- we had some
people come in. In fact, I talked to Zeb Buffin about this at length, as well -- is the notion that
you create this district, you provide incentives. And the biggest incentive we could provide
would be advertising in the jazz publications. Because when people love jazz -- and whether
they're here on telecom meeting or a sports meeting -- they want to go to jazz. Everybody in this
room that goes out knows that, if you go up to Hollywood -- if you're into jazz, everybody goes
to Hollywood. Is that pretty much where the jazz area is? What's the thing called up there,
Jason?
Jason Walker: O'Hara's.
Chairman Teele: O'Hara's. And in that whole area. So -- I mean, there is a definite market.
And the way we are working this district and the way we're working these two districts are to try
to create niches, where nobody else is doing them and then go out and do it. I believe that there
is justification for a loan or support, but I think Commissioner Winton is right. Until we get --
let the policy catch up with what's going on out there, we need to try to figure out how we do it.
We did, however, say that we're supporting and we're helping people with these horrible impact
fees that are really destroying the redevelopment. And it makes this whole notion of Eastward
whole and the Urban Core a joke. Because the water and sewer impact fees, Commissioner, are
just killing the businesses. We heard the other day in the zoning meeting from Mr. --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- Soyka, I guess, two hundred thousand dollar ($200,000) impact fee, you
know. So, those are the kinds of things that we're prepared to do. But until Commissioner
Winton is comfortable with it, I think we should do as Commissioner Sanchez is recommending,
temporarily pass it and ask the staff to work more closely to develop the policy.
Ms. Lewis: We have begun conversations with Community Development to fashion it pretty
much, as to what they have with their programs, and we just need to follow up (INAUDIBLE).
Chairman Teele: And the Planning Department's got the lead on that, with the City.
Ms. Lewis: Well, with regard to the loan, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: And, see, I --
Ms. Lewis: A forgivable loan.
Vice Chairman Winton: I think there is a distinction between small, independent businesses and
major development. And the distinction I draw -- and I don't know if we can figure out how to -
- how that becomes part of the criteria that allows you to qualify. But the small businesses are
the ones who can't -- who absolutely -- their deal simply won't work when you have to pay the
44 July 29, 2002
impact fees, and the water and sewer hook-up fees, and other things like that. So, it seems to me
that there's a real benefit to us developing a policy that has some favored nation status treatment
of businesses below a certain threshold. Because you can get a thousand of those going in the
neighborhood and really make it explode, whereas one big development, you know, if they're
not a big developer, he ain't coming if the numbers don't work. So, there may be a few things
we do for them, but it will be very different than we do for the small guys.
Chairman Teele: Yeah. If this were for the owner of the building, I would not want to entertain
Vice Chairman Winton: That's right. Exactly.
Chairman Teele: And with all due respect to Mr. Haylor --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: -- who, I think, is one of the great Americans.
Vice Chairman Winton: And I want to help these guys, because I know they've been a pioneer
in coming in that area, but I'm just -- I don't know how to do it right now, without some
guidelines here. Because I know that there's people sitting in the audience, that are going to be
here at the next Commission meeting asking for the same thing, and I don't have a reason to tell
them no, other than "you guys already heard me say that I'm only going to give this out once."
That's not a very good deal.
Chairman Teele: All right. So, that's going to be temporarily passed.
45 July 29, 2002
9. AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING WITH MIAMI PARKING AUTHORITY (DEPARTMENT OF
OFFSTREET PARKING FOR PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEMENT FOR
PARKING UNDER I-395.
AUTHORIZE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO AIRSPACE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN CRA AND FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(FDOT) FOR PURPOSE OF LEASING AIRSPACE UNDER I-395 BETWEEN NW 3RD
AVENUE TO BISCAYNE BOULEVARD FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC PARKING
LOT AND STORAGE AREA.
AUTHORIZE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO JOINT
PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF PARKING LOT
AND STORAGE AREA UNDERNEATH I-395, BETWEEN BISCAYNE BOULEVARD AND
NW 3RD AVENUE, FOR PURPOSE OF PUBLIC PARKING AND STORAGE AREA.
TABLED: REQUEST CITY MANAGER TO AMEND ORDINANCE 11917 WHICH
CREATED 24 HOUR PARKWEST ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT (See #11).
Chairman Teele: Items 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15. I saw the distinguished director. Art, where are
you? Oh, there he is. Did you all get the agreements done. And, Ms. Lewis, are you and Mr.
Noriega of one accord?
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): I believe so, sir. We met, and there was a draft
MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) that --
Chairman Teele: Art, why don't you come up and just -- I think it's important that we try to
figure out how to work this stuff together now.
Ms. Lewis: And based on the timing of that, we were unable to get it in the package and
distribute it. But --
Chairman Teele: When did you all receive the draft MOU from Off -Street Parking?
Ms. Lewis: On Friday, sir.
Art Noriega: Yeah. We got it to them on Friday.
Chairman Teele: OK. So, you all created the document.
Mr. Noriega: Yeah. It's basically an exact duplicate of our agreement with Watson Island --
with the City for Watson Island. We pretty much copied that basic format, so that we didn't
have to reinvent the wheel.
Chairman Teele: Did we approve -- did the Commission approve the Watson Island one, yet?
Mr. Noriega: Yes.
46 July 29, 2002
-
Chairman Teele: And it's a duplicate of that, pretty much?
Mr. Noriega: Yeah, exact duplicate, with the exception of changing the City to the CRA
(Community Redevelopment Agency). It's pretty much exactly the same.
Chairman Teele: Now, is Debora Rivera here? Is Ms. Rivera here? Because I really should --
Debora Rivera: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: How are you doing, Ms. Rivera?
Ms. Rivera: Good.
Chairman Teele: You want to just identify yourself for the record, as well.
Ms. Rivera: Debora Rivera, Florida Department of Transportation.
Chairman Teele: Welcome.
Ms. Rivera: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Hope you found something to eat, and sorry the air conditioner's not on.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. And, Commissioner Sanchez, I'm not on the MSEA (Miami
Sports and Expedition Authority) Board any longer.
Board Member Sanchez: Neither am I.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, you're not?
Chairman Teele: Tomas is the Vice Chairman.
Board Member Sanchez: Neither am I.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, man. We've got to -- did MSEA run out of money? Did MSEA
run out of money? FP&L (Florida Power & Light) cut the power off?
Board Member Regalado:. No. We just spend a lot there, and then we have to save here.
Remember, there are shrimps over there.
Vice Chairman Winton: It's designed to make these meetings go fast, I think. Sorry.
Chairman Teele: Ms. Rivera, on number 14, your -- you all required that there be no
development credits for any parking underneath the interstate; is that correct?
47 July 29, 2002
Ms. Rivera. No, sir, that's not correct. It was something that came up during discussion. And,
in fact, I think that, subsequent to one of the meetings, an e-mail was forwarded to staff, which
suggested that maybe that was something that you wanted to consider as to what the potential
impact would be to encouraging or discouraging development.
Chairman Teele: I thought Mr. Abreu told me directly --
Ms. Lewis: That was my understanding in that meeting as well.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Calas, you want to put this on the record. I don't want to disagree with
you, but I have a clear direction from Mr. Abreu that he wanted to see that language.
Ms. Rivera: What Secretary Abreu was referring to was making sure that we could clearly
distinguish the use of this parking area as a public purpose, as opposed to directly benefiting
developers.
Chairman Teele: I think that's what I was asking. Yeah.
Ms. Rivera: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: OK.
Ms. Rivera: I don't necessarily -- I'm not necessarily sure that the language that has been
selected is necessarily a requirement of ours. But, surely, we want to make sure that the public
purpose is clear, and that there are no --
Chairman Teele: We committed to Mr. Abreu that we would pass language. And I think one of
the concerns Mr. Abreu has is giving this whole debate on 395 being upped or lowered and all of
that, that no one does anything that's perceived as trying to block in Mayor Diaz or block him
out. And, so, if, hypothetically, 395 were to be lowered, we certainly couldn't create any
development rights underneath it that, you know, we wind up getting into a lawsuit. So, I think
we want it to be very clear to Secretary Abreu that we were living up to the letter and the spirit.
Vice Chairman Winton: So -- may I ask? So, what you're saying, in clarifying here -- because I
didn't understand it until maybe just now. What you're saying is that you want to make sure that
whatever action that we're taking between us and Off -Street Parking, that we are not creating
any development rights underneath 395; that, if there were a decision to tear 395 down and bring
it to grade, we would be allowed to do that, because there wouldn't be any implied development
rights there.
Chairman Teele: I would fully agree, except for one thing. Off -Street Parking, CRA, and any
other third party --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right, right.
Chairman Teele: And the problem is going to be --
48 July 29, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Right, right.
Chairman Teele: -- any other third party. Because you know what's going to be next.
Everybody who's got land next to it is going to come in and say --
Vice Chairman Winton: Implied.
Chairman Teele: --"Well, why should I have to do this? Because the parking's right there and
nobody's using it." Well, fine, you know, that you can use it, but you don't have a development
right or you don't get the right to --
Board Member Sanchez: To use the parking.
Chairman Teele: -- exempt yourself from other City codes and City regulations --
Board Member Sanchez: Or get credit.
Chairman Teele: Or get credits for that, because that is not what this is about. And, that, of
course --
Vice Chairman Winton: Good, good, good, good.
Chairman Teele: -- is going to be the --
Vice Chairman Winton: Great.
Chairman Teele: -- natural -- you know --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, that's very good. Great.
Chairman Teele: -- once you do this, that is going to be the natural creeping that goes on into
that issue.
Ms. Rivera: And, Commissioner, when I responded to your question, my intent was to convey to
you that we did not necessarily recommend the language, as it's being proposed. Merely, that
Secretary Abreu wanted to make a clear distinction between the public purpose and the
development activities in the adjacent areas. Obviously, the granting of development credits, and
individual property owners going to their local governments and seeking variances, are different
issues. And I would imagine that --
Chairman Teele: Well, let me just say this, Ms. Rivera. This would be a resolution of the CRA
requesting, Ana, the City, to develop an ordinance. This would not be the ordinance here. So, if
you've got some better language or some preferred language, the opportunity to do that would be
to work with the City Planning Department and City Attorney in developing that language, if that
passes here today.
49 July 29, 2002
Ms. Rivera: And we would be happy to do that.
Chairman Teele: But the intent is to codify the oral commitments that the CRA and consultants
have made with Mr. Abreu,that we would not allow creeping of property owners to then turn
around and say, "OK. Now, we want a credit, because our land happens to be next to it." And
that's the thing that he's very careful about. And, obviously, once you do that, then you've
blocked off any discussion about removing 395 to (INAUDIBLE) or whatever. So, those items
are all interrelated, items 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 --
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: -- and 15. Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: May I make a suggestion? And that is that you might want to bring the
public input on the CRA Board record, and bring people up-to-date in terms of the concept that
came out of -- were we in a CRA board meeting --
Chairman Teele: In a City.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- when we were talking about this? City? That's what I thought.
Chairman Teele: No, no.
Vice Chairman Winton: City Commission meeting.
Chairman Teele: We were in a City Commission meeting taking it up as a board -- as a CRA
board.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, we took it up as a CRA board? OK.
Chairman Teele: Exactly.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, you already put that on the record --
Chairman Teele: Exactly.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- in terms of how -- the new plan here for getting parking developed?
Chairman Teele: I think the most important thing for me, though, is item number 15, and that is
to work with the Planning Department to really clean that thing up down there. I mean, the way
we get our --
Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely.
50 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: -- property values up is the kind of things that we've done, that nobody will
ever really understand or take note of, except the property owners. Sofa takes note of it. But if
you look at the fence -- the parking lot there on l l th Street, on the south side of 11 th Street, and
Biscayne Boulevard, it is a 100% improvement, Ana, from what it was. And I know that Mr.
Sofa sc_eamed and kicked and, you know -- but we made him do a setback. We made him have
grass.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. You go look at the difference between that and other
(INAUDIBLE). It's night --
Chairman Teele: Night and day.
Vice Chairman Winton: Night and day.
Chairman Teele: And that's what's creating the value. The value's being created in a lot of the
decorative and -- the removal of those chain link fences -- as you come down 395, Commissioner
Carey, you know, going to Biscayne Boulevard, the thing looks like a prison camp. It looks like
an old, you know, chain gang camp, you know. It's horrible. And one of the things that we want
to work with Off -Street Parking and DOT (Department of Transportation) and everybody, is to
remove all of that, so that it really begins to look like we're going to put a half a billion dollars
($500,000,000) in a Performing Arts Center and an entertainment area, where it's a fun place to
go. And, so, DOT gets out of this pretty much, at this point, with no money. But we're going to
come back and see, through the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) process, how we can
get some money from you to help us.
Vice Chairman Winton: Do we have a motion, yet, on 11?
Board Member Sanchez: Is it a one -dollar ($1) deal?
Chairman Teele: It's a one -dollar ($1) deal. On 11.
Vice Chairman Winton: Do we have a motion, yet?
Chairman Teele: No. Motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Board Member Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
51 July 29, 2002
on
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-133
RESOLUTION NO. OMNI 02-62
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST (SEOPW) COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER
INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH MIAMI PARKING
AUTHORITY (DEPARTMENT OF OFFSTREET PARKING), IN A FORM
SUBSTANTIALLY ACCEPTABLE TO GENERAL COUNSEL AND THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION AND
MANAGEMENT FOR PARKING UNDER I-395.
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OMNI
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING WITH MIAMI PARKING AUTHORITY (DEPARTMENT
OF OFFSTREET PARKING), IN A FORM SUBSTANTIALLY ACCEPTABLE
TO GENERAL COUNSEL AND THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE
PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEMENT FOR PARKING
UNDER I-395.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Teele: Twelve.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Board Member Sanchez: Moved. Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
52 July 29, 2002
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-134
RESOLUTION NO. OMNI 02-63
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST (SEOPW) COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO
ENTER INTO AN AIRSPACE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CRA AND
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR THE
SOLE PURPOSE OF LEASING THE AIRSPACE UNDER I-395 BETWEEN
NW 3RD AVENUE TO BISCAYNE BOULEVARD FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC PARKING LOT AND STORAGE AREA
CONSISTENT WITH THE CRA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN; FURTHER
INSTRUCTING SPECIAL COUNSEL TO PREPARE THE REQUIRED
LEGAL INSTRUMENTS.
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OMNI
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE
CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO AN AIRSPACE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CRA AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF LEASING
THE AIRSPACE UNDER I-395 BETWEEN NW 3RD AVENUE TO
BISCAYNE BOULEVARD FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC
PARKING LOT AND STORAGE AREA CONSISTENT WITH THE CRA
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN; FURTHER INSTRUCTING SPECIAL COUNSEL
TO PREPARE THE REQUIRED LEGAL INSTRUMENTS.
53 July 29, 2002
M
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Teele: On 13 --
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Board Member Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
54 July 29, 2002
on
-Ait
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-135
RESOLUTION NO. OMNI 02-64
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN PARKWEST (SEOPW) COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO
ENTER INTO A JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR THE
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A PARKING LOT AND STORAGE
AREA UNDERNEATH I-395, BETWEEN BISCAYNE BOULEVARD AND
NW 3RD AVENUE, FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF PUBLIC PARKING AND
STORAGE AREA; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND
SPECIAL COUNSEL TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ATTACHED
HERETO AS EXHIBIT A AND MADE A PART HEREOF (THE " I-395 JOINT
PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT"); FURTHER AUTHORIZING CRA
CONSULTING ENGINEER TO PREPARE A 30% DESIGN PLAN FOR
SUBMITTAL TO FDOT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS; FURTHER
DESIGNATING CRA CONSULTING ENGINEER AS OWNERS
REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PROJECT; FURTHER REQUIRING THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO RETURN TO THE BOARD WITH THE COST
ESTIMATE FOR SAID CONSTRUCTION.
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OMNI
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE
CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A JOINT PARTICIPATION
AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF
A PARKING LOT AND STORAGE AREA UNDERNEATH I-395, BETWEEN
BISCAYNE BOULEVARD AND NW 3RD AVENUE, FOR THE SOLE
PURPOSE OF PUBLIC PARKING AND STORAGE AREA; AUTHORIZING
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND SPECIAL COUNSEL TO EXECUTE
THE AGREEMENT ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBIT A AND MADE A
PART HEREOF (THE " I-395 JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT");
FURTHER AUTHORIZING CRA CONSULTING ENGINEER TO PREPARE
A 30% DESIGN PLAN FOR SUBMITTAL TO FDOT WITHIN THIRTY (30)
DAYS; FURTHER DESIGNATING CRA CONSULTING ENGINEER AS
OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE TO THE PROJECT; FURTHER REQUIRING
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO RETURN TO THE BOARD WITH THE
COST ESTIMATE FOR SAID CONSTRUCTION.
55 July 29, 2002
00
OWA
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Teele: On 14. This is to request the City Manager to amend the ordinance on the --
Vice Chairman Winton: Dealing with the subject we just talked about.
Chairman Teele: The credits, yeah.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manger, Operations): Mr. Chairman, can we get Ana up here --
Ana Gelabert-Sanchez (Director of Planning and Zoning): I'm here.
Mr. Rollason: -- to make a comment on the record because I think there's a little confusion on
this one.
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Right now, Commissioners, there's no development credits. I think
there was a confusion of some property owners that, for being in the Entertainment District, they
were getting anything special. But there's not such a thing as development credits.
Chairman Teele: Is there anything that prohibits it?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We don't have it in the ordinance, where someone would get credits.
We used to have it years ago, and it was taken away. So, right now, we don't have development
credits or transfer of development rights. We don't have that in the City. What the
Entertainment District has -- had they been coming many of the buildings, because there are
more warehouses (INAUDIBLE) they have been asking for variances. It's an issue of parking.
But they do -- you know, so it's different --
Chairman Teele: See, there's a lot of misinformation, and it's the -- what I consider the
dominant political philosophy of Miami, and that's "me too." The people on the Omni don't
understand, in some ways, that Park West was created sort of as one district, with common -- sort
of common parking, based upon Metro Mover and all that stuff, early on. And there were a
whole bunch of exceptions made or -- to some extent, some exceptions made, where there's a
common -- is there a common parking area in Park West?
56 July 29, 2002
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: What we -- no, sir. What we have is, there's a -- when the -- in the
Entertainment District, when the clubs are coming for putting the club -- and they might have an
issue that they cannot fit the parking -- the Planning Department and the effort because of
recognizing, that many of these are adaptive reuse -type of warehouse buildings. We are -- we
have determined that to be a hardship. So, we are recommending, for the variance of parking.
The one other method there is, is to through a Class II Special Permit. If you are a club, you can
ask for 100% of your parking, if you can get a lease with one of the existing parking lots, since
there's so many of them in that area. But, mostly, they've been coming for variances.
Chairman Teele: Can people in Omni apply for a variance, as well?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes, they can. Yes, they can.
Chairman Teele: Is there anyone from the public who'd like to be heard on this? Because,
apparently, what we don't need to do is take an action on 14. Yes, sir. State your name and
address for the record, sir. And welcome.
Gil Terem: Yes. Good evening, everybody. My name is Gil Terem. I'm a property owner at 13
Northeast 14th Street, at the Omni. And I'm part of the Community Board, representing about
four or five building owners and businesses in the area. First of all, I'm very happy that we
already talking about the parking underneath 395. This is something that I was discussing with
(INAUDIBLE) and the DDA (Downtown Development Authority), about three years ago, and
bless God that we're here and talking about it. The only confusion that we have right now is
whether we're trying to open a business in the area or lease it to prospective business owner that
wants to come to the Omni and open their businesses, is what's the requirement and what's the
parking variation, the impact fees? So, everything that's related to the parking is very unclear in
the area. On one hand, we know that the 395 will come -- the parking underneath the 395 will
come next year, but we don't know how it's going -- how it can apply to our businesses. In other
words, OK. If I want to open a restaurant there, do I have to have a parking on premises or I can
use the future parking under 395? So, we really need to know where we stand on this point of
view, right now and in the future.
Chairman Teele: Well, again -- I'll yield to Commissioner Winton. But this -- the
Redevelopment Authority does not engage in what those requirements are. That is something
that the City Commission and the City Planning Director, the lady standing right beside you,
does. And, so, you know --
Vice Chairman Winton: Did you hear his questions, Ana?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I'm sorry. The Attorney was asking me something.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, essentially, what he said is that the people that own businesses in
the area and the new people coming in don't understand -- essentially, he said a number of
things, but one of them is about the parking. They don't know what the parking requirement is,
and whether or not -- how they can use 395 or not use 395, and what their options are. He also
57 July 29, 2002
talked about impact fees, and a whole bunch of other things, and those are relatively easy to get
answered. I mean, staff's there. They can answer those questions easily.
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I think, with the parking issue, when someone comes to the department
asking exactly what is it they can or cannot do or if they have an issue with waivers, we do
explain it, the options that may be available. I don't remember if the gentleman was with the
group that I explained what was the confusion -- the (INAUDIBLE) confusion on the parking.
But I would be more than happy to sit with them and just do it one more time. I don't have a
problem with that. But when someone comes in to do a club or open a business, the issue of
parking is a zoning requirement, and so is for the clubs. It's not that they are waived. They still
have to go through the process. The only thing is that, in some -- we've review them case -by -
case, and there's hardships determined in the zoning ordinance. We don't get to pick whether we
think it's a hardship or not. It's clearly defined. What we consider is that an adaptive reuse
building, it's a hardship. But that would be true for any other building.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, it also depends on availability of other parking.
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: True.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, this is -- this isn't -- this is never going to be an answer that says,
"In this whole area, you've got this." I mean, it's -- as far as I can tell, this is always going to be
a property -by -property basis. I mean, it could be a line of properties right here within "X"
number of feet of this gets that benefit. But, otherwise, it's going to be on a case -by -case basis --
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Right.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- where the developer or the owner of the property needs to go when
they're doing their due diligence or if they skip it when they're doing due diligence. Before they
buy, they need to go down and see the Planning Department right away, and the question can be
answered. I don't think it's a big mystery.
Mr. Terem: If I may? The reason I raise it right now, and in related to the parking underneath
the 395, is that we're sitting in the forum of the CRA here. I'm part of the area, as a business
owner and a future business owner, and a real estate owner there. Right now, we're talking
about putting parking underneath the 395 partially from our money. And as I understand it, in all
this area, whether it is Park West or Omni, there's not enough parking spaces for the buildings
themselves. There might be an open lot that can be turned into parking. But if we create 1,500
or so -- I don't know how many parking spots underneath the 395. And, physically, this 395 is
between Park West and the Omni -- why can't we ease the requirement towards the future
parking that we'll have there, and still --
Chairman Teele: Yeah. But the point that I'm trying to get you to understand is -- that's a very
good point. But this Board doesn't have the power to ease any of those. That's something that
the City Commission -- the City of Miami Commission has the authority --
58 July 29, 2002
Mr. Terem: I understand. And we spoke with Mayor Manny Diaz the other day. We met him in
the Omni there, and the Park West. We went around with him and we showed him the problem,
and, hopefully, it is going to work. But Commissioner Winton is our Commissioner there, and
he's sitting on this Board, and that's why -- maybe it's not the issue, but -- I don't know.
Somehow or another, we're never on the agenda. So, we're a little bit confused.
Chairman Teele: Well, why don't we do this? Why don't we pass item 14, as a discussion item
to the City Commission, and then have a public hearing on that item with the public hearing on
parking and all of that, and just have a full discussion? Because I think -- you know, we don't
want to say you're in the wrong place, even though you are at the wrong place on that, because
we don't have that authority. The Manager -- the City Manager is -- has a representative here.
The Planning Director would be in a position to control the flow of the discussion and all of that.
And I just think that it's very important that we have that discussion. Because, as I keep saying,
there's a lot of misinformation about this. And everybody in Park West feels like -- everybody
in the Omni feels like something's going over in Park West, and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I
mean, I've heard enough of this to know that it's very misinformed and very, very, frustrating.
Vice Chairman Winton: Ana, could I ask you a question? If and when we do the parking under
395, will -- I'm assuming that, at some point,r you will have a series of guidelines that spell out
how the public and property owners can take advantage of that parking; is that correct?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes, sir. And -- yes, we would. I think once -- right now we have been
dealing with the lots that we might have available, not ours, but private ones. I just -- the ones I
referred to on the variance. There's another amendment that would probably can be part of the
discussion the day of City Commission, where also we were requested by Commission, and we
did it. It was the six (INAUDIBLE) in the whole redevelopment area, 600 feet away from a
municipal parking lot, that also that can be used.
Vice Chairman Winton: So --
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: So, we've been trying to help out, and that, perhaps, could be the whole
presentation.
Vice Chairman Winton: When -- if you're assuming now that we're moving forward -- because
we're passing a series of resolutions associated with the development of parking under 395 --
when would you have the plan worked out, that you could present to the public, that spells out
how businesses and which businesses can take advantage of the parking under 395?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: If I could ask --
Vice Chairman Winton: Does it require a new ordinance or do we have ordinances in place that
can deal with that?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Probably, we could amend the ordinance that we have in place. If I
could ask, perhaps, by the second meeting in September, that it's a Planning and Zoning, it
would give us more time just to make sure that we've covered everything.
59 July 29, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So, by the second meeting in September, maybe the first meeting
in October, then we could bring forward a plan that tells the property owners who can use -- who
can take advantage of, and who can't take advantage of the parking that's going to be available
under 395, once it gets there. And then that question about this issue can be answered. And, by
the way, it's pretty hard to answer that question when you don't have a program in place to begin
with, and there is no parking under 395 now. So, there couldn't be an answer about what you're
going to do with the parking under 395, because we didn't have any parking under 395.
Chairman Teele: Well -- and I also think, Ana, that that -- your discussion needs to be carefully
coordinated with Off -Street Parking. Because it's my understand -- you know, the agreement
here is that, in any event, Off -Street Parking is going to manage this. And what I don't want,
you know -- you know, there are certain economic issues. And while -- you know, I'm very
concerned about the public, the Performing Arts Center, and the need for the education
component of that. I don't want the City speaking to the economic issues, without discussing
them with Off -Street Parking.
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: They will be part of the discussion, sir.
Board Member Sanchez: All right.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm done.
60 July 29, 2002
10. AUTHORIZE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO JOINT
PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR REMOVAL OF ALL CHAIN LINKED FENCING
SURROUNDING FDOT PROPERTIES/RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED WITHIN CRA
REDEVELOPMENT AREAS; PROVIDE FOR REPLACEMENT AND INSTALLATION OF
DECORATIVE FENCING SURROUNDING SAID PROPERTIES.
Chairman Teele: All right. So, we'll temporarily pass 14 and item 15. Is there a motion? I
would ask that 15 be modified to also authorize the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) -
- the Executive Director to make an application to the MPO for appropriate funding, as well as, a
part of 15.
Vice Chairman Winton: I will move 15, with the proviso that you just suggested, and one other.
And the other is that, at the -- not the board meeting, where we're going to discuss budget,
because I want that dedicated -- I mean, budget and finance, and all that jazz. But the immediate
following board meeting, that this item come back with the financial model in place, so that we
know where this money is blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So that this is passed, subject to the
review of that.
Board Member Sanchez: Are you referring --
Vice Chairman Winton: So we can see all of that.
Board Member Sanchez: Commissioner Winton, are you referring to the budgetary impact on
15, which is one million dollars ($1,000,000) --
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm --
Board Member Sanchez: -- for the fencing?
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm suggesting that we pass it, subject to a review of all of the
component pieces that I talked about in the model that we've got to create that shows where the
money's coming from, how the money's been -- what pile of money this has been budgeted
from, so it shows completely what's there, where it's been budgeted, how we -- and all of those
kinds of things.
Board Member Sanchez: I could support you on all the items, except 15. Once again, my debate
on this is that you have, once again, estimated costs of fifty-two dollars ($52) per linear foot, and
the budgetary impact of one million dollars ($1,000,000). I think that's high. I think that once
you buy fence in such a large amount, you could get a better deal than fifty-two dollars ($52) per
linear foot -- feet. I'm just -- on the finance point -- on the issue --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, actually --
Chairman Teele: I will bet you that the number comes in at two million dollars ($2,000,000),
before it's all said and done. In any --
61 July 29, 2002
maxNOOO
-
Board Member Sanchez: I tend to disagree with you.
Chairman Teele: But in either event, I think your point is well taken. This is not an effort -- this
is does not authorize the expenditure of any money. This authorizes entering into an agreement
with DOT (Department of Transportation) for the removal of it. But we won't implement the
removal until it comes back for a budget approval. So, the motion would have to be -- resolution
should be amended to take out the budgetary dollars, just so that it's there, or to caveat that this
does not authorize the expenditure of any funds for the project. Does that --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Board Member Sanchez: That's fine. But, Commissioner, I tend to disagree with you, when you
say that it doesn't have or set a precedence on a financial input --
Chairman Teele: No. I'm saying that we should amend it to take it out.
Board Member Sanchez: -- budgetary input, when you say that it's not going to cost money. At
the end of the day, you're basically taking -- if you're saying a million dollars ($1,000,000), that
million dollars ($1,000,000) has to come from somewhere for fencing.
Vice Chairman Winton: But --
Board Member Sanchez: If you're going to tell me, OK, we're going to set aside a million
dollars ($1,000,000). It may not be a million dollars ($1,000,000).
Vice Chairman Winton: He's saying --
Board Member Sanchez: It may be 650.
Vice Chairman Winton: He's saying we're not going to allocate any money, at all, at this point.
Chairman Teele: We're not setting aside any money. That's what I'm --
Vice Chairman Winton: No money. And, by the way -- and from a staff standpoint, I'd also like
to add, for Commissioner Sanchez's purpose, here's another issue -- quandary that we get in.
Commissioner Sanchez thinks that fifty-two dollars ($52) a linear foot is too much for the kind
of fencing we're do -- we're going to do. I don't have any idea if it's too much or too little.
Y'all do. You do this kind of work, and you ought to be able to bring us the -- kind of like a
comparable sale in real estate.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager, Operations): Right. We could bring you the
comparables from Parks and wherever else --
Vice Chairman Winton: Bingo. Bingo. So that you can show the -- show a picture of the kind
of fencing and landscaping we're going to do, and we did this in this park, in this park, in this
62 July 29, 2002
park, and it was eighty-two dollars ($82) a linear foot, or it was fifteen dollars ($15) a linear foot,
or it's fifty-two dollars ($52) a linear foot. And then we don't have to -- he doesn't have to
guess. I don't have to guess.
Mr. Rollason: Also, Mr. Chairman, I would encourpge that, when we negotiate the JPA, that
there are -- there's fencing there that FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) is probably,
at some phase, has got to replace anyway. We shouldn't be paying the full load on that. We
should negotiate that to whereby -- some of that fencing's in terrible shape --
Vice Chairman Winton: I think that's what the Chairman said.
Mr. Rollason: -- as it is.
Chairman Teele: That's exactly my point.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Mr. Rollason: And we need to cut a deal on that.
Chairman Teele: And let me just say this. I don't think we ought to waste one dollar ($1). And
I think, ultimately, the fencing discussion, if Parkinson's law is apropos, the old management --
City Council spend more time arguing about the color of the Christmas punch than the cost of
the gymnasium. But if Parkinson's law, we'll have a lot of discussion about the fencing.
Because, really, I don't think it's going to be the cost. It's going to be what kind of fencing we
want in there, and that's something that I think this Board and both the Omni, the Performing
Arts Center people should do. But, again, only the government, only the government would
have such pristine real estate, be spending a half a billion dollars ($500,000,000) -- four hundred
million dollars ($400,000,000), plus, in the Performing Arts Center and the redevelopment areas
that are there, and have an area that looks like what it looks like. I think there is a direct
relationship on how an area looks and the value that it's able to create for the property owners
and for the people who are trying to move property, et cetera. So, I think this is going to be a
very good discussion. It think it's going to --
Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman, just for -- to follow up on what you're saying. We --
several months ago we had a meeting with the residents of the Shenandoah area, around Brian
Park, and the Parks Department showed them several models. They met. They picked one kind
of fence. It's a picket fence. It's beautiful. I think Frank was there with me the other day. It's
four blocks square, and the cost was sixty-four thousand dollars ($64,000) to the Parks
Department. But I'll tell you, if we ever are going to have that discussion, it would be worth
taking a ride around Brian Park or Shenandoah Park. Brian, is on 24`h Avenue and 131h Street,
southwest, or Shenandoah. But I think, at the Brian Park, is the one that you're referring to. And
I am sure that -- and when you see that, you're going to have an idea of how it looks on that
property.
Chairman Teele: No question about it. Well, I think there's going to be ample opportunity to
discuss it. I think -- the really thing, Deborah, that is so frustrating is that 395 is literally one of
63 July 29, 2002
the main front doors to the City of Miami. At least, certainly, at the northern end. And, you
know, for 20 years it's looked like it looks now. And I think that is a part of the frustration that's
bringing about all these activists coming up with plans on how to lower it and all of that. I really
think -- you know, this is not to commend -- to condemn DOT, but I really think DOT ought to
step up with us on this, and try to make that a gateway. You know, we should have beautiful
trees. I mean, this should just -- like what any other developer would do. You know, you go to
Weston or you go to --what's that thing Armando Cordino's got down there? Coral Gables, and
some of these private developments. These are beautiful entranceways. And there's no reason
that our DOT entranceways should look so -- And, so we want to work with you on this, is what
we're saying.
Debora Rivera: Commissioner, I agree with you. And the Department stands prepared to work
with the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) and any other local governments to enhance
the transportation facilities, and to incorporate them into the overall community.
Chairman Teele: The key word is "funding."
Ms. Rivera: I understand that. I think that the Department would be very interested in working
with you all in helping the MPO identify funding. I think it's also important to note that fencing
and lighting and landscaping and other kinds of amenities are typically the sorts of features that
are included in master plan. And so, today, we're not installing a white picket fence. And
tomorrow we're installing a green fence. We want to make sure that kind of stuff is addressed.
And, frankly, that's not the kind of role that the Department can play. That really is the role of
locals. And, so we expect you all to take a lead, and we'll stand solidly behind you in supporting
that kind of an initiative.
Vice Chairman Winton: We're --
Chairman Teele: With finesse.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Chairman Teele: Beautiful finesse.
Vice Chairman Winton: We're actually well into our master planning process as we speak. So,
we'll have that soon.
Ms. Rivera: Thank you. And if there are any other questions --
Chairman Teele: No.
Ms. Rivera: -- regarding these items?
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much.
Ms. Rivera: All right.
64 July 29, 2002
a�... `b,.
Chairman Teele: Let's just clarify one thing before we --
Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question on 15.
Chairman Teele: Art and Cesar, do we have an agreement as to about how many parking spaces
there are underneath? Because all kinds of numbers are being thrown around, and we ought to at
least try to bring that to -- between Biscayne and 2"d, there are some parking spaces already.
Art Noriega: Yeah. On the newer development, which is the undeveloped land, they've done an
initial assessment to be upwards of just over 500 spaces.
Chairman Teele: Five hundred spaces. Thank you very much. Is there -- Cesar, that's the good
number?
Cesar Calas: That's correct, sir.
Chairman Teele: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, on item 15, then the resolution's going to be
amended to authorize the Executive Director to negotiate a joint participation agreement and
return it to the Board. And on item 14, you may wish to consider that. That was merely a
request to the City Manager to go forward. You temporarily passed that item. But it was merely
a request to the City Manager. I don't know if you want to go back to that item or not.
Chairman Teele: Well, I guess what we heard from Ana is that it wasn't necessary, because
there is no such credits right now. But we'll take it up, if you recommend. All right. As
amended -- 15, as amended, is moved by Commissioner Sanchez. I'm sorry, moved by
Commissioner Winton, second by --
Board Member Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: -- Commissioner Sanchez, as amended. All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
65 July 29, 2002
M
M
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-136
RESOLUTION NO. OMNI 02-65
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN PARKWEST (SEOPW) COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO
ENTER INTO A JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR THE REMOVAL OF
ALL CHAIN LINKED FENCING SURROUNDING FDOT
PROPERTIES/RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED WITHIN THE CRA
REDEVELOPMENT AREAS; FURTHER PROVIDING FOR THE
REPLACEMENT AND INSTALLATION OF DECORATIVE FENCING
SURROUNDING SAID PROPERTIES.
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OMNI
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE
CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A JOINT PARTICIPATION
AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(FDOT) FOR THE REMOVAL OF ALL CHAIN LINKED FENCING
SURROUNDING FDOT PROPERTIES/RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED WITHIN
THE CRA REDEVELOPMENT AREAS; FURTHER PROVIDING FOR THE
REPLACEMENT AND INSTALLATION OF DECORATIVE FENCING
SURROUNDING SAID PROPERTIES.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
66 July 29, 2002
11. REQUEST CITY MANAGER TO AMEND ORDINANCE 11917 WHICH CREATED 24
HOUR PARKWEST ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT, BY PROHIBITING DEVELOPERS
FROM OBTAINING DEVELOPMENT CREDITS AS RESULT OF CONSTRUCTION OF
PUBLIC PARKING LOT AND STORAGE AREA UNDERNEATH I-395 BETWEEN
BISCAYNE BOULEVARD -AND Iv'W 3RD AVENUE (See #9).
Chairman Teele: On 14, just is a matter of forwarding it over to the City. Could we do that?
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, Alex, you sure you want to -- since no such animal exists, why
would we be taking a formal action here?
Chairman Teele: To prohibit.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): It would require -- actually, the resolution suggests that the
Manager -- requests that the Manager consider an amendment --
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So moved.
Chairman Teele: To prohibit.
Mr. Vilarello: -- that prohibits.
Vice Chairman Winton: To prohibit, right. So moved.
Mr. Vilarello: And as it goes through the process, the professional staff will recommend in favor
or against --
Vice Chairman Winton: Got it. So moved.
Mr. Vilarello: -- depending on what's appropriate.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
Board Member Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
67 July 29, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-137
RESOLUTION NO. OMNI 02-66
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OMNI
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) REQUESTING THE
MIAMI CITY MANAGER TO AMEND ORDINANCE 11917 WHICH
CREATED THE 24 HOUR PARKWEST ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT, BY
PROHIBITING DEVELOPERS FROM OBTAINING DEVELOPMENT
CREDITS AS A RESULT OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC
PARKING LOT AND STORAGE AREA UNDERNEATH I-395 BETWEEN
BISCAYNE BOULEVARD AND NW 3RD AVENUE.
AND
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN PARKWEST (SEOPW) COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) REQUESTING THE MIAMI CITY MANAGER TO AMEND
ORDINANCE 11917 WHICH CREATED THE 24 HOUR PARKWEST
ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT, BY PROHIBITING DEVELOPERS FROM
OBTAINING DEVELOPMENT CREDITS AS A RESULT OF THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC PARKING LOT AND STORAGE AREA
UNDERNEATH I-395 BETWEEN BISCAYNE BOULEVARD AND NW 3RD
AVENUE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
68 July 29, 2002
12. TABLE PROPOSED AGREEMENT WITH STEWART BARNES, LLP, FOR
GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS REPRESENTATION, $78,000.
Chairman Teele: Item 16.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner --
Board Member Regalado: I'll second it for discussion.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado's recognized for discussion.
Board Member Regalado: This government and public affairs representation, is this lobby or --
Board Member Sanchez: What is that?
Chairman Teele: Ms. Lewis, was this the planning process in Memphis?
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): That is correct, sir. What we're being authorized or
asking for the authorization is to enter into an agreement with Stewart Barnes, to seek funding
for the trip, and to be the liaison between the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) and the
Memphis Commerce -- I'm sorry. Chelsa, could you help me out on this?
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that's not their --
Chairman Teele: This is the --
Vice Chairman Winton: That's not what their scope of services says. Their scope of service is
much, much, much more in depth, if you look at it.
Chairman Teele: Let's temporarily pass it. I've not reviewed it either.
Vice Chairman Winton: Their scope of services is to go to Washington, on our behalf, and seek
funding for doing the kind of projects that we're doing here, and other stuff, and it's tied to --
Board Member Regalado: No. But she said -- Johnny, she said she'll seek funding for the trip to
Memphis.
Vice Chairman Winton: No, no. But that is not what this scope of services, that comes from the
vendor, says.
69 July 29, 2002
M
M
Board Member Regalado: That's right. That's what I'm saying.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm reading the scope of services here.
Chairman Teele: Let's --
Board Member Regalado: No. But --
Board Member Sanchez: Let's go ahead and --
Chairman Teele: Let's just temporarily --
Board Member Sanchez: -- temporarily pass.
Chairman Teele: Let's table this.
Vice Chairman Winton: Fine.
Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner --
Vice Chairman Winton: Withdraw my motion. Well, my motion didn't have a second, anyhow.
Chairman Teele: Motion by Commissioner Winton to table.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Board Member Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: By Commissioner Sanchez. All in favor say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Board Member Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 02-138
A MOTION TO TABLE PROPOSED AGREEMENT WITH STEWART
BARNES, LLP, FOR GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
REPRESENTATION, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $78,000.
70 July 29, 2002
,'
(Here follows body of motion, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Board Member Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. OMNI 02-67
A MOTION TO TABLE PROPOSED AGREEMENT WITH STEWART
BARNES, LLP, FOR GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
REPRESENTATION, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $78,000.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Gonzalez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
71 July 29, 2002
13. DIRECT CRA ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE STATUS REPORT ON SUPPORT SERVICES
THAT WERE TO BE PROVIDED FOR THREE BUSINESSES IN OVERTOWN
(JACKSON'S SOUL FOOD RESTAURANT, JUST RIGHT BARBER SHOP AND TWO
GUYS RESTAURANT).
Chairman Teele: Security Plan Assessment.
Board Member Sanchez: Poinciana. They're back again?
Chairman Teele: I would like to take up two quick things. Number one, there was a very fine
story that appeared regarding Commissioner -- regarding Congresswoman Meek's efforts in
Overtown, and the businesses. And, again, it highlights -- we've had three businesses, Mr.
Attorney. We've had three businesses that we approved, providing support for, and that article
made reference of that. Can we get a status report of that for the meeting, and can we get all of
the documents prepared that are necessary to carry that out, please, regarding the Two Guys
Restaurant, Just Right, and Jackson Soul Food, those three? I mean, because it's a little
embarrassing to read, you know, that they're waiting on us, again. And, on that regard, I think
one of the big issues is the -- what's the word you always say, Ms. Planning Director? Is the Re -
adoptive use?
Vice Chairman Winton: Adaptive reuse.
Ana Gelabert-Sanchez (Director of Planning and Zoning): Adaptive reuse.
Chairman Teele: Adaptive reuse. The problem is, Madam Director, is anything that happens in
Overtown requires an adaptive reuse. Anything. Especially, if you want to make these buildings
ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliant, you know, or meet basic Codes. One of the
biggest problems that I have is, virtually every business in Overtown -- virtually every business
in the Black community doesn't meet Code; ADA, bathrooms, parking, et cetera. We need to
look at, in a comprehensive manner, to provide for the adaptive reuse, and if it means ordinances,
then we need to do that. But I think, you know, everybody's got to go through -- jump through
yourself for two and three years is a little ridiculous.
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: If I may clarify. I am not sure what properties are you talking, but
there's two things. When I mentioned the adaptive reuse, it's as far as parking. The other
building Codes, which are administered by the Building Department, that might relate to the
ADA, is a different issue, and I don't believe those are things that can be waived or do without.
But I would certainly go back and talk to the director and get details. The only one that I
mentioned was the adaptive reuse as a hardship for the parking. And the other one -- and like I
said, I'm not familiar with the particular situation. They might have nothing to -- they might be
just meeting the building Code, which is necessary.
Chairman Teele: Well, the problem is, if we're going to stay caught in a time warp -- if a
building was built on -- without the proper setback, and if you're trying to put in the right kind of
bathrooms, like we're trying to do, at least, in two of those buildings, the two restaurants, you
know, you're caught in a legal morass that literally makes it almost impossible to do anything.
72 July 29, 2002
111., e � -0•
Vice Chairman Winton: Well --
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I can get back to you on the particulars. I am not familiar with those
projects, so I need to know what was the problem.
Vice Chairman Winton: In fact, that's the suggestion I was just going to make. Because many
times we all get caught up in -- you know, we hear part of the detail and part of the detail, and it
seems to me, although, that staff ought to go and meet with the restaurant owners, get the details
of the catch-22 problems that they have to deal with, so that then we have something very
concrete and tangible to work with. And many times -- when I'm dealing with folks in my own
district, and they're talking about, "Well, I've got this problem and that problem and this
problem," but I can't ever get anybody to pin anything down. So, I can't solve it, if I can't pin it
down. And in order to solve these kind of problems that are very, very specifically -- they are
detailed. End of story. And if we can't pin down the detail, we can't solve the problem. So, I
would encourage, if it's appropriate, for us to direct staff to meet with the owners of the
restaurant. Have a meeting with them, talk about what the issues are, and they could bring those
issues back to us, so that maybe there's some debate we can have, or maybe they can just solve
the problems right away and we don't have to have a debate.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager, Operations): We can certainly have the director from
the Building Department and the building official meet with them and see whether there's any
phasing in or anything can be done to reasonably accommodate and that type of thing, because
you're exactly right.
Chairman Teele: Could you get a meeting with David Hernandez and Cesar Calas and the
architects and us, before we meet with other people? Because, you know, one of the things we
do is, everybody wants to rush out and meet with people and -- you know, we ought to have our
thing together before we go out and meet with anybody outside.
Mr. Rollason: Certainly. We can set that up.
73 July 29, 2002
14. AUTHORIZE CRA ARCHITECT AND CONSULTING ENGINEER TO EXPEND
$15,000 IN PROVIDING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN ASSESSMENT PHASE OF
NATIONAL FOOD FRANCHISE PROJECT (DIARY QUEEN) AS IT RELATES TO
ZONING, BUILDING AND PLANNING REQUIREMENTS.
Chairman Teele: The other issue is the franchise issue. I understand there is a legal problem
with the franchise issue or something. Mr. Stevenson, are you -- you're here on the franchise
issue?
Chris Stevenson: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: As the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) knows, we have been out
for the better part of three years -- two years in advertising, trying to get a franchise in Overtown.
When you think about Overtown, it's a community that is denied the same kinds of food
groupings that other communities have. And one of the reasons is, as we have found painfully, is
that Overtown sits in a valley. They two peaks over it are Jackson Hospital complex, which has
the largest concentration of franchises anywhere in Dade County, and then Miami -- Biscayne
Boulevard. And when you do the straight line, the two miles, five miles, three miles from the
next one, you basically have almost -- I don't want to call it redlining because it's not redlining,
based upon ethnicity or neighborhoods, the way banks do. It's just redlining based upon the fact
that there is a Popeye's, there is a Burger King, there is a SubWay. Virtually everything that we
talked to, within the two-mile area, particularly because of Jackson Hospital. We got an
application for a Dairy Queen. Mr. Stevenson, you have that Dairy Queen franchise, is that
right?
Mr. Stevenson: That's correct, sir.
Chairman Teele: So, I would hope that whatever -- you know, whatever irregularities there are,
that we can get them resolved. And, if not, we can throw out the bid and --
Board Member Sanchez: Change the tape.
Chairman Teele: We can throw out the bid and take an action directly. But in either event, I
think it's going to be extremely frustrating to have been advertising for two years in newspapers
and then have a submission. And if we do have some irregularities, then the Board needs to be
apprised of them.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, all the lawyers shook their heads --
Board Member Sanchez: There wasn't a problem.
Vice Chairman Winton: So --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): There's -- as I'm being informed now, there's some forms
that need to be filled out that are supportive of their proposal, including things that they received
74 July 29, 2002
N- - .-e
credit for in terms of the RFP (Request for Proposals). And they need to fill out those
component forms that are necessary. As soon as they do that, we can move forward.
Board Member Sanchez: When you say "they," are you referring to Dairy Queen?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes.
Chairman Teele: There was only one submission. I mean, we trolled and begged, and all the
incentives --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: And it really speaks volumes to the economic --
Vice Chairman Winton: Does he have those forms?
Mr. Vilarello: They're a part of the bid package. All of these irregularities are waivable;
however, there's a request by the Executive Director to make sure that we proceed with those
forms being filled out. I don't know why Dairy Queen hasn't filled those forms out.
Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Stevenson, are you in possession of those documents? Could you
please step up and put your name on the record?
Chairman Teele: What I would like to do is authorize the consulting engineer to expend not
more than "X" number of dollars in providing technical assistance on the site, and I'd like to do
that at the close of this. But I think one of the issues gets down to the fact that we can't
determine if the site works if we don't, you know, expend certain dollars in technical assistance,
and whether or not it's going to meet the setbacks and the Codes and all of this and all of that.
So, Mr. Stevenson, go right ahead. Would you give us your name and address for the record.
Mr. Stevenson: Chris Stevenson, 4770 Northwest 17 Avenue, Miami, Florida. I've been
working with the CRA pretty closely, trying to find out if there's any other documents that I
needed, you know, so I can turn those in. I've been trying to coordinate with Ms. Chelsea. And
if there is any, please let me know. I have not been informed of any other documents they need -
Chairman Teele: Then I apologize. Obviously, we need to talk to you. What is the immediate
problem that you have now? You all are trying to make what -- let's assume that you can get all
the work done. What is the immediate problem that you have now in moving forward?
Mr. Stevenson: Right now, we're looking for an agreement, as far as with the CRA, and as far as
the commitment as far as with the projects, so our architects can go in there, so we can do some -
- you know, the preliminary assessment, as far as parking and architect's drawings, and that type
of thing, sir. So, we are, you know --
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't understand.
75 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: The RFP -- the document indicates that the CRA will not participate in the
financing, as it relates to the franchisee and the franchisor. However, once he has evidence of a
franchise, the CRA document indicates that we will provide technical support, including but not
limited to, architectural engineering, and capital support for the build -out of the building, based
upon some type of commitment of "X" number of jobs that will be created in the area. And, so,
we're sort of at a "chicken and the egg kind" of situation. What I wanted to do was to authorize
the consulting engineer -- is there an architect assigned to this project?
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): Zyscovich.
Chairman Teele: Who?
Ms. Lewis: Zyscovich.
Vice Chairman Winton: Zyscovich.
Chairman Teele: Zyscovich.
Board Member Sanchez: I can't pronounce, it either.
Chairman Teele: Well, I would like to authorize that the architect --
Board Member Sanchez: I can't pronounce his name, either, so don't worry about it.
Chairman Teele: Zyscovich. And the consulting engineer, Cesar Calas, be authorized to expend
up to fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000), between the two of them, to provide technical assistance
in the assessment phase of the project, as it relates to the zoning, the building, the planning
requirements, as a condition, as it relates to the build -out. And that's what I would like to do, so
that we don't sit here and waste another 45 days while we're getting documents.
Vice Chairman Winton: But I would like to emphasize that the operative word was "up to" and
this shouldn't take anywhere close to that kind of money. So, whoever's managing that process,
this ain't a fifteen thousand dollar ($15,000) tab, by any stretch of the imagination, not even
close. So, it doesn't have to come back to us. But I hope that we manage that very, very
carefully.
Chairman Teele: Would you move it?
Vice Chairman Winton: This isn't a blank check for 15 gran.
Chairman Teele: Up to.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
76 July 29, 2002
Board Member Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor --
Board Member Sanchez: Up to 15.
Chairman Teele: -- up to, between those two firms. All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
SEOPW/CRA MOTION NO. 02-139
A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA ARCHITECT AND CONSULTING
ENGINEER TO EXPEND AN AMOUNT UP TO $15,000 IN PROVIDING
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN THE ASSESSMENT PHASE OF THE
NATIONAL FOOD FRANCHISE PROJECT (DIARY QUEEN) AS IT
RELATES TO ZONING, BUILDING AND PLANNING REQUIREMENTS.
(Here follows body of motion, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Board Member Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Teele: And I'm going to underscore what Commissioner Winton says. It's "up to."
What we're trying to do is move forward, Mr. Stevenson, while you're doing everything that
you've got to do. The RFP document, I think, anticipated -- I think the budget anticipated up to
some amount of money. I don't remember. Let me --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
77 July 29, 2002
15. DIRECT CRA ADMINISTRATION TO REPORT BACK TO BOARD ON ISSUE OF
ELEVATORS RELATING TO SOLOMON YUKEN PROJECT.
Chairman Teele: There was one other item, the Poinciana Village item. But before we do that,
Mr. Yuken, I'd like to acknowledge you, again. Mr. .-uken has received a substantial grant from
the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), the largest single grant, and it is to work there in
the area where Parking Lot 3 is, and to provide, substantially, the redesign and the fagade, I
guess, would be the correct term, improvements to the building. I'm really pleased that you're
moving forward, Mr. Yuken. Is there any help that we can give you or anything that is amiss?
Solomon Yuken: Well, I don't know if you have passed by the --
Chairman Teele: Yes.
Mr. Yuken: -- building. We are almost two to three weeks away to finish it up, the structure and
every hard part of the final touches of the front of the buildings. And as of this point, we haven't
got the approval from the City Attorney in regards to the recommendation of the loan and monies
cannot be drawn out --
Chairman Teele: I was unaware of that
shoulder.
Board Member Sanchez: I guess not.
I thought we were here to pat each other on the
Chairman Teele: Mr. Yuken is indicating some concern about the loan document or the grant
document in his case.
Mr. Yuken: Ilene said that it's in the system, that has to -- it needs signatures. And that's the
last I heard from her.
Chairman Teele: How much was the grant, 400,000?
Mr. Yuken: Four nineteen.
Chairman Teele: Four nineteen?
Mr. Yuken: Yes.
Chairman Teele: All right. Well, I just want to commend you for moving forward. And I think
your building is the most defining building, other than our churches, on 3rd Avenue, and it's
going to change the look of 3rd Avenue. And we really are looking forward to working with you.
Mr. Yuken: I appreciate it. And now that I'm here, you know, there is a second phase to that,
which was the elevators. And before the structure was done, I took it upon myself to do the
preparation of the excavation, and all the structure for the elevators.
78 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: All right. Well, I'm going to ask --
Mr. Yuken: And that is pending.
Chairman Teele: I'm gong to ask Mr. Calas and staff to come back and give us a report on the
issue of the elevators. As I understood it, the elevators were not a part of the grant.
Mr. Yuken: That's correct.
Chairman Teele: But we said we would consider it at a later date.
Mr. Yuken: That is correct.
Chairman Teele: And, so -- you know, again, it's a part of the so-called charette process that we
held three years ago -- two and a half years ago, and we want to live up to that.
Mr. Yuken: OK. I appreciate it. Thank you for the --
Chairman Teele: Thank you.
Board Member Sanchez: Thank you.
79 July 29, 2002
MM
16. SECURITY PLAN ASSESSMENT FOR POINCIANA VILLAGE.
Chairman Teele: The last item is the --
Board Member Sanchez: Poinciana.
Chairman Teele: -- Poinciana Village.
Vice Chairman Winton: No. You've got more items --
Chairman Teele: Well, I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's not the last item.
Chairman Teele: We have the updates from the Executive Director. I apologize.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, and a couple other things.
Chairman Teele: Poinciana, come right ahead. What else?
Board Member Sanchez: No. Let's do the Poinciana. I've got to get going.
Vice Chairman Winton: GASB (Government Accounting Standard Board)-34.
Chairman Teele: That's the update. Yeah.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, OK. I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: Yes, sir.
Dale Bryant: Dale Bryant, Poinciana Village Condominium Homeowners' Association, 201
Northwest 7th Street. We're on the agenda here with the update plan. Ms. Lewis shared a copy
with us, and I understand she's going to present it to you today.
Chairman Teele: All right. Well, you've got a copy of it now?
Mr. Bryant: Yes, I have a copy.
Chairman Teele: Well, when it's convenient -- you know, again, we want to provide technical
assistance in whatever way we can. I would like to just say, for the record, the build's going to
need to be painted very soon.
Mr. Bryant: We agree with you, sir.
Chairman Teele: And, you know, I -- so, we need to --
80 July 29, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Where are we right now? I'm confused. I mean, this issue here is about
security. What's -- is there a recommendation? I mean, do we have an action item here?
Chairman Teele: I think they need to take it up, and come back to us with a recommendation
from the Homeowners' Association. That was a commitment -- I think you or somebody said
that, in one of the meetings, that we weren't going to deal with anything other than security, and
we had dealt with -- I think we gave twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) or so toward the
security guards, and Water and Sewer, something, and that the only thing the Board said -- I
guess it was Commissioner Sanchez --
Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may.
Chairman Teele: Yeah.
Board Member Sanchez: You know, I, as well as the entire Board, has been very sympathetic to
the Poinciana Village residents. I mean, we have helped with the landscaping. We have
provided fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) towards -- I forgot what it was -- and now they're
back again on the agenda for twenty-six thousand dollars, seven hundred and thirty-seven dollars
and twenty-eight cents ($26,737.28) for security, and you just touched up that the building is
going to need painting. Well, I guarantee you, in a couple of months, they'll be back out here for
us to paint the building. I mean, I'm very sympathetic and I want to help you, but -- I mean,
we've got to draw the line somewhere, because -- I mean, how much -- here again, you know -- if
we're going to commit helping your building, and you say, well, let's put it through the -- we
have the money in the budget, and we sit down with them and say, "OK, we're going to give you
three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000)" -- and if it's our responsibility, which, of yet, I tend
to disagree. But, you know, I'm very sympathetic to the residents there because, you know,
whatever the outcome with the developer that he didn't live up to expectation -- and the burden's
on you today, you know, and your maintenance go up. Well, guess what? Maintenance all over
the city are going up, and people have to adapt. But here you are, coming back in front of us
again with twenty-six thousand dollars ($26,000) for security. I mean, I'm very concerned with
that.
Mr. Bryant: Commissioner, this was a study that was done through the CRA's (Community
Redevelopment Agency) Office, and this is the, you know, results of the study and
recommendation of the person who did the study.
Chairman Teele: The CRA instructed -- Board instructed the staff not to consider all of the other
things that you all were asking for, but to consider a review of security, and to give you a report.
There is no recommendation, to my knowledge. This is giving you a report on a consultant study
regarding security. It's up to you all to come back and say, this is something you would like to
request or not request or -- and how much of it you're going to pay and how much you want us to
pay. But the fact of the matter is, there was a clear discussion from the Board that the only thing
that we felt there was some sense of duty and obligation was in the area of Police -- I shouldn't
say -- in the area of security. I want to remind the Board that the CRA induced the project.
There are substantial issues associated with this project. The CRA owns the land that the project
is on still. The CRA has certainly an interest in the project, but I don't think we have a legal
81 July 29, 2002
responsibility, as Commissioner Sanchez and others have said. And we're here to be available to
you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Bloom, at the outside, your best professional guess, how long is it
likely or could it potentially take to ultimately resolve this whole issue of who controls this site
within the courts, which is where we are right now; is that not correct?
William R. Bloom (Special Counsel/CRA): That is correct. There is a -- there was supposed to
be a hearing this week on a motion --
Chairman Teele: Supposed to have been today at 2:30.
Mr. Bloom: -- to consolidate the Poinciana Village litigation with the Sawyer's Walk litigation.
Unfortunately, because the Judge's schedule, the judge requested that hearing be delayed. And,
so, it will not be heard, I believe, until September.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Is it on the docket?
Mr. Bloom: I don't know if there is a date.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Mr. Bloom: I mean, we're pushing, obviously, to get the Sawyer's Walk litigation resolved as
quickly as possible.
Vice Chairman Winton: And, then, assuming you can consolidate --
Chairman Teele: We don't want to consolidate.
Mr. Bloom: Well, we don't want to consolidate.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Assuming you can't -- assuming then that it doesn't get
consolidated.
Mr. Bloom: The --
Vice Chairman Winton: Two months, six months, twelve months, two years, four years?
Mr. Bloom: Probably six months would be optimistic. There was a general release signed by
Poinciana Village in 1998 with respect to that.
82 July 29, 2002
14", *".e
Vice Chairman Winton: So -- I said this at -- in our last discussion because, Joe, you and I lead
the charge against providing support. But in the very last conversation, as I had had more and
more time to think about this, in the real estate world there's, generally speaking, no -- "cheaper"
is not the right term I'm looking for -- there's no less expensive way to get a customer than
keeping the one you've got. It's always much more expensive to get the new customer than it is
to keep the one you've got. These are customers that the City and the CRA recruited into the
redevelopment area. Yo-yo.
Board Member Sanchez: Yeah, I got it.
Vice Chairman Winton: These are the customers that we recruited into the CRA area, and
they're going to be, by far and away, the least costly customer we will ever deal with, because
we've already got them. And because of circumstances, this -- and this isn't a private
development. This is a joint private/public development that the CRA is smack dab in the
middle of. If this were a private development, where a private developer bought the land, built
the deal, promised them the moon, they bought into it, and they moved in, you know, and they --
"Too bad. See ya. That was the developer. You, done." But --
Chairman Teele: Commissioner, I don't -- I think the Attorney ought to be listening to you,
because I'm very concerned with the way you all -- this discussion is going, given the litigation.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well --
Chairman Teele: Because I'm not sure this was a public/private development, at the point where
the property owners came in and bought. It was a public/private between us and the developer,
but between --
Board Member Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may.
Chairman Teele: But between the RF -- between the City, really, not the CRA, and the
developer. That is, the land, the RFP (Request for Proposal), dah, dah, dah, dah.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that still fits in terms of my -- the point I'm -- but I'm -- you're
protecting against -- you're protecting something here, and I trust you there. So, I don't want to
say something -- I want -- I would like to make my point, but I don't want to make my point at
the expense of a whole bunch of other things. So, Attorneys, if I'm doing -- headed down a path
here where I ought to go a different direction, tell me.
Mr. Bloom: Well, let me just jump in for a second. I mean, as Commissioner Teele stated, it was
a private/public lease. The tenants, or the purchasers of units, they had their contractural
relationship with the developer, Poinciana Limited.
Vice Chairman Winton: I understand that. Right.
Mr. Bloom: All right. There's no obligation, on the part of the CRA as the successor to the City,
to provide any benefits or services to the unit owners.
83 July 29, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Got it. OK. I understand clearly.
Board Member Sanchez: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: And I know where I'm going to go with this. We have had a number of
discussions about providing financial support to different kind of businesses and businesses in
particular, and we've provided a great deal of money to get a new project, a great deal of money
to get a new project developed on 3rd Avenue, which Mr. Yuken is working on right now. We
have a development here, where -- which was really kind of the pioneer that brought folks back
into -- exactly the kind of people, with disposable income, that we're looking for -- brought them
back into the CRA area. And as a -- and now, then, there isn't a mechanism to solve this
particular problem. And, so, it seems to me that this is a different situation than lots of other
things that we might talk about. And I'm not sure that we shouldn't be looking at a -- kind of a
global, two-year budget for the appropriate maintenance and security of that operation, and have
some negotiations between us and them about what they're going to bring to the table and what
we're going to bring to the table to stabilize that project for the next two years. Because, within
that two-year period, all the litigation ought to be resolved on that issue, as opposed to
continuing to let this thing kind of eek out and eek out and eek out. And there's going to be --
there will clearly -- in my mind, there will be substantial -- potential for substantial losses within
that complex that won't do any of us any good.
Board Member Sanchez: But, Johnny, the question here is, can the litigation be resolved? I
mean, this has been going forever. And let me just say, first of all, I think that we have assisted
already, in many ways. We have no responsibility there. That's how I think. All right. Now,
here's the things that I want to get at, and I've got to be very careful. First of all, I question that
you can use TIF (Tax Increment Funds) money for security. I don't think you can. As a matter
of fact, I know you can't. The other issue is, when you're going to provide security and you start
providing technical security with cameras and stuff, and you put the cameras there, you know,
you -- we could be nice, but I guarantee you one thing: The litigation, if something should ever
happen, that they'll come back and say, "Well, hey, you put the cameras, but some security guard
fell asleep and didn't monitor the cameras and something happened in the facility," then you
open yourself to litigation that may not be very -- benefit to the CRA. Those are the concerns
that I have. I think that once you start adding cameras and you may have something happen in
that building, they're going to come back and say, "Hey, the finger's at the CRA," and we'll be
out here again in front -- either in court or with the residents out here again.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, if I may?
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney.
Mr. Vilarello: What I'd like to try to address with the Board is this. The CRA has no direct
contractual relationship with the homeowners to provide anything, or any technical responsibility
under the law with regard to the homeowners. To the extent that you consider some process, like
84 July 29, 2002
Commissioner Winton suggested, you are creating a relationship. If it is negligently implied,
negligently enforced, can create liability for the City. I suggest that you not mix the two issues.
It's a slippery slope that you --
Vice Chairman Winton: Which two?
Mr. Vilarello: The CRA providing any kind of benefit to the Homeowners' -- assistance to the
Homeowners' Association. It's a slippery slope that you start with providing some gratuitous
assistance. In the first instance, a gratuity to make sure that they can cover a bill that we did two
years ago, and then go into a long-term, ongoing relationship for the next two years. You are
now creating a relationship between the CRA. And if it's lawful for you to do that, which is
another question that we have to broach, you're now creating a relationship where you do have
responsibilities that address the issue that Commissioner Sanchez just raised. If -- there is no
certainly with regard to litigation. I can't give you a time frame to get that litigation concluded. I
could tell you that I attended two mediations that went at least five hours each, with regard to
this project. I'd be more than happy to discuss that in greater detail at an executive session. I
don't think an executive session is necessary right now. However, if it's the will of the Board to
have another session, we'll be more than happy -- I'll be more than happy to ask for such, but we
are far apart. And I have taken the direction of the Board. It's very clear to me that this is of
critical importance for us to get this resolved. I can tell you that, as we sit today, we're very far
apart. And the process, if I were to have to speculate today, is going to be the litigation process,
as oppose to the settlement process. But my direction from the Board is very clear in terms of
potential settlement.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman -- Mr. Vice Chairman, members of the Board, I represent this
area, and I am extremely concerned. I'm frustrated. I inherited this mess. We've tried to do
everything to work with the developer, to work with the homeowners. To be very candid with
you, I have adopted a philosophy that "No good deed goes unpunished." I mean, we gave
fifteen or so thousand dollars as a gratuitous act.
Board Member Sanchez: How much was the landscape -- we did do the landscaping, correct?
Chairman Teele: Oh, we did landscaping, but that -- we did that for the developer.
Board Member Sanchez: And then fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) in --
Chairman Teele: You know, and --
Board Member Sanchez: -- in December.
Chairman Teele: And I'm -- you know, we're yet to hear the kind of dialogue in the pursuit of
our overall redevelopment efforts. I take note of the fact that this is one of the few residential
components in the entire Overtown area, and I think we should keep that before us. But at the
same time, I think anything that we do, "A," has to be treated as a grant for community services
or something other than an obligation, as the Attorney has said, and under no circumstances
would I support providing the service. For example, we would -- you know, we would give them
85 July 29, 2002
a road map or something, but the grant terms would be that they would have to do anything like
that. I think, to refresh every one's recollection, there was a lot of complaints about a lot of
different things. And the security issue, the fact that the dialogue was that the police were
called, they were slow getting there, the -- a whole series of issues relating to security, was the
one iss,:e, I think, that everyone on the Board or most of us were concerned about. I think what
staff was asked to do was to develop a model, using some consultants, and give it to them. The
fact that it's here before us now, I don't think warrants an action today, and I think, if the
homeowners want to take the information that's before us and come back at a later date with a
request, that would be their right to do it. But I think it would be extremely premature to do
anything today, and they should do that well in advance of any Commission meeting, in working
with the City Attorney, as well as the Executive Director. So, I would like to just move on,
unless there's something else the homeowners --
Mr. Bryant: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Sanchez, you know, we are the homeowners,
and we came to you as the homeowners. We have nothing to do with the developer in that
lawsuit. And we're just, in a sense, citizens caught in a big situation, and we're not party to that.
The first time when we came, which was almost a year ago, last September, right in this room,
basically, we asked the citizens and persons who had the courage to move in this area for some
assistance. You don't necessarily have to earmark it for anything, and in very simple, you know,
baseline dollars and cents for a foreseeable period, six months, nine months, a year short, if you
wish. You know, we would be able to maintain ourselves, and the security that we presently use
for -- with some assistance of around six thousand dollars ($6,000) per month. That was the
number that we indicated, you know, before this -- before -- when we came here before the
study. And that's been fairly consistent. If there's some mechanism, it doesn't have to be tied to
security to obligate the City in some way, shape, or form, but as citizens who chose to live in
here — and, personally, I moved from Broward here, because I saw the vision, the vision painted
by the developer, the City, and there was all kinds of brochures. None of us would have moved
there, you know, if that wasn't there. So, as Commissioner Winton said, we're here ready as your
customers. We're tax paying. Right now there's 64 units, and I would say the average annual
taxes -- you know, the County, School Board, the City, is approximately 1200, per unit, times 64
units. If we're not able to survive, what's going to happen is, we're going to be forced to squeeze
out the persons at the bottom of the realm. I can afford the fee, and a number of my neighbors
can afford the fee. But what you will then have to do is simply force out all the other persons
who were deliberately attracted to this program, because it's a mixed income situation. We can't
carry them, and that's where we are. So, if we can't get some assistance, then, instead of 220, the
Association fee will have to go over 300, and there's going to be at least 40 percent foreclosure
immediately. You know, that's the situation we're in. We've been trying to keep it where we do
-- you know, personally, I spend a lot of time away from my business, which is costing me
money, and I'm unprepared to continue doing that. To help in running it is not my -- you know,
it's not my function. It shouldn't be there. We're in a very difficult situation. And while the
lawsuits are going on, I'd ask you to consider consequences if somebody gets raped, murdered on
the compound, you know. We're on the first line, but we don't' have any money. I think any
lawyer is going to be looking down the line to everybody who has been involved in it. All we're
saying is, whichever way you can work it, from a mechanical point of view, approximately six
thousand per month, as a general budget contribution -- doesn't have to be earmarked for
security, if that's a problem -- and we can provide our own maintenance and security.
86 July 29, 2002
%;<.
Chairman Teele: Heard that threat?
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, that's exactly the type of dialogue --
Board Member Sanchez: That you don't want to get into.
Mr. Vilarello: -- that we need to be concerned about, because, right now, there is no relationship,
no privity of contract between the CRA, the City, and the Homeowners' Association. The
Homeowners' Association owes a responsibility to the members of the . Homeowners'
Association. So, that goes right to the heart of the issue. And I think what I'm hearing, at least,
is an attempt to -- at the same time -- as the Chairman indicated that "no good deed goes
unpunished," at the same time that they're reaching out for assistance from us, the intention,
ultimately, is to shed that responsibility to the CRA and away from the Homeowners'
Association, where it, legally and lawfully, should lie. And if they have any issues with regard
to claims against the developer, the developer, who might have provided or not provided items,
then they need to seek those remedies from the developer and not from the CRA or the City.
Board Member Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado. Board Member Regalado.
Board Member Regalado: I think that we all know that the new direction and the guidelines and
all the steps that HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) -- federal HUD is
taking is toward helping homeowners. And I think that there are departments, there are
mechanisms, there are programs that they can tap into if individuals have problems with their
mortgage, and maybe the Homeowners' Association. I would suggest that someone from
Community Development would try to talk to this group and offer them some of the information
and alternatives that they have, because I know that there is federal money to help people that are
in this predicament. I don't know about the homeowners, as such, but I do know about
individuals. And if we are able to alleviate some of the pressure on some of the individuals --
because some of the individuals -- and this is the whole problem, as I remember when I met with
you. Some of the individuals are having a hard time paying their mortgage and their fees to the
condo association. So, I don't know if we can get someone from Community Development to
meet with them, with the CRA staff, and offer information regarding some of the programs.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Manager, would you see if there --
Frank Rollason (Director, Building & Zoning): Right. I'll take care of that.
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much, Mr. Manager. OK.
Mr. Bryant: Nothing to do with this plan, then, sir?
Chairman Teele: Sir?
87 July 29, 2002
Mr. Bryant: This plan --
Chairman Teele: That's informational for your Association, for you, and for the public. All
right. Madam Director, you have item --
Mr. Bryant: If I may, sir. Motion directing the CRA Director to prepare a plan, to provide a
long-term and short-term police presence at Poinciana Village, including payment for the short-
term security at its next regularly scheduled CRA board meeting. That is what we are, you
know, going to be pursuing.
Chairman Teele: Well, I think --
Vice Chairman Winton: (Inaudible).
Chairman Teele: I think that was the discussion that the staff has recommended, but I think, in
light of the discussion, the Attorney -- and the record that you're laying down, you know -- the
Attorney is cautioning us now that we need to be very careful.
Mr. Bloom: Commissioner, I want to clarify. Staff did not make a recommendation regarding
the report. They obtained a report and provided it to the developer without recommendation.
Chairman Teele: All right. In any event, there'll be no action today, until the lawyers have had a
chance to review the discussion, the transcript, and everything, and see just where we are. But I
will say, as the person who represents the district, I'm extremely concerned about the record and
the doubt -- the language that is being used, because it really does suggest -- well, I think the
language will be self-explanatory, and we should make a transcript of the discussion, please, so
that everyone has it. But, you know, it almost puts us in a position where we'd be darned if we
do and be darned if we don't, and that's a very bad position, I think. I feel really bad now,
because, you know, I really want to figure out a way to help, but given the way the dialogue is
going, I'm sure the Attorneys are going to have a lot to say about anything that I want to do.
Vice Chairman Winton: But -- Mr. Chairman, I will tell you that it would have been a lot more
helpful for me, as a board member here, and them, as the public, if the statement that we heard
tonight about the slippery slope would have been made six or nine months ago, when we brought
up the whole discussion about providing any support to them, period.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, for the last two years, I've been advising this Board of the concern
that I have about -- from the day that we started providing the fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000),
the same discussion has been -- I've made the same statement. You cannot -- we have no
relationship with this Homeowners' Association, and when you create that association and you
create that relationship, you're going to -- the courts will look to whether you provided assistance
appropriately or not. I've had this -- I have mentioned before that we should not start with the
first fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000), as we've gone forward.
88 July 29, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I'll tell you, that must have gone right over my head, and it
wouldn't be the first thing that went right over my head, because things have, but I missed it
completely.
Chairman Teele: Well, I kept saying that it was in the context of a Christmas statement, and I
hope that that record will reflect that. That's why I started us off by saying, "No good deed goes
unpunished." I mean, nobody's going to ever come and say "thank you." And we realize, you
know, the situation you're in. And if there's -- where we are right now is, we're in a dialogue that
the Attorneys are uncomfortable with. I can tell you, I'm uncomfortable with it, because I'd
rather provide assistance of some kind. But given the dialogue, I don't see there's any way we
can provide assistance, because it's not about providing the equipment or that. It's just about
providing money. Once you get into privy -- once you get into a relationship, you're in a
relationship, and that -- and then to hear, after the discussion, "Well, what we're looking for is six
thousand dollars ($6,000) a month," you know, that cuts my feet out from under me to give you
anything, because there's no way this Board is going to start a long-term relationship like that.
Mr. Bryant: Mr. Chairman, I put that out again, because that was what we started with originally.
As Commissioner Sanchez expressed some concern on this -- you know, it's a highly
sophisticated study, and we appreciate it. And this is a lot of money. We're not saying that this
is necessarily what needs to be implemented. What we're saying is that we can provide a
situation and keep the ship together for that amount.
Chairman Teele: All right. We're going to move on. I thought the purpose of the study, just so
that we're clear, was to try to figure out a way that there could be some capital dollars that could
come in, that could save your operating costs on a monthly basis. That was a part of what we
kept talking about. I'm concerned about the safety of every citizen in the City of Miami, just as I
am about the people -- the residents of Poinciana Village. And if there's anything that I can do as
a Commissioner or as a CRA Board member, I would like to try to take a look at that. However,
I think, given the situation that we're in with the litigation, and given the fact that the dialogue is
going along the way that it's -- it's going in the route that it's going, we have to be very careful.
And all I'd ask you to do is to consider that document, consider the record, and then, if there is an
opportunity to come back in October, then come back with a plan, but make sure that whatever
the plan is, that you've sat down with the City Attorney and with the Executive Director before
you come back to the Board.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- I'm sorry. It seems to me that the Attorneys -- if that's kind of
the final statement, frankly, I'm not sure they need to waste their time, and we don't want them to
waste more time. I don't want them to have to go to more meetings if we're done. So --
Mr. Vilarello: I've met with them, and I have clearly communicated to them that my
recommendation ultimately to this Board will be that there's no new relationship created between
the CRA and this Association.
Vice Chairman Winton: And I'm not going to go against the advice of our legal counsel. So, I
don't see the reason for any kind of additional meeting.
89 July 29, 2002
17. DISCUSSION ON RECOMMENDATION MADE BY KPMG FOR A LIST OF FIRMS TO
EDUCATE THE CRA BOARD, STAFF, AND CITY OF MIAMI FINANCE DIRECTOR
(ACTING IN THE CAPACITY AS CRA FIDUCIARY) ON GASB-34.
Chairman Teele: All right. Madam Director, Item 18.
Dale Bryant: Well, thank you.
Chairman Teele: With discussion on "B", the KPMG (Klyneld, Peat, Marwick, Goerdeler), did
you want to take that up now or you want to take it up on September 9th, Commissioner Winton?
This is KPMG.
Vice Chairman Winton: Which item is this, 18?
Chairman Teele: Eighteen-B.
Vice Chairman Winton: No. I think this one could be now, because this is kind of -- this is
really a separate issue. And that's just about getting -- making sure that we're GASB
(Government Accounting Standard Board)-34 converted.
Chairman Teele: Bob, are you the expert on this?
Vice Chairman Winton: And we're kind of behind the eight ball, also, by the way.
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): Beg pardon, sir?
Chairman Teele: Who's the expert on this? What's your recommendation on 18-B, ma'am?
Ms. Lewis: My recommendation is to -- based on the three companies provided from KPMG,
Grau and Company. And the idea, sir, would be to get scope of services from Grau, depending
on what packages they have. Because a lot of the firms have put together packages on how to
implement GASB-34.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. You asked me a specific question. I gave
you an answer, but I wasn't paying attention. These blanks need to be filled in. So --
Chairman Teele: Well, that's what I was hoping she'd do.
Vice Chairman Winton: Fill in —
Chairman Teele: Just fill in the blank. The management firm of blank, not to exceed blank
dollars. That's what we're looking for.
Vice Chairman Winton: I mean, if that can't be done, then move it to the --
90 July 29, 2002
on
Ms. Lewis: Well, I -- we had already discussed this. And not having an idea of the scope of
services or the packages that they have, I would recommend not to --
Vice Chairman Winton: You're not ready to put -- fill in the blank. So, let's bring it back on the
Chairman Teele: Well, why don't we authorize her to meet with and bring back an agreement
with that firm?
Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely. Great.
Chairman Teele: Who's the firm?
Ms. Lewis: Grau and Company.
Vice Chairman Winton: An agreement that would -- bring back an agreement that we would
then be asked to approve, that would include scope of services on our money.
Chairman Teele: Exactly.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Chairman Teele: Would you second it, please, Commissioner?
Board Member Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: Those opposed?
The following motion was introduced by Board Member Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA R-02-140
A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO MEET
WITH GRAU AND COMPANY, ONE OF THE FIRMS CHOSEN BY KPMG
TO EDUCATE THE CRA BOARD, STAFF AND CITY OF MIAMI FINANCE
DIRECTOR, ACTING IN THE CAPACITY AS CRA FIDUCIARY, ON GASB
34 AND BRING BACK AN AGREEMENT WITH SAID FIRM, INCLUDING
SCOPE OF SERVICES, FOR BOARD APPROVAL.
91 July 29, 2002
M
Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Board Member Joe Sanchez
The following motion was introduced by Board Member Winton, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. OMNUCRA M-02-68
A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO MEET
WITH GRAU AND COMPANY, ONE OF THE FIRMS CHOSEN BY KPMG
TO EDUCATE THE CRA BOARD, STAFF AND CITY OF MIAMI FINANCE
DIRECTOR, ACTING IN THE CAPACITY AS CRA FIDUCIARY, ON GASB
34 AND BRING BACK AN AGREEMENT WITH SAID FIRM, INCLUDING
SCOPE OF SERVICES, FOR BOARD APPROVAL.
Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Board Member Joe Sanchez
92 July 29, 2002
18. CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO APPLY FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM SAFE
NEIGHBORHOOD GRANT FUNDS FOR DOMINO PARK AND MATCHING FUNDS
FROM THE CRA; FURTHER REQUESTING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO SEEK
REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI FOR SAID MATCH TO BE FUNDED
FROM THE CITY'S HOMELAND DEFENSE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUNDS.
Chairman Teele: Now, is there a second agreement, or is it two?
Vice Chairman Winton: Nope. Move to adjourn?
Chairman Teele: Yeah. Is there any other matter that needs to come before the Board?
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): Yes, sir. I have three items. First is the Safe
Neighborhood -- I'm sorry, sir. We were informed, the latter part of last week, that Safe
Neighborhoods has grant monies available, and we wanted to apply that to the Domino Park
project, and the deadline is, in fact, tomorrow. We've worked with --
Chairman Teele: You want a motion to authorize you to apply for a grant?
Ms. Lewis: That is correct.
Board Member Regalado: OK. Move it.
Chairman Teele: Of how much money?
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Ms. Lewis: Four hundred thousand, sir. I'm sorry, three hundred thousand.
Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Regalado. Seconded by Commissioner Winton,
authorizing the Executive Director to apply for the grant.
Board Member Regalado: Does he need any matching dollars or not?
Ms. Lewis: Yes, sir. And that is for -- we've spoken to the Assistant City Manager responsible
for Finance and Administration, Robert Nachlinger, and the match would be coming from the
Homeland Defense, because there are dollars already allocated.
Vice Chairman Winton: How much is the match?
Chairman Teele: Same amount.
Ms. Lewis: Dollar for dollar. It's three hundred thousand.
Board Member Regalado: Three hundred thousand.
93 July 29, 2002
M
CM
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I don't know (INAUDIBLE) come from, but --
Chairman Teele: Hold on. We're not the City Commission. Why don't you authorize the CRA
(Community Redevelopment Agency) to put up the match and to seek reimbursement from the
City? We have that authority to do that.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, OK.
Board Member Regalado: Yeah, that's --
Chairman Teele: So, the motion would be to authorize you to make the application, not to
exceed four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000), and authorizing the CRA to provide matching
grant funds; further requiring that the CRA seek reimbursement of the matching grant funds from
the City of Miami.
Board Member Regalado: OK. That's the motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection to that? All those in favor say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-141
A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO APPLY
FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD GRANT FUNDS FOR
THE DOMINO PARK, IN THE AMOUNT OF $300,000, AND MATCHING
FUNDS FROM THE CRA IN THE AMOUNT OF $300,000; FURTHER
REQUESTING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO SEEK REIMBURSEMENT
FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI FOR SAID MATCH TO BE FUNDED FROM
THE CITY'S HOMELAND DEFENSE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUNDS.
94 July 29, 2002
Om
RMA
Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Board Member Joe Sanchez
95 July 29, 2002
*- W
19. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL AND
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE "ANNUAL OVERTOWN COME ALIVE EVENT",
FRIDAY, AUGUST 16, 2002, TO SUNRAY, AUGUST 25, 2002,
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): The second item is for the Overtown optimist. We
are currently their fiduciary, and they have a program that's usually in the summer called
"Overtown Come Alive." This is the fourth year that the Overton Optimist has been responsible
for the event. But, if I'm not mistaken, I understand this has been going on since the 80s, and
their updated budget, which has provided today, staff is recommending ten thousand dollars
($10,000) to support this event, sir. And we have --
Chairman Teele: Now, is this CD (Community Development) dollars or CRA (Community
Redevelopment Agency) dollars?
Ms. Lewis: CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) dollars, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Is it legal?
Ms. Lewis: It's actually for technical assistance. We have assisted them with putting the event
together in the past.
Chairman Teele: Provided these are not TIF (Tax Increment Funds) or CD funds.
Ms. Lewis: OK, sir.
Chairman Teele: Provided these are not CRA, TIF, or CD funds.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, it's legal then.
Chairman Teele: Would you move it, Commissioner Regalado?
Board Member Regalado: Yes, I do.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: All those in favor, say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
96 July 29, 2002
0
,-w
The following resolution was introduced by Board Member Regalado, who moved for its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-142
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN PARKWEST (SEOPW) COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL
AND FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE "ANNUAL OVERTOWN COME
ALIVE EVENT", FRIDAY, AUGUST 16, 2002 TO SUNDAY, AUGUST 25,
2002, SPONSORED BY THE OVERTOWN OPTIMIST CLUB, IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $10,000, SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY
OF FUNDS.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Board Member Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Board Member Tomas Regalado
Board Member Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Chairman Teele: Now, let me ask you this. Why can't you use CB (sic) public service dollars
for this.
Vice Chairman Winton: Who? Which kind?
Chairman Teele: CD.
Ms. Lewis: We don't have any public service dollars allocated from Community Development,
sir.
Chairman Teele: Ms. Lewis --
Board Member Regalado: Just for the record, Mr. Chairman, all of this money will be paid to
the City.
Chairman Teele: Yes.
Ms. Lewis: Most of it.
97 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: Almost all of it.
Board Member Regalado: Off -duty.
Chairman Teele: It's the same old drill. It's the same old drill. Ms. Lewis, we do have -- I mean,
I had a discussion with Barbara Rodriguez. The Optimist do have CD dollars that we are --
you've spent all that?
Ms. Lewis: No, sir. This is not an eligible activity, under their grant with Community
Development, sir.
Chairman Teele: I've never heard of -- I mean, under public service, anything is eligible. Just
about.
Ms. Lewis: Well, based on the budget that they've presented to CD, sir, it wasn't included.
Chairman Teele: OK. All right. I don't want to debate it.
Vice Chairman Winton: We'll pass it. Right.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All in favor say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): "Aye."
Chairman Teele: All opposed?
98 July 29, 2002
20. DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED TENTATIVE AND FINAL PLAT OF
ALLEYWAY ON EAST SIDE AS PART OF EXPANSION OF LYRIC THEATER,
LOCATED AT 819 NW 2 AVENUE — MANAGER, ATTORNEYS, CRA EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, CONSULTANTS TO REVIEW AND RECOMMEND.
Chairman Teele: What's the third and final item?
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): The third item is the Black Archives. They're
preparing a replat, and they are requiring or requesting the CRA (Community Redevelopment
Agency) approve the signatures required for the adjacent property owners for the replat.
Vice Chairman Winton: What does that mean? I don't understand.
Chairman Teele: What does that mean?
William Bloom (Special Counsel for CRA): Basically, what the Black Archives is attempting to
do, they're attempting to plat property that is owned by the Black Archives, together with
property that's owned by the City of Miami and land owned by the CRA. Now, with respect to
the land owned by the CRA, it's previously come before this board, it's been rejected by this
board, because that strip of land, that alleyway, is part of the property that was included in the
RFP (Request for Proposal) for the Lyric Village project and, therefore, we did not want to add
that land to the Lyric Village -- Lyric Theater project until the pending litigation was resolved.
Chairman Teele: See, we're in a mess. We're always in a mess.
Vice Chairman Winton: It's just awful.
Chairman Teele: There's litigation everywhere. But can we legally do this, without impacting
the litigation?
Mr. Bloom: It would impact the litigation. I mean, you'd basically be platting property, which
they would then have to replat.
Chairman Regalado: But I tell you something -- excuse me. I tell you something: You arrived
late, and Commissioner Teele was ill, but I was at the Lyric on Saturday and, you know, it
sounded, from the Dade Heritage Trust, as that this is done, that the Lyric will expand north, and
they were very enthusiastic about it. So, you know, I don't know whom they talked to or
whatever. Because -- I mean, that was a matter of fact.
Chairman Teele: Yeah. But you all better get a legal opinion before we start doing this kind of
stuff. Somebody better sit down with a lawyer. This is a silly litigation. We're assuming this
litigation, too, right? I mean, the City is -- but the City is taking the lead on this thing. We've
asked the City to take the lead on this litigation. And before we start doing something, you
know, we better get the City and City Manager and City Attorney to give us an opinion on it. I
mean, I'm looking for a legal opinion before I start signing off on platting something. Because
I'll tell you this: You know --
99 July 29, 2002
0M
om
Vice Chairman Winton: We'll have to have that. We have to have a legal opinion.
Chairman Teele: I mean, why bring it to us to do?
Mr. Bloom: Eventually -- the first step is platting it. The second step is saying, "OK. Now, we
want to develop it," and the CRA, you know, who owns the property, has not agreed to convey
them that portion of the property.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Manager, do you agree?
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): I don't see us taking the first step, until counsel tells
me to go forward with the plat. Why would I join that property to something else, if my counsel
advises me against it?
Mr. Bloom: To clarify what I'm saying is, we should not, until the litigation is resolved, join in
any plats, number one. Number two, even if there was not any litigation, you shouldn't join in
any plats until you had made the decision on what you were going to do with that property,
whether you intended it to become part of the Lyric Theater project, as opposed to it going
through the back door and them saying, "Well, you platted it. Now you have to give it to us."
Chairman Teele: Look, I will say here and now, I would like to give the land to the Lyric
Theater, but I'll be darned if I want to give the land and open up another lawsuit, or at least give
somebody rise to have a judge say -- what they said when they made the City pay two million
dollars ($2,000,000) -- that the City's conduct and the City's actions were inconsistent with the
document and, that is, we said we were going to help the guy -- what was that litigation, where
we paid out two million dollars ($2,000,000) or so?
Mr. Bloom: Circa.
Chairman Teele: Where we said -- where the City was said in Circa Sawyer -- this predates me
by ten years or so -- but the City was saying, "Oh, we want to help you. We want to help you,"
but, on the other hand, we, the City, was doing other things. You can't have it both ways. If
these guys, the St. John's CDC (Community Development Corporation), have the right or have,
in their mind, a contract from the City, until we can unwind that contract -- because if we go to
court, they're going to use this plat as evidence number one. This is going to be evidence "A,"
that the City was not sincere, and then we will have a real problem. Now, I mean -- you know,
with all -- yes, ma'am.
Valerie Riles -Robinson: Commissioner Teele, if I may address y'all. We're not talking about the
50 feet that's in litigation with St. John. What we're asking for is a closure of the alleyway, the
10 feet that is directly behind the Lyric. And from our consultants, Ludovici and Orange, they
have instructed that that is CRA property -- well, the abutting property, and we have to have
signatures of all the adjacent landowners.
Chairman Teele: Right.
100 July 29, 2002
'1.. ' "W"
Ms. Riles -Robinson: We're talking about the closure of a public alley -- of the public way there,
not the 50 feet in litigation.
Chair--ian Teele: I want to do anything we can do to accommodate this. I would ask that the
City Manager and the City Attorney and Special Counsel come back and give us what we can do.
And if we -- if we can do it on August 22nd, I'll call a special Board meeting of the CRA just to
authorize this plat, if we can do that; is that fair?
Vice Chairman Winton: I'd go with that also.
Chairman Teele: Is that fair, Commissioner?
Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely.
Chairman Teele: I mean, but we need to make sure --
Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely.
Chairman Teele: -- we know what we're doing when we do it. So, what we're saying is, we're
asking the City Manager and the City Attorney and --
Vice Chairman Winton: And the City's legal counsel.
Chairman Teele: -- the CRA Executive Director, along with their consultants, to sit down and
make sure we can do what we're saying -- you're saying we can do, and if we can do it, we'll call
a special meeting to approve that.
Ms. Riles -Robinson: Fair enough. Fair enough.
Chairman Teele: Is that fair?
Ms. Riles -Robinson: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: Great.
101 July 29, 2002
21. A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE IN AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $13,207.40 RELATED
TO CITY SERVICES AND FEES, FOR THE "ANNUAL OVERTOWN COME ALIVE
EVENT", FRIDAY, AUGUST 16, 2002 TO SUNDAY, AUGUST 25, 2002, SPONSORED BY
THE OVERTOWN OPTR,1'IST CLUB; FURTHER DIRECTING THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR TO SEEK REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE CITY AT THE SEPTEMBER CITY
COMMISSION MEETING FOR SAID EXPENDITURE.
Vice Chairman Winton: Next issue.
Annette Lewis (Executive Director, CRA): That's all I have, sir.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado.
Vice Chairman Winton: Move to adjourn.
Board Member Regalado: Move it.
Chairman Teele: Yes, ma'am.
Annie Guerin: Excuse me, Commissioner Teele.
Vice Chairman Winton: Because I've got to take kids from Palm Beach here, and I'm going to
dinner with them.
Chairman Teele: Let's just hear two -- 30 seconds.
Ms. Guerin: Good afternoon, Commissioner Teele, Commissioners Winton and Regalado. My
name is Annie Guerin, and I represent the Overtown Community Optimist Club. Commissioner
Teele, the reason I came up to the podium was to get a clarification on the assistance that's
coming from the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). I really would like to request
more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), because, as you know, this Festival also serves as a
fundraiser for our kids, and if ten thousand dollars ($10,000) is given and it's going to be paid to
City services, it doesn't help us. In order to promote the festival the way we need to, we do need
to get a headliner to come into the park in order to push the vending spaces that we're trying to
promote. Those vending spaces, that money does go toward those -- towards the children.
Chairman Teele: What was your request to the CRA Director?
Ms. Guerin: Well, my request to the CRA was 39.
Chairman Teele: Thirty-nine thousand?
Ms. Guerin: Yes. I do have --
Vice Chairman Winton: Out of a total budget of what?
102 July 29, 2002
Ms. Guerin: That was through the total budget. I turned it in to Ms. Lewis.
Vice Chairman Winton: Your total budget —
Ms. Guerin: Was 39.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- for the entire event was 399
Ms. Guerin: Thirty-nine. But I do --
Vice Chairman Winton: And you wanted the CRA to fund the whole thing?
Ms. Guerin: No, not exactly. Not exactly. What I would like to request is twenty-five. I do
have Union Planters coming in as a sponsor. It is virtually hard to get sponsorships for
Overtown, and I'm going to be perfectly honest with you.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's true.
Ms. Guerin: And I have done dozens and hundreds of letters, going out to different corporations.
Chairman Teele: Where is the venue? Is the venue Gibson Park?
Ms. Guerin: Yes.
Chairman Teele: Is there an activity that we could be responsible for from the budget?
Ms. Guerin: We have a group, a headliner, that we wanted to bring in to promote the festival, but
we have to pay for their services, and we have to do hotel and travel accommodations for that
group.
Chairman Teele: How much is all that going to be?
Ms. Guerin: That comes to nineteen.
Chairman Teele: Nineteen.
Ms. Guerin: Nineteen nine, I think it is.
Chairman Teele: Nineteen thousand?
Ms. Guerin: Yes.
Ms. Lewis: That -- for the entertainment, the total is twenty-four, seven -fifty. And --
Vice Chairman Winton: When is this event?
103 July 29, 2002
Ms. Guerin: August 16th, 17th, and 18th.
Chairman Teele: What's the name of the group?
Ms. Guerin: City High.
Ms. Lewis: For the record -- and Ms. Guerin --
Ms. Guerin: We have several -- we had contacted several entertainers, but due to the time
restraint, they were all booked up.
Vice Chairman Winton: How much did we provide last year?
Ms. Lewis: Last year we only needed technical support. And her initial request did not specify a
dollar amount, because that was one of the first questions I asked when assistance was requested.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I'm confused. If the whole project costs 39, and it's a fundraiser
for the Optimist, and the CRA provided nothing, except technical support last year --
Chairman Teele: Raised no money.
Vice Chairman Winton: Is that what the deal is, it raised no money?
Ms. Guerin: We did -- we could not raise any money because we did not have advertising. You
go to the radio stations -- and even though you tell them that this is for kids, they come with
these astronomical prices. EDR, they wanted to charge us five thousand dollars ($5,000), plus to
do the advertisements and to bring a live remote out, and to give away their own promotional
items. Hot 105 was extremely high. You're talking about four hundred dollars ($400) per air
time spot. And if it's not prime time, you're talking two -fifty to three hundred dollars ($300).
And if you don't have the proper entertainment there to bring your spectators in, it's kind of hard.
Chairman Teele: Well, I will tell you -- Commissioner. Commissioner Regalado.
Board Member Regalado: See, there are certain FCC (Florida Communications Commission)
rules that force radio stations to devote some time to public service. Only not -for -profit groups
qualify, and I don't understand why would they -- I understand why would they charge you five
thousand dollars ($5,000), because they wanted to send -- sell you the whole package. They
want to promote their -- bring their broadcast live there, with their own air personalities, and all
that. But I don't understand the part on the four hundred and five -hundred -dollar ($500) spots.
Because they would give you, on non prime time, free public service. Any other radio station
would do, but --
Ms. Guerin: They do --
104 July 29, 2002
1* '00
Board Member Regalado: But that's not the point. The point is that, if you don't have a class act,
if you don't have something that you can attract --
Ms. Guerin: Pull, right.
Board Member Regalado: -- public, you can advertise whatever you want. No one will come.
Ms. Guerin: Right.
Board Member Regalado: So -- I mean, you've got to concentrate on names and groups. I don't
know what's the will of the Board, but --
Ms. Guerin: Last year we had Slip and Slide. They volunteered. They sent us someone, but this
year they could not. And it's just if you don't have a product out there that's going to pull, it's not
going to work.
Vice Chairman Winton: When did this request come to us?
Board Member Regalado: Today.
Vice Chairman Winton: Ms. Lewis.
Ms. Lewis: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: When did this request come to us?
Ms. Lewis: This request -- let me check with -- last week, sir. We had spoken -- they had
verbally requested, but we had asked for formal requests in order to put to the Board.
Vice Chairman Winton: How long ago did they verbally request?
Ms. Lewis: I'll have to give you that date. It escapes me right now, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: I mean, I don't need a date. I mean roughly.
Ms. Lewis: Roughly. When did you have your awards banquet?
Ms. Guerin: We had our awards banquet in June, but we had met prior -- we had several
meetings and at -- during that time, that's when we were going through the changing of our board
of directors.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, Commissioner Teele --
Ms. Guerin: And this was back in March.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- I don't know what the right answer is, here, but I can --
105 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: There is no right answer.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Because I understand that this is a unique circumstance, and the
things `hat go on in Overtown are unique, and that getting sponsors for things in Overtown are
very, very, very difficult. But at 8:15 -- and I don't know if this is -- there's a -- there's just a lot
of unanswered questions, and I'm stuck. I don't know what the right thing to do here is. I mean,
there are so many things that I don't understand about the history, and for us, the CRA, to
suddenly become essentially the only sponsor and the primary funder of this fundraising event
just -- I could tell you, if it were -- and I would vote for things that we wouldn't do anywhere else
in this City in Overtown. But if this request was coming to me from somewhere else, I would
ask a million questions. I can't figure out even the questions to ask at 8:15 at night.
Chairman Teele: It's not fair.
Vice Chairman Winton: So -- yeah. I mean, it just doesn't seem right to take the money with
two -week's notice, and to go from providing only in -kind to providing twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000). Now, we voted for ten, but kind of on faith. But I don't know how -- without
spending some real time, understanding how this whole process works, and what's really going
on with the Overtown Optimist, and the kinds of things that we could do to really help. You
know, it's hard to get there.
Chairman Teele: Well, you know -- I agree, Commissioner. The thing that I don't understand in
this budget, Ms. Lewis, is, the first page says "Grand total: 32,000," but I don't see any of the
City costs, and grand total normally means, grand, grand total.
Ms. Lewis: All right. Sir, that was the document that I had --
Chairman Teele: That was the document you received?
Ms. Lewis: Correct, sir.
Chairman Teele: So, it's 32,000 plus --
Ms. Lewis: I have an updated that was handed to me this afternoon. The new numbers are thirty-
nine thousand, four hundred and twenty-three dollars ($39,423).
Chairman Teele: Plus the City services?
Ms. Guerin: We're currently working with the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Office.
They're trying to work with us to handle the -- to see if they can work with some of the City fees
also.
Chairman Teele: Be careful you don't get somebody in trouble.
Ms. Guerin: OK.
106 July 29, 2002
�4,., - *.O
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I'm surprised that hasn't already been at the City Commission
before --
Chairman Teele: Well, that's what I'm saying. It's too late --
Vice Chairman Winton: (INAUDIBLE) I mean, why isn't it already there?
Chairman Teele: But it's too late to do it at the City. And the NET Office can't --
Vice Chairman Winton: I mean, we waive those fees all the time for everybody and their
grandmother. So, you know, I can't imagine that we wouldn't have waived those fees at a
Commission meeting, but it didn't come to the Commission meeting.
Chairman Teele: And the ten thousand dollars ($10,000), Ms. Lewis, is tied to nothing. I don't
see what the 10,000 --
Ms. Lewis: Well, the 10,000 was based on the entertainment. As you see in their budget, they
have City high, ten thousand dollars ($10,000), which is their entertainment.
Chairman Teele: Well, I'll tell you what I'm prepared to do, if you'll -- if you will preside,
Commissioner Regalado --
Board Member Regalado: Yes, I will.
Chairman Teele: -- or Commissioner Winton. I would like to move an additional seventeen
thousand dollars ($17,000) related totally to the cost of City services and fees. As I see the
13,000 -- and the waivable fees -- when is this event?
Ms. Guerin: August 16th, 17th, and 18th, sir.
Chairman Teele: Well, I would like to move thirteen thousand two hundred and seven dollars
and forty cent ($13,207.40) to pay the City of Miami. I would so move.
Board Member Regalado: We have a motion and a second.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Discussion. I would like to modify that motion to request that
-- I don't know how you -- you know -- but what we need to do is go back to the City in
September -- at a September Commission meeting, and seek reimbursement for City services,
just like any other group gets its City service stuff wiped out. And we ought to -- if we're going
to pay it upfront, let's go back to the City and see if we can get it back.
Chairman Teele: Yeah. As an advance then.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right. So, that's --
107 July 29, 2002
Chairman Teele: Pending City board action.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's the modification of the motion. And just as a comment: I won't
vote for this next year if we don't have a crystal clear understanding of how this whole process
works. And I don't get it, and I don't know if it was staffs fault or Optimist's fault that we're
getting this at 8:15, 8:30, two weeks before the event. But if there isn't a full discussion
regarding how this whole process works, and what -- I'm not going to vote for this next year. So,
I hope that you get to the staff earlier next year, so we can have a full discussion about how this
money is used and what the process is.
Board Member Regalado: Look, Johnny and Arthur, if we were able to find all the details about
this several month ago, we could have done several things. We could have promoted this event
on NET-9. We could have get the Overtown NET Office involved. We could have gotten the
PAL, Police Athletic League, involved. We could have gotten the Cultural and Entertainment
Board to support and buy their contacts, maybe get you a class act. You know, it's a lot of things
that we could have done, but it's only a few days away, and I don't know anything else that we
can do.
Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question.
Board Member Regalado: All in favor say "aye."
The Board Members (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Chairman Teele, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-143
A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CRA TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL AND
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE IN AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $13,207.40 RELATED TO CITY SERVICES AND FEES, FOR THE
"ANNUAL OVERTOWN COME ALIVE EVENT", FRIDAY, AUGUST 16,
2002 TO SUNDAY, AUGUST 25, 2002, SPONSORED BY THE OVERTOWN
OPTIMIST CLUB; FURTHER DIRECTING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
TO SEEK REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE CITY AT THE SEPTEMBER
CITY COMMISSION MEETING FOR SAID EXPENDITURE.
108 July 29, 2002
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Board Member Joe Sanchez
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman, now, just so that it's clear, what we've approved is ten thousand
dollars ($10,000), unspecified, for the Director to work with y'all, and then we've approved
paying for the City services, and we're asking -- I'm respectfully --
Frank Rollason (Director, Building & Zoning): Right. You're asking for that to come back to
the City, to retro that back to the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency).
Chairman Teele: Yeah, exactly. But what we're trying to do is make sure there's no -- we don't
get into the embarrassing situation that they can't have the event because --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: -- there's no Police or no Fire. You know, that kind of --
Mr. Rollason: I understand.
Chairman Teele: -- situation. Now, I would hope that the Police Athletic League, and maybe the
CRA Director, will consider, you know, something like banners and T-shirts and something, as a
miscellaneous cost, that doesn't have to come before this Board. Because I do want to recognize
that there are very few businesses in Overtown that are doing it, but there's no reason to bring
this here in this manner.
109 July 29, 2002
- .1
22. LEGAL REPORT FROM SPECIAL COUNSEL RELATING TO ARENA TOWERS.
Chairman Teele: Is there any other matter to come before the Board? If not --
William R. Bloom (Special Counsel/CRA): Commissioner, one --
Vice Chairman Winton: If there is, I'm leaving.
Mr. Bloom: One quick matter. In connection with the Arena Towers, there's a request for an
estoppel letter. The lender is GMAC (General Motors Acceptance Corporation) Commercial
Mortgage Corporation, which does not fall within the definition of an institutional lender, as
defined in the lease. So, what we would propose to do is give an estoppel letter strictly in
accordance with the terms of the lease; however, request that GMAC Commercial Mortgage
Corporation be acknowledged as having the rights of an institutional lender under the lease,
without amending the lease any further.
Chairman Teele: Well, wait a minute. Let me say this. Before we give them an estoppel letter, I
want them -- I want you all to all sit down and agree on basic things. You know, we always go
first. We go first. How much money do they owe us on the unpaid -- you know --
Mr. Bloom: They've provided preliminary financial statements. We will require, before we issue
an estoppel letter, the certified audited financial statements by Price Waterhouse, or an
equivalent national accounting firm, which will then determine the amount of rent that they owe
us, which will have to be paid as a condition of giving an estoppel letter, or the estoppel letter
will reflect that rent as being unpaid. Same thing with insurance and other provisions where they
haven't complied with the lease.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, do you need a motion?
Mr. Bloom: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Board Member Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Objections? All those in favor say "aye."
The board members (collectively): Aye
Chairman Teele: As amended. Thank you.
110 July 29, 2002
z: .
OJ
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. SEOPW/CRA 02-144
A MOTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF AN ESTOPPELld.ETTER IN
ACCORDANCE TO TERMS OF LEASE RELATING TO THE ARENA
TOWERS AND FURTHER REQUESTING THAT GMAC COMMERCIAL
MORTGAGE CORPORATION BE ACKNOWLEDGED AS HAVING RIGHTS
OF AN INSTITUTIONAL LENDER UNDER THE LEASE WITHOUT
AMENDING THE LEASE ANY FURTHER.
Upon being seconded by Board Member Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Board Member Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Board Member Angel Gonzalez
Board Member Joe Sanchez
III July 29, 2002
0
-o
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST OMNI REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THE MEETING
ADJOURNED AT 8:24 P.M.
ATTEST:
PRISCILLA A. THOMPSON
CITY CLERK
SYLVIA S. SCHEIDER
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR.,
CHAIRMAN
(SEAL)
112 July 29, 2002
m
RECEIPT
DATE: October 3, 2002
SUBJECT: Minutes for July 29, 2002 and August 22, 2002 CRA Meeting
Received By:
I - Z�--02..
q-Z&-0Z
RECEIPT
DATE: October 1, 2002
SUBJECT: Minutes for the July 29, 2002 CRA Meeting
MAYOR DIAZ
VICE CHAIRMAN WINTON
COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ
COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ
CHAIRMAN REGALADO
COMMISSIONER TEELE
ived
WA � �� MA.K